arkitect
Apr 18, 12:42 PM
Left handed people have always been persecuted and represent a significantly larger portion of society than homosexuals, plus they tend to do well in society regardless of the persecution.
So you're cool with left-handers but not left-footers (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=left%20footer)?
:confused:
So you're cool with left-handers but not left-footers (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=left%20footer)?
:confused:
Rodimus Prime
Oct 6, 05:47 PM
My original iPhone was not subsidized and I had to buy it at full price. I chose the device with no qualms about what network I was required to use.
While the iPhone is now subsidized, so are many other phones on many other networks. If only certain networks were doing this to add value to choosing their contracts, I could understand your point of choosing the network before the device. Maybe I'm missing something but I don't understand how this changes my argument that the service is just a commodity while the device is the consumer's primary choice.
I think the biggest problem is when Apple had the chance to change the game by not doing subizided cost they instead give in and just make it worse by forcing a much larger than average subsudize on there phone ($400 vs $250).
Unlock phones puts the network and the phone separete. But as long as it is lock in together it should be choose network first
i get what your sayin, but nah, they can still complain all they want... i dont think it says in the contract be expected to have 30% dropped calls.
people complain not only to relieve themselves, but to eventually get whats right. (complaining on macrumors isnt exactly the best way of going about it, ill give you that)
Well the people who choose the iPhone knowing service are spotty put the label on them as not smart.
Smart people look things over and choose what works best for them. For me I know service is the first thing I look at and that is how I got to ATT (Cingular at the time )for my phone and dump Verizon. Verizon service was crap where I was 6 months out of the year. Sprint and Cingular/ATT were king in that area. I used Sprint for a while and it was great. Switch to ATT because most of my friends and family were on it so M2M.
Either way I choose the service first then pick out the phones from there.
While the iPhone is now subsidized, so are many other phones on many other networks. If only certain networks were doing this to add value to choosing their contracts, I could understand your point of choosing the network before the device. Maybe I'm missing something but I don't understand how this changes my argument that the service is just a commodity while the device is the consumer's primary choice.
I think the biggest problem is when Apple had the chance to change the game by not doing subizided cost they instead give in and just make it worse by forcing a much larger than average subsudize on there phone ($400 vs $250).
Unlock phones puts the network and the phone separete. But as long as it is lock in together it should be choose network first
i get what your sayin, but nah, they can still complain all they want... i dont think it says in the contract be expected to have 30% dropped calls.
people complain not only to relieve themselves, but to eventually get whats right. (complaining on macrumors isnt exactly the best way of going about it, ill give you that)
Well the people who choose the iPhone knowing service are spotty put the label on them as not smart.
Smart people look things over and choose what works best for them. For me I know service is the first thing I look at and that is how I got to ATT (Cingular at the time )for my phone and dump Verizon. Verizon service was crap where I was 6 months out of the year. Sprint and Cingular/ATT were king in that area. I used Sprint for a while and it was great. Switch to ATT because most of my friends and family were on it so M2M.
Either way I choose the service first then pick out the phones from there.
iBug2
Apr 29, 02:12 PM
And people kept telling me that OSX and iOS weren't going to merge in any meaningful manner for years ahead, if ever. Yeah right. I'd bet the one after this has them nearly fully merged and I mean towards iOS for the most part. OSX will be dumbed down to the lowest common brain cell and you won't be able to get free/open software anymore. It'll have to come through the App Store or not at all. Wait and see. That is the point I'll be moving on.
This will happen eventually, but not just with Apple. All commercial OS's will go "closed". But not in 2-3 years, more like 10-15 or so. Your only chance for an open OS will be stuff like Linux then.
Anyway, I've already said too much. :)
This will happen eventually, but not just with Apple. All commercial OS's will go "closed". But not in 2-3 years, more like 10-15 or so. Your only chance for an open OS will be stuff like Linux then.
Anyway, I've already said too much. :)
DeSnousa
May 16, 07:44 PM
you have to run the smp2 client to get a3 units. and you have to have a passkey and 10 completed units with the passkey to get a bonus (and you have to complete 80% of your units also i think)
Thanks I have it all configured now, I have been doing a3 units all along. Can't wait to complete my 10 units. Hopefully this should boost the ppd from my i7 as it currently is doing 850-900ppd.
Thanks I have it all configured now, I have been doing a3 units all along. Can't wait to complete my 10 units. Hopefully this should boost the ppd from my i7 as it currently is doing 850-900ppd.
ironsienna
Apr 30, 04:04 AM
The idea of having a slider for changing tabs, having the active tab lighter in color than darker, reminds me of the interface of my LED Machines app, where you have to choose between music from the itunes collection or sound for the alarm.
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/led-machines-led-flashlight/id384295424?mt=8
http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/4656/alarma.png
Its being there since August. Do you think it was a source of inspiration for them?? ;)
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/led-machines-led-flashlight/id384295424?mt=8
http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/4656/alarma.png
Its being there since August. Do you think it was a source of inspiration for them?? ;)
dicklacara
Jul 21, 01:25 PM
But Apple admitted that it DOES drop more calls than 3GS.
They spun it as "less than 1 per 100", but assuming all 3,000,000 iPhone 4 users make about 5 calls per day, that's over ONE MILLION dropped calls per week MORE than iPhone 3GS.
It's a problem.
It's been reproduced by CNET, Consumer Reports, NYT, and many others.
The debate here is not whether there's a problem, but why Apple is obfuscating, rather than fixing it, pretending that bridging the gap of their electrically exposed antenna is equivalent to attenuating an antenna by completely covering it with one's meaty hand.
(seems like moving this gap to the bottom edge of the phone where it's far less likely to be touched, would be an easy fix).
Couple of things:
1) What isn't factored into your calculations is that because of its more-sensitive antenna, the iP4 was able to make calls, in marginal signal areas, where the 3GS showed no signal and was not able to attempt or receive a call... dropping any of these "never-before-possible" calls would reflect poorly on the iP4, and be included in the "< 1 call per hundred" more dropped calls by the iP4.
2) <1 per 100 more dropped calls by the iP4 than the 3GS. "< 1" can mean anything from, say, .0000000001 to .9999999999. Without knowing the real delta fraction it is difficult to base calculations on it.
3) The 3GS came into being with a plethora of available cases-- the iP4 with 1 case, that was in so short supply as to be non-available. Apple stated that 80% of the 3GSs left their store with a case. So, many 3Gs had 2 layers of antenna shielding, the 3GS plastic housing and an external case. The bulk of iP4s had neither-- 0 levels of antenna shielding.
All of this has been widely reported (or obvious) to those who care to objectively examine the facts. So it is a bit disingenuous to make your assertions, without qualification.
.
They spun it as "less than 1 per 100", but assuming all 3,000,000 iPhone 4 users make about 5 calls per day, that's over ONE MILLION dropped calls per week MORE than iPhone 3GS.
It's a problem.
It's been reproduced by CNET, Consumer Reports, NYT, and many others.
The debate here is not whether there's a problem, but why Apple is obfuscating, rather than fixing it, pretending that bridging the gap of their electrically exposed antenna is equivalent to attenuating an antenna by completely covering it with one's meaty hand.
(seems like moving this gap to the bottom edge of the phone where it's far less likely to be touched, would be an easy fix).
Couple of things:
1) What isn't factored into your calculations is that because of its more-sensitive antenna, the iP4 was able to make calls, in marginal signal areas, where the 3GS showed no signal and was not able to attempt or receive a call... dropping any of these "never-before-possible" calls would reflect poorly on the iP4, and be included in the "< 1 call per hundred" more dropped calls by the iP4.
2) <1 per 100 more dropped calls by the iP4 than the 3GS. "< 1" can mean anything from, say, .0000000001 to .9999999999. Without knowing the real delta fraction it is difficult to base calculations on it.
3) The 3GS came into being with a plethora of available cases-- the iP4 with 1 case, that was in so short supply as to be non-available. Apple stated that 80% of the 3GSs left their store with a case. So, many 3Gs had 2 layers of antenna shielding, the 3GS plastic housing and an external case. The bulk of iP4s had neither-- 0 levels of antenna shielding.
All of this has been widely reported (or obvious) to those who care to objectively examine the facts. So it is a bit disingenuous to make your assertions, without qualification.
.
GoKyu
Apr 12, 07:24 AM
Do you really think MS will ever do that?
As stupid as they are, probably not. They're happy with having the most market share, why should they bother changing anything?
But, when it's as easy to get a virus as downloading a banner ad from a website that you visit ( sometimes even legitimate ones) using IE with ActiveX enabled, then *maybe* a stronger security model is called for.
These days, if you're running Windows and don't have at least a good antivirus, antispyware and (can't hurt) firewall, you're almost assured of getting infected somehow. I see it all the time at work - we have people coming in paying hundreds to have us remove viruses and to install a new antivirus program, because they didn't know the old one expired.
If Microsoft was smart, they'd even *consider* doing this - I hate to say it, but look at Mac users - even though we're not immune to potential viruses in the future, how long has OS X been around, and how much malware is out there to infect it? Maybe 5-10 programs? UNIX just has that stronger security model...
As stupid as they are, probably not. They're happy with having the most market share, why should they bother changing anything?
But, when it's as easy to get a virus as downloading a banner ad from a website that you visit ( sometimes even legitimate ones) using IE with ActiveX enabled, then *maybe* a stronger security model is called for.
These days, if you're running Windows and don't have at least a good antivirus, antispyware and (can't hurt) firewall, you're almost assured of getting infected somehow. I see it all the time at work - we have people coming in paying hundreds to have us remove viruses and to install a new antivirus program, because they didn't know the old one expired.
If Microsoft was smart, they'd even *consider* doing this - I hate to say it, but look at Mac users - even though we're not immune to potential viruses in the future, how long has OS X been around, and how much malware is out there to infect it? Maybe 5-10 programs? UNIX just has that stronger security model...
OllyW
Mar 9, 07:23 AM
Apple makes what?
Loads and loads of money. ;)
Loads and loads of money. ;)
rerelease
Apr 25, 02:57 PM
I actually really dislike the borderless look. I hope they don't do this. A larger screen is one thing I really don't need. If I want a big screen, I'll get an iPad.
Same here. It's completely unwarranted, there's virtually no space to be gained and it looks aesthetically weaker compared to the iPhone 4.
Same here. It's completely unwarranted, there's virtually no space to be gained and it looks aesthetically weaker compared to the iPhone 4.
flopticalcube
Apr 21, 12:19 PM
Very inexactly. The Arabs invented 0 some time ago. The system is borked.
It's only because the page is changing so quickly and the vote count you see may not be accurate at the time you place your vote but your vote is included and the vote count refreshed after you make a vote.
With fancy quote handling...
And I went through all the trouble of deleting the tag. Well thought out, MacRumors!
PS can we add a consecutive post auto join next? :o
It's only because the page is changing so quickly and the vote count you see may not be accurate at the time you place your vote but your vote is included and the vote count refreshed after you make a vote.
With fancy quote handling...
And I went through all the trouble of deleting the tag. Well thought out, MacRumors!
PS can we add a consecutive post auto join next? :o
Geckotek
Dec 13, 10:21 PM
Ill be handing out grains of salt.
<-----Takes one
I just don't see Apple creating a situation where they're going to have 2 separate refresh dates for the iPhone. Whatever they do, they're going to make it so they refresh ALL of their iPhones around June of every year. Otherwise they're going to put one of the carriers at a distinct disadvantage because Verizon will have the latest technology for up to 6 months before it goes to ATT--which will hurt apple sales overall.
Why on earth would they create such a manufacturing and delivery nightmare??? OF COURSE they would put Verizon and AT&T on 2 separate refresh dates, it only makes sense. The situation you describe is perfectly normal and happens all the time. It's only practical for Apple to do the same.
Will it come in white? :rolleyes:
:D
Is this the same Verizon LTE network that takes about 2 minutes to handshake between the LTE and 3G network?
Yeah, that isn't happening.
Not that I think this is happening, but isn't that issue getting fixed with a simple firmware update?
I'm getting really tired of reading "iPhone on Verizon 4G after Christmas!" rumors on here. WHy is it that every time someone says "Oh, I've heard the iPhone's coming to Verizon in January," MacRumors puts it on the front page or Page 2? Are enough people so totally obsessed with the iPhone, they pee their pants if they don't hear a Verizon iPhone rumor every day/every other day?
Uhhh...because that's the purpose of MacRumors?? :confused:
Not that I believe the rumor, but the phone being LTE only will simply mean that there's one version between the AT&T and verizon phones that supports CDMA and GSM networks. Instead, there will be a CDMA/LTE phone and a GSM 3G phone. Thus, AT&T's LTE network being infantile/non-existent throws a wrench in that.
That being said, I highly doubt an early 2011 verizon iphone. LTE, doubly so. If it's coming for Verizon, it will be unveiled/launch the same time as the AT&T iphone 5.
Once again, this makes no sense. There are already capacity issues keeping up with demand. Apple already rolls out to other carriers globally on a delayed schedule. Why would Verizon be any different? That being said, it would be easy for Verizon to tweak a few issues found in the iPhone 4 *cough-antenna-cough*
How about not even putting it up on the site? My question was why do they have to have a new article for every time someone says that?
As for peeing pants, ok, maybe people aren't peeing their pants. But obviously people care enough to post these this rumor every time another site posts the rumor. I'm just tired of seeing dozens of new articles about this place or that place saying "iPhone on Verizon after Christmas!" Ok, I get it! People expect a Verizon iPhone. Get over it. This is kinda like the Beatles on iTunes, or people talking for months that Michael Jackson died, etc.
Anyone know a good news site that says what has happened and then move on to the next news item? If this is all that MacRumors is going to post, I think it may be time to say goodbye to MacRumors. Just tired of seeing the same rumors repeated over & over again.
B-BYE!
Y would they make a verizon iPhone before July when they come out with a new one anyway. It's stupid I'm shure that they will come out with one when they always come out with them in JULY. They will make more money (maybe) if they do what they always do, unless apple is becoming like the driods and make a new one every month. Whatever the case may be this verizon rumor is getting pushed back and back
Wrong, they will make more money if they stagger the release. Think about the additional hype that comes with a release. Now do that 2x a year. Yeah...it's the best thing for Apple to do...2 release cycles. One major release with a minor update on the second release.
Actually I think this is what might happen, eventually. But rather than AT&T getting the same spec iPhone "A" 6 months later, they will get the "B" with some improvements, then the next year Verizon gets the "C" 6 months after that and so on... Where they will just keep leap frogging each other. I think the market is moving too fast for Apple to continue with just yearly updates.
Right. One of the problems people have when they try to predict what Apple might do is they assume the past = the future. "Oh, Apple only does yearly updates, so this rumor is impossible." Well, Apple does what it does . . . until it doesn't. They don't do books, but now they do. They don't do movies, but now they do, etc.
Apple is not a MacRumors poster stubbornly sticking to the only thing they know. Apple changes as market conditions change. If they think they can increase profitability and market share by making semi-yearly phone updates, they are going to switch to semi-yearly phone updates. Simple as that.
So a Q1 2011 Verizon phone is quite possible.
^^AGREED^^
I'm not buying it (either in terms of the story, or in terms of a supposed hybrid phone if it does make it to market).
The baseband chipsets don't exist as mass market components (either in supply or feature set).
If they did, they'd suck down battery faster than you could keep the damn thing charged. I think it is pretty clear where Apple plays - technology that is applicable, relevant, and usable.
I don't think 4G is there yet, unless Qualcomm et al are hiding some major hybrid CDMA/LTE chipsets (the LTE-only chipsets themselves are power hogs - why do you think VZW hasn't rolled out handsets, they've limited 4G use to people hooking USB cards into a 3000mAh battery that can feed that 500mAh - 1000mAh draw).
Battery technology is getting better, and the chipsets are getting better, but not in time for a device in January. Maybe I'll eat crow, but I doubt it. If this happens (and it might), it's not going to be a great device that everyone is expecting (read: keep the 4G radio off and use it as a CDMA iPhone 4) or it's simply not going to exist. It's possible VZW needed a retort to ATT's simultaneous voice & data ploy so they included it to check that off the list and the phone will stick to EVDO for nearly everything...but the EVDO<->LTE carrier handoff isn't transparent (far worse than EDGE<->3G), so that is a usability issue in and of itself that I think Apple would not like.
Not that you're definately wrong, but it crosses my mind that we are all assuming that the LTE chipsets will be power hogs when they first come out. But we have no idea if this is the case. They could easily take what they learned from developing the 3G chipsets to start off more efficient with the first get of LTE chipsets.
Like I said, I'm not saying that's the case, it just came to mind that we are all making an assumption re: this aspect of it.
I don't see that happening. It's just not how Apple works.
Really, because Apple never changes right? Excuse me while I go buy that new MacBook Air with the PowerPC chip in it. Oh...wait a tick!
<-----Takes one
I just don't see Apple creating a situation where they're going to have 2 separate refresh dates for the iPhone. Whatever they do, they're going to make it so they refresh ALL of their iPhones around June of every year. Otherwise they're going to put one of the carriers at a distinct disadvantage because Verizon will have the latest technology for up to 6 months before it goes to ATT--which will hurt apple sales overall.
Why on earth would they create such a manufacturing and delivery nightmare??? OF COURSE they would put Verizon and AT&T on 2 separate refresh dates, it only makes sense. The situation you describe is perfectly normal and happens all the time. It's only practical for Apple to do the same.
Will it come in white? :rolleyes:
:D
Is this the same Verizon LTE network that takes about 2 minutes to handshake between the LTE and 3G network?
Yeah, that isn't happening.
Not that I think this is happening, but isn't that issue getting fixed with a simple firmware update?
I'm getting really tired of reading "iPhone on Verizon 4G after Christmas!" rumors on here. WHy is it that every time someone says "Oh, I've heard the iPhone's coming to Verizon in January," MacRumors puts it on the front page or Page 2? Are enough people so totally obsessed with the iPhone, they pee their pants if they don't hear a Verizon iPhone rumor every day/every other day?
Uhhh...because that's the purpose of MacRumors?? :confused:
Not that I believe the rumor, but the phone being LTE only will simply mean that there's one version between the AT&T and verizon phones that supports CDMA and GSM networks. Instead, there will be a CDMA/LTE phone and a GSM 3G phone. Thus, AT&T's LTE network being infantile/non-existent throws a wrench in that.
That being said, I highly doubt an early 2011 verizon iphone. LTE, doubly so. If it's coming for Verizon, it will be unveiled/launch the same time as the AT&T iphone 5.
Once again, this makes no sense. There are already capacity issues keeping up with demand. Apple already rolls out to other carriers globally on a delayed schedule. Why would Verizon be any different? That being said, it would be easy for Verizon to tweak a few issues found in the iPhone 4 *cough-antenna-cough*
How about not even putting it up on the site? My question was why do they have to have a new article for every time someone says that?
As for peeing pants, ok, maybe people aren't peeing their pants. But obviously people care enough to post these this rumor every time another site posts the rumor. I'm just tired of seeing dozens of new articles about this place or that place saying "iPhone on Verizon after Christmas!" Ok, I get it! People expect a Verizon iPhone. Get over it. This is kinda like the Beatles on iTunes, or people talking for months that Michael Jackson died, etc.
Anyone know a good news site that says what has happened and then move on to the next news item? If this is all that MacRumors is going to post, I think it may be time to say goodbye to MacRumors. Just tired of seeing the same rumors repeated over & over again.
B-BYE!
Y would they make a verizon iPhone before July when they come out with a new one anyway. It's stupid I'm shure that they will come out with one when they always come out with them in JULY. They will make more money (maybe) if they do what they always do, unless apple is becoming like the driods and make a new one every month. Whatever the case may be this verizon rumor is getting pushed back and back
Wrong, they will make more money if they stagger the release. Think about the additional hype that comes with a release. Now do that 2x a year. Yeah...it's the best thing for Apple to do...2 release cycles. One major release with a minor update on the second release.
Actually I think this is what might happen, eventually. But rather than AT&T getting the same spec iPhone "A" 6 months later, they will get the "B" with some improvements, then the next year Verizon gets the "C" 6 months after that and so on... Where they will just keep leap frogging each other. I think the market is moving too fast for Apple to continue with just yearly updates.
Right. One of the problems people have when they try to predict what Apple might do is they assume the past = the future. "Oh, Apple only does yearly updates, so this rumor is impossible." Well, Apple does what it does . . . until it doesn't. They don't do books, but now they do. They don't do movies, but now they do, etc.
Apple is not a MacRumors poster stubbornly sticking to the only thing they know. Apple changes as market conditions change. If they think they can increase profitability and market share by making semi-yearly phone updates, they are going to switch to semi-yearly phone updates. Simple as that.
So a Q1 2011 Verizon phone is quite possible.
^^AGREED^^
I'm not buying it (either in terms of the story, or in terms of a supposed hybrid phone if it does make it to market).
The baseband chipsets don't exist as mass market components (either in supply or feature set).
If they did, they'd suck down battery faster than you could keep the damn thing charged. I think it is pretty clear where Apple plays - technology that is applicable, relevant, and usable.
I don't think 4G is there yet, unless Qualcomm et al are hiding some major hybrid CDMA/LTE chipsets (the LTE-only chipsets themselves are power hogs - why do you think VZW hasn't rolled out handsets, they've limited 4G use to people hooking USB cards into a 3000mAh battery that can feed that 500mAh - 1000mAh draw).
Battery technology is getting better, and the chipsets are getting better, but not in time for a device in January. Maybe I'll eat crow, but I doubt it. If this happens (and it might), it's not going to be a great device that everyone is expecting (read: keep the 4G radio off and use it as a CDMA iPhone 4) or it's simply not going to exist. It's possible VZW needed a retort to ATT's simultaneous voice & data ploy so they included it to check that off the list and the phone will stick to EVDO for nearly everything...but the EVDO<->LTE carrier handoff isn't transparent (far worse than EDGE<->3G), so that is a usability issue in and of itself that I think Apple would not like.
Not that you're definately wrong, but it crosses my mind that we are all assuming that the LTE chipsets will be power hogs when they first come out. But we have no idea if this is the case. They could easily take what they learned from developing the 3G chipsets to start off more efficient with the first get of LTE chipsets.
Like I said, I'm not saying that's the case, it just came to mind that we are all making an assumption re: this aspect of it.
I don't see that happening. It's just not how Apple works.
Really, because Apple never changes right? Excuse me while I go buy that new MacBook Air with the PowerPC chip in it. Oh...wait a tick!
vincenz
Apr 6, 12:44 PM
Build one. Metal trash can, insulation tubes that are used for heating inside the house, and a few other various parts...
You'd pair food with a trash can? :confused:
Maybe for you...
http://thedecorologist.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/toilet-coffee-mug-via-harrietcarter.jpg
You'd pair food with a trash can? :confused:
Maybe for you...
http://thedecorologist.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/toilet-coffee-mug-via-harrietcarter.jpg
Steve Ballmer
Apr 29, 03:01 PM
Whew!! They also brought Safari's "Drag Image to Desktop to save Image File" back in this Preview Build. :D
In previous Lion Builds, dragging an image to the desktop resulted in a Safari Link file to the Image's location on the web.
That was actually fixed in the build before this one.
The new "Show Downloads" button is interesting. But I wish it would replace the separate Downloads window altogether, just so it's one less thing taking up screen real estate.
In previous Lion Builds, dragging an image to the desktop resulted in a Safari Link file to the Image's location on the web.
That was actually fixed in the build before this one.
The new "Show Downloads" button is interesting. But I wish it would replace the separate Downloads window altogether, just so it's one less thing taking up screen real estate.
TheMacBookPro
Mar 18, 10:51 AM
That was exactly my point. I don't see why people care so much about what phone someone else has. It's only the Android folks that engage in this, I have yet to see an iPhone owner behave so pathetically.
Seriously?
You're behaving pretty pathetically too. What are you trying to gain from this thread? The approval of other Apple fanboys? Or are you trying to make yourself feel better about your purchase?
Take a look through the forums, and you'll find plenty of people 'behaving so pathetically' in plenty of threads. Including this one!
FTR I have two iPhone 4's, a Nexus S and a LYNX 3D (SH-03C). There goes your theory that Android device owners are all too poor to afford an iPhone :rolleyes:
Several things:
Never had Angry Birds run at '2FPS' and I have the 'original Google phone'- a HTC G1. Runs nice and smooth on 2.2 (general usage and games). My iPhone 3G OTOH...
Doing the same things (heavy web browsing, 1~2 hours of talk time, 1 hour of A2DP BT music streaming in my car) I get just under 1 days' battery life on both my NS and iPhone 4.
As for the screen- less pixel dense on my NS obviously but in direct sunlight the NS's SAMOLED is way better than my iPhone.
Love the 3D on my SH-03C. Mobile ASV on it is as good, if not better than, the iPhone's IPS technology.
I gotta admit that my 4's screen is crisper. Shame they can't produce them all the same (my 32GB is pee-yellow while my 16GB is very white).
You're either a balanced 'reviewer' or an Apple apologist (plenty of them here!). I'm leaning towards the latter. ;)
Seriously?
You're behaving pretty pathetically too. What are you trying to gain from this thread? The approval of other Apple fanboys? Or are you trying to make yourself feel better about your purchase?
Take a look through the forums, and you'll find plenty of people 'behaving so pathetically' in plenty of threads. Including this one!
FTR I have two iPhone 4's, a Nexus S and a LYNX 3D (SH-03C). There goes your theory that Android device owners are all too poor to afford an iPhone :rolleyes:
Several things:
Never had Angry Birds run at '2FPS' and I have the 'original Google phone'- a HTC G1. Runs nice and smooth on 2.2 (general usage and games). My iPhone 3G OTOH...
Doing the same things (heavy web browsing, 1~2 hours of talk time, 1 hour of A2DP BT music streaming in my car) I get just under 1 days' battery life on both my NS and iPhone 4.
As for the screen- less pixel dense on my NS obviously but in direct sunlight the NS's SAMOLED is way better than my iPhone.
Love the 3D on my SH-03C. Mobile ASV on it is as good, if not better than, the iPhone's IPS technology.
I gotta admit that my 4's screen is crisper. Shame they can't produce them all the same (my 32GB is pee-yellow while my 16GB is very white).
You're either a balanced 'reviewer' or an Apple apologist (plenty of them here!). I'm leaning towards the latter. ;)
Donz0r
Jan 9, 03:00 PM
It's been 2 hours now, any predictions on how much longer? (I normally don't pay attention to the qt stream.)
whoooaaahhhh
Jan 8, 02:10 PM
When you spend the whole year waiting for the event you want the moment to be perfect.
What are we doing here...losing our virginity? Yeesh!
What are we doing here...losing our virginity? Yeesh!
wlh99
Apr 27, 09:34 AM
Update *** "I though it worked but the timer kept going on the background.
crashed :confused:
wlh99, do you get an exception in the invalid method " [myTimer Invalidate]" ?
I didn't test the code at all, so no. But it doesn't surprise me. An exception is thrown when you try to message an object that no longer exists.
I test to see if myTimer is nil as a check to see if the my timer object exists. But elsewhere in the progam I release myTimer and never set myTimer to nil. So, the pointer still points to a memory location, but no object is there so the [myTimer invalidate] fails with an exception. It's a very beginner mistake on my part.
add
mytimer = nil;
to the cancelIt: method.
I strongly recommend reading this document:
http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#documentation/Cocoa/Conceptual/MemoryMgmt/MemoryMgmt.html
The important thing (assuming you are trying to learn to program) is that you don't just accept that it works, and that instead you know why what you were doing was wrong, and why the answer works.
Look at your first post. Can you say why it crashes? ulbadr's response was pretty direct in his answer, and you didn't understand it. Do you understand it now? Can you say for sure what the code you first posted does, and why it crashes?
crashed :confused:
wlh99, do you get an exception in the invalid method " [myTimer Invalidate]" ?
I didn't test the code at all, so no. But it doesn't surprise me. An exception is thrown when you try to message an object that no longer exists.
I test to see if myTimer is nil as a check to see if the my timer object exists. But elsewhere in the progam I release myTimer and never set myTimer to nil. So, the pointer still points to a memory location, but no object is there so the [myTimer invalidate] fails with an exception. It's a very beginner mistake on my part.
add
mytimer = nil;
to the cancelIt: method.
I strongly recommend reading this document:
http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#documentation/Cocoa/Conceptual/MemoryMgmt/MemoryMgmt.html
The important thing (assuming you are trying to learn to program) is that you don't just accept that it works, and that instead you know why what you were doing was wrong, and why the answer works.
Look at your first post. Can you say why it crashes? ulbadr's response was pretty direct in his answer, and you didn't understand it. Do you understand it now? Can you say for sure what the code you first posted does, and why it crashes?
rorschach
Apr 15, 02:16 PM
Hm.
These seem like something that everyone here says can't be real, "no way Apple would design something like that," the "perspective is all off" ... and then end up being real after all.
Remember the screenshots of the Fat Nano ad file in Photoshop?
These seem like something that everyone here says can't be real, "no way Apple would design something like that," the "perspective is all off" ... and then end up being real after all.
Remember the screenshots of the Fat Nano ad file in Photoshop?
miles01110
Apr 21, 01:30 PM
Exactly rdowns & miles01110. If people can't even adequately vote on a news post, how can we expect this to add any value?
Part of the issue is what defines "adequately voting"? The voting system on the front page is entirely subjective and- in my opinion- adds nothing to the appeal or disappeal of the story. Same for individual posts.
Part of the issue is what defines "adequately voting"? The voting system on the front page is entirely subjective and- in my opinion- adds nothing to the appeal or disappeal of the story. Same for individual posts.
BlueRevolution
Oct 28, 07:34 PM
I rue the day when Apple has to try and lock down OSX like MS is forced to attempt with Vista!
OS X doesn't even have a serial number in the boxes. Apple's lack of caring of this extends to the point where they haven't even bothered to have the ability to tell the difference between a pirated copy and a legitimate copy of the OS. I don't see tyrannical anti-piracy policy coming anytime soon, and I don't see Apple taking drastic measures to prevent OS X on beige boxes soon either.
Everyone seems to be forgetting the math of piracy. It's not
gross profit = (unit price) (units in use - units pirated)
it's
gross profit = (unit price) (units in use - units pirated + sales gained due to piracy)
This will be especially noticeable in Apple's case, where people that might never otherwise have the opportunity or inclination to try out OS X download it onto their PCs, fall in love with it and their next computer is a Mac. Not only has Apple made a software sale, they have also sold a piece of $2k hardware with a 20% profit margin. I personally know people that have done this.
I think that prettymuch alone of large software companies, Apple sees the other side of piracy. It's never a given that you're a pirate OR you buy software/music/movies/games/whatever in stores.
OS X doesn't even have a serial number in the boxes. Apple's lack of caring of this extends to the point where they haven't even bothered to have the ability to tell the difference between a pirated copy and a legitimate copy of the OS. I don't see tyrannical anti-piracy policy coming anytime soon, and I don't see Apple taking drastic measures to prevent OS X on beige boxes soon either.
Everyone seems to be forgetting the math of piracy. It's not
gross profit = (unit price) (units in use - units pirated)
it's
gross profit = (unit price) (units in use - units pirated + sales gained due to piracy)
This will be especially noticeable in Apple's case, where people that might never otherwise have the opportunity or inclination to try out OS X download it onto their PCs, fall in love with it and their next computer is a Mac. Not only has Apple made a software sale, they have also sold a piece of $2k hardware with a 20% profit margin. I personally know people that have done this.
I think that prettymuch alone of large software companies, Apple sees the other side of piracy. It's never a given that you're a pirate OR you buy software/music/movies/games/whatever in stores.
Cagle
Apr 5, 03:21 PM
Steve Jobs describes Apple�s theory in making apps; set a bar for developers to do better...
:eek:
:eek:
Lynxpoint
Apr 29, 05:13 PM
Sensible defaults. Usability before looks. The iOS scrollbars might look better but they remove usability. Same with the slider, it's not as intuitive.
Apple should not break intuitiveness and usability just to change some esthetics, especially if this is just change for the same of change.
I agree with you completely, but still a part of me always remembers that people don't necessarily like change thrust upon them. Sometimes change is for the better, but the effect is not immediate. I only say this because I have changed the scollbars on Snow Leopard to Lion-like ones as well as using the scroll reverser app, and I have found I prefer these changes and I really like the idea of the bars vanishing when not active.
Apple should not break intuitiveness and usability just to change some esthetics, especially if this is just change for the same of change.
I agree with you completely, but still a part of me always remembers that people don't necessarily like change thrust upon them. Sometimes change is for the better, but the effect is not immediate. I only say this because I have changed the scollbars on Snow Leopard to Lion-like ones as well as using the scroll reverser app, and I have found I prefer these changes and I really like the idea of the bars vanishing when not active.
Scarlet Fever
Jan 12, 12:13 AM
i dont think he was arrogant. I think he was genuinely excited about this product, not because it earns the company (and ultimately himself) money, but because it is such a big leap in technology.
And at the start of the keynote, he did say that Mac hardware and software will be announced in a couple of weeks time. Just wait a little while, and i'm sure you'll hear people complaining that the new C2Q MPs dont have their name engraved on the side of the machines:p
And at the start of the keynote, he did say that Mac hardware and software will be announced in a couple of weeks time. Just wait a little while, and i'm sure you'll hear people complaining that the new C2Q MPs dont have their name engraved on the side of the machines:p
citizenzen
May 5, 01:39 PM
No- it just means that people with no regard for the law will have that capability, while you won't.
Sorry, but that doesn't make sense to me Lee.
Fewer guns would mean fewer guns for everybody.
Sorry, but that doesn't make sense to me Lee.
Fewer guns would mean fewer guns for everybody.
No comments:
Post a Comment