ericinboston
Apr 28, 12:57 PM
Not surprising the iPhone 3GS was #2.
Not surprising...because it sells for $49?
If I were in the market for a smartphone and could choose a $49 iPhone 3GS vs. a $199+ iPhone 4 vs. a $199+ Android...I would very very seriously consider the 3GS since it is AT LEAST 4x cheaper...and in reality, does 99% of the iPhone 4 (I have the 3GS and as far as I can tell the 4 simply added Facetime and a front camera for facetime use).
Not surprising...because it sells for $49?
If I were in the market for a smartphone and could choose a $49 iPhone 3GS vs. a $199+ iPhone 4 vs. a $199+ Android...I would very very seriously consider the 3GS since it is AT LEAST 4x cheaper...and in reality, does 99% of the iPhone 4 (I have the 3GS and as far as I can tell the 4 simply added Facetime and a front camera for facetime use).
Yaboze
Apr 14, 09:13 PM
Well, ATT iP4 here, I can confirm 3rd party apps pop open then animate when opening after that.
All Apple core apps open with animation on the first shot.
Animations seem better than .1 and .2, but not totally smooth.
All Apple core apps open with animation on the first shot.
Animations seem better than .1 and .2, but not totally smooth.
alphaod
Nov 29, 04:31 AM
I want one of these (which I can probably do without):
Nikon 24mm f/1.4
http://alphaod.com/pics/mr02/mr_24f14-112910.png
But I would really like one of these:
Nikon TC-17E II teleconverter
http://alphaod.com/pics/mr02/mr_tc17e-112910.png
I could definitely use it to increase the focal length of my telephoto and only sacrificing 1.5 f-stops.
Nikon 24mm f/1.4
http://alphaod.com/pics/mr02/mr_24f14-112910.png
But I would really like one of these:
Nikon TC-17E II teleconverter
http://alphaod.com/pics/mr02/mr_tc17e-112910.png
I could definitely use it to increase the focal length of my telephoto and only sacrificing 1.5 f-stops.
aswitcher
Jul 25, 05:39 AM
The existing iPods already are lickable, though the 3rd gen controls are a little more convenient than the click wheel and button interfaces. Feel free to take my word on this, and if you feel the need to confirm, remember that it's probably rude in most places to lick someone else's iPod without asking nicely first.
Ok, now I need to see all that in a silhouette Apple add.
Ok, now I need to see all that in a silhouette Apple add.
rmhop81
Apr 26, 02:09 PM
Yes.
My original point is though that, given that you ALREADY have all of your music (and probably videos) stores on your local hard drive of your computer, and have your computer connected to the internet, why the heck would you need APPLE to stream your music from the internet, when you can just buy StreamToMe or Audio Galaxy or 20 other apps that can do this for a $5 TOTAL incremental cost from what you already have. You can stream all of your music, including your already set up playlists, AND your video right from your figgin' hard drive. Why the heck do you need to pay APPLE anything?
The only benefit I can see it to not eat into your HOME data cap limits, which are usually pretty high anyway (I've NEVER had an issue, and I stream all of the time). But you'd have to upload your non-iTunes purchased songs to their servers anyway, which would offset that somewhat.
Tony
not everyone wants a dedicated home server that they load everything on and let it run 24 hours a day. We just have a MBA.... i'm not gonna load all my music on there and leave it plugged in 24 hours a day. Just not gonna happen.
My original point is though that, given that you ALREADY have all of your music (and probably videos) stores on your local hard drive of your computer, and have your computer connected to the internet, why the heck would you need APPLE to stream your music from the internet, when you can just buy StreamToMe or Audio Galaxy or 20 other apps that can do this for a $5 TOTAL incremental cost from what you already have. You can stream all of your music, including your already set up playlists, AND your video right from your figgin' hard drive. Why the heck do you need to pay APPLE anything?
The only benefit I can see it to not eat into your HOME data cap limits, which are usually pretty high anyway (I've NEVER had an issue, and I stream all of the time). But you'd have to upload your non-iTunes purchased songs to their servers anyway, which would offset that somewhat.
Tony
not everyone wants a dedicated home server that they load everything on and let it run 24 hours a day. We just have a MBA.... i'm not gonna load all my music on there and leave it plugged in 24 hours a day. Just not gonna happen.
ChrisNM
Apr 28, 07:06 PM
i had to check the calendar to make sure it wasn't April 1st.
Crusader
Sep 12, 11:54 PM
I think the price has to do with it being not just hand made in general, but also hand stitched. They were telling me that hand stitching is stronger and easier to repair over what any machine can do, but takes a lot longer to do. They're really down to earth folks. Just a younger couple trying to make a living at a trade.
I want to have 1 or 2 but unfortunately I'm from Hong Kong. Not sure if they ship them oversea.
I want to have 1 or 2 but unfortunately I'm from Hong Kong. Not sure if they ship them oversea.
BenRoethig
Jul 22, 09:45 AM
50%? Did you forget how much Macs cost? One of the main reasons Dell has such a huge market share is because they are so cost effective and come with great bundles aimed at the average person. 50% of computer users could never afford a Mac.
He also assumes that everyone else thinks like mac users.
He also assumes that everyone else thinks like mac users.
CDCC
Apr 22, 11:04 PM
Several reasons. It's very fast - Mannheim is about a year, and Dusseldorf about two. You can't raise invalidity of the patent as a defense. You have to very early in the case explain your theory of non-infringement, etc. The system works very differently than the U.S.
Apple is glad it's fast! They are glad the system works very differently.
How long did the MS vs Apple and MS antitrust suits last?
Apple is glad it's fast! They are glad the system works very differently.
How long did the MS vs Apple and MS antitrust suits last?
shyam09
Nov 8, 10:40 AM
so this is what im getting: (or i hope to get)
http://maxthetechguy.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/macbook-pro-131.jpg
the macbook pro 13"
http://images.intomobile.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/apple-ipad-april-3.jpg
an iPad
http://www.9to5mac.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/35-09589b_office2011mac.jpg
finally.. the MS office 2011 for mac
im hoping i get it this week so i can play with it during my 4 day weekend!:cool:
http://maxthetechguy.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/macbook-pro-131.jpg
the macbook pro 13"
http://images.intomobile.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/apple-ipad-april-3.jpg
an iPad
http://www.9to5mac.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/35-09589b_office2011mac.jpg
finally.. the MS office 2011 for mac
im hoping i get it this week so i can play with it during my 4 day weekend!:cool:
LagunaSol
Apr 26, 09:05 AM
I agree with the others. Bring back the 24" model!!!
satkin2
Apr 15, 03:40 AM
Apps universal between iOS and OSX would make sense, an iWorks suite that you can run on either your Mac and finish on your iOS device, that would be really nice.
I wouldn't be suprised if this was just a coding error, but sometime in the future I can imagine that the ability to run the same apps on both systems will be possible.
I wouldn't be suprised if this was just a coding error, but sometime in the future I can imagine that the ability to run the same apps on both systems will be possible.
roadbloc
Apr 16, 06:55 AM
Uh please.
It's great that Google bought Android but there's a very few things google have done on their own.
Uh please.
Google has done a helluva lot to Android since they bought it. Android is unrecognisable now to what it was in 05. They have simply bought a brand name to get their product popular.
In other words, you are talking rubbish sir. Stop accusing people of trolling, when they are simply telling it how it is.
It's great that Google bought Android but there's a very few things google have done on their own.
Uh please.
Google has done a helluva lot to Android since they bought it. Android is unrecognisable now to what it was in 05. They have simply bought a brand name to get their product popular.
In other words, you are talking rubbish sir. Stop accusing people of trolling, when they are simply telling it how it is.
res1233
Apr 23, 01:13 AM
What do you don't seem to understand is that every individual person does not care what most people need/want. I want to be able to buy the phone I need. If you go with what "most people" need it would be a dumb phone then (with great battery life BTW)
Then leave these forums. Clearly apple-related news is not for you. Clearly you want a phone that apple does not provide. Why are you even here? The truth is, nobody is stopping you from buying that android with 4 hours of battery life if it is more suited to your tastes. You are not entitled in any way to force Apple to make a device that suits your needs. Go buy the Thunderbolt. Enjoy it.
Then leave these forums. Clearly apple-related news is not for you. Clearly you want a phone that apple does not provide. Why are you even here? The truth is, nobody is stopping you from buying that android with 4 hours of battery life if it is more suited to your tastes. You are not entitled in any way to force Apple to make a device that suits your needs. Go buy the Thunderbolt. Enjoy it.
caspersoong
Apr 15, 02:46 AM
Another huge update... Apple should test their updates better. These frequent updates are getting really annoying to me and my friends.
MowingDevil
Apr 29, 03:10 PM
Apple pays 70% straight to the record companies, which would be $0.90. If Amazon pays the same, then they have $0.21 loss before they even start. Or Amazon gets different prices than Apple, which would need some explaining.
My thoughts exactly. Reeks of collusion and I could see lawsuits flying over this.
My thoughts exactly. Reeks of collusion and I could see lawsuits flying over this.
renewed
Sep 14, 12:13 PM
Halo: Reach Legendary Edition
Halo: Reach Limited Edition Xbox 360 S
Replacing my old Xbox 360 Elite. Can't wait to get all this set up and play.
http://i51.tinypic.com/334uhbo.jpg
Kinda uber jealous. Not of how much this set you back though, I'm sure. :p
Halo: Reach Limited Edition Xbox 360 S
Replacing my old Xbox 360 Elite. Can't wait to get all this set up and play.
http://i51.tinypic.com/334uhbo.jpg
Kinda uber jealous. Not of how much this set you back though, I'm sure. :p
Full of Win
Apr 29, 03:26 PM
Apple pays 70% straight to the record companies, which would be $0.90. If Amazon pays the same, then they have $0.21 loss before they even start. Or Amazon gets different prices than Apple, which would need some explaining.
How do you know this? Just curious. I've heard all sorts of numbers bandied about, but yet to see a confirmation as to the distribution.
I'm not a lawyer, but why does it need any explaining? Could it be that Amazon was better at negotiating than Apple, and got a better deal from the content providers? Is there a legal reason that Amazon cannot get more concessions and thus a lower price than does Apple?
How do you know this? Just curious. I've heard all sorts of numbers bandied about, but yet to see a confirmation as to the distribution.
I'm not a lawyer, but why does it need any explaining? Could it be that Amazon was better at negotiating than Apple, and got a better deal from the content providers? Is there a legal reason that Amazon cannot get more concessions and thus a lower price than does Apple?
ChazUK
Apr 30, 11:29 AM
I guess I have the opposite view of this since I will buy from iTunes as long as they continue to provide a lossless format--and Amazon provides only a lossy format. That is more important to me than a slight price difference. AAC plays on anything I need to play it on--and it could be converted to another lossless format such as FLAC if you really wanted to get out from under Apple's proprietary format. I am also a huge Amazon fan and a Prime member and buy a lot of stuff from them--but not MP3s.
I don't want to burst your bubble but Apple sell their tracks in a lossy format. Apple's format for iTunes purcases is a different beast to Flac.
I don't want to burst your bubble but Apple sell their tracks in a lossy format. Apple's format for iTunes purcases is a different beast to Flac.
pacmans
Oct 26, 08:16 PM
Canon EOS 7D!
network23
Jul 25, 11:04 AM
But I think the biggest advantage is that it would be very very simple to adjust the interface to dial phonenumbers, type text messages, and so on. In other words: the iPhone would be within handreach, and it would not require dozens of buttons added to interface (eg via a dock connector like the FM radio) I believe this was planned for 2006
This is what I thought when I saw the report on the Apple patents for the different interfaces (number pad, 4-way "cross" control, iPod controls, etc.). What if those "alternative" controls were actually all "displayed" controls on a none-touch screen, and Apple is planning on making this device your iPod, your cell phone, and your gaming machine? Depending on what you select, the proper controls will appear.
We know Apple was looking to hire a game programmer for the iPod. We think Apple's working on a cell phone based on comments made at the last financials meeting. We saw the patents for the various control interfaces, coincidentally all being shown on the same form factor.
My concerns are cost(how in the world could Apple make such a device that's also affordable) and simplicity(most iPod reviewers seem to come to the conclusion that it's the iPod simplicity that's the key to its success). Adding all these features seems very un-Apple and could make the device rather confusing and cumbersome.
This is what I thought when I saw the report on the Apple patents for the different interfaces (number pad, 4-way "cross" control, iPod controls, etc.). What if those "alternative" controls were actually all "displayed" controls on a none-touch screen, and Apple is planning on making this device your iPod, your cell phone, and your gaming machine? Depending on what you select, the proper controls will appear.
We know Apple was looking to hire a game programmer for the iPod. We think Apple's working on a cell phone based on comments made at the last financials meeting. We saw the patents for the various control interfaces, coincidentally all being shown on the same form factor.
My concerns are cost(how in the world could Apple make such a device that's also affordable) and simplicity(most iPod reviewers seem to come to the conclusion that it's the iPod simplicity that's the key to its success). Adding all these features seems very un-Apple and could make the device rather confusing and cumbersome.
Megakazbek
Apr 13, 05:22 AM
By bringing up the rear you mean leading the pack now in sells and innovation, hardware*(No one can argue that all of the android phones in the iPhone 4's category all have better specs.
WTF?
As far as I remember, iPhone 4 still is smaller, has better battery life and screen resolution than comparable Android phones. What specs do you mean?
iOS also has to dish out the features that the customers want.
1. File system
2. More personalization
3. Widgets
4. Better notifications
5. Wifi tethering
6. the most important of them all it must have a picture of me on it.
Better notifications - yes. File system - never, it's an archaic way of user file management, it's only suitable for OS internal usage and should never be exposed to end user. I agree that there should be better way of managing documents and media in iOS, but it should NOT be any crap like a "file system". And Apple will only implement it when they invent something cool, they will never allow crap on their devices.
Widgets and personalization - not needed. Only nerd losers stare at their OS, being unable to find any better way to spend their pathetic empty life with no purpose. Normal people never see OS screen for more than 0.5 seconds - the time it takes to lauch required app. No one needs personalizing something that you don't even look at.
5 & 6 are already available.
WTF?
As far as I remember, iPhone 4 still is smaller, has better battery life and screen resolution than comparable Android phones. What specs do you mean?
iOS also has to dish out the features that the customers want.
1. File system
2. More personalization
3. Widgets
4. Better notifications
5. Wifi tethering
6. the most important of them all it must have a picture of me on it.
Better notifications - yes. File system - never, it's an archaic way of user file management, it's only suitable for OS internal usage and should never be exposed to end user. I agree that there should be better way of managing documents and media in iOS, but it should NOT be any crap like a "file system". And Apple will only implement it when they invent something cool, they will never allow crap on their devices.
Widgets and personalization - not needed. Only nerd losers stare at their OS, being unable to find any better way to spend their pathetic empty life with no purpose. Normal people never see OS screen for more than 0.5 seconds - the time it takes to lauch required app. No one needs personalizing something that you don't even look at.
5 & 6 are already available.
awmazz
Mar 9, 07:57 AM
For movies it's different because each one is a narrative of it's own. You can't can't compare Sean Connery with Pierce Brosnan as you can't compare Never Say Never with Tomorrow Never Dies because both movies are done in their individual way.
On a television series, you have a continuous narrative that can change its direction, but as soon as you change major plot points or dare switch the main actors with new ones, that's a plain insult to the audience who watched from the start.
I'm the opposite. I had no problem with Catwoman changing from Julie Newmar to Eartha Kitt in the Batman TV series because the style and tenor of both the show and character didn't change.
I do have a problem with the modern Batman movie franchise where each movie is a revisioning deopending on which director got up on which side of the bed so every movie has a different feel and you have the Joker played completely differently by Jack Nicholson and Heath Ledger, Catwoman by Michelle Pfeifferand Halle Berry, and every Batman as well by Michael Keaton, Val Kilmer, George Clooney and Christian Bale. It's like multiple cover versions of the same song by different atrists and you're expected to like and buy them all, which is ridiculous.
On a television series, you have a continuous narrative that can change its direction, but as soon as you change major plot points or dare switch the main actors with new ones, that's a plain insult to the audience who watched from the start.
I'm the opposite. I had no problem with Catwoman changing from Julie Newmar to Eartha Kitt in the Batman TV series because the style and tenor of both the show and character didn't change.
I do have a problem with the modern Batman movie franchise where each movie is a revisioning deopending on which director got up on which side of the bed so every movie has a different feel and you have the Joker played completely differently by Jack Nicholson and Heath Ledger, Catwoman by Michelle Pfeifferand Halle Berry, and every Batman as well by Michael Keaton, Val Kilmer, George Clooney and Christian Bale. It's like multiple cover versions of the same song by different atrists and you're expected to like and buy them all, which is ridiculous.
coachingguy
Mar 31, 02:47 PM
When I got my iPad, the first app I fell in love with was the Cal. I remember saying to multiple people that I hope this makes its way in the Apple Os... This is a huge improvement!
Coachingguy
Coachingguy
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario