FloatingBones
Nov 25, 12:34 AM
For the last time, STOP SPEAKING FOR OTHER PEOPLE!!! You have NO right what-so-ever to speak for anyone but yourself and yet you continue to state that EVER SINGLE iOS USER hates Flash and is glad to be rid of it and yet this Skyfire app proves just the opposite.
What I said: Users of the 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash plugins is completely true. There are no Flash plugins for this device. Nobody can run a shred of Flash content in their browser on this device.
No amount of nonsensical shouting will change the facts.
You have every right to give your opinion on the matter, but it is your opinion, not the opinion of every single iOS user in existence.
But owners of those 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. Nobody forced them to buy those devices. If they were somehow "disappointed" because there are no Flash plugins available, nobody prevented them from returning them or reselling them.
That is NOT a shortcoming of Flash dude.
Also incorrect. There are huge shortcomings of Flash, and you've never addressed them.
You've never addressed the identity-leaking of Flash cookies: Flash doesn't honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser. More than half of the top 100 websites are now using Flash cookies to track users and store information about them. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt) Do you actually like the fact that those sites do an end-run around the cookie privacy settings by using Flash? I can't find a single rational person that likes the identity-leaking.
You've never addressed the quirkiness that Flash brings to the browser UI. On my Mac, scrolling works differently when my mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that appears in a Flash window is not searchable with the browser's text-finding feature. My Mac doesn't behave like a Mac inside of a Flash window.
The engineering choice made for iOS is simplicity. Layering Flash on top of the browser would compromise that simplicity. Click-to-flash semantics would add yet another layer of clutter and obfuscation to the UI.
You've never addressed Adobe's inability to deal competently to secure their software. Security experts believe that Adobe is going to surpass Microsoft as the #1 target for security attacks. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-231.htm) Besides Flash, Adobe Reader is a vector for zero day bugs (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). I really don't know how you do that: it's a PDF reader! The bugs have been around in Adobe Reader for years and Adobe still hasn't fixed them.
If Apple enabled Flash in iOS Safari, they would be farming out the correct operation of their iOS browser to a company that has proven to be one of the least competent companies in dealing with malware attacks. Noted security expert Steve Gibson mocks their cluelessness:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I have yet to find a single Flash enthusiast who can address those issues. I'm hardly surprised that you can't address them, either.
That is a shortcoming of Steve Jobs' choosing.
Nonsense. They are engineering and design choices. If Apple made bad engineering and design choices, they would never have sold 120M+ of these devices.
If you think they are a "shortcoming": there are simple solutions. Don't buy an iOS device. If you did buy one, sell it. Or maybe you can see if it will blend (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAl28d6tbko).
One thing is certain: Apple will not compromise their iOS browser with Flash, and complaining about that is rather silly.
Even if Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete, that doesn't mean people don't want to be able to access the entire Web in the here and now.
Adobe Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete. Even Adobe acknowledges the fact (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999).
Between the 120M+ iOS devices, the click-to-flash plugins disable Flash downloads on Windows, Mac OS X and Linux machines, and Adobe's new Flash-to-HTML5 conversion tools (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999), the abandonment of Flash will continue to accelerate.
You just don't seem to comprehend that.
You are correct. Flash is a legacy technology, and its day has passed.
You seem to have this deep seated hatred of Flash
There are fundamental failings in both the design and deployment of Flash. I listed three of those earlier in my reply.
The thing that got my attention was when I realized that Flash was maintaining its own set of cookies and that those cookies did not honor the privacy settings of my browser. I then learned about click-to-flash plugins to minimize my exposure to Flash. The shocking thing to me was how much disabling Flash improved the browsing experience: faster page loads, less flashing advertisements, and far less CPU usage.
and I can tell that if Steve had said "I LOVE Flash" instead you would almost undoubtedly be here fighting against HTML5 and for Flash.
You imply that I blindly agree with Apple's (and Jobs's) decisions. That is not the case.
I strongly disagree with Apple's decision to prevent Hypermac from selling external batteries for Mac computers (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1032695). Hypermac makes a quality product, and they are filling a niche that Apple ignores. Magsafe is a wonderful technology, but they should be licensing this tech to third-party vendors. I fondly hope that Apple addresses this deficiency in their strategy and product accessories soon.
If you search, you can find where I commented on this in the public record weeks ago.
Yes, I honestly believe that. You have no vested interest in either one. You're just being Steve's doormat.
Now you know better.
I see no reason why ANYONE should have to convert to HTML5.
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt)
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
Even if all those four large concerns were addressed, websites have to deal with the growing number of users that use Flash-blocking plugins. Advertisers that deliver their ads with Flash have no guarantee that users will allow those Flash apps to be downloaded and run on their machines.
Those are the reasons why Flash's viability for delivering web content is in decline. Even if you don't see the reasons, Adobe does (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html).
What I said: Users of the 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash plugins is completely true. There are no Flash plugins for this device. Nobody can run a shred of Flash content in their browser on this device.
No amount of nonsensical shouting will change the facts.
You have every right to give your opinion on the matter, but it is your opinion, not the opinion of every single iOS user in existence.
But owners of those 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. Nobody forced them to buy those devices. If they were somehow "disappointed" because there are no Flash plugins available, nobody prevented them from returning them or reselling them.
That is NOT a shortcoming of Flash dude.
Also incorrect. There are huge shortcomings of Flash, and you've never addressed them.
You've never addressed the identity-leaking of Flash cookies: Flash doesn't honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser. More than half of the top 100 websites are now using Flash cookies to track users and store information about them. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt) Do you actually like the fact that those sites do an end-run around the cookie privacy settings by using Flash? I can't find a single rational person that likes the identity-leaking.
You've never addressed the quirkiness that Flash brings to the browser UI. On my Mac, scrolling works differently when my mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that appears in a Flash window is not searchable with the browser's text-finding feature. My Mac doesn't behave like a Mac inside of a Flash window.
The engineering choice made for iOS is simplicity. Layering Flash on top of the browser would compromise that simplicity. Click-to-flash semantics would add yet another layer of clutter and obfuscation to the UI.
You've never addressed Adobe's inability to deal competently to secure their software. Security experts believe that Adobe is going to surpass Microsoft as the #1 target for security attacks. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-231.htm) Besides Flash, Adobe Reader is a vector for zero day bugs (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). I really don't know how you do that: it's a PDF reader! The bugs have been around in Adobe Reader for years and Adobe still hasn't fixed them.
If Apple enabled Flash in iOS Safari, they would be farming out the correct operation of their iOS browser to a company that has proven to be one of the least competent companies in dealing with malware attacks. Noted security expert Steve Gibson mocks their cluelessness:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I have yet to find a single Flash enthusiast who can address those issues. I'm hardly surprised that you can't address them, either.
That is a shortcoming of Steve Jobs' choosing.
Nonsense. They are engineering and design choices. If Apple made bad engineering and design choices, they would never have sold 120M+ of these devices.
If you think they are a "shortcoming": there are simple solutions. Don't buy an iOS device. If you did buy one, sell it. Or maybe you can see if it will blend (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAl28d6tbko).
One thing is certain: Apple will not compromise their iOS browser with Flash, and complaining about that is rather silly.
Even if Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete, that doesn't mean people don't want to be able to access the entire Web in the here and now.
Adobe Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete. Even Adobe acknowledges the fact (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999).
Between the 120M+ iOS devices, the click-to-flash plugins disable Flash downloads on Windows, Mac OS X and Linux machines, and Adobe's new Flash-to-HTML5 conversion tools (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999), the abandonment of Flash will continue to accelerate.
You just don't seem to comprehend that.
You are correct. Flash is a legacy technology, and its day has passed.
You seem to have this deep seated hatred of Flash
There are fundamental failings in both the design and deployment of Flash. I listed three of those earlier in my reply.
The thing that got my attention was when I realized that Flash was maintaining its own set of cookies and that those cookies did not honor the privacy settings of my browser. I then learned about click-to-flash plugins to minimize my exposure to Flash. The shocking thing to me was how much disabling Flash improved the browsing experience: faster page loads, less flashing advertisements, and far less CPU usage.
and I can tell that if Steve had said "I LOVE Flash" instead you would almost undoubtedly be here fighting against HTML5 and for Flash.
You imply that I blindly agree with Apple's (and Jobs's) decisions. That is not the case.
I strongly disagree with Apple's decision to prevent Hypermac from selling external batteries for Mac computers (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1032695). Hypermac makes a quality product, and they are filling a niche that Apple ignores. Magsafe is a wonderful technology, but they should be licensing this tech to third-party vendors. I fondly hope that Apple addresses this deficiency in their strategy and product accessories soon.
If you search, you can find where I commented on this in the public record weeks ago.
Yes, I honestly believe that. You have no vested interest in either one. You're just being Steve's doormat.
Now you know better.
I see no reason why ANYONE should have to convert to HTML5.
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt)
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
Even if all those four large concerns were addressed, websites have to deal with the growing number of users that use Flash-blocking plugins. Advertisers that deliver their ads with Flash have no guarantee that users will allow those Flash apps to be downloaded and run on their machines.
Those are the reasons why Flash's viability for delivering web content is in decline. Even if you don't see the reasons, Adobe does (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html).
inkswamp
Jul 21, 12:06 PM
Don't mean to be a wet blanket, but I didn't care about Apple's market share when it was slipping in the 90s and I don't care about it now that it's climbing. I didn't buy my Mac to be popular and I don't particularly care that lots of people are (or are not) using them. It's just an irrelevant metric to me.
Apple produces very high quality machines and that's always going to ding them (ironically) in terms of market share as people will buy new machines less often and because loads of people aren't picking up bargain Macs at Wal-Mart. I know lots of Windows users and they buy new PCs on average every two years. I buy a new Mac on average every 5 years and most Mac users I know do the same. Market share is just meaningless, even when it's positive news.
Besides, Apple deals in the kind of quality that will keep it around for many, many years, regardless of which way its market share is going and that's all that I care about.
I can say that I predicted Apple would release software to dual boot an Intel Mac but without proof who would believe me?
Only if you were John C. Dvorak. :D ;)
Apple produces very high quality machines and that's always going to ding them (ironically) in terms of market share as people will buy new machines less often and because loads of people aren't picking up bargain Macs at Wal-Mart. I know lots of Windows users and they buy new PCs on average every two years. I buy a new Mac on average every 5 years and most Mac users I know do the same. Market share is just meaningless, even when it's positive news.
Besides, Apple deals in the kind of quality that will keep it around for many, many years, regardless of which way its market share is going and that's all that I care about.
I can say that I predicted Apple would release software to dual boot an Intel Mac but without proof who would believe me?
Only if you were John C. Dvorak. :D ;)
Michael Scrip
May 4, 06:37 PM
I said "iPhone dominate smartphone market". What you mentioned is iOS vs Android. They're completely different.
If Apple did not have VZ iPhone, they will have 0 share outside GSM phone. Apple want the market share to translate into profit.
Apple is a company who's profit comes, mostly, from selling hardware. So market share of product matters to Apple. Google, on the other side, cares more on OS market share. As long as iPhone still win the "phone market", not the OS market share, Apple will do well.
Maybe you misunderstood me... I don't care about market share... either hardware share or software share. I don't think it matters how much of one thing there are against another thing.
You're right... Apple cares about profit... mostly from selling hardware. Which they do... lots of hardware. I think that's more important for a company.
Apple is, and has always been, a hardware company.
Google went down the route of putting their software on any device that wanted it... which is why I hate when people compare Android vs the iPhone.
If Apple did not have VZ iPhone, they will have 0 share outside GSM phone. Apple want the market share to translate into profit.
Apple is a company who's profit comes, mostly, from selling hardware. So market share of product matters to Apple. Google, on the other side, cares more on OS market share. As long as iPhone still win the "phone market", not the OS market share, Apple will do well.
Maybe you misunderstood me... I don't care about market share... either hardware share or software share. I don't think it matters how much of one thing there are against another thing.
You're right... Apple cares about profit... mostly from selling hardware. Which they do... lots of hardware. I think that's more important for a company.
Apple is, and has always been, a hardware company.
Google went down the route of putting their software on any device that wanted it... which is why I hate when people compare Android vs the iPhone.
randyharris
Jul 10, 04:08 PM
1. Pages 2 does have an auto-correct feature. It's in preferences.
A major functional snafu is that you can't add auto-correction data from the GUI of Pages, you have to go into the preferences. In Word you are able to right click on your red squiggly word, and you can set a default auto correct right there from the Contextual menu. NeoOffice has the same function. This is sorely lacking from Pages.
Randy
A major functional snafu is that you can't add auto-correction data from the GUI of Pages, you have to go into the preferences. In Word you are able to right click on your red squiggly word, and you can set a default auto correct right there from the Contextual menu. NeoOffice has the same function. This is sorely lacking from Pages.
Randy
more...
cmaier
Apr 21, 10:39 PM
Even more entertaining is the fact that Apple is so arrogant they fail to realize how stupid they look.
Suing their biggest vendor.
It doesn't get any more stupid than that.
This happens all the time, and usually results in the plaintiff paying less for the stuff they're buying from that vendor.
Suing their biggest vendor.
It doesn't get any more stupid than that.
This happens all the time, and usually results in the plaintiff paying less for the stuff they're buying from that vendor.
mjteix
Apr 13, 10:35 AM
Technical issues aside - odds are that Apple would rather sell you a new Mac Pro with Thunderbolt onboard.
That would mean video onboard too. Which would not be completly dumb since the MP also plays the role of the Xserve now, and that some usages don't need a powerful gpu. For those usages that need one (or two), the PCIe slots are there, and the onboard Thunderbolt port(s) could be used as data port(s) only.
The other way, is to release graphics cards including Thunderbolt port(s), and since Apple offers only a couple of them for the MP, it shouldn't be that complicated, especially when future Xeon SB cpus will offer 24/40 PCIe 3.0 lanes per cpu. A 16x PCIe 3.0 slot could accomodate 16x 2.0 lanes for the gpu itself and up to 16x 2.0 lanes for Thunderbolt controllers...
I think that Intel wants Thunderbolt to carry video no matter what, that's, I believe, the reason why they said "no PCIe upgrade card" for existing computers. Someone can probably make a 16x PCIe 2.0 combo card with gpu + Thunderbolt, but the gpu would have to be connected thru only 8x lanes with 4x/8x lanes for the Thunderbolt port(s). Maybe it's a good idea, maybe it's not... Technically, there's no reason why it can't be done.
In any case, Intel will release Thunderbolt's Developer Kits this quarter, so more technical info will be available, and some questions may be answered.
That would mean video onboard too. Which would not be completly dumb since the MP also plays the role of the Xserve now, and that some usages don't need a powerful gpu. For those usages that need one (or two), the PCIe slots are there, and the onboard Thunderbolt port(s) could be used as data port(s) only.
The other way, is to release graphics cards including Thunderbolt port(s), and since Apple offers only a couple of them for the MP, it shouldn't be that complicated, especially when future Xeon SB cpus will offer 24/40 PCIe 3.0 lanes per cpu. A 16x PCIe 3.0 slot could accomodate 16x 2.0 lanes for the gpu itself and up to 16x 2.0 lanes for Thunderbolt controllers...
I think that Intel wants Thunderbolt to carry video no matter what, that's, I believe, the reason why they said "no PCIe upgrade card" for existing computers. Someone can probably make a 16x PCIe 2.0 combo card with gpu + Thunderbolt, but the gpu would have to be connected thru only 8x lanes with 4x/8x lanes for the Thunderbolt port(s). Maybe it's a good idea, maybe it's not... Technically, there's no reason why it can't be done.
In any case, Intel will release Thunderbolt's Developer Kits this quarter, so more technical info will be available, and some questions may be answered.
more...
Rooskibar03
Apr 23, 04:04 PM
In general, the staff at most retail and restaurant chains are taught to notify the authorities and not get involved. Violating this policy can and will get you fired at best, or killed at worst.
And at what point in American society did helping a fellow human being in distress become less important that making 5 bucks an hour slinging burgers.
Seriously, if McD's fires you for doing the right thing I'm sure there is a BK nearby you can apply at.
IMHO the bystanders in this situation are just as guilty. Maybe Seinfield was onto something all those years ago.
And at what point in American society did helping a fellow human being in distress become less important that making 5 bucks an hour slinging burgers.
Seriously, if McD's fires you for doing the right thing I'm sure there is a BK nearby you can apply at.
IMHO the bystanders in this situation are just as guilty. Maybe Seinfield was onto something all those years ago.
generik
Aug 18, 04:51 PM
Yet that doesn't change the fact that the BSOD still exists in XP.
The code for kernel panics exists in MacOS too, from my experience sometimes the OS even croaks before it can even draw the cool graphical error screen out. At least Windows XP has a fully functional BSOD :rolleyes:
The code for kernel panics exists in MacOS too, from my experience sometimes the OS even croaks before it can even draw the cool graphical error screen out. At least Windows XP has a fully functional BSOD :rolleyes:
more...
southernpaws
Apr 23, 11:35 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
You enjoy seeing every issue from the perspective of someone who wants Apple to fail.
Apple cares very deeply about their product, which is why they don't give in to every spec junkie who demands the latest and greatest immediately. The current chips don't give a usable battery life in Apple's eyes. If you want to get a phone that eats batteries that's your business, but Apple doesn't have an interest in developing anything like that.
Nope. I see every issue from the consumer perspective - as I should (being a consumer). Any other perspective would be an abomination (unless for those who hold tons of AAPL shares).
Phrases like "in Apple's eyes" is a good example of what I am talking about. Apple does not use iPhones, consumers do. Consumer eyse are the only eyes that matter. And that is exactly why people are switching to Android. If Apple cares more about what they think is right than what I think is right (for me) it would be stupid for me to care about what Apple thinks or does.
They would still have to use two chips as I understand it: one to support CDMA and then the other to support LTE.
I doubt that but even if that was the case then what? Every other phone manufacturer on the planet can design a phone that has LTE and Apple could not? Because they spend on R&D much less than any other hi-tech company of comparable size?
And there we have it friends! This guy has no clue what he's talking about. There are no hybrid LTE/3G chips available yet, so the multiple chips thing has nothing to do with GSM/CDMA. If Apple wanted to support 3G AND LTE which they would have to do considering how scarce LTE is at the moment, the only way for them to do it is to use two chips. Battery life would drain.
Here's a site for you to consider: Thunderbolt Battery Life (http://www.gottabemobile.com/2011/03/18/htc-thunderbolt-battery-life/)
This is what people are talking about when they say the iPhone's battery life would be horrible. It has nothing to do with a hybrid CDMA/GSM chip, and has everything to do with the lack of a hybrid 3G/LTE chip.
In fact, hybrid CDMA/GSM chips exist, and are already being used by Apple.
You miss the point. I did not investigate the details about the number of chips. Not everyone cares. The point here is that there many people who want LTE and the there is Apple with their "single phone fits all" strategy. Here is a piece of relevant information for you from Information Week:
"In its recently quarterly earnings report, Verizon Wireless noted that more than 500,000 customers signed up for LTE services and/or devices during its most recent quarter. Add that to the 65,000 who signed up in December, and Verizon has about 565,000 people using its next-generation wireless network. At this rate, Verizon may have more than 2 million 4G users by the end of the year.
Of the 500,000 who signed up for 4G services this quarter, more than half (260,000) chose a 4G phone--the HTC Thunderbolt--that went on sale in mid-March. It scored a significant number of customers in its first two weeks of availability. That means between January 1 and March 15, about 240,000 people purchased other 4G devices, such as USB modems."
As you can see 260K people bought HTC Thunderbolt since Verizon started selling them (about a month). This translates to about 3 million phones annually. Clearly the demand is there. Also, you keep forgetting that other phones have swappable batteries.
Unfortunately, you don't see everything from your so called consumer perspective. Millions of people own iPhones, and it's not like they had no choice. Apple does a fine job of listening to the majority of consumers. Just not you
You enjoy seeing every issue from the perspective of someone who wants Apple to fail.
Apple cares very deeply about their product, which is why they don't give in to every spec junkie who demands the latest and greatest immediately. The current chips don't give a usable battery life in Apple's eyes. If you want to get a phone that eats batteries that's your business, but Apple doesn't have an interest in developing anything like that.
Nope. I see every issue from the consumer perspective - as I should (being a consumer). Any other perspective would be an abomination (unless for those who hold tons of AAPL shares).
Phrases like "in Apple's eyes" is a good example of what I am talking about. Apple does not use iPhones, consumers do. Consumer eyse are the only eyes that matter. And that is exactly why people are switching to Android. If Apple cares more about what they think is right than what I think is right (for me) it would be stupid for me to care about what Apple thinks or does.
They would still have to use two chips as I understand it: one to support CDMA and then the other to support LTE.
I doubt that but even if that was the case then what? Every other phone manufacturer on the planet can design a phone that has LTE and Apple could not? Because they spend on R&D much less than any other hi-tech company of comparable size?
And there we have it friends! This guy has no clue what he's talking about. There are no hybrid LTE/3G chips available yet, so the multiple chips thing has nothing to do with GSM/CDMA. If Apple wanted to support 3G AND LTE which they would have to do considering how scarce LTE is at the moment, the only way for them to do it is to use two chips. Battery life would drain.
Here's a site for you to consider: Thunderbolt Battery Life (http://www.gottabemobile.com/2011/03/18/htc-thunderbolt-battery-life/)
This is what people are talking about when they say the iPhone's battery life would be horrible. It has nothing to do with a hybrid CDMA/GSM chip, and has everything to do with the lack of a hybrid 3G/LTE chip.
In fact, hybrid CDMA/GSM chips exist, and are already being used by Apple.
You miss the point. I did not investigate the details about the number of chips. Not everyone cares. The point here is that there many people who want LTE and the there is Apple with their "single phone fits all" strategy. Here is a piece of relevant information for you from Information Week:
"In its recently quarterly earnings report, Verizon Wireless noted that more than 500,000 customers signed up for LTE services and/or devices during its most recent quarter. Add that to the 65,000 who signed up in December, and Verizon has about 565,000 people using its next-generation wireless network. At this rate, Verizon may have more than 2 million 4G users by the end of the year.
Of the 500,000 who signed up for 4G services this quarter, more than half (260,000) chose a 4G phone--the HTC Thunderbolt--that went on sale in mid-March. It scored a significant number of customers in its first two weeks of availability. That means between January 1 and March 15, about 240,000 people purchased other 4G devices, such as USB modems."
As you can see 260K people bought HTC Thunderbolt since Verizon started selling them (about a month). This translates to about 3 million phones annually. Clearly the demand is there. Also, you keep forgetting that other phones have swappable batteries.
Unfortunately, you don't see everything from your so called consumer perspective. Millions of people own iPhones, and it's not like they had no choice. Apple does a fine job of listening to the majority of consumers. Just not you
Cheerwino
Apr 14, 08:06 AM
Guys, I didn't want to start a new thread, but...
Should I buy the ix.Mac.MarketingName now? I've heard the ix.Mac.MarketingName 2 is going to be much more betterer. Should I buy now or wait? I was waiting for the price to come down, but it hasn't changed in the entire 5 minutes I've known about this product...
Sent by ix.Man.NotVerySerious
If it has retina and Thunderbolt, I'm getting first gen. You can always sell it on Craigslist the day before Gen 2 comes out for twice what you paid for it.
Should I buy the ix.Mac.MarketingName now? I've heard the ix.Mac.MarketingName 2 is going to be much more betterer. Should I buy now or wait? I was waiting for the price to come down, but it hasn't changed in the entire 5 minutes I've known about this product...
Sent by ix.Man.NotVerySerious
If it has retina and Thunderbolt, I'm getting first gen. You can always sell it on Craigslist the day before Gen 2 comes out for twice what you paid for it.
more...
diamond.g
Apr 12, 03:26 PM
If it's connections to your laptop, that's a win right there. Once you've set up the other connected devices, you won't have to mess with them whenever you go somewhere with the laptop.
The only connection I want going to my laptop is power. Everything else needs to be wireless. That is winning, duh. ;)
The only connection I want going to my laptop is power. Everything else needs to be wireless. That is winning, duh. ;)
Melrose
Feb 1, 04:27 AM
I've lived next door to people like him. If you idolize this man, you have a screw loose.
more...
twoodcc
Nov 4, 05:14 PM
Welcome!
Please run the bigadv units, you will get much better PPD. It looks like you are running the regular SMP client for now.
Use -smp 8 if the are 2008 or earlier, -smp 16 if they are 2009 otco...
will -smp 8 be fast enough?
Please run the bigadv units, you will get much better PPD. It looks like you are running the regular SMP client for now.
Use -smp 8 if the are 2008 or earlier, -smp 16 if they are 2009 otco...
will -smp 8 be fast enough?
Xero910
Apr 28, 08:03 PM
The UV protection necessary for the white iPhone didn't come out of thin air. The added thickness was likely to provide an additional layer of protection. I'd be curious to see its innards, which is no doubt just around the corner. C'mon iFixit, rip it apart!
more...
nick004
Oct 24, 07:42 AM
anyone got benchmarks??? :)
LaMerVipere
Jul 24, 05:52 PM
The Might Mouse is the worst piece of crap Apple has ever released. Everyone knows it!
The only reason anyone would buy this thing is because of blind Apple brand loyalty.
The only reason anyone would buy this thing is because of blind Apple brand loyalty.
more...
KingYaba
Jun 7, 03:51 AM
I think gettin' a head start on the bar exam would be a great use of that kid's time. He could be our next Supreme Court justice. :p
MarximusMG
Apr 13, 02:11 PM
I'm not so sure about this actually having any chance of happening. But if it did, I would be the first in line for one.
Moyank24
Apr 30, 09:37 PM
So long, and thanks for all the fish!
come on boys now, make me proud!
I'll keep following and update the spreadsheet in my sig (maybe not til monday) as a minimal satisfaction (plus a bigger one if the village win), i have a perfect record this game, only voted to lynch the wolves!
go villas!
There Moyank!, I hear your apres-mort parties are to die for!
I've got some Ol' Janx Spirit....
Oh they are. And the best part is there are no sandwiches in the afterlife.
come on boys now, make me proud!
I'll keep following and update the spreadsheet in my sig (maybe not til monday) as a minimal satisfaction (plus a bigger one if the village win), i have a perfect record this game, only voted to lynch the wolves!
go villas!
There Moyank!, I hear your apres-mort parties are to die for!
I've got some Ol' Janx Spirit....
Oh they are. And the best part is there are no sandwiches in the afterlife.
ucfgrad93
Feb 28, 01:53 PM
More Charlie Sheen cats here (http://mediumlarge.wordpress.com/2011/02/24/cats-quote-charlie-sheen/) and here. (http://mediumlarge.wordpress.com/2011/02/28/cats-quote-charlie-sheen-morning-news-edition/)
Thanks for the links! They were pretty funny. Here is my favorite.
Thanks for the links! They were pretty funny. Here is my favorite.
Satori
Apr 12, 09:24 AM
If enough people take a guess on the release date of the next iPhone, someone is going to be right!
mccldwll
Apr 29, 06:41 AM
Ok, that works if you are thinking of getting a cellphone vs. not getting a cellphone.
But when you are thinking of getting what type of cellphone, no, it doesn't count. Cause by deciding you are getting a cellphone but trying to decide which type, you already committed to buying the plan,what type of cellphone does not affect the cost of the plan, you are going to pay it regardless. So the cost of the plan really doesn't count for the cost of the cellphone when you are comparing cellphones together.
...........
The point is when we are comparing different cellphones to each other, the service doesn't matter cause if you are getting the cellphone, you are going to pay the service regardless and which cellphone you get isn't going to affect the service's price. Therefore it is irrelevant when talking cost of one cellphone vs. another to bring in the cost o the contract.
Carriers love consumers who think like you do. It's how they are able to lock people into contracts and get rid of crappy phones--make them believe that getting a POS andrrhoid for free is such a wonderful deal compared to paying $200 for an iPhone 4 (forget the fact that that they'll be stuck with a piece of junk for a long time, suffering with poor support and function, and stuck with something completely worthless at the end, all because advertisers dangle bright, shiny objects in front of their eyes and let them believe they're saving so much in the beginning).
But when you are thinking of getting what type of cellphone, no, it doesn't count. Cause by deciding you are getting a cellphone but trying to decide which type, you already committed to buying the plan,what type of cellphone does not affect the cost of the plan, you are going to pay it regardless. So the cost of the plan really doesn't count for the cost of the cellphone when you are comparing cellphones together.
...........
The point is when we are comparing different cellphones to each other, the service doesn't matter cause if you are getting the cellphone, you are going to pay the service regardless and which cellphone you get isn't going to affect the service's price. Therefore it is irrelevant when talking cost of one cellphone vs. another to bring in the cost o the contract.
Carriers love consumers who think like you do. It's how they are able to lock people into contracts and get rid of crappy phones--make them believe that getting a POS andrrhoid for free is such a wonderful deal compared to paying $200 for an iPhone 4 (forget the fact that that they'll be stuck with a piece of junk for a long time, suffering with poor support and function, and stuck with something completely worthless at the end, all because advertisers dangle bright, shiny objects in front of their eyes and let them believe they're saving so much in the beginning).
TwoSocEmBoppers
Mar 16, 12:26 PM
IIRC, the manager said that they only had 16GB WiFi. But I had already tuned out at that point since I was there for AT&T, so I may have misheard.
First off...Eriden nice meeting you today, sir! Was a fun morning less the disappointment of neither of us getting our desired model.
Anyways, Eriden is correct. The Brea store had only 16GB Black Wifi and a mix of white and black 16, 32, and 64 Verizon iPads.
*continues hunt for the elusive 32GB black wifi*
Ample supply of 64 Verizon at SCP for no, but was told by the mall cop that we were not allowed to "loiter" and he told everyone in the back of the line to leave or we would be forced to leave. Real nice.
Brea had a 105 year old mall cop who yelled at some kids sitting in the middle of the floor. I'm almost positive he called for backup. Haha
Anyway, off to order my GSM version online
Just ordered mine online. At least have one in the pipeline. And hey...it is getting shipped to Mass so I'll save $20 on sales tax :)
Are stores open at 9am today instead of the usual 10am?
Brea did.
First off...Eriden nice meeting you today, sir! Was a fun morning less the disappointment of neither of us getting our desired model.
Anyways, Eriden is correct. The Brea store had only 16GB Black Wifi and a mix of white and black 16, 32, and 64 Verizon iPads.
*continues hunt for the elusive 32GB black wifi*
Ample supply of 64 Verizon at SCP for no, but was told by the mall cop that we were not allowed to "loiter" and he told everyone in the back of the line to leave or we would be forced to leave. Real nice.
Brea had a 105 year old mall cop who yelled at some kids sitting in the middle of the floor. I'm almost positive he called for backup. Haha
Anyway, off to order my GSM version online
Just ordered mine online. At least have one in the pipeline. And hey...it is getting shipped to Mass so I'll save $20 on sales tax :)
Are stores open at 9am today instead of the usual 10am?
Brea did.
Bonsai1214
Jan 29, 11:04 AM
The uDAC-2 has both a DAC and an amp.
ah, didn't see it was uDAC-2. my fault.
ah, didn't see it was uDAC-2. my fault.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar