WeegieMac
Mar 18, 02:49 AM
I don't know of many people who buy a �500 iPhone outright. Most (Especially in the UK) will be on a 18-24 month contract.
If you buy it outright for �500 then it's your device with no contract. When you buy it outright it's up to you to buy a SIM and find a plan.
I run my iPhone 4 on O2's Unlimited PAYG plan, giving me free & unlimited calls and texts to other O2 users (my entire family and all friends bar one are on O2), for �15 per month. I added the web bolt on for �10 per month, which means for every �15 I top up, O2 take �10 off for my 500mb web access bolt on.
So, for �15 a month I get free calls and texts to everyone I know and 500mb of 3G internet. And best of all, I can change whenever I like because the phone is unlocked and SIM free right out the box.
If you buy it outright for �500 then it's your device with no contract. When you buy it outright it's up to you to buy a SIM and find a plan.
I run my iPhone 4 on O2's Unlimited PAYG plan, giving me free & unlimited calls and texts to other O2 users (my entire family and all friends bar one are on O2), for �15 per month. I added the web bolt on for �10 per month, which means for every �15 I top up, O2 take �10 off for my 500mb web access bolt on.
So, for �15 a month I get free calls and texts to everyone I know and 500mb of 3G internet. And best of all, I can change whenever I like because the phone is unlocked and SIM free right out the box.
TripHop
Apr 25, 11:44 PM
I don't know if I'd even want them to bother if it's only going from 3.5 to 3.7. Doesn't seem like the difference would be noticeable.It's The Dual Core A5 Inside And The Better Rear Camera That Are Most Important. While I'm all for up to a 4" screen within a similar to the current size form factor, I know from iPad 2 experience that the A5 is the most important new component. Performance is radically better with A5 inside. :)
I would really appreciate a 64GB storage model even if I had to pay $399 for it. I don't know what the market is for that much storage capacity. Might be too small for Apple to bother offering. But I keep wishing for this each year.
My guess is it will ship in the September-October time frame - early Fall. I also think they may add T-Mobile as a carrier then, perhaps even Sprint. I think it's only a matter of another year or two at the most for iPhones to be on all major US domestic carriers.
I would really appreciate a 64GB storage model even if I had to pay $399 for it. I don't know what the market is for that much storage capacity. Might be too small for Apple to bother offering. But I keep wishing for this each year.
My guess is it will ship in the September-October time frame - early Fall. I also think they may add T-Mobile as a carrier then, perhaps even Sprint. I think it's only a matter of another year or two at the most for iPhones to be on all major US domestic carriers.
jholzner
Sep 12, 08:38 AM
movies and gaming video :rolleyes:
I just came here to post this info. I'll include the image in my post. Too bad it doesn't list a price. Looks like the rumors of it ONLY including Disney movies are wrong.
[Edit: yeah, later posters are probably right, just short clips]
http://static.flickr.com/95/241496992_e86c8584c0_d.jpg
I just came here to post this info. I'll include the image in my post. Too bad it doesn't list a price. Looks like the rumors of it ONLY including Disney movies are wrong.
[Edit: yeah, later posters are probably right, just short clips]
http://static.flickr.com/95/241496992_e86c8584c0_d.jpg
roadbloc
Mar 14, 06:54 AM
Garageband is a great product and is pretty innovative.
I disagree. GarageBand is nothing but a mere childs toy compaired to the likes of Pro-Tools and the Ableton Suite. Even Logic (GarageBand for grown ups) is pretty damn basic compaired to what DigiDesign put into their products.
Steve can say "This is not a toy!" in his demos as much as he likes. GarageBand is a toy.
I disagree. GarageBand is nothing but a mere childs toy compaired to the likes of Pro-Tools and the Ableton Suite. Even Logic (GarageBand for grown ups) is pretty damn basic compaired to what DigiDesign put into their products.
Steve can say "This is not a toy!" in his demos as much as he likes. GarageBand is a toy.
more...
DoFoT9
May 12, 07:02 PM
haha thanks. i try to be.
i thought about doing this, and it wouldn't be very hard to do, but if something goes wrong, there's really nothing i can do remotely. the only things that seem to go wrong is the computer crashing, or restarting. either way, i don't have auto login, so i wouldn't be able to get to it remotely. heat isn't the problem right now (it was when i was trying 4.0 ghz - or 4 x gpu).
if the machines resboot then there is no problem with remote login. setup some sort of VNC server that opens once the machine starts up and away you go! i can do that to any of my machines from external sites - works a treat :D
my main 3 rigs (i need names!)
1. Asus - running 3.5 ghz i7 920. 2 x GTX 260 Slice?
2. Alienware - 3.6 ghz i7 920 now. 2 x GTX 260 Dice?
3. home built (need name) - 3.6 ghz i7 930 now. 1 x GTX 260, 1 x GTS 250. Sandy?
and i've got my ps3 folding and my macbook pro gpu folding right now, but not all the time
thats a hell of alot of power!!!!! atm i only have my i7 iMac - 4 cores, and crappy E4600 @2.4ghz lol. the PC has a 8500GT - can that be used in any way? it worked with BOINC when i used to do SETI. it was about 2x faster then my CPU haha.
i thought about doing this, and it wouldn't be very hard to do, but if something goes wrong, there's really nothing i can do remotely. the only things that seem to go wrong is the computer crashing, or restarting. either way, i don't have auto login, so i wouldn't be able to get to it remotely. heat isn't the problem right now (it was when i was trying 4.0 ghz - or 4 x gpu).
if the machines resboot then there is no problem with remote login. setup some sort of VNC server that opens once the machine starts up and away you go! i can do that to any of my machines from external sites - works a treat :D
my main 3 rigs (i need names!)
1. Asus - running 3.5 ghz i7 920. 2 x GTX 260 Slice?
2. Alienware - 3.6 ghz i7 920 now. 2 x GTX 260 Dice?
3. home built (need name) - 3.6 ghz i7 930 now. 1 x GTX 260, 1 x GTS 250. Sandy?
and i've got my ps3 folding and my macbook pro gpu folding right now, but not all the time
thats a hell of alot of power!!!!! atm i only have my i7 iMac - 4 cores, and crappy E4600 @2.4ghz lol. the PC has a 8500GT - can that be used in any way? it worked with BOINC when i used to do SETI. it was about 2x faster then my CPU haha.
Osarkon
Jan 10, 04:09 PM
Whilst hilarious for the first few times, it did go on way too far.
And they shouldn't have done it to live presentations, that's just plain evil.
I also hope they're not allowed to Macworld. Even if they have matured up, banning them from it this year will ensure that they don't misbehave the next time.
And they shouldn't have done it to live presentations, that's just plain evil.
I also hope they're not allowed to Macworld. Even if they have matured up, banning them from it this year will ensure that they don't misbehave the next time.
more...
-hh
Oct 19, 10:16 AM
The market share (and Princeton report) are favorable news for the Mac platform and for Apple.
But it is interesting to read this from Gartner, in the light that this very same Company is also in the news right now for their "Macs should be made by Dell" splash (actual paper was "Apple Should License the Mac to Dell")
In conjunction with this articles observation that Dell's PC marketshare has been sliding (lost worldwide #1 to HP, etc), along with business reports that aren't rosey on Dell's margins (nor their get well plan, which isn't working), the newsfolk who picked up on Gartner really got their headline wrong. It really should have been IMO:
"Dell sliding bad - needs rescue in form of Mac licence from Apple".
In said report (the other one, not this one) Gartner suggested that 'Apple should concentrate on what it does best - create software - and make use of Dell's production and distribution infrastructure.' In this report, there's not a peep of such 'black clouds on the horizon' for Apple ... must be two different guys in the Gartner shop :)
Quite interesting, since the bottom line right now is that the Mac Pro is known to be less expensive than the Dell equivalent, for what does that suggest about expertise in cutting deals with Intel, and efficiently running production & distrubution?
The reality is that Apple generally contracts out much of their manufacturing, true. However, so does Dell. As such, why should Apple bother to pay to go through Dell? That's called using a "Middle Man" and this intermediate step would increase costs, which would then either lower Apple's unit profits, or force them to raise prices ... which hearkens the 'Macs cost more' paradigm.
This is why Gartner's suggestion seems to be more aimed to help Dell through their current fiscal troubles but does not help Apple in any meaningful way at this time.
Perhaps Apple will need Dell for access to Dell's assemblers, but that would only occur when Apple's total market share gets huge - say exceeds 33%. Barring a Vista-catastrophy, at the current rate of market share growth, we're still more than a year or two away from having to cross that bridge, which ironically gives Michael Dell plenty of time to become more retrospective and apologetic about inflammatory comments he has made of Apple in the past.
-hh
PS: if you look more closely at Apple's 3Q numbers, you'll see that desktop sales were relatively flat: the growth was in laptops.
But it is interesting to read this from Gartner, in the light that this very same Company is also in the news right now for their "Macs should be made by Dell" splash (actual paper was "Apple Should License the Mac to Dell")
In conjunction with this articles observation that Dell's PC marketshare has been sliding (lost worldwide #1 to HP, etc), along with business reports that aren't rosey on Dell's margins (nor their get well plan, which isn't working), the newsfolk who picked up on Gartner really got their headline wrong. It really should have been IMO:
"Dell sliding bad - needs rescue in form of Mac licence from Apple".
In said report (the other one, not this one) Gartner suggested that 'Apple should concentrate on what it does best - create software - and make use of Dell's production and distribution infrastructure.' In this report, there's not a peep of such 'black clouds on the horizon' for Apple ... must be two different guys in the Gartner shop :)
Quite interesting, since the bottom line right now is that the Mac Pro is known to be less expensive than the Dell equivalent, for what does that suggest about expertise in cutting deals with Intel, and efficiently running production & distrubution?
The reality is that Apple generally contracts out much of their manufacturing, true. However, so does Dell. As such, why should Apple bother to pay to go through Dell? That's called using a "Middle Man" and this intermediate step would increase costs, which would then either lower Apple's unit profits, or force them to raise prices ... which hearkens the 'Macs cost more' paradigm.
This is why Gartner's suggestion seems to be more aimed to help Dell through their current fiscal troubles but does not help Apple in any meaningful way at this time.
Perhaps Apple will need Dell for access to Dell's assemblers, but that would only occur when Apple's total market share gets huge - say exceeds 33%. Barring a Vista-catastrophy, at the current rate of market share growth, we're still more than a year or two away from having to cross that bridge, which ironically gives Michael Dell plenty of time to become more retrospective and apologetic about inflammatory comments he has made of Apple in the past.
-hh
PS: if you look more closely at Apple's 3Q numbers, you'll see that desktop sales were relatively flat: the growth was in laptops.
scott523
Oct 3, 01:25 PM
This is a little disappointing that Steve is confirming to keynote MWSF 2007 when it's just October, which means he probably wants us to wait (I hope not). :(
Besides, hasn't Steve keynoted MWSF every year?
Besides, hasn't Steve keynoted MWSF every year?
more...
andrewbecks
May 2, 08:55 PM
Really its not brain surgery.
Windows 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, XP (5.0), Vista (6.0), Windows 7 (7.0).
Actually, if I'm not mistaken, I believe that Windows 7 is actually version 6.1.
v1: Windows 1.0
v2: Windows 2.0
v3: Windows 3.x, Windows NT 3.1
v4: Windows 95 (4.0.x), Windows NT 4 (also 4.0.x), Windows 98 (4.1.x), Windows ME (4.9)
v5: Windows 2000 (5.0.x), Windows XP (5.1.x), Windows XP 64-bit (5.2.x)
v6: Windows Vista (6.0.x), Windows 7 (6.1.x)
Don't ask me why--seems a bit illogical to me. Especially since, at some point, they'll likely have a v7.x and it will likely create additional confusion.
Wikipedia has a little more detail on this:
There has been some confusion over naming the product Windows 7, while versioning it as 6.1 to indicate its similar build to Vista and increase compatibility with applications that only check major version numbers, similar to Windows 2000 and Windows XP both having 5.x version numbers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_7
Windows 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, XP (5.0), Vista (6.0), Windows 7 (7.0).
Actually, if I'm not mistaken, I believe that Windows 7 is actually version 6.1.
v1: Windows 1.0
v2: Windows 2.0
v3: Windows 3.x, Windows NT 3.1
v4: Windows 95 (4.0.x), Windows NT 4 (also 4.0.x), Windows 98 (4.1.x), Windows ME (4.9)
v5: Windows 2000 (5.0.x), Windows XP (5.1.x), Windows XP 64-bit (5.2.x)
v6: Windows Vista (6.0.x), Windows 7 (6.1.x)
Don't ask me why--seems a bit illogical to me. Especially since, at some point, they'll likely have a v7.x and it will likely create additional confusion.
Wikipedia has a little more detail on this:
There has been some confusion over naming the product Windows 7, while versioning it as 6.1 to indicate its similar build to Vista and increase compatibility with applications that only check major version numbers, similar to Windows 2000 and Windows XP both having 5.x version numbers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_7
m-dogg
Jan 5, 04:06 PM
This is a great idea for those that would like this option. MR rocks as always!
Me though, I prefer the frequent frantic checks to the site as I try to get all my 'real work' done at the office.
One year everyone was going out to lunch and I lied and said I had too much work to do...just so I could eat at my desk and get all the late-breaking news. My co-workers would think I was weird if I said why I really wasn't going...
Yes, I'm a geek. :p
Me though, I prefer the frequent frantic checks to the site as I try to get all my 'real work' done at the office.
One year everyone was going out to lunch and I lied and said I had too much work to do...just so I could eat at my desk and get all the late-breaking news. My co-workers would think I was weird if I said why I really wasn't going...
Yes, I'm a geek. :p
more...
Thinine
Apr 29, 03:53 PM
Finally, Apple has made a significant change to one of the first user interface changes observed (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/10/25/mac-os-x-lion-notes-ios-scroll-bars-any-corner-resizing-dock-changes/) way back in October when Apple first demoed Mac OS X Lion: iOS-style scrollbars. Initial builds of Mac OS X Lion had featured scrollbars that overlaid the window's comments, appearing only when necessary and then disappearing after a brief period of time.
Apple has done away with that concept, returning to fixed scrollbars (http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/29/163551-lion_scrollbar_non_overlay.jpg) along the right side of each window, although they do retain the dark iOS-like appearance. The refined scrollbars are present at all times and do not disappear after use.
No they haven't. Fading is now a user preference. You can have them fade automatically, stay all the time, or fade according to your input device.
Apple has done away with that concept, returning to fixed scrollbars (http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/29/163551-lion_scrollbar_non_overlay.jpg) along the right side of each window, although they do retain the dark iOS-like appearance. The refined scrollbars are present at all times and do not disappear after use.
No they haven't. Fading is now a user preference. You can have them fade automatically, stay all the time, or fade according to your input device.
twoodcc
May 16, 08:07 PM
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.
nice! did you get your passkey?
nice! did you get your passkey?
more...
Machead III
Sep 12, 03:58 AM
6 (SIX) PM UK time :)
I thought it was 5pm?
I thought it was 5pm?
trunkster
Oct 6, 02:47 PM
Verizon really doesn't offer any good phones. The phones with cheap data plans can hardly handle the processing speed of loading the websites so sure it's 3G, it will load just as slow as edge.
more...
kdarling
May 2, 06:10 PM
all I am saying is that it is far more likely that this is a bug than intentional.
+1
I am sure that if I asked anybody today if they thought that file size was too large, they would definitely use their 20/20 hindsight to say "of course it is". I would.
Exactly.
Of course, the right thing to do would've been to take some field trips and/or gather sample data over a week's commute. At least take some time to do some serious thinking about the size.
Unfortunately, Apple says they like to operate "like a startup", shuffling engineers from one project to another. That usually doesn't lead to well debugged software, because there isn't continuous daily code ownership nor time to experiment.
(We're seeing the results of this "startup" mode over and over again, from those incorrect status bar signal levels, to not testing the antenna without a case, to all the Daylight Savings bugs. It's like development code is being left in all over the place. It's not just Apple, either. Such is life these days even in big corporations. They're too cheap to hire enough people.)
So a programmer in such a crunch position probably picked a number out of thin air. Perhaps they turned to a coworker and asked, "How big should I make this cache? A megabyte? Less?" and they answered " Better too much cache than too little. Go for it, make it two megabytes just in case."
Happens all the time in real life. When there's so much code to do and worry about, a person has to pick their time focus, and this one must've seemed inconsequential. As you said, hindsight is easy.
+1
I am sure that if I asked anybody today if they thought that file size was too large, they would definitely use their 20/20 hindsight to say "of course it is". I would.
Exactly.
Of course, the right thing to do would've been to take some field trips and/or gather sample data over a week's commute. At least take some time to do some serious thinking about the size.
Unfortunately, Apple says they like to operate "like a startup", shuffling engineers from one project to another. That usually doesn't lead to well debugged software, because there isn't continuous daily code ownership nor time to experiment.
(We're seeing the results of this "startup" mode over and over again, from those incorrect status bar signal levels, to not testing the antenna without a case, to all the Daylight Savings bugs. It's like development code is being left in all over the place. It's not just Apple, either. Such is life these days even in big corporations. They're too cheap to hire enough people.)
So a programmer in such a crunch position probably picked a number out of thin air. Perhaps they turned to a coworker and asked, "How big should I make this cache? A megabyte? Less?" and they answered " Better too much cache than too little. Go for it, make it two megabytes just in case."
Happens all the time in real life. When there's so much code to do and worry about, a person has to pick their time focus, and this one must've seemed inconsequential. As you said, hindsight is easy.
IJ Reilly
Oct 19, 03:37 PM
I don't doubt this, but from someone who has been using Windows since 3.1.1, take my word that Vista is a gigantic improvement over XP. While I agree that MS's claims of grandure aren't justified, there's no denying that Vista is a noteworthy upgrade (rather than an 8-month downgrade until SP1 surfaces).
So what? Really, not be flip, but XP was a big improvement over 98, and 98 was a bit improvement over 95, etc. A very significant number of people simply do not care. If XP or 98 or whatever they are using suffices, then they are not going to take the Vista plunge.
You're half right and half wrong. Some people wouldn't even consider upgrading (whether it's because they don't know what Vista is / how it's different or due to apathy). More people, however, will (one way or another) become convinced that an upgrade is necessary. They're also convinced that whatever slop MS puts on their plate is good enough (as you suggested). They say, "This upgrade from XP to Vista is good enough for MS so it's good enough for me. No need to explore the other options."
Microsoft has taught its customers that the risks can easily outweigh the benefits. That lesson may be finally sinking in.
And sadly, it doesn't matter how they're sold. Once people start using Vista and see that it's an improvement over what they've been using. They won't consider a switch to the Mac. People talk often about iLemmings, but it really goes QUITE understated the number of MS Lemmings there are. (Think "1984" ad.) MS has great power over those who are unconscious to the computing world. Vista is not going to change that. The only thing that will drive people to the Mac is their becoming "conscious." That is much harder to do and Apple deserves MUCH applause for the amount of waking up they've done to the MS Lemmings.
Well it does and it doesn't. If Microsoft is looking for a big upgrade movement, then I think they're not going to get it. And I don't think that a lot people will walk into Best Buy and buy a new PC because they like the look of Vista. As always, I believe the need that drives new PC purchases is to get new hardware, not the newest version of Windows. I think I've got history on my side of this debate. But we shall see!
So what? Really, not be flip, but XP was a big improvement over 98, and 98 was a bit improvement over 95, etc. A very significant number of people simply do not care. If XP or 98 or whatever they are using suffices, then they are not going to take the Vista plunge.
You're half right and half wrong. Some people wouldn't even consider upgrading (whether it's because they don't know what Vista is / how it's different or due to apathy). More people, however, will (one way or another) become convinced that an upgrade is necessary. They're also convinced that whatever slop MS puts on their plate is good enough (as you suggested). They say, "This upgrade from XP to Vista is good enough for MS so it's good enough for me. No need to explore the other options."
Microsoft has taught its customers that the risks can easily outweigh the benefits. That lesson may be finally sinking in.
And sadly, it doesn't matter how they're sold. Once people start using Vista and see that it's an improvement over what they've been using. They won't consider a switch to the Mac. People talk often about iLemmings, but it really goes QUITE understated the number of MS Lemmings there are. (Think "1984" ad.) MS has great power over those who are unconscious to the computing world. Vista is not going to change that. The only thing that will drive people to the Mac is their becoming "conscious." That is much harder to do and Apple deserves MUCH applause for the amount of waking up they've done to the MS Lemmings.
Well it does and it doesn't. If Microsoft is looking for a big upgrade movement, then I think they're not going to get it. And I don't think that a lot people will walk into Best Buy and buy a new PC because they like the look of Vista. As always, I believe the need that drives new PC purchases is to get new hardware, not the newest version of Windows. I think I've got history on my side of this debate. But we shall see!
more...
ten-oak-druid
Apr 29, 09:44 PM
As for this control panel issue with buttons versus sliders, why does Apple feel they need to group expose and spaces under one control panel anyway?
Why not just make them separate control panels?
Why not just make them separate control panels?
psycoswimmer
Jan 9, 01:44 PM
Darn, I expected to come home from school and have it be there. :P I'm not going to be tempted to check any sites or do anything where there might be a spoiler. I think this will be a good time to practice piano & do homework. :)
Question: When did the keynote end? Was it 11 PM EST or PST? If it was PST, that would mean the keynote only ended 44 minutes ago (about). :eek:
Edit: MR is being really slow right now for me.
Question: When did the keynote end? Was it 11 PM EST or PST? If it was PST, that would mean the keynote only ended 44 minutes ago (about). :eek:
Edit: MR is being really slow right now for me.
D1G1T4L
Mar 17, 05:38 PM
Actually, you said:
Sorry, but that's the same at laughing at the people, ie, a form of being "Holier than thou." After all, what did your post add to this discussion except to say that you think you're above the comments being posted.
Nice try at excusing yourself though, "buddy".
If that makes you feel better I'm fine with you calling me holier than thou :D. Feel free to continue bashing the OP. I get a good laugh.
Sorry, but that's the same at laughing at the people, ie, a form of being "Holier than thou." After all, what did your post add to this discussion except to say that you think you're above the comments being posted.
Nice try at excusing yourself though, "buddy".
If that makes you feel better I'm fine with you calling me holier than thou :D. Feel free to continue bashing the OP. I get a good laugh.
Willis
Oct 17, 10:43 AM
so it's kind of a mixture here.
1. more capacity -> blu-ray
2. lower price -> hd-dvd
3. porn industry choses the cheapest format -> hd-dvd
Actually, the porn industry has gone with Blu-Ray.
1. more capacity -> blu-ray
2. lower price -> hd-dvd
3. porn industry choses the cheapest format -> hd-dvd
Actually, the porn industry has gone with Blu-Ray.
larrylaffer
Apr 8, 01:07 PM
"Rating: -45"
haha
haha
aiqw9182
Mar 28, 03:12 PM
I'll give it does have advantages. I don't think I would agree that it is "a hell of a lot easier", as most apps have an automatic updater or some mechanism to make you aware that an update is available.
The Mac App store updating mechanism is flawed, at least in my experience. For example, a few days ago the Mac App Store did not detect that I had the app Awaken 4 on my mac, even thought they host Awaken 5 on the store. I had to go to the developers website and download Awaken 5 and then update it the old fashioned way.
I, like many people, had a hard time getting XCode 4.00 to be upgraded to XCode 4.01. AppStore simply wouldn't recognize that I had previously purchased XCode 4 (yes, I had the XCode installer in /applications ). Downloading outside of the appstore would have been vastly easier...
I never said it was perfect. If you have many apps as I do that DON'T have automatic updates then it is a royal pain in the ass to go to their site(assuming you even know where it is), download it again, unpackage the dmg, and place it in my applications folder. Sure, if you only have a few apps then it isn't THAT bad but I have upwards to 20 apps that I have to do this with. It's a chore. With the Mac App Store I can take a quick glance, click update all if there are any updates and be done with it.
The Mac App store updating mechanism is flawed, at least in my experience. For example, a few days ago the Mac App Store did not detect that I had the app Awaken 4 on my mac, even thought they host Awaken 5 on the store. I had to go to the developers website and download Awaken 5 and then update it the old fashioned way.
I, like many people, had a hard time getting XCode 4.00 to be upgraded to XCode 4.01. AppStore simply wouldn't recognize that I had previously purchased XCode 4 (yes, I had the XCode installer in /applications ). Downloading outside of the appstore would have been vastly easier...
I never said it was perfect. If you have many apps as I do that DON'T have automatic updates then it is a royal pain in the ass to go to their site(assuming you even know where it is), download it again, unpackage the dmg, and place it in my applications folder. Sure, if you only have a few apps then it isn't THAT bad but I have upwards to 20 apps that I have to do this with. It's a chore. With the Mac App Store I can take a quick glance, click update all if there are any updates and be done with it.
macFanDave
Aug 1, 11:55 AM
Denmark, Norway and Sweden are just about the happiest countries in the world. Taking the iTMS away from them ought to knock them down a few pegs!
penter
Dec 25, 02:20 PM
Yes they do. BUT not when it means a crap ass experience for the customer. Because that just results in returns, complaints etc. LTE right now is only in a handful of major cities and not even perfect coverage there.
As for the whole "but android" argument, Apple doesn't do things just because everyone else does. Which is why we still don't have blu-ray in their computers despite every other computer (including even some so called netbooks) having had blu-ray drives for at least the last year. We also don't have Flash in the iphone etc despite every other smart phone having Flash and every other announced tablet saying it would.
I don't buy the flash argument. Thats actually a pretty complicated subject...
But I see what you mean.
Now, can anyone please explain what the difference between 'true 4G' and LTE?
Is LTE something else entirely? Something that bridges the CDMA and GSM technologies, allowing CDMA phones to use chips, and chip-based phones to be compatible with CDMA networks?
I've wikipediaed the whole deal, but i don't really get it...
It seems like there are *two* kinds of LTE as well. Is that where the difference between true 4G and fake 4G lies? One is LTE, and the other is TRUE LTE?
And how can a carrier say it has 4G, if its not *really* 4G? is it just a glorified 3G system?
On a different note, Christmas is here... any news on the Verizon iPhone release?
Sry for so many questions
As for the whole "but android" argument, Apple doesn't do things just because everyone else does. Which is why we still don't have blu-ray in their computers despite every other computer (including even some so called netbooks) having had blu-ray drives for at least the last year. We also don't have Flash in the iphone etc despite every other smart phone having Flash and every other announced tablet saying it would.
I don't buy the flash argument. Thats actually a pretty complicated subject...
But I see what you mean.
Now, can anyone please explain what the difference between 'true 4G' and LTE?
Is LTE something else entirely? Something that bridges the CDMA and GSM technologies, allowing CDMA phones to use chips, and chip-based phones to be compatible with CDMA networks?
I've wikipediaed the whole deal, but i don't really get it...
It seems like there are *two* kinds of LTE as well. Is that where the difference between true 4G and fake 4G lies? One is LTE, and the other is TRUE LTE?
And how can a carrier say it has 4G, if its not *really* 4G? is it just a glorified 3G system?
On a different note, Christmas is here... any news on the Verizon iPhone release?
Sry for so many questions
No comments:
Post a Comment