Aleco
Apr 8, 01:23 AM
Best Buy made reservations on the iPad. When I went in and said they have several instock, he checked on the computer. They said they had 5 but it was all for reserved customers that put $100 down in the first place.
FleurDuMal
Sep 12, 11:28 AM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet. But nice to know, I guess.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
notjustjay
Apr 8, 12:22 AM
I do not intend to be rude, but there is a difference in HDMI cables, no matter what the Internet tells you. Conductors, shielding materials/layers and the way the connectors are put together are a few differentiators. An AudioQuest Coffee cable, for example, which is several hundred dollars ($600 I believe for a 1.5m) is made of pure silver starting with the tips and going the length of the cable. This is not the same as a no name $5 dollar HDMI cable from Amazon.
Sure there is a difference, but is it noticable? Is it worth the cost?
A Ferrari costs a lot more than a Ford Fiesta. It's better built and has a lot more power under the hood. But if all you're ever doing is driving at 20 mph, then it doesn't matter, the Fiesta has all the power you need and you'll save a pile of money. Now, you don't want to go rock bottom and buy a junker that might break down, but as long as it runs smoothly at 20 mph, any car will do the job.
You don't want ultra-cheap crappy cables that can develop loose connections or come poorly shielded, as that can cause dropouts. But neither do you need pure silver or oxygen-free shielding or whatever. Any HDMI cable will either fail outright or do the exact same job as any other for the given application.
Sure there is a difference, but is it noticable? Is it worth the cost?
A Ferrari costs a lot more than a Ford Fiesta. It's better built and has a lot more power under the hood. But if all you're ever doing is driving at 20 mph, then it doesn't matter, the Fiesta has all the power you need and you'll save a pile of money. Now, you don't want to go rock bottom and buy a junker that might break down, but as long as it runs smoothly at 20 mph, any car will do the job.
You don't want ultra-cheap crappy cables that can develop loose connections or come poorly shielded, as that can cause dropouts. But neither do you need pure silver or oxygen-free shielding or whatever. Any HDMI cable will either fail outright or do the exact same job as any other for the given application.
DotCom2
Apr 27, 09:25 AM
Problem is, if you turn "Location Services" off, then you can't use "Find My iPhone" which I think is quite a useful feature! :(
ccrandall77
Aug 11, 01:24 PM
Hahahha coverage maps don't mean jack.Everyone in the wireless business knows they are gross approximations of the reality.
Prince William Already Has
doobs22
Mar 22, 10:14 PM
That just makes me glad I ordered my iPad 2 wifi w/64GB
Prince William#39;s wedding
Prince William Kate Middleton
Prince William and Kate
prince william wedding date.
prince william wedding date.
Prince William
prince william wedding date.
prince william wedding date.
Prince William and Kate
Prince William at St Andrews
+william+wedding+date
jacket prince william and
prince william queen elizabeth
Reacent Post
blackcrayon
Mar 22, 09:56 PM
Christ I am so sick of them taking fantastic hardware and absolutely ruining it by using proprietary file formats and frankenstein versions of Android. I do get a kick out of their 10.1" model being both thinner and lighter than the 9.7" Ipad2 though. That will undoubtedly have the apple apologists out en masse.
Yes 2 tenths of a millimeter thinner and 6 - 12 grams of weight difference... I'm sure the "apple apologists" are losing a lot of sleep over that one :rolleyes:
Yes 2 tenths of a millimeter thinner and 6 - 12 grams of weight difference... I'm sure the "apple apologists" are losing a lot of sleep over that one :rolleyes:
michaelrjohnson
Aug 7, 04:46 PM
So the cat won't be out of the bag until Spring 2007?
I thought Leopard was slated for December?
Maybe that means it will actually be launched at MWSF in January ...
January is not Spring. Do not expect a release in January; Expect a full-featured preview, with an announcement of a final shipping-date.
I thought Leopard was slated for December?
Maybe that means it will actually be launched at MWSF in January ...
January is not Spring. Do not expect a release in January; Expect a full-featured preview, with an announcement of a final shipping-date.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 01:02 AM
I agree. The Democrats will, of course, push Obama for a second-term and thus our opposition candidates are all GOP, none of whom are serious contenders for improving our present situation.
Obama is far from perfect. But all of the known GOP contenders (Huckabee, Palin, Bachmann, Romney, Paul etc etc) are completely unacceptable.
If I read the Obama administration correctly, the US involvement will be very limited and while "advisors" are certainly on the ground
At this stage I doubt we have any boots on the ground. Communication with the opposition leadership is still patchy but they have made it clear they do not want foreign soldiers in-country. It will be best if the situation can be resolved without further foreign military intervention.
Obama is far from perfect. But all of the known GOP contenders (Huckabee, Palin, Bachmann, Romney, Paul etc etc) are completely unacceptable.
If I read the Obama administration correctly, the US involvement will be very limited and while "advisors" are certainly on the ground
At this stage I doubt we have any boots on the ground. Communication with the opposition leadership is still patchy but they have made it clear they do not want foreign soldiers in-country. It will be best if the situation can be resolved without further foreign military intervention.
Bilbo63
Apr 19, 02:31 PM
What annoys me even more is that Apple always seems to make these claims that they made such and such first, and that Windows is copying Mac OS.. What annoys me is if you know a bit of the history you'll find that Apple copied Xerox interface, with permission of course, but it's not like they came up with it first..
Now they are making another claim that Samsung is copying..
No, you are wrong here. Apple did not copy the Xerox interface. Xerox developed a GUI that became the very early building blocks of the Mac OS. Xerox brass didn't get it and didn't know what to do with it. Apple made a deal with Xerox, hired the key talent, brought it in-house and further developed the whole GUI approach.
The seeds were clearly planted at Xerox, however, the finished Mac OS was a very different, more complete animal.
Now they are making another claim that Samsung is copying..
No, you are wrong here. Apple did not copy the Xerox interface. Xerox developed a GUI that became the very early building blocks of the Mac OS. Xerox brass didn't get it and didn't know what to do with it. Apple made a deal with Xerox, hired the key talent, brought it in-house and further developed the whole GUI approach.
The seeds were clearly planted at Xerox, however, the finished Mac OS was a very different, more complete animal.
theBB
Aug 11, 07:28 PM
Confused.
Can somebody explain me the differences between the cellphone market between the US and Europe.
Will a 'iPhone' just be marketed to the US or worldwide (as the iPod does)?
Well, let's see, about 20 years ago, a lot of countries in Europe, Asia and elsewhere decided on a standard digital cell phone system and called it GSM. About 15 years ago GSM networks became quite widespread across these countries. In the meantime US kept on using analog cell phones. Motorola did not even believe that digital cell phone had much of a future, so it decided to stay away from this market, a decision which almost bankrupted the company.
US started rolling out digital service only about 10 years ago. As US government does not like to dictate private companies how to conduct their business, they sold the spectrum and put down some basic ground rules, but for the most part they let the service providers use any network they wished. For one reason or another, these providers decided go with about 4 different standards at first. Quite a few companies went with GSM, AT&T picked a similar, but incompatible TDMA (IS=136?) standard, Nextel went with a proprietary standard they called iDEN and Sprint and Verizon went with CDMA, a radically different standard (IS-95) designed by Qualcomm. At the time, other big companies were very skeptical, so Qualcomm had to not only develop the underlying communication standards, but manufacture cell phones and the electronics for the cell towers. However, once the system proved itself, everybody started moving in that direction. Even the upcoming 3G system for these GSM networks, called UMTS, use a variant of CDMA technology.
CDMA is a more complicated standard compared to GSM, but it allows the providers to cram more users into each cell, it is supposedly cheaper to maintain and more flexible in some respects. However, anybody in that boat has to pay hefty royalties to Qualcomm, dampening its popularity. While creating UMTS, GSM standards bodies did everything they could to avoid using Qualcomm patents to avoid these payments. However, I don't know how successful they got in these efforts.
Even though Europeans here on these forums like to gloat that US did not join the worldwide standard, that we did not play along, that ours is a hodge podge of incompatible systems; without the freedom to try out different standards, CDMA would not have the opportunity to prove its feasibility and performance. In the end, the rest of the world is also reaping the benefits through UMTS/WCDMA.
Of course, not using the same standards as everybody else has its own price. The components of CDMA cell phones cost more and the system itself is more complicated, so CDMA versions of cell phones hit the market six months to a year after their GSM counterparts, if at all. The infrastructure cost of a rare system is higher as well, so AT&T had to rip apart its network to replace it with GSM version about five years after rolling it out. Sprint is probably going to convert Nextel's system in the near future as well.
I hope this answers your question.
Can somebody explain me the differences between the cellphone market between the US and Europe.
Will a 'iPhone' just be marketed to the US or worldwide (as the iPod does)?
Well, let's see, about 20 years ago, a lot of countries in Europe, Asia and elsewhere decided on a standard digital cell phone system and called it GSM. About 15 years ago GSM networks became quite widespread across these countries. In the meantime US kept on using analog cell phones. Motorola did not even believe that digital cell phone had much of a future, so it decided to stay away from this market, a decision which almost bankrupted the company.
US started rolling out digital service only about 10 years ago. As US government does not like to dictate private companies how to conduct their business, they sold the spectrum and put down some basic ground rules, but for the most part they let the service providers use any network they wished. For one reason or another, these providers decided go with about 4 different standards at first. Quite a few companies went with GSM, AT&T picked a similar, but incompatible TDMA (IS=136?) standard, Nextel went with a proprietary standard they called iDEN and Sprint and Verizon went with CDMA, a radically different standard (IS-95) designed by Qualcomm. At the time, other big companies were very skeptical, so Qualcomm had to not only develop the underlying communication standards, but manufacture cell phones and the electronics for the cell towers. However, once the system proved itself, everybody started moving in that direction. Even the upcoming 3G system for these GSM networks, called UMTS, use a variant of CDMA technology.
CDMA is a more complicated standard compared to GSM, but it allows the providers to cram more users into each cell, it is supposedly cheaper to maintain and more flexible in some respects. However, anybody in that boat has to pay hefty royalties to Qualcomm, dampening its popularity. While creating UMTS, GSM standards bodies did everything they could to avoid using Qualcomm patents to avoid these payments. However, I don't know how successful they got in these efforts.
Even though Europeans here on these forums like to gloat that US did not join the worldwide standard, that we did not play along, that ours is a hodge podge of incompatible systems; without the freedom to try out different standards, CDMA would not have the opportunity to prove its feasibility and performance. In the end, the rest of the world is also reaping the benefits through UMTS/WCDMA.
Of course, not using the same standards as everybody else has its own price. The components of CDMA cell phones cost more and the system itself is more complicated, so CDMA versions of cell phones hit the market six months to a year after their GSM counterparts, if at all. The infrastructure cost of a rare system is higher as well, so AT&T had to rip apart its network to replace it with GSM version about five years after rolling it out. Sprint is probably going to convert Nextel's system in the near future as well.
I hope this answers your question.
shartypants
Mar 22, 03:35 PM
copy cats. Same price for a piece of crap, no thanks.
dextertangocci
Jul 27, 10:21 AM
Can I swop the Merom with the Yonah in my MB?
Kranchammer
Mar 31, 06:24 PM
I would add I never understand the comparison of Smartphones running Android to smartphones running IOS.
Neither Google or Apple sell their phone operating systems, and the Android spectrum is made up of 50 handsets from 10 different manufacturers who are in direct competition with each other. They are not one big group working together to take on Apple. It makes absolutely zero sense to make that kind of comparison.
It is just as weird as loping off iPod and iPad IOS users...
If people want to compare smartphones, then compare actual sales of individual smartphones, each which only use one OS. People should not draw meaningless lines in the sand lumping all android based handsets together, because they are not together other than they run android. They might as well compare black phones to white phones.
I imagine if you made a chart of the top selling smartphones in the last 5 years, it would consist of the iPhone 4, the iPhone 3GS, the iPhone 3G and the iPhone.
Why not group smartphones by what kind of graphics chip they have or what type of memory chip they use? The OS is irrelevant. Nobody in the smartphone business is directly making money off any of these oses, it is a stupid way to categorize smart phones.
Of course it happens because if they didn't lump them together it would look absurd with Apple totally dominating the smart phone market with their latest phone every year while 100 android commodity phones all have tiny market shares just to get replaced by the next one.
How does HTC running android OS benefit or relate to a Motorola phone running android? It does not, at all.
Hey, you! No rationality allowed in this here thread. Vitriol, stereotypes, and blanket generalizations only!
Shame on you. ;)
Neither Google or Apple sell their phone operating systems, and the Android spectrum is made up of 50 handsets from 10 different manufacturers who are in direct competition with each other. They are not one big group working together to take on Apple. It makes absolutely zero sense to make that kind of comparison.
It is just as weird as loping off iPod and iPad IOS users...
If people want to compare smartphones, then compare actual sales of individual smartphones, each which only use one OS. People should not draw meaningless lines in the sand lumping all android based handsets together, because they are not together other than they run android. They might as well compare black phones to white phones.
I imagine if you made a chart of the top selling smartphones in the last 5 years, it would consist of the iPhone 4, the iPhone 3GS, the iPhone 3G and the iPhone.
Why not group smartphones by what kind of graphics chip they have or what type of memory chip they use? The OS is irrelevant. Nobody in the smartphone business is directly making money off any of these oses, it is a stupid way to categorize smart phones.
Of course it happens because if they didn't lump them together it would look absurd with Apple totally dominating the smart phone market with their latest phone every year while 100 android commodity phones all have tiny market shares just to get replaced by the next one.
How does HTC running android OS benefit or relate to a Motorola phone running android? It does not, at all.
Hey, you! No rationality allowed in this here thread. Vitriol, stereotypes, and blanket generalizations only!
Shame on you. ;)
briansolomon
Jul 14, 05:26 PM
It's about time. For a company that prides itself on innovations, features, and ease of use this is something that should not just be coming to fruition now...and should have never been eliminated from the G5 during the change from G4 <<<weird wording but I think you all will get the idea
ccrandall77
Aug 11, 01:59 PM
As I said before GSM has 81% of the market. UMTS (W-CDMA) enable hand-over back and forth UMTS and GSM. CDMA2000 can not do hand-over between GSM and CDMA2000. (See Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W-CDMA): "The CDMA family of standards (including cdmaOne and CDMA2000) are not compatible with the W-CDMA family of standards that are based on ITU standards.")
Hence all networks that has GSM will transfer to UMTS since this decrases their initial investment as they transfer from 2/2.5G to 3G. Changing network standad is expensive, but the GSM/EDGE marketshare has been growing in US and will most likely continue to grow. At the same time CDMA is non-existant in europe.
The conclusion is simple - CDMA2000 is in the long run as dead as betamax.
If long run is 10yrs, I'll grant you that. But in the US and much of Asia (Australia maybe) where there's CDMA carriers, CDMA2000 1x-EVDx is going to be around for a while.
Actually WCDMA also inherits much of it's tech from CDMA/IS-95 and I have seen some documentation that shows that WCDMA can be compatible with CDMA2000 just like UTMS/WCDMA is compatible with GSM. But it sounds as if the upgrade path for GSM/GPRS/EDGE to WCDMA is easier than going from CDMA2000 1x to WCDMA.
But since for the next several years CDMA2000 1x-EVDO will be better than the GSM related technologies. And by the time WCDMA takes over, the iPhone will be as antiquated as the Newton.
Apple needs to create both versions as CDMA has about 5x% of the US market... and Apple has and probably will continue to cater to the US market first.
Hence all networks that has GSM will transfer to UMTS since this decrases their initial investment as they transfer from 2/2.5G to 3G. Changing network standad is expensive, but the GSM/EDGE marketshare has been growing in US and will most likely continue to grow. At the same time CDMA is non-existant in europe.
The conclusion is simple - CDMA2000 is in the long run as dead as betamax.
If long run is 10yrs, I'll grant you that. But in the US and much of Asia (Australia maybe) where there's CDMA carriers, CDMA2000 1x-EVDx is going to be around for a while.
Actually WCDMA also inherits much of it's tech from CDMA/IS-95 and I have seen some documentation that shows that WCDMA can be compatible with CDMA2000 just like UTMS/WCDMA is compatible with GSM. But it sounds as if the upgrade path for GSM/GPRS/EDGE to WCDMA is easier than going from CDMA2000 1x to WCDMA.
But since for the next several years CDMA2000 1x-EVDO will be better than the GSM related technologies. And by the time WCDMA takes over, the iPhone will be as antiquated as the Newton.
Apple needs to create both versions as CDMA has about 5x% of the US market... and Apple has and probably will continue to cater to the US market first.
animatedude
Apr 6, 12:27 PM
the article doesn't mention when these wil be released.
hobo.hopkins
Apr 25, 01:50 PM
"a perfect storm", "overreaction", "typical for the us to sue.."
... sorry, but in what ways do I benefit by having apple track my whereabouts to the day and meter? why isn't there an opt-in (apart from the general 'eat **** or die' TOU) or at least an opt-out for this? why is it so easy to access the data?
... apple deserves to get a beating for this.
they're known for focussing on the user in terms of design and UI of theirdevices... they should also make the step to focus on their users best interest in terms of privacy and freedom, rather than their own greed.
You're right in asking why there isn't a way to opt-out of the collection or clear your past history more easily. To say that it is an invasion of privacy is just false, however, because the information remains private. Only those with access to your phone or computer can see the information.
... sorry, but in what ways do I benefit by having apple track my whereabouts to the day and meter? why isn't there an opt-in (apart from the general 'eat **** or die' TOU) or at least an opt-out for this? why is it so easy to access the data?
... apple deserves to get a beating for this.
they're known for focussing on the user in terms of design and UI of theirdevices... they should also make the step to focus on their users best interest in terms of privacy and freedom, rather than their own greed.
You're right in asking why there isn't a way to opt-out of the collection or clear your past history more easily. To say that it is an invasion of privacy is just false, however, because the information remains private. Only those with access to your phone or computer can see the information.
Multimedia
Aug 26, 08:28 PM
On the day that the MBP's with merom go on sale, I wonder WHAT TIME Apples website will change and display the new products? :confused:Updated Wesbite Is Usually by 9 Eastern. Occasionally later. But usually then. :)Probebly 10:00AM - 11:00AM Pacific time.No.Eastern? That's 6:00AM Pacific? You think? 9:00AM Pacific sounds good.No. its usually by 6AM Pacific 9AM Eastern. I KNOW - not guessing.
Synapple
Apr 20, 02:00 PM
Let's not forget that big companies file lawsuits not only when they think they have a rock solid case.
Lawsuits are also filed to 1) deter competitors (not only the specific one that gets sued) and 2) raise a point in the media (in this case the point being Apple invents, competitors are copycats).
Of course, had the case been deemed totally unfounded by Apple Legal and their bunch of advisors, it wouldn't have been brought to court at all.
At the same time, if there is any chance that the case has some merit, a company will sue for sure, if points 1 and 2 above are not considered to do more damage than good.
Conversely, solid lawsuits are not brought forward because of the bad impact sueing might have in the media.
In this case Apple might have sued not necessarily because they think they'll win, but also, and maybe most importantly, to reinstate their position in the market. Even though some might read this as a crazy action from Apple, it is also likely that people with no particular tech interest (and still potential customers) will hear about it and get the message that Apple is defending what they have invented against a copycat.
Lawsuits are also filed to 1) deter competitors (not only the specific one that gets sued) and 2) raise a point in the media (in this case the point being Apple invents, competitors are copycats).
Of course, had the case been deemed totally unfounded by Apple Legal and their bunch of advisors, it wouldn't have been brought to court at all.
At the same time, if there is any chance that the case has some merit, a company will sue for sure, if points 1 and 2 above are not considered to do more damage than good.
Conversely, solid lawsuits are not brought forward because of the bad impact sueing might have in the media.
In this case Apple might have sued not necessarily because they think they'll win, but also, and maybe most importantly, to reinstate their position in the market. Even though some might read this as a crazy action from Apple, it is also likely that people with no particular tech interest (and still potential customers) will hear about it and get the message that Apple is defending what they have invented against a copycat.
Mad Mac Maniac
Apr 7, 10:24 PM
Please tell him.
me too! I wanna learn!
How does withholding stock from the public aid a company? I can imagine holding them till everything is registered in their system and accounted for. But turning people away when they actually do have stock doesn't sound like a good business practice to me
me too! I wanna learn!
How does withholding stock from the public aid a company? I can imagine holding them till everything is registered in their system and accounted for. But turning people away when they actually do have stock doesn't sound like a good business practice to me
Roto3180
Mar 31, 04:45 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
I also kind of thought that Google would close things off after awhile. Android is what Wonblows was in the 90s. Every Tom, Dick and Harry wrote software for it, most of it was crap but gave the belief it was superior to the Mac OS. Microshaft cracked down and eased out the bad software developers and the same thing will happen to Android. Especially since rouge developers have came about.
I also kind of thought that Google would close things off after awhile. Android is what Wonblows was in the 90s. Every Tom, Dick and Harry wrote software for it, most of it was crap but gave the belief it was superior to the Mac OS. Microshaft cracked down and eased out the bad software developers and the same thing will happen to Android. Especially since rouge developers have came about.
lorductape
Nov 28, 06:27 PM
it's as I feared would happen after microsoft was stupid with the zune marketplace. but honestly, who didn't see this coming?
death to microsoft. this just adds another reason.
basically, this is something that microsoft probably did on purpose. It set a precident in the recording industry that companies will be required to match in order to get recording deals. its only $1 in the zunes case, but that's a significant amount when you think of the iPod's popularity. now it will be expected that EVERY online music store will do this.
it would just go to the company.
exactly! who does universal think they are???
what does microsoft think they were doing???
death to microsoft. this just adds another reason.
basically, this is something that microsoft probably did on purpose. It set a precident in the recording industry that companies will be required to match in order to get recording deals. its only $1 in the zunes case, but that's a significant amount when you think of the iPod's popularity. now it will be expected that EVERY online music store will do this.
it would just go to the company.
exactly! who does universal think they are???
what does microsoft think they were doing???
digitalbiker
Aug 25, 10:09 PM
In a world full of computers, I want to be helped by a human with common sense.
I'm with you on this one! The first thing I do when I reach a phone menu system is try to figure out how to circumvent it so that I can get to a real person.
The problem with menu systems is that they only cover the most likely common user problems. I have been around computers long enough that I can fix all the easy issues. The only time I call is when my problem is serious and phone support never has a menu option for that.
I'm with you on this one! The first thing I do when I reach a phone menu system is try to figure out how to circumvent it so that I can get to a real person.
The problem with menu systems is that they only cover the most likely common user problems. I have been around computers long enough that I can fix all the easy issues. The only time I call is when my problem is serious and phone support never has a menu option for that.
0 comments:
Post a Comment