starflyer
Apr 25, 02:04 PM
This is why we need a "loser pays" system.
Jazwire
Apr 6, 01:03 PM
Awesome, can't wait.
Picking up the 11" soon as they are out.
Picking up the 11" soon as they are out.
BVeritas
Mar 31, 07:39 PM
As an Apple fanboy, I'm disappointed to post this, but Android will continue to win despite the huge fragmentation problem.
Unlike Windoze based computers, cell phone users expect to replace their phones minimally every two years. So for the most part these users just don't care whether the manufacturers bother to upgrade the OS or whether the few apps they've found need to be repurchased.
When they go shopping and see a brand new Android phone running a better OS with more apps than they had before, they will simply buy it. Especially since there will continue to be two for one offers and lots of competition.
Like Apple computers, iPhones will be superbly engineered, but that hasn't mattered in the computer arena and it won't matter in the cell phone arena.
BTW, I expect Apple to eventually command 20% of the world's computer, cell phone, and tablet market with 50% (or more) of the profits, so it's not like Apple won't be successful. It's like combining all of the luxury cars together under one manufacturer.
Unlike Windoze based computers, cell phone users expect to replace their phones minimally every two years. So for the most part these users just don't care whether the manufacturers bother to upgrade the OS or whether the few apps they've found need to be repurchased.
When they go shopping and see a brand new Android phone running a better OS with more apps than they had before, they will simply buy it. Especially since there will continue to be two for one offers and lots of competition.
Like Apple computers, iPhones will be superbly engineered, but that hasn't mattered in the computer arena and it won't matter in the cell phone arena.
BTW, I expect Apple to eventually command 20% of the world's computer, cell phone, and tablet market with 50% (or more) of the profits, so it's not like Apple won't be successful. It's like combining all of the luxury cars together under one manufacturer.
daneoni
Aug 27, 07:34 PM
Now. But how much have iMac prices changed since release? I don't think they have. They released the iMac and MBP lines around the same time Yonah was intro'ed, and the iMacs did not see any speed bumps or price changes that I know of. Therefore they should be able to implement similar pricing with Conroe @ 2.4GHz, just with a profit margin closer to the iMac release amounts.
Of course they could always go for the 2.13GHz version, which is less expensive, and still plenty faster than the existing 1.83 :)
20" iMac prices have reduced....at least in the UK
Of course they could always go for the 2.13GHz version, which is less expensive, and still plenty faster than the existing 1.83 :)
20" iMac prices have reduced....at least in the UK
jmbear
Nov 29, 12:39 PM
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
Viggy
Aug 27, 07:07 PM
HI!
Anyone knows if jointly with this rumor is the rumor of the upgrade of graphic cards on MacBook (not Pro) to Intel GMA 965 (I think is this the reference...)?
Thanks!
Anyone knows if jointly with this rumor is the rumor of the upgrade of graphic cards on MacBook (not Pro) to Intel GMA 965 (I think is this the reference...)?
Thanks!
Piggie
Apr 8, 07:13 AM
I don't know if anyone has explained Best Buy's actions at all and why they would hold back on selling stock the have yet.
I run a branch for a construction supply company and am judged based on daily and monthly goals.
It doesn't matter if I do three times my monthly goal this month if I don't hit goal at all next month. It doesn't make sense but it is the way business works. I have held orders that come in at the end of the month for the beginning of the next if I have already hit this month's goal so that I get a head start on next month's.
For the manager at Best Buy he probably felt that it served him better to the corporate big wigs if he hit his goal every day rather than pass his goal one day and not reach it the next.
Is it best for the COMPANY or for the CONSUMER? No... But in this world of sales and numbers managers tend to do what will make their bosses happy, which is to make sure that when they check the numbers on the spreadsheet every day they hit their numbers and don't get yelled at.
100% agree with you and people need to realise how stupid people high up the ladder are, and out of touch with reality with these things, which then cause the behaviour you have explained to happen.
Actually by selling more than your expected quota this month may even end up with your expected quota being increased for future months.
Effectively shooting yourself in the foot.
To put it in it's simplest form, say someone paid you $5 to walk to the shops and buy them a pizza, and give you 15 mins for the journey. You go the task, get your $5 dollars and everyone is happy.
Now, once you decide to jog a little and arrive back in 10 mins, wow that's great, so much quicker. but from now on, will will only allow you 11 mins to get the pizza for the $5 payment.
Then you are silly enough to run a little one day and come back in just 5 mins, wow, this is an improvement. Head office have now decided to allow you 6 mins to perform the task for your $5.
How stupid are you, when you could have been walking all this time and still of had your original 15mins for your $5 payment.
Perhaps you could of run in just 5 mins, but you really should of stopped and chatted to someone for 10 mins to use your allowed time up.
I run a branch for a construction supply company and am judged based on daily and monthly goals.
It doesn't matter if I do three times my monthly goal this month if I don't hit goal at all next month. It doesn't make sense but it is the way business works. I have held orders that come in at the end of the month for the beginning of the next if I have already hit this month's goal so that I get a head start on next month's.
For the manager at Best Buy he probably felt that it served him better to the corporate big wigs if he hit his goal every day rather than pass his goal one day and not reach it the next.
Is it best for the COMPANY or for the CONSUMER? No... But in this world of sales and numbers managers tend to do what will make their bosses happy, which is to make sure that when they check the numbers on the spreadsheet every day they hit their numbers and don't get yelled at.
100% agree with you and people need to realise how stupid people high up the ladder are, and out of touch with reality with these things, which then cause the behaviour you have explained to happen.
Actually by selling more than your expected quota this month may even end up with your expected quota being increased for future months.
Effectively shooting yourself in the foot.
To put it in it's simplest form, say someone paid you $5 to walk to the shops and buy them a pizza, and give you 15 mins for the journey. You go the task, get your $5 dollars and everyone is happy.
Now, once you decide to jog a little and arrive back in 10 mins, wow that's great, so much quicker. but from now on, will will only allow you 11 mins to get the pizza for the $5 payment.
Then you are silly enough to run a little one day and come back in just 5 mins, wow, this is an improvement. Head office have now decided to allow you 6 mins to perform the task for your $5.
How stupid are you, when you could have been walking all this time and still of had your original 15mins for your $5 payment.
Perhaps you could of run in just 5 mins, but you really should of stopped and chatted to someone for 10 mins to use your allowed time up.
kas23
Apr 10, 07:23 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2 like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C134 Safari/6533.18.5)
Interesting news, but the bit about booting competitors is downright disgusting.
It's not like they threatened anyone. They likely went to the organizers and said "We'd like to make a really cool announcement at your event but we'd need most of your presentation and sponsorship space to do it." SuperMeet said sure, Apple paid, and here we are. It's not like the other sponsors didn't get their money back (I'm assuming.)
Yeah, I'm sure that's what happened...if they were dealing with the Apple of 5 years ago. But, no, we now see today's Apple in action. The same Apple that stole that hot chick's iAd app idea, the same that "asked" Toyota to remove the Scion ad from Cydia, the same that sent out their own ninja's to search some dude's house for the iPhone 4 prototype, etc.
Interesting news, but the bit about booting competitors is downright disgusting.
It's not like they threatened anyone. They likely went to the organizers and said "We'd like to make a really cool announcement at your event but we'd need most of your presentation and sponsorship space to do it." SuperMeet said sure, Apple paid, and here we are. It's not like the other sponsors didn't get their money back (I'm assuming.)
Yeah, I'm sure that's what happened...if they were dealing with the Apple of 5 years ago. But, no, we now see today's Apple in action. The same Apple that stole that hot chick's iAd app idea, the same that "asked" Toyota to remove the Scion ad from Cydia, the same that sent out their own ninja's to search some dude's house for the iPhone 4 prototype, etc.
VanNess
Aug 5, 05:59 PM
Im glad we will be getting a bit of closure on monday, while I love the rumors its been getting a bit to much, im actively avoiding all mac related sites... I dont want to be the boy that spoilt his own Xmas! :D
Here, let me show you the art and science of rumoring (http://www.misterbg.org/AppleProductCycle/), Apple-style.
Here, let me show you the art and science of rumoring (http://www.misterbg.org/AppleProductCycle/), Apple-style.
greenstork
Jul 31, 12:08 PM
Of course, the problem with waiting until Paris for consumer upgrades like MacBook is that Apple will entirely miss the educational buying season, losing one of the largest markets for its consumer products...
Why would Apple miss the educational buying season? They just released a brand new educational iMac (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060712164540.shtml) this month. eMacs don't need or want the latest and greatest, fastest chips, they need the most bang for their buck. I believe that the $899 educational iMac fits that description to the letter.
Why would Apple miss the educational buying season? They just released a brand new educational iMac (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060712164540.shtml) this month. eMacs don't need or want the latest and greatest, fastest chips, they need the most bang for their buck. I believe that the $899 educational iMac fits that description to the letter.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 12:48 PM
Though, for what it's worth, I'd much rather we returned to the constitutional practice of getting approval from congress before committing ourselves to military intervention.
I agree with the sentiment, though I wonder how much difference it would make - Bush managed to lie, cheat and steal a vote out of congress in favor of the Iraq invasion. Plenty of congress members were either duped or cowed into voting in favor. It wasn't a declared war, it was even better - he had congressional sanction without being restrained by a declared war.
I agree with the sentiment, though I wonder how much difference it would make - Bush managed to lie, cheat and steal a vote out of congress in favor of the Iraq invasion. Plenty of congress members were either duped or cowed into voting in favor. It wasn't a declared war, it was even better - he had congressional sanction without being restrained by a declared war.
maclaptop
Apr 12, 11:03 PM
The sheer amount of people posting here, saying they're moving from iPhone if the new model is delayed significantly is quite telling really.
We're a community that thrives on tech news, but the average joe doesn't care and if his/her contract is up dior renewal between June and the release date and there's no new iPhone to fill that void, chances are they AREN'T going to hang around for iPhone 5.
I've had iPhones on the 'odd numbered cycles' (ie. 1 and 3) and I really am thinking of switching. I don't want the hassle of having to wait 2/3/4/however many months. Call me fickle, or having no patience, but MY OPINION is that Apple just isn't keeping up with competition.
As much as I like Apple products, I believe you have some very valid points. My iPhone 4 is a good phone, but its not Apples best work. Its well documented that the engineers discovered the antenna fault well in advance of launch, advised Steve Jobs and he waived it off, ignoring them. Its that cavalier attitude that will at some point come back and bite them.
Yet Steve has cultivated a massive cadre of followers that will live in defense and denial, while worshipping his every move. They have closed their minds to anything outside of Apples walled garden. I can see how attractive they find it, simple and easy.
That said the choices like Android are the very reason our free enterprise system works so well. If the Google OS was as bad as it's made out to be in this forum, I can assure you there would not be the thousands of posts about it, that appear in this forum.
Viva Le Choice
We're a community that thrives on tech news, but the average joe doesn't care and if his/her contract is up dior renewal between June and the release date and there's no new iPhone to fill that void, chances are they AREN'T going to hang around for iPhone 5.
I've had iPhones on the 'odd numbered cycles' (ie. 1 and 3) and I really am thinking of switching. I don't want the hassle of having to wait 2/3/4/however many months. Call me fickle, or having no patience, but MY OPINION is that Apple just isn't keeping up with competition.
As much as I like Apple products, I believe you have some very valid points. My iPhone 4 is a good phone, but its not Apples best work. Its well documented that the engineers discovered the antenna fault well in advance of launch, advised Steve Jobs and he waived it off, ignoring them. Its that cavalier attitude that will at some point come back and bite them.
Yet Steve has cultivated a massive cadre of followers that will live in defense and denial, while worshipping his every move. They have closed their minds to anything outside of Apples walled garden. I can see how attractive they find it, simple and easy.
That said the choices like Android are the very reason our free enterprise system works so well. If the Google OS was as bad as it's made out to be in this forum, I can assure you there would not be the thousands of posts about it, that appear in this forum.
Viva Le Choice
acies909
Apr 27, 08:11 AM
This is a lie
Keeping a database of our general location is logging our location. :mad: Does Apple really think this double talk, where they say they keep a database of location but don't log the location is going to fly?
At least our overlord will now, I hope, stop collecting location data when location services are turned off. It's a disgrace that it took a media storm to shame them into action.
The fact is that the iPhone is logging the location of the near by hot spot and cell tower. So if the cell tower is 50 miles away is some instances it is tracking that information not that the GPS location of your phone 50 miles from your phone. If you did the tracking thing on your computer and saw the map with your info, you would notice that some of the dots are places that you probably have never been. When I did and I went up to Northern Michigan it was tracking information approx 60 miles from the road I was on. This is why I never worried about this cause I knew it wasn't actually tracking my iPhones GPS location rather the nearest cell or Wifi location.
Keeping a database of our general location is logging our location. :mad: Does Apple really think this double talk, where they say they keep a database of location but don't log the location is going to fly?
At least our overlord will now, I hope, stop collecting location data when location services are turned off. It's a disgrace that it took a media storm to shame them into action.
The fact is that the iPhone is logging the location of the near by hot spot and cell tower. So if the cell tower is 50 miles away is some instances it is tracking that information not that the GPS location of your phone 50 miles from your phone. If you did the tracking thing on your computer and saw the map with your info, you would notice that some of the dots are places that you probably have never been. When I did and I went up to Northern Michigan it was tracking information approx 60 miles from the road I was on. This is why I never worried about this cause I knew it wasn't actually tracking my iPhones GPS location rather the nearest cell or Wifi location.
NebulaClash
Apr 27, 10:40 AM
I'm a little confused at the magnitude of people's reaction here.
It's Apple. If Apple does something, it's the end of the world. If everyone else does something similar, *shrug*
Apple does well in the market place, so it behooves the tech media to attack Apple as often as their partners wish them to. Standard PR tactics.
It's Apple. If Apple does something, it's the end of the world. If everyone else does something similar, *shrug*
Apple does well in the market place, so it behooves the tech media to attack Apple as often as their partners wish them to. Standard PR tactics.
Keebler
Apr 10, 04:01 PM
i know i'll be hanging around my macs looking for internet news on Tuesday.
I do think it was a pr*ck move they pulled - one i would have expected from the microsoft of old holding everyone by the short n' curlys! :(
And, I didn't travel much, but did a few times and I know i wouldn't be happy if my trip to Vegas was suddenly cancelled b/c of showboating.
I worked for a software company years ago and those events were months, if not a full year's worth of planning, energy and sales forecasted. Such a crucial way for a company to interact with their users.
Let's hope the release justifies forcing the other sponsors to pull.
I do think it was a pr*ck move they pulled - one i would have expected from the microsoft of old holding everyone by the short n' curlys! :(
And, I didn't travel much, but did a few times and I know i wouldn't be happy if my trip to Vegas was suddenly cancelled b/c of showboating.
I worked for a software company years ago and those events were months, if not a full year's worth of planning, energy and sales forecasted. Such a crucial way for a company to interact with their users.
Let's hope the release justifies forcing the other sponsors to pull.
obeygiant
Mar 17, 01:03 PM
Obeygiant, you have a way of distilling issues down to their core. The funny thing is, I don't think Lee even realizes he's doing it.
Yeah I'm pretty sure I'm on his ignore list. lol
Yeah I'm pretty sure I'm on his ignore list. lol
pdpfilms
Aug 11, 10:37 AM
"...Earlier than some may be expecting"??
Wasn't everyone expecting this a year ago?
Wasn't everyone expecting this a year ago?
Mattie Num Nums
Apr 19, 03:05 PM
Lol if apple was a religion it would have more extremists than Islam, Judaism, and Christianity combined! :eek:
Pssstt... I think it already is a religion to many.
When someone speaks about "smartphone marketshare" he usually means world wide and not only for Botswana. But nice try. :rolleyes:
You mean when someone says Marketshare they mean that other place outside of the center of the universe America?
Pssstt... I think it already is a religion to many.
When someone speaks about "smartphone marketshare" he usually means world wide and not only for Botswana. But nice try. :rolleyes:
You mean when someone says Marketshare they mean that other place outside of the center of the universe America?
themoonisdown09
Apr 12, 07:07 AM
I just choked on my own vomit. I really want a new iPhone this summer.
maclaptop
Apr 12, 07:51 AM
Maybe they need to wait in order to get 28/32nm A5 chips. No point in having an iPhone 5 with a 3 hour battery life
Or maybe their waiting while the new antenna engineers they hired try and convince Steve to leave them alone to do their job.
They want to put the antenna inside where it belongs.
Jobs ego can't handle it.
Or maybe their waiting while the new antenna engineers they hired try and convince Steve to leave them alone to do their job.
They want to put the antenna inside where it belongs.
Jobs ego can't handle it.
UK-MacAddict
Apr 11, 05:12 PM
If this is true I think Apple are looking to slot yearly iPhone releases into January since the month has been clear for them since they pulled out of Macworld.
If this is the case then I'll probably sell my black iPhone 4 and get the white iPhone 4 if they really do release it this spring. I wanted the white when they came out and if iPhone 5 is being delayed getting the white will be like a new phone anyways :D
Also I dont think any iPhone will have 4G until 2013 at the earliest. Many countries dont have it up and running yet and I cant seeing Apple making one specifically for the US market. I live in the UK and the networks wont even be able to start bidding for the technology until early 2012 with devices actually showing up until 2013. So I think Apple will wait until its biggest markets for the iPhone catch up before anything is released.
If this is the case then I'll probably sell my black iPhone 4 and get the white iPhone 4 if they really do release it this spring. I wanted the white when they came out and if iPhone 5 is being delayed getting the white will be like a new phone anyways :D
Also I dont think any iPhone will have 4G until 2013 at the earliest. Many countries dont have it up and running yet and I cant seeing Apple making one specifically for the US market. I live in the UK and the networks wont even be able to start bidding for the technology until early 2012 with devices actually showing up until 2013. So I think Apple will wait until its biggest markets for the iPhone catch up before anything is released.
CaoCao
Mar 1, 04:37 PM
No, not really. Why is this relevant?
They are not permitted to marry their chosen partner, so no, this is again complete bollocks.
Retrogress is a verb, and they were not retrograde, on the contrary they were very progressive in many respects.
In short, your cogency is significantly inferior to Lee's.
To argue a point one have a definition of the point. On what point of the definition do you dissent?
The legal definition of marriage according to the government of the United States of America "...'marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife..."
Thank you for point out an error in my sentence structure.
They are not permitted to marry their chosen partner, so no, this is again complete bollocks.
Retrogress is a verb, and they were not retrograde, on the contrary they were very progressive in many respects.
In short, your cogency is significantly inferior to Lee's.
To argue a point one have a definition of the point. On what point of the definition do you dissent?
The legal definition of marriage according to the government of the United States of America "...'marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife..."
Thank you for point out an error in my sentence structure.
63dot
Apr 30, 03:05 PM
I wonder what it would be like to go through life looking for racism around every corner? Constantly seeing the world in these glasses would have to be very tiresome and frustrating. Pretty sad really. People need to stop thinking about themselves and others as being members of groups, and start thinking of everyone as individuals. We're a society of individuals, we get our rights and our liberties as individuals, not because we're part of group A or group B.
If liberals would stop 'crying wolf' ('claiming racism') at every corner, we might actually take them seriously and help out when there's actual evidence.
Though I don't agree with you much on some issues (except for the anti-nation building stuff), I have to say you have it right. We are individuals.
While there are some racists who tried to jump on the birther bandwagon, I did see plenty of non-racists have some concern about where Obama was born, or if in Hawaii, being born there before it was a state and then being a coverup to put his age right after statehood.
To be fair, some judges and constitutional experts were not quite sure about John McCain and his "eligibility" to run for office. Con law textbooks give both sides about this issue but are not declarative on what the answer is as to who is eligible to run. Can a person who committed perjury run for president? Then how did America let Clinton run after all the apparent lies he told federal prosecutors about Whitewater and his supposed ties to Tyson and letting them get by on environmental regs while he was governor or Arkansas?
During the 2008 election, these birther issues only came up sporadically, and America was far more interested in the important issues (Iraq, the recession, and finding somebody to put us out of the mess that W put us in).
If liberals would stop 'crying wolf' ('claiming racism') at every corner, we might actually take them seriously and help out when there's actual evidence.
Though I don't agree with you much on some issues (except for the anti-nation building stuff), I have to say you have it right. We are individuals.
While there are some racists who tried to jump on the birther bandwagon, I did see plenty of non-racists have some concern about where Obama was born, or if in Hawaii, being born there before it was a state and then being a coverup to put his age right after statehood.
To be fair, some judges and constitutional experts were not quite sure about John McCain and his "eligibility" to run for office. Con law textbooks give both sides about this issue but are not declarative on what the answer is as to who is eligible to run. Can a person who committed perjury run for president? Then how did America let Clinton run after all the apparent lies he told federal prosecutors about Whitewater and his supposed ties to Tyson and letting them get by on environmental regs while he was governor or Arkansas?
During the 2008 election, these birther issues only came up sporadically, and America was far more interested in the important issues (Iraq, the recession, and finding somebody to put us out of the mess that W put us in).
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 02:09 PM
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.
OK. let us just cut to the chase. The keyword here is hand-over. CDMA2000 doesnt support it from GSM. GSM has 81%. Hence cdma is and will always be a small local network that can be used in small pockets on this planet. Furthermore, I seriously doubt ITU/FOMA will change anything in the standard to allow any compability for CDMA2000 since it is not in their interest.
The faster cdam/CDMA2000 moves to oblivion the better.
We would all benefit from one standard, cheaper phones, worldwide access, lower minute rates (from higher competition) Just look at how Vz bills you.
Having multiple standard on cellphones is just as clever as having two incompatible internet.
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.
OK. let us just cut to the chase. The keyword here is hand-over. CDMA2000 doesnt support it from GSM. GSM has 81%. Hence cdma is and will always be a small local network that can be used in small pockets on this planet. Furthermore, I seriously doubt ITU/FOMA will change anything in the standard to allow any compability for CDMA2000 since it is not in their interest.
The faster cdam/CDMA2000 moves to oblivion the better.
We would all benefit from one standard, cheaper phones, worldwide access, lower minute rates (from higher competition) Just look at how Vz bills you.
Having multiple standard on cellphones is just as clever as having two incompatible internet.
No comments:
Post a Comment