*LTD*
Apr 24, 03:40 PM
There is a lot of Apple Dick riding going on. Their is nothing wrong with that. But at some point you have to wake up and look at the rest of the world. World wide in smartphone sells Iphone leads by a large margin. World wide Smartphone OSs, iPhone is generally in third or fourth place (Depends on who made it, Some put RIM in front of iOS). But the majority of them place Android or Symbian as the top selling OS.
If many of your theories that android would disappear if the iPhone was on the same carrier holds no weight. AT&T is still selling millions of Android based phones next to the iPhone (that is was even when AT&T had a piss poor line up android phones.) Right now yes iPhone is selling more then android OS on verizon. But once the honey moon phase is over android based phones will slip back ahead in sells.
And please for the love of all thats good stop going by your personal observations. Watch me do it. In my men of honor meetings on campus I see no iOS devices and half the room has Androids. In my history class there is an equal proportion of Android OS to iOS phones. its based on where and when you look however it does not represent the entire world.
But this does my school did a survey online and we found as March 20 the Ratios look like this- Blackberry 17%, iOS 40, Android 35%, other ties in the rest. Highest selling phone: iPhone 4, iPhone 3gs, Lg Optimus 1 series of phones.
Thanks for the anecdote.
The iPhone sets the bar. Google has to flood the market with a lot of junk to achieve higher share. That's hardly impressive. Google is the MS of mobile. Hardly a compliment. License out your beta OS to anyone that can slam together a box, give it away, and away you go.
The iPhone is still the #1 selling handset. Where are the iPhone killers? There aren't any. Because the competition doesn't know how to make one. Because Apple approaches tech from a totally different place.
The iOS platform still dominates, and given the iPad's success, it'll be that way for the foreseeable future.
Android enjoys highest smartphone market share. Yet the OS is pretty brutal and their ecosystem is a mess. So why do they have greater share? Not because they make a superior product, but because the only alternative to an iPhone was an Android-based device, and Eric T. Mole got to work licensing it out to everyone with no regard for design or User Experience. If you flood the market with what, 70+ (probably a lot more) devices and let everyone and their dog make the devices you'll eventually enjoy force of numbers.
Android is given away free to anyone to manufacture, to make as many POS devices as they wish, to sell for peanuts, in massive volume.
That's all it is. Market flooding at every price point and you get some sort of touchscreen and some sort of app store. And given Google's Microsoftian horizontal business model, that's all it'll ever be.
For instance, THIS is the kind of total junk that Google puts their name to:
http://www.gsmarena.com/zte_racer-reviews-3423.php
And guess what: Dell went ahead and copied it. The DELL XCD28. Same junk. But Android market share just went up!
Here's another amazing Android device:
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/reviews/2010/11/worst-gadget-ever-ars-reviews-a-99-android-tablet.ars
Anything to be proud of? But hey, they're dirt cheap. And uh . . . "open" or whatever.
If Google actually *cared* about what they put the Android name to, if they actually gave a damn about the USER, would they allow this? Ask yourself that. That's the difference. There are some things Apple *will not* allow to exist - namely: garbage.
Google does not care - I'll repeat that - DOES NOT CARE, about what happens to their OS, on what devices it's used, what the result is when someone like ZTE or Dell gets their hands on it. It's a great recipe for pushing huge amounts of volume. It's also a great recipe for manufacturing cheap, poorly-made phones in China. The upshot of all this is you get massively inflated market share, a good chunk owing to phones that should have never seen the light of day. Yes, you have the choice to buy junk. You have the choice to just buy a cheapie. Nothing inherently wrong with this. It's your call, right? HOWEVER, this also contributes to Android market share. That's the catch. The question is not just: how big is your market share? But also: what constitutes your market share?
What constitutes Apple's market share? There's no chance for any confusion here. The iPhone. Same attention to detail in hardware and OS, same high-quality User Experience device to device. All the things that make it the #1 selling handset. There is no chance of junk. In fact, if you're Apple, you owe it to yourself to get as close to perfection as you can every time, because you only sell ONE phone, and not on every carrier, and your licensing is closed. Every last % of Apple's share is an iPhone. There is no chance for crap or inflated share from the sale of cheap commodity-phones.
Apple's share constitutes the #1-selling handset. Exclusively. Android share constitutes: the good, the bad, and the downright ugly.
How does Android market share look now? I'd wager it looks a bit different than before you looked at what's behind the numbers, that is, the kind of infrastructure that supports those high numbers.
Yes, highest market share for Android. Until you go hunting for the REASON.
If many of your theories that android would disappear if the iPhone was on the same carrier holds no weight. AT&T is still selling millions of Android based phones next to the iPhone (that is was even when AT&T had a piss poor line up android phones.) Right now yes iPhone is selling more then android OS on verizon. But once the honey moon phase is over android based phones will slip back ahead in sells.
And please for the love of all thats good stop going by your personal observations. Watch me do it. In my men of honor meetings on campus I see no iOS devices and half the room has Androids. In my history class there is an equal proportion of Android OS to iOS phones. its based on where and when you look however it does not represent the entire world.
But this does my school did a survey online and we found as March 20 the Ratios look like this- Blackberry 17%, iOS 40, Android 35%, other ties in the rest. Highest selling phone: iPhone 4, iPhone 3gs, Lg Optimus 1 series of phones.
Thanks for the anecdote.
The iPhone sets the bar. Google has to flood the market with a lot of junk to achieve higher share. That's hardly impressive. Google is the MS of mobile. Hardly a compliment. License out your beta OS to anyone that can slam together a box, give it away, and away you go.
The iPhone is still the #1 selling handset. Where are the iPhone killers? There aren't any. Because the competition doesn't know how to make one. Because Apple approaches tech from a totally different place.
The iOS platform still dominates, and given the iPad's success, it'll be that way for the foreseeable future.
Android enjoys highest smartphone market share. Yet the OS is pretty brutal and their ecosystem is a mess. So why do they have greater share? Not because they make a superior product, but because the only alternative to an iPhone was an Android-based device, and Eric T. Mole got to work licensing it out to everyone with no regard for design or User Experience. If you flood the market with what, 70+ (probably a lot more) devices and let everyone and their dog make the devices you'll eventually enjoy force of numbers.
Android is given away free to anyone to manufacture, to make as many POS devices as they wish, to sell for peanuts, in massive volume.
That's all it is. Market flooding at every price point and you get some sort of touchscreen and some sort of app store. And given Google's Microsoftian horizontal business model, that's all it'll ever be.
For instance, THIS is the kind of total junk that Google puts their name to:
http://www.gsmarena.com/zte_racer-reviews-3423.php
And guess what: Dell went ahead and copied it. The DELL XCD28. Same junk. But Android market share just went up!
Here's another amazing Android device:
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/reviews/2010/11/worst-gadget-ever-ars-reviews-a-99-android-tablet.ars
Anything to be proud of? But hey, they're dirt cheap. And uh . . . "open" or whatever.
If Google actually *cared* about what they put the Android name to, if they actually gave a damn about the USER, would they allow this? Ask yourself that. That's the difference. There are some things Apple *will not* allow to exist - namely: garbage.
Google does not care - I'll repeat that - DOES NOT CARE, about what happens to their OS, on what devices it's used, what the result is when someone like ZTE or Dell gets their hands on it. It's a great recipe for pushing huge amounts of volume. It's also a great recipe for manufacturing cheap, poorly-made phones in China. The upshot of all this is you get massively inflated market share, a good chunk owing to phones that should have never seen the light of day. Yes, you have the choice to buy junk. You have the choice to just buy a cheapie. Nothing inherently wrong with this. It's your call, right? HOWEVER, this also contributes to Android market share. That's the catch. The question is not just: how big is your market share? But also: what constitutes your market share?
What constitutes Apple's market share? There's no chance for any confusion here. The iPhone. Same attention to detail in hardware and OS, same high-quality User Experience device to device. All the things that make it the #1 selling handset. There is no chance of junk. In fact, if you're Apple, you owe it to yourself to get as close to perfection as you can every time, because you only sell ONE phone, and not on every carrier, and your licensing is closed. Every last % of Apple's share is an iPhone. There is no chance for crap or inflated share from the sale of cheap commodity-phones.
Apple's share constitutes the #1-selling handset. Exclusively. Android share constitutes: the good, the bad, and the downright ugly.
How does Android market share look now? I'd wager it looks a bit different than before you looked at what's behind the numbers, that is, the kind of infrastructure that supports those high numbers.
Yes, highest market share for Android. Until you go hunting for the REASON.
Eidorian
Apr 29, 03:48 PM
Moto Android phones play AAC iTunes music just fine too.
One of the reasons why I picked the phone I have now.
I have a large iTunes library that I have no desire to repurchase or convert to another format.
DoubleTwist syncs them over without any issues.I will have to take a look at DoubleTwist, again.
One of the reasons why I picked the phone I have now.
I have a large iTunes library that I have no desire to repurchase or convert to another format.
DoubleTwist syncs them over without any issues.I will have to take a look at DoubleTwist, again.
Stuipdboy1000
Apr 15, 08:09 AM
I picked up on this before, it was in 4.3.1 for sure
It was quietly introduced in iOS 4.3.
It was quietly introduced in iOS 4.3.
jettredmont
Oct 23, 07:22 PM
This is actually an incorrect report that Microsoft has tried to correct, but it keeps getting reported.
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=157
I know we jump all over MS for spreading FUD... We shouldn't do the same.
Ummmm ... The Oct 18 Update in that link says exactly what we've been saying here: you can't legally run Vista Home editions in a VM. Period. See:
Update 18-Oct: Microsoft has issued yet another "clarification." They say you really can't legally run Vista home versions in a VM. I say their agreement is incomprehensible and their policy is stupid and short-sighted. Details here.
So ... FCT* then?
(* Fear, Certainty, and Truth, as opposed to Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt)
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=157
I know we jump all over MS for spreading FUD... We shouldn't do the same.
Ummmm ... The Oct 18 Update in that link says exactly what we've been saying here: you can't legally run Vista Home editions in a VM. Period. See:
Update 18-Oct: Microsoft has issued yet another "clarification." They say you really can't legally run Vista home versions in a VM. I say their agreement is incomprehensible and their policy is stupid and short-sighted. Details here.
So ... FCT* then?
(* Fear, Certainty, and Truth, as opposed to Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt)
more...
psendeavor
Jul 24, 03:33 PM
Bah, these things are rubbish. The scroll wheel clogs up with dirt, just as scroll ball mice did in days gone by - except there is no user access to clean it thoroughly. Apple need to re-think the design on this one before updating it.
Yep, and me, I'm NOT coming back from my Logitech MX 1000 Laser. Mighty Mouse is only serving during those 30 or so min a week when the MX (http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/products/features/opticaltopics/AR/EN,CRID=2090) is charging, and that's 30 min too long.
Yep, and me, I'm NOT coming back from my Logitech MX 1000 Laser. Mighty Mouse is only serving during those 30 or so min a week when the MX (http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/products/features/opticaltopics/AR/EN,CRID=2090) is charging, and that's 30 min too long.
Michaelgtrusa
Mar 31, 10:23 AM
I really like what I see!
more...
mc68k
Sep 18, 10:40 PM
anyone with a newer mac pro or xserve can kill in the stats. should be a nice incentive. i am excited about mac folding for the first time in a while
einmusiker
Dec 31, 12:25 AM
No, I'm 100% right. Weight control is about calories. End of story. Calories in < Calories out and you lose weight. Opposite and you gain weight. There's no more or less here, that is the very basic premise. You want to discuss specifics that affect calories in/calories out, but that's flawed. Teach people the base first, and let them balance themselves out. You can very easily test your metabolic rate.
So you're saying these people have abnormally low "Calories out". It still comes down to that very simple equation. These people first have to fix their calories out, get their metabolism back straight, then they can fix their calories in.
It is that easy to lose weight. People don't know this very simple and basic concept, they think "Fat/Sugar" has to do with weight, which is completely false. "Low Saturated Fat!" on a box of cookies means squat if the cookies are 170 calories for 3 vs 180 calories for 3 of the same cookies with normal saturated fat. You still can't eat the whole box in one sitting and think "hey, it's low fat, I can't gain weight from this".
You'd be surprised how many people think this way.
People struggle because like someone pointed out, they lack willpower and I'll add that they lack education. Calorie control is the only way to lose weight. There's seriously no other way, since weight is based off of calories and calories alone. To lose weight, you need a calorie deficiency. To be more precise, 3500 calories = 1 lbs, each way. So you need to create a calorie deficiency of 3500 calories before you lose 1 lbs. My metabolic rate is around 1740, that's what I burn each day without lifting a finger. Add in my normal routine, and I'm around the magic 2000 calorie diet. Let's not add in my gym routine. So to lose 1 lbs in 7 days, I need to go on a 1500 calorie diet per day. That's going to give me a deficiency of 500 per day, times 7 days, 1 lbs lost.
There's entire industries because they profit from it. Some people like to buy "instant" solutions. 1 lbs in 7 days ? Bah humbug, too long, I have 100 to lose! There's no instant solutions to weight loss, quite the contrary, the entire weight loss industry makes money by keeping people fat and coming back for miracle cures. Their proposed plans of "1 shake/bar for breakfeast, same for lunch and a balanced diner" is awful. First, it should be the opposite, a good breakfeast and then their bars/shakes for lunch and diner. Breakfeast is where you get your day's energy. Second, that's not calorie control since it doesn't explain that it is trying to create a calorie deficit. So people just still overeat, they compensate the calories they didn't eat at breakfeast/lunch with a huge "balanced" diner.
I'm 32, work 35 hours per week in IT (sitting down on my ass), am on call with tons of pages coming in once every 2 weeks. I have a girlfriend, a mortgage and a dog.
Again, staying trim has nothing to do with having time or being busy or not. If you spend less calories, eat less calories. Balance your calories in to your calories out and you'll stay trim. Sure it means doing a bit more research into what you're eating, but that's not impossible. It also means listening to your body. Feeling "stuffed" means you overate. You should never feel full or stuffed. A donut is not faster to mow down than an Apple. It's not more filling either. It's tons more calories though.
You made an assumption about me and you were wrong. You should look at yourself and what you are or aren't doing that is making you fat, not make up excuses.
But again, it's just because you don't understand your caloric need for a day and you either overeat or eat just the right amount to maintain your weight. You don't even need to exercise to create a calorie deficiency. I think you're the perfect example of what I'm talking about, you don't understand the very basic concept, which has nothing to do with time spent, but rather food ingested.
People need to get it out of their heads that it is about exercise. It's 10% working out, 90% food. Get your nutrition right and you won't need to exercise a day in your life. If you want to get fit however, make sure to balance your nutrition around your added caloric need to not drop weight too fast or at all if your goal is maintaining.
ok, I'm sorry but how the hell do you know what I do or don't understand about nutrition?? your presumptions are offensive
So you're saying these people have abnormally low "Calories out". It still comes down to that very simple equation. These people first have to fix their calories out, get their metabolism back straight, then they can fix their calories in.
It is that easy to lose weight. People don't know this very simple and basic concept, they think "Fat/Sugar" has to do with weight, which is completely false. "Low Saturated Fat!" on a box of cookies means squat if the cookies are 170 calories for 3 vs 180 calories for 3 of the same cookies with normal saturated fat. You still can't eat the whole box in one sitting and think "hey, it's low fat, I can't gain weight from this".
You'd be surprised how many people think this way.
People struggle because like someone pointed out, they lack willpower and I'll add that they lack education. Calorie control is the only way to lose weight. There's seriously no other way, since weight is based off of calories and calories alone. To lose weight, you need a calorie deficiency. To be more precise, 3500 calories = 1 lbs, each way. So you need to create a calorie deficiency of 3500 calories before you lose 1 lbs. My metabolic rate is around 1740, that's what I burn each day without lifting a finger. Add in my normal routine, and I'm around the magic 2000 calorie diet. Let's not add in my gym routine. So to lose 1 lbs in 7 days, I need to go on a 1500 calorie diet per day. That's going to give me a deficiency of 500 per day, times 7 days, 1 lbs lost.
There's entire industries because they profit from it. Some people like to buy "instant" solutions. 1 lbs in 7 days ? Bah humbug, too long, I have 100 to lose! There's no instant solutions to weight loss, quite the contrary, the entire weight loss industry makes money by keeping people fat and coming back for miracle cures. Their proposed plans of "1 shake/bar for breakfeast, same for lunch and a balanced diner" is awful. First, it should be the opposite, a good breakfeast and then their bars/shakes for lunch and diner. Breakfeast is where you get your day's energy. Second, that's not calorie control since it doesn't explain that it is trying to create a calorie deficit. So people just still overeat, they compensate the calories they didn't eat at breakfeast/lunch with a huge "balanced" diner.
I'm 32, work 35 hours per week in IT (sitting down on my ass), am on call with tons of pages coming in once every 2 weeks. I have a girlfriend, a mortgage and a dog.
Again, staying trim has nothing to do with having time or being busy or not. If you spend less calories, eat less calories. Balance your calories in to your calories out and you'll stay trim. Sure it means doing a bit more research into what you're eating, but that's not impossible. It also means listening to your body. Feeling "stuffed" means you overate. You should never feel full or stuffed. A donut is not faster to mow down than an Apple. It's not more filling either. It's tons more calories though.
You made an assumption about me and you were wrong. You should look at yourself and what you are or aren't doing that is making you fat, not make up excuses.
But again, it's just because you don't understand your caloric need for a day and you either overeat or eat just the right amount to maintain your weight. You don't even need to exercise to create a calorie deficiency. I think you're the perfect example of what I'm talking about, you don't understand the very basic concept, which has nothing to do with time spent, but rather food ingested.
People need to get it out of their heads that it is about exercise. It's 10% working out, 90% food. Get your nutrition right and you won't need to exercise a day in your life. If you want to get fit however, make sure to balance your nutrition around your added caloric need to not drop weight too fast or at all if your goal is maintaining.
ok, I'm sorry but how the hell do you know what I do or don't understand about nutrition?? your presumptions are offensive
more...
cult hero
Apr 15, 08:30 PM
At one point, Apple got it certified as UNIX, so OS X is a UNIX platform, not just UNIX-like. Linux is probably fairly close to being able to be UNIX certified as well, but there is a money outlay that nobody wants to spend. To top it off, UNIX certification means zilch to the Linux community, so why would anyone pay to have it certified? I'm not even sure how Apple benefitted from their certification.
I believe Apple got the certification because they were calling themselves UNIX prior to getting the certification and it had to do with legalities. I do know, at least at the time, it ONLY applied to Leopard running on Intel machines because of how the certification works.
It's paper and nothing more. Whenever some Mac weenie is like "we're REAL UNIX unlike Linux" I know I can safely just slap him. Certification means very little. Actual POSIX compliance�among other things�is what matters.
I believe Apple got the certification because they were calling themselves UNIX prior to getting the certification and it had to do with legalities. I do know, at least at the time, it ONLY applied to Leopard running on Intel machines because of how the certification works.
It's paper and nothing more. Whenever some Mac weenie is like "we're REAL UNIX unlike Linux" I know I can safely just slap him. Certification means very little. Actual POSIX compliance�among other things�is what matters.
SandynJosh
Apr 29, 05:12 PM
Oh good. I like lower prices.
When I buy music, I typically buy from Amazon anyway. Their prices almost always seem to be cheaper than iTunes for the music I buy.
/would not buy or listen to anything by the artists listed in the above article. Just sayin' :p
I've only bought one song from Amazon and the sample rate was less than I get with iTunes. Anyone else notice a difference?
When I buy music, I typically buy from Amazon anyway. Their prices almost always seem to be cheaper than iTunes for the music I buy.
/would not buy or listen to anything by the artists listed in the above article. Just sayin' :p
I've only bought one song from Amazon and the sample rate was less than I get with iTunes. Anyone else notice a difference?
more...
Keebler
Dec 30, 03:45 PM
This will be a thread hand-grenade, but let's face it - depending on her/your/our healthcare situation, you kindof are paying for this. What we have here with this woman is a pending and unnatural liability on the healthcare system and insurance network due to her socially- and personally-irresponsible whim.
Who's paying for her bypass surgeries, ER trips, and specialized healthcare infrastructure in order to deal with a person of her size? We are. The cost to sustain her life will with all probablity be more than an average person's: so your premiums (or taxes, if you're in a socialized-medicine country) go up. I'm all for personal freedoms and not letting people tell others what to do with their bodies, but I don't want to subsidize stupid behavior like this. I say make her carry her own weight, and I mean that both literally and figuratively.
+1 it's a hand grenade that needs to be tossed. fantastic points.
Here's another one, but hopefully it isn't. It's a personal observation.
First, let me say that my own country, Canada, is not far behind so this isn't a 'my country is better than yours' situation.
Last year, I travelled to Myrtle Beach. On the way there, I was astounded at the amount of obese and out of shape people on the way down through all the states. I was once overweight so I have been there :( I couldn't believe that for every turnpike gas station, there were at least 3 or 4 fast food joints and/or donut shops. Add that to the economy issues and ppl don't have alot of choice to eat healthier foods which are more expensive. (of course, walking and running are free).
Later that night, I watched the news and this is when all the rage was about passing the healthcare bill. There was a debate about it.
one thought instantly came to mind: no wonder they wanted to pass it. With the number of overweight ppl, you're talking a potentially massive money maker (insurance and health care premiums). It's like making the cows fatter by only supplying them with fattening food or fattening situations then charge them for a heavier weight on the transport truck scale.
Now, those are my own observations so I'm not saying i'm right or wrong, but I think there's something to it. You may or may not agree or think i'm nuts, but I know what I saw, shocked me.
Again, it's nothing personal against anyone who was overweight b/c I was too. I've lost 25 lbs, which may not seem like a lot, but I'm also short and trust me, it's made a massive difference in my lifestyle in the most positive way :) I'm in better shape than I was in high school - which is sad really.
Who's paying for her bypass surgeries, ER trips, and specialized healthcare infrastructure in order to deal with a person of her size? We are. The cost to sustain her life will with all probablity be more than an average person's: so your premiums (or taxes, if you're in a socialized-medicine country) go up. I'm all for personal freedoms and not letting people tell others what to do with their bodies, but I don't want to subsidize stupid behavior like this. I say make her carry her own weight, and I mean that both literally and figuratively.
+1 it's a hand grenade that needs to be tossed. fantastic points.
Here's another one, but hopefully it isn't. It's a personal observation.
First, let me say that my own country, Canada, is not far behind so this isn't a 'my country is better than yours' situation.
Last year, I travelled to Myrtle Beach. On the way there, I was astounded at the amount of obese and out of shape people on the way down through all the states. I was once overweight so I have been there :( I couldn't believe that for every turnpike gas station, there were at least 3 or 4 fast food joints and/or donut shops. Add that to the economy issues and ppl don't have alot of choice to eat healthier foods which are more expensive. (of course, walking and running are free).
Later that night, I watched the news and this is when all the rage was about passing the healthcare bill. There was a debate about it.
one thought instantly came to mind: no wonder they wanted to pass it. With the number of overweight ppl, you're talking a potentially massive money maker (insurance and health care premiums). It's like making the cows fatter by only supplying them with fattening food or fattening situations then charge them for a heavier weight on the transport truck scale.
Now, those are my own observations so I'm not saying i'm right or wrong, but I think there's something to it. You may or may not agree or think i'm nuts, but I know what I saw, shocked me.
Again, it's nothing personal against anyone who was overweight b/c I was too. I've lost 25 lbs, which may not seem like a lot, but I'm also short and trust me, it's made a massive difference in my lifestyle in the most positive way :) I'm in better shape than I was in high school - which is sad really.
rockthecasbah
Jul 26, 10:02 AM
If this patent is anything close to reality, Apple may be prepping something much bigger than an iPod, something closer to a full-featured OS X tablet computer. You'll be running a full-featured version of iTunes, not just the simplified UI of the iPod:
http://images.appleinsider.com/patent-ipod-touch17.gif
but who would want to have a full featured iTunes when you still haven't solved the problem of typing. The most efficient part for me is to type out what you're looking for. I do, however, see the advantage to making playlists more efficiently on the go, giving you the ability to shuffle anything you choose, not just "All Songs" which is a bother. :)
http://images.appleinsider.com/patent-ipod-touch17.gif
but who would want to have a full featured iTunes when you still haven't solved the problem of typing. The most efficient part for me is to type out what you're looking for. I do, however, see the advantage to making playlists more efficiently on the go, giving you the ability to shuffle anything you choose, not just "All Songs" which is a bother. :)
more...
keruah
Apr 14, 05:03 AM
I hope there will be dual-core processor and 1Gb ram on the white phone, that's all i am asking for. Otherwise i am going to use my cheap cell phone until iphone 5 comes out.
So what's the app that needs 1GB ram?
So what's the app that needs 1GB ram?
jaydub
Feb 1, 09:38 PM
Super excited.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/49/190420053_84b4f0c7b4.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4024/4274856138_92a4c2a9fe.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/49/190420053_84b4f0c7b4.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4024/4274856138_92a4c2a9fe.jpg
more...
xPismo
Nov 3, 10:47 AM
<Darth Vader voice> Impressive.... </voice>
Great to see another virtual machine app for osx/intel. I can't wait to get my hands on one and try all this new fun stuff out! I feel so left out.
...i'd install avid in parallels. ... more features quicker.
OMG! Avid in a virtual machine? I doubt, and I know I'm old and cranky, that Avid will ever work convincingly in a VM environment. Bootcamp hopefully one day.
Great to see another virtual machine app for osx/intel. I can't wait to get my hands on one and try all this new fun stuff out! I feel so left out.
...i'd install avid in parallels. ... more features quicker.
OMG! Avid in a virtual machine? I doubt, and I know I'm old and cranky, that Avid will ever work convincingly in a VM environment. Bootcamp hopefully one day.
kuwisdelu
Apr 28, 04:29 PM
This is pretty cool, since it means we can measure how thick color is.
As far as light goes, where black is the absence of all color, white is the presence of all colors.
Clearly, this means all those extra colors in white are making the phone thicker.
As far as light goes, where black is the absence of all color, white is the presence of all colors.
Clearly, this means all those extra colors in white are making the phone thicker.
more...
leekohler
Apr 27, 11:03 AM
Agree, slapping the wall with her hand at end was a dead Giveaway.
You people really have problems. I feel sorry for you. That you would sit here and say things like this is just sad. Just what exactly is wrong with you? What is it that makes you so callous? Is it boredom? Or is it just fun for you the be this way?
You people really have problems. I feel sorry for you. That you would sit here and say things like this is just sad. Just what exactly is wrong with you? What is it that makes you so callous? Is it boredom? Or is it just fun for you the be this way?
iApples
May 2, 01:12 AM
300 lb virgins with A cups, facial hair, and gonorrhea
enjoy yourself Osama
Some people may dig that sorta thing. :D
enjoy yourself Osama
Some people may dig that sorta thing. :D
johneaston
May 2, 03:40 AM
Because they have to bury him within 24 hours
Why?
Why?
tbrinkma
Apr 28, 01:01 PM
All boats except Symbian (it's too huge a s[t]inking ship to be lifted by any tide) and Windows Phone 7 ( they made a paper boat in the hope of getting lifted but sadly it looks like the tide is too big for it to ride)
Ok, sure. There's exceptions for boats which have been so neglected they're keels have rusted out (Symbian), and boats with cast-lead structural members (WinP7)... :p
Ok, sure. There's exceptions for boats which have been so neglected they're keels have rusted out (Symbian), and boats with cast-lead structural members (WinP7)... :p
SR20DETDOG
Apr 5, 05:00 AM
http://img845.imageshack.us/img845/6686/wtr3.jpg
Wow, that is absolutely stunning and beautiful shot. Looks fanastic:D
Wow, that is absolutely stunning and beautiful shot. Looks fanastic:D
OceanView
Mar 16, 10:07 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
They said they have some 16 gig wifi, and some verizons in stock but no at&t's. I don't think they have enough for the whole line though.
I want an AT&T model.
Guess I will skip today.
They said they have some 16 gig wifi, and some verizons in stock but no at&t's. I don't think they have enough for the whole line though.
I want an AT&T model.
Guess I will skip today.
Queso
Oct 19, 07:56 AM
Since when did HP become the number 1? I've not heard anything, do you have an article or something that I could possibly read?
The Gartner report released yesterday had Dell and HP virtually tied for first place with 17.2% market share each (HP ever so slightly higher) and the IDC one had HP 300k units (or 0.2%) ahead.
Dell are still #1 in the USA, but even there the gap narrowed, from Dell having a 2.2 million unit lead in the previous quarter to a 1.5 million unit lead in the quarter just ended.
HP are really leaping ahead. I expect they will take the US #1 spot back from Dell sometime next year.
The Gartner report released yesterday had Dell and HP virtually tied for first place with 17.2% market share each (HP ever so slightly higher) and the IDC one had HP 300k units (or 0.2%) ahead.
Dell are still #1 in the USA, but even there the gap narrowed, from Dell having a 2.2 million unit lead in the previous quarter to a 1.5 million unit lead in the quarter just ended.
HP are really leaping ahead. I expect they will take the US #1 spot back from Dell sometime next year.
ghostlyorb
Apr 29, 07:29 AM
Interesting. Well I'm sure it's not a big deal. Why are people complaining over .2mm?
No comments:
Post a Comment