southernpaws
Apr 23, 11:35 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
You enjoy seeing every issue from the perspective of someone who wants Apple to fail.
Apple cares very deeply about their product, which is why they don't give in to every spec junkie who demands the latest and greatest immediately. The current chips don't give a usable battery life in Apple's eyes. If you want to get a phone that eats batteries that's your business, but Apple doesn't have an interest in developing anything like that.
Nope. I see every issue from the consumer perspective - as I should (being a consumer). Any other perspective would be an abomination (unless for those who hold tons of AAPL shares).
Phrases like "in Apple's eyes" is a good example of what I am talking about. Apple does not use iPhones, consumers do. Consumer eyse are the only eyes that matter. And that is exactly why people are switching to Android. If Apple cares more about what they think is right than what I think is right (for me) it would be stupid for me to care about what Apple thinks or does.
They would still have to use two chips as I understand it: one to support CDMA and then the other to support LTE.
I doubt that but even if that was the case then what? Every other phone manufacturer on the planet can design a phone that has LTE and Apple could not? Because they spend on R&D much less than any other hi-tech company of comparable size?
And there we have it friends! This guy has no clue what he's talking about. There are no hybrid LTE/3G chips available yet, so the multiple chips thing has nothing to do with GSM/CDMA. If Apple wanted to support 3G AND LTE which they would have to do considering how scarce LTE is at the moment, the only way for them to do it is to use two chips. Battery life would drain.
Here's a site for you to consider: Thunderbolt Battery Life (http://www.gottabemobile.com/2011/03/18/htc-thunderbolt-battery-life/)
This is what people are talking about when they say the iPhone's battery life would be horrible. It has nothing to do with a hybrid CDMA/GSM chip, and has everything to do with the lack of a hybrid 3G/LTE chip.
In fact, hybrid CDMA/GSM chips exist, and are already being used by Apple.
You miss the point. I did not investigate the details about the number of chips. Not everyone cares. The point here is that there many people who want LTE and the there is Apple with their "single phone fits all" strategy. Here is a piece of relevant information for you from Information Week:
"In its recently quarterly earnings report, Verizon Wireless noted that more than 500,000 customers signed up for LTE services and/or devices during its most recent quarter. Add that to the 65,000 who signed up in December, and Verizon has about 565,000 people using its next-generation wireless network. At this rate, Verizon may have more than 2 million 4G users by the end of the year.
Of the 500,000 who signed up for 4G services this quarter, more than half (260,000) chose a 4G phone--the HTC Thunderbolt--that went on sale in mid-March. It scored a significant number of customers in its first two weeks of availability. That means between January 1 and March 15, about 240,000 people purchased other 4G devices, such as USB modems."
As you can see 260K people bought HTC Thunderbolt since Verizon started selling them (about a month). This translates to about 3 million phones annually. Clearly the demand is there. Also, you keep forgetting that other phones have swappable batteries.
Unfortunately, you don't see everything from your so called consumer perspective. Millions of people own iPhones, and it's not like they had no choice. Apple does a fine job of listening to the majority of consumers. Just not you
You enjoy seeing every issue from the perspective of someone who wants Apple to fail.
Apple cares very deeply about their product, which is why they don't give in to every spec junkie who demands the latest and greatest immediately. The current chips don't give a usable battery life in Apple's eyes. If you want to get a phone that eats batteries that's your business, but Apple doesn't have an interest in developing anything like that.
Nope. I see every issue from the consumer perspective - as I should (being a consumer). Any other perspective would be an abomination (unless for those who hold tons of AAPL shares).
Phrases like "in Apple's eyes" is a good example of what I am talking about. Apple does not use iPhones, consumers do. Consumer eyse are the only eyes that matter. And that is exactly why people are switching to Android. If Apple cares more about what they think is right than what I think is right (for me) it would be stupid for me to care about what Apple thinks or does.
They would still have to use two chips as I understand it: one to support CDMA and then the other to support LTE.
I doubt that but even if that was the case then what? Every other phone manufacturer on the planet can design a phone that has LTE and Apple could not? Because they spend on R&D much less than any other hi-tech company of comparable size?
And there we have it friends! This guy has no clue what he's talking about. There are no hybrid LTE/3G chips available yet, so the multiple chips thing has nothing to do with GSM/CDMA. If Apple wanted to support 3G AND LTE which they would have to do considering how scarce LTE is at the moment, the only way for them to do it is to use two chips. Battery life would drain.
Here's a site for you to consider: Thunderbolt Battery Life (http://www.gottabemobile.com/2011/03/18/htc-thunderbolt-battery-life/)
This is what people are talking about when they say the iPhone's battery life would be horrible. It has nothing to do with a hybrid CDMA/GSM chip, and has everything to do with the lack of a hybrid 3G/LTE chip.
In fact, hybrid CDMA/GSM chips exist, and are already being used by Apple.
You miss the point. I did not investigate the details about the number of chips. Not everyone cares. The point here is that there many people who want LTE and the there is Apple with their "single phone fits all" strategy. Here is a piece of relevant information for you from Information Week:
"In its recently quarterly earnings report, Verizon Wireless noted that more than 500,000 customers signed up for LTE services and/or devices during its most recent quarter. Add that to the 65,000 who signed up in December, and Verizon has about 565,000 people using its next-generation wireless network. At this rate, Verizon may have more than 2 million 4G users by the end of the year.
Of the 500,000 who signed up for 4G services this quarter, more than half (260,000) chose a 4G phone--the HTC Thunderbolt--that went on sale in mid-March. It scored a significant number of customers in its first two weeks of availability. That means between January 1 and March 15, about 240,000 people purchased other 4G devices, such as USB modems."
As you can see 260K people bought HTC Thunderbolt since Verizon started selling them (about a month). This translates to about 3 million phones annually. Clearly the demand is there. Also, you keep forgetting that other phones have swappable batteries.
Unfortunately, you don't see everything from your so called consumer perspective. Millions of people own iPhones, and it's not like they had no choice. Apple does a fine job of listening to the majority of consumers. Just not you
frito1224
May 4, 12:52 AM
Verizon in store rep told me that their version will be out in September
Eriden
Mar 16, 08:02 AM
Uh-oh, if you arent position 1 in front of the Apple Store, then the guy is probably a scalper. I think it's mostly mall employees lined up inside right now. I managed to get in with a hopeful mall employee just before 5am.
*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.
coolbreeze
Apr 28, 03:56 PM
First, the volume switch issue, then this. I feel sorry for case manufacturers. What a nightmare.
CalBoy
Jan 26, 01:22 AM
The ticker is AAPL, and it's traded on Nasdaq, not NYSE.
Actually Nasdaq is an index, not a trading cite. The NYSE is an exchange (much like one we'd find in London, Tokyo, etc). What Apple is not listed under is the Dow 30 (commonly referred to only as "the Dow" or "Dow Jones Industrial Average"), which lists the 30 largest companies of the US based on industry and importance (current ones include WalMart, GE, CitiGroup, etc).
Actually Nasdaq is an index, not a trading cite. The NYSE is an exchange (much like one we'd find in London, Tokyo, etc). What Apple is not listed under is the Dow 30 (commonly referred to only as "the Dow" or "Dow Jones Industrial Average"), which lists the 30 largest companies of the US based on industry and importance (current ones include WalMart, GE, CitiGroup, etc).
samcraig
Apr 14, 10:52 AM
It's for the new computer Apple is introducing called LISA
Westyfield2
May 3, 07:45 AM
Mac Mini: Core2Duo
:( :rolleyes:
:( :rolleyes:
silentnite
Apr 23, 10:44 AM
There is a phone for everyone, apple may not make it. That does not mean this is the end for you. If you can't wait find another means. Simple fix!
Rot'nApple
Apr 28, 11:26 AM
Monkeeboy Eric Schmidt's Android is Goin' Down! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URb8h4dLKps) :D
/
/
/
/
/
/
roadbloc
Apr 16, 06:55 AM
Uh please.
It's great that Google bought Android but there's a very few things google have done on their own.
Uh please.
Google has done a helluva lot to Android since they bought it. Android is unrecognisable now to what it was in 05. They have simply bought a brand name to get their product popular.
In other words, you are talking rubbish sir. Stop accusing people of trolling, when they are simply telling it how it is.
It's great that Google bought Android but there's a very few things google have done on their own.
Uh please.
Google has done a helluva lot to Android since they bought it. Android is unrecognisable now to what it was in 05. They have simply bought a brand name to get their product popular.
In other words, you are talking rubbish sir. Stop accusing people of trolling, when they are simply telling it how it is.
AaronEdwards
Apr 29, 01:50 AM
Ok, that works if you are thinking of getting a cellphone vs. not getting a cellphone.
But when you are thinking of getting what type of cellphone, no, it doesn't count. Cause by deciding you are getting a cellphone but trying to decide which type, you already committed to buying the plan,what type of cellphone does not affect the cost of the plan, you are going to pay it regardless. So the cost of the plan really doesn't count for the cost of the cellphone when you are comparing cellphones together.
Maybe if we were comparing getting a landline to a cellphone (where the costs of the service for the landline are going to be drastically different).
Or even if we were comparing going from AT&T to Verizon there might be some small difference. So only if the cellphones are on different networks (with the iphone though, this only matters if you are comparing to a T-Mobile or Sprint phone as you can get an iphone on either AT&T or Verizon so the plan cost will be the same for the iphone as whatever other phone you want to get on either network).
You still don't get the point.
The point is when we are comparing different cellphones to each other, the service doesn't matter cause if you are getting the cellphone, you are going to pay the service regardless and which cellphone you get isn't going to affect the service's price. Therefore it is irrelevant when talking cost of one cellphone vs. another to bring in the cost o the contract.
Total cost matters. And since you are going to have to pay the monthly payment even if you don't use the phone one second or download even one byte, then, yes, the plan is part of the total cost of the phone.
Without the plan, the 3GS costs $449 not $49.
The monthly cost for a 3GS will be higher than the initial payment. And my example is with the cheapest plan I could get, with a more expensive plan the difference in what you pay for the phone will matter even less. And mccldwll has an excellent point about the value of the phone at the end of contract period.
Anyone who is unable to pay the extra $150 up front, probably shouldn't get a phone with a plan that will at least cost you $55/month. And if go for the cheapest plan, then what's the point of getting a smart phone?
Is there actually anyone here who would buy a 3GS over a 4? Anyone who thinks that's a good idea? For themselves? Considering that most people here are talking about waiting for the 4S/5.
But when you are thinking of getting what type of cellphone, no, it doesn't count. Cause by deciding you are getting a cellphone but trying to decide which type, you already committed to buying the plan,what type of cellphone does not affect the cost of the plan, you are going to pay it regardless. So the cost of the plan really doesn't count for the cost of the cellphone when you are comparing cellphones together.
Maybe if we were comparing getting a landline to a cellphone (where the costs of the service for the landline are going to be drastically different).
Or even if we were comparing going from AT&T to Verizon there might be some small difference. So only if the cellphones are on different networks (with the iphone though, this only matters if you are comparing to a T-Mobile or Sprint phone as you can get an iphone on either AT&T or Verizon so the plan cost will be the same for the iphone as whatever other phone you want to get on either network).
You still don't get the point.
The point is when we are comparing different cellphones to each other, the service doesn't matter cause if you are getting the cellphone, you are going to pay the service regardless and which cellphone you get isn't going to affect the service's price. Therefore it is irrelevant when talking cost of one cellphone vs. another to bring in the cost o the contract.
Total cost matters. And since you are going to have to pay the monthly payment even if you don't use the phone one second or download even one byte, then, yes, the plan is part of the total cost of the phone.
Without the plan, the 3GS costs $449 not $49.
The monthly cost for a 3GS will be higher than the initial payment. And my example is with the cheapest plan I could get, with a more expensive plan the difference in what you pay for the phone will matter even less. And mccldwll has an excellent point about the value of the phone at the end of contract period.
Anyone who is unable to pay the extra $150 up front, probably shouldn't get a phone with a plan that will at least cost you $55/month. And if go for the cheapest plan, then what's the point of getting a smart phone?
Is there actually anyone here who would buy a 3GS over a 4? Anyone who thinks that's a good idea? For themselves? Considering that most people here are talking about waiting for the 4S/5.
Consultant
Nov 10, 05:41 PM
I wonder what battery life will be like.
Also, how many people downloaded it just so they could watch porn?
Many Porn sites are smart enough to provide HTML5 alternative.
Also, how many people downloaded it just so they could watch porn?
Many Porn sites are smart enough to provide HTML5 alternative.
Chaszmyr
Jul 25, 08:12 AM
Hey, Bluetooth MM can operate on 1 or 2 AA batteries. :eek:
Does this mean we will get a longer battery live than the previous one?
By "previous one" I'm assuming you mean the Wireless one button mouse and not the wired Mighty Mouse, seeing as wired mice don't use batteries. Simple answer, it's possible, but I wouldn't bet on getting better battery life.
I think it's a kind of weird feature, personally. If they did it because they thought maybe sometimes you'd have just one battery lying around, that would be fine... but they say it's to make it lighter... Batteries are heavy in bulk, but a single AA battery has no significant weight, imo.
Does this mean we will get a longer battery live than the previous one?
By "previous one" I'm assuming you mean the Wireless one button mouse and not the wired Mighty Mouse, seeing as wired mice don't use batteries. Simple answer, it's possible, but I wouldn't bet on getting better battery life.
I think it's a kind of weird feature, personally. If they did it because they thought maybe sometimes you'd have just one battery lying around, that would be fine... but they say it's to make it lighter... Batteries are heavy in bulk, but a single AA battery has no significant weight, imo.
yg17
Apr 29, 03:28 PM
With all the improvements made to Amazon MP3 lately, there really is NO reason to buy music from the iTunes store anymore. None.
Agreed. I'm glad Amazon is using MP3. I refuse to spend a dime on AAC files. My car doesn't play them, I don't want them.
Agreed. I'm glad Amazon is using MP3. I refuse to spend a dime on AAC files. My car doesn't play them, I don't want them.
trainguy77
Oct 14, 11:37 PM
We moved up a rank today some how. :eek: As well the number of active users is increasing. I kind of think us talking about it here seems to be helping! I might just set my signature back to something about folding tomorrow at some point.
MajorTom
Jul 10, 11:01 AM
I think pages is a great app and these new features are most welcome IMO.
The Maestro
Oct 24, 09:28 AM
i took the plunge
MacBook Pro, 15-inch, 2.33GHz
Part Number: MA610
2GB 667 DDR2 - 2x1GB SO-DIMMs
SuperDrive 6x (DVD+R DL/DVD RW/CD-RW)
MacBook Pro 15-inch Widescreen Display
Backlit Keyboard (English) & Mac OS (English)
Country kit
120GB Serial ATA drive (5400rpm)
2.33GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
Ready to ship: 4 days
MacBook Pro, 15-inch, 2.33GHz
Part Number: MA610
2GB 667 DDR2 - 2x1GB SO-DIMMs
SuperDrive 6x (DVD+R DL/DVD RW/CD-RW)
MacBook Pro 15-inch Widescreen Display
Backlit Keyboard (English) & Mac OS (English)
Country kit
120GB Serial ATA drive (5400rpm)
2.33GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
Ready to ship: 4 days
mikemac11
Apr 15, 01:53 PM
Is there an option to make iCal look normal?
no
no
irishv
Apr 26, 12:44 PM
I would happily pay the current fee for MobileMe if Apple offered some better options for hosting a website. Right now I pay for web hosting for a family blog and a flickr pro account. If I could host my wordpress blog on my idisk space with my own domain name, I would sign up right now.
!� V �!
Apr 25, 03:28 PM
Whaa? That young? I have a 4 year old MBP that just about copes with aperture.
MBP = 4 years old
iMac = 3 years old
And both will be upgraded to Lion. No problems yet , even 1080p content plays well, slight lag to catch up when RWD or FF other than that no problems. :)
MBP = 4 years old
iMac = 3 years old
And both will be upgraded to Lion. No problems yet , even 1080p content plays well, slight lag to catch up when RWD or FF other than that no problems. :)
rusty2192
Apr 14, 10:00 PM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5107/5617511987_6e779f0f17.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/48874590@N02/5617511987/)
IMG_3839 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/48874590@N02/5617511987/) by Rusty2192 (http://www.flickr.com/people/48874590@N02/), on Flickr
IMG_3839 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/48874590@N02/5617511987/) by Rusty2192 (http://www.flickr.com/people/48874590@N02/), on Flickr
CFreymarc
Mar 29, 08:21 AM
Really? Wow, what's next?
Cupertino:
Apple has announced a reduction in the number of restrooms available in their office buildings. This is seen as a media ploy to drive up demand. :rolleyes:
Tin foil hats, necessity or fashion accessory? New at eleven.
But are they ready to make the move to Vegas? Would love to see WWDC move here. :)
I would love to see that but I doubt they will do it due to time lost of Steve's engineers making it to Vegas for a week. Most of Steve's boys talk one or two days and they are back to work. There are other venues larger than Moscone closer than Vegas but not as convenient. I am surprised they haven't split it into a two week event with one week Mac and the other iOS. Offer tickets for one of the weeks and a superpass for both.
Cupertino:
Apple has announced a reduction in the number of restrooms available in their office buildings. This is seen as a media ploy to drive up demand. :rolleyes:
Tin foil hats, necessity or fashion accessory? New at eleven.
But are they ready to make the move to Vegas? Would love to see WWDC move here. :)
I would love to see that but I doubt they will do it due to time lost of Steve's engineers making it to Vegas for a week. Most of Steve's boys talk one or two days and they are back to work. There are other venues larger than Moscone closer than Vegas but not as convenient. I am surprised they haven't split it into a two week event with one week Mac and the other iOS. Offer tickets for one of the weeks and a superpass for both.
InfinitiG
Apr 28, 04:46 PM
Does this mean the white iphone is 10% more durable?
No comments:
Post a Comment