Gatesbasher
Mar 24, 08:13 PM
Pardon? Want to try that again?
I can't speak for him, but DOS was tolerable. No iteration of Windows has been. That's probably what he meant.
I can't speak for him, but DOS was tolerable. No iteration of Windows has been. That's probably what he meant.
kirky29
Apr 15, 01:30 PM
I doubt and hope these are not true! Although, something different from the current iPhone's would be nice!
Lets hope for a 'real' iPhone Refresh soon. :)
:apple:
Lets hope for a 'real' iPhone Refresh soon. :)
:apple:
blanding
Dec 26, 07:33 AM
oh, i already received it ,i like it very much.
flopticalcube
Nov 24, 08:05 PM
Online stores are still having problems. Try reviewing your orders.
more...
Jaro65
Aug 6, 03:19 PM
The U.S. can build cars just as good as the best of the rest of the world, but only when we want to - which is a shame, because we historically haven't wanted to.
I see some changes in the US auto industry now and would actually consider purchasing something from Ford. Let's just hope that this trend continues.
I see some changes in the US auto industry now and would actually consider purchasing something from Ford. Let's just hope that this trend continues.
ezekielrage_99
Jan 9, 04:55 PM
These are my predictions:
iPhone 2.0:
3G model
16gb Storage
Also Released in Australia
iPhone will be release in Australia within the next month (end of Feb by the latest) only on the Telstra network. Unfortunately Telstra has exclusive rights for the iPhone, so the product will be awesome (e.g. being Apple) but the service provider will be crap....
At my work we got a demo of the iPhone from Telstra for development reasons, we will be supplying data for a few of the services for the iPhone in Australia.
iPhone 2.0:
3G model
16gb Storage
Also Released in Australia
iPhone will be release in Australia within the next month (end of Feb by the latest) only on the Telstra network. Unfortunately Telstra has exclusive rights for the iPhone, so the product will be awesome (e.g. being Apple) but the service provider will be crap....
At my work we got a demo of the iPhone from Telstra for development reasons, we will be supplying data for a few of the services for the iPhone in Australia.
more...
Nicolasdec
Jan 9, 05:29 PM
i was whatching it and it ****ed up in the middle
longofest
Oct 17, 09:06 AM
I'd rather see Blu Ray win this. It's clearly the better product on paper.
However, as history shows us, this doesn't mean it will win :(
Apple supporting both? I think it's a good option to give the customers - it's us who'll decide... But a hybrid drive will be the best bet.
Bluray is clearly better, and TDK (I think) is definitely doing an incredible job of pushing disk capacities through the 200 GB roof (http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/04/28/tdk_200gb_blu-ray_disc/) (with multiple layers, and increasing the single-layer capacity to 33 GB). But I heard in this forum that the content creators are still using MPEG-2, which while H.264 and WM9 is fully supported in both Bluray and HD-DVD, only HD-DVD is using the advanced codecs. So, the end result is the studios aren't using Bluray to its full capacity.
If true, I'd like to see studios stop being stupid and start using the better technology. But another BIG problem I see with bluray right now is that it is so darn expensive. There is a 2:1, and sometimes a 3:1 price difference between them and HD-DVD. I don't have over a grand to spend on a Bluray player, and I don't want to wait a decade to get one either...
No they won't.
If (I said IF) everyone can end up buying a player that plays both formats, why would they have to release both formats?
Maybe all Sony movies are on Blu-Ray and all Warner Brother's movies are on HDVD. Everyone can buy either and play them in their dual-player.
That's it. Easy.
I have lots of doubts that it will work out this way, but hey...that WOULD be best, wouldn't it?
Warner looks like they will put movies out on the hybrid disks, so if you have a blu-ray player, you can play it, and if you have an HD-DVD player you can play it. Same end game. The problem comes when you have a studio like Universal that only puts out stuff on HD-DVD or Fox that just puts out on Blu-ray. Then you need the universal player.
NEC has developed a chip that can decode both, as you have hinted at. The optical technology is coming along (I saw something on Digg a little bit ago that noted some progress in that arena), but still not there yet.
However, as history shows us, this doesn't mean it will win :(
Apple supporting both? I think it's a good option to give the customers - it's us who'll decide... But a hybrid drive will be the best bet.
Bluray is clearly better, and TDK (I think) is definitely doing an incredible job of pushing disk capacities through the 200 GB roof (http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/04/28/tdk_200gb_blu-ray_disc/) (with multiple layers, and increasing the single-layer capacity to 33 GB). But I heard in this forum that the content creators are still using MPEG-2, which while H.264 and WM9 is fully supported in both Bluray and HD-DVD, only HD-DVD is using the advanced codecs. So, the end result is the studios aren't using Bluray to its full capacity.
If true, I'd like to see studios stop being stupid and start using the better technology. But another BIG problem I see with bluray right now is that it is so darn expensive. There is a 2:1, and sometimes a 3:1 price difference between them and HD-DVD. I don't have over a grand to spend on a Bluray player, and I don't want to wait a decade to get one either...
No they won't.
If (I said IF) everyone can end up buying a player that plays both formats, why would they have to release both formats?
Maybe all Sony movies are on Blu-Ray and all Warner Brother's movies are on HDVD. Everyone can buy either and play them in their dual-player.
That's it. Easy.
I have lots of doubts that it will work out this way, but hey...that WOULD be best, wouldn't it?
Warner looks like they will put movies out on the hybrid disks, so if you have a blu-ray player, you can play it, and if you have an HD-DVD player you can play it. Same end game. The problem comes when you have a studio like Universal that only puts out stuff on HD-DVD or Fox that just puts out on Blu-ray. Then you need the universal player.
NEC has developed a chip that can decode both, as you have hinted at. The optical technology is coming along (I saw something on Digg a little bit ago that noted some progress in that arena), but still not there yet.
more...
gnasher729
Oct 5, 02:45 PM
Methinks you don't have a good grasp of public key encryption. (Or at least how it's supposed to work).
It seems that you got encryption and decryption mixed up.
It seems that you got encryption and decryption mixed up.
toddybody
May 2, 01:13 PM
NSA does not have a security expert at Apple. Apple has a security expert who used to be with the NSA. Big difference.
To your knowledge, they dont.
To your knowledge, they dont.
more...
tktaylor1
Apr 11, 02:54 PM
New glasses. I have to pick up another pair in 2 weeks.
asxtb
Sep 12, 07:30 AM
Japan store down too. :rolleyes:
Ditto. But I get no black screen.
Ditto. But I get no black screen.
more...
Lord Blackadder
Aug 10, 01:10 PM
There's nothing really sinister about it. It's just harder to measure and to this point, there's been no point in trying to measure it in comparison to cars.
I understand that they have to be measured differently, but doesn't it make sense that they be compared apples-to-apples (if possible) to the vehicles they are intended to replace?
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
That is true, but as you pointed out later "green", "efficient", "alternative[to oil imports]" are not all the same thing. Perhaps they are more green but less efficient, or less efficient but more green. Just being more efficient in terms of bang for buck is not necessarily also good from an environmental or alternative energy standpoint. But you are right that the end cost per mile is going to weigh heavily when it comes to consumer acceptance of new types of autos.
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
I would argue that Europe's switch to diesels did not involve quite the environmental tradeoff you imply - in the 70s we in the US were driving cars with huge gasoline engines, and to this day diesel regulation for trucks in this country is pretty minimal. Our emissions were probably world-leading then - partially due to the fact that we had the most cars on the roads by far. The problem lies (in my heavily biased opinion) in ignorance. People see smoke coming off diesel exhausts and assume they are dirtier than gasoline engines. But particulate pollution is not necessarily worse, just different. People are not educated about the differerence between gasoline engine pollution and diesel engine pollution. Not to mention the fact that diesel engines don't puff black smoke like they did in the 70s. I'm not arguing that diesels are necessarily cleaner, but they are arguably no worse than gasoline engines and are certainly more efficient.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
It's a fair point. Given the choice, I would prioritize moving to domestic fuel sources in the short term over a massive "go green" (over all alse) campaign.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
I agree completely. The transition needs to be made as transparent as possible. People need to know the source, efficiency and cleanliness of their power source so that they can make informed choices.
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
I'm not trying to sound stubborn, I simply have not come accross the numbers anywhere. I don't get paid to do this research, ya know. I do it while hiding from the boss. ;)
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
I'm no math whiz (or electrician), but wouldn't 200 watts/hr * 8 hours = 1.6kw, rather than 16kw? I thought you'd need 2kw/hr * 8hrs to charge a 16kw battery.
It's not that I don't think people have looked into this stuff, it's just that I myself have no information on just how much energy the Volt uses and how much the grid can provide. In the short term, plugin hybrids are few in number and I don't see it being an issue. But it's something we need to work out in the medium/long term.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Communism means nothing in this country, because we've been so brainwashed by Cold War/right-wing rhetoric that, like "freedom", the term has been stolen for propaganda purposes until the original meanings have become lost in a massive sea of BS. I was using it for it's hyperbole value. :D
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Well, that's the nature of democracy. But it's not so much a question of the fact that people realize a smaller car is more efficient, but a question of whether people really care about efficiency. I have recently lived in Nevada and Alaska, two states whose residents are addicted to burning fuel. Seemingly everyone has a pickup, RV and four-wheelers. Burning fuel is not just part of the daily transportation routine - it's a lifestyle.
CAFE standardsAnd if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
I walk to work. I used to commute 34 miles a day (total), and while I never minded it, I felt pretty liberated being able to ditch the car for my daily commute. Four years of walking and I don't want to go back. I love cars and motorsport, and I don't consider myself an environmentalist, but I got to the point where I realized that I was driving a lot more than necessary. That realization came when I moved out of a suburb (where you have to drive to get anywhere) and into first a small town and then a biggish city. In both cases it became possible to walk almost everywhere I needed to go. A tank of fuel lasted over a month (or longer) rather than a week from my highway-commuting days. And I lost weight as I hauled by fat backside around on foot. ;)
I won't be in the market for another car for a few years, and my current car (a Subaru) is not very fuel efficient - but then again it has literally not been driven more than half a dozen times in the last six months. When the time comes to replace it I'll be looking for something affordable (ruling out the Volt) but efficiency will be high on the priority list, followed by green-ness.
I wonder if all of you people who are proposing a diesel/diesel hybrid are Europeans, because in America, diesel is looked at as smelly and messy - it's what the trucks with black smoke use.
<snip>
As far as the Chevy Volt goes, I just don't like the name... but the price is right assuming they can get it into the high $20,000's rather quickly.
I'm an American, and yes I've seen the trucks with black smoke. We just need to discard that preconception. This isn't 1973 anymore. We also need to tighten up emissions regualtion on trucks.
The Volt is a practical car by all acoioutns, but it costs way too much. The battery is the primary contributing factor, I've heard that it costs somewhere between $8-15k by itself. Hopefully after GM has been producing such batteries for a few years the cost will drop substantially.
I understand that they have to be measured differently, but doesn't it make sense that they be compared apples-to-apples (if possible) to the vehicles they are intended to replace?
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
That is true, but as you pointed out later "green", "efficient", "alternative[to oil imports]" are not all the same thing. Perhaps they are more green but less efficient, or less efficient but more green. Just being more efficient in terms of bang for buck is not necessarily also good from an environmental or alternative energy standpoint. But you are right that the end cost per mile is going to weigh heavily when it comes to consumer acceptance of new types of autos.
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
I would argue that Europe's switch to diesels did not involve quite the environmental tradeoff you imply - in the 70s we in the US were driving cars with huge gasoline engines, and to this day diesel regulation for trucks in this country is pretty minimal. Our emissions were probably world-leading then - partially due to the fact that we had the most cars on the roads by far. The problem lies (in my heavily biased opinion) in ignorance. People see smoke coming off diesel exhausts and assume they are dirtier than gasoline engines. But particulate pollution is not necessarily worse, just different. People are not educated about the differerence between gasoline engine pollution and diesel engine pollution. Not to mention the fact that diesel engines don't puff black smoke like they did in the 70s. I'm not arguing that diesels are necessarily cleaner, but they are arguably no worse than gasoline engines and are certainly more efficient.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
It's a fair point. Given the choice, I would prioritize moving to domestic fuel sources in the short term over a massive "go green" (over all alse) campaign.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
I agree completely. The transition needs to be made as transparent as possible. People need to know the source, efficiency and cleanliness of their power source so that they can make informed choices.
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
I'm not trying to sound stubborn, I simply have not come accross the numbers anywhere. I don't get paid to do this research, ya know. I do it while hiding from the boss. ;)
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
I'm no math whiz (or electrician), but wouldn't 200 watts/hr * 8 hours = 1.6kw, rather than 16kw? I thought you'd need 2kw/hr * 8hrs to charge a 16kw battery.
It's not that I don't think people have looked into this stuff, it's just that I myself have no information on just how much energy the Volt uses and how much the grid can provide. In the short term, plugin hybrids are few in number and I don't see it being an issue. But it's something we need to work out in the medium/long term.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Communism means nothing in this country, because we've been so brainwashed by Cold War/right-wing rhetoric that, like "freedom", the term has been stolen for propaganda purposes until the original meanings have become lost in a massive sea of BS. I was using it for it's hyperbole value. :D
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Well, that's the nature of democracy. But it's not so much a question of the fact that people realize a smaller car is more efficient, but a question of whether people really care about efficiency. I have recently lived in Nevada and Alaska, two states whose residents are addicted to burning fuel. Seemingly everyone has a pickup, RV and four-wheelers. Burning fuel is not just part of the daily transportation routine - it's a lifestyle.
CAFE standardsAnd if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
I walk to work. I used to commute 34 miles a day (total), and while I never minded it, I felt pretty liberated being able to ditch the car for my daily commute. Four years of walking and I don't want to go back. I love cars and motorsport, and I don't consider myself an environmentalist, but I got to the point where I realized that I was driving a lot more than necessary. That realization came when I moved out of a suburb (where you have to drive to get anywhere) and into first a small town and then a biggish city. In both cases it became possible to walk almost everywhere I needed to go. A tank of fuel lasted over a month (or longer) rather than a week from my highway-commuting days. And I lost weight as I hauled by fat backside around on foot. ;)
I won't be in the market for another car for a few years, and my current car (a Subaru) is not very fuel efficient - but then again it has literally not been driven more than half a dozen times in the last six months. When the time comes to replace it I'll be looking for something affordable (ruling out the Volt) but efficiency will be high on the priority list, followed by green-ness.
I wonder if all of you people who are proposing a diesel/diesel hybrid are Europeans, because in America, diesel is looked at as smelly and messy - it's what the trucks with black smoke use.
<snip>
As far as the Chevy Volt goes, I just don't like the name... but the price is right assuming they can get it into the high $20,000's rather quickly.
I'm an American, and yes I've seen the trucks with black smoke. We just need to discard that preconception. This isn't 1973 anymore. We also need to tighten up emissions regualtion on trucks.
The Volt is a practical car by all acoioutns, but it costs way too much. The battery is the primary contributing factor, I've heard that it costs somewhere between $8-15k by itself. Hopefully after GM has been producing such batteries for a few years the cost will drop substantially.
Weaselboy
Apr 22, 10:04 AM
I do think there should only be "ups", but the icon could be a checkmark. When you click it some subtext would appear below/next to it. Something like "You liked this comment" or "You agree with comment" or "This comment was helpful".
I completely agree with you on this. Posts should be marked if they are helpful etc and just ignored if they are not. The site can still use the data in the same way for whatever site improvements they want later.
Having "downvotes" will I suspect lead to what we see on Reddit comments where any post that does not fall in line with the hivemind gets downvoted. Getting downvoted leads to people getting discouraged and not participating in the discussion IMO. Outright abusive posts can still be reported to the mods.
I completely agree with you on this. Posts should be marked if they are helpful etc and just ignored if they are not. The site can still use the data in the same way for whatever site improvements they want later.
Having "downvotes" will I suspect lead to what we see on Reddit comments where any post that does not fall in line with the hivemind gets downvoted. Getting downvoted leads to people getting discouraged and not participating in the discussion IMO. Outright abusive posts can still be reported to the mods.
more...
TomCondon
Apr 5, 03:08 PM
haha this is as lame as a tv station bringing out a half hour of the most "unique" and "fascinating" ads, wow.
also, maybe if they were some good, funny ads it would be ok, but no. The ads shown in the pic are just "EAT MCRIB" and "MAYBELLINE"...
also, maybe if they were some good, funny ads it would be ok, but no. The ads shown in the pic are just "EAT MCRIB" and "MAYBELLINE"...
Aeolius
Oct 6, 06:46 PM
As a fan of Japanese architecture and minimalism myself, this is a refreshing idea to read about. Nothing beats a mix of modern and Japanese architecture.
To each their own, I suppose. Personally, I dislike modern-looking houses. When we built our house, I wanted it to look like it had been here half a century.
I still don't consider my house a mansion, though. When I think of a mansion I think of fragile decor (not childproof), rooms decorated just for show (formal dining room, etc), immaculate landscaping, a garage without a drop of oil on the floor, a wet bar, and either a room devoted to the display of taxidermy or a room filled with musical instruments that no one plays.
To each their own, I suppose. Personally, I dislike modern-looking houses. When we built our house, I wanted it to look like it had been here half a century.
I still don't consider my house a mansion, though. When I think of a mansion I think of fragile decor (not childproof), rooms decorated just for show (formal dining room, etc), immaculate landscaping, a garage without a drop of oil on the floor, a wet bar, and either a room devoted to the display of taxidermy or a room filled with musical instruments that no one plays.
more...
Hovey
Jul 21, 12:04 PM
But Apple admitted that it DOES drop more calls than 3GS.
They spun it as "less than 1 per 100", but assuming all 3,000,000 iPhone 4 users make about 5 calls per day, that's over ONE MILLION dropped calls per week MORE than iPhone 3GS.
It's a problem.
It's been reproduced by CNET, Consumer Reports, NYT, and many others.
The debate here is not whether there's a problem, but why Apple is obfuscating, rather than fixing it, pretending that bridging the gap of their electrically exposed antenna is equivalent to attenuating an antenna by completely covering it with one's meaty hand.
(seems like moving this gap to the bottom edge of the phone where it's far less likely to be touched, would be an easy fix).
Umm, that's still less than 1%. That's pretty good. That would be out of 100 million calls. 99 million calls were fine.
They spun it as "less than 1 per 100", but assuming all 3,000,000 iPhone 4 users make about 5 calls per day, that's over ONE MILLION dropped calls per week MORE than iPhone 3GS.
It's a problem.
It's been reproduced by CNET, Consumer Reports, NYT, and many others.
The debate here is not whether there's a problem, but why Apple is obfuscating, rather than fixing it, pretending that bridging the gap of their electrically exposed antenna is equivalent to attenuating an antenna by completely covering it with one's meaty hand.
(seems like moving this gap to the bottom edge of the phone where it's far less likely to be touched, would be an easy fix).
Umm, that's still less than 1%. That's pretty good. That would be out of 100 million calls. 99 million calls were fine.
minnesotamacman
Sep 12, 08:06 AM
Think they will close the store this morning to update the laptop line??? or will they do it when they close the store during the live session?
psycoswimmer
Jan 9, 02:44 PM
sorry about the spoiler in the ticker guys
I'm sitting here trying to do updates... that one was a mistake on my part.
Really sorry. I removed it. we'll still post the link when it comes.
arn
Thanks Arn. Like I said, at least no details were revealed.
I'm sitting here trying to do updates... that one was a mistake on my part.
Really sorry. I removed it. we'll still post the link when it comes.
arn
Thanks Arn. Like I said, at least no details were revealed.
iVeBeenDrinkin'
Apr 7, 01:15 AM
About damn time too...
http://i54.tinypic.com/5n30z.jpg
Looking forward to shooting with this new gear...
Nice kit
http://i54.tinypic.com/5n30z.jpg
Looking forward to shooting with this new gear...
Nice kit
Cyclotrode
Apr 8, 01:20 PM
I wonder what the special promotion is.
I'm guessing that it's probably for an upcoming Reward Zone Member shopping event that they hold every so often. They usually do those events on Sundays after normal store hours.
I'm guessing that it's probably for an upcoming Reward Zone Member shopping event that they hold every so often. They usually do those events on Sundays after normal store hours.
kdarling
Oct 7, 08:44 AM
Surprised this hasn't been noted here yet...
USAToday interviewed (http://www.usatoday.com/tech/wireless/2009-10-06-verizon-google-android_N.htm)the Verizon Wireless CEO about their new Android partnership, and got an extra comment:
Meantime, (the CEO) says, the carrier is continuing to talk with Apple about bringing the iPhone to Verizon. McAdam says Verizon would love to have the device, anytime Apple is ready. "It's up to them to decide."
Until then, he says, the two companies are having "lots of discussions" about Verizon's network and how it might affect Apple.
Real, or just pushing ATT's buttons so they have to pay Apple more? Who knows.
USAToday interviewed (http://www.usatoday.com/tech/wireless/2009-10-06-verizon-google-android_N.htm)the Verizon Wireless CEO about their new Android partnership, and got an extra comment:
Meantime, (the CEO) says, the carrier is continuing to talk with Apple about bringing the iPhone to Verizon. McAdam says Verizon would love to have the device, anytime Apple is ready. "It's up to them to decide."
Until then, he says, the two companies are having "lots of discussions" about Verizon's network and how it might affect Apple.
Real, or just pushing ATT's buttons so they have to pay Apple more? Who knows.
Since '84
Jul 21, 04:21 PM
You know, I've been reading all this stuff, and was a bit worried while I waited for my iPhone4 to arrive. Since then, I have traveled to 4 countries on business, and have been a long distance train through rural areas. I have tried everywhere to use the death grip to drop the signal to 0, but I can't. I can't get it to drop a call, and I can't get it to lose signal - I can get it to 1 bar but I can still surf on 3G with that, and the call quality has been fine. I've used overseas carriers' SIM's too...And I'm left handed, and have no case.
At the end of all this, I've simply decided that for me, this phone is the best I've had, and I have no problem with it in any way. I'm just glad I won't have to read all this stuff and worry any more. Sorry if you have problems, but as everyone says, take it back. Being a long time Mac user I have no problem using equipment that is not the most common anyway.
At the end of all this, I've simply decided that for me, this phone is the best I've had, and I have no problem with it in any way. I'm just glad I won't have to read all this stuff and worry any more. Sorry if you have problems, but as everyone says, take it back. Being a long time Mac user I have no problem using equipment that is not the most common anyway.
leekohler
Apr 22, 11:19 AM
we'll see how france looks when the interest on their debt exceeds their GDP. Paid vacation has to end sometime
Well, ours is not much better. We just never get anything for it. At least the French do.
Oh wait. Sorry- corporations and big oil have gotten quite a bit of money out of it.
Well, ours is not much better. We just never get anything for it. At least the French do.
Oh wait. Sorry- corporations and big oil have gotten quite a bit of money out of it.
