iJohnHenry
Apr 9, 04:59 PM
I know how to drive a manual, but it has been ages since last time I have been in one
Same here.
I've had a flat-head Ford (stearing column shift), Chevy Cavalier, Porsche, Chevy Corvair Corsa :eek:, with some autos in between, and ever since.
When you drive to/from Toronto all the time, standard just makes no sense, now that autos are much more efficient.
Same here.
I've had a flat-head Ford (stearing column shift), Chevy Cavalier, Porsche, Chevy Corvair Corsa :eek:, with some autos in between, and ever since.
When you drive to/from Toronto all the time, standard just makes no sense, now that autos are much more efficient.
Surely
Nov 27, 12:34 PM
After being here for 3 years, Surely he's not a troll. ;)
My god, the dog with the goggles is right! I think I like him just as much as the donkey astronaut.
Oh, another set of these:
http://i.imgur.com/1IdVf.jpg
My god, the dog with the goggles is right! I think I like him just as much as the donkey astronaut.
Oh, another set of these:
http://i.imgur.com/1IdVf.jpg
kellen
Jan 27, 09:57 AM
of course i got it fully loaded with Bose Sound etc.
Of course.
Just made me laugh reading that.
Of course.
Just made me laugh reading that.
Lollypop
Aug 7, 04:26 AM
Interesting read but im not sure about system wide Software update. It could be like opening a can of worms - although it wont smell and have soil on it, it could become a weakpoint for hackers/viruses etc. :(
If done the right way I dont see how it could be a problem. For one, the user has to explicitly add the 3rd party product, apple could also act as a intermediary or something, the update will only become available through software update once apple has tested it (can download it youself when released), and even though the update comes from the 3rd parties webserver the hash is stored on apples servers and the update HAS to be verified and compared to the hash.
edit: spelling
If done the right way I dont see how it could be a problem. For one, the user has to explicitly add the 3rd party product, apple could also act as a intermediary or something, the update will only become available through software update once apple has tested it (can download it youself when released), and even though the update comes from the 3rd parties webserver the hash is stored on apples servers and the update HAS to be verified and compared to the hash.
edit: spelling
sluthy
Jan 3, 07:31 PM
The C2D upgrade happened in November. The 17s actually shipped toward the last part of November. I can't understand why anyone would think that an improvement is needed in the displays on the MBP line. Some of you must have extaordinary vision if you could expect the video to be crisper or any more HD than it is. When I am viewing HD TV on this MBP, it actually blows the picture that we get on our HDTV set. And movies are really realistic looking on this screen. I perceive that anyone wanting a major upgrade to what I am seeing right here is going after "bragging rights" .... But that is just MHO
I also own a bad A$$ custom built notebook with a kick butt video card and super duper display and I actually like this Mac better. Again ... MHO
:cool:
But the screen on the 17in MBP (1680x1050) by definition can't do HD (1920x1080). I don't care how well it can scale down, scaling down is not playing at true native resolution, and with most new content heading toward 1080i (and eventually 1080p), getting anything less than that now is just heading toward a dead end media wise IMO.
I also own a bad A$$ custom built notebook with a kick butt video card and super duper display and I actually like this Mac better. Again ... MHO
:cool:
But the screen on the 17in MBP (1680x1050) by definition can't do HD (1920x1080). I don't care how well it can scale down, scaling down is not playing at true native resolution, and with most new content heading toward 1080i (and eventually 1080p), getting anything less than that now is just heading toward a dead end media wise IMO.
Scottsdale
May 2, 07:48 PM
This shows exactly where Apple is headed with OSes. It is combining its iOS and OS X for consistency. I think one OS brand is the future Apple envisions whether we like it or not.
RBMaraman
Jan 1, 07:40 PM
12" Mbp
Not gonna happen.
The only time the words "Pro" and "12 Inch" fall together is in reference to pr0n.
Not gonna happen.
The only time the words "Pro" and "12 Inch" fall together is in reference to pr0n.
hyperpasta
Sep 1, 03:02 PM
Apple used to have all-in-ones, consumer towers, pro towers, etc. Remember the PowerMac 6400? Too many products is too confusing for the consumer. If that means that a couple of people can't get the exact configuration they want, so be it.
Not more products... more BTO options. Here's my ideal line.
Mac Cube - $499
Low-end Conroe
512MB RAM
80GB HD (full-size)
Superdrive
Intel Graphics
Mac Cube - $699
Mid-end Conroe
1GB RAM
120GB HD
Superdrive
Intel Graphics
All BTO... up to mid-end Conroe, 4GB of RAM, real video card, and even a 500GB HD!
iMac
As it is now, but modernized specs and low to mid-Conroe. BTO DOWNgradable to the current "education" model.
Mac Pro
Also as it is now.
MacBook White - $999
Low-End Merom
1GB RAM
60GB HD
Combo Drive
Intel Graphics
13" Matte Display
MacBook White - $1299
Mid-End Merom
1GB RAM
80GB HD
Superdrive
Intel Graphics
13" Matte Display
BOTH models are equally upgradable... to 2GB RAM, 100GB HD, Low-End Graphics Card.
MacBook Pro 15" - $1799
High-End Merom
1GB RAM
80GB HD
Superdrive
128MB Graphics
15" Matte Display
MacBook Pro 17" - $1999
Same as 15" with 17" screen.
See? FEWER models, more BTO. Much easier to find a Mac you agree with.
Not more products... more BTO options. Here's my ideal line.
Mac Cube - $499
Low-end Conroe
512MB RAM
80GB HD (full-size)
Superdrive
Intel Graphics
Mac Cube - $699
Mid-end Conroe
1GB RAM
120GB HD
Superdrive
Intel Graphics
All BTO... up to mid-end Conroe, 4GB of RAM, real video card, and even a 500GB HD!
iMac
As it is now, but modernized specs and low to mid-Conroe. BTO DOWNgradable to the current "education" model.
Mac Pro
Also as it is now.
MacBook White - $999
Low-End Merom
1GB RAM
60GB HD
Combo Drive
Intel Graphics
13" Matte Display
MacBook White - $1299
Mid-End Merom
1GB RAM
80GB HD
Superdrive
Intel Graphics
13" Matte Display
BOTH models are equally upgradable... to 2GB RAM, 100GB HD, Low-End Graphics Card.
MacBook Pro 15" - $1799
High-End Merom
1GB RAM
80GB HD
Superdrive
128MB Graphics
15" Matte Display
MacBook Pro 17" - $1999
Same as 15" with 17" screen.
See? FEWER models, more BTO. Much easier to find a Mac you agree with.
blevins321
Mar 22, 04:32 PM
Do people seriously have that many songs?!!! seriously?!!!
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
Not just songs. Could be used with a media dock for movies and TV shows too. And don't say Apple TV2. I mean away from your home.
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
Not just songs. Could be used with a media dock for movies and TV shows too. And don't say Apple TV2. I mean away from your home.
Gregg2
Apr 11, 07:57 PM
A CVT is simply a transmission with no fixed gear ratios. It can have any gear ratio between a set minimum and maximum, it has no "steps" like "1st gear, 2nd gear". In other words, it's a transmission type where you could theoretically have the engine spin where it produces the most power (let's say at 5000 rpm) all the time while accelerating. In reality, car CVTs do still have gears, like the Honda Fit which is a 7 gear automatic CVT transmission.
CVT, DSG or the traditional fluid type are all automatics. They just differ in their inner workings. What you're talking about has nothing to do with the inner-working, the paddle like shifters or + - gates on the shifter is simply an interface that lets you override any of the automatic transmissions and select your own gear.
A distinction to make. You could technically have a CVT transmission that you put in "drive" and drive off and you could have a traditional automatic with paddle shifters. Both are unrelated in their function.
Interesting, even for someone not real mechanically inclined, such as myself. And yes, the CVT on my soon to be new vehicle can be placed in "regular" drive and it behaves as a normal automatic. You can also use the CVT without the paddles, using the shift lever instead. In fact, you can get one that doesn't even have paddles. The ones that do also allow you to use the shift lever to "change gears".
CVT, DSG or the traditional fluid type are all automatics. They just differ in their inner workings. What you're talking about has nothing to do with the inner-working, the paddle like shifters or + - gates on the shifter is simply an interface that lets you override any of the automatic transmissions and select your own gear.
A distinction to make. You could technically have a CVT transmission that you put in "drive" and drive off and you could have a traditional automatic with paddle shifters. Both are unrelated in their function.
Interesting, even for someone not real mechanically inclined, such as myself. And yes, the CVT on my soon to be new vehicle can be placed in "regular" drive and it behaves as a normal automatic. You can also use the CVT without the paddles, using the shift lever instead. In fact, you can get one that doesn't even have paddles. The ones that do also allow you to use the shift lever to "change gears".
archer75
May 3, 04:37 PM
Well, you got what you wanted on the 2GB 6970m! At least as a BTO option.
Yep, I am pleasantly surprised. I ordered one.
Yep, I am pleasantly surprised. I ordered one.
iJohnHenry
Mar 31, 05:41 PM
Didn't the Persian supply corridor factor into the soviets being able to hold off the Germans?
As did the supply ships making their way to Murmansk. Many merchant marines lost their lives on that run.
As did the supply ships making their way to Murmansk. Many merchant marines lost their lives on that run.
homieg340
Oct 23, 10:20 PM
What TIME are the updates on Tuesdays usually made? EST? PST?
Also, can we be certain that the update is tomorrow? Wouldn't this be too soon for them to update? It seems they've given almost no time for the resellers-then again, does apple usually make suprise announcements, completely out of the blue like this?
Someone with more experience please clarify.
Also, can we be certain that the update is tomorrow? Wouldn't this be too soon for them to update? It seems they've given almost no time for the resellers-then again, does apple usually make suprise announcements, completely out of the blue like this?
Someone with more experience please clarify.
ingenious
Mar 28, 01:49 PM
Apple does not need to enter the 500 dollar market- Steve Jobs has said it himself. He himself has compared Apple to BMW among others to show that Apple is the luxury company right now. They're not going to waste quality for quanity and just try to sell machines. Read it in an interview from him. The point is, Apple IS NOT DYING! It's a debt free company, has billions in cash, is leading the MP3 Player and Online Music store industry, has what was and is still almost the worlds fastest personal computer. It has the best OS, and more and more people are switching, its just that there are more people going to PCs than macs (new users). APPLE IS NOT DYING! STEVE IS BACK. :D :D :D :D
emotion
Aug 29, 09:29 AM
The Mac Mini is going to use the 5000 series Meroms and the iMac is going to use the 7000s.
I bet this is the case too. 2MB cache instead of the higher end 4MB cache in the 7000s.
I find it hard to believe they will stick with Yonahs.
I'd also like to see a drop in price, so I guess if they do stick with Yonah then a drop might happen.
I bet this is the case too. 2MB cache instead of the higher end 4MB cache in the 7000s.
I find it hard to believe they will stick with Yonahs.
I'd also like to see a drop in price, so I guess if they do stick with Yonah then a drop might happen.
Rodimus Prime
Apr 20, 10:33 PM
sorry, but wherever you got your information, it is not correct. fwiw, my last car, a vw passat, i sold with 312k miles on it. i bought it new at the dealer. still had the original clutch. your 100k replacement claim is bogus.
highway mileage is different due to gear ratios, not "physically locked". automatics use different ratios than manuals, even with same engine. shift speed is irrelevant for mileage.
and lastly, manuals do not cost more. every car i've ever owned, new or old, including my 2007 porsche 911, have come standard with a manual transmission. if you want automatic, that's an option you pay extra for, several $thousand in some cases. i've never owned an American car, so maybe the domestics are different, but your blanket statement is still wrong.
on my wife's mercedes, it needs automatic fluid change every 30k miles. dealer charges ~$300 for this. That's $1000 in service in 90k miles assuming nothing breaks. My manual transmission requires no service or fluid changes for 100k miles. $1000 in maintenance vs $0 in maintenance. automatic is far more expensive from a maintenance standpoint.
Umm porsche not exactly a valid argument of a car and that falls in the sports car catigory. Complete different field.
As for the clutchs 300k on a original clutch is pretty far unless you do heavy high way miles there.
Going heavy city lets see I had to replace the clutch in my old car at around 95k. My dad replaced the clutch in is Honda at 110k. Numbers I have been reading off the net about my current car clutches are going at 90-120k range. Now it does depend on driving. You are not going to find mean 300k on a original clutch. 100k is more the norm. Big time with city miles on it.
Also my car manual cost me more about 1000 bucks more but at it is a higher model as the model right below it is auto only. Manuals are being mostly reduced to sporter car lines/models now days leaving autos for everything else.
Yes they have different gear ratios comparing the 2 but for MPG sorry Manuals are losing out. They can not compete with CVS, computer controlled shifting and now adding in extra gears. Those factors are just adding up against Manuals and they can not keep up. Manuals are limited to human timing which losses to computer timing. And the shifting timing is not the speed the shift is done but at what RPM are at the given load. Computers can adjust to getting best MPG at a given load demand far better than a human which means they have better MPG.
highway mileage is different due to gear ratios, not "physically locked". automatics use different ratios than manuals, even with same engine. shift speed is irrelevant for mileage.
and lastly, manuals do not cost more. every car i've ever owned, new or old, including my 2007 porsche 911, have come standard with a manual transmission. if you want automatic, that's an option you pay extra for, several $thousand in some cases. i've never owned an American car, so maybe the domestics are different, but your blanket statement is still wrong.
on my wife's mercedes, it needs automatic fluid change every 30k miles. dealer charges ~$300 for this. That's $1000 in service in 90k miles assuming nothing breaks. My manual transmission requires no service or fluid changes for 100k miles. $1000 in maintenance vs $0 in maintenance. automatic is far more expensive from a maintenance standpoint.
Umm porsche not exactly a valid argument of a car and that falls in the sports car catigory. Complete different field.
As for the clutchs 300k on a original clutch is pretty far unless you do heavy high way miles there.
Going heavy city lets see I had to replace the clutch in my old car at around 95k. My dad replaced the clutch in is Honda at 110k. Numbers I have been reading off the net about my current car clutches are going at 90-120k range. Now it does depend on driving. You are not going to find mean 300k on a original clutch. 100k is more the norm. Big time with city miles on it.
Also my car manual cost me more about 1000 bucks more but at it is a higher model as the model right below it is auto only. Manuals are being mostly reduced to sporter car lines/models now days leaving autos for everything else.
Yes they have different gear ratios comparing the 2 but for MPG sorry Manuals are losing out. They can not compete with CVS, computer controlled shifting and now adding in extra gears. Those factors are just adding up against Manuals and they can not keep up. Manuals are limited to human timing which losses to computer timing. And the shifting timing is not the speed the shift is done but at what RPM are at the given load. Computers can adjust to getting best MPG at a given load demand far better than a human which means they have better MPG.
BRLawyer
Apr 19, 02:05 PM
[SIZE=1]
Back on topic....... Supposedly, Ivy Bridge (next year?) will support USB 3. I wonder if it will be possible to have some sort of a Thunderbolt to USB 3 interface. I would hate to buy a new iMac now and not be able to take advantage of the USB 3 speed when it becomes more widely used in the next few years. Or is that not something to worry about?
Why would you want to use a SLOWER interface in the first place? As far as ports are concerned, TB should be able to work with everything (USB, FW etc.) anyway, provided the right adapters are used...
Back on topic....... Supposedly, Ivy Bridge (next year?) will support USB 3. I wonder if it will be possible to have some sort of a Thunderbolt to USB 3 interface. I would hate to buy a new iMac now and not be able to take advantage of the USB 3 speed when it becomes more widely used in the next few years. Or is that not something to worry about?
Why would you want to use a SLOWER interface in the first place? As far as ports are concerned, TB should be able to work with everything (USB, FW etc.) anyway, provided the right adapters are used...
SeaFox
Dec 28, 01:52 AM
anything is possible minus 1 thing: the option to dock and iPod simply is so out of place that I do not know why it keeps getting brought up. iTV is focused on streaming content from your computer, not your iPod.
I think an iPod dock is a great idea. It would be nice to be able to use your iTV for something without a computer running. Hey, take your iPod to a friend's house and you can all watch a movie at their house from your collection, just like taking your entire video library with you.
There are two problems with this:
1) HD content takes up a huge amount of space. So if Apple did offer HD movies, the copy iTunes will transfer to your iPod would be reduced quality.
2) iTunes purchases would not be playable on the component outputs on the iTV. The movie studios would require you use an HDMI connection or something else that supported HDCP to ensure you didn't copy the movie out of the iTunes ecosphere.
As several of us have discussed before, my hope is that iTV will be able to stream all forms of content on my computer, but with particular emphasis on digital media. So if I want to bring a word doc up and type or a movie I am working on in final cut pro, I can do so. Similarly, and with more fully developed components all my digital media can be run on my tv. The goal is to make this experience integrate all the entertainment features we love, but throughout our homes. Quality preservation is essential and I think they will work to ensure that takes place.
The issue here is you're asking your iTV to open other files, in other words, you're asking it to be a regular computer. That isn't going to work because it makes the OS/interface more complicated. A home entertainment component needs to be simple and fast. This is where Apple's embedded OSX rumors would be coming in. Everyone read that and thought about the Apple Phone because that was the hot topic of the week and the was the notion of a PDA Apple phone. But an embedded real-time operating system is just what the iTV needs.
People need to stop comparing the iTV to a Mac Mini, they should thinking of it the same way you think of an XBox compared to a Windows PC. Yeah, they're both made by Microsoft, but the XBox doesn't run Windows, it runs a smaller GUI on top of what is mostly a DirectX back end.
What's funny is the reason people keep thinking of the Mini is because what consumers really want is an Apple DVR, a Mac Mini with a little stronger hardware, no external power supply, and a built in tuner. Add PVR functionality to Front Row and maybe a little bit more expansive remote and you'd have that. But since the Mini isn't expandable, it isn't even possible for a consumer to cobble together the solution themselves from a PCI tuner card and DVR software available, the closest they can do has lots of "extra parts" lying around from the ElGato external tuner, a monitor adapter to give them the connection they need, and the Mini's power supply, and it still would not be as easy to navigate since a keyboard would probably be needed at some point.
So a MacMini wont download and play a HD movie or display a word doc, and you need the iTV to accomplish this basic task?
No, it will do those things, but a MacMini costs $600. Not everyone wants to keep their main computer hooked up to the TV. The iTV allows them to watch their iTunes Store-purchased movies on a larger screen than their regular monitor without moving their computer.
Also, most people don’t need final cut pro or photo shop. So, that’s why I was thinking this could be a basic computer. If not you will need the mac mini to go with it, and why not simply include the iTV with the Mac Mini so you don’t have two devises in a limited shelf space.
The iTV is meant to be an add-on to an existing Macintosh household. Not a self-contained entertainment product like a CableCo box or a PS2.
The idea is the iTV would support more common TV connection methods out of the box, be designed to fit in better aesthetically with home entertainment components, offer better video performance, overall stability, and lower power usage than a MacMini for less.
Is the problem the iTV will address processing the images or scaling them?
I hope so. Maybe it will be upconverting for watching current iTunes movies on an HDTV?
I think an iPod dock is a great idea. It would be nice to be able to use your iTV for something without a computer running. Hey, take your iPod to a friend's house and you can all watch a movie at their house from your collection, just like taking your entire video library with you.
There are two problems with this:
1) HD content takes up a huge amount of space. So if Apple did offer HD movies, the copy iTunes will transfer to your iPod would be reduced quality.
2) iTunes purchases would not be playable on the component outputs on the iTV. The movie studios would require you use an HDMI connection or something else that supported HDCP to ensure you didn't copy the movie out of the iTunes ecosphere.
As several of us have discussed before, my hope is that iTV will be able to stream all forms of content on my computer, but with particular emphasis on digital media. So if I want to bring a word doc up and type or a movie I am working on in final cut pro, I can do so. Similarly, and with more fully developed components all my digital media can be run on my tv. The goal is to make this experience integrate all the entertainment features we love, but throughout our homes. Quality preservation is essential and I think they will work to ensure that takes place.
The issue here is you're asking your iTV to open other files, in other words, you're asking it to be a regular computer. That isn't going to work because it makes the OS/interface more complicated. A home entertainment component needs to be simple and fast. This is where Apple's embedded OSX rumors would be coming in. Everyone read that and thought about the Apple Phone because that was the hot topic of the week and the was the notion of a PDA Apple phone. But an embedded real-time operating system is just what the iTV needs.
People need to stop comparing the iTV to a Mac Mini, they should thinking of it the same way you think of an XBox compared to a Windows PC. Yeah, they're both made by Microsoft, but the XBox doesn't run Windows, it runs a smaller GUI on top of what is mostly a DirectX back end.
What's funny is the reason people keep thinking of the Mini is because what consumers really want is an Apple DVR, a Mac Mini with a little stronger hardware, no external power supply, and a built in tuner. Add PVR functionality to Front Row and maybe a little bit more expansive remote and you'd have that. But since the Mini isn't expandable, it isn't even possible for a consumer to cobble together the solution themselves from a PCI tuner card and DVR software available, the closest they can do has lots of "extra parts" lying around from the ElGato external tuner, a monitor adapter to give them the connection they need, and the Mini's power supply, and it still would not be as easy to navigate since a keyboard would probably be needed at some point.
So a MacMini wont download and play a HD movie or display a word doc, and you need the iTV to accomplish this basic task?
No, it will do those things, but a MacMini costs $600. Not everyone wants to keep their main computer hooked up to the TV. The iTV allows them to watch their iTunes Store-purchased movies on a larger screen than their regular monitor without moving their computer.
Also, most people don’t need final cut pro or photo shop. So, that’s why I was thinking this could be a basic computer. If not you will need the mac mini to go with it, and why not simply include the iTV with the Mac Mini so you don’t have two devises in a limited shelf space.
The iTV is meant to be an add-on to an existing Macintosh household. Not a self-contained entertainment product like a CableCo box or a PS2.
The idea is the iTV would support more common TV connection methods out of the box, be designed to fit in better aesthetically with home entertainment components, offer better video performance, overall stability, and lower power usage than a MacMini for less.
Is the problem the iTV will address processing the images or scaling them?
I hope so. Maybe it will be upconverting for watching current iTunes movies on an HDTV?
Killyp
Aug 24, 06:44 PM
...I will admit that stranger things have happened.
Like this?
http://static.flickr.com/20/73218496_12cd47ab24.jpg
gawd i hope i don't get banned for that!
Like this?
http://static.flickr.com/20/73218496_12cd47ab24.jpg
gawd i hope i don't get banned for that!
ericinboston
Apr 26, 12:51 PM
"Amazon" is a generic term and should not be used for a store name.
Amazon is not a generic term. It is, however, the name of a single river on planet Earth...among a few other names/uses ("the Amazon", "Amazon basin", "Amazon Women").
Where else have you seen/heard the term Amazon in a generic sense? Some examples of a generic term are (at least have been generic over the past 75+ years):
light bulb
door
wood
lock
Amazon is not a generic term. It is, however, the name of a single river on planet Earth...among a few other names/uses ("the Amazon", "Amazon basin", "Amazon Women").
Where else have you seen/heard the term Amazon in a generic sense? Some examples of a generic term are (at least have been generic over the past 75+ years):
light bulb
door
wood
lock
eenu
Aug 16, 11:04 AM
The problem/concern would be you syncing w/ other iTunes libs (edit: and they're not just concerned about ITMS purchases.
Not hard for Apple to stop this with something like a digital signature allowing your pod to only sync with your library
As far as sharing in your range. Again a waste of battery to support this. I have what I wnat ton hear for the most part. I don't much care to drain my battery searching other users' libs (that will come and go as they wander around and in and out of range - oh great, I found a cool Streets video I don't have!! Oh wait he just left range!!!), it's short-lived enough already.
Agreed but this feature could be used for you to listen to your friends ipod music if they have a song they want you to hear OR in the work place. You should be in range for at least 8 hrs of the day :p
Not hard for Apple to stop this with something like a digital signature allowing your pod to only sync with your library
As far as sharing in your range. Again a waste of battery to support this. I have what I wnat ton hear for the most part. I don't much care to drain my battery searching other users' libs (that will come and go as they wander around and in and out of range - oh great, I found a cool Streets video I don't have!! Oh wait he just left range!!!), it's short-lived enough already.
Agreed but this feature could be used for you to listen to your friends ipod music if they have a song they want you to hear OR in the work place. You should be in range for at least 8 hrs of the day :p
spinedoc77
Nov 6, 11:38 AM
They are just doing it for publicity I bet...
I've only had one dropped call with my iPhone 4
I've got 2 ip4's, one for me and one for my wife. They drop calls quite frequently, I wouldn't say a huge amount more than our old 3GS', but definitely noticeable more drops. It's funny how people who have no problems say that no one has any problems, but they do. I can noticeably drop my signal bars by just pressing my thumb on the antenna seam, and if I'm in a low signal area I can usually make the phone drop a call by putting my hand on that seam.
Now I still own my ip4, I like it, don't love it, but like it for what it does enough for me to keep it. I'm not complaining, but there is a need to temper both the "there is no problem" AND the "sky is falling" camps. Invariably, as with most other stuff in life, the truth lies somewhere in the middle, and there are some problems with the iphone4 but they aren't deal breakers. I think this is the vast majority of users who follow along on these forums and are amused by the vitriolic camps on both sides who fight to the bitter end to prove their point, I know I'm certainly amused at how much energy some put in to prove their point.
I've only had one dropped call with my iPhone 4
I've got 2 ip4's, one for me and one for my wife. They drop calls quite frequently, I wouldn't say a huge amount more than our old 3GS', but definitely noticeable more drops. It's funny how people who have no problems say that no one has any problems, but they do. I can noticeably drop my signal bars by just pressing my thumb on the antenna seam, and if I'm in a low signal area I can usually make the phone drop a call by putting my hand on that seam.
Now I still own my ip4, I like it, don't love it, but like it for what it does enough for me to keep it. I'm not complaining, but there is a need to temper both the "there is no problem" AND the "sky is falling" camps. Invariably, as with most other stuff in life, the truth lies somewhere in the middle, and there are some problems with the iphone4 but they aren't deal breakers. I think this is the vast majority of users who follow along on these forums and are amused by the vitriolic camps on both sides who fight to the bitter end to prove their point, I know I'm certainly amused at how much energy some put in to prove their point.
2ndPath
Sep 1, 01:44 PM
One more thing... they'll change the name from iMac to Mac, bringing a perfect symmetry to their product line-up:
Mac
Mac Pro
MacBook
MacBook Pro
It brings more symetry (but then you still need the MacBook Mini), but it would eliminate the "i", which appears to be an important trademark for Apple, as it is included in the name of many products.
Mac
Mac Pro
MacBook
MacBook Pro
It brings more symetry (but then you still need the MacBook Mini), but it would eliminate the "i", which appears to be an important trademark for Apple, as it is included in the name of many products.
gnasher729
Aug 29, 04:28 PM
you can be certain that the price-difference is there. since merom and yonah are 1:1 compatible, why would anyone use yonah istead of merom? but since the two will be sold side-by-side, yonah obviously has some benefits that merom does not have. and that benefit is most likely price.
Who says Intel will keep selling Yonahs for long time once Merom comes out?
Who says Intel will keep selling Yonahs for long time once Merom comes out?
No comments:
Post a Comment