Hwangsta
May 3, 07:44 AM
I was hoping for i7...c'mon apple WHY!
oh, BTO option, I hope they have i7 in stores
oh, BTO option, I hope they have i7 in stores
ThePimento
Apr 26, 12:14 PM
$20/Year isn't bad at all. That's about $1.67 per month. However, unless they have a 'must-have' feature, I'll be sticking with AudioGalaxy to stream my iTunes library to my iPhone via 3G/WiFi.
That also depends on how much storage I get. My library is currently around 115GB. If they do what they're talking about (just have Apple's service look at your library and load tracks), that would be fine. That's what Lala used to do.
That also depends on how much storage I get. My library is currently around 115GB. If they do what they're talking about (just have Apple's service look at your library and load tracks), that would be fine. That's what Lala used to do.
triceretops
May 3, 09:15 AM
The i7 isn't the default processor?:confused:
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.
more...
wmk461
Jan 30, 02:08 PM
Save your liberal banter, chicken little.
Liberal banter = common sense and simple logic for the intelligent.... Too many people are so caught up in their lives that they forget the trauma of the past. History repeats itself and the market is like a roller coaster... remember the 1980's? Or even worse the 1930's.... Tech Stock is not going to hold. I am betting on Gold to hit at least 1500.00 in the next coming months and then upwards to the 2000.00 range.
Liberal banter = common sense and simple logic for the intelligent.... Too many people are so caught up in their lives that they forget the trauma of the past. History repeats itself and the market is like a roller coaster... remember the 1980's? Or even worse the 1930's.... Tech Stock is not going to hold. I am betting on Gold to hit at least 1500.00 in the next coming months and then upwards to the 2000.00 range.
Carlanga
May 3, 11:37 PM
pfft, this should not be front page news, hell not even second page... just a bunch of hearsay from a CR that knows nothing about it and speculates BS.
more...
gregdeeg
Apr 13, 08:23 PM
I am a VZW customer who has been waiting for the iPhone 5 but my Droid original is about to die. I'm getting the white Iphone the minute it comes out with news of the latest IPhone 5 delay and because everyone has black. I can't wait anymore and will just sell the 4 on ebay for $400+ and buy the 5 outright (3GS still go for 300+ on ebay used). Plus I will lock into unlimited data for future LTE :)
Dwalls90
Apr 22, 04:39 PM
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)
Hope not...
Hope not...
more...
lmalave
Oct 19, 08:18 AM
Its clear Apple is missing something in the midrange desk top line. Its time for the Cube or Macintosh or headless iMac or Max Mini or something. iMac isnt for everyone and the world has billions of big beautiful displays just waiting for a midrange Mac but if Apple prices it again the same as the towers it will be another failure. Its way past time for the next Macintosh. Needs a real GPU, at least 1 expansion slot and should be priced right along with ugly iMac:D or a pinch below.
This is not beyond the realm of possibility. I could see Apple modifying the Mac mini at some point to make the graphics card more accessible and upgradeable. But of course it would be a laptop graphics card and not a full desktop graphics card. Do ATI / nVidia sell something like mini-PCI graphics cards to consumers?
But anyway, althought it's a possibility I think it's a slim one, since gamers are just not Apple's focus right now...
This is not beyond the realm of possibility. I could see Apple modifying the Mac mini at some point to make the graphics card more accessible and upgradeable. But of course it would be a laptop graphics card and not a full desktop graphics card. Do ATI / nVidia sell something like mini-PCI graphics cards to consumers?
But anyway, althought it's a possibility I think it's a slim one, since gamers are just not Apple's focus right now...
andiwm2003
Jul 24, 03:21 PM
I'll take two, please.
why not four? one for each wheel;)
why not four? one for each wheel;)
more...
enda1
Jul 26, 02:39 PM
Have you see the "gestures" video? It would be done by physically touching the iPod. No camera needed.
Did ye all not read the report. The whole point is that it is a "Proximity sensor" . That it can detect your gestures while "spaced away" from the ipod. This would be no big deal if it required rubbing your greasy fingers all over the display!!
Did ye all not read the report. The whole point is that it is a "Proximity sensor" . That it can detect your gestures while "spaced away" from the ipod. This would be no big deal if it required rubbing your greasy fingers all over the display!!
benjags
Nov 4, 06:44 PM
Maybe I need more RAM, but I was dissapointed to be reminded of Virtual PC, the way it totally slows the rest of my Mac down...
http://static.flickr.com/118/288535502_996a0fc6b1.jpg (http://static.flickr.com/118/288535502_996a0fc6b1_o.jpg)
[click for bigger image]
kinda off topic, but i really think Vista looks a lot better without all the "aero transparency thing" making the windows titles a little too much unreadable...
http://static.flickr.com/118/288535502_996a0fc6b1.jpg (http://static.flickr.com/118/288535502_996a0fc6b1_o.jpg)
[click for bigger image]
kinda off topic, but i really think Vista looks a lot better without all the "aero transparency thing" making the windows titles a little too much unreadable...
more...
Mustafa Monde
Jul 11, 03:29 PM
Not that it is the most clunky thing MS as spawned, but elegant-it ain't. I can imagine that whatever craptacular iteration of a music player Gates can come up with will be trounced nicely by the much more desirable next gen iPod. It must be tough to be so egotistical insofar as their products are concerned and yet untalented in making them. I hope they never get rid of Balmer and his ilk-they keep MS user unfriendly and thats the way I like it.
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.
more...
NathanMuir
Apr 25, 04:45 PM
Eldiablojoe, just because.
lilo777
Apr 23, 12:48 AM
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.
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.
more...
Dagless
Apr 25, 12:37 PM
I am mentally jumping for joy!
My newest computer is a 17" 2006 iMac. I play (some of) the latest PC games, I develop games and I edit trailers/other mid-high endery stuff. My iMac is a beast for getting through this far but it's starting to really show its age.
As soon as the new models are out you can consider a 27" bought. Words can't express how much I'm looking forward to this.
Looking forward to owning my first glossy display too. I imagine it's beautiful for photo editing+gaming.
My newest computer is a 17" 2006 iMac. I play (some of) the latest PC games, I develop games and I edit trailers/other mid-high endery stuff. My iMac is a beast for getting through this far but it's starting to really show its age.
As soon as the new models are out you can consider a 27" bought. Words can't express how much I'm looking forward to this.
Looking forward to owning my first glossy display too. I imagine it's beautiful for photo editing+gaming.
PghLondon
Apr 28, 11:26 AM
This is fun.
Yes, the iPhone does compete against Android. The last time I went into a AT&T or Verizon store, this was obvious. To say that the iPhone does not compete against Android is silly.
WRONG. iPhone = hardware. Android = software.
iOS competes against Android.
Because there is only two hardware choices, the iPhone 4 or iPhone 3GS. Making this argument is so empty, in that it does not take into account the reasons behind it.
WRONG. The choice is iPhone OR any Android phone OR any Win7 Phone OR any RIM phone, etc.
Hello Mr. Straw man. The article was about iPhone; if you read it it states "covering U.S. mobile phone sales". Now, if by mobile OS, you are also adding in the iPad, that is debatable. I've been a iPad 3G owner since April 30th and I can tell you that I do not consider the iPad a mobile device. Sure, its easy to carry, but to lump in its sales with phone handset sales is a stretch. If you are making that stretch, how about adding netbooks into the mix as well?
If those netbooks ran Android, I'd count them. But they don't. And YOU'RE bringing up straw men? Phone versus non-phone makes no difference if they're running the same OS and same apps.
When your sales numbers for phones are ~50% of that of your competitor; whereas a few years ago they were barely a blip, then yes that means they are getting kicked in the teeth in handset OS sales.
In your mind maybe. But only in your mind.
PS: Handset OS sales? What the hell does that mean?
Yes, the iPhone does compete against Android. The last time I went into a AT&T or Verizon store, this was obvious. To say that the iPhone does not compete against Android is silly.
WRONG. iPhone = hardware. Android = software.
iOS competes against Android.
Because there is only two hardware choices, the iPhone 4 or iPhone 3GS. Making this argument is so empty, in that it does not take into account the reasons behind it.
WRONG. The choice is iPhone OR any Android phone OR any Win7 Phone OR any RIM phone, etc.
Hello Mr. Straw man. The article was about iPhone; if you read it it states "covering U.S. mobile phone sales". Now, if by mobile OS, you are also adding in the iPad, that is debatable. I've been a iPad 3G owner since April 30th and I can tell you that I do not consider the iPad a mobile device. Sure, its easy to carry, but to lump in its sales with phone handset sales is a stretch. If you are making that stretch, how about adding netbooks into the mix as well?
If those netbooks ran Android, I'd count them. But they don't. And YOU'RE bringing up straw men? Phone versus non-phone makes no difference if they're running the same OS and same apps.
When your sales numbers for phones are ~50% of that of your competitor; whereas a few years ago they were barely a blip, then yes that means they are getting kicked in the teeth in handset OS sales.
In your mind maybe. But only in your mind.
PS: Handset OS sales? What the hell does that mean?
iTootyFrooty
Apr 22, 04:30 PM
I think the phone could be a tiny bit thinner but not this thin. The teardrop design is best left with just the Macbook air (iPhone Air?). I'd stay close the the current design and maybe mix it up with the first one a bit. Must say I'm loving the screen and home button though
Tones2
Apr 22, 10:46 AM
Image (http://dailymobile.se/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/HTC-ThunderBolt-vs-iPhone-4-Internet-Speed-Test.jpg)
Uh, no thanks. I don't need a bigger phone print in my pocket.
Just get bigger pockets. :)
Tony
Uh, no thanks. I don't need a bigger phone print in my pocket.
Just get bigger pockets. :)
Tony
Macula
Dec 1, 02:24 PM
Apple needs to get serious about security. They cannot develop such an integrated, holistic line of products ("in your den, car, pocket,...") without tightening their security.
Windows Vista is NOT Windows XP. Apple risks lagging behind in that area and, in an ironic reversal of fortune, being widely considered as inferior to Microsoft in terms of security.
But if we agree that the development of a secure OS is all about utilizing sound design, coding and auditing processes, then we must also accept that the challenge will be very difficult for Apple to meet: You just cannot do that with Open Source...
Maybe it's about time Apple closed the Mac OS kernel?
Windows Vista is NOT Windows XP. Apple risks lagging behind in that area and, in an ironic reversal of fortune, being widely considered as inferior to Microsoft in terms of security.
But if we agree that the development of a secure OS is all about utilizing sound design, coding and auditing processes, then we must also accept that the challenge will be very difficult for Apple to meet: You just cannot do that with Open Source...
Maybe it's about time Apple closed the Mac OS kernel?
-aggie-
Apr 26, 04:50 PM
Ah, a last minute vote by Aggie. It looks like he might not have purposely bolded his original vote. Add his name to the list for tomorrow.
I used an annoyance meter. You pegged it out. :D
I used an annoyance meter. You pegged it out. :D
seanpholman
Mar 15, 10:59 AM
At the back of the line at FI and I am hearing they are all sold out now. I guess it was a good try. Congrats to the guys that got one.
--Sean
--Sean
mc68k
Oct 6, 06:09 PM
^ have you tried the bigadv units with your macpro?
No comments:
Post a Comment