wclyffe
Dec 20, 05:49 AM
Ok, its the 20th...lets see what email we get next from BLT.
DeaconGraves
May 4, 03:24 PM
My opposition to this isn't because I think Digital Distribution is bad (the copy of Windows 7 I'm writing this on was downloaded, legally I might add, from Microsoft), it's because of how Apple is offering it.
I was able to download a .iso of Windows and install it how I wanted to. I was able to back up the .iso to an external hard drive and also to burn a copy of it.
The App Store (unless they change things) wouldn't allow that. I would have no problem with this if Apple included a way to create a DVD or USB installer from the download.
You seem really hung up on the fact that if Lion is sold on the app store it has to act exactly like every thing else on the app store, when that doesn't necessarily have to be the case.
Apple has always strived for simplicity, and creating one application where every other application can be downloaded makes things really simple for people who are not power users like you and me. Want the newest version of OS X? App store. Want iWork '11? App Store. Need a keyboard firmware update (hypothetically)? App Store.
I don't disagree with you that downloads from the Apple website itself aren't a bad thing, but it hasn't been the simplest thing either. And again, no one has said what other options will be available. There might be .iso downloads elsewhere on the website. The OS installer might have an option to burn a recovery disc.
Honestly, I'm with you for the most part. If there's no easy options to create a physical version of Lion for me to have as backup, I'm buying retail. But that doesn't mean the App Store version is a bad thing. It's a good thing for 95% of the people out there who aren't on these forums. :)
I was able to download a .iso of Windows and install it how I wanted to. I was able to back up the .iso to an external hard drive and also to burn a copy of it.
The App Store (unless they change things) wouldn't allow that. I would have no problem with this if Apple included a way to create a DVD or USB installer from the download.
You seem really hung up on the fact that if Lion is sold on the app store it has to act exactly like every thing else on the app store, when that doesn't necessarily have to be the case.
Apple has always strived for simplicity, and creating one application where every other application can be downloaded makes things really simple for people who are not power users like you and me. Want the newest version of OS X? App store. Want iWork '11? App Store. Need a keyboard firmware update (hypothetically)? App Store.
I don't disagree with you that downloads from the Apple website itself aren't a bad thing, but it hasn't been the simplest thing either. And again, no one has said what other options will be available. There might be .iso downloads elsewhere on the website. The OS installer might have an option to burn a recovery disc.
Honestly, I'm with you for the most part. If there's no easy options to create a physical version of Lion for me to have as backup, I'm buying retail. But that doesn't mean the App Store version is a bad thing. It's a good thing for 95% of the people out there who aren't on these forums. :)
Eraserhead
Apr 22, 12:18 PM
You just overlooked an elephant. Why would you want to discourage consumer spending? In today's economy, the government and markets are working hard to get people interested in buying again. A VAT tax would only discourage that. A VAT and no income tax would only encourage people to save more than to spend. We need people to spend or no jobs will be created.
Saving money does allow for investment - which also creates jobs ;).
Saving money does allow for investment - which also creates jobs ;).
cav23j
Nov 30, 10:36 AM
im just staying away from this software now
Daveoc64
May 4, 03:26 PM
You seem really hung up on the fact that if Lion is sold on the app store it has to act exactly like every thing else on the app store, when that doesn't necessarily have to be the case.
I'm only "hung up" on that because that's what everything points to right now.
The current betas of Lion are simply DMGs with install files.
I'm only "hung up" on that because that's what everything points to right now.
The current betas of Lion are simply DMGs with install files.
Erasmus
Aug 4, 06:48 PM
New iMacs next Tuesday. I'll take one if it comes with a Conroe, Apple, thank you. But of course, if that's too hot, a Merom would do fine, too. Unless it will still use that dull 667MHz FSB, of course. At least put in an X1800 in it. Oh, and 1GB of RAM. And, while you're at it, throw in a 24" display too. And get rid of the lower bevel of the 'display design'. All that, and I'm buying straight away. If it will come pre-loaded with Leopard and will have a universal BlueRay/HD DVD-burner built-in, that is.
:rolleyes:
But seriously, I'm soooo ready for a new iMac. This 800MHz G4 iMac is getting old. It works like a charm, still, and is plenty fast for most stuff, but it just doesn't feel right anymore. Also, I never had quite the relationship with it as with my old 233MHz G3 iMac. I WANT A NEW iMAC! AND I WANT IT NOW!
Sounds like someone wants an iMac Ultra! (Really final Propaganda)
We Apple customers want an iMac with at LEAST (preferrably >>) 2.4 Conroe, at least an X1800 with 512 MB (Which should be quite likely if the PMs (sorry MPs) get SLI), a 23" screen, which Apple should have plenty of from their Cinema D's, and more RAM slots than you can polk a 2Gb RAM stick at (Meaning >=4), with most of them filled.
All for under AU$4 Grand.
That should take care of all gamers, any professionals who require a reasonably portable Desktop with awesome power, and in fact, anyone else.
--------------------
MBPs do use Lithium Polymer batteries. It says so on the Apple MBP website. I'm sure the MBs do too.
--------------------
As an aside, is anyone else here as happy as I am that we will never see one of those evil "Pentium" chips in our precious Macs? Hooray, there will be no Pentium 5! (Unless they call the Conroe line Pentium, like they keep calling Core Duo "Centrino Duo", to my utmost annoyance. Isn't Centrino the "Budget" brand name?)
Death (Or severe overheating and frying) to all Pentiums!
--------------------
Anyone else here interested in an iMac Ultra?
Anyone else have an extreme and probably unwarranted hatred of the Pentium moniker?
:rolleyes:
But seriously, I'm soooo ready for a new iMac. This 800MHz G4 iMac is getting old. It works like a charm, still, and is plenty fast for most stuff, but it just doesn't feel right anymore. Also, I never had quite the relationship with it as with my old 233MHz G3 iMac. I WANT A NEW iMAC! AND I WANT IT NOW!
Sounds like someone wants an iMac Ultra! (Really final Propaganda)
We Apple customers want an iMac with at LEAST (preferrably >>) 2.4 Conroe, at least an X1800 with 512 MB (Which should be quite likely if the PMs (sorry MPs) get SLI), a 23" screen, which Apple should have plenty of from their Cinema D's, and more RAM slots than you can polk a 2Gb RAM stick at (Meaning >=4), with most of them filled.
All for under AU$4 Grand.
That should take care of all gamers, any professionals who require a reasonably portable Desktop with awesome power, and in fact, anyone else.
--------------------
MBPs do use Lithium Polymer batteries. It says so on the Apple MBP website. I'm sure the MBs do too.
--------------------
As an aside, is anyone else here as happy as I am that we will never see one of those evil "Pentium" chips in our precious Macs? Hooray, there will be no Pentium 5! (Unless they call the Conroe line Pentium, like they keep calling Core Duo "Centrino Duo", to my utmost annoyance. Isn't Centrino the "Budget" brand name?)
Death (Or severe overheating and frying) to all Pentiums!
--------------------
Anyone else here interested in an iMac Ultra?
Anyone else have an extreme and probably unwarranted hatred of the Pentium moniker?
emotion
Nov 22, 05:43 AM
What's he banging on about? By "PC guys" who does he mean? Microsoft?
If this is the case is he saying that Windows Mobile (the OS he's stupidly paying for some of his products) isn't up to scratch? I can't see Palm surviving the year if he's this mixed up.
I have been using PDAs for years. I like using them. I've tried quite a few and where Windows CE (and variants) fail is they try and be too computer like. Palm OS is nice in that it does the simple stuff that you need on the move (and in meetings etc) well. It would be hard for Apple to figure this out and improve on the situation. They already have half the software written (iSync, iTunes, iPhoto).
The only thing Apple need to decide is: to they try and tackle the hard problem for a PDA/smart phone ie. data input. How do you write text on the device. This is the thing that killed the PDA market imo and why you see so many devices with thumbboards these days instead of (or as well as) touch screens. If they don't they have an extended iPod. Which might work out ok.
The other problem is the data rates mobile phone carriers charge. They need to be EDGE/HSDPA, flat rate and VOIP enabled. Not many carriers can manage that (T-Mobile are close in the UK though).
OK, rant over :)
If this is the case is he saying that Windows Mobile (the OS he's stupidly paying for some of his products) isn't up to scratch? I can't see Palm surviving the year if he's this mixed up.
I have been using PDAs for years. I like using them. I've tried quite a few and where Windows CE (and variants) fail is they try and be too computer like. Palm OS is nice in that it does the simple stuff that you need on the move (and in meetings etc) well. It would be hard for Apple to figure this out and improve on the situation. They already have half the software written (iSync, iTunes, iPhoto).
The only thing Apple need to decide is: to they try and tackle the hard problem for a PDA/smart phone ie. data input. How do you write text on the device. This is the thing that killed the PDA market imo and why you see so many devices with thumbboards these days instead of (or as well as) touch screens. If they don't they have an extended iPod. Which might work out ok.
The other problem is the data rates mobile phone carriers charge. They need to be EDGE/HSDPA, flat rate and VOIP enabled. Not many carriers can manage that (T-Mobile are close in the UK though).
OK, rant over :)
SandynJosh
Nov 23, 12:57 PM
In looking over all the ideas generated in this thread and all the trends going on in the world, I'm lead to wonder if a consumer iPhone makes as much sense as it would seem to at first blush. Sure, the numbers can be great, but the profit potential is nearly nil.
Hasn't the consumer iPhone by now become a commodity product? More features are being tucked in rather then reducing the cost further and the base cost of contracts are at an all time low. I don't think it would be wise for Apple or anyone else to enter a relatively mature commodity market.
RIM has mapped out a good chunk of the business market, but it still is vulnerable. But is the business market alone worth the risk at this point?
I suspect that Apple's stragegy is to leverage off the iPod market base in such a way that it becomes an easy choice to buy the new iPhone. For example, many of the newest cars will have a place to integrate the iPod into the sound system. Aircraft companies are making a similar provision for the audio AND the video. Tons of other manufacturers have made in-home equipment to hold and access the information stored in the iPod.
Imagine, if you will, the new iPhone nesting in all them iPod-friendly ports. In the car, it becomes a hands free cell phone with voice recognition dialing and a high-quality speakerphone (aka, the car's sound system). Now imagine either a business person using the system as he cruises between appointments, or a group of teens using it as they cruise the streets on a Friday night. Both productive for one and way cool for the other group.
All of the above done without adding much at all to a basic phone/iPod, just the pure iPod base being leveraged. Now add a few user interface features and a couple of bells and whistles to appeal to a broad range of users and you hit the ground running.
It's the more specific user related want list that next needs to be addressed and that's where it gets dicey. That might be best marketed as additional features that could be added as needed.
For example, not everyone needs GPS. However, let's go back to the automobile with the iPod port in the dash. Now using the new iPhone with the GPS option, a person can travel to an unfamiliar place with ease. They may not have bought the GPS option in the beginning, but they bought the ability to add the option when they made their decision. It's similar to computers in this regard. Oftem a computer isn't purchased with the full load of RAM but a computer that can't be expanded has a harder go of it even if it is superior... i.e. the history of the early Mac.
A good camera phone with some image stabilization would serve a lot of people. Would it be better as an option that might bulk up the phone a little but could be slipped on and off as needed?
However apple does the iPhone it will need to integrate it into the existing iPod port structure for maximum penetration right out of the gate. And then, let's not forget the soon-to-be-released iTV. How might that integrate a phone's utility?
I hinestly can't imagine a good answer to that last question, but my mind is still reeling with the unanswered question of why Steve would pre-announce a product after not doing so since 1983.
Hasn't the consumer iPhone by now become a commodity product? More features are being tucked in rather then reducing the cost further and the base cost of contracts are at an all time low. I don't think it would be wise for Apple or anyone else to enter a relatively mature commodity market.
RIM has mapped out a good chunk of the business market, but it still is vulnerable. But is the business market alone worth the risk at this point?
I suspect that Apple's stragegy is to leverage off the iPod market base in such a way that it becomes an easy choice to buy the new iPhone. For example, many of the newest cars will have a place to integrate the iPod into the sound system. Aircraft companies are making a similar provision for the audio AND the video. Tons of other manufacturers have made in-home equipment to hold and access the information stored in the iPod.
Imagine, if you will, the new iPhone nesting in all them iPod-friendly ports. In the car, it becomes a hands free cell phone with voice recognition dialing and a high-quality speakerphone (aka, the car's sound system). Now imagine either a business person using the system as he cruises between appointments, or a group of teens using it as they cruise the streets on a Friday night. Both productive for one and way cool for the other group.
All of the above done without adding much at all to a basic phone/iPod, just the pure iPod base being leveraged. Now add a few user interface features and a couple of bells and whistles to appeal to a broad range of users and you hit the ground running.
It's the more specific user related want list that next needs to be addressed and that's where it gets dicey. That might be best marketed as additional features that could be added as needed.
For example, not everyone needs GPS. However, let's go back to the automobile with the iPod port in the dash. Now using the new iPhone with the GPS option, a person can travel to an unfamiliar place with ease. They may not have bought the GPS option in the beginning, but they bought the ability to add the option when they made their decision. It's similar to computers in this regard. Oftem a computer isn't purchased with the full load of RAM but a computer that can't be expanded has a harder go of it even if it is superior... i.e. the history of the early Mac.
A good camera phone with some image stabilization would serve a lot of people. Would it be better as an option that might bulk up the phone a little but could be slipped on and off as needed?
However apple does the iPhone it will need to integrate it into the existing iPod port structure for maximum penetration right out of the gate. And then, let's not forget the soon-to-be-released iTV. How might that integrate a phone's utility?
I hinestly can't imagine a good answer to that last question, but my mind is still reeling with the unanswered question of why Steve would pre-announce a product after not doing so since 1983.
Tilpots
May 7, 10:35 AM
I've heard similar rumors about MobileMe going free. Makes sense if Apple could leverage the new iAd system to generate targeted campaigns, and effectively subsidise the cost of opening the system up to more users.
Free MobileMe as an iAd platform? That sounds about right. Paid MobileMe without the iAds? I think we're getting somewhere now...
Free MobileMe as an iAd platform? That sounds about right. Paid MobileMe without the iAds? I think we're getting somewhere now...
ravenvii
May 3, 11:41 AM
Yet more of Don't panic's questions:
you spoke about motivations, does that imply that the "end game" is different between the couple, the wizard and the adventurers? or is it just color?
Yes, their end-game goals are slightly different.
more: how long are the rounds? how large is the map? how long do you envisage this game lasting? is there a built-in clock of any sort?
The rounds are as long as you make it. That's why I require active participation - otherwise they could take forever. There is no built-in clock.
in the original post it said 2 points/turn, 2 turns/round, but in reality it is 1 point/turn? which is forfaited if the villain uses any action in the turn (place monsters/traps, heal, move)?
Every round, the villain gets 2 turns/points. If he moves, he uses one turn. Then he decides to heal, that takes another turn. Then the round is over for him, and when the next round comes, he gets another two turns. If in the previous turn he decides to do nothing, then the next round he will have four turns to play with.
Plutonius' questions:
1) Will it be real time or will it be 2 turns / 24 hours or something in between ?
No, it is two turns. No time limits or any kind of built-in clock.
2) What will our turn orders consist of and do we PM or use the thread (could you please post an example of a couple turns.) ?
The heroes use the thread, the villain PMs the GMs.
Example round:
Turn 1: Heroes discuss amongst themselves and decide to explore the room. They discover a trap that the villain placed and a treasure. They disarm the trap, and grab the treasure (automatic), and because they found a treasure, they level up.
Turn 2: Heroes discuss amongst themselves again, and decide on a door to take. They move to the next room, and meet a level 1 goblin. They fight and easily kill the goblin. The wizard takes one hit because random.org says so.
In the meanwhile, the villain has 3 turns - he has one turn remaining from last round, plus two turns from this round. The villain PMs the GMs saying he wants a lvl 4 gargoyle in that room. The gargoyle costs 3 turns. The villain now has 0 turns, and the gargoyle is placed in the said room.
Round ends.
3) Do we talk to each other through the thread or PMs ?
Everyone talks in the thread. Only the Villain uses PMs.
you spoke about motivations, does that imply that the "end game" is different between the couple, the wizard and the adventurers? or is it just color?
Yes, their end-game goals are slightly different.
more: how long are the rounds? how large is the map? how long do you envisage this game lasting? is there a built-in clock of any sort?
The rounds are as long as you make it. That's why I require active participation - otherwise they could take forever. There is no built-in clock.
in the original post it said 2 points/turn, 2 turns/round, but in reality it is 1 point/turn? which is forfaited if the villain uses any action in the turn (place monsters/traps, heal, move)?
Every round, the villain gets 2 turns/points. If he moves, he uses one turn. Then he decides to heal, that takes another turn. Then the round is over for him, and when the next round comes, he gets another two turns. If in the previous turn he decides to do nothing, then the next round he will have four turns to play with.
Plutonius' questions:
1) Will it be real time or will it be 2 turns / 24 hours or something in between ?
No, it is two turns. No time limits or any kind of built-in clock.
2) What will our turn orders consist of and do we PM or use the thread (could you please post an example of a couple turns.) ?
The heroes use the thread, the villain PMs the GMs.
Example round:
Turn 1: Heroes discuss amongst themselves and decide to explore the room. They discover a trap that the villain placed and a treasure. They disarm the trap, and grab the treasure (automatic), and because they found a treasure, they level up.
Turn 2: Heroes discuss amongst themselves again, and decide on a door to take. They move to the next room, and meet a level 1 goblin. They fight and easily kill the goblin. The wizard takes one hit because random.org says so.
In the meanwhile, the villain has 3 turns - he has one turn remaining from last round, plus two turns from this round. The villain PMs the GMs saying he wants a lvl 4 gargoyle in that room. The gargoyle costs 3 turns. The villain now has 0 turns, and the gargoyle is placed in the said room.
Round ends.
3) Do we talk to each other through the thread or PMs ?
Everyone talks in the thread. Only the Villain uses PMs.
Butthead
Sep 16, 01:05 PM
2.16 and 2.33 Merom options
Magnetic latch
MacBook style keyboard
New video card (Nvidia?)
160GB hard drive option
IMO, these are the least that Apple can do to keep up with other high performance notebooks in the market. I think new MBP's will arrive one the same day as Photokina although they may not be highlighted at the event.
Dreaming really (note 1920 res. hack for PB thread here has over 100k views, Apple get a clue!), but hopefully the delay has more to do with better upgrades, vid chip (Nvidia GeForce Go 7900 GTX, 512 MB please), a true HD screen (WQUXGA (http://www.videotechnology.com/0904/formats.html) would be even nicer, 4k res, yeah baby, just the ticket for Leopard and the 17in model), etc. ; than limited supply of Merom's...why put them in the iMac 1st when the profit margin is higher on the MBP's- which are in more need of an early upgrade than the iMac?
Dell already has these features in one of it's expensive laptops (though almost twice as thick, which makes it much easier to implement):
http://www.mobilityguru.com/2006/08/28/see_eurocom_emperor_fly_with_nvidia_sli/page2.html
Magnetic latch
MacBook style keyboard
New video card (Nvidia?)
160GB hard drive option
IMO, these are the least that Apple can do to keep up with other high performance notebooks in the market. I think new MBP's will arrive one the same day as Photokina although they may not be highlighted at the event.
Dreaming really (note 1920 res. hack for PB thread here has over 100k views, Apple get a clue!), but hopefully the delay has more to do with better upgrades, vid chip (Nvidia GeForce Go 7900 GTX, 512 MB please), a true HD screen (WQUXGA (http://www.videotechnology.com/0904/formats.html) would be even nicer, 4k res, yeah baby, just the ticket for Leopard and the 17in model), etc. ; than limited supply of Merom's...why put them in the iMac 1st when the profit margin is higher on the MBP's- which are in more need of an early upgrade than the iMac?
Dell already has these features in one of it's expensive laptops (though almost twice as thick, which makes it much easier to implement):
http://www.mobilityguru.com/2006/08/28/see_eurocom_emperor_fly_with_nvidia_sli/page2.html
z3r01
Apr 26, 04:18 PM
This is obvious because iOS is from one company...selling iOS devices. Android is o. Every other device that really isn't any competition if u ask me...every HTC, motorola , are now stocking android that they just got lazy. "oh we just made a quad core with 7 cameras...let's add android...perfect..exactly like an evo"....boring...some say "oh iOS isn't exciting" in earlier posts are wrong...not that I'm a fanboy to iOS..I'm a fanboy to the best I see..and android for a fact isn't...every damn android device has nothing different then just cameras...evo..shift..thunderbolt...droid...it's just stupid...what happened to when cell phones competed for hardware and software?
FaziBear
Sep 15, 05:14 PM
Yes finally! I think this makes sense, but then like all of you, this is just my opinion... anyways...
LET THE COUTDOWN BEGIN!!!
AGAIN...
10 Days and counting.
LET THE COUTDOWN BEGIN!!!
AGAIN...
10 Days and counting.
Piggie
Apr 23, 06:25 PM
Because those screens WILL look better to those normal customers. Text and graphics will look sharper, and clearer.
The iPhone screen, before the retina screen, had a higher resolution than macs. People could not see individual pixels. Despite that, ask any Tom Dick or Harry on the street, and they will be unequivocal that the Retina screen is far better looking than the 3GS screens.
The iPhone, before the current model had a screen res of 320 x 480
The first iMac, made 13 years ago in 1998 (the G3) had a screen res of 1024x768 the same as an iPad2 they are making today.
The first Apple Mac in 1984, 27 years ago had a screen res of 512�342 on a black and white screen.
I don't know where you get your statement than the "iPhone had a higher resolution than macs"
The iPhone screen, before the retina screen, had a higher resolution than macs. People could not see individual pixels. Despite that, ask any Tom Dick or Harry on the street, and they will be unequivocal that the Retina screen is far better looking than the 3GS screens.
The iPhone, before the current model had a screen res of 320 x 480
The first iMac, made 13 years ago in 1998 (the G3) had a screen res of 1024x768 the same as an iPad2 they are making today.
The first Apple Mac in 1984, 27 years ago had a screen res of 512�342 on a black and white screen.
I don't know where you get your statement than the "iPhone had a higher resolution than macs"
RichP
Aug 7, 08:55 PM
So..I have one on order too, not sure if I am all that excited, which sounds ridiculous. Ive been holding out replacing my 1.8G5 for a while, and my plan was to get a cheapo quad g5 once these things came out, but the 2.66 quad is pretty damn cheap compared to what the old quad was. Hell, ebay wont have deals on used G5 quads that are worth the "used" risk for ages now.
About the RAM, I ordered mine with the Radeon card, which will postpone my order some. By then, someone will have one of these machines, and figure out what the deal is with the RAM heatsinks so I can order more..i hope :o
edit: dont forget, you get a free nano with edu purchase!
About the RAM, I ordered mine with the Radeon card, which will postpone my order some. By then, someone will have one of these machines, and figure out what the deal is with the RAM heatsinks so I can order more..i hope :o
edit: dont forget, you get a free nano with edu purchase!
GQB
Mar 28, 10:47 AM
im the opposite, this would be devastating to me as my contract runs out June this year......
%IMG_DESC_17%
%IMG_DESC_18%
%IMG_DESC_19%
LagunaSol
Apr 25, 09:04 AM
Maybe you could shed some light on this for me before I switch to a Droid. They don't track me.
LOL at Android users naive enough to think their "free" OS, funded by targeted advertising, isn't collecting user data.
LOL at Android users naive enough to think their "free" OS, funded by targeted advertising, isn't collecting user data.
marksman
Apr 20, 01:11 AM
If you can have a bigger screen without a physically larger device size and weight, then yes, it is necessarily better.
iPhone 4 with 3.5" screen: 115.2mm x 58.6mm x 9.3mm
weight: 137 grams
HTC Thunderbolt with 4" screen: 122mm x 66mm x 13mm
weight: 164 grams
I am not sure about you, but on composite that HTC with a 4" screen is noticeably larger in every possible way over the iPhone 4.
Sure it is only 5% taller, but 12% wider and almost 50% thicker as well as 15% heavier.
Perhaps you don't know anything about Apple, but they take the size of their devices very seriously.
I also don't understand how some of you think it is possible to have a significantly larger screen without making the phone bigger. It is not like the current iPhone has a lot of space. Again it seems people just read a bigger number and think it must be better. If we left it up to other companies smartphones would all be twice as thick and weigh twice as much as they do now, while being massively unwieldy. Apple actually has an aesthetic set of benchmarks that are important to them as anything else. It is not only aesthetic either, but actually using the device and carrying it around, the size makes a big difference.
My 3.5" iPhone 4 screen is pretty amazing, especially considering the size and weight of the device. Much more impressive than any 4" screened device I have seen.
Edit: In case anyone is wondering the 4" Samsung Galaxy S specs: 122.4mm x 64.2mm x 9.9mm weight 118 grams. It weighs less, but the physical dimensions are larger in ever way.
iPhone 4 with 3.5" screen: 115.2mm x 58.6mm x 9.3mm
weight: 137 grams
HTC Thunderbolt with 4" screen: 122mm x 66mm x 13mm
weight: 164 grams
I am not sure about you, but on composite that HTC with a 4" screen is noticeably larger in every possible way over the iPhone 4.
Sure it is only 5% taller, but 12% wider and almost 50% thicker as well as 15% heavier.
Perhaps you don't know anything about Apple, but they take the size of their devices very seriously.
I also don't understand how some of you think it is possible to have a significantly larger screen without making the phone bigger. It is not like the current iPhone has a lot of space. Again it seems people just read a bigger number and think it must be better. If we left it up to other companies smartphones would all be twice as thick and weigh twice as much as they do now, while being massively unwieldy. Apple actually has an aesthetic set of benchmarks that are important to them as anything else. It is not only aesthetic either, but actually using the device and carrying it around, the size makes a big difference.
My 3.5" iPhone 4 screen is pretty amazing, especially considering the size and weight of the device. Much more impressive than any 4" screened device I have seen.
Edit: In case anyone is wondering the 4" Samsung Galaxy S specs: 122.4mm x 64.2mm x 9.9mm weight 118 grams. It weighs less, but the physical dimensions are larger in ever way.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 18, 04:15 PM
Just because I stick a Ford logo on the hood doesn't mean I can make my new Mustang look like a Porsche Carrera clone.
On that subject, auto companies do this within their own brands. Ford will make a Lincoln and a Mercury that is the same as a Ford model but with a different name on it.
I never understood that about the auto industry. If you buy up competition and keep the name around instead of folding the acquisition into the one brand, then do something unique with each brand. Ford/Lincoln/Mercury for instance should divide up product lines between brands. Ford could be brand name of the truck line while the other two are brand names for luxury and compact cars for instance. But the experts will say this is silly. LOL
On that subject, auto companies do this within their own brands. Ford will make a Lincoln and a Mercury that is the same as a Ford model but with a different name on it.
I never understood that about the auto industry. If you buy up competition and keep the name around instead of folding the acquisition into the one brand, then do something unique with each brand. Ford/Lincoln/Mercury for instance should divide up product lines between brands. Ford could be brand name of the truck line while the other two are brand names for luxury and compact cars for instance. But the experts will say this is silly. LOL
LeoNobilis
Mar 29, 05:03 PM
Those idiots must stop investing heavily in the asian markets. They are essentially selling their technology to asians, while also squandering immense financial resources on them.
Remingtonh
Apr 25, 09:17 AM
Just don't go anywhere you're not supposed to be and it's a non issue.
Mjmar
Mar 26, 10:00 PM
Fall iPhone 5?
cirus
Apr 24, 01:54 PM
You contradict yourself here. A 27" iMac is probably already retina, considering the viewing distance should be around 30" away.
As the distance grows, the PPI treshold to achieve the "retina" effect of "Eye can't distinguish the individual pixels" becomes lower. Given enough distance, 48 PPI can be enough to be dubbed "retina display" (your standard 50" 1080p TV).
No, you're not wrong. But I'm not either. I'll let you figure out why (think about the lower case b in Mbps vs MB of RAM ;) ). Unless I'm misinterpreting something, I doubt DP 1.2 can push out 21 gigaBYTES of data per second...
As for the 6990 listing that as max resolution, I'm betting that has more to do with current LCD display limitation (that is the max resolutions you'll find on an LCD monitor) than with actual hardware limitation. The hardware is capable of more than that. Some of these cards with a single GPU have 2-4 DP outputs capable of driving 2-4 of these 2560x1600 monitors. The GPU itself doesn't a problem pushing out these pixels and DP 1.2 makes it so they can push it over a single connection.
Sony was there first with the Vaio Z. 13.3", 1920x1080 baby. If it weren't so expensive it would be mine and I'd be back to running Linux.
Thanks, a 'duh' moment for me.
However, ati does list the 6990 as having a maximum display resolution of 2650 x 1600 per display though it can handle up to 6 displays. There will have to be a change somewhere. (Though you could probably write a program that would allow this resolution). That is still going to max out thunderbolt so you would not be able to drive one of those displays at native with a macbook pro.
As the distance grows, the PPI treshold to achieve the "retina" effect of "Eye can't distinguish the individual pixels" becomes lower. Given enough distance, 48 PPI can be enough to be dubbed "retina display" (your standard 50" 1080p TV).
No, you're not wrong. But I'm not either. I'll let you figure out why (think about the lower case b in Mbps vs MB of RAM ;) ). Unless I'm misinterpreting something, I doubt DP 1.2 can push out 21 gigaBYTES of data per second...
As for the 6990 listing that as max resolution, I'm betting that has more to do with current LCD display limitation (that is the max resolutions you'll find on an LCD monitor) than with actual hardware limitation. The hardware is capable of more than that. Some of these cards with a single GPU have 2-4 DP outputs capable of driving 2-4 of these 2560x1600 monitors. The GPU itself doesn't a problem pushing out these pixels and DP 1.2 makes it so they can push it over a single connection.
Sony was there first with the Vaio Z. 13.3", 1920x1080 baby. If it weren't so expensive it would be mine and I'd be back to running Linux.
Thanks, a 'duh' moment for me.
However, ati does list the 6990 as having a maximum display resolution of 2650 x 1600 per display though it can handle up to 6 displays. There will have to be a change somewhere. (Though you could probably write a program that would allow this resolution). That is still going to max out thunderbolt so you would not be able to drive one of those displays at native with a macbook pro.
DJMastaWes
Jul 22, 10:02 AM
I'm just burnin' doin' the Merom Dance!
Sing it with me, now! :D
Regardless of what happens on the 7th, I'm ordering a MBP. Though, things look like they're shaping up for that! Apple would be nuts not to put that chip in the MBP now that it's shipping.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed! Can't wait....
I know the odds are riseing for merom MBPs at WWDC, but anyone have opinions on a new enclosure for them at WWDC?
Sing it with me, now! :D
Regardless of what happens on the 7th, I'm ordering a MBP. Though, things look like they're shaping up for that! Apple would be nuts not to put that chip in the MBP now that it's shipping.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed! Can't wait....
I know the odds are riseing for merom MBPs at WWDC, but anyone have opinions on a new enclosure for them at WWDC?