bloodycape
Jul 16, 04:00 AM
We've seen it with Betamax, MiniDisc, MemoryStick, etc. Sony doesn't play well with others, they like their own formats. Heck, take a look at the Sony DRM fiasco from last year with the rootkit CDs. Do you really trust Sony to be checking in on what Blueray discs you are playing and verifying your encryption keys on a dailybasis? There are very few features in Blueray which are consumer friendly.
I'd beg to differ on that point. MemoryStick is actually doing pretty well in the market considering that the top three cards are SD, CF and MS stick. Granted they keep changing it but it is doing better then Beta, MiniDisc and MinisDisk HD(even though there are many die hard minidisk fans). Hell you even look at those multi memory card readers there is always support for MS stick. So it does look like Sony did something right there.
I'd beg to differ on that point. MemoryStick is actually doing pretty well in the market considering that the top three cards are SD, CF and MS stick. Granted they keep changing it but it is doing better then Beta, MiniDisc and MinisDisk HD(even though there are many die hard minidisk fans). Hell you even look at those multi memory card readers there is always support for MS stick. So it does look like Sony did something right there.
mambodancer
Jul 18, 09:14 AM
The assumption is that the movies will be downloadable. It's entirely possible that Apple may follow a model like netflix. Have an online DB of thousands of movies that you can review online, read reviews and member comments, and then rent the movie and have it shipped to you like Netflix and Blockbuster. Return it when you have watched it. Order and buy brand new and used DVD's. Charge a monthly subscription service. Maybe Apple will buy Netflix?
Additionally, if Apple does provide the option of at once delivery via downloads then I don't think they need to provide DVD quality as a download (though resolution options and a price structure to match would be nice-being able to watch HD-DVD on my Mac would be great)*.
I like the $9.99 price point for movie downloads that you can keep if they are DVD quality and I'm sure Steve will continue to fight for this. This isn't much different than what the Columbia DVD movie club offers now when you consider the number of movies that you get - for their member offer you can buy 7 DVD's for an average price of $3.90 each. Movies sell from Columbia starting at $14.95 to $19.95 and they always have some kind of special offer-buy one at regular club prices, get your next DVD for 50% off.
This would be another step toward dropping cable TV for me altogether. The $45 a month I'm paying to rent TV and movies from Comcast is a great incentive to cancel cable. The quality of cable downloads (record to VCR) isn't so great and if I'm downloading TV I still have to deal with commercials. I'd much rather do the "movie and TV on demand" thing through my computer.
And yes, I finally got rid of my TV, CD player, amps, tape drive, DVD player, VCR and entertainment console in favor of listening and watching through my computer system. I love not having that hugh piece of furniture crammed full of electronics and cabling in my living room!
Additionally, if Apple does provide the option of at once delivery via downloads then I don't think they need to provide DVD quality as a download (though resolution options and a price structure to match would be nice-being able to watch HD-DVD on my Mac would be great)*.
I like the $9.99 price point for movie downloads that you can keep if they are DVD quality and I'm sure Steve will continue to fight for this. This isn't much different than what the Columbia DVD movie club offers now when you consider the number of movies that you get - for their member offer you can buy 7 DVD's for an average price of $3.90 each. Movies sell from Columbia starting at $14.95 to $19.95 and they always have some kind of special offer-buy one at regular club prices, get your next DVD for 50% off.
This would be another step toward dropping cable TV for me altogether. The $45 a month I'm paying to rent TV and movies from Comcast is a great incentive to cancel cable. The quality of cable downloads (record to VCR) isn't so great and if I'm downloading TV I still have to deal with commercials. I'd much rather do the "movie and TV on demand" thing through my computer.
And yes, I finally got rid of my TV, CD player, amps, tape drive, DVD player, VCR and entertainment console in favor of listening and watching through my computer system. I love not having that hugh piece of furniture crammed full of electronics and cabling in my living room!
Major Kong
Oct 23, 08:37 AM
Some users in Germany report that their dealers told them existing MacBook (Pro) orders will be deleted and re-ordered tomorrow due to new releases of these notebooks.
All systems go for tomorrow update. :)
All systems go for tomorrow update. :)
PowerFullMac
Jan 12, 01:02 PM
for me, this would go into the "who cares" column. i don't need another notebook no matter how thin it is. what i need is a sub notebook. i don't believe a thinner notebook would garner all of this much attention. not a big enough deal. not the apple style. MacBook Air. i have to say no way.
i'll go out on a limb and say the "air" has something to do with a new wireless network to replace the stupid EDGE network.
Maybe its not just thinner, maybe its got some special feautre(s)! Or maybe it has a multi-touch display!
i'll go out on a limb and say the "air" has something to do with a new wireless network to replace the stupid EDGE network.
Maybe its not just thinner, maybe its got some special feautre(s)! Or maybe it has a multi-touch display!
gkarris
Nov 27, 09:04 PM
IMAGINED?
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
Didn't you read this post and the article attached?
"but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me"
Ding-Ding-Ding! You answered all of your above complaints and whining about Apple's prices. You aren't the target audience for their displays.
(note: I would suggest you see my comp specs and gear below before reading my post further)
Perhaps it is an oversight of Apples that they sell both consumer and pro-sumer computers, and yet only offer a pro-sumer monitor. However considering that 2 of the 3 consumer computers by Apple have built in monitors, and the 3rd is meant to be used with exisiting mouse, keyboard and monitor, it may not be such a big deal.
Also, if you want cheaper, there exists cheaper. It's not as if Apple is robbing you of much needed options in montior selection by not offering a cheap monitor. Any monitor made today will work with your Mac. The only thing they are robbing you of is their design.
Now don't anyone bring up the "Apple is bad because of what I can get from Dell" topic again until you read this very carefully (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
.
In summery though, Apple uses a different, far more advanced color accurate panel for their monitors. This allows them certification that they pay for. They also pay someone with a design background to make the casing, and don't have the EE's do it like at some companies :rolleyes:
Now, back on topic :)
I was in the "Apple needs to make a 17" monitor" crowd for a long time. Than I bought a cheap 20" wide display, and I love it. I suppose with Photography and a few games here and there, there is a reason I'm inclined to now say I wouldn't use a smaller screen. But unless Apple wants to sell a consumer display (which they don't currently do), to be used with the Mac Mini, I really don't see much of a reason for Apple to do it. A pro-sumer 17" display is useless and pointless IMHO. If you have a 3 grand G5 doing professional graphics/video work, you aren't going to buy a pro-sumer 17" monitor for $400 :rolleyes:
That said, if Apple had offered a consumer level 20" wide monitor at a similar price point to Dells, I'd have bought it hands down.
It's clearly known that Apple monitors are pro quality and Dell ones are cheap consumer quality, hence the price difference...
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
Didn't you read this post and the article attached?
"but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me"
Ding-Ding-Ding! You answered all of your above complaints and whining about Apple's prices. You aren't the target audience for their displays.
(note: I would suggest you see my comp specs and gear below before reading my post further)
Perhaps it is an oversight of Apples that they sell both consumer and pro-sumer computers, and yet only offer a pro-sumer monitor. However considering that 2 of the 3 consumer computers by Apple have built in monitors, and the 3rd is meant to be used with exisiting mouse, keyboard and monitor, it may not be such a big deal.
Also, if you want cheaper, there exists cheaper. It's not as if Apple is robbing you of much needed options in montior selection by not offering a cheap monitor. Any monitor made today will work with your Mac. The only thing they are robbing you of is their design.
Now don't anyone bring up the "Apple is bad because of what I can get from Dell" topic again until you read this very carefully (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
.
In summery though, Apple uses a different, far more advanced color accurate panel for their monitors. This allows them certification that they pay for. They also pay someone with a design background to make the casing, and don't have the EE's do it like at some companies :rolleyes:
Now, back on topic :)
I was in the "Apple needs to make a 17" monitor" crowd for a long time. Than I bought a cheap 20" wide display, and I love it. I suppose with Photography and a few games here and there, there is a reason I'm inclined to now say I wouldn't use a smaller screen. But unless Apple wants to sell a consumer display (which they don't currently do), to be used with the Mac Mini, I really don't see much of a reason for Apple to do it. A pro-sumer 17" display is useless and pointless IMHO. If you have a 3 grand G5 doing professional graphics/video work, you aren't going to buy a pro-sumer 17" monitor for $400 :rolleyes:
That said, if Apple had offered a consumer level 20" wide monitor at a similar price point to Dells, I'd have bought it hands down.
It's clearly known that Apple monitors are pro quality and Dell ones are cheap consumer quality, hence the price difference...
gheilner
Jun 23, 12:28 PM
it is the only product now to start with the "i" and not run the "i"OS.
umm there are LOTS of iPOD's (remember them?) that dont run iOS.
umm there are LOTS of iPOD's (remember them?) that dont run iOS.
Angrisano
Sep 6, 08:05 PM
I can not believe how long it has taken me to finally bother to register here...And it has taken the release of an iMac to do it.
Ironically I've been a longtime reader myself and just registered because of this article, though for exactly the opposite reason as you. :D
And yes I realize my complaints about a mid-range tower probably seem pointless to most. But the iMac just doesn't seem to meet my needs. I'm happy with my current dual monitors (which match in size and resolution) and I'd prefer more than a 128mb graphics card.
Moreover, I've been a Mac user since 1993 and never owned a single LCD-based Mac which didn't have a dead pixel. That's about seven Macs, including my current MacBook. Bad luck, I realize but I'm just not buying an all-in-one desktop from Apple. :p
Ironically I've been a longtime reader myself and just registered because of this article, though for exactly the opposite reason as you. :D
And yes I realize my complaints about a mid-range tower probably seem pointless to most. But the iMac just doesn't seem to meet my needs. I'm happy with my current dual monitors (which match in size and resolution) and I'd prefer more than a 128mb graphics card.
Moreover, I've been a Mac user since 1993 and never owned a single LCD-based Mac which didn't have a dead pixel. That's about seven Macs, including my current MacBook. Bad luck, I realize but I'm just not buying an all-in-one desktop from Apple. :p
Irishman
Apr 22, 09:32 AM
SNIP
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.5 GHz i3 processor
8 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1499.99
SNIP
That is the one I'll be getting. Why an i3 SB and not an i7 SB? I don't see Apple using an i3 in anything
Fixed!
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.5 GHz i3 processor
8 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1499.99
SNIP
That is the one I'll be getting. Why an i3 SB and not an i7 SB? I don't see Apple using an i3 in anything
Fixed!
VPrime
Jan 5, 01:58 AM
To the BMW guys, how reliable is the E46 325i?
I have a chance to pick one up for a fairly low cost (Less than $6,000 canadian). It is pretty much mint and VERY well maintained.
Car has a bit higher miles (~125,000 miles/ 205,000km), but I am guessing well maintained they will last quite a while?
I really enjoyed my brothers E36, and I just got rid of my project cars so I figure this would be a nice change.
I have a chance to pick one up for a fairly low cost (Less than $6,000 canadian). It is pretty much mint and VERY well maintained.
Car has a bit higher miles (~125,000 miles/ 205,000km), but I am guessing well maintained they will last quite a while?
I really enjoyed my brothers E36, and I just got rid of my project cars so I figure this would be a nice change.
MacRumors
Jun 22, 11:46 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/06/22/apple-to-launch-ios-enabled-imac-with-touch-interface/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2010/06/22/124452-iphone_imac.jpg
justin bieber
Justin Bieber
Justin Bieber#39;s Hair Trimmings
Justin thinks he#39;s starting to
Justin Bieber Offers Beliebers
Justin Bieber
me up with Justin Bieber
Justin Bieber On Vanity Fair,
obsessed justin bieber fans.
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2010/06/22/124452-iphone_imac.jpg
Heavy Fluid
Nov 25, 03:56 PM
Used, but in really good condition. Great components and tires should make this a blast to ride.
http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q34/lovtrance/KHS2.jpg
http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q34/lovtrance/KHS2.jpg
milo
Sep 6, 08:48 AM
Hmm... the Mini still has no Core 2 Duo? That does not sound too promising for MacBook (Pro) updates... unless Apple only wants to use the Core 2 Duo for the high end laptops (MacBook Pro) of course... Or are they waiting untill Leopard has been released?
We'll see it soon in the macbook pro, I'd guess the MB will be later on.
So are all the yonah naysayers ready for a big plate of crow?
We'll see it soon in the macbook pro, I'd guess the MB will be later on.
So are all the yonah naysayers ready for a big plate of crow?
blizaine
Sep 14, 11:28 AM
Consumer Reports says "we still think the same thing" for the third time and that's first page news? Sounds more like they're fishing for free publicity.
That is all they ever do. It's all about page hits and controversy for them. They did the same thing with the whole protein drink scare they tried to create a few months ago, that his been disproved multiple times.
That is all they ever do. It's all about page hits and controversy for them. They did the same thing with the whole protein drink scare they tried to create a few months ago, that his been disproved multiple times.
ccunning
Jul 14, 11:28 AM
I just saw this and though it was pretty interesting:
Sony also introduced their own small-format 90.0 � 94.0 mm disk, similar to the others but somewhat simpler in construction than the AmDisk. The first computer to use this format was the HP-150 of 1983, and Sony also used them fairly widely on their line of MSX computers. Other than this the format suffered from a similar fate as the other new formats; the 5�-inch format simply had too much market share. Things changed dramatically in 1984 when Apple Computer selected the format for their new Macintosh computers. By 1989 the 3�-inch was outselling the 5�-inch.
Here is the source:
Sony's 3.5" Floppy Disk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floppy_drive#The_3.C2.BD-inch_microfloppy_diskette)
Sony also introduced their own small-format 90.0 � 94.0 mm disk, similar to the others but somewhat simpler in construction than the AmDisk. The first computer to use this format was the HP-150 of 1983, and Sony also used them fairly widely on their line of MSX computers. Other than this the format suffered from a similar fate as the other new formats; the 5�-inch format simply had too much market share. Things changed dramatically in 1984 when Apple Computer selected the format for their new Macintosh computers. By 1989 the 3�-inch was outselling the 5�-inch.
Here is the source:
Sony's 3.5" Floppy Disk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floppy_drive#The_3.C2.BD-inch_microfloppy_diskette)
peestandingup
Jul 15, 12:33 AM
I usually think Apple makes great decisions, but my guess is that Blu-Ray was a bad one. I think it will ultimately fail with consumers.
There is A LOT riding on this right now & given Sony's track record with this sorta stuff, im a little concerned. Their PSP (UMD) format is already on its way out & is being discontinued. Not to mention all the other failed Sony formats over the years.
Now, they announce the PS3 is gonna have that ridiculous price tag of $600, which could have been much cheaper if they didnt include Blu-Ray in every single machine. They should have made it an add-on & gave people a choice instead of shoving it in everyones face. Correct me if im wrong, but dont gamers just wanna play games? You're looking at upwards of $1,000 for the system, a couple games, add-ons, etc. If PS3 fails (which it very well might), then kiss Blu-Ray goodbye.
Sony is setting themselves up for a huge backlash & I could really care less about them. I just wish Apple wasnt supporting their format.
There is A LOT riding on this right now & given Sony's track record with this sorta stuff, im a little concerned. Their PSP (UMD) format is already on its way out & is being discontinued. Not to mention all the other failed Sony formats over the years.
Now, they announce the PS3 is gonna have that ridiculous price tag of $600, which could have been much cheaper if they didnt include Blu-Ray in every single machine. They should have made it an add-on & gave people a choice instead of shoving it in everyones face. Correct me if im wrong, but dont gamers just wanna play games? You're looking at upwards of $1,000 for the system, a couple games, add-ons, etc. If PS3 fails (which it very well might), then kiss Blu-Ray goodbye.
Sony is setting themselves up for a huge backlash & I could really care less about them. I just wish Apple wasnt supporting their format.
SuperCachetes
Mar 18, 07:56 AM
Would you rather have the Libyan people (who have called for help!) slaughtered by Gaddafi?
How very humanitarian (and dramatic) of you.
Can you please provide a chart of how many "slaughtered" we are required to acknowledge before we take military action? I would like to know what the threshold is.
...Because I have a hard time believing this is the only aggressive dictator in existence at this moment. If I have to choose between Libyans being slaughtered/not slaughtered, I want you to choose which atrocities in the world to respond to, and which to ignore. Be prepared to to explain why you did not depose Dictator "X" who was violating human rights as opposed to Libya's Dictator "Y." Or, in the odd chance you would choose to involve the USA in every single non-democratic nation with an unloved and power-hungry misanthropic leader, you may demonstrate how such a widespread show of American force might affect world opinions of our foreign policy, particularly in regions of the world where we may already be viewed as imperialist heathens.
For extra credit, you may describe in 100 words or less how either selective or across-the-board military responses benefit economic or social problems within the United States itself.
How very humanitarian (and dramatic) of you.
Can you please provide a chart of how many "slaughtered" we are required to acknowledge before we take military action? I would like to know what the threshold is.
...Because I have a hard time believing this is the only aggressive dictator in existence at this moment. If I have to choose between Libyans being slaughtered/not slaughtered, I want you to choose which atrocities in the world to respond to, and which to ignore. Be prepared to to explain why you did not depose Dictator "X" who was violating human rights as opposed to Libya's Dictator "Y." Or, in the odd chance you would choose to involve the USA in every single non-democratic nation with an unloved and power-hungry misanthropic leader, you may demonstrate how such a widespread show of American force might affect world opinions of our foreign policy, particularly in regions of the world where we may already be viewed as imperialist heathens.
For extra credit, you may describe in 100 words or less how either selective or across-the-board military responses benefit economic or social problems within the United States itself.
Bengt77
Sep 1, 01:39 PM
wouldn't swapping a conroe chip in be an option? just go to Fry's and buy the chip then.
No, the Conroe and Merom are not, as they call it, pin-compatible. The Yonah and Merom are, by the way. So yeah, it makes sense for Apple to go with the Merom, but that doesn't mean I like it one bit.
EDIT: Sorry, roland.g, you beat me to it.
No, the Conroe and Merom are not, as they call it, pin-compatible. The Yonah and Merom are, by the way. So yeah, it makes sense for Apple to go with the Merom, but that doesn't mean I like it one bit.
EDIT: Sorry, roland.g, you beat me to it.
asphalt-proof
Sep 1, 02:08 PM
OH PLEASE OH PLEASE OH PLEASE!!!
I remember when there was speculation about a 19" iMac being released (back in the g4 days or, as I call them, the Bad Ol' Days). There were some there that totally pooh-poohed the idea and predicted it would bite into sales of Powermacs. Didn't happened. I think the 23" is a natural evolution and will buy one as soon as my wife allows me to. (been working on my wheedling and whining).
Can't wait til the 12th.
I remember when there was speculation about a 19" iMac being released (back in the g4 days or, as I call them, the Bad Ol' Days). There were some there that totally pooh-poohed the idea and predicted it would bite into sales of Powermacs. Didn't happened. I think the 23" is a natural evolution and will buy one as soon as my wife allows me to. (been working on my wheedling and whining).
Can't wait til the 12th.
Anticlockwork
Jan 6, 12:44 AM
http://i418.photobucket.com/albums/pp263/sochrisash/DSC04078.jpg
No show winner, but its mine :P :D
Woot I'm not the only one!
Here is mine. 72 Super beetle.
http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/7638/img0174ix.jpg (http://img600.imageshack.us/i/img0174ix.jpg/)
No show winner, but its mine :P :D
Woot I'm not the only one!
Here is mine. 72 Super beetle.
http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/7638/img0174ix.jpg (http://img600.imageshack.us/i/img0174ix.jpg/)
kevingaffney
Sep 14, 11:10 AM
Does the iPhone have an inherent design issue with regards to antenna performance. The answer is, absolutely YES. Does the bumper mitigate this issue, in my experience it does, however only a marginal amount.
I have dropped calls every day, in places where I would have near full signal if I was not holding the phone. I have 3G data issues, especially in the fringe areas where I did not have an issue with my 3Gs.
The iPhone is a great device and I agree that consumer reports is splitting hairs with the antenna issue.
Apple agree's there is a problem or they would not have given away bumpers to everyone.
Fortunately, I use my iPhone as a phone only about 20% of the time, so 80% of my use is great. The other 20% is only a problem about 1 in 7 calls.
So, while it is a little inconvenient when a call drops when I hold the phone in that way, or short data interruptions on 3G from time-to-time, overall I get a lot done with the iPhone.
I do look forward to changing my iPhone to a newer device at the first reasonable opportunity, primarily because of the antenna issue.
I would agree completely. Have to say I use mine all day for business use. Hardly ever drop a call and it's way the best of all the iPhones I've had so far going back to 2nd gen
I have dropped calls every day, in places where I would have near full signal if I was not holding the phone. I have 3G data issues, especially in the fringe areas where I did not have an issue with my 3Gs.
The iPhone is a great device and I agree that consumer reports is splitting hairs with the antenna issue.
Apple agree's there is a problem or they would not have given away bumpers to everyone.
Fortunately, I use my iPhone as a phone only about 20% of the time, so 80% of my use is great. The other 20% is only a problem about 1 in 7 calls.
So, while it is a little inconvenient when a call drops when I hold the phone in that way, or short data interruptions on 3G from time-to-time, overall I get a lot done with the iPhone.
I do look forward to changing my iPhone to a newer device at the first reasonable opportunity, primarily because of the antenna issue.
I would agree completely. Have to say I use mine all day for business use. Hardly ever drop a call and it's way the best of all the iPhones I've had so far going back to 2nd gen
applefanDrew
May 2, 09:02 PM
I like it, but right now there's 3 ways to install apps: App Store, download from internet and drag to applications folder, installer wizard (like MS Office). Also, the difference between the applications folder and LaunchPad will be confusing for most users. This whole thing needs to be unified. Either get rid of the Applications folder or get rid of LaunchPad.
Afaik, there is no apps folder on the dock by default in lion. Launchpad has taken it's place.
Afaik, there is no apps folder on the dock by default in lion. Launchpad has taken it's place.
FireStar
Oct 3, 09:20 AM
Wow. Everyone at macrumors must love switcheasy. Are they that good?
Ohhhhhh, yes. Nice cases, amazing accesories, and all for around the same price as Griffin or Belkin. Lots of variety too.
As a SwitchEasy tradition, we have included everything you need to protect and accessorize your new iPod Touch 2G. With our RebelTouch package, you'll get the following
Ohhhhhh, yes. Nice cases, amazing accesories, and all for around the same price as Griffin or Belkin. Lots of variety too.
As a SwitchEasy tradition, we have included everything you need to protect and accessorize your new iPod Touch 2G. With our RebelTouch package, you'll get the following
m4rc
Mar 28, 11:50 AM
Maybe he will go away and stop making up senseless rubbish if we just agree with him? Yes, Apple is dieing. Maybe a month, maybe a few weeks, but not long now. Such a shame. Gonna miss them. All because they didn't make a $500 computer, which cost more than that to make and market properly. They really should have listened to Imac_Japan you know, he saw it coming. Just think, if they hadn't been wasting their energy on that stupid iPod.......
Has he gone yet?
Has he gone yet?
twoodcc
Oct 5, 10:30 PM
Congrats, keep the bigadv coming!
thanks. like i said, i'll have them coming when it gets colder. but it looks like mc68k will keep them coming
EDIT: and congrats to you! over 2 million now!
thanks. like i said, i'll have them coming when it gets colder. but it looks like mc68k will keep them coming
EDIT: and congrats to you! over 2 million now!
No comments:
Post a Comment