pengu
Sep 18, 08:34 AM
You are right. I make a call. i expect to pay for it. i dont expect the person im calling to get billed for the damn call.
and. as for pricing. yes, vodafone have a 1c/sec flat rate on calls. but. i pay $79/month and at the end of the my account has a automatic refund (of sorts) applied, so anything up to $500 in calls/txt/etc is included in the $79.
i DO use my mobile for most calls. i use my landline maybe once a week, because it has a better speakerphone if im using it for a long time.
and. as for pricing. yes, vodafone have a 1c/sec flat rate on calls. but. i pay $79/month and at the end of the my account has a automatic refund (of sorts) applied, so anything up to $500 in calls/txt/etc is included in the $79.
i DO use my mobile for most calls. i use my landline maybe once a week, because it has a better speakerphone if im using it for a long time.
wallock
Sep 14, 01:14 PM
All I have to say is....
Encore of the John Legend performance will have the crowd going NUTS :rolleyes:
Encore of the John Legend performance will have the crowd going NUTS :rolleyes:
jmille44
Apr 22, 07:36 PM
I have an original mac portable sitting next to my 11". Laptop design has only downsized from this original beast and gotten faster.
I am not impressed yet. Incremental updates, nothing major or breakthrough.
That's just how it will always be. I'll hold onto this 11" for 8 years and guess what. It's replacement will be just an 11" roll out touch screen computer.
That is where this is going in 8 years and I am still not impressed.
I am not impressed yet. Incremental updates, nothing major or breakthrough.
That's just how it will always be. I'll hold onto this 11" for 8 years and guess what. It's replacement will be just an 11" roll out touch screen computer.
That is where this is going in 8 years and I am still not impressed.
swingerofbirch
Aug 31, 01:47 PM
I wonder if it will still be called the iTunes Music Store?
toddybody
Apr 30, 10:55 PM
1. Play doesn't mean it needs to be on max settings and max resolution, so I am correct the last 2 generation can run crisis and crisis 2 at minimum settings
at about a 1080p resolution, and minimum settings for crisis is still pretty amazing.
2. When you say "There is No Mac that can max crysis" .... are you excluding the 5870 mac pro?!
3. You are very similar to me.... however instead oh having a Mac and a Gaming PC rig, I have a gaming PC that is hackintoshed.
Let's agree to disagree about min settings being viable play;)
On your 5870 mention (which was a good card)...it's not going to allow max settings on that fancy cinema display (which I consider to be the staple of many pro owners...at least the ones I know personally). To me, a game should be played at native res, settings aside.
Not to distract from the original issue...Crysis is still a very relevant and great benchmark for current system test. BUT, last time I checked...this isn't a dictatorship:) stay well, glad to hear theres some hackintosh gamers out there in MR
at about a 1080p resolution, and minimum settings for crisis is still pretty amazing.
2. When you say "There is No Mac that can max crysis" .... are you excluding the 5870 mac pro?!
3. You are very similar to me.... however instead oh having a Mac and a Gaming PC rig, I have a gaming PC that is hackintoshed.
Let's agree to disagree about min settings being viable play;)
On your 5870 mention (which was a good card)...it's not going to allow max settings on that fancy cinema display (which I consider to be the staple of many pro owners...at least the ones I know personally). To me, a game should be played at native res, settings aside.
Not to distract from the original issue...Crysis is still a very relevant and great benchmark for current system test. BUT, last time I checked...this isn't a dictatorship:) stay well, glad to hear theres some hackintosh gamers out there in MR
zep1977
Mar 29, 12:10 PM
Apple should just shut down and give the money back to the shareholders. :rolleyes:
P-Worm
Sep 13, 08:58 PM
No way, it might actually happen...
P-Worm
P-Worm
Silentwave
Sep 18, 06:44 PM
A 10megapixel phone will record more clearly the low quality picture that comes from these tiny lenses.
It will be a much larger file, and won't look much better than a 3MP. Still, as the lenses improve this will change.
There IS a limit as to what can be done at a given price point. Eventually the cost of a good lens for it will outweigh the benefits.
Sticking a 10mp sensor in a phone to me is ridiculous. Very few people ever need 10mp, and if they do they get a real camera instead. Not only does the phone have a very limited set of potential lens features, but the lens will generally be low quality and poorly corrected unless you spend a significant amount of money for a good one. Even then size will become an issue.
All a 10mp phone will do is be unusable in anything but superb light. It'll probably have even worse dynamic range than existing phones, record murky detail, and have the poorest signal to noise ratio on the planet.
It will be a much larger file, and won't look much better than a 3MP. Still, as the lenses improve this will change.
There IS a limit as to what can be done at a given price point. Eventually the cost of a good lens for it will outweigh the benefits.
Sticking a 10mp sensor in a phone to me is ridiculous. Very few people ever need 10mp, and if they do they get a real camera instead. Not only does the phone have a very limited set of potential lens features, but the lens will generally be low quality and poorly corrected unless you spend a significant amount of money for a good one. Even then size will become an issue.
All a 10mp phone will do is be unusable in anything but superb light. It'll probably have even worse dynamic range than existing phones, record murky detail, and have the poorest signal to noise ratio on the planet.
Eidorian
Apr 14, 01:10 PM
The real question that I haven't seen anyone ask, is will this be Intel only or will other chipsets/manufacturers support it as well.It appears to be Intel only for now and it is a rather large controller compared to USB 3.0 ones.
Intel gave many other vendors a field day for profits by not supporting USB 3.0 on their PCH. Though this did drive boards costs up and certain vendors preferred to wait for Intel to simply include support. To be honest, it only appears to be Apple.
Intel gave many other vendors a field day for profits by not supporting USB 3.0 on their PCH. Though this did drive boards costs up and certain vendors preferred to wait for Intel to simply include support. To be honest, it only appears to be Apple.
econgeek
Apr 14, 12:21 PM
We really should be hoping that Thunderbolt succeeds and USB 3 fails. USB has always been a hack for lowest common denominator PCs and PC manufacturers who were not interested in investing in quality external communication.
USB is a poorly designed protocol, and rather than fix it, they have just extended it with USB3, and pretend like it is faster.
In real world use, USB3 is more like 2.5Gbps-- one way.
In real world use, Thunderbolt is 20Gbps-- both directions. (two 10Gbps channels)
This means Thunderbolt is effectively 20 times faster than USB3 -- if you maxed it out. Right now the two are competitive only because we don't have external devices capable of maxing out the bandwidth... but eventually we will.
I'll have to seriously considering delaying getting a new iMac until 2012 now. I don't want to be caught having to buy more expensive Thunderbolt external drives. Thunderbolt is great only if the drives are no more expensive than USB 3.0 drives.
What will be cheaper is whatever is the more popular. Thus we want Intel to delay support for USB3 and give thunderbolt time to be adopted widely. We really need to avoid another Firewire situation here, lest the entire world be held back by a crappy, second rate technology that is ubiquitous.
Look at the price difference of a USB 2 hard drive vs. Firewire- that is purely due to the USB market being bigger, it has no technological reason.
Think about the millions of people copying large files onto 1 or 2TB USB drives and how long they have to wait.... with no advantages of USB over Firewire.
USB2 is not even as fast as Firewire 400, let alone Firewire 800.
Drat, I just bought a MBP, first laptop upgrade in 4 years :( Hopefully we get a Thunderbolt-to-USB3 connector.
Those have been announced already at this weeks NAB. Apple will likely include USB3 in their laptops, though.
USB is a poorly designed protocol, and rather than fix it, they have just extended it with USB3, and pretend like it is faster.
In real world use, USB3 is more like 2.5Gbps-- one way.
In real world use, Thunderbolt is 20Gbps-- both directions. (two 10Gbps channels)
This means Thunderbolt is effectively 20 times faster than USB3 -- if you maxed it out. Right now the two are competitive only because we don't have external devices capable of maxing out the bandwidth... but eventually we will.
I'll have to seriously considering delaying getting a new iMac until 2012 now. I don't want to be caught having to buy more expensive Thunderbolt external drives. Thunderbolt is great only if the drives are no more expensive than USB 3.0 drives.
What will be cheaper is whatever is the more popular. Thus we want Intel to delay support for USB3 and give thunderbolt time to be adopted widely. We really need to avoid another Firewire situation here, lest the entire world be held back by a crappy, second rate technology that is ubiquitous.
Look at the price difference of a USB 2 hard drive vs. Firewire- that is purely due to the USB market being bigger, it has no technological reason.
Think about the millions of people copying large files onto 1 or 2TB USB drives and how long they have to wait.... with no advantages of USB over Firewire.
USB2 is not even as fast as Firewire 400, let alone Firewire 800.
Drat, I just bought a MBP, first laptop upgrade in 4 years :( Hopefully we get a Thunderbolt-to-USB3 connector.
Those have been announced already at this weeks NAB. Apple will likely include USB3 in their laptops, though.
EspressoLove
Apr 23, 01:14 AM
Yes it is a deal breaker. I actually spend quite a bit of time in bed after lights out surfing and reading, keeping up with stuff (I am doing it at this moment) with the brightness at the lowest level +1 to not disturb my wife, and its definitely not enough to see the keyboard.
...
If it is absolutely deal breaker for you then you might look at Glowing fluorescent keyboard stickers (http://www.amazon.com/Glowing-fluorescent-English-keyboard-stickers/dp/B004CEN1VU) ...
I'd think it's not nearly as good as Apple's backlight (and you can't ramp it up, or turn it off :eek:)
For me it would be nice to have KB backlight, but not a big deal
...
If it is absolutely deal breaker for you then you might look at Glowing fluorescent keyboard stickers (http://www.amazon.com/Glowing-fluorescent-English-keyboard-stickers/dp/B004CEN1VU) ...
I'd think it's not nearly as good as Apple's backlight (and you can't ramp it up, or turn it off :eek:)
For me it would be nice to have KB backlight, but not a big deal
kdarling
Apr 20, 10:30 AM
I thought this was an FCC mandate (to track GPS information for cellphones) after 9/11.
Not the date 9/11. Location is mandated for E911, the emergency call number.
However, in ATT's case, that location is determined on the carrier side alone, not by way of the phone itself as is done on say, Verizon.
Agree to that, but why is it being collected without permission?
If it's not sent anywhere, then it's almost certainly a simple programmer screwup, leaving in test code.
The data is actually collected by cell tower triangulation, not GPS.
To use the cell method (and I doubt it's triangulation - but that's a different topic), the cell id must be sent to Apple's location server, which then returns the computed general center of that cell, which is in an area about 1/3 of the tower's coverage.
The claim is that no data is going back and forth while the location is being collected, which makes no sense unless every iPhone has a huge cell database stored or cached internally. (Possible.)
Not the date 9/11. Location is mandated for E911, the emergency call number.
However, in ATT's case, that location is determined on the carrier side alone, not by way of the phone itself as is done on say, Verizon.
Agree to that, but why is it being collected without permission?
If it's not sent anywhere, then it's almost certainly a simple programmer screwup, leaving in test code.
The data is actually collected by cell tower triangulation, not GPS.
To use the cell method (and I doubt it's triangulation - but that's a different topic), the cell id must be sent to Apple's location server, which then returns the computed general center of that cell, which is in an area about 1/3 of the tower's coverage.
The claim is that no data is going back and forth while the location is being collected, which makes no sense unless every iPhone has a huge cell database stored or cached internally. (Possible.)
twoodcc
Aug 23, 07:30 PM
wow.....$100 million. yikes :eek:
Piggie
Apr 22, 11:24 AM
You don't own anything you download from the iTunes store now. You hold a license and are allowed to play or view it, but you do not own it.
Well no, not in the true sense of the word, but you do have the data and can use the data elsewhere.
In the same way technically you don't own the music on a record, or cassette or CD, but you do have the ability to use/listen to the music elsewhere.
I can just see this ability, which we have taken for granted since the 1st every records were sold to the public in around 1894 will soon, if big companies get there way and the public buy into it without thinking, will be coming to an end.
Well no, not in the true sense of the word, but you do have the data and can use the data elsewhere.
In the same way technically you don't own the music on a record, or cassette or CD, but you do have the ability to use/listen to the music elsewhere.
I can just see this ability, which we have taken for granted since the 1st every records were sold to the public in around 1894 will soon, if big companies get there way and the public buy into it without thinking, will be coming to an end.
blackstarliner
Sep 19, 03:15 PM
Afte reading the whole article, I get the feeling that Apple will be slammed in this Thursday's follow-up article about iTS.
Maybe, but he seems to mention that it was nicer somehow in one paragraph.
Plus, this review finds shortcomings in both systems:
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/business/technology/15548570.htm
Maybe, but he seems to mention that it was nicer somehow in one paragraph.
Plus, this review finds shortcomings in both systems:
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/business/technology/15548570.htm
silverblue3
Aug 28, 12:15 PM
Assuming they release it tomorrow, would it be available at the apple store right away(not the online store)? :confused:
daddy-mojo
Sep 15, 06:17 PM
the ipod wasn't a ground up design either.
portal player had the software, pixo designed the UI, toshiba had the new 1.8" hard drives and tony fadell who came up with the whole idea was an outside vendor who pitched the ipod to real networds first (who turned them down, genius).
now admittedly, it was apple, jobs and ives' that took a good idea and refined it to being the great product introduced in '03, but the ipod was an interesting break from apple's NIH syndrome. so much so that i question the TS report about apple going for a ground up design.
I still have and use my original 5gb ipod. Came out before christmas, but after 9/11. I remember thinking how expensive it seemed & the state of the country at that point and wondered if anyone would buy it, I got mine in the spring of '02.
portal player had the software, pixo designed the UI, toshiba had the new 1.8" hard drives and tony fadell who came up with the whole idea was an outside vendor who pitched the ipod to real networds first (who turned them down, genius).
now admittedly, it was apple, jobs and ives' that took a good idea and refined it to being the great product introduced in '03, but the ipod was an interesting break from apple's NIH syndrome. so much so that i question the TS report about apple going for a ground up design.
I still have and use my original 5gb ipod. Came out before christmas, but after 9/11. I remember thinking how expensive it seemed & the state of the country at that point and wondered if anyone would buy it, I got mine in the spring of '02.
Peace
Sep 4, 04:09 PM
Read on and be wowed:
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2016
Unfortunately that seemingly inadvertent leak was recanted today by the radio host
http://www.yourmaclife.com
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2016
Unfortunately that seemingly inadvertent leak was recanted today by the radio host
http://www.yourmaclife.com
netdog
Sep 5, 04:11 AM
I've got a feeling that AI is right on the money here. Next Tuesday is going to be exciting, and I expect that it will go according to the script that AI has suggested.
Mudbug
Sep 14, 12:14 AM
screen is scaled 16x10 format (don't know if that's right or not) - key shape/layout is unknown.
again, these are renditions, not the product itself. Although, I'd buy one...
again, these are renditions, not the product itself. Although, I'd buy one...
infidel69
Apr 14, 05:36 PM
Glad to hear it:D
Im really stoked to see the Ivy Bridge benchmarks...the i72600k blew my mind:eek: I feel bad for the enthusiast folks who bought a 980x :(
Enthusiasts had the 980 for atleast 6 months now and it's still faster than any sb cpu. Alot of those guys already had x58 mobo's anyway. Now if you purchased a brand new 12 core Mac Pro then then I agree with you.
Im really stoked to see the Ivy Bridge benchmarks...the i72600k blew my mind:eek: I feel bad for the enthusiast folks who bought a 980x :(
Enthusiasts had the 980 for atleast 6 months now and it's still faster than any sb cpu. Alot of those guys already had x58 mobo's anyway. Now if you purchased a brand new 12 core Mac Pro then then I agree with you.
Rocketman
Sep 1, 02:55 PM
While it sounds good, I don't see this happen soon at all. Also, Verizon disagrees with you, because they are pulling fiber to the homes in several (large) cities and more to come. The investment for 4G (802.16e I assume you're talking about)will be much too high while not providing enough guarantees it will be financial feasible in short and mid term to make shareholders feel confortable. But if it will, Apple will get my money :) But are there enough gadget geeks like me in the world? That will make or break the project.....
It boils down to suburban, rural, and rural-suburban access.
Currently Satellite will do it at high cost. (hughesnet.com)
2G will do it with crippled bandwidth and high cost.
POTS will do it with crippled speed and uncrippled cost.
Big cities are never the biggest nut to crack.
Rocketman
It boils down to suburban, rural, and rural-suburban access.
Currently Satellite will do it at high cost. (hughesnet.com)
2G will do it with crippled bandwidth and high cost.
POTS will do it with crippled speed and uncrippled cost.
Big cities are never the biggest nut to crack.
Rocketman
iGary
Sep 14, 10:15 AM
you can feel free to go ahead and explain yourself in your next post instead of just mindlessly making statements with nothing to back them up. thanks.
I already did that (explain myself) and you said I was ignorant for doing so - didn't leave me many options, really. :)
I already did that (explain myself) and you said I was ignorant for doing so - didn't leave me many options, really. :)
WillEH
Apr 25, 08:29 AM
Sounds like he doesn't drive, and just wanted this topic for attention. But I could be wrong..
On the other note. You wonder why insurance for young/new drivers is so high. :rolleyes:
I'm taking my test on the 24th May (UK), my insurance has been quoted to me at �1700.00 for the year. This is because I am male, and 20. So I must be a "racer boy"... I'm not sure what it's like in America. But the reason I get quoted that kind of insurance is because of drivers like you. It's very irresponsible of you to drive like that, and then brag about it. But I don't think it even happened.
On the other note. You wonder why insurance for young/new drivers is so high. :rolleyes:
I'm taking my test on the 24th May (UK), my insurance has been quoted to me at �1700.00 for the year. This is because I am male, and 20. So I must be a "racer boy"... I'm not sure what it's like in America. But the reason I get quoted that kind of insurance is because of drivers like you. It's very irresponsible of you to drive like that, and then brag about it. But I don't think it even happened.
