MikeTheC
Nov 25, 10:46 PM
All this talk about Palm needing to modernize their OS, or it is outdated, or needing to re-write is absolutely hilarious.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
kavika411
Mar 29, 08:43 AM
I'm glad Amazon rolled this out before Apple in the sense that I hope it pushes Apple to roll out a cloud subscription that handily beats Amazon's offering.
MarcelV
Sep 11, 10:30 AM
Actually, how about vPod instead? I believe it's easier to say that than Video iPod.
And the logic here is..... iPod = iPod with iusic? If Apple had that logic, we would have seen an mPod, right? Or pPod for the iPod Photo. But I have seen them doing thinks that would throw real logic out of the door, before, so yeah, why not vPod for the video one.
And the logic here is..... iPod = iPod with iusic? If Apple had that logic, we would have seen an mPod, right? Or pPod for the iPod Photo. But I have seen them doing thinks that would throw real logic out of the door, before, so yeah, why not vPod for the video one.
Small White Car
Apr 26, 02:32 PM
I'm worried about you.
There's a huge difference between a phone (or at least a device that contains a phone) and a tablet.
But then again, everyone has different tastes. Some can't tell the difference between a Steak and SOS... :eek:
And there's a huge difference between a 17" Macbook Pro and a 11" Macbook Air.
But they both get counted as laptops, don't they?
And what's your reasoning for why iPods don't get counted here? Because they don't have monthly contracts? How does that make sense? Should we only count iMac sales if they're hooked up to a monthly ISP or something?
There's a huge difference between a phone (or at least a device that contains a phone) and a tablet.
But then again, everyone has different tastes. Some can't tell the difference between a Steak and SOS... :eek:
And there's a huge difference between a 17" Macbook Pro and a 11" Macbook Air.
But they both get counted as laptops, don't they?
And what's your reasoning for why iPods don't get counted here? Because they don't have monthly contracts? How does that make sense? Should we only count iMac sales if they're hooked up to a monthly ISP or something?
Mike Oxard
Mar 29, 09:24 AM
For $1000 you would go a long way to getting a mac mini with a 1TB drive and get it hosted at macminicolo (http://www.macminicolo.net/). Send them a secod hand mini and it'd be cheaper. Not sure how nice the experience would be streaming stuff to your phone over 3G though :o
Thomas2006
May 6, 06:07 AM
I'm not saying this rumor is true, but I am saying "never say never". They are Apple, they will make it work no matter what processor they go with. :)
Steve did say they had a goal of making OS X CPU/platform-agnostic. The Accelerate.framework, which came out before Apple announced they were switching to Intel, was the first publicly announced piece of this plan. Remember when all the 1337 coders said they could write better hand optimized Altivec code than what Apple could produce with their layer/wrapper? The people that used the Accelerate.framework had that much less to do to get their applications Intel-native.
Steve did say they had a goal of making OS X CPU/platform-agnostic. The Accelerate.framework, which came out before Apple announced they were switching to Intel, was the first publicly announced piece of this plan. Remember when all the 1337 coders said they could write better hand optimized Altivec code than what Apple could produce with their layer/wrapper? The people that used the Accelerate.framework had that much less to do to get their applications Intel-native.
GregA
Nov 27, 01:28 AM
Too big! <snip> I probably want some functional capabilties (e.g. iPhoto red eye and retouch, or simple text/excel type input) but I DO NOT NEED TO RUN PHOTOSHOP ON MY TABLET! I will transfer my data/photos/video onto my main computer to do that kind of work."
Agreed. Not a computer... but connecting to it.
I always thought the direction Apple would go with a tablet was as a consumer device extension to iPhoto, almost how iPod extends iTunes.
Interesting idea. I guess if you could make it a little thicker than an iPod nano but 7x4" (or 9x5"?) it could be a neat picture frame. It could also do eBooks.
Then again if you use the screen casting in iChat then each tablet in the house could run it's own low power apps, say dashcode apps, front row, iChat, then hook into a more powerful machine to run fullblow applications.
Gives Apple a nice little ecosystem of complimentry products.
Yes... complimentary products. A very simple device that ALSO can connect and get extra functions.
Agreed. Not a computer... but connecting to it.
I always thought the direction Apple would go with a tablet was as a consumer device extension to iPhoto, almost how iPod extends iTunes.
Interesting idea. I guess if you could make it a little thicker than an iPod nano but 7x4" (or 9x5"?) it could be a neat picture frame. It could also do eBooks.
Then again if you use the screen casting in iChat then each tablet in the house could run it's own low power apps, say dashcode apps, front row, iChat, then hook into a more powerful machine to run fullblow applications.
Gives Apple a nice little ecosystem of complimentry products.
Yes... complimentary products. A very simple device that ALSO can connect and get extra functions.
ChrisNM
Apr 25, 10:06 AM
Bzzt. Wrong. Everyone using iOS has already given their consent for tracking by accepting the License Agreement and not globally turning off Location Services. You can't claim you didn't know or give consent when it's on page 2 of the License Agreement of the fracking phone's OS:
I seem to recall Facebook trying to use the same defense with all of its privacy issues and it didn't work so well.
Personally, I think this whole thing is a tempest in a teapot, but falling back on the license agreement is pretty weak.
I seem to recall Facebook trying to use the same defense with all of its privacy issues and it didn't work so well.
Personally, I think this whole thing is a tempest in a teapot, but falling back on the license agreement is pretty weak.
DTphonehome
Jul 30, 09:20 AM
Even so, the USA is in dire need of a decent cell phone. The fact that the Razr is so popular says it all. The Razr is a terrible phone (along with most other Motorolas for that matter). And the rest of the selection available is pretty sad too!
It's true...but I don't see it changing anytime soon. Americans are used to getting free or cheap phones when they sign up for a carrier contract. The carriers subsidize the cost so that expensive phones can be had for <$200. They RARELY pay full retail price ($300-$700) on a phone...mainly only when they break theirs and still have time on their contract. The way I understand it, the rest of the world pays full retail everytime they want a new phone. Is this right?
It's true...but I don't see it changing anytime soon. Americans are used to getting free or cheap phones when they sign up for a carrier contract. The carriers subsidize the cost so that expensive phones can be had for <$200. They RARELY pay full retail price ($300-$700) on a phone...mainly only when they break theirs and still have time on their contract. The way I understand it, the rest of the world pays full retail everytime they want a new phone. Is this right?
PygmySurfer
Apr 7, 09:34 AM
So, what is Apple doing with a bunch of 7" touch screens, since Jobs said "7 inch tablets are dead on arrival"?
I also don't recall RIM ever giving a date before April 19th.
I also don't recall RIM ever giving a date before April 19th.
HOMBRESINIESTRO
Mar 27, 11:32 AM
There is probably some truth in it after all:
The iPhone 5 will come with iOS 5 in June/July and then this fall, we will see iOS 5 for the iPad 2, making it feel like an all new iPad. Perhaps they even call it iPad 3 internally.
This is also a perfectly sane explanation of the rumor of iOS 5 coming this fall - it will be, but it's the iPad version "the source" is talking about.
The iPhone 5 will come with iOS 5 in June/July and then this fall, we will see iOS 5 for the iPad 2, making it feel like an all new iPad. Perhaps they even call it iPad 3 internally.
This is also a perfectly sane explanation of the rumor of iOS 5 coming this fall - it will be, but it's the iPad version "the source" is talking about.
�algiris
Mar 28, 09:55 AM
The iPhone 4 is already dated relative to other phones on the market. To have a phone on the market for 18 months without an update is insane.
It was good 3 months ago, it's good now and it still be good 3 months from now. It only makes sense to wait and get everything in order if a major change/upgrade is coming. Competition is not going anywhere.
It was good 3 months ago, it's good now and it still be good 3 months from now. It only makes sense to wait and get everything in order if a major change/upgrade is coming. Competition is not going anywhere.
alvindarkness
Apr 10, 12:02 PM
I'm not saying that 2 is an incorrect answer, the equation is ambiguous. However, I assume the equation is written that way because it is done on a forum without formula writing ability and writing-
48(9+3) = 288
Cristiano Ronaldo Photo
cristiano ronaldo real madrid
ronaldo cristiano real madrid
Cristiano Ronaldo wallpaper
Wallpaper Cristiano Ronaldo:
cristiano ronaldo wallpaper
48(9+3) = 288
thogs_cave
Aug 11, 09:57 AM
Damn, and I just got my new MacBook yesterday
Plus if my MacBook gets lonely and depressed he can talk to my 1st gen PowerMac G5
Shasta
I really doubt that the MacBook will be updated that quickly. It wouldn't make much sense, but then again we are talking Apple.
And, don't worry. My MacBook and 1st-gen G5 get along just fine. :D
Plus if my MacBook gets lonely and depressed he can talk to my 1st gen PowerMac G5
Shasta
I really doubt that the MacBook will be updated that quickly. It wouldn't make much sense, but then again we are talking Apple.
And, don't worry. My MacBook and 1st-gen G5 get along just fine. :D
wizard
Mar 29, 04:06 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Globalization is a race to the bottom, and nobody seems to understand that while the 3rd world rises up, the 1st world inevitably must slide down.
It's not a zero sum game. Western economies will increasingly shift toward higher skilled professions as the BRIC countries take over manufacturing and mid level white collar work. The U.S. must step up its educational training in order for its many low paid service workers to move up the ladder, though.
Are you not familiar with the concept of an idiot? Seriously there is only so much you can do with some people. This whole idea that education can solve all our problems is bogus. Some people are beyond education and others like Steve J. Find a different path.
Beyond that you can't really have an economy without some sort of manufacturing. You know it is half of the goods and services phrase.
In any event Apples problems are age old and directly related to relying on a single supplier. Hopefully they can get this material they need manufactured in another plant. If not Apple will end up having some pretty bad quarters.
Globalization is a race to the bottom, and nobody seems to understand that while the 3rd world rises up, the 1st world inevitably must slide down.
It's not a zero sum game. Western economies will increasingly shift toward higher skilled professions as the BRIC countries take over manufacturing and mid level white collar work. The U.S. must step up its educational training in order for its many low paid service workers to move up the ladder, though.
Are you not familiar with the concept of an idiot? Seriously there is only so much you can do with some people. This whole idea that education can solve all our problems is bogus. Some people are beyond education and others like Steve J. Find a different path.
Beyond that you can't really have an economy without some sort of manufacturing. You know it is half of the goods and services phrase.
In any event Apples problems are age old and directly related to relying on a single supplier. Hopefully they can get this material they need manufactured in another plant. If not Apple will end up having some pretty bad quarters.
Vulpinemac
Apr 25, 09:25 AM
I don't think that is the point here. Apple, arguably the greatest and most customer-centric company with the world's best smart phone, the best OS and magical appliances (at least, that is what I'm being told here over and over again) collects location data without your prior knowledge or consent. If you become a member of MacRumors it is your own, deliberate, decision. But I already can see where this is going. Cue the drone-like Apple defenders, I hear them coming ;)
The drones, any more, are the anti-Apple Zealots, who know less about what they argue than they do about their own favorite hardware or OS.
The drones, any more, are the anti-Apple Zealots, who know less about what they argue than they do about their own favorite hardware or OS.
Mjmar
Mar 26, 10:00 PM
Fall iPhone 5?
ChrisA
Aug 4, 12:19 PM
My best gues is that Apple will make their entire lineup 64 bit. This should be easy for them to do and at the same time will give them a way to distance themselves from all the other PC makers. Apple would have a very easy to understand advertizing statment "All macs are 64 bit" Easy to understand is key.
DavidLeblond
May 4, 03:01 PM
Why put it in the App Store if it isn't an App?
Because it has a payment system and delivery system in place.
But it isn't an app. It's an OS upgrade.
Because it has a payment system and delivery system in place.
But it isn't an app. It's an OS upgrade.
WestonHarvey1
Mar 31, 09:33 AM
Sabertooth.
That sounds more like a retconned name for Macintosh System Software 1.0.
That sounds more like a retconned name for Macintosh System Software 1.0.
spaceballl
Mar 27, 12:27 AM
That's all wonderful, but can I have 64GB on my iPhone now? OK THX.
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.
alvindarkness
Apr 10, 01:21 PM
Who said that this an equation? What is the variable that is unknown?
2 is still winning!
You don't need a variable for it to be an equation.
Definition of Equation - An equation is a mathematical statement that asserts the equality of two expressions. Equations consist of the expressions that have to be equal on opposite sides of an equal sign.
Definition of Expression - In mathematics, an expression is a finite combination of symbols that are well-formed according to the rules applicable in the context at hand. Symbols can designate values (constants), variables, operations, relations, or can constitute punctuation or other syntactic entities.
2 is still winning!
You don't need a variable for it to be an equation.
Definition of Equation - An equation is a mathematical statement that asserts the equality of two expressions. Equations consist of the expressions that have to be equal on opposite sides of an equal sign.
Definition of Expression - In mathematics, an expression is a finite combination of symbols that are well-formed according to the rules applicable in the context at hand. Symbols can designate values (constants), variables, operations, relations, or can constitute punctuation or other syntactic entities.
thisisahughes
Mar 27, 07:46 AM
I think this rumor can be readily discredited.
Apple has been trying for a few years now to streamline product updates so that they happen like clockwork once per year.
The past few macbook pro updates have been in the spring/late winter, macbooks are seemingly being updated prior to the Back to School deal, iPods are updated in September towards the end of the student sale, iPhones have launched in June every year, iPad and iPad 2 both began selling in the spring, and while iMacs haven't had a clear pattern emerge yet, it appears to be coalescing around 1 year and I think it's safe to say that as time goes on, a yearly cycle will become dominant.
Despite the news of Lion being almost ready (or ready) for Golden Master, I think it's more probable that Lion is put on hold until iOS 5 is ready to launch as happened with Leopard and to a much lesser extent, Snow Leopard. Apple makes far more money and gets far more worldwide press from the iOS family than it does the OS X lineup. At this point, not launching an iPhone and a new OS for it in June would go against 4 years of pattern and practice, and would cause too much negative publicity, especially in the face of a constantly evolving market where a few months of lag time can cost a company vital market share and mindshare.
wow. perfect.
Apple has been trying for a few years now to streamline product updates so that they happen like clockwork once per year.
The past few macbook pro updates have been in the spring/late winter, macbooks are seemingly being updated prior to the Back to School deal, iPods are updated in September towards the end of the student sale, iPhones have launched in June every year, iPad and iPad 2 both began selling in the spring, and while iMacs haven't had a clear pattern emerge yet, it appears to be coalescing around 1 year and I think it's safe to say that as time goes on, a yearly cycle will become dominant.
Despite the news of Lion being almost ready (or ready) for Golden Master, I think it's more probable that Lion is put on hold until iOS 5 is ready to launch as happened with Leopard and to a much lesser extent, Snow Leopard. Apple makes far more money and gets far more worldwide press from the iOS family than it does the OS X lineup. At this point, not launching an iPhone and a new OS for it in June would go against 4 years of pattern and practice, and would cause too much negative publicity, especially in the face of a constantly evolving market where a few months of lag time can cost a company vital market share and mindshare.
wow. perfect.
No comments:
Post a Comment