Amazing Iceman
Mar 22, 04:46 PM
well said. it's hard to even have a civil conversation here anymore. not sure what the majority of the age group here is now, but the discussions since i've joined here just a couple of years ago seem to be on the decline with immaturity. there are a handful of respectful and open minded people who do back up their thoughts with details and sense, but you'd have to wade through a lot of "fanboy" (i hate that term) jargon to sift the ones worth replying to.
True. The debate gets too personal, and starts loosing credibility after a while.
If this was a live debate, there would have been a shootout already.
Cool off people, and provide solid arguments to sustain your point.
True. The debate gets too personal, and starts loosing credibility after a while.
If this was a live debate, there would have been a shootout already.
Cool off people, and provide solid arguments to sustain your point.
mattsh
Sep 19, 06:24 AM
to be honest - i've been looking at the lenovo offerings and i'm attracted. i have been a diehard apple fan my entire life, but if all it means is i have to use tiger clone (aka vista) but at least have hardware that is current with technology i'll buy.
so yes, apple has a monopoly, but they can't be to jack ass about it because people will start to go other places no matter how good ilife is.
there is no excuse that one of the top 5 notebook venders in the united states on intel architecture is behind this much its competitors.
You know I've been thinking about this. Does Apple really NEED to update now? I mean what's the purpose of the update? Yes there is 64bit, but other then that? Not much. A LITTLE more speed, but OSX already runs pretty fast... faster then Windows would with comparible hardware. OSX already does more then Windows does and does it better. Maybe Apple doesn't NEED To stay up with the latest processor fad because they are already better then the competition.. maybe the competition NEEDS faster hardward because they OS is so bloated it runs slowly unless they have it. Ever think of that? Honestly, I'm 100% happy with my current MB which does not have the new processor in it. I launch most programs in under a second.:D
so yes, apple has a monopoly, but they can't be to jack ass about it because people will start to go other places no matter how good ilife is.
there is no excuse that one of the top 5 notebook venders in the united states on intel architecture is behind this much its competitors.
You know I've been thinking about this. Does Apple really NEED to update now? I mean what's the purpose of the update? Yes there is 64bit, but other then that? Not much. A LITTLE more speed, but OSX already runs pretty fast... faster then Windows would with comparible hardware. OSX already does more then Windows does and does it better. Maybe Apple doesn't NEED To stay up with the latest processor fad because they are already better then the competition.. maybe the competition NEEDS faster hardward because they OS is so bloated it runs slowly unless they have it. Ever think of that? Honestly, I'm 100% happy with my current MB which does not have the new processor in it. I launch most programs in under a second.:D
mccldwll
Apr 27, 08:34 AM
I think it was not a bug, nut data waiting to be sent to Apple for profit generating purposes.
Well........in Full of's case, nut data certainly was accurate.
Well........in Full of's case, nut data certainly was accurate.
Blue Velvet
Mar 23, 06:11 AM
Libya is more like Bosnia than Iraq. A moment of force has the potential to change the scope of the conflict, hopefully for the positive, in a way that a full-blown invasion would merely complicate. That's the central part that fivepoint, who is merely interested in making another partisan screed, is ignoring.
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
lsvtecjohn3
Apr 19, 03:50 PM
Well Rovio (Angry Birds) thinks otherwise:
http://www.insidemobileapps.com/2011/03/13/angry-birds-android-ios/
"The company said in December that it expected to make $1 million per month from Android by the end of 2010. (...) Now that the app has seen about 100 million installs across all platforms, Rovio is not getting the same initial bump in paid download revenue from Apple’s app store. On Android, the company doesn’t offer paid Angry Birds apps, but sees recurring revenue from advertising."
So they make more money with their free Android version than they do with the paid iOS version.
Apple Has Paid $2 Billion To App Developers (And Other Key Stats)
[http://www.techspot.com/news/42006-apple-has-paid-over-2-billion-to-app-developers.html
How much has Google paid?
And how many other developers feel that way as Rovio ... a few. If marker share was the end all then why is all the new top apps coming out for iOS first then Android later? Android going to have a large market share iOS will probability have around 20- 25% market share and if people continue to keep paying for apps I don't see anything changing this.
Why I prefer iOS Development over Android, from a Java guy
http://www.jeviathon.com/2011/01/why-i-prefer-ios-development-over.html
Android is a mess, say developers
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/04/04/android-is-a-mess-say-developers/
IOS Easier For Developers Compared To Android
http://www.mobile88.com/news/read.asp?file=/2011/4/5/20110405035733&phone=iOS-easier-to-develop-Android-Symbian
http://www.insidemobileapps.com/2011/03/13/angry-birds-android-ios/
"The company said in December that it expected to make $1 million per month from Android by the end of 2010. (...) Now that the app has seen about 100 million installs across all platforms, Rovio is not getting the same initial bump in paid download revenue from Apple’s app store. On Android, the company doesn’t offer paid Angry Birds apps, but sees recurring revenue from advertising."
So they make more money with their free Android version than they do with the paid iOS version.
Apple Has Paid $2 Billion To App Developers (And Other Key Stats)
[http://www.techspot.com/news/42006-apple-has-paid-over-2-billion-to-app-developers.html
How much has Google paid?
And how many other developers feel that way as Rovio ... a few. If marker share was the end all then why is all the new top apps coming out for iOS first then Android later? Android going to have a large market share iOS will probability have around 20- 25% market share and if people continue to keep paying for apps I don't see anything changing this.
Why I prefer iOS Development over Android, from a Java guy
http://www.jeviathon.com/2011/01/why-i-prefer-ios-development-over.html
Android is a mess, say developers
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/04/04/android-is-a-mess-say-developers/
IOS Easier For Developers Compared To Android
http://www.mobile88.com/news/read.asp?file=/2011/4/5/20110405035733&phone=iOS-easier-to-develop-Android-Symbian
dejunky
Apr 6, 02:54 PM
And THAT's why I didn't jump the gun on a MBA yet. Now give me the new processors, and a backlit keyboard, and Apple's got my $.
(Be nice if they could bump up the battery life on the 11 too)
I couldn't have said it better myself!
Although I would change the $ to a � ;-)
(Be nice if they could bump up the battery life on the 11 too)
I couldn't have said it better myself!
Although I would change the $ to a � ;-)
skunk
Mar 1, 04:55 PM
The legal definition of marriage according to the government of the United States of America "...'marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife..."I can't help it if you live in a backward country. I was talking about civilised norms. And whatever your cockeyed definition, it is still not equality.
59031
Jul 14, 03:04 PM
Power Supply at the top is REALLY stupid.
iMacThere4Iam
Mar 31, 10:09 PM
They all gripe and moan about Apple, then they all copy Apple. Gripe some more, copy some more. And on it goes...
Chris Bangle
Aug 11, 10:14 AM
We always have "next tuesday"
notabadname
Apr 25, 03:32 PM
There is also a difference in whether the phone keeps and uses data to function and perform services, and whether that data is transmitted to Apple and used by Apple for tracking. The burden of proof (it would seem - in my non-laywer opinion) would be to show that Apple is specifically collecting that data and using or storing it. Not just that the phone keeps it resident, on-board for use by Apps which the user may "allow" to use location data.
I'm betting Apple is smart enough not to be collecting the data outside the SLA.
I'm betting Apple is smart enough not to be collecting the data outside the SLA.
bibbz
Jun 14, 06:02 PM
@NJRonbo...
Reservations with a pin attached DO guarantee you a phone on launch day. This is how our DC knows how many to send. Otherwise there would be no point in doing a reservation. Basically if a store takes 20 reservations, they will get 20 phones plus a few extra based on how many reservations they took. If a store tells you the reservation will not guarantee you a phone, go to a diff RS bc that store doest know what theya re talking about.
:apple: says we cannot call it a "pre-order" and we cannot take money for the iPhone 4 before launch day!
Reservations with a pin attached DO guarantee you a phone on launch day. This is how our DC knows how many to send. Otherwise there would be no point in doing a reservation. Basically if a store takes 20 reservations, they will get 20 phones plus a few extra based on how many reservations they took. If a store tells you the reservation will not guarantee you a phone, go to a diff RS bc that store doest know what theya re talking about.
:apple: says we cannot call it a "pre-order" and we cannot take money for the iPhone 4 before launch day!
ohaithar
Aug 22, 07:37 AM
I bought GT PSP and its as if the developers actively tried to suck all the enjoyment out of the series.
GT for the PSP did suck
GT for the PSP did suck
Ahheck01
Apr 12, 10:27 AM
The SuperMeet stage show aka FCP (or if **** hits the fan then iMovie Pro) preview begins at 7 pm.
7pm Vegas Time? If so, for others scheduling your availability like me :cool::
Pacific Time: 7:00pm
Mountain Time: 8:00pm
Central Time: 9:00pm
Eastern Time: 10:00pm
7pm Vegas Time? If so, for others scheduling your availability like me :cool::
Pacific Time: 7:00pm
Mountain Time: 8:00pm
Central Time: 9:00pm
Eastern Time: 10:00pm
Raidersmojo
Jun 16, 05:33 PM
I work for radioshack and they were doing a nationwide release at the same time for iphone 4, because when we did the evo release, the east coast took all the phones before the west got anything.
this time they did a major release at 12:00 Central. totally screwed everyone since everyone waited for 1 to generate pins.
luckily, got two for customers, and four for myself (had my dad buy them)
two 32 Gigs and two 16's. I hope they come because our manager was talking about how potentially we might not get the phone.
this time they did a major release at 12:00 Central. totally screwed everyone since everyone waited for 1 to generate pins.
luckily, got two for customers, and four for myself (had my dad buy them)
two 32 Gigs and two 16's. I hope they come because our manager was talking about how potentially we might not get the phone.
runninmac
Aug 17, 01:01 AM
This is a very dumb question but is Photoshop running under rosetta in this test?
If Photoshop is that is nuts.
Oh, please believe it is.
:eek:
If Photoshop is that is nuts.
Oh, please believe it is.
:eek:
JAT
Apr 6, 04:09 PM
YOU apparently havent used either at any length.
I have said nothing that would relate to usage. Do you know what "apparent" means?
I have said nothing that would relate to usage. Do you know what "apparent" means?
leekohler
Mar 3, 10:41 PM
Being gay is not a sin, homosexual actions are a sin.
If that's what you want to believe, fine. Respect my belief that it's perfectly fine, and stop making laws against me.
If that's what you want to believe, fine. Respect my belief that it's perfectly fine, and stop making laws against me.
Cheffy Dave
Mar 25, 10:44 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) Mobile/8G4)
Bullsh|t. If Apple is really done with Lion, then they should only be charging $29 for it (if that), like 10.6. More confusing scrollbars, tiny window controls and a better graphics/OGL support...add in the touch-screen readiness and you might have a quick $29 update.
STOP!There is always WINDOZE!:rolleyes:
Bullsh|t. If Apple is really done with Lion, then they should only be charging $29 for it (if that), like 10.6. More confusing scrollbars, tiny window controls and a better graphics/OGL support...add in the touch-screen readiness and you might have a quick $29 update.
STOP!There is always WINDOZE!:rolleyes:
heisetax
Jul 14, 03:43 PM
This is good news for me.. it will make it easy to resist buying one this year. No 3ghz xeon, no bluray, no new case design.
This means that the 2.7 GHz G5 of a year ago or more would still be a high for CPU speeds for the PowerMac/MacPro line. We already have dual dual 2.5 GHz G5 a year ago. An increase to 2.66 GHz means that either 2008 or 2009 we will see the promised 3 GHz PowerMac/MacPro.
Any bets on which year it will be?
Bill the TaxMan
This means that the 2.7 GHz G5 of a year ago or more would still be a high for CPU speeds for the PowerMac/MacPro line. We already have dual dual 2.5 GHz G5 a year ago. An increase to 2.66 GHz means that either 2008 or 2009 we will see the promised 3 GHz PowerMac/MacPro.
Any bets on which year it will be?
Bill the TaxMan
macgeek2005
Aug 19, 06:08 PM
I'm sure you know this. But just a reminder that you would be dealing with an extremely fragile and tricky upgrade process that could destroy your motherboard or fry the processor without the latest cooling system from Apple. Just my own caution against attempting this. Not worth the risk I think. There will be a better video card with the Dual Clovertown Mac Pro as well as other changes to the system fixing bugs discovered between now and then. Too many changes in the works for me to want to fool with such a complex system.
You make me mad you know that? All over the boards I see your posts with your weird avatar and your extremely critical opinions on everything. Why don't you wait until 2010 and get a 32 core system from intel. Why don't you wait until nobody uses computers anymore. This is just a phase in the history of the world. There will be something beyond computers in another few hundred years. Why buy a computer if it'll be obsolete at some point?
Professional users are out there using G5 towers and even G4's. They're using MacBook Pro's, which are much less powerfull than the Quad Mac Pro right now. I mean, what's your problem? Will there ever be a computer good enough for you?
There are people like you out there, but i've never met a case as extreme as you. I mean, you even went as far as to say that theres very little you can do with 4 cores. Where the **** did you pull that from? Actually, don't answer that question.
I think that you're secretly some evil worker from microsoft trying to stall people from buying Mac Pro's!
If everyone could all of a sudden comprehend exactly how powerful the current machines are, anyone who was thinking of buying one, would buy one.
But you're out here with your "Clovertown is better" and your "Bugs must be worked out" and your this and your that.
You know what? I have three Rev. A iMac Core Duo's in my house, and not a single one of them has had a bug, a crash, a freeze, or a problem of any sort. Rev. A.
HMMM. Maybe Apple does know how to do Rev. A. Just sometimes? Maybe? Perhaps?
Especially with their Quad Xeon 64 Bit Workstation which they've been working on for over a year?
Do you realise that in the procces of making these computers they work out the bugs themselves? They use the computers, and find all the bugs possible, and work them out?
What do you think all those apple workers have been doing for the last year and a half, if not working out bugs on their machines?
For anyone out there who has been needlessly influenced by this guy to wait for a system that will only be outdated by the one that will come after it, please uninfluence yourself, and buy the stupid computer that you want, when you want it.
Jeeshh!!
You make me mad you know that? All over the boards I see your posts with your weird avatar and your extremely critical opinions on everything. Why don't you wait until 2010 and get a 32 core system from intel. Why don't you wait until nobody uses computers anymore. This is just a phase in the history of the world. There will be something beyond computers in another few hundred years. Why buy a computer if it'll be obsolete at some point?
Professional users are out there using G5 towers and even G4's. They're using MacBook Pro's, which are much less powerfull than the Quad Mac Pro right now. I mean, what's your problem? Will there ever be a computer good enough for you?
There are people like you out there, but i've never met a case as extreme as you. I mean, you even went as far as to say that theres very little you can do with 4 cores. Where the **** did you pull that from? Actually, don't answer that question.
I think that you're secretly some evil worker from microsoft trying to stall people from buying Mac Pro's!
If everyone could all of a sudden comprehend exactly how powerful the current machines are, anyone who was thinking of buying one, would buy one.
But you're out here with your "Clovertown is better" and your "Bugs must be worked out" and your this and your that.
You know what? I have three Rev. A iMac Core Duo's in my house, and not a single one of them has had a bug, a crash, a freeze, or a problem of any sort. Rev. A.
HMMM. Maybe Apple does know how to do Rev. A. Just sometimes? Maybe? Perhaps?
Especially with their Quad Xeon 64 Bit Workstation which they've been working on for over a year?
Do you realise that in the procces of making these computers they work out the bugs themselves? They use the computers, and find all the bugs possible, and work them out?
What do you think all those apple workers have been doing for the last year and a half, if not working out bugs on their machines?
For anyone out there who has been needlessly influenced by this guy to wait for a system that will only be outdated by the one that will come after it, please uninfluence yourself, and buy the stupid computer that you want, when you want it.
Jeeshh!!
skunk
Mar 21, 02:58 PM
I see your point. Personally, I'd been hoping Obama might hold ground on issues such as torture/surveillance/getting out of wars, and was fully prepared to accept fiscal policies I would hate (as a conservative--NOT a Republican, mind you) if we'd get some of the aforementioned issues. Gave up on any hope of that when PATRIOT got extended, though...on a few social issues (gay rights) Obama has distinguished himself admirably from his predecessor. However, in the big picture, we've still got a shill for big business and big government/brother, who is overextending the American military with conflicts in which we cannot afford to participate.Strangely enough, I agree with you entirely. :confused:
Virtualball
Apr 19, 02:32 PM
It appears from the F700's standpoint though the natural progression became TouchWiz.
Wrong. Just because a company released one phone that has a similar look as the iPhone doesn't mean their current offerings are a progression of that phone. It's a true testament as to who browses this forum if you honestly think that. The F700 didn't run an advanced OS, so it probably ran Symbian or used BREW. That means all Samsung did was create a theme. How does a theme they made 3 years prior to the Galaxy S mean it's a progression on the coding and UI they built? It doesn't. Here's a list of every Samsung phone: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Samsung_mobile_phones Now, pick out one of those and say it inspired all of their new devices 3 years later.
The F700 was an iPhone clone with a keyboard. It's depressing that people are saying that the iPhone copied its own clone.
Wrong. Just because a company released one phone that has a similar look as the iPhone doesn't mean their current offerings are a progression of that phone. It's a true testament as to who browses this forum if you honestly think that. The F700 didn't run an advanced OS, so it probably ran Symbian or used BREW. That means all Samsung did was create a theme. How does a theme they made 3 years prior to the Galaxy S mean it's a progression on the coding and UI they built? It doesn't. Here's a list of every Samsung phone: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Samsung_mobile_phones Now, pick out one of those and say it inspired all of their new devices 3 years later.
The F700 was an iPhone clone with a keyboard. It's depressing that people are saying that the iPhone copied its own clone.
jvmxtra
Apr 6, 04:03 PM
wait, theres other brands of tablets out there?
love it!!
love it!!
No comments:
Post a Comment