or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by thataveragejoe

Digitimes is a joke.   This is a big part of it. I don't see it happening until 2013.   The bigger obstacle is quad core ARM and integrated LTE is in its infancy for one. If all other rumors are to be combined, the new iPhone is darn near final and hitting production very soon. If Apple was going to rigorously test this new platform, they'd use more time. I'd fathom quad core would hit the iPad first anyway. You also have the A9 vs A15 power to performance arguments. 
  Odds are it would just be 1024x768 for obvious compatibility. PPI varies based on distance to face.  Not really. There are a variety of reasons why that wouldn't work. The obvious point is for a smaller sized tablet for which there appears to be a market for, but no one's properly executed yet.    Yeah, we know how well Steve thought one size fits all. Steve laughed at 'hummer phones' and now all phones except the iPhone have bigger screens and the next one seems to be...
They're code names. It's Android 4.1.
The Nexus tablet is NOT an iPad competitor by any stretch. It's a Kindle Fire competitor.    http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/27/us-google-tablet-idUSBRE85Q00Q20120627
Insert Digitimes joke here.
Don't play games that much but I noticed DrawSomething didn't work in Beta 1, works now in Beta 2 with no app changes. So far happier with Beta 2, 1 had serious lag issues all over (to be expected)
"Safeguard your data. By doing nothing." was a terrible tagline in all senses anyway.
  Was just about to point that out. Makes no sense. My assumption is that a similar spec'd tablet like surface made by Dell, HP, ASUS etc would cost that much but even still, it's just guessing. 
I apologize in advance if this is harsh, but for the basic retail sales staff (not genius) how are they really different than any other retail job selling a product? Just because the company is successful doesn't make their position anymore valuable. 
  This isn't the OJ trail, his is the only one that matters.     That's quite a case of denial you've got there, and it's still obvious you haven't read the decision. The judge rejected it because it didn't meet the legal qualifications for assessing damages. The same went for Motorola by the way. This has been something he's asked for very publicly numerous times. Everything Posner said is explained and documented with references. The only demonstration of bias here is...
New Posts  All Forums: