or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by melgross

No, one was. I still have that one. It's pretty strong.
It's probably being used for protection too. Despite skin being much softer than glass, very small particles can get on skin and scratch the bottom. If it's dusty outside, that dust, which partly consists of fine particles of quartz, will scratch the glass.For record playback, and you remember those, I hope, a diamond stylus wears out after 1,000 hours of play, even though the pure vinyl used is much softer than the diamond stylus. Again, dust.
Sapphire has been used for phone covers for years. The ridiculously expensive Vertu phones, previously owned by Nokia, have been using sapphire. I'd like to know what the breakage of their phones are.
It would shatter if it weren't bonded to the screen below.As I said, the 4 had glass up to the corners, unprotected. On both sides. That made it more likely it would break, even with a case, but much less likely than without the case. It's unfortunate that the way it was dropped that it did break. It's most likely to break if it lands on a corner.We can look at two popular plastics. Acrylic and polycarbonate. Acrylic has better light transmission. But that doesn't prevent...
But it's interesting that Apple has been adding to the background processes for years. This year I believe it will be the biggest expansion to multitasking yet. That will consume more RAM, SoC time, and battery life.
You really shouldn't be putting your phone in you back pocket in the first place.
I'm not sure what one thing has to do with the other. Fortunately, I WAS the boss.But did you really read my post? I'm talking in reference to the fact that for two years running, Apple doubled performance of their SoC, and the year before that, it was a 50% improvement for the CPU. When compared to those very significant improvements, yes, 25% is measly.We have to look at this in reference to what they wanted to do this year. In the past, they kept the power draw about...
When this publication, and others, were discussing this new chip, well before it was announced, as being a four core design, I disagreed, and stated that it would, again, be a two core design. I'm on record with that.The reason I gave, and I'm still giving, is that per core performance is very important. We've seen that with Apple the past couple of years, where their iOS products perform very well, beating out their competitors, though losing a bit in multicore...
I see what Apple is doing. And some of it is pretty good. But I was talking about this SoC in particular. And as this SoC goes, it's not even close! Understand that Apple uses an ultra low power i5 for their cheapest, and lowest performing Macbook Air. The A8 isn't even in the same continent in performance.Are they working on another chip that could be? Sure. But we're not talking about some mythical chip. We're talking about one that exists.People have to stop defending...
Really? Show where it's a rewriting. It's not, you should know. What I said is exactly correct. If you don't know that, then you should look back. You seem to have a very limited way of looking at things. You really think that Samsung's phones haven't cut into Apple's sales? How naive is that? Right now, one third of the market here, in the USA is in phones larger than 4.7".
New Posts  All Forums: