or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Rayz

Not for some time. The typical use case for a iPad (short documents, web-surfing, email) means that they'll get upgraded less often. TouchID won't help that much in the consumer market because most iPads never leave the house.The upsurge will come if/when the IBM deal takes hold The iPad will replace the cash till over the next decade or so.Apple is laying waste to existing markets, which is why it is hungrily searching for new ones.
Gotta keep those ad-clicks comng I remember when AI used to actually produce really interesting insider info. Now it's just a hit-whoring regurgitator for other sites if you want proper reporting then go to MaObserver.
Apple didn't deny that the services exist; they denied that they were created to help law enforcement agencies crack iDevices.Good to see that Apple isn't letting the hit-whoring websites dictate the narrative completely. It's good practice for Apple's PR department which has been asleep at the wheel for years.
Right, it's a pair of headphones. There's not a lot that anyone can do with headphones that won't make them look like . . .  another pair of headphones.   I think a lot of people are missing the point. Samsung is done copying Apple's products. They've tried it, been allowed to get away with it, and the result is that their profits are collapsing while Apple's are still rising.   This is the next move: try to copy Apple's strategy, even though they don't really...
Dammit ...    The new programming language!   Now I get it!
Did any of these so-called analysts see this coming?   When the man said he was doubling down on secrecy, he meant it.
 This sounds more like a serious co-ordination problem than a design fault with the iPhone  
 Very true.  But what's worse is Google having access to your eating habits, sleeping habits, exercise regime, organ monitoring data gathered over time . . . Your medical records only get updated when you go to your doctor, and people only do that when they're sick. How much would the insurance companies pay to historical medical data that ran from when you bought your GoogleWatch, right up until the point you make a claim?
 Thanks for pointing this out; it's even worse than I originally thought. So they said they wouldn't do something, then they did it anyway.  So they lied, basically. What if they said they wouldn't sell my private data, then did it anyway?What if they said they won't pass my tracked medical data to insurance companies, then did it anyway? How far does this 'misrepresentation' go? Again, thanks for correcting my mistake, but I think I'll pass on 'Google Health'  anyway....
 Mmmmm. http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/09/f-t-c-fines-google-22-5-million-for-safari-privacy-violations/  Seems like 'privacy' is a dirty word around Google HQ; not the kind of people I'll be trusting with my health details.
New Posts  All Forums: