or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by JDW

Precisely why Apple is idiotic for spending this kind of money ("chump change" or not) merely on "AdWords." It's ridiculous for a company as well-known as Apple to do this, and as an AAPL investor for more than 11 years, I do not like it at all. Another part of it that I hate is the fact that Apple is paying this kind of money to Google, whom we all know is the New Microsoft, intent on copying anything Apple is successful at.Steve Jobs needs to do the right thing and cut...
Thank you, Samurai! My feeble eyes overlooked that part. Being an owner of the Oct. 2009 iMac i7 2.8GHz (8GB RAM), it would be interesting to see that older i7 iMac model added to the same performance graph. The 0.13GHz faster CPU alone probably wouldn't make the 2010 i7 model "feel" noticeably faster than the 2009 model, but I am curious about the impact of the 1066 RAM vs. 1333 RAM. Anyway, thank you.
AppleInsider, thank you for this interesting article. However, you really need to clarify the exact model as defined by "Late 2009 iMac" in your performance comparison bar graph. I assume that late 2009 model was NOT an i7 as the bars show the 2010 i7 to be almost 200% faster, which doesn't make sense. So what CPU and Clock is it?
That should be fairly easy. Think about it. Does anyone honestly think the iPhone 4 prototype was the first stolen device Gizmodo has every paid money for? (And yes, folks, Gizmodo knew full well it was stolen too.) And do you honestly think they are not buying stolen property now? Therefore, it's just a matter of keeping a close eye on Gizmodo and then bringing their unlawful activities to light.
If only more people would consider the Positive news like this and cast aside the negative. But some of the sinister elements in the media and blogosphere do have a vested interest in seeing more people NOT buy an iPhone 4, thereby driving down AAPL stock so they can buy low and later sell high when all this news blows over. For those of you who doubt me, consider this has happened...
Your last sentence answers your initial questions. It's not so much the cry-baby consumer, it's the money-seeking law firms. Lawyers pray upon the weak-minded to get them involved in class action suits. But wicked lawyers aside, I still say the FCC deserves the brunt of the blame here. Under the guise of looking out for your health, they devise rules that limit the performance of your wireless devices.
If anyone needs to be taken to court over this, it is the sly FCC, not Apple. The regulatory hand of the US government is what really limits your reception, folks.
What are the implications of this? And I am quite shocked no one is talking about it! Are we now going to see web pages grow larger in terms of filesize, chewing up bandwidth, only because web designers are now going to start saving bitmap graphics at higher resolutions than 72dpi, so they display more sharply on the iPhone 4?
Both are easily fixable. It's called, "wait for the 2nd Gen." Seriously. I really wanted to purchase one of these things, but I refuse to do so over one point: it has no camera and I want to video conference with it. Hopefully there will be intense pressuring on Apple over the next year to add this, such that they will break down and do it in Gen. 2. I think it is technologically feasible even if the so-called "camera mount" turned out to be the slot for the ambient...
I enjoyed the intro, "Steve Jobs of Apple COMPUTER." The word may have been dropped from the official company name 3 years, but it lives on in our minds.
New Posts  All Forums: