or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by caliminius

It's a game controller. It's purpose is already strictly defined. I imagine it could be implemented in apps that aren't actually games, like anatomy apps allowing you to navigate the human body with the controller, but that still doesn't make it any less ridiculous to carry around a large controller for use with an iPhone.And beyond limitations Apple puts on the iPod touch, the iPad is pretty much just a larger device. Which isn't a bad thing. If my iPad could make phone...
I can't understand why anyone would want a separate controller unless the game was being streamed to the AppleTV. Especially for an iPhone. Let's carry around an accessory that's twice as big as the phone and figure out some way to prop the phone so you can use the controller. This might be the best iOS compatible controller so far but that's not really something to brag about right now. And their commercial is ridiculous. Two teenagers huddled around the tiny iPad screen...
You don't need to "shove" the phone in someone's crotch, just drop it to your waist like you would if you were normally carrying it. Easy and now you can be facing 90 degrees away from your actual target (like the imaginary perv at the urinal would be). And it's going to be at or near the perfect height for the crotch "money shot" unlike Glass which is stuck on your head. And if you actually happen to be sensitive enough to realize someone's phone camera is pointing at...
Cell phones represent the same threat to privacy as Google Glass but you don't seem paranoid about people taking penis shots with them. As a new device, Glass represents even less of a threat because a) the level of ownership is so low there's probably as much chance being struck by lightning then having a Glass owner standing at the urinal next to you (not even factoring the tiny chance it's a person looking to get a money shot) and b) the activity is far more conspicuous...
What does price have to do with anything? Consoles are in the category of set top boxes, i.e., you put it on a shelf and probably never move it again.And maybe this will illustrate my point. If Apple and Roku have 80% of the narrowly defined "set-top streaming device" category but represent only 20% of actual streamed content, doesn't that paint a very different picture of the "dominance" of these devices?This article is trying to paint Apple as one of the leaders of...
Without factoring in game consoles, these numbers are just smoke and mirrors nonsense. Where would those percentages fall factoring in the PS3/4 and Xbox 360/One? Considering how Netflix announced last December that the PS3 was the most used set-top device accessing their content, it would clearly present a very different picture. Where would they fall factoring in TiVo and connected TVs? They'd probably be reduced back to niche players where they actually fall.
What part of fiscal year do you not understand? That's 150 million in a year, or an average of 37.5 million per quarter.
I'm not "everybody" but I want an iPhone with a bigger screen. It's my biggest complaint with the device and will probably be the reason I replace my iPhone 4S with an Android device. I was okay with the screen size until I bought an iPad but now it feels tiny (I'm reminded of Jobs' famous "sand paper" comment). Sorry if you don't understand why somebody would want a larger screen iPhone but at the end of the day you're not "everybody" anymore than I am.
Considering how they have extremely similar interfaces, I'm going to call BS on this. Google Maps even has bigger buttons so it's actually easier to use than Apple Maps. Apple Maps confusing uses what looks like an information icon (the "i" in the circle) to access map settings and everything just seems further away and not as easy to access. Although it might be nonstandard, it's also nice Google having access to the map settings without having to make your way through...
I don't care who designed it, it's just not that attractive.
New Posts  All Forums: