or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by sdbryan

The iPod touch is quite different from any tablet. It fits in your pocket and can be with you always (except if you are swimming). The same cannot be said of a tablet. I know I am definitely buying an iPod touch to replace my 3rd generation model and so is John Siracusa, so that is at least two. I hope there is decent availability but with the great screen, better camera, power efficient Bluetooth, better performance it easily justifies the $300 price for me. I think...
Gosh, is someone stuck back in the 90's? Explanations about a company of the scale that Apple has achieved in terms of a small group of fanatics is severely reality deficient. The only significant manipulation going on is creating products that are highly desirable to a mass audience.
I believe what this new variant of WiFi brings that is not already available with bluetooth is higher bandwidth and fidelity. Possibly because of its roots in cellphone headsets and power constraints the audio profiles for bluetooth are rather modest when it comes to audio fidelity.
Of course they have removed a feature. The customer is already paying to have his data moved across the network. AT&T is deciding there are some bits they won't move for a paying customer. It is none of their business how the customer uses those bits. This is what network neutrality is about. The actions of AT&T are outrageous.
This has to be one of the stupidest comments I have ever read on the Internet in20 years (yes, including years before the commercial web). I presume it must be trolling, but really, a prop in a sci fi movie as prior art? It is a prop, not an invention. The judge quite properly excluded it because the assertion was incredibly stupid and has no place in a court of law. The lawyers for Samsung should be (and might be) ashamed of themselves for such a frivolous motion.
If you carry it in your pocket, it is an iPod. If you carry it in some sort of backpack, it is an iPad. In most ways the current iPod touch and iPad are very similar. But I'll take out my iPod on a whim while bringing out my iPad usually means I'm seated or have a more compelling reason. Also, an iPod can usually be used one handed while an iPad usually requires both hands.
I own an iPad and iPod touch. That still doesn't solve the issue of being able to read iBooks on the Mac. Apple's failure to address this obvious omission is just embarrassing and an insult to Mac owners.
This may be crazy talk but I think it would be nice if Apple finally made it possible to read iBooks on the Mac. Amazon supports Kindle books on the Mac but Apple declines to support iBooks on the Mac. Go figure.
You have fallen victim to MacDonalds PR damage control. Try finding information about the whole issue of MacDonalds and coffee temperature that has not been spun by paid PR people. It is sad that paid liars tend to prevail because so much money is at their disposal.
New Posts  All Forums: