or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by addicted44

Nope. That was speculation. Hence the "I think". Unlike analysts (and many commentators here) I don't claim my speculations to be the absolute truth. Just informed guesses.
It also runs better on my iPhone 4 than iOS6 did. Although, I am seeing a few (rare) crashes, but did not see any at all with iOS6.
I don't understand Apple's strategy with the 5c. It doesn't seem priced to sell (the problem isn't that it is "too expensive" at $100 with contract. The problem is that it is only $100 less than the 5s, which is a much better product). At the same time, Apple is advertising it far more than they are the 5s. So it seems like it is being marketed to sell. I think the production issues with the 5s really caught Apple off guard, forcing them to promote the 5c like the latest...
 Hah...I noticed the same thing just a few seconds after you. Glad I wasn't the only one who thought that was a puff piece.
Btw, that CNet article absolutely reads like a paid advertorial. It probably isn't as obvious as that, but I bet it's something like "Hey CNet, we will give you exclusive interviews with all our top guys if you write a positive article about the Gear's development". And while even CNet isn't going to stoop as low as to call the turd that is this "smart"watch a decent product, they made it about Samsung, and how impressive they were in quickly delivering this (crap) product.
I dont understand something.   Samsung has been working on this since 2011, but at the same time they finished it only in "6 months" with massive changes in the last few weeks of release displaying the strength of their vertical integration.   So which is it? 2 years, or 6 months?   And the review claims it is style over substance. While that does seem to have been Samsung's attitude while developing this POS, I will quibble and call it "lack of style over substance"...
 Hmm...So Apple should build a device which has 5 times the most expensive component in the iPhone and sell it for the same price as the iPhone. Okay. Little Pedro needs to go back to his meds.
 In what way does it limit the device from an end user perspective. And to counter your question about 256mb of RAM, What is wrong with you? Why are you demanding only 4GB. Why not 64GB of RAM? Or 256GB of RAM? Or Gazzillion GB of RAM? Like most things in life, you need to balance out several different consequences. And Apple has decided that 1GB allows them to meet that balance the best. And considering the success they have had (and that their devices have always been...
 Agreed. Qualcomm aint going anywhere. You can't be in the cellphone business and not see some of your money go to Qualcomm. Apple would be stupid, at the very least, to dump Qualcomm based on these comments (even if they don't use Qualcomm CPUs and SoCs, they do use their networking chips, which are the best in the business and will only get better).
 RAM sucks up a lot of power when idle. Adding more RAM than necessary is a surefire way to battery power hell.
New Posts  All Forums: