or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by MarquisMark

Slightly off topic... why did Apple start with the name A4? It always throws me off because their naming is skewed from the ARM naming. It would make sense if they started with A1 (i.e. Apple chip 1). As it is, I have to remember A4=A8, A5=A9, (A6=A15?). I know the average user doesn't care, but as a techie and a bit neurotic, it just messes with my head. :)   Not complaining, just wondering why.  
  And Safari is essentially KDE's Konquerer with Apple modifications.  
To be honest, I don't see the difference between devs using UDID or their own system. The end result is still them being able to track users. Unless Apple is forbidding tracking in general, I don't really see the point in this. Also, does it say anywhere whether Apple or iAds is also not allowed to track using UDID?
Ah, well specific to phones would be customization (more icons per page, more tabs in the browser, etc.). I also know guys who get into the Android kernel to do speed tweaks, overclocking, or speed governing for power savings. That kind of stuff is half for the end result and half for the act of doing it (aka "because it was there" mentality).
Tinkering is all of the above. It is modifying aesthetic or functional aspects of something. Changing the background wallpaper is a type of tinkering. It is also a way of discovering how something works (like disassembling a clock to see it's inner workings).Some people just like to tinker because it's fun. It doesn't have to have a purpose or end goal. Other people want something to "just work". Nothing wrong with either way. Everyone is different which is why having...
While I agree it shouldn't be iPhone5, I'm not convinced it's gonna be iPhone6. You'll just get dummies asking "what happened to the iPhone5?" I think Apple kinda painted themselves into a corner here. They already fixed the naming problem caused by the oddly named 2nd Gen "3G" by calling the 3rd Gen "3GS". So the name and the phone were sync'ed for the 4th. Then they release the "4S". Whatever rationale Apple marketing had for "4S", will probably apply to naming the 6th...
This idea isn't necessarily restricted to software. Let's say we have two rechargeable batteries that look the same and output the same voltage and current. They could be using completely different chemicals to generate the energy. Do we allow a patent for "cylindrical rechargeable batteries" or for "cylindrical rechargeable batteries using a Nickel Cadmium chemical reaction". There a fine line between function and implementation that needs to be clearly defined and up...
It's kinda funny. In a lot of ways, Apple is now what IBM was back then. Cutting edge tech, market leader, tightly controlled environment, people either loved them or hated them. Not sure how that happened. So the question is, who is the new Apple?
Now this is a real patent. Developing a hardware and software solution to the multi-touch problem is real innovation. I'm sorry, I love AAPL and all but the patents these guys have been fighting over (vague or look/feel or "...on a mobile" type patents) just seem so... I don't know... petty. Whether this is going to hurt GOOG et al. shall be seen. Don't know what tech is in the current androids so I can't say but this isn't the only way to do multi-touch (see: jeff han...
I feel like this article is just trying to push the "Android sucks, iPhone rules" view. But all I see from this is Verizon is greedy... screwing everyone it can, in any way it can. In other words, what's new?
New Posts  All Forums: