or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Sevenfeet

According to the CNET article, it's not that Apple has an exclusive. Intel just thinks that PC manufacturers will probably wait until their next design cycles to implement. This is likely because Apple was the launch partner and co-developed the technology. Anyone can get the chipsets now but it'll take a while before we see it in every Dell or HP. On the other hand, motherboard manufacturer move a lot faster. i expect we'll see some boards from ASUS and their...
It's interesting to gauge the real product from the rumors that were flying around in the last 72 hours. Here's what did and didn't happen: Thunderbolt: Yep, we got that. 10 Gbps throughput (bi-directional!). Pretty cool. It also can provide 10 watts of power to the bus which is enough to charge an iPad...stay tuned on that one. Sandy Bridge: Yes, we got that too. Big surprise....no Core i3 anywhere in the lineup. Apple remembered that the word "Pro" is in...
One more thing...defenders of WebM forget that this whole bit of MPEG-LA checking out a competitor for patent violations has happened before. Microsoft developed VC-1 as an alternative to H.264 and offered it as an alternative for the potentially lucrative Blu-Ray market. They even offered it to standards bodies. Then the MPEG-LA looked at it and discovered that it was riddled with already used patents in the MPEG-LA patent pool. Microsoft had a couple of choices. ...
I'm sure Verizon would reply "Well, there's always Wifi".
You're probably thinking of Proloquo2go. You might think that $190 is expensive but in the land of assisted communications, the cost of it and an iOS device is dirt cheap. It's currently the best program out there on any platform and is easily customizable for the person's needs.
A couple of things...they say that Apple has known about this since late 2002. How exactly did they know? Second, assuming they did know and tell you to go to Hell, why didn't you sue in 2003-2004? Or when App store appeared in 2008? Why wait 8 years? Let's assume for a second the patent is legitimate (a huge stretch). There is legal precident for "You snooze, you lose". Xerox sued Apple over the UI to the Mac in 1990 and was thrown out for basically waiting too...
People also forget that mobile is more than just "handheld". Apple has been dealing with battery tech since the late 80's when the Mac Portable debuted with a lead acid battery. Years after building PowerBooks and even Newtons gave Apple enough expertise to manage iPod batteries which led to iPhones and iPads. Apple even now does their own proprietary battery chemistry.Strangely, you'd think that RIM which has been only building battery-enabled handhelds for a decade...
Palm had the advantage of putting out a more fully formed product in terms of an OS before Google with Android. It was nothing short of a miracle considering how long it took Google and Microsoft to do the same thing. The problem was that Palm as a company was in a terrible state...not unlike Apple in 1996-1997. With limited budget, they put most of their efforts in the software on the assumption that they still had enough expertise to do a decent piece of hardware...
I'm sure there were similar comments made inside the offices of Nokia, Palm and Motorola at the time. Assuming the report is true, it speaks to a failure of thinking outside the normal constraints of building a product...in other words, a lack of imagination. The iPhone's processor wasn't a huge surprise. ARM had been making or licensing processors in the mobile space since the early 90s....even the Newton used one. But Apple was able to use all the knowledge of...
Guilty! My wife loves mine but the kids are the one's that tipped the balance to get a second one. $499 later and an Otterbox Defender case and the kids have their own. Since one of my kids is special needs, it's a big boost to him.
New Posts  All Forums: