or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Crowley

 The Moto is a bigger watch, of course it looks more bulky.
^ Crikey those are some dramatic words.  A "nightmare" on the maps?  Why?  You can see a little bit more in the horizontal and vertical on the second photo, just not in the diagonal.  That's fine, and it's even good because a rectangular watch of the same dimensions would be so much blockier and large on a wrist.  Hell, more in the vertical and horizontal is even how our eyes work, so how is it a nightmare?   Yes, aligned text may get cut off a bit when it's at the...
 You missed a bit... 
I think we're arguing the same point. If the iPhone 3G and 3GS are of the same versioning, as with the 4 and 4S, or 5 and 5S, then there was only one version between the original iPhone (surely the 1?) and 4.  The fact that it was called the 3G instead of a regular number obfuscates things, but it was either the 2 or the 3.  I say 2, you say 3, let's call the whole thing off  
Why?  The user will never experience the 6+ at the 6 resolution.  The comparison is of user experience of performance, and in that the iPhone 6 comes out best.
They skipped iPhone 3. I don't think numerical consistency means all that much to Apple or Microsoft.  It's just marketing.
Since you have to touch the screen to answer the phone, and the incoming calll screen only ever shows in the correct orientation (IIRC), I don't think this is all that much of a problem.
 I think I was pretty clear. When businesses fail there is fallout.  People lose jobs, investment comes to nothing, customers lose continuity, and possibly money that they paid for a service that will not be delivered.  If the free markets "efficiency" is predicated on businesses competing and some of them failing, then I think its "efficiency" is a misnomer.  The failures are waste.
If businesses are failing, then they're not so efficient, are they?  To be in a constant state of competition is also to be in a fragile environment, where price trumps quality, and which can be conducive to critical mistakes getting made.  The free market is not perfect, and it is rarely free either. Plus, government has scale, and a wealth of in-house experience and specialism on its side. It can be very efficient (obviously it is not always so, I never claimed that)....
^ I don't think anyone sensible is arguing for unlimited government. The question is where the limits are. Clearly yours are quite low.
New Posts  All Forums: