or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by ontheinside

I hope the change in Phil's title/role indicates that Tim has acknowledged he shouldn't be presenting at keynotes and that Phil was and is the perfect shoe-filler for Steve Jobs in terms of the keynotes.
That depends on 4G being ratified as a specific technology by that time. I don't believe it has yet. If they go down the LTE route it should be the iPhone LTE. It's "LTE Advanced" that is a 4G candidate technology. LTE (non-Advanced) isn't a candidate for being ratified as 4G.
I'm predicting Apple won't use the name iPhone 5 at all now because of the ridiculous rumour mongering this time around. I predict it'll be the iPhone LTE akin to iPhone 3G.
I had a feeling those cases were a Chinese con. Poor suckers who bought those things.
Nah, I'd have to guess you're new to watching Apple this closely. It's always been this way. That's why it's not worth reading into rumours. You'll only end up disappointed. I'm generally disappointed with every keynote and have been for about ten years now. When you're this seasoned, it's sensible to get cynical.
I think you're on to the fact that the slide is probably just a randomly made-up slide and has no bearing in fact. The iPhone 4 (CDMA) was the only iPhone ever to support CDMA. So the fact that they're listing the previous models with CDMA underneath is entirely wrong. Could that also mean they're wrong about the next gen iPhone???
As Apple usually disappoints, it's always best to err on the side of caution. I am placing my bets on an iPhone 4S being the only new iPhone. The redesign won't come until the entire Western world is ready for 4G.
I think you're absolutely right. This article is essentially making this up. The purpose of being able to use fibre optic in many things is about distance/cable length. The throughput will be down to the controller. I doubt these first generation controllers will simply increase the throughput when an optical cable is present. When Intel specified 100Gbps they meant that's its future potential. They didn't mean that right from the beginning that's going to be possible.
It's been practice in the past for the .1 release to be largely bug fixes and limited or no API changes. So it's not necessary for developers to gain early access to it until Apple is changing something major.
The article says the letter refers to the minor release .2. This is not accurate.
New Posts  All Forums: