or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Suddenly Newton

Please. This is the last hurrah for the compact camera, before smartphones snuff them out once and for all. It'll be yesterday's news, like the QuickTake 100 or the Sony Floppy Disk-based Mavica.
Boom! Phrasing!
There's no disputing that. But superimposing the iPhone 5 on top of the molding was a little misleading. That's no better than people who stretch the iPhone 5 into a bigger graphic and assume that's what the iPhone 6 will look like. The molding is information enough. No need to project an iPhone 5 on top of it to "complete" the picture. We still don't know what it will look like (exactly), and there are questions about the screen size left unanswered.
It's a negotiating tactic.
It's an iPhone 4S in the photo.
I wasn't suggesting anything of that nature. How did you get that from my post? I know it is about adopting Apple's file format.
I agree with this. And really, is this Microsoft who was famous for NIH (not invented here) syndrome, adopting an Apple format this early in the game? I'm shocked!
Oh cool! I'd let Microsoft do it. Because it won't matter. It's not worth the effort to block. Besides, people have reverse engineered Microsoft Office file formats all the time. It's not like this is unprecedented.
If the "screen" in the schematic drawing is indeed 53.7mm wide, and we assume that maybe the cutout for the screen is larger than the screen itself, then how long would a 16:9 screen be? Answer: 95.5mm. That would yield a 109.6mm diagonal screen, or 4.3" screen.A 16:9 screen would be too short for the molding.
 I don't think it's the same resolution. If you believe that the inset rectangular area shown in the drawing is the screen, then it would appear to have a 2:1 aspect ratio instead of the current 16:9 aspect. One possibility is that've added more pixels so it's a 1280x640 display. That's 2:1.
New Posts  All Forums: