Apple prepping iPod nano with camera, three new iPhones - report - Page 3

I miss my dominatrix and Windows 95.

Yes, but were you allowed to take a cellphone photo?

What about iRon?

(iIron doesn't sound nice)

The problem I see is that putting it at the top would either push the screen down or make the device thicker if its behind the screen. I don't think those ideas will fly out of Apple, particularly the thicker part. Of course, this may be just one of those things that they have to make a choice/compromise, because they all have undesirable factors going against them. though personally, I think pushing down the screen a bit wouldn't be a big deal to my sensibilities, depending on how it's presented, and I think some visual slight of hand such as what Apple does with their notebooks right now.


Let me get this right, you are going to watch a feature length movie composed and designed for screens measured in several feet or meters, and run for well over an hour, on a 2" screen? Really, in the case of the nano (the root of this thread), that's what you seem to be arguing. If that's true, I wish I had your fortitude. At any rate, I don't see why feature films is a justifiable reason to push the screen aspect ratio of a hand held device in a certain way. Just as movies don't stick with one aspect ratio, I don't think hand held devices should be forced into any one of them either.

If you want to talk about digital still cameras, most are 4:3 or 3:2. Some offer a 16:9 mode, but that's not so common, and I think those cameras usually offer it by cropping pixel rows the top and bottom, not by adding pixel columns to the sides. Even two of my HD camcorders have a 4:3 sensor, they record HD by using only a 16:9 frame within that, not recording the top and bottom portions.

I have to wonder if we're really talking about 3 almost identical new iPhones - differentiated just by their radio version. I think this could be about the US' unique choice of frequencies, compared with Europe's choice of frequencies, and lastly different TD-SCDMA standards in China.

ie: It's not about speed of networks at all (just frequencies).

In Australia, Telstra has the fastest network (14 or 21Mbps) on 850Mhz 3G (like AT&T). Vodafone & Optus use 900Mhz and 2100Mhz (more European) and haven't set it up as fast as Telstra yet. When we buy Nokia's 3G phones we have to choose whether it's the 850Mhz OR 900Mhz UMTS version - since there isn't a single UMTS chip that does 850 AND 900 3G. They both support the same GSM and 2100Mhz 3G.


So I'd hope that each phone would have a faster ARM chip, 802.11n, videography, HD playback etc. - then it's just customised to 3 cellular technologies. It would give some credibility to the rumours of Apple talking with Sprint (a 4th cellular technology - though I doubt it came to anything).


I wonder when the iPod will jump to the iPhone ARM processor and OS.... even without touch screen or apps etc.

It'd be interesting to have iPods & iPhones & new AppleTV all being great ways of getting iTunes shows on your TV.

Clearly this all means that teckstud and Dunks go to the same gym where people f**k and as such phones are banned. In fact, techstud and Dunks probably have "run across" each other. Enjoy dropping the soap in the showers, fellas... Hey man, it's all cool.

All of this has nothing to do, of course, with the new iPhone 3G.

BTW I like the shiny black back. Wait... liking shiny black backs... this may have something to do with the first paragraph above.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say he was joking.

Phones are banned at most gyms, fool.
But you've probaly never even been to one - that would interfere with your fetish for shiny black plasticy backs.

Someone finally picked this up.. except, they mean fifth-generation iPod nano.

Third-gen was the short fat one, which I quite liked incidently.
They have it right futher down in the article.