You got me there. I wasn't able to watch Sky King because there was to much snow on the tv set and the humming noise was either audio feedback or the sound of the engines, it was hard to tell.
You aren't nearly as funny as you think you are, and you still haven't responded.
And Sky King was a good show, though I barely remember it.
The other way to look at it is that Apples exclusive agreement with AT&T is disgraceful and they ned to be held accountable when and where ever possible. It is that old phrase " you made your bed now lay in it".
Really? A bit of hyperbole their, no?
Without AT&T's blind (literally!) trust in Apple there would be no iPhone. We know this because Verizon admitted they passed on it first, and still continue to do so.
There would be no Android, Pre, or Verizon wi-fi enabled Blackberry were it not for AT&T's willingness to work with Apple. We would still be working under the anacharist model of phones being developed for the phone companies instead of end users.
Whether you like them or not, for whatever reasons, you should at least respect them for the extremely significant role they played in getting all smartphone users to where we are today.
For those who continue to have difficulty in understanding Apple sticking with and supporting AT&T, you really need to think about the above
Sprint even tells people to turn the 4g radio off if they are out of coverage. I think they shouldn't have to, but the technology isn't there yet to detect and automatically toggle.
GPS and a database?
It's not technology, but a lack of focus on the end user experience.
What's the saying - don't confuse stupidity with laziness?
What I'm surprised at is that they don't have a private WiFi station there just for the demos.
They probably did but there is only so much radio spectrum . It looks like interference did them in.
What this means is there will be new restrictions on what is allowed in the in hall next year. Hopefully they will start streaming the keynotes live again and this whole live blogging thing will be once again moot.
Curious how the iPhone now has a far superior display to the iPad. Why wasn't the iPad granted a 'retina' display?
Cost and availability? It's far easier and cheaper to make a small technically complex display - effective yield rates are much higher as a bad section affects fewer whole displays. I have no doubt economies of scale and improvements in production techniques fostered by the new iPhone will eventually transfer to the iPad.
And I'm sure exclusive agreements with manufacturers will maintain those Apple funded advancements as an Apple exclusive. Well, until the next leapfrog in tech
Quote:
Also why no 64gb option? The iPod Touch has had that for ages now. 32gb seems awfully small these days.
I too was very disappointed in that. Now I'm seriously considering waiting to see if there is a six month bump with a 64 GB option
I'm not a programmer any more, but there are ways of binding a device. I can't say how, exactly, but it has to do with passwording the system.
How do you password the device in my pocket that is broadcasting?
Again, expect restrictions on devices (metal detectors and strip searches?) before next year. Or hopefully they will just stream the $&?!@ keynote live again
Meaning 'Google like' conversation? That's BS. Many people have been requesting for this feature for ages. The reason why it's needed it because many people use POP accounts.
Isn't that kind of like complaining you don't have a mouse in DOS?
Seriously, I know people still use POP, but why should I have sympathy for them? Almost as bad as a complaint I saw on another forum that a person couldn't secure WEP - well duh, it's old and broken
Bowser, at a guess you are a first year grad student, very likely you have some links with UC Berkely and you do some TA to help you pay the bills. You have been told about the dean (Levi) been in the Guinness book of records for having (in his youth) the best vernier acuity recorded. Everybody in Berkley is told that the day they arrive.
You are right, about Vernier acuity being just a very specific (almost irrelevant) case, in which brain processing helps. For normal tasks like reading, watching videos, or playing on a computer screen, vernier acuity is irrelevant. What maters is normal visual acuity.
As a vision grad student (and teacher!) you should also understand the concept of visual angle. The minimum resolution the normal human eye can see is about 1.5 minutes of arc. This with a typical eye of 21mm length, matches about the foveal photoreceptor size of 1 to 1.5microns. At a distance of 20-30cm (normal near point of well corrected subject) 1.5 minute of arc corresponds closely to about 300dpi. That is what the "retina" display means. Nothing else. And that is why the 300dpi standard is in place.
Also, you should as a vision sciences teacher know that detailed vision only happens at the fovea, which is only about 300 microns. In the rod free area (very centre of the fovea, and what is used for reading and recognising faces) there are no more than 20,000 cones. In total the fovea has some 200,000 cones. So at 300dpi at 2in X2 in square has 360,000 dots. More than your fovea can cope with.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bowser
I teach vision science in a major California, university, the claims about this display are patently false.
First, I'll overlook the claim about what the human retina can display, that's just wrong. The retina doesn't display anything, it's not a projector. Rather, it is an information gather device that has light projected on to it. It's nothing like a display at all. And, even if SJ meant display as in a projection screen, which is only partially correct, it doesn't change facts about the acuity of human visual perception.
The human retina is actually capable of picking up details finer than the width of a human photoreceptor itself. This is sometimes measured with what's called vernier acuity, the ability to detect if two lines are offset from one another.
Further, there are literally BILLIONS of receptors in the retina, with MILLIONS in a linear inch. There is no way a display of 326 ppi is higher resolution than the millions of receptors in a linear inch in the retina.
I'm very saddened to see this misrepresentation of the capabilities of the display in the new iPhone. It will only give the trolls food.
But not too tempted since it's illegal and if the FCC ever gets terribly annoyed they can fine you for $11K and throw you in jail for a year as an example...
Yes, I am familiar with that work, I earned a PhD in Perceptual Psychology with an emphasis on visual attention, psychophysics, and physiological psychology at UC Santa Cruz. I now teach Perception at another UC campus now.
But your understanding of optics, and geometry don't help you. As I have pointed out in my previous posts, there are a number of factual mistakes in your arguments that undermine your credibility.
While you are correct in your assertions about the vernier acuity, the numbers you provide are wrong, the figure of 8minarc is baseless and wrong. Photoreceptors are much smaller than that!
Vernier acuity is a very interesting topic, and it has its applications. Reading and playing games is not one of them. But correct me please.
The limits of normal human vision (every day tasks) is set by the arrangement of retinal cones, but most importantly the size of the PSF on the retina. The combination of these 2 factors gives you the standard 300dpi. If a PhD in visual perception did not give you the background needed to understand this very basic concept, and being able to differentiate between normal every day activities, and super-resolution in specialised tasks like vernier acuity, you PhD training left many holes behind, that will have to be filled in over the years.
Hard to believe but I don't have an iPhone yet, BUT I am on Verizon -
Can you buy the iOS 4 phone and not hook up with AT&T and then only use it on WiFi?
I know they would add mucho $ to the price. I like all the new features-5MP cam, HD video, etc. But, I don't need AT&T since my reception is bad anyway at my home.
Is this possible?
Your best bet on this would probably be eBay or Craig's List in a couple weeks. I'm sure you'll be able to get a gently used 3GS that would run iOS 4 then, or are you specifically looking for the iPhone 4 hardware. The other option would be to wait for the iPod Touch update in a few more months, but there again you may be missing some features/functionality you can only get with iPhone 4 hardware. Just a couple thoughts.
Oops... About the time I hit submit I caught the line I read over where you were specifying the iPhone 4 hardware features as being what you liked. Oh well.
I haven't read a single post in this thread, but will go back and do so, so this may already have been mentioned.
On the Apple.com website, it reads:
"
While most phones have only one microphone, iPhone 4 has two. The main mic, located on the bottom next to the speakers, is for phone and FaceTime calls, voice commands, and memos. The second mic, built into the top near the headphone jack, is for making your phone and video calls better. It works with the main mic to suppress unwanted and distracting background sounds, such as music and loud conversations. This dual-mic noise suppression helps make every conversation a quiet one."
Notice it says the main mic is place near the "speakers".
Does anyone know if another speaker has been added, either near where the mic is, or internally similar to the way the iPod touch has it?
Greg
Dual mics are for noise cancellation. Just like on the Nexus One. So why would they add another speaker?
Comments
You got me there. I wasn't able to watch Sky King because there was to much snow on the tv set and the humming noise was either audio feedback or the sound of the engines, it was hard to tell.
You aren't nearly as funny as you think you are, and you still haven't responded.
And Sky King was a good show, though I barely remember it.
Why in the world would you have done that to someone who is speaking the truth?
Definition of a fanboi right here... Talk about missing the context!
The other way to look at it is that Apples exclusive agreement with AT&T is disgraceful and they ned to be held accountable when and where ever possible. It is that old phrase " you made your bed now lay in it".
Really? A bit of hyperbole their, no?
Without AT&T's blind (literally!) trust in Apple there would be no iPhone. We know this because Verizon admitted they passed on it first, and still continue to do so.
There would be no Android, Pre, or Verizon wi-fi enabled Blackberry were it not for AT&T's willingness to work with Apple. We would still be working under the anacharist model of phones being developed for the phone companies instead of end users.
Whether you like them or not, for whatever reasons, you should at least respect them for the extremely significant role they played in getting all smartphone users to where we are today.
For those who continue to have difficulty in understanding Apple sticking with and supporting AT&T, you really need to think about the above
Sprint even tells people to turn the 4g radio off if they are out of coverage. I think they shouldn't have to, but the technology isn't there yet to detect and automatically toggle.
GPS and a database?
It's not technology, but a lack of focus on the end user experience.
What's the saying - don't confuse stupidity with laziness?
What I'm surprised at is that they don't have a private WiFi station there just for the demos.
They probably did but there is only so much radio spectrum
What this means is there will be new restrictions on what is allowed in the in hall next year. Hopefully they will start streaming the keynotes live again and this whole live blogging thing will be once again moot.
Otherwise the outcry will be epic
Curious how the iPhone now has a far superior display to the iPad. Why wasn't the iPad granted a 'retina' display?
Cost and availability? It's far easier and cheaper to make a small technically complex display - effective yield rates are much higher as a bad section affects fewer whole displays. I have no doubt economies of scale and improvements in production techniques fostered by the new iPhone will eventually transfer to the iPad.
And I'm sure exclusive agreements with manufacturers will maintain those Apple funded advancements as an Apple exclusive. Well, until the next leapfrog in tech
Also why no 64gb option? The iPod Touch has had that for ages now. 32gb seems awfully small these days.
I too was very disappointed in that. Now I'm seriously considering waiting to see if there is a six month bump with a 64 GB option
It would seem as thought they would just pick the channels they wanted to use, and lock them from other use. That should solve the problem.
Huh? If I have a mifi, Android phone or jail broken iPhone, how is Apple supposed to prevent me from using a channel? I'm broadcasting too..
That is what I think. Honestly.
I think until a deal with Verizon makes sense for Apple you can put what you want in one hand an poo in another and see what fills up first
I'm not a programmer any more, but there are ways of binding a device. I can't say how, exactly, but it has to do with passwording the system.
How do you password the device in my pocket that is broadcasting?
Again, expect restrictions on devices (metal detectors and strip searches?) before next year. Or hopefully they will just stream the $&?!@ keynote live again
Meaning 'Google like' conversation? That's BS. Many people have been requesting for this feature for ages. The reason why it's needed it because many people use POP accounts.
Isn't that kind of like complaining you don't have a mouse in DOS?
Seriously, I know people still use POP, but why should I have sympathy for them? Almost as bad as a complaint I saw on another forum that a person couldn't secure WEP - well duh, it's old and broken
It does have a delete a thread.
Meaning 'Google like' conversation? That's BS.
That is BS. Are there really people out there who think Google invented threading? That would explain a lot.
You are right, about Vernier acuity being just a very specific (almost irrelevant) case, in which brain processing helps. For normal tasks like reading, watching videos, or playing on a computer screen, vernier acuity is irrelevant. What maters is normal visual acuity.
As a vision grad student (and teacher!) you should also understand the concept of visual angle. The minimum resolution the normal human eye can see is about 1.5 minutes of arc. This with a typical eye of 21mm length, matches about the foveal photoreceptor size of 1 to 1.5microns. At a distance of 20-30cm (normal near point of well corrected subject) 1.5 minute of arc corresponds closely to about 300dpi. That is what the "retina" display means. Nothing else. And that is why the 300dpi standard is in place.
Also, you should as a vision sciences teacher know that detailed vision only happens at the fovea, which is only about 300 microns. In the rod free area (very centre of the fovea, and what is used for reading and recognising faces) there are no more than 20,000 cones. In total the fovea has some 200,000 cones. So at 300dpi at 2in X2 in square has 360,000 dots. More than your fovea can cope with.
I teach vision science in a major California, university, the claims about this display are patently false.
First, I'll overlook the claim about what the human retina can display, that's just wrong. The retina doesn't display anything, it's not a projector. Rather, it is an information gather device that has light projected on to it. It's nothing like a display at all. And, even if SJ meant display as in a projection screen, which is only partially correct, it doesn't change facts about the acuity of human visual perception.
The human retina is actually capable of picking up details finer than the width of a human photoreceptor itself. This is sometimes measured with what's called vernier acuity, the ability to detect if two lines are offset from one another.
Further, there are literally BILLIONS of receptors in the retina, with MILLIONS in a linear inch. There is no way a display of 326 ppi is higher resolution than the millions of receptors in a linear inch in the retina.
I'm very saddened to see this misrepresentation of the capabilities of the display in the new iPhone. It will only give the trolls food.
This size (8 arcmin.) is about 40% the size of a cone receptor at 16 ft.
A foveal cone is 2 microns. Take a 21mm length eye... you have
q=2/21000 = 9.5e-5rads = 0.3arcmin = 18arc seconds
8 arcmin is about the size 24 cones! Not 40% of one.
I just read you post about your PhD in Santa Cruz... Don't they teach you elementary trigonometry there?
Huh? If I have a mifi, Android phone or jail broken iPhone, how is Apple supposed to prevent me from using a channel? I'm broadcasting too..
For $25 I'm tempted to get one for when I'm at the movies:
http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.4355
But not too tempted since it's illegal and if the FCC ever gets terribly annoyed they can fine you for $11K and throw you in jail for a year as an example...
The first ever right move in digital photography I've been waiting for since years... Way to go Apple.
Seriously...missing the old Fujis with decent low light in a compact...
Yes, I am familiar with that work, I earned a PhD in Perceptual Psychology with an emphasis on visual attention, psychophysics, and physiological psychology at UC Santa Cruz. I now teach Perception at another UC campus now.
But your understanding of optics, and geometry don't help you. As I have pointed out in my previous posts, there are a number of factual mistakes in your arguments that undermine your credibility.
While you are correct in your assertions about the vernier acuity, the numbers you provide are wrong, the figure of 8minarc is baseless and wrong. Photoreceptors are much smaller than that!
Vernier acuity is a very interesting topic, and it has its applications. Reading and playing games is not one of them. But correct me please.
The limits of normal human vision (every day tasks) is set by the arrangement of retinal cones, but most importantly the size of the PSF on the retina. The combination of these 2 factors gives you the standard 300dpi. If a PhD in visual perception did not give you the background needed to understand this very basic concept, and being able to differentiate between normal every day activities, and super-resolution in specialised tasks like vernier acuity, you PhD training left many holes behind, that will have to be filled in over the years.
Hard to believe but I don't have an iPhone yet, BUT I am on Verizon -
Can you buy the iOS 4 phone and not hook up with AT&T and then only use it on WiFi?
I know they would add mucho $ to the price. I like all the new features-5MP cam, HD video, etc. But, I don't need AT&T since my reception is bad anyway at my home.
Is this possible?
Your best bet on this would probably be eBay or Craig's List in a couple weeks. I'm sure you'll be able to get a gently used 3GS that would run iOS 4 then, or are you specifically looking for the iPhone 4 hardware. The other option would be to wait for the iPod Touch update in a few more months, but there again you may be missing some features/functionality you can only get with iPhone 4 hardware. Just a couple thoughts.
Oops... About the time I hit submit I caught the line I read over where you were specifying the iPhone 4 hardware features as being what you liked. Oh well.
I haven't read a single post in this thread, but will go back and do so, so this may already have been mentioned.
On the Apple.com website, it reads:
"
While most phones have only one microphone, iPhone 4 has two. The main mic, located on the bottom next to the speakers, is for phone and FaceTime calls, voice commands, and memos. The second mic, built into the top near the headphone jack, is for making your phone and video calls better. It works with the main mic to suppress unwanted and distracting background sounds, such as music and loud conversations. This dual-mic noise suppression helps make every conversation a quiet one."
Notice it says the main mic is place near the "speakers".
Does anyone know if another speaker has been added, either near where the mic is, or internally similar to the way the iPod touch has it?
Greg
Dual mics are for noise cancellation. Just like on the Nexus One. So why would they add another speaker?