Most likely true. However, not all trends are inexorable. The same was said about Japan 25 years ago. Given the demographics, it does seem likely that China will overtake the USA. Thankfully, overall GDP is not important in the daily life of anyone. GDP per head, however, is far more important. For a long time after China overtakes the USA in overall GDP, the average person in the USA will have a far higher standard of living and income.
China will overtake the US as long as they can avoid civil war or massive internal unrest. Their demographics are also looking very bad for the next 15-20 years. For one thing, their "one child" policy left them with a high ratio of males to females, due to infanticide. Some have suggested that this overbalance of males makes them more likely to experience internal strife or civil war... Too many males, not enough females. Get it?
China will overtake the US as long as they can avoid civil war or massive internal unrest. Their demographics are also looking very bad for the next 15-20 years. For one thing, their "one child" policy left them with a high ratio of males to females, due to infanticide. Some have suggested that this overbalance of males makes them more likely to experience internal strife or civil war... Too many males, not enough females. Get it?
I think a lot of research backs that up Well, it's China. Maybe some forced sex changes would solve it?
Ridiculously, unnecessarily complicated set of options.
Isn't this always the case with Cell phone companies...They all seem to "nickle & dime" you and leave you with a feeling of being ripped off! Rather like CableTV companies, Insurance companies and banks. Who dreams up this crap?
I want to be "partnered" with a company that gives me value. Not one that I have to keep reading the monthly bill or the fine print or both! Uggh!
I'm going to get the 3G model to replace my wifi model. My thought is that since it's purely month to month, why not? Plus on resale, the value of the 3G pretty much conveys with little depreciation.
Yep. Especially if you forget to cancel the 3G auto-renewing service. The new owners might enjoy that for a while.
Presumably because a lot of iPads are leaving the store subsidised with 3G Service Plans. Certainly if I ever get one, that's how I'd do it.
But, as we've discussed, I'm not interested until they make it lighter, thinner, (Significantly) higher capacity and give it a retina display. Until they do that, I still think the MacBook Air 11 is an iPad's overachieving younger brother.
But that makes me wonder: WiFi is so ubiquitous these days, do they really think that there will be that much demand for the 3G iPad? Or am I missing something here?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer
Wrong assumption.
It means expanded growth through subsidized contracts with Telcos. No more, no less.
Quote:
Originally Posted by noexpectations
I bet the carriers will offer subsidized prices for new contracts.
There's the Android price factor - Imagine that "decent" (well, Netbook quality) Honeycombs come out around $249-599. And then imagine "saving" $200 on a real iPad (with a two year lock-in of course).
It puts the acquisition of the iPad that much further downstream into where a larger portion of the populace can choose Apple without Apple compromising build-quality or the full UI experience. Most people are influenced by the entry price - despite the monthly givebacks to their friendly cellcos - so like the two guys I above, I call the allocation a market share play.
Same here - jailbroken iPhone 4 allows me to tether all I want when I happen to be out of range of a wifi network feel so bad for the AT&T/Verizon people that will be paying for it on a month to month basis. \
Glad to see that you are a proud member of the jailbreak group. No wonder why many, if not most, consider jailbreakers thieves.
If true, I am deeply disappointed in Apple's apparent decision to produce THREE versions of the iPad. Say it isn't true that the "really clever folks" in Cupertino couldn't figure out an iPad with BOTH - GSM and CDMA capability. Apple tsk! tsk!
(I hope this rumor is someone's idea of a really sick joke)
I wouldn't mind getting GPS, but question the usefulness of it. If you're using GPS, chances are you're out of range of a wifi hotspot. Which means the Maps app won't work. You'd need to buy an app that has offline maps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
I have the 3G model, however I have only used the cellular feature a couple times when I first got it. Now I almost always have wifi available, yet my contract keeps renewing automatically. I could stop it obviously but, if I need it, I have to go through the hassle of setting it up again.
I thought that once an iPad is set up, it's just a trivial matter of going to Settings and a couple of clicks to buy more data.
If true, I am deeply disappointed in Apple's apparent decision to produce THREE versions of the iPad. Say it isn't true that the "really clever folks" in Cupertino couldn't figure out an iPad with BOTH - GSM and CDMA capability. Apple tsk! tsk!
(I hope this rumor is someone's idea of a really sick joke)
It is not a sick joke. It is the reality of the licensing fees for CDMA for use in phones that will never use CDMA.
Mind you, I was also hopeful for a "world phone" but more research lead to the conclusion that this simply made no economic sense for Apple.
It is not a sick joke. It is the reality of the licensing fees for CDMA for use in phones that will never use CDMA.
Mind you, I was also hopeful for a "world phone" but more research lead to the conclusion that this simply made no economic sense for Apple.
To be clear, is each CDMA frequency discrete? And does it need payment to the someone? Or is there some sort of fee assessed based just on the quantity of CDMA units issued? Who pays this fee? Is there a place to research these regulations? So many questions. . . .
If its a fixed fee and not to much, one might be willing to pay the extra cost just to have the flexibility.
To be clear, is each CDMA frequency discrete? And does it need payment to the someone? Or is there some sort of fee assessed based just on the quantity of CDMA units issued? Who pays this fee? Is there a place to research these regulations? So many questions. . . .
If its a fixed fee and not to much, one might be willing to pay the extra cost just to have the flexibility.
I initially made the same arguments because I really wanted to believe that Apple would offer a unified device.
CDMA and GSM/UMTS are not just different frequencies; they use different signaling technologies which require different radios. So, on order to make such a phone Apple would need to include both radios. Qualcomm does make a chip that includes both radios (which is another reason that I was hopeful) but these are, of course, more expensive. Qualcomm also holds a boatload of CDMA IP which they license based on a percentage as I recall; I've read that the licensing fees are not insignificant.
Even with all the above, I still argued that the added cost might be worth it to Apple in order to streamline their production and inventory management and this would probably makes sense if CDMA were more widely deployed around the world. But the extreme disparity between GSM and CDMA means Apple (and hence, the GSM customer) would be paying extra for technology that would never be used.
As much as I would like to see a unified product, it looks like it won't be happening soon as evidenced by the fact that there are three leaked internal product numbers.
Comments
Most likely true. However, not all trends are inexorable. The same was said about Japan 25 years ago. Given the demographics, it does seem likely that China will overtake the USA. Thankfully, overall GDP is not important in the daily life of anyone. GDP per head, however, is far more important. For a long time after China overtakes the USA in overall GDP, the average person in the USA will have a far higher standard of living and income.
China will overtake the US as long as they can avoid civil war or massive internal unrest. Their demographics are also looking very bad for the next 15-20 years. For one thing, their "one child" policy left them with a high ratio of males to females, due to infanticide. Some have suggested that this overbalance of males makes them more likely to experience internal strife or civil war... Too many males, not enough females. Get it?
That sounds awfully like a negative, not a positive....
Could end up as a positive... HIV positive. Ouch! (Apologies in advance to everyone for the horrible, horrible joke)
China will overtake the US as long as they can avoid civil war or massive internal unrest. Their demographics are also looking very bad for the next 15-20 years. For one thing, their "one child" policy left them with a high ratio of males to females, due to infanticide. Some have suggested that this overbalance of males makes them more likely to experience internal strife or civil war... Too many males, not enough females. Get it?
I think a lot of research backs that up
Ridiculously, unnecessarily complicated set of options.
Isn't this always the case with Cell phone companies...They all seem to "nickle & dime" you and leave you with a feeling of being ripped off! Rather like CableTV companies, Insurance companies and banks. Who dreams up this crap?
I want to be "partnered" with a company that gives me value. Not one that I have to keep reading the monthly bill or the fine print or both! Uggh!
Best
I'm going to get the 3G model to replace my wifi model. My thought is that since it's purely month to month, why not? Plus on resale, the value of the 3G pretty much conveys with little depreciation.
Yep. Especially if you forget to cancel the 3G auto-renewing service. The new owners might enjoy that for a while.
But, as we've discussed, I'm not interested until they make it lighter, thinner, (Significantly) higher capacity and give it a retina display. Until they do that, I still think the MacBook Air 11 is an iPad's overachieving younger brother.
But that makes me wonder: WiFi is so ubiquitous these days, do they really think that there will be that much demand for the 3G iPad? Or am I missing something here?
Wrong assumption.
It means expanded growth through subsidized contracts with Telcos. No more, no less.
I bet the carriers will offer subsidized prices for new contracts.
There's the Android price factor - Imagine that "decent" (well, Netbook quality) Honeycombs come out around $249-599. And then imagine "saving" $200 on a real iPad (with a two year lock-in of course).
It puts the acquisition of the iPad that much further downstream into where a larger portion of the populace can choose Apple without Apple compromising build-quality or the full UI experience. Most people are influenced by the entry price - despite the monthly givebacks to their friendly cellcos - so like the two guys I above, I call the allocation a market share play.
That sounds awfully like a negative, not a positive....
Only if you like guys ....
Same here - jailbroken iPhone 4 allows me to tether all I want when I happen to be out of range of a wifi network
Glad to see that you are a proud member of the jailbreak group. No wonder why many, if not most, consider jailbreakers thieves.
(I hope this rumor is someone's idea of a really sick joke)
Here's hoping the wifi version gets GPS.
I wouldn't mind getting GPS, but question the usefulness of it. If you're using GPS, chances are you're out of range of a wifi hotspot. Which means the Maps app won't work. You'd need to buy an app that has offline maps.
I have the 3G model, however I have only used the cellular feature a couple times when I first got it. Now I almost always have wifi available, yet my contract keeps renewing automatically. I could stop it obviously but, if I need it, I have to go through the hassle of setting it up again.
I thought that once an iPad is set up, it's just a trivial matter of going to Settings and a couple of clicks to buy more data.
If true, I am deeply disappointed in Apple's apparent decision to produce THREE versions of the iPad. Say it isn't true that the "really clever folks" in Cupertino couldn't figure out an iPad with BOTH - GSM and CDMA capability. Apple tsk! tsk!
(I hope this rumor is someone's idea of a really sick joke)
It is not a sick joke. It is the reality of the licensing fees for CDMA for use in phones that will never use CDMA.
Mind you, I was also hopeful for a "world phone" but more research lead to the conclusion that this simply made no economic sense for Apple.
It is not a sick joke. It is the reality of the licensing fees for CDMA for use in phones that will never use CDMA.
Mind you, I was also hopeful for a "world phone" but more research lead to the conclusion that this simply made no economic sense for Apple.
To be clear, is each CDMA frequency discrete? And does it need payment to the someone? Or is there some sort of fee assessed based just on the quantity of CDMA units issued? Who pays this fee? Is there a place to research these regulations? So many questions. . . .
If its a fixed fee and not to much, one might be willing to pay the extra cost just to have the flexibility.
To be clear, is each CDMA frequency discrete? And does it need payment to the someone? Or is there some sort of fee assessed based just on the quantity of CDMA units issued? Who pays this fee? Is there a place to research these regulations? So many questions. . . .
If its a fixed fee and not to much, one might be willing to pay the extra cost just to have the flexibility.
I initially made the same arguments because I really wanted to believe that Apple would offer a unified device.
CDMA and GSM/UMTS are not just different frequencies; they use different signaling technologies which require different radios. So, on order to make such a phone Apple would need to include both radios. Qualcomm does make a chip that includes both radios (which is another reason that I was hopeful) but these are, of course, more expensive. Qualcomm also holds a boatload of CDMA IP which they license based on a percentage as I recall; I've read that the licensing fees are not insignificant.
Even with all the above, I still argued that the added cost might be worth it to Apple in order to streamline their production and inventory management and this would probably makes sense if CDMA were more widely deployed around the world. But the extreme disparity between GSM and CDMA means Apple (and hence, the GSM customer) would be paying extra for technology that would never be used.
As much as I would like to see a unified product, it looks like it won't be happening soon as evidenced by the fact that there are three leaked internal product numbers.