According to the very convincing rumours describing the model numbers of the 3G radios in the upcoming iPhone it is not capable of more than Rx 7.2Mbps / Tx 384Kbps.
If you have knowledge that says otherwise, please cite it as it's a rumour we have not heard, save for the Telestra's foolish claim.
Your argument stems from my omitting A/V from the name? The discussion was about whether AIM would supply an app or whether Apple would use it's native code. Adding a suffix of A/V doesn't change my argument or the items I laid down for discussion as it wasn't about the ability to have an audio and/or video conversation. Again, we did not discuss, in any form, which feature set Apple will eschew from iChat for the iPhone.
i doubt aol would supply the s/w, they haven't managed to do so in the last years, why would they put more effort into it now??? i never understood why aol was that stupid... not to get aim 100% compatible with ichat... now they're almost extinct, and apple is thriving...
i think you need to read up on the future of hsdpa...
I think you need to get your facts right. HSDPA supports up to 14.4Mbit/s. Evolved HSPA, which is a different standard, currently supported by no-one and not supported in the iPhone, is something different. It may be supported it may never be supported (see Evolved EDGE), right now it's vapourware.
You spout so much misleading and patently false information. I feel sorry for people who come here are read your posts and take them as gospel.
the iphone is capable of the faster hsdpa+ speeds...
ichatAV is different since it's video chat works... as aim never got video chat to work with a good codec and no audio... a video chat w/o audio isn't worth much... and video quality has to be very good, not just video somehow streamed to the other party.. that's why ichatAV is used by so many people for video chat and other video applications in leopard... like remote desktop and video streaming...
No, it's not. You have no basis for that information. Or put more colloquially, it's bullshit. The chip set which it looks like using doesn't support Evolved HSPA. And you're saying that Apple is going to jump HSUPA, the next step and go straight to Evolved HSPA makes no sense. No handset maker has released HSUPA. It's just ridiculous.
No, it's not. You have no basis for that information. Or put more colloquially, it's bullshit. The chip set which it looks like using doesn't support Evolved HSPA. And you're saying that Apple is going to jump HSUPA, the next step and go straight to Evolved HSPA makes no sense. No handset maker has released HSUPA. It's just ridiculous.
Yep, said in better words that mine..
Quote:
Originally Posted by smokeonit
the iphone will support up to 42Mbit hsdpa speeds!
Quote:
Originally Posted by smokeonit
the iphone is capable of the faster hsdpa+ speeds...
You really need to stop asserting things as fact that are completely speculative at best. First of all, HSDPA, HSUPA, "evolved HSPA" AKA HSPA+, and HSOPA are specific standards outlined in the 3GPP specifications so saying HSPDA = HSPA+, or that is doesn't matter to distinguish between them is incorrect. HSDPA only supports speeds as high as 14.4mbps (no phone currently supports this in practice), and you won't get anywhere near that speed on average on 14.4mbps networks.
On the other hand, "HSPA+", which is specified in the 3GPP release 7 spec does support up to 42 Mbit/s on the downlink and 22 Mbit/s on the uplink. However, to assert that the next iPhone will handle 42mbps HSPA+ is crazy. First of all, until we know otherwise, we can only assume that the Infineon 3G chip found in the firmware is going to be used in the next iPhone. It's been reported that this chip does not even support HSUPA, which is an obvious step before HSPA+. More importantly, HSPA+ uses MIMO to achieve it's fast throughput, a technology that uses multiple transmit and receive antennae and reconstructs the original signal from fragments coming in from these multiple sources. The technology is still in testing phase, and it certainly isn't something that a HSPA iPhone can just update to via software, so I don't see any potential way the iPhone 3G could be compatible. The Telstra guy was either just totally ignorant, or he is talking about a future iPhone.
No you can't. EDGE in Denmark (large cities like Copenhagen) the speeds range from 400-600 Kbps, while HSPDA is 7.2 mbit (rumored 3G iPhone), soon up to 20 MBit (which the new iPhone doesn't support)
EDGE itself can't go that fast, it maxes out around ~230kbps using 4-timeslot links, and double that on 8-timeslots. You guys must have whats called "Evolved EDGE" which is pretty cool. I'm never seen or heard of it being used before.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerryb
GPS? Someone please tell me why GPS is so important for anyone to have? I always know where I am don't you?
1) Navigating AROUND the metro area you live in
2) Navigating TO the city you are going to visit
2) Navigating AROUND a city you are visiting, especially large cities
4) LOCATING such things as restaurants, bars, floral shops, hardware stores, etc in said cities and getting directions to them
5) GPS treasure hunts
Quote:
Originally Posted by success
I have a question about Crackberry and iPhone. Friend says that the Crackberry is better cause it has push email. Is that the same thing for upcoming 3G iphone and does it even matter for the person who isn't working for a corporation where they might be using some type of corporate mail exchange server? What features does/will the 3G iPhone have that the Crackberry won't?
Thanks
all iPhones will have access to exchange-based Push Email. As for advantages over the iPhone, there are plenty of other threads to answer that. AI search or Google is your friend.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dlux
Last year during the run-up to the iPhone I wanted to get a GPS device for navigation. I also liked the principal of One Device To Rule Them All. When it was determined that the V1.0 iPhone didn't have GPS hardware, we bought a Garmin instead. In retrospect, this was a good decision (for us) for a number of reasons: *snip*
Most of your arguments disappear when you add GPS navigation software to the iPhone. Whether Apple has written their own is yet to be seen, but I wouldn't doubt that they have. Worst case scenario is that you buy 3rd party navigation software with voice directions for $20. Couple that with a 3rd party dash mount and suddenly TomTom isn't relevant for a certain percentage of iPhone users.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac-sochist
Off topic, I guess, but can this be even remotely true? I live in the US, and I must have had a hundred people in the last couple of years ask me if I had Yahoo IM ("Do You Yahoo?" is synonymous with: "Do you use an Instant Messenger?") and maybe two ask me if I had MSN, but I have never,in my life, had anyone ask me if I had AOL! Are they still in business?
People use both, but AIM has more users in the USA. On the other hand, MSN is dominant in Europe. Hopefully iChat builds in an abstraction layer between those and Google Talk/Gmail chat/Jabber.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac-sochist
The next time somebody hits you with that "Macs are more expensive" line and you tell them: "Not any more. They buy the same commodity parts as everybody else;" just remember: this is the downside of that. You get all these leaks about the newest products, so when Apple actually announces them, no matter how earth-shattering they may be, everybody goes: "That's Old News! What else you got?" and the stock goes down.
Only the commodity parts are known, like the future CPU lineup from Intel or future GPUs from Nvidia. That type of stuff doesn't matter, it's the custom hardware integration and special software that makes Apple's products innovative.
My great concern is Apple releasing a tablet, ASAP!
It's unlikely they will anytime soon, but it would certainly be a nice "Oh, and one more thing" and awfully timely for my situation where my chance of getting my brother hooked on Macs is fleeting, and contingent on such a device!
quoted: "Get this. Australian site ChannelNews claims that a "senior executive of Telstra" is the latest 3G iPhone bean spiller. They quote the exec as saying the following:
"We know what is coming we have seen the new device and it will be available on our network as soon as it is launched in the USA. By Christmas this phone will be capable of 42Mbps which will make it faster than a lot of broadband offerings and the fastest iPhone on any network in the world."
Interesting. We know that Telstra's Next G HSDPA network has been capable of 14.4Mbps since 2007. At GSMA Mobile World Congress, they even committed to 21Mbps before the end of the year and 42Mbps using HSPA+ (aka, Evolved HSPA, HSPA Evolution) technology in 2009... not Christmas of 2008. Hard to say if this is just industry blow-harding or actual insider info. June 9th: T-minus 17 days and counting."
Since you first mentioned HSPA+ at least two people have made stated that it was only the Telstra exec that made such a claim, and that he clearly didn't know what he was talking about.
I'm going to repost Winterspans' comment to you again. It explains it all very clearly, IMO. If there are questions just post them as such and they will gladly answered. If you post an executive's statement as stone chiseled gospel and fail to see the facts then, well, I'm speechless, except to say it's a fairly common practice for non-technical execs from technical companies cannonballing the media with something that can't be true. A Sun exec stated the next Mac OS would be ZFS and it wasn't even close to being ready, I still there are some issues with it as bootable filesystem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by winterspan
You really need to stop asserting things as fact that are completely speculative at best. First of all, HSDPA, HSUPA, "evolved HSPA" AKA HSPA+, and HSOPA are specific standards outlined in the 3GPP specifications so saying HSPDA = HSPA+, or that is doesn't matter to distinguish between them is incorrect. HSDPA only supports speeds as high as 14.4mbps (no phone currently supports this in practice), and you won't get anywhere near that speed on average on 14.4mbps networks.
On the other hand, "HSPA+", which is specified in the 3GPP release 7 spec does support up to 42 Mbit/s on the downlink and 22 Mbit/s on the uplink. However, to assert that the next iPhone will handle 42mbps HSPA+ is crazy. First of all, until we know otherwise, we can only assume that the Infineon 3G chip found in the firmware is going to be used in the next iPhone. It's been reported that this chip does not even support HSUPA, which is an obvious step before HSPA+. More importantly, HSPA+ uses MIMO to achieve it's fast throughput, a technology that uses multiple transmit and receive antennae and reconstructs the original signal from fragments coming in from these multiple sources. The technology is still in testing phase, and it certainly isn't something that a HSPA iPhone can just update to via software, so I don't see any potential way the iPhone 3G could be compatible. The Telstra guy was either just totally ignorant, or he is talking about a future iPhone.
Wise words, Dlux. We will know a lot more in 25 hours. I am cancelling an out of town appointment that would interfere with watching the blow by blow reports via Internet.
Having said that I loved the "old" (2004-2007) Viamoto product which used Nextel's network and GPS-enabled Motorola iDEN i88s handsets (i730, etc.) to receive spoken turn-by-turn directions to destinations. It worked great and in markets covering over 90% of the US population. The easy to program Garmins, TomToms, etc. made that product obsolete.
Please update the image to take out references to the hypothetical HSOPA name which was used before development. (it was never the name of the air interface for LTE, if you must then call it E-UTRA) There is no reference to the work HSOPA in the entire 3GPP site!
Please change UMTS-LTE to just LTE as LTE is now the primary upgrade path for both UMTS networks as well as CDMA2000.
Please correct the speeds to the final speeds, not the goals which had to be exceeded for the project. 326.4 Mbit/s download and 86.4 Mbit/s upload speeds for each 20MHz.
HSOPA, Super 3G and Pre 4G are quite old terms and were used to describe a hypothetical implementation which does not resemble LTE as it does now. It's accepted as being the 4G standard.
LTE-Advanced is further down the development track than the state of LTE described in the table!
I think there's a bit of confusion here. There isn't really a 'pairing' between those 3G bands.
You are quite wrong, and if you read the article you linked to you explicitly lists the paired bands for each spectrum. There are two different frequency bands for the uplink and the downlink.
1900/2100 is the predominant worldwide pairing for 3G
1700/2100 is used only by T-Mobile USA
The other pairs aren't that far apart and are only ever referred to by a single frequency.
1900/2100 is usually known as 2100
1700/2100 is usually known as 1700
All this information is in the article you linked to.
the schedule for thursday afternoon 5PM, contains a topic called "Location". Could be the confirmation for GPS ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
The current phone does location without GPS.
So, maybe.
The SDK keynote from March 6th showcased a new Core Service called Core Location. I think it covers any and all hardware that will assist in quickly discerning one's location, but doesn't necessarily mean GPS. If not, I hope Apple opens up BT so developers and manufacturers can make compatible GPS devices.
what an ass ben.charny is LOL. Not surprised it's on cnn and from the AP either. Both worthless sources with a bunch of dumb-ass libs working for them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox
Well, at least they're not this guy. (Thanks to Gruber)
Writing for CNN Money, he opines:
Yes, it's true, you're not hallucinating, someone claiming expertise in scoping out Apple's plans by pouring over patent filings doesn't know the difference between Flash the software and flash memory chips. And confuses the two in such a way as to reach a hilariously wrong conclusion. In print. So we can see it.
Bet his nickname over at CNN is "flash" right about now, and will be for all time.
what an ass ben.charny is LOL. Not surprised it's on cnn and from the AP either. Both worthless sources with a bunch of dumb-ass libs working for them.
Comments
According to the very convincing rumours describing the model numbers of the 3G radios in the upcoming iPhone it is not capable of more than Rx 7.2Mbps / Tx 384Kbps.
If you have knowledge that says otherwise, please cite it as it's a rumour we have not heard, save for the Telestra's foolish claim.
Your argument stems from my omitting A/V from the name? The discussion was about whether AIM would supply an app or whether Apple would use it's native code. Adding a suffix of A/V doesn't change my argument or the items I laid down for discussion as it wasn't about the ability to have an audio and/or video conversation. Again, we did not discuss, in any form, which feature set Apple will eschew from iChat for the iPhone.
PS: Even Apple refers to it as iChat, sans the A/V.
i doubt aol would supply the s/w, they haven't managed to do so in the last years, why would they put more effort into it now??? i never understood why aol was that stupid... not to get aim 100% compatible with ichat... now they're almost extinct, and apple is thriving...
i think you need to read up on the future of hsdpa...
I think you need to get your facts right. HSDPA supports up to 14.4Mbit/s. Evolved HSPA, which is a different standard, currently supported by no-one and not supported in the iPhone, is something different. It may be supported it may never be supported (see Evolved EDGE), right now it's vapourware.
You spout so much misleading and patently false information. I feel sorry for people who come here are read your posts and take them as gospel.
the iphone is capable of the faster hsdpa+ speeds...
ichatAV is different since it's video chat works... as aim never got video chat to work with a good codec and no audio... a video chat w/o audio isn't worth much... and video quality has to be very good, not just video somehow streamed to the other party.. that's why ichatAV is used by so many people for video chat and other video applications in leopard... like remote desktop and video streaming...
No, it's not. You have no basis for that information. Or put more colloquially, it's bullshit. The chip set which it looks like using doesn't support Evolved HSPA. And you're saying that Apple is going to jump HSUPA, the next step and go straight to Evolved HSPA makes no sense. No handset maker has released HSUPA. It's just ridiculous.
No, it's not. You have no basis for that information. Or put more colloquially, it's bullshit. The chip set which it looks like using doesn't support Evolved HSPA. And you're saying that Apple is going to jump HSUPA, the next step and go straight to Evolved HSPA makes no sense. No handset maker has released HSUPA. It's just ridiculous.
Yep, said in better words that mine..
the iphone will support up to 42Mbit hsdpa speeds!
the iphone is capable of the faster hsdpa+ speeds...
You really need to stop asserting things as fact that are completely speculative at best. First of all, HSDPA, HSUPA, "evolved HSPA" AKA HSPA+, and HSOPA are specific standards outlined in the 3GPP specifications so saying HSPDA = HSPA+, or that is doesn't matter to distinguish between them is incorrect. HSDPA only supports speeds as high as 14.4mbps (no phone currently supports this in practice), and you won't get anywhere near that speed on average on 14.4mbps networks.
On the other hand, "HSPA+", which is specified in the 3GPP release 7 spec does support up to 42 Mbit/s on the downlink and 22 Mbit/s on the uplink. However, to assert that the next iPhone will handle 42mbps HSPA+ is crazy. First of all, until we know otherwise, we can only assume that the Infineon 3G chip found in the firmware is going to be used in the next iPhone. It's been reported that this chip does not even support HSUPA, which is an obvious step before HSPA+. More importantly, HSPA+ uses MIMO to achieve it's fast throughput, a technology that uses multiple transmit and receive antennae and reconstructs the original signal from fragments coming in from these multiple sources. The technology is still in testing phase, and it certainly isn't something that a HSPA iPhone can just update to via software, so I don't see any potential way the iPhone 3G could be compatible. The Telstra guy was either just totally ignorant, or he is talking about a future iPhone.
BTW, here is an image I created recently..
No you can't. EDGE in Denmark (large cities like Copenhagen) the speeds range from 400-600 Kbps, while HSPDA is 7.2 mbit (rumored 3G iPhone), soon up to 20 MBit (which the new iPhone doesn't support)
EDGE itself can't go that fast, it maxes out around ~230kbps using 4-timeslot links, and double that on 8-timeslots. You guys must have whats called "Evolved EDGE" which is pretty cool. I'm never seen or heard of it being used before.
GPS? Someone please tell me why GPS is so important for anyone to have? I always know where I am don't you?
1) Navigating AROUND the metro area you live in
2) Navigating TO the city you are going to visit
2) Navigating AROUND a city you are visiting, especially large cities
4) LOCATING such things as restaurants, bars, floral shops, hardware stores, etc in said cities and getting directions to them
5) GPS treasure hunts
I have a question about Crackberry and iPhone. Friend says that the Crackberry is better cause it has push email. Is that the same thing for upcoming 3G iphone and does it even matter for the person who isn't working for a corporation where they might be using some type of corporate mail exchange server? What features does/will the 3G iPhone have that the Crackberry won't?
Thanks
all iPhones will have access to exchange-based Push Email. As for advantages over the iPhone, there are plenty of other threads to answer that. AI search or Google is your friend.
Last year during the run-up to the iPhone I wanted to get a GPS device for navigation. I also liked the principal of One Device To Rule Them All. When it was determined that the V1.0 iPhone didn't have GPS hardware, we bought a Garmin instead. In retrospect, this was a good decision (for us) for a number of reasons: *snip*
Most of your arguments disappear when you add GPS navigation software to the iPhone. Whether Apple has written their own is yet to be seen, but I wouldn't doubt that they have. Worst case scenario is that you buy 3rd party navigation software with voice directions for $20. Couple that with a 3rd party dash mount and suddenly TomTom isn't relevant for a certain percentage of iPhone users.
Off topic, I guess, but can this be even remotely true? I live in the US, and I must have had a hundred people in the last couple of years ask me if I had Yahoo IM ("Do You Yahoo?" is synonymous with: "Do you use an Instant Messenger?") and maybe two ask me if I had MSN, but I have never, in my life, had anyone ask me if I had AOL! Are they still in business?
People use both, but AIM has more users in the USA. On the other hand, MSN is dominant in Europe. Hopefully iChat builds in an abstraction layer between those and Google Talk/Gmail chat/Jabber.
The next time somebody hits you with that "Macs are more expensive" line and you tell them: "Not any more. They buy the same commodity parts as everybody else;" just remember: this is the downside of that. You get all these leaks about the newest products, so when Apple actually announces them, no matter how earth-shattering they may be, everybody goes: "That's Old News! What else you got?" and the stock goes down.
Only the commodity parts are known, like the future CPU lineup from Intel or future GPUs from Nvidia. That type of stuff doesn't matter, it's the custom hardware integration and special software that makes Apple's products innovative.
Just look at Multi-touch.
My great concern is Apple releasing a tablet, ASAP!
It's unlikely they will anytime soon, but it would certainly be a nice "Oh, and one more thing" and awfully timely for my situation where my chance of getting my brother hooked on Macs is fleeting, and contingent on such a device!
Dang it all.
quoted: "Get this. Australian site ChannelNews claims that a "senior executive of Telstra" is the latest 3G iPhone bean spiller. They quote the exec as saying the following:
"We know what is coming we have seen the new device and it will be available on our network as soon as it is launched in the USA. By Christmas this phone will be capable of 42Mbps which will make it faster than a lot of broadband offerings and the fastest iPhone on any network in the world."
Interesting. We know that Telstra's Next G HSDPA network has been capable of 14.4Mbps since 2007. At GSMA Mobile World Congress, they even committed to 21Mbps before the end of the year and 42Mbps using HSPA+ (aka, Evolved HSPA, HSPA Evolution) technology in 2009... not Christmas of 2008. Hard to say if this is just industry blow-harding or actual insider info. June 9th: T-minus 17 days and counting."
hspa+ support on iphone 3G...: http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/23/3...ved-hspa-data/
Since you first mentioned HSPA+ at least two people have made stated that it was only the Telstra exec that made such a claim, and that he clearly didn't know what he was talking about.
I'm going to repost Winterspans' comment to you again. It explains it all very clearly, IMO. If there are questions just post them as such and they will gladly answered. If you post an executive's statement as stone chiseled gospel and fail to see the facts then, well, I'm speechless, except to say it's a fairly common practice for non-technical execs from technical companies cannonballing the media with something that can't be true. A Sun exec stated the next Mac OS would be ZFS and it wasn't even close to being ready, I still there are some issues with it as bootable filesystem.
You really need to stop asserting things as fact that are completely speculative at best. First of all, HSDPA, HSUPA, "evolved HSPA" AKA HSPA+, and HSOPA are specific standards outlined in the 3GPP specifications so saying HSPDA = HSPA+, or that is doesn't matter to distinguish between them is incorrect. HSDPA only supports speeds as high as 14.4mbps (no phone currently supports this in practice), and you won't get anywhere near that speed on average on 14.4mbps networks.
On the other hand, "HSPA+", which is specified in the 3GPP release 7 spec does support up to 42 Mbit/s on the downlink and 22 Mbit/s on the uplink. However, to assert that the next iPhone will handle 42mbps HSPA+ is crazy. First of all, until we know otherwise, we can only assume that the Infineon 3G chip found in the firmware is going to be used in the next iPhone. It's been reported that this chip does not even support HSUPA, which is an obvious step before HSPA+. More importantly, HSPA+ uses MIMO to achieve it's fast throughput, a technology that uses multiple transmit and receive antennae and reconstructs the original signal from fragments coming in from these multiple sources. The technology is still in testing phase, and it certainly isn't something that a HSPA iPhone can just update to via software, so I don't see any potential way the iPhone 3G could be compatible. The Telstra guy was either just totally ignorant, or he is talking about a future iPhone.
BTW, here is an image I created recently..
Having said that I loved the "old" (2004-2007) Viamoto product which used Nextel's network and GPS-enabled Motorola iDEN i88s handsets (i730, etc.) to receive spoken turn-by-turn directions to destinations. It worked great and in markets covering over 90% of the US population. The easy to program Garmins, TomToms, etc. made that product obsolete.
BTW, here is an image I created recently..
Please update the image to take out references to the hypothetical HSOPA name which was used before development. (it was never the name of the air interface for LTE, if you must then call it E-UTRA) There is no reference to the work HSOPA in the entire 3GPP site!
Please change UMTS-LTE to just LTE as LTE is now the primary upgrade path for both UMTS networks as well as CDMA2000.
Please correct the speeds to the final speeds, not the goals which had to be exceeded for the project. 326.4 Mbit/s download and 86.4 Mbit/s upload speeds for each 20MHz.
HSOPA, Super 3G and Pre 4G are quite old terms and were used to describe a hypothetical implementation which does not resemble LTE as it does now. It's accepted as being the 4G standard.
LTE-Advanced is further down the development track than the state of LTE described in the table!
I think there's a bit of confusion here. There isn't really a 'pairing' between those 3G bands.
You are quite wrong, and if you read the article you linked to you explicitly lists the paired bands for each spectrum. There are two different frequency bands for the uplink and the downlink.
1900/2100 is the predominant worldwide pairing for 3G
1700/2100 is used only by T-Mobile USA
The other pairs aren't that far apart and are only ever referred to by a single frequency.
1900/2100 is usually known as 2100
1700/2100 is usually known as 1700
All this information is in the article you linked to.
http://developer.apple.com/wwdc/sche...time=afternoon
the schedule for thursday afternoon 5PM, contains a topic called "Location". Could be the confirmation for GPS ?
i dont know if anybody noticed
http://developer.apple.com/wwdc/sche...time=afternoon
the schedule for thursday afternoon 5PM, contains a topic called "Location". Could be the confirmation for GPS ?
The current phone does location without GPS.
So, maybe.
i dont know if anybody noticed
http://developer.apple.com/wwdc/sche...time=afternoon
the schedule for thursday afternoon 5PM, contains a topic called "Location". Could be the confirmation for GPS ?
The current phone does location without GPS.
So, maybe.
The SDK keynote from March 6th showcased a new Core Service called Core Location. I think it covers any and all hardware that will assist in quickly discerning one's location, but doesn't necessarily mean GPS. If not, I hope Apple opens up BT so developers and manufacturers can make compatible GPS devices.
Why would there be references to specific chips hardware in the firmware?
Just one question . . .
Why would there be references to specific chips hardware in the firmware?
Firmware is directly tied to hardware. It's what allows the functionality to be seen, and used by the system. Each chip has it's own firmware coding.
That's an oversimplification, but gives the idea.
Well, at least they're not this guy. (Thanks to Gruber)
Writing for CNN Money, he opines:
Yes, it's true, you're not hallucinating, someone claiming expertise in scoping out Apple's plans by pouring over patent filings doesn't know the difference between Flash the software and flash memory chips. And confuses the two in such a way as to reach a hilariously wrong conclusion. In print. So we can see it.
Bet his nickname over at CNN is "flash" right about now, and will be for all time.
So take heart, Apple Insider!
what an ass ben.charny is LOL. Not surprised it's on cnn and from the AP either. Both worthless sources with a bunch of dumb-ass libs working for them.
I suppose you're a dumb-ass Reactionary?