Keep dreaming. It was originally reported back in the day, that AT&T and Apple had a five-year exclusivity pact. We don't know whether that's been preserved after the death of the monthly-revenue sharing idea with 3G, but I find it awfully convenient that around the time those five years would be up, LTE should have been adopted and mostly deployed by the major carriers who are supporting it. At that point, we could technically have a Verizon iPhone (I'll be the first in line to switch back to them). There would no longer be a functional barrier between the cellular technology of the two big carriers.
Given that, I can't see how Apple would run a CDMA version of anything since it's going to be replaced eventually anyway. Either way, both AT&T and Apple are greatly benefitting from this partnership. Apple makes a killer phone their way, while really only limiting very specific things at AT&T's request, and AT&T pockets the extra subscriber revenue in what has to be approaching billions for them. Win-win; no need to shoot the goose laying the golden eggs.
An OLED screen would be great and I'd be willing to spend the premium on it to get it, but would the average consumer? What does a 3.5" OLED screen with 480x360 resolution cost these days?
A recent article pegged Sony as saying they will eventually push an 11" OLED TV to retail for $700.
I'm not sure how the cost of a smaller OLED screen would translate into a device like iPhone.
I, too, would pay a premium for OLED. The color generation, clarity and contrast is phenomenal. Perfect for iPhone.
There's nothing offensive about the phrase "Far East." However, there is something offensive about this poor grammar:
The accuracy of both reports is unknown.
The subject of the sentence is accuracy (not reports). Funny how no one notices grammar, anymore.
It's not that nobody notices the grammar anymore, it's just that some people are just trying to keep to the subject at hand, instead of working for the Grammar Nazis.
Comments
Given that, I can't see how Apple would run a CDMA version of anything since it's going to be replaced eventually anyway. Either way, both AT&T and Apple are greatly benefitting from this partnership. Apple makes a killer phone their way, while really only limiting very specific things at AT&T's request, and AT&T pockets the extra subscriber revenue in what has to be approaching billions for them. Win-win; no need to shoot the goose laying the golden eggs.
Keep dreaming. It was originally reported back in the day, that AT&T and Apple had a five-year exclusivity pact.
An OLED screen would be great and I'd be willing to spend the premium on it to get it, but would the average consumer? What does a 3.5" OLED screen with 480x360 resolution cost these days?
A recent article pegged Sony as saying they will eventually push an 11" OLED TV to retail for $700.
I'm not sure how the cost of a smaller OLED screen would translate into a device like iPhone.
I, too, would pay a premium for OLED. The color generation, clarity and contrast is phenomenal. Perfect for iPhone.
If you had to check 3 sources to ascertain whether or not that is archaic, perjorative or offensive then that speaks volumes.
Asia is the preferable term - not Far East, unless your a member of British royalty 50 years ago.
I agree with Studley. That rumor came from the way,way,really way Far West.
Maybe he typed it occidently.
Well now, that's a different Slant isn't it.
There's nothing offensive about the phrase "Far East." However, there is something offensive about this poor grammar:
The accuracy of both reports is unknown.
The subject of the sentence is accuracy (not reports). Funny how no one notices grammar, anymore.
It's not that nobody notices the grammar anymore, it's just that some people are just trying to keep to the subject at hand, instead of working for the Grammar Nazis.