Download the photo from the site and look at the image properties. It states it was taken with a Minolta Dimage XT, well that reflection in the picture is no Dimage XT, that's a Sony cybershot.
FAKE
Yes, and apart from technicals, the reflection appears to be photoshopped in (poorly) so as to give the appearance of authenticity. It just looks funny to me. That strong of a reflection would not be made in a dark room and poor lighting like that.
Problem with this idea is that Vodafone is set to release the iPhone in a lot of places. Most with good G3 services. In Australia you would have to be brain damaged some way to buy a standard GSM product since all major players are now offering 3G services.
Here is an article link to state that GSM in Australia could be turned off in 2010.
Why would anyone spend up $1000 Aus for a phone that will be useless in two years? Maybe because they are going to upgrade. But many of us will use this phone till it dies. I would rather that be due to it failing after many years of faithful services and not because the GSM network is turned off. The reality seems to be that no matter how you present it the iPhone is not a mission critical devices and if waiting 1 to 5 months get me a G3 then it is worth it.
And really all I want is for Steve Jobs to come out and say "What is the price for this 3G iPhone. Well you will get it for the same price as the current generation iPhones."
Turn off GSM network?!! the article is talking about turning off 2G network not the whole GSM network!! read it again. However, I am not sure if that will effect the 2.5G iPhone. Even if it did, Australia will be getting 3G iPhone not 2.5G.
I am not so taken with this one. It reeks "Its boxy but its good" like a Volvo car. But what I really don't understand is why Apple would have put a rim around the screen when one of the defining aspects of the touch interface was that it had a flush surface with the body of the iPhone. Why go backwards?
Isn't the 3G chipset larger than the current one?
That must have been one heck of a backlight to produce a shadow of the fingers holding the camera onto the table (seen on left side of photo).
Everyone has decent digital cameras, so until I see a spy shot with at least 1600x1200 resolution, I will continue to be doubtful.
Download the photo from the site and look at the image properties. It states it was taken with a Minolta Dimage XT, well that reflection in the picture is no Dimage XT, that's a Sony cybershot.
NBC is operated by a bunch of idiots which is why it is usually at the bottom of my list of channels to check when watching tv at home and I never bothered with a purchase of any of it's shows when they were available on iTunes. I see where the Zune store will have "Those shows and more than 800 TV episodes including Comedy Central's "South Park" and MTV's "The Hills" will be available at the Zune store starting on Tuesday for the equivalent of $1.99 in Microsoft points that must be purchased in advance." Wait a minute. A dollar ninety-nine?!?!?! Wasn't that one of the gripes NBC had with Apple and their pricing of $1.99 per show???
If I never hear of another mac related rumor or news story about NBC coming back to iTunes, it will be too soon!
I think all these iPhone rumors and supposed photos are getting ridiculous. It seems to have devolved into just link baiting.
All you have to do is post some alleged scoop and an image and next thing you know every mac site is linking to you. Credibility and photoshop skills are not even important.
I am not so taken with this one. It reeks "Its boxy but its good" like a Volvo car. But what I really don't understand is why Apple would have put a rim around the screen when one of the defining aspects of the touch interface was that it had a flush surface with the body of the iPhone. Why go backwards?
Are you sure the original is flush? I thought it is set back a bit so that if it were laid on a surface with the screen down there would be less chance of it getting damaged.
Are you sure the original is flush? I thought it is set back a bit so that if it were laid on a surface with the screen down there would be less chance of it getting damaged.
ehhh the screen is actually less than a hair higher than the bezel
Download the photo from the site and look at the image properties. It states it was taken with a Minolta Dimage XT, well that reflection in the picture is no Dimage XT, that's a Sony cybershot.
FAKE
You are exactly right, in fact, its this one. (I apologize for the size). <big_ass_image>
Look carefully at this picture...when I say it is this one, I don't just mean this model, I mean its THIS PICTURE! This person really didn't even try.
You are exactly right, in fact, its this one. (I apologize for the size).
<big_ass_image>
Look carefully at this picture...when I say it is this one, I don't just mean this model, I mean its THIS PICTURE! This person really didn't even try.
I understand linking to the actual image used in the photoshopping, but it's .8MB, you should really just post a link to the image. Not everyone has a fast connection and I'm sure AI servers don't want to resend such a large file each time someone access this page.
edit: Thanks, Rogzilla. Helps with the page formatting too.
Problem with this idea is that Vodafone is set to release the iPhone in a lot of places. Most with good G3 services. In Australia you would have to be brain damaged some way to buy a standard GSM product since all major players are now offering 3G services.
Here is an article link to state that GSM in Australia could be turned off in 2010.
Why would anyone spend up $1000 Aus for a phone that will be useless in two years? Maybe because they are going to upgrade. But many of us will use this phone till it dies. I would rather that be due to it failing after many years of faithful services and not because the GSM network is turned off. The reality seems to be that no matter how you present it the iPhone is not a mission critical devices and if waiting 1 to 5 months get me a G3 then it is worth it.
And really all I want is for Steve Jobs to come out and say "What is the price for this 3G iPhone. Well you will get it for the same price as the current generation iPhones."
In addition, Vodafone New Zealand rejected the iPhone because of the fact that it was not 3G capable. There is no EDGE service here in New Zealand.
Yet New Zealand is clearly mentioned in the Vodafone/iPhone statement. This would support the idea that there is a 3G iPhone on the horizon.
I took the photo into photoshop and man, is it ever touched up. I agree with a poster above who said it's an LG phone photoshopped to look like it could be the 3G iPhone.
1) The bottom left edge of the phone - the shadow is so obviously placed, a black blurred shape, multiply'd and opaque. The bottom left corner to top left corner have a 'white' band that runs up, simulating glare/reflection, it's a perfect line, with no variants and minimal colour flux, which proves it's just a selection and white to grey gradient.
2) The home button IS off center, and according to the placement of the phone (and to a poster above) the camera apparently used to take this shot (if it was a camera and not a phone) is not on the correct angle to be reflected in the screen, and would be better at stabilizing a shot and reducing noise.
3) The photo noise - is clearly embellished with a photoshop filter. The noise on the background is stationary, while the noise on the phone is blurred, clearing up the fact that this is photoshopped. If the photoshop-ist pulled this image from say an LG site, they would have had to blur the phone to fit with the rest of the image. When they layered the phone on the background, they realized that the noise overlayed on top of the phone did not coincide with the fake blur on the phone itself - so they blurred the noise only on the phone to make it look close.
4) The colour - although the phone is allegedly black, nothing in a real photo is ever full blacks and greys. This phone is. So according to what I've said earlier, this was a mock-up photo, or an illustration. When you look close at the phone, you can see little colours everywhere, which is just a child of the photo noise. When I sample a section in photoshop, I clearly get a consistent RGB reading of the same 3, two digit numbers - making this an obvious mock-up because the greys are too grey, the blacks are too black and the edges of the phone do not reflect the colours of the surface it is laying on.
FAKE
or
Man will I ever be embarrassed when this turns out to be a real phone.
Comments
Here's why:
Download the photo from the site and look at the image properties. It states it was taken with a Minolta Dimage XT, well that reflection in the picture is no Dimage XT, that's a Sony cybershot.
FAKE
Yes, and apart from technicals, the reflection appears to be photoshopped in (poorly) so as to give the appearance of authenticity. It just looks funny to me. That strong of a reflection would not be made in a dark room and poor lighting like that.
Problem with this idea is that Vodafone is set to release the iPhone in a lot of places. Most with good G3 services. In Australia you would have to be brain damaged some way to buy a standard GSM product since all major players are now offering 3G services.
Here is an article link to state that GSM in Australia could be turned off in 2010.
http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum...fm/684948.html
Why would anyone spend up $1000 Aus for a phone that will be useless in two years? Maybe because they are going to upgrade. But many of us will use this phone till it dies. I would rather that be due to it failing after many years of faithful services and not because the GSM network is turned off. The reality seems to be that no matter how you present it the iPhone is not a mission critical devices and if waiting 1 to 5 months get me a G3 then it is worth it.
And really all I want is for Steve Jobs to come out and say "What is the price for this 3G iPhone. Well you will get it for the same price as the current generation iPhones."
Turn off GSM network?!! the article is talking about turning off 2G network not the whole GSM network!! read it again. However, I am not sure if that will effect the 2.5G iPhone. Even if it did, Australia will be getting 3G iPhone not 2.5G.
I am not so taken with this one. It reeks "Its boxy but its good" like a Volvo car. But what I really don't understand is why Apple would have put a rim around the screen when one of the defining aspects of the touch interface was that it had a flush surface with the body of the iPhone. Why go backwards?
Isn't the 3G chipset larger than the current one?
That must have been one heck of a backlight to produce a shadow of the fingers holding the camera onto the table (seen on left side of photo).
Everyone has decent digital cameras, so until I see a spy shot with at least 1600x1200 resolution, I will continue to be doubtful.
Here's why:
Download the photo from the site and look at the image properties. It states it was taken with a Minolta Dimage XT, well that reflection in the picture is no Dimage XT, that's a Sony cybershot.
FAKE
Logic wins every time!
Apparently Microsoft has made a deal with NBC/Universal to offer it's programs for the Zune:
See:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080506/...soft_zune_dc_2
NBC is operated by a bunch of idiots which is why it is usually at the bottom of my list of channels to check when watching tv at home and I never bothered with a purchase of any of it's shows when they were available on iTunes. I see where the Zune store will have "Those shows and more than 800 TV episodes including Comedy Central's "South Park" and MTV's "The Hills" will be available at the Zune store starting on Tuesday for the equivalent of $1.99 in Microsoft points that must be purchased in advance." Wait a minute. A dollar ninety-nine?!?!?! Wasn't that one of the gripes NBC had with Apple and their pricing of $1.99 per show???
If I never hear of another mac related rumor or news story about NBC coming back to iTunes, it will be too soon!
All you have to do is post some alleged scoop and an image and next thing you know every mac site is linking to you. Credibility and photoshop skills are not even important.
Is it just an illusion or is the "home" button off-center?
Exactly what I was thinking. I didn't try to measure it though.
I am not so taken with this one. It reeks "Its boxy but its good" like a Volvo car. But what I really don't understand is why Apple would have put a rim around the screen when one of the defining aspects of the touch interface was that it had a flush surface with the body of the iPhone. Why go backwards?
Are you sure the original is flush? I thought it is set back a bit so that if it were laid on a surface with the screen down there would be less chance of it getting damaged.
Are you sure the original is flush? I thought it is set back a bit so that if it were laid on a surface with the screen down there would be less chance of it getting damaged.
ehhh the screen is actually less than a hair higher than the bezel
the glass they used made this not matter so much.
ehhh the screen is actually less than a hair higher than the bezel
the glass they used made this not matter so much.
You would be surprised. Put this down on a concrete or other hard stone surface, and you will quickly find out that not only diamonds scratch glass!
Here's why:
Download the photo from the site and look at the image properties. It states it was taken with a Minolta Dimage XT, well that reflection in the picture is no Dimage XT, that's a Sony cybershot.
FAKE
You are exactly right, in fact, its this one. (I apologize for the size). <big_ass_image>
Look carefully at this picture...when I say it is this one, I don't just mean this model, I mean its THIS PICTURE! This person really didn't even try.
Edit-Happy?
You are exactly right, in fact, its this one. (I apologize for the size).
<big_ass_image>
Look carefully at this picture...when I say it is this one, I don't just mean this model, I mean its THIS PICTURE! This person really didn't even try.
I understand linking to the actual image used in the photoshopping, but it's .8MB, you should really just post a link to the image. Not everyone has a fast connection and I'm sure AI servers don't want to resend such a large file each time someone access this page.
edit: Thanks, Rogzilla.
If you look at the angle of the camera relative to the phone, the reflection of the camera should not be visible at all!
Problem with this idea is that Vodafone is set to release the iPhone in a lot of places. Most with good G3 services. In Australia you would have to be brain damaged some way to buy a standard GSM product since all major players are now offering 3G services.
Here is an article link to state that GSM in Australia could be turned off in 2010.
http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum...fm/684948.html
Why would anyone spend up $1000 Aus for a phone that will be useless in two years? Maybe because they are going to upgrade. But many of us will use this phone till it dies. I would rather that be due to it failing after many years of faithful services and not because the GSM network is turned off. The reality seems to be that no matter how you present it the iPhone is not a mission critical devices and if waiting 1 to 5 months get me a G3 then it is worth it.
And really all I want is for Steve Jobs to come out and say "What is the price for this 3G iPhone. Well you will get it for the same price as the current generation iPhones."
In addition, Vodafone New Zealand rejected the iPhone because of the fact that it was not 3G capable. There is no EDGE service here in New Zealand.
Yet New Zealand is clearly mentioned in the Vodafone/iPhone statement. This would support the idea that there is a 3G iPhone on the horizon.
1) The bottom left edge of the phone - the shadow is so obviously placed, a black blurred shape, multiply'd and opaque. The bottom left corner to top left corner have a 'white' band that runs up, simulating glare/reflection, it's a perfect line, with no variants and minimal colour flux, which proves it's just a selection and white to grey gradient.
2) The home button IS off center, and according to the placement of the phone (and to a poster above) the camera apparently used to take this shot (if it was a camera and not a phone) is not on the correct angle to be reflected in the screen, and would be better at stabilizing a shot and reducing noise.
3) The photo noise - is clearly embellished with a photoshop filter. The noise on the background is stationary, while the noise on the phone is blurred, clearing up the fact that this is photoshopped. If the photoshop-ist pulled this image from say an LG site, they would have had to blur the phone to fit with the rest of the image. When they layered the phone on the background, they realized that the noise overlayed on top of the phone did not coincide with the fake blur on the phone itself - so they blurred the noise only on the phone to make it look close.
4) The colour - although the phone is allegedly black, nothing in a real photo is ever full blacks and greys. This phone is. So according to what I've said earlier, this was a mock-up photo, or an illustration. When you look close at the phone, you can see little colours everywhere, which is just a child of the photo noise. When I sample a section in photoshop, I clearly get a consistent RGB reading of the same 3, two digit numbers - making this an obvious mock-up because the greys are too grey, the blacks are too black and the edges of the phone do not reflect the colours of the surface it is laying on.
FAKE
or
Man will I ever be embarrassed when this turns out to be a real phone.
Give us an iPhone. I don't care what gen it is
Give us movie downloads
Give us tv show downloads
It took 5 years before we got iPhoto printing
It took nearly 3 years to get the damn music store.
Do they want to stop piracy? Or increase it so they can sue grandmas and small children?
Make the stuff available at a decent price through a legitimate channel!