My guess is that he was in danger of losing his account due to complaints about his insults, and that the mods allowed him to abandon it instead of accepting a ban. The new account was allowed due to his whining that other people have multiple accounts, and that to deny him the same would not not be fair.
PS: People refer to the next iPad as iPad 3 not because they are sure it will be called that, but because it's the 3rd gen iPad. For all we know it could be iPad 2S if it has the same form factor, or even iPad 2 HD or anything else, but we sat iPad 3 because it's a logical placeholder.
Agreed...
However, If the next iPad was going to be essentially the same form factor with the addition of processor/graphics boost, Retina Display and Siri...
I'd rather see it called the iPad 2RS, or just iPad RS, instead of HD. HD has become such an overused term lately and i'd hope apple would stay away from buzz terminology like this.
For example, have you ever seen that infomercial that is trying to sell you sunglasses that "let you see things in High Definition"? I mean, seriously...
HD has become such an overused term lately and i'd hope apple would stay away from buzz terminology like this.
Not only that, but the iPad will NEVER have an HD screen. They are ONLY good for watching movies. Everything else works best with the nearly square screen currently used on the iPad.
However, If the next iPad was going to be essentially the same form factor with the addition of processor/graphics boost, Retina Display and Siri...
I'd rather see it called the iPad 2RS, or just iPad RS, instead of HD. HD has become such an overused term lately and i'd hope apple would stay away from buzz terminology like this.
For example, have you ever seen that infomercial that is trying to sell you sunglasses that "let you see things in High Definition"? I mean, seriously...
As a general rule I have never been a fan of Apple's naming conventions. MacBook and its variants; iPod, iPad, or 'i' anything save for the iPhone; or AirPort whatever. That said, I don't buy products for the name but how they for into my life.
Not only that, but the iPad will NEVER have an HD screen. They are ONLY good for watching movies. Everything else works best with the nearly square screen currently used on the iPad.
This is where I point out aspect ratio is not synonymous with high definition. Your typical reply is usually some roundabout way to say you were only joking.
This is where I point out aspect ratio is not synonymous with high definition. Your typical reply is usually some roundabout way to say you were only joking.
If "HD" means something, it means display resolutions of 1,280×720 pixels (720p) or 1,920×1,080 pixels (1080i/1080p).
The iPad will never be HD, as the term is generally used. But if the term can mean anything one wants, one can claim that the iPad is already HD.
If "HD" means something, it means display resolutions of 1,280×720 pixels (720p) or 1,920×1,080 pixels (1080i/1080p).
The iPad will never be HD, as the term is generally used. But if the term can mean anything one wants, one can claim that the iPad is already HD.
I'm not joking.
Thinking you're "joking" or "trolling" is better than the alternative. So just to clarify you are saying without a doubt in your mind that 2048 pixels along the x-axis doesn't contain either 1280 or 1920 pixels and that 1536 pixels along the y-axis doesn't contain either 720 or 1080 pixels.
Your argument is that each pixel from a 1280x720 or 1920x1080 video cant be directlt repeesented. Sad!
Also, according to your argument any content that exceeds the aspect ratio of the standard HD display, which are plentiful with 2.35:1 means they also aren't in HD.
Perhaps it's time to learn that HD is a lose term that means anything over SD and that even those 720p is still considered HD eventually it will referred to as SD the way 480p no longer refers to HD.
Thinking you're "joking" or "trolling" is better than the alternative. So just to clarify you are saying without a double in your mind that 2048 pixels along the x-axis doesn't contain either 1280 or 1920 pixels and that 1536 pixels along the y-axis doesn't contain either 720 or 1080 pixels.
Your argument is that each pixel from a 1280x720 or 1920x1080 video cant be directlt repeesented. Sad!
Also, according to your argument any content that exceeds the aspect ratio of the standard HD display, which are plentiful with 2.35:1 means they also aren't in HD.
Perhaps it's time to learn that HD is a lose term that means anything over SD and that even those 720p is still considered HD eventually it will referred to as SD the way 480p no longer refers to HD.
No. I am saying the term HD has a meaning. I am predicting that the iPad will never fall into that meaning.
So you don't believe that the iPad will get a Retina display at any point in its product run?
I'm sure he thinks it will, unless he has arbitrarily assigned 3:2 aspect ratio or 960x640 as the only resolution to mean Retina Display. However he believes that no matter how much higher the resolution is over the standard HDTV it will never have a definition that is HIGH, in his opinion. It could be 1,000,000p and he'd still say it's standard definition. Brilliant¡
2) Explain to us you rationale that aspect ratio defines definition without any consideration for pixel density or resolution.
I have no particular rationale for the meaning of the term "HD" or "High Definition" as it is generally applied to display technology.
Nice try at trolling. You understand exactly and precisely what I am saying, as I have repeated it several times. Each time, you have tried to put words in my mouth.
If you still have problems, work them out yourself or better yet, continue to claim things that I may have said, had I put all logic and most normal word definitions aside.
If you cant afford the current or at least the one before the current then you wont be able get much content for your iphone cause most apps in the apple apps store cost money.
You are better off with android if you cant or dont want to speed money on apps
The last figures I saw, 82% of the apps in the AppStore were in the free category, with just 18% paid. Apple users like their free apps too.
"Using Apple's announced figures, the App Store model suggests that 82 percent of applications on the iOS App Store are free, while 18 percent are paid. Those paid applications have an average selling price of $1.44."
With iphone 4 not being able to do SIRI why would anyone want one even if its free
The 3GS is more aesthetically pleasing and feels much nicer in the hand. I'm still not a fan of the iPhone4/4S "cereal-box". My 3GS still isn't 2 years old. I'm perfectly happy with it and it runs iOS5. Thanks to the lower screen res, it performs well.
The new model has some features I'd like, but I'm not exactly dying to get one. Siri looks like an interesting piece of beta software but is not a pre-requisite for life as we know it.
I figure I'm an iPhone5 candidate. Hopefully that will include a form factor redesign.
Comments
The guy I was quoting never stops.
My guess is that he was in danger of losing his account due to complaints about his insults, and that the mods allowed him to abandon it instead of accepting a ban. The new account was allowed due to his whining that other people have multiple accounts, and that to deny him the same would not not be fair.
Pretty close?
PS: People refer to the next iPad as iPad 3 not because they are sure it will be called that, but because it's the 3rd gen iPad. For all we know it could be iPad 2S if it has the same form factor, or even iPad 2 HD or anything else, but we sat iPad 3 because it's a logical placeholder.
Agreed...
However, If the next iPad was going to be essentially the same form factor with the addition of processor/graphics boost, Retina Display and Siri...
I'd rather see it called the iPad 2RS, or just iPad RS, instead of HD. HD has become such an overused term lately and i'd hope apple would stay away from buzz terminology like this.
For example, have you ever seen that infomercial that is trying to sell you sunglasses that "let you see things in High Definition"? I mean, seriously...
HD has become such an overused term lately and i'd hope apple would stay away from buzz terminology like this.
Not only that, but the iPad will NEVER have an HD screen. They are ONLY good for watching movies. Everything else works best with the nearly square screen currently used on the iPad.
Agreed...
However, If the next iPad was going to be essentially the same form factor with the addition of processor/graphics boost, Retina Display and Siri...
I'd rather see it called the iPad 2RS, or just iPad RS, instead of HD. HD has become such an overused term lately and i'd hope apple would stay away from buzz terminology like this.
For example, have you ever seen that infomercial that is trying to sell you sunglasses that "let you see things in High Definition"? I mean, seriously...
As a general rule I have never been a fan of Apple's naming conventions. MacBook and its variants; iPod, iPad, or 'i' anything save for the iPhone; or AirPort whatever. That said, I don't buy products for the name but how they for into my life.
Not only that, but the iPad will NEVER have an HD screen. They are ONLY good for watching movies. Everything else works best with the nearly square screen currently used on the iPad.
This is where I point out aspect ratio is not synonymous with high definition. Your typical reply is usually some roundabout way to say you were only joking.
This is where I point out aspect ratio is not synonymous with high definition. Your typical reply is usually some roundabout way to say you were only joking.
If "HD" means something, it means display resolutions of 1,280×720 pixels (720p) or 1,920×1,080 pixels (1080i/1080p).
The iPad will never be HD, as the term is generally used. But if the term can mean anything one wants, one can claim that the iPad is already HD.
I'm not joking.
If "HD" means something, it means display resolutions of 1,280×720 pixels (720p) or 1,920×1,080 pixels (1080i/1080p).
The iPad will never be HD, as the term is generally used. But if the term can mean anything one wants, one can claim that the iPad is already HD.
I'm not joking.
First gen, no. Second gen, no. Third gen, possibly. That tends to be the thing people believe.
If "HD" means something, it means display resolutions of 1,280×720 pixels (720p) or 1,920×1,080 pixels (1080i/1080p).
The iPad will never be HD, as the term is generally used. But if the term can mean anything one wants, one can claim that the iPad is already HD.
I'm not joking.
Thinking you're "joking" or "trolling" is better than the alternative. So just to clarify you are saying without a doubt in your mind that 2048 pixels along the x-axis doesn't contain either 1280 or 1920 pixels and that 1536 pixels along the y-axis doesn't contain either 720 or 1080 pixels.
Your argument is that each pixel from a 1280x720 or 1920x1080 video cant be directlt repeesented. Sad!
Also, according to your argument any content that exceeds the aspect ratio of the standard HD display, which are plentiful with 2.35:1 means they also aren't in HD.
Perhaps it's time to learn that HD is a lose term that means anything over SD and that even those 720p is still considered HD eventually it will referred to as SD the way 480p no longer refers to HD.
Thinking you're "joking" or "trolling" is better than the alternative. So just to clarify you are saying without a double in your mind that 2048 pixels along the x-axis doesn't contain either 1280 or 1920 pixels and that 1536 pixels along the y-axis doesn't contain either 720 or 1080 pixels.
Your argument is that each pixel from a 1280x720 or 1920x1080 video cant be directlt repeesented. Sad!
Also, according to your argument any content that exceeds the aspect ratio of the standard HD display, which are plentiful with 2.35:1 means they also aren't in HD.
Perhaps it's time to learn that HD is a lose term that means anything over SD and that even those 720p is still considered HD eventually it will referred to as SD the way 480p no longer refers to HD.
No. I am saying the term HD has a meaning. I am predicting that the iPad will never fall into that meaning.
No need to fling insults.
No. I am saying the term HD has a meaning. I am predicting that the iPad will never fall into that meaning.
So you don't believe that the iPad will get a Retina display at any point in its product run?
No. I am saying the term HD has a meaning. I am predicting that the iPad will never fall into that meaning.
No need to fling insults.
1) Stop whining.
2) Explain to us you rationale that aspect ratio defines definition without any consideration for pixel density or resolution.
So you don't believe that the iPad will get a Retina display at any point in its product run?
I'm sure he thinks it will, unless he has arbitrarily assigned 3:2 aspect ratio or 960x640 as the only resolution to mean Retina Display. However he believes that no matter how much higher the resolution is over the standard HDTV it will never have a definition that is HIGH, in his opinion. It could be 1,000,000p and he'd still say it's standard definition. Brilliant¡
I could swear dying the iPhone 3GS special event the [S] was stated as being for speed.
Yes, the "S" in 3GS stands for Speed.
WWDC 2009: Apple unveils iPhone 3GS
I don't remember anything official about the S in 4S either.
1) Stop whining.
2) Explain to us you rationale that aspect ratio defines definition without any consideration for pixel density or resolution.
I have no particular rationale for the meaning of the term "HD" or "High Definition" as it is generally applied to display technology.
Nice try at trolling. You understand exactly and precisely what I am saying, as I have repeated it several times. Each time, you have tried to put words in my mouth.
If you still have problems, work them out yourself or better yet, continue to claim things that I may have said, had I put all logic and most normal word definitions aside.
If you cant afford the current or at least the one before the current then you wont be able get much content for your iphone cause most apps in the apple apps store cost money.
You are better off with android if you cant or dont want to speed money on apps
The last figures I saw, 82% of the apps in the AppStore were in the free category, with just 18% paid. Apple users like their free apps too.
"Using Apple's announced figures, the App Store model suggests that 82 percent of applications on the iOS App Store are free, while 18 percent are paid. Those paid applications have an average selling price of $1.44."
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...ice_up_14.html
The last figures I saw, 82% of the apps in the AppStore were in the free category, with just 18% paid. Apple users like their free apps too.
Given the amazing popularity of the FreeGS, that makes a lot of sense. Apple has captured a whole new demographic.
With iphone 4 not being able to do SIRI why would anyone want one even if its free
The 3GS is more aesthetically pleasing and feels much nicer in the hand. I'm still not a fan of the iPhone4/4S "cereal-box". My 3GS still isn't 2 years old. I'm perfectly happy with it and it runs iOS5. Thanks to the lower screen res, it performs well.
The new model has some features I'd like, but I'm not exactly dying to get one. Siri looks like an interesting piece of beta software but is not a pre-requisite for life as we know it.
I figure I'm an iPhone5 candidate. Hopefully that will include a form factor redesign.