dont fall for it jag.. if you notice, there is a trend of confrontation and argument rather than discussion and criticism from some people on this site.
See PM.
BTW, sorry for having a hand in dragging your thread off topic.
The 6th generation iPhone running iOS 6 on an A6 processor will not be called the iPhone 5. That's nonsense.
The 5th generation iPhone running iOS 5 on an A5 processor is called the iPhone 4s. I have no idea what the next iPhone will be called nor do I really care, I just don't think iPhone 6 is a given for the reasons you stated. As for the iPad it doesn't sound like the "retina" display will show until the 4th revision.
The 5th generation iPhone running iOS 5 on an A5 processor is called the iPhone 4s.
Exactly, so there's absolutely no reason to call the next one the iPhone 5.
Quote:
I just don't think iPhone 6 is a given for the reasons you stated.
Well, it won't be "iPhone 4G" because Apple has expressly stated they're going to let the carriers beat each other up over telephony technology names.
And it's not likely to be "iPhone LTE" as Sprint would then have to sell an "iPhone LTE" on their network that 1. Has WiMAX and WiMAX only, and 2. Wouldn't work on anything but 3G there, anyway.
That really only leaves 6 unless you have an awesome alternative you've held in reserve? I'm all ears for a new awesome name.
Quote:
As for the iPad it doesn't sound like the "retina" display will show until the 4th revision.
As a completely unrelated response, that's not going to be related to any numbering conventions; rather, the presumed (un)availability of panels in appropriate volume from LG/Samsung, agreed?
As a completely unrelated response, that's not going to be related to any numbering conventions; rather, the presumed (un)availability of panels in appropriate volume from LG/Samsung, agreed?
I would agree with that. I have read that an increase in resolution to 1600x1200 may be in the works for rev3 but that seems like a less than ideal step...
As per the iPhone name, I have no name to offer and I wasn't trying to say you are wrong, just pointing out that the past wonky naming pattern hasn't been tied to revision/os/chip.
As per the iPhone name, I have no name to offer and I wasn't trying to say you are wrong, just pointing out that the past wonky naming pattern hasn't been tied to revision/os/chip.
I guess I understand. I don't think anyone would have bought an "iPhone S5L8920" over an "iPhone 3GS".
The 6th generation iPhone running iOS 6 on an A6 processor will not be called the iPhone 5. That's nonsense.
So you should be waiting for the iPhone 2. By that rationale, it's MANY years overdue.
When the iPhone 5 was announced this morning, I was reminded of this thread and this particular post... made with such conviction and a certain all-knowing bravado.
Anyone here who is actually plugged into Apple or the decisions of the executives likely isn't saying very much. And those who tend to have the most to say, may just be the ones who know the least. And so it goes... As The World Turns.
Fine. Explain why else the 6th device with an A6 chip running iOS 6 was the "iPhone 5" when the 4th device with an A4 chip running iOS 4 was the "iPhone 4".
Internally, the iPhone 4 reports as iPhone3,1. Internally, we can assume the 6th iPhone reports as iPhone 5,1.
Fine. Explain why else the 6th device with an A6 chip running iOS 6 was the "iPhone 5" when the 4th device with an A4 chip running iOS 4 was the "iPhone 4".
Internally, the iPhone 4 reports as iPhone3,1. Internally, we can assume the 6th iPhone reports as iPhone 5,1.
What changed in the last two years?
As I tried to explain to you last year, companies are under no obligation to follow naming conventions that you, or any other consumer/observer, approve of. Apple can and will call its devices whatever it chooses, whether you like it or approve of it or not. This is reality. And we must learn to deal with that reality.
Unless one is plugged into Tim Cook's brain, you don't know. So there's no reason to *believe* that you know. Now that this device has been named the iPhone 5, do you finally see where I was coming from? Probably not. But with this announcement, the point is now clearly made none the less.
Something has changed in the past six months, then. They didn't give their last product a name that didn't apply.
They called the 6th iPhone a name that has nothing to do with the device whatsoever in any respect. I somehow doubt that it's a coincidence that the blogosphere has used this name for a year.
Dude, you're beating a dead horse. You don't need to explain to me how you got to that wrong turn in the road. No one said that your original logic was bad. Your reasons for believing what you did made sense... somewhat. What I said was, you're not privy to decisions made at Apple. Apple decides. And only Apple decides. Opinions on fan boards mean nothing. So for one to insist what Apple will or will not do is complete folly, as demonstrated here.
Except they're apparently stronger than common sense in Apple's mind now.
There's just no actual evidence of that being true. Do you have a link to an interview or something that supports that claim? But look, as I was trying to explain last year, at the end of the day, it's just a name on a smartphone - much like the number being dropped altogether from the last iPad. And although (as I said) your basic reasoning was not really faulty, you're not plugged into Apple or its marketing strategies any more than any of the rest of us. In Apple's view, it might have made less logical sense to go from 4S to 6. I don't know. But don't make more of it than necessary. Other than your comments on this fan board/forum, I've really heard not a single peep about this in the outside world.
Comments
dont fall for it jag.. if you notice, there is a trend of confrontation and argument rather than discussion and criticism from some people on this site.
See PM.
BTW, sorry for having a hand in dragging your thread off topic.
Mike
Sorry, Steve - I still want Flash and universal AirPrint on my next iPad.
Mike
Sorry, Mike. The former will absolutely never happen and the latter is up to the printer manufacturers.
Sincerely,
Common Sense. Or Silence Dogood, if you prefer.
Oh, dear heaven's not THIS conversation again…
The 6th generation iPhone running iOS 6 on an A6 processor will not be called the iPhone 5. That's nonsense.
The 5th generation iPhone running iOS 5 on an A5 processor is called the iPhone 4s. I have no idea what the next iPhone will be called nor do I really care, I just don't think iPhone 6 is a given for the reasons you stated. As for the iPad it doesn't sound like the "retina" display will show until the 4th revision.
The 5th generation iPhone running iOS 5 on an A5 processor is called the iPhone 4s.
Exactly, so there's absolutely no reason to call the next one the iPhone 5.
I just don't think iPhone 6 is a given for the reasons you stated.
Well, it won't be "iPhone 4G" because Apple has expressly stated they're going to let the carriers beat each other up over telephony technology names.
And it's not likely to be "iPhone LTE" as Sprint would then have to sell an "iPhone LTE" on their network that 1. Has WiMAX and WiMAX only, and 2. Wouldn't work on anything but 3G there, anyway.
That really only leaves 6 unless you have an awesome alternative you've held in reserve? I'm all ears for a new awesome name.
As for the iPad it doesn't sound like the "retina" display will show until the 4th revision.
As a completely unrelated response, that's not going to be related to any numbering conventions; rather, the presumed (un)availability of panels in appropriate volume from LG/Samsung, agreed?
As a completely unrelated response, that's not going to be related to any numbering conventions; rather, the presumed (un)availability of panels in appropriate volume from LG/Samsung, agreed?
I would agree with that.
As per the iPhone name, I have no name to offer and I wasn't trying to say you are wrong, just pointing out that the past wonky naming pattern hasn't been tied to revision/os/chip.
As per the iPhone name, I have no name to offer and I wasn't trying to say you are wrong, just pointing out that the past wonky naming pattern hasn't been tied to revision/os/chip.
I guess I understand. I don't think anyone would have bought an "iPhone S5L8920" over an "iPhone 3GS".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Oh, dear heaven's not THIS conversation again?
The 6th generation iPhone running iOS 6 on an A6 processor will not be called the iPhone 5. That's nonsense.
So you should be waiting for the iPhone 2. By that rationale, it's MANY years overdue.
When the iPhone 5 was announced this morning, I was reminded of this thread and this particular post... made with such conviction and a certain all-knowing bravado.
Anyone here who is actually plugged into Apple or the decisions of the executives likely isn't saying very much. And those who tend to have the most to say, may just be the ones who know the least. And so it goes... As The World Turns.
Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior
Anyone here who is actually plugged into Apple or the decisions of the executives likely isn't saying very much.
We don't need to be. We ARE their naming source now.
Riiiiight. ;-)
Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior
Riiiiight. ;-)
Fine. Explain why else the 6th device with an A6 chip running iOS 6 was the "iPhone 5" when the 4th device with an A4 chip running iOS 4 was the "iPhone 4".
Internally, the iPhone 4 reports as iPhone3,1. Internally, we can assume the 6th iPhone reports as iPhone 5,1.
What changed in the last two years?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Fine. Explain why else the 6th device with an A6 chip running iOS 6 was the "iPhone 5" when the 4th device with an A4 chip running iOS 4 was the "iPhone 4".
Internally, the iPhone 4 reports as iPhone3,1. Internally, we can assume the 6th iPhone reports as iPhone 5,1.
What changed in the last two years?
As I tried to explain to you last year, companies are under no obligation to follow naming conventions that you, or any other consumer/observer, approve of. Apple can and will call its devices whatever it chooses, whether you like it or approve of it or not. This is reality. And we must learn to deal with that reality.
Unless one is plugged into Tim Cook's brain, you don't know. So there's no reason to *believe* that you know. Now that this device has been named the iPhone 5, do you finally see where I was coming from? Probably not. But with this announcement, the point is now clearly made none the less.
Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior
Apple can and will call its devices whatever it chooses…
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Apples-Phil-Schiller-on-the-new-iPad-name-because-we-dont-want-to-be-predictable_id27823
Something has changed in the past six months, then. They didn't give their last product a name that didn't apply.
They called the 6th iPhone a name that has nothing to do with the device whatsoever in any respect. I somehow doubt that it's a coincidence that the blogosphere has used this name for a year.
Dude, you're beating a dead horse. You don't need to explain to me how you got to that wrong turn in the road. No one said that your original logic was bad. Your reasons for believing what you did made sense... somewhat. What I said was, you're not privy to decisions made at Apple. Apple decides. And only Apple decides. Opinions on fan boards mean nothing. So for one to insist what Apple will or will not do is complete folly, as demonstrated here.
Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior
Opinions on fan boards mean nothing.
Except they're apparently stronger than common sense in Apple's mind now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Except they're apparently stronger than common sense in Apple's mind now.
There's just no actual evidence of that being true. Do you have a link to an interview or something that supports that claim? But look, as I was trying to explain last year, at the end of the day, it's just a name on a smartphone - much like the number being dropped altogether from the last iPad. And although (as I said) your basic reasoning was not really faulty, you're not plugged into Apple or its marketing strategies any more than any of the rest of us. In Apple's view, it might have made less logical sense to go from 4S to 6. I don't know. But don't make more of it than necessary. Other than your comments on this fan board/forum, I've really heard not a single peep about this in the outside world.
Is Siri for the upcoming iOS 6 software going to be release for the iPad 2?
I have a new iPad, but my friend is the owner of a iPad 2.
Originally Posted by AdrianJNYC
Is Siri for the upcoming iOS 6 software going to be release for the iPad 2?
No.
Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior
There's just no actual evidence of that being true.
The 6th phone has a number 5 in the name. Come on.