propynyl
Mar 22, 04:26 PM
Hard drives are a dying technology. Rightfully so! Any non-computer with a HD should be killed! And in the next few years, HDs should go the way of the floppy.
raymondso
Oct 23, 07:44 AM
Hoping not only MBP, but also MP.
I've been waiting too long with my money burning my pocket :(
update: sorry, should be MB instead of MP, typing mistake
I've been waiting too long with my money burning my pocket :(
update: sorry, should be MB instead of MP, typing mistake
jace88
Jan 4, 03:12 AM
Evos are awesome cars! How fast is your model 0-60
Thanks :) Manufacturer claims it's low 5's, but I think it's closer to 5.5 (stock). Whilst I've got some mods on it (intake/exhaust), I recently detuned it because the aftermarket tune I was running was misfiring when WOT (might've been cool to teenagers watching from the side of the road but scared the heck out of me as I don't want engine trouble!).
Thanks :) Manufacturer claims it's low 5's, but I think it's closer to 5.5 (stock). Whilst I've got some mods on it (intake/exhaust), I recently detuned it because the aftermarket tune I was running was misfiring when WOT (might've been cool to teenagers watching from the side of the road but scared the heck out of me as I don't want engine trouble!).
.jpg "short hairstyles for men 2011.")
h'biki
Apr 16, 03:21 AM
when marketshare is almost 0 % you are close to dying, look a 1 % of all new machines built is not giving me any confidence in the platform. sure we have 10 % in a installed platform but are loosing everywhere( thank you motorola for holding up the ass end. Fact is Pcs are running away from Mac and when a 500 dollar machine kicks a new $2000 Imac its time to say so long to Jobs and his croonies. Supported you guys way to long at my expense.
Layman's version:
When you CEASE TO MAKE A PROFIT then you are dying*. Until then, it doesn't matter what your market share is.
If 1% of the world's population gave me a dollar, I'd be very rich. If 50% of the world's population gave you 1 cent, you'd also be rich, but not as rich as me... even though you have a greater market share. Its all about margins!
For those who are actually interested in understanding the world of business:
*Well, possibly dying... You have to continue to lose money and do it over a period of time before you are dying. Even then, that may be a result of mismanagement, rather than the company itself being dead -- there may still be the potential for money to be made. Really, the only time a company is dead is when its bankrupt and/or when its taken over and its assets stripped (because its been mis-valued).
To give two recent examples. Gateway has been losing money for some time. It has gone from a all time high in 1997 of $61 per share to its current price of around $6 (which it has been at for over the last year). In other words, its been devalued by a magnitude of 10. (They may have refinanced during that time and devalued the price per share, while increasing their overall market value... but I can't remember them doing that. Gateway may have greater marker share, but Apple is valued at around $28 per share. Just to make the comparison properly fair, Gateway has a market value of $1,999 Million, while Apple's market value is around $10,000 million. In other words, Apple is worth ten times as much as Gateway, despite their smaller market share. (Admittely, Apple's share price flucates like crazy, but thats arguably a result of the FUD of uninformed gits, like those at C|Net). Nonetheless, Gateway is likely to be around for some time. Until it continues to burn through money and its share price drops even lower, and it becomes the target of a hostile takeover... which will result in (1) a merger/total buyout/absortion; (2) a massive corporate governance change because the hostile company thinks there's money to be made; and (3) its bought out, its assets stripped and resold.
Example 2 is Media 100. They were also burning through money. Unlike Gateway, however, they weren't generating much gross revenue. Their technology was good, but not that good, and their management was baaad. They weren't generating much gross revenue, which is why no one was really interested in buying them or giving them a loan. They just didn't seem capable of even making a profit (and thats what matters). They were a dying company (unlike Gateway, which is just troubled). So they were forced to file for bankruptcy. Now their assets are being bought by Optibase -- when that deal is complete, they will be dead.
Point is, corporate finance is a very convuluted world. They're like stars. The bigger they are, the longer it usually takes them to die. Sometimes there are corporate "supernovas" (like Enron or HIH or OneTel) in which the whole corporate structure implodes, but thats because of criminal negligence, lack of transparency, and dodgy account practices. (All of which render the mechanisms of the market for corporate control to be rather useless. Noone wants to touch a company when you don't want to know what you're buying).
The most important thing to the world of corporate finance -- the one in which a company lives or dies -- is profit per share, then revenue. Both of which Apple has. Thus it is healthy. Oh, and its debt free. This is a good thing, because it signals to potentially future creditors that it pays off it loans... thus they're likely to bail it out, if it finds itself in trouble again. (Of course, there are mitigating factors there, but thats true of anything).
The only reason that Apple's market share is an issue is because uninformed gits in the IT press (tautology that) scream about it being an issue. This creates information asynchronicity (imnsho) and distorts the market (both the share market and the IT market). Personally I reckon that if people didn't think market share was an issue, Apple would actually be increasing its marketshare. Of course, thats exactly the reason companies like C|NET do scream about it, so it becomes a quasi self-fulfililng prophercy.
Here endeth the lesson on "Introduction to Corporate Financing 101"
Layman's version:
When you CEASE TO MAKE A PROFIT then you are dying*. Until then, it doesn't matter what your market share is.
If 1% of the world's population gave me a dollar, I'd be very rich. If 50% of the world's population gave you 1 cent, you'd also be rich, but not as rich as me... even though you have a greater market share. Its all about margins!
For those who are actually interested in understanding the world of business:
*Well, possibly dying... You have to continue to lose money and do it over a period of time before you are dying. Even then, that may be a result of mismanagement, rather than the company itself being dead -- there may still be the potential for money to be made. Really, the only time a company is dead is when its bankrupt and/or when its taken over and its assets stripped (because its been mis-valued).
To give two recent examples. Gateway has been losing money for some time. It has gone from a all time high in 1997 of $61 per share to its current price of around $6 (which it has been at for over the last year). In other words, its been devalued by a magnitude of 10. (They may have refinanced during that time and devalued the price per share, while increasing their overall market value... but I can't remember them doing that. Gateway may have greater marker share, but Apple is valued at around $28 per share. Just to make the comparison properly fair, Gateway has a market value of $1,999 Million, while Apple's market value is around $10,000 million. In other words, Apple is worth ten times as much as Gateway, despite their smaller market share. (Admittely, Apple's share price flucates like crazy, but thats arguably a result of the FUD of uninformed gits, like those at C|Net). Nonetheless, Gateway is likely to be around for some time. Until it continues to burn through money and its share price drops even lower, and it becomes the target of a hostile takeover... which will result in (1) a merger/total buyout/absortion; (2) a massive corporate governance change because the hostile company thinks there's money to be made; and (3) its bought out, its assets stripped and resold.
Example 2 is Media 100. They were also burning through money. Unlike Gateway, however, they weren't generating much gross revenue. Their technology was good, but not that good, and their management was baaad. They weren't generating much gross revenue, which is why no one was really interested in buying them or giving them a loan. They just didn't seem capable of even making a profit (and thats what matters). They were a dying company (unlike Gateway, which is just troubled). So they were forced to file for bankruptcy. Now their assets are being bought by Optibase -- when that deal is complete, they will be dead.
Point is, corporate finance is a very convuluted world. They're like stars. The bigger they are, the longer it usually takes them to die. Sometimes there are corporate "supernovas" (like Enron or HIH or OneTel) in which the whole corporate structure implodes, but thats because of criminal negligence, lack of transparency, and dodgy account practices. (All of which render the mechanisms of the market for corporate control to be rather useless. Noone wants to touch a company when you don't want to know what you're buying).
The most important thing to the world of corporate finance -- the one in which a company lives or dies -- is profit per share, then revenue. Both of which Apple has. Thus it is healthy. Oh, and its debt free. This is a good thing, because it signals to potentially future creditors that it pays off it loans... thus they're likely to bail it out, if it finds itself in trouble again. (Of course, there are mitigating factors there, but thats true of anything).
The only reason that Apple's market share is an issue is because uninformed gits in the IT press (tautology that) scream about it being an issue. This creates information asynchronicity (imnsho) and distorts the market (both the share market and the IT market). Personally I reckon that if people didn't think market share was an issue, Apple would actually be increasing its marketshare. Of course, thats exactly the reason companies like C|NET do scream about it, so it becomes a quasi self-fulfililng prophercy.
Here endeth the lesson on "Introduction to Corporate Financing 101"
JunBug119
Nov 26, 10:44 PM
Hate it when a coworker shoves me an order form and I feel obligated to purchase something.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v328/BurningSensation/ChocCaramelCrunchPackage2.jpg
Tennis elbow sucks
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v328/BurningSensation/mueller-adjustable-elbow-support4521300.jpg
For my netbook
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v328/BurningSensation/logitech-n315-lapdesk-156-notebook-cooler-dc939-000182.jpg
For the mentioned netbook cause I hate using the trackpad
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v328/BurningSensation/Microsoft-Wireless-Mobile-Mouse-4000-with-BlueTrack.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v328/BurningSensation/ChocCaramelCrunchPackage2.jpg
Tennis elbow sucks
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v328/BurningSensation/mueller-adjustable-elbow-support4521300.jpg
For my netbook
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v328/BurningSensation/logitech-n315-lapdesk-156-notebook-cooler-dc939-000182.jpg
For the mentioned netbook cause I hate using the trackpad
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v328/BurningSensation/Microsoft-Wireless-Mobile-Mouse-4000-with-BlueTrack.jpg
hunkaburningluv
Mar 26, 08:28 AM
If someone had come out with a console allowing for full-color 1024x768 touchscreen controllers the other consoles would be scrambling to catch up. Even if that controller cost $499.
While there are some nits here (30fps isn't exactly ideal performance, the dongle connection seems too flimsy for real gameplay, etc) I think this is a huge step forward in gaming.
Nintendo and Microsoft should be shaking in their boots right now.
As a rather casual gamer, I'd love to see the bastard love-child of this and kinect.
you think? I think no none would buy the $499 controller as it's too expensive for a controller.
Ninty and M$ have nothing to worry about anything that apple does in relation to games will supplement the market as it is.
Not really. Properly designed controls on touch screen will be just fine... You will see...
Anyone who thinks that the long-term viability of the IOS ecosystem as a significant home game player because of the lack of hard controls is just missing the picture.
I can't figure out why some people think you have to look at the screen of a touchscreen device to use it to manipulate things in a game world. Between rotation and movement of the device itself with properly placed buttons you can do a lot with it, none of it requiring looking at the touch screen.
I suspect most people could distinguish between the lower left corner of their device and the upper right corner, for instance, without looking at the screen.
There is still a vast difference in the tactility (sp) and force feed back that hardcore gamers won't take too - as much as I don't like modern warfare, but I doubt the metric crapload of players would prefer to play with touch controls
but when you remove the need for look at a touch screen, then why need it? A simple touch pad would suffice. By removing the need to look at the screen, you remove the point of it.
Hardcore gaming will never change to the extent it doesn't need a controller and as such the market isn't going to change. Sure I can't wait until I play starcraft or the like on an ipad, but I won't be ditching any of my consoles.
While there are some nits here (30fps isn't exactly ideal performance, the dongle connection seems too flimsy for real gameplay, etc) I think this is a huge step forward in gaming.
Nintendo and Microsoft should be shaking in their boots right now.
As a rather casual gamer, I'd love to see the bastard love-child of this and kinect.
you think? I think no none would buy the $499 controller as it's too expensive for a controller.
Ninty and M$ have nothing to worry about anything that apple does in relation to games will supplement the market as it is.
Not really. Properly designed controls on touch screen will be just fine... You will see...
Anyone who thinks that the long-term viability of the IOS ecosystem as a significant home game player because of the lack of hard controls is just missing the picture.
I can't figure out why some people think you have to look at the screen of a touchscreen device to use it to manipulate things in a game world. Between rotation and movement of the device itself with properly placed buttons you can do a lot with it, none of it requiring looking at the touch screen.
I suspect most people could distinguish between the lower left corner of their device and the upper right corner, for instance, without looking at the screen.
There is still a vast difference in the tactility (sp) and force feed back that hardcore gamers won't take too - as much as I don't like modern warfare, but I doubt the metric crapload of players would prefer to play with touch controls
but when you remove the need for look at a touch screen, then why need it? A simple touch pad would suffice. By removing the need to look at the screen, you remove the point of it.
Hardcore gaming will never change to the extent it doesn't need a controller and as such the market isn't going to change. Sure I can't wait until I play starcraft or the like on an ipad, but I won't be ditching any of my consoles.
Rodimus Prime
Mar 19, 11:56 AM
Must we get involved in this? Can't France do something for once by themselves, or any other european nations for that matter? When was the last time they even fired a weapon? You know, the taliban were once known as freedom fighters too. I'm so sick of these countries, let them self destruct, maybe some day they will choose to civilize themselves. Please, no more US to the rescue, and then they all wonder why many Americans have a feeling of exceptionalism. :rolleyes:
Umm kind of hard to do this with out the US and its military power. My understanding is the US it mostly going to provide support for it but not as much of the combat forces. The support being things like aerial refueling as we have the most of those flying gas tanks. They will circle over the Mediterranean Sea refueling planes going to and from missions. Kind of key to extend the range of the fighters and Fighter bombers.
Other thing the US I believe will provide is cruise missals as that they can launch from the Mediterranean Sea. This mostly to take out the Air Defenses. They might provide a few bombers to help take out artillery
US is not taking the lead. But is providing support. US is going to have the other countries really provide most of the planes needed for this.
Umm kind of hard to do this with out the US and its military power. My understanding is the US it mostly going to provide support for it but not as much of the combat forces. The support being things like aerial refueling as we have the most of those flying gas tanks. They will circle over the Mediterranean Sea refueling planes going to and from missions. Kind of key to extend the range of the fighters and Fighter bombers.
Other thing the US I believe will provide is cruise missals as that they can launch from the Mediterranean Sea. This mostly to take out the Air Defenses. They might provide a few bombers to help take out artillery
US is not taking the lead. But is providing support. US is going to have the other countries really provide most of the planes needed for this.
ZipZap
May 3, 04:50 AM
i bought my first ever ipad last week............
today while working on my macbook i touched its screen to flick through pictures...... amazing how easily we transform?
Took 5 versions of the iphone, 1 version of the ipad and a s-load of developers to get here.
today while working on my macbook i touched its screen to flick through pictures...... amazing how easily we transform?
Took 5 versions of the iphone, 1 version of the ipad and a s-load of developers to get here.
JoshH
Sep 6, 09:43 PM
I'm in consensus with everyone else... the quality has to be there. 480p minimum, and even then, that can look questionable on a high res monitor.
shabbasuraj
Oct 23, 09:18 AM
Tuesday is the day.
I think it is for real.
allegedly....
I think it is for real.
allegedly....
jettredmont
Apr 12, 10:16 PM
Fine. You all go and apply to work at a post house and put "iMovie" on your resume. See how long it takes for them to laugh you out the door.
I haven't really used iMovie since HD, so to be honest I don't really care what they do to it. It's "Super quick to capture and edit DV" time has come and gone.
Ummm ... if you are wanting to build your pro resume, obviously you wouldn't put a consumer app on it. I'm a software engineer, and I wouldn't put Automator as a skill on my resume either.
iMovie is a great consumer video editing app, far more capable than iMovie HD ever was, and still much easier for "everyday" people to understand. No, it's not Final Cut. That's why Apple makes Final Cut Pro.
I haven't really used iMovie since HD, so to be honest I don't really care what they do to it. It's "Super quick to capture and edit DV" time has come and gone.
Ummm ... if you are wanting to build your pro resume, obviously you wouldn't put a consumer app on it. I'm a software engineer, and I wouldn't put Automator as a skill on my resume either.
iMovie is a great consumer video editing app, far more capable than iMovie HD ever was, and still much easier for "everyday" people to understand. No, it's not Final Cut. That's why Apple makes Final Cut Pro.
Built
Apr 2, 11:58 PM
Ummm - the reason probably is shown on the 1400 post "light bleed" thread. People WANT the thing bad so they don't "return" it... they get it "swapped". Quite a few people over there are on their 4th to 5th swap
(which boggles my mind frankly) in a search to get one with no bleed.
They all seem to have it to varying degrees but I have to hand it to Apple for (so far) not claiming this is "in spec" to shut down all these
"swaps".
Apple probably lists all these as "exchanges" and therefore they don't count as "returns". Makes the customer happy and makes them look good in the press. Everybody wins.
Towards the end of the huge thread over at Apple.com people are being told the same thing from the reps when they call... that Apple "is looking into the qc issue on this batch of iPads and hopes to resolve the issue". That's good news for everybody.
...but all the Apple apologists...so quick to jump to Apple's defense...say that there is no such problem. :D
You are dead on correct. Many people do not want to endure the wait for a new one if they return it...Many are waiting to see if Apple can resolve the issue in a future production batch. What good is exchanging if the new one is going to have the same, or worse, problem
I love Apple products but I am always entertained by the rabid zeal of the delusional Apple apologists who insist the company can do no wrong...OR...they simply ignore the common, and obvious, flaws in the Apple product they buy, trying to convince themselves that they have the only "good" one...which on some subconscious level they need to tell themselves so they can believe they are "special" somehow.
(which boggles my mind frankly) in a search to get one with no bleed.
They all seem to have it to varying degrees but I have to hand it to Apple for (so far) not claiming this is "in spec" to shut down all these
"swaps".
Apple probably lists all these as "exchanges" and therefore they don't count as "returns". Makes the customer happy and makes them look good in the press. Everybody wins.
Towards the end of the huge thread over at Apple.com people are being told the same thing from the reps when they call... that Apple "is looking into the qc issue on this batch of iPads and hopes to resolve the issue". That's good news for everybody.
...but all the Apple apologists...so quick to jump to Apple's defense...say that there is no such problem. :D
You are dead on correct. Many people do not want to endure the wait for a new one if they return it...Many are waiting to see if Apple can resolve the issue in a future production batch. What good is exchanging if the new one is going to have the same, or worse, problem
I love Apple products but I am always entertained by the rabid zeal of the delusional Apple apologists who insist the company can do no wrong...OR...they simply ignore the common, and obvious, flaws in the Apple product they buy, trying to convince themselves that they have the only "good" one...which on some subconscious level they need to tell themselves so they can believe they are "special" somehow.
tjwaido
Apr 27, 12:44 AM
APPle Store - Oh, wait. Apple would probable sue themselves for infringing on Apple Store. Seems to be the trend.
gkarris
Mar 22, 11:27 PM
I would buy this if it was 220gb. Great mockup
oooh, an Aluminum Unibody iPod Classic - now that would be an INSTANT Classic!!! :eek:
:D
oooh, an Aluminum Unibody iPod Classic - now that would be an INSTANT Classic!!! :eek:
:D
zac4mac
Sep 6, 10:01 AM
It may have been introduced then, but that wasn't the last time it was refreshed . See here which is actually on May 16th.
Wrong, all they did then was drop the bottom config. Top speed is STILL 2.16GHz, as it was the day the 15"MBP started shipping in Feb. - I have a 2.0 that I received Feb28. The ONLY speed bump the MBP has gotten was before they started shipping.
Z
Wrong, all they did then was drop the bottom config. Top speed is STILL 2.16GHz, as it was the day the 15"MBP started shipping in Feb. - I have a 2.0 that I received Feb28. The ONLY speed bump the MBP has gotten was before they started shipping.
Z
daneoni
Apr 12, 09:23 AM
Learned to drive on a manual car and suffice it to say i haven't forgotten what i learned.
mainstreetmark
Jul 19, 03:47 PM
Count me in, too.
Of course, they got an extra $200 out of me, because I wanted a black Macbook. *grumble*
Of course, they got an extra $200 out of me, because I wanted a black Macbook. *grumble*
Senbei
Sep 6, 09:11 AM
Any thoughts - why no Merom?
Apple seems to be stratifying their desktop lines based on processors.
Mini - Core Duo (Yonah) 1.66-1.83GHz
iMac - Core 2 Duo (Merom) 1.83GHz-2.33GHz
Mac Pro - Quad Xeon (Woodcrest) 2.00GHz-3.00GHz
All of this leaves room for Core 2 Duo E6600 (2.4GHz) and E6700 (2.67GHz) to eventually appear in a suitable form factor some time in the future.
Apple seems to be stratifying their desktop lines based on processors.
Mini - Core Duo (Yonah) 1.66-1.83GHz
iMac - Core 2 Duo (Merom) 1.83GHz-2.33GHz
Mac Pro - Quad Xeon (Woodcrest) 2.00GHz-3.00GHz
All of this leaves room for Core 2 Duo E6600 (2.4GHz) and E6700 (2.67GHz) to eventually appear in a suitable form factor some time in the future.
Sydde
Mar 20, 06:45 PM
Hang about for a moment. I think you have struck on something brilliant.
We let them trust God to cure them, from a disease He has allowed them to acquire, and there will be less of 'them', in the long run.
I like this line of thinking. Mother Nature would be amused.
Nature's cure. Scrape that pink fungus off the big rock.
We let them trust God to cure them, from a disease He has allowed them to acquire, and there will be less of 'them', in the long run.
I like this line of thinking. Mother Nature would be amused.
Nature's cure. Scrape that pink fungus off the big rock.
Tmelon
Mar 30, 08:39 PM
Launchpad is now fixed.. Click and hold to move multiple apps (shakes like iPhone)
When launching expose dock doesn't crash any more...
Much snappier in performance
Has anyone noticed when shutting down the menu bar up top stays into the blue screen?
Also has anyone noticed that spot light doesn't show apps anymore?
So does the Launchpad have an easy way to remove icons yet?
When launching expose dock doesn't crash any more...
Much snappier in performance
Has anyone noticed when shutting down the menu bar up top stays into the blue screen?
Also has anyone noticed that spot light doesn't show apps anymore?
So does the Launchpad have an easy way to remove icons yet?
lyzardking
Dec 22, 02:01 PM
Are they having problems finishing on time or do they quit before they get all the way finished?
I had two of them (on two different machines) just stop, all eight cores using 0% CPU.
Prior to that I'd get one done about 2 days early (with killer points) on each machine.
So I've restarted the client (dumped prefs/reinstalled F@H) on each machine and now have a completion date of ~12/25 (fingers crossed) for both machines.
Congrats to twoodcc for hitting the 3 mil mark!
I had two of them (on two different machines) just stop, all eight cores using 0% CPU.
Prior to that I'd get one done about 2 days early (with killer points) on each machine.
So I've restarted the client (dumped prefs/reinstalled F@H) on each machine and now have a completion date of ~12/25 (fingers crossed) for both machines.
Congrats to twoodcc for hitting the 3 mil mark!
nagromme
Sep 14, 11:57 AM
Consumer Reports is making five mistakes:
1. Not doing full-scale testing of the kind antenna engineers have called them out on. They’ve done informal testing—quick and easy, but not the full useful facts their readers deserve. Yes, that kind of testing would need some really expensive facilities and lots of time. So they should at least point out that their tests are very limited and may be misleading.
2. Not publishing stats on how many users actually lose calls over this. They do surveys all the time—how about one comparing the iPhone 4 to other phones in actual use? (Most of the iPhone 4 antenna complaints seem to come from people who don’t own one!)
3. Criticizing only the iPhone, not other phones, for losing signal when gripped wrong. (Which all phones clearly do. Some more, some less. Many of them tell you right in the manual not to “hold it that way!")
4. Exaggerating the problem. Putting a very rare and minor issue, that affects so few, ahead of so many positives that affect everyone: benefits no other phone can touch. How are their flaws (which no case can fix) vs. the iPhone acceptable? And does CR clearly state that they DO recommend the iPhone for case users—which is a huge (maybe the largest) group of phone users?
5. Standing on their ego (or worrying misguidedly about their reputation) and not refining their position when that is clearly called for. Black-and-white controversial simplicity sells mindshare and magazines. But it doesn’t reflect reality, and CR readers deserve better. CR should be willing to back down when they’ve gone too far. Example: “The iPhone 4’s antenna flaws are rarely an issue and it’s the best smartphone we reviewed. But because we don’t know what each buyer will experience, we are only able to fully recommend the iPhone 4 if you also use a case. Luckily, Apple will continue to supply one free of charge on request, so this antenna issue need not affect your calls nor your wallet."
I only trust CR’s large-scale survey data (they seem to be good at that) not their editorial content. They’ve consitently failed to note Apple’s legitimate strengths over the years (ever see an article helping the everyday buyer choose between OS X and Windows?) but never fail to make something out the negatives. That’s not helping an uninformed reader become informed. And it really does seem like an anti-Apple bias sometimes.
That is precisely what auto manufacturers do. They send a letter to every owner, and fix the problem, whether or not the owner has reported it.
And that kind of preventive mass action makes sense for a product that holds peoples’ lives in its hands every moment of use.
It’s absurd to suggest that Apple should “fix” a problem as though it were widespread, when it’s not. Fixing it when it IS a problem is all that is necessary. And then let the non-iPhone users continue to moan about how bad Apple is treating us contented iPhone users :D They believe a blog wildfire over actual user experience—or at least they enjoy fanning the wildfire?
1. Not doing full-scale testing of the kind antenna engineers have called them out on. They’ve done informal testing—quick and easy, but not the full useful facts their readers deserve. Yes, that kind of testing would need some really expensive facilities and lots of time. So they should at least point out that their tests are very limited and may be misleading.
2. Not publishing stats on how many users actually lose calls over this. They do surveys all the time—how about one comparing the iPhone 4 to other phones in actual use? (Most of the iPhone 4 antenna complaints seem to come from people who don’t own one!)
3. Criticizing only the iPhone, not other phones, for losing signal when gripped wrong. (Which all phones clearly do. Some more, some less. Many of them tell you right in the manual not to “hold it that way!")
4. Exaggerating the problem. Putting a very rare and minor issue, that affects so few, ahead of so many positives that affect everyone: benefits no other phone can touch. How are their flaws (which no case can fix) vs. the iPhone acceptable? And does CR clearly state that they DO recommend the iPhone for case users—which is a huge (maybe the largest) group of phone users?
5. Standing on their ego (or worrying misguidedly about their reputation) and not refining their position when that is clearly called for. Black-and-white controversial simplicity sells mindshare and magazines. But it doesn’t reflect reality, and CR readers deserve better. CR should be willing to back down when they’ve gone too far. Example: “The iPhone 4’s antenna flaws are rarely an issue and it’s the best smartphone we reviewed. But because we don’t know what each buyer will experience, we are only able to fully recommend the iPhone 4 if you also use a case. Luckily, Apple will continue to supply one free of charge on request, so this antenna issue need not affect your calls nor your wallet."
I only trust CR’s large-scale survey data (they seem to be good at that) not their editorial content. They’ve consitently failed to note Apple’s legitimate strengths over the years (ever see an article helping the everyday buyer choose between OS X and Windows?) but never fail to make something out the negatives. That’s not helping an uninformed reader become informed. And it really does seem like an anti-Apple bias sometimes.
That is precisely what auto manufacturers do. They send a letter to every owner, and fix the problem, whether or not the owner has reported it.
And that kind of preventive mass action makes sense for a product that holds peoples’ lives in its hands every moment of use.
It’s absurd to suggest that Apple should “fix” a problem as though it were widespread, when it’s not. Fixing it when it IS a problem is all that is necessary. And then let the non-iPhone users continue to moan about how bad Apple is treating us contented iPhone users :D They believe a blog wildfire over actual user experience—or at least they enjoy fanning the wildfire?
YS2003
Oct 23, 10:59 PM
I hope Apple will get this done this week. I see "when C2D lappy come out" threads repeatedly (mostly by new members). With the update, we will change that line of thread into the buyer's remorse threads from the people who bought CoreDuo MBP. That would be good for a change.
KnightWRX
Apr 21, 12:10 PM
Reports are the file isn't sent to Apple, it doesn't leave the iPhone/iTunes backup. It exists to cache the location of nearby cell towers to provide a rough location in an area with no GPS or data connection. If it wasn't persistent, it would be pointless
This explains it very well: http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12432603&postcount=16
But it doesn't need to be as persistent and as precise as it is for that to work. My history of last year is not relevent. The file should be flushed/cleaned out after a certain time. After a point, the data isn't useful to the phone.
It also shouldn't be backed-up. The device starts with a new DB when its new, no reason it shouldn't start over when you restore. That would alleviate some of the privacy concerns at least.
And if this same file isn't what is being sent to Apple, and you have information indicating this, then the summary of the article that makes it sound like it is should be fixed.
This explains it very well: http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12432603&postcount=16
But it doesn't need to be as persistent and as precise as it is for that to work. My history of last year is not relevent. The file should be flushed/cleaned out after a certain time. After a point, the data isn't useful to the phone.
It also shouldn't be backed-up. The device starts with a new DB when its new, no reason it shouldn't start over when you restore. That would alleviate some of the privacy concerns at least.
And if this same file isn't what is being sent to Apple, and you have information indicating this, then the summary of the article that makes it sound like it is should be fixed.
No comments:
Post a Comment