Legion93
May 2, 03:01 PM
+1
It's probably a QC issue. Some are thicker while others are not.
If your an Asian worker in china and work over 60 hours per week, you're probably going to get tired of putting 1,000 same parts over and over again per hour, thus causing some minor, and very minor tweaks to the device, and Apple's QC is excellent by the way.
It's probably a QC issue. Some are thicker while others are not.
If your an Asian worker in china and work over 60 hours per week, you're probably going to get tired of putting 1,000 same parts over and over again per hour, thus causing some minor, and very minor tweaks to the device, and Apple's QC is excellent by the way.
0815
Apr 5, 10:45 AM
If I would leak something, I would make sure the device is clean, the camera is in focus and there is enough light.
Why are leaked images (almost) always such bad quality?
High quality images would make it too easy see that it's all fake/mockup/... ... guess that's also the reason for the ugly scratched plastic cover - if the thing would be real he/she would have taken it off for a better picture.
Macrumors: please move back to page2 or better page99 ... it's too obvious of a fake. I rather see the Wozniak comment on page1 since this has some real content.
Why are leaked images (almost) always such bad quality?
High quality images would make it too easy see that it's all fake/mockup/... ... guess that's also the reason for the ugly scratched plastic cover - if the thing would be real he/she would have taken it off for a better picture.
Macrumors: please move back to page2 or better page99 ... it's too obvious of a fake. I rather see the Wozniak comment on page1 since this has some real content.
-AG-
Apr 5, 06:33 PM
I thought they were committed to Thunderbolt and ignoring USB 3.0
I wish people would actually think before they post sometimes.
YES this connector has USB3, it also has USB2, Thunderbolt and a pretty white cable too.
What people fail to realise is that if you own a current gen/future Mac you can use the thunderbolt part of the connection, if you own an older version then it will use the USB2 part. OR if you are using a USB3 compatible PC then you can use their USB3 connection.
Its actually a quite clever design and means that the iProducts 30pin connector can be relevant for many more years to come.
I wish people would actually think before they post sometimes.
YES this connector has USB3, it also has USB2, Thunderbolt and a pretty white cable too.
What people fail to realise is that if you own a current gen/future Mac you can use the thunderbolt part of the connection, if you own an older version then it will use the USB2 part. OR if you are using a USB3 compatible PC then you can use their USB3 connection.
Its actually a quite clever design and means that the iProducts 30pin connector can be relevant for many more years to come.
spongeandy87
Nov 18, 06:08 PM
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/White-OEM-iPhone-4G-Back-Rear-GLASS-Battery-COVER-00858-/280589735339?pt=UK_Mobiles_Accessories_RL&hash=item41547395ab#ht_1048wt_1141
more...
scoobydoo99
Oct 13, 07:06 PM
I find it funny how investors continue to trust these "analyst" <snip>
It's either:
THIS analyst
or
THESE analysts
please pluralize :)
It's either:
THIS analyst
or
THESE analysts
please pluralize :)
darkplanets
Apr 5, 07:42 PM
Am I the only one that's happy about adapters?
I feel they give the maximum flexibility for the minimum port interference; I'd rather have 4 of these good-for-any-use ports on my computer than a set number of fixed use ports, some of which never get used.
I guess it's just me?
I feel they give the maximum flexibility for the minimum port interference; I'd rather have 4 of these good-for-any-use ports on my computer than a set number of fixed use ports, some of which never get used.
I guess it's just me?
more...
Fukui
Apr 3, 07:13 PM
I'd LOVE to see Ruby support in TextEdit for Tiger!
EDIT: Oops, wandering off-topic again...
Ruby support should definitely be in an update of Pages.
I'm sure your not the only one.
EDIT: Oops, wandering off-topic again...
Ruby support should definitely be in an update of Pages.
I'm sure your not the only one.
MacViolinist
Oct 16, 07:46 PM
I would love something along the lines of a nano that made phone calls. I could even do without the numeric pad.
more...
gatearray
Apr 5, 01:01 PM
1. its obvious you have never used android
2. the xoom is an excellent device. those stating they think that having a dedicated tablet OS is silly is kidding themselves. How can you consider yourself a "power user" and be tripped up by honeycomb? Seriously, can you only operate touch screens' with grids? I would would submit facebook has a tougher learning curve than honeycomb, but stop with the comments already, 2.2/2.3/3.0 are very well done OS's
...
Yes yes yes, they're all just awesome OS's and the buying public really seems to be dedicated to all the sweet flavors of these many sugary-named, fragmented platforms. Anyway...
knock-knock
WHO'S THERE?
"a true tablet OS blah, blah, blah."
A TRUE TABLET OS, HOW CAN YOU TELL?
"there are not enough applications made for me to even arrange in a grid!"
:)
2. the xoom is an excellent device. those stating they think that having a dedicated tablet OS is silly is kidding themselves. How can you consider yourself a "power user" and be tripped up by honeycomb? Seriously, can you only operate touch screens' with grids? I would would submit facebook has a tougher learning curve than honeycomb, but stop with the comments already, 2.2/2.3/3.0 are very well done OS's
...
Yes yes yes, they're all just awesome OS's and the buying public really seems to be dedicated to all the sweet flavors of these many sugary-named, fragmented platforms. Anyway...
knock-knock
WHO'S THERE?
"a true tablet OS blah, blah, blah."
A TRUE TABLET OS, HOW CAN YOU TELL?
"there are not enough applications made for me to even arrange in a grid!"
:)
Fraaaa
Apr 21, 02:07 PM
The iphone 5 will be a minor spec bump, i seriously doubt they are waiting for september unless it is for LTE which people claim isnt coming until the revision after that (which imo will be quick to get it out before the holidays rather than waiting till the next june)
1. the A5 is more than a minor spec bump - it's a serious spec bump.
2. WHY would we want LTE when Android phones have already shown how bad is for battery life? Moreover, not all countries have LTE and even in the US is not widely adopted. Is useless have not optimized technology this time that also cannot be used but by few.
There is only one thing I could disagree on the A5 adoption on the iPhone. If you have seen the iPhone4 and iPad2 internals you should think about this:
a. The iPhone4 was so packed you could not fit an hair in it. The A5 is way bigger than the A4.
b. The solution for the iPad2 problem with the more demanding A5 consumption was to add a third pack of battery.
This means that the iPhone4 design cannot allow the A5 chip, let alone a bigger battery. I believe that Apple has surely an internal redesign; however, I feel that they will not use the same exact A5 found in the iPad2.
So, it's most likely they are going do these things.
1. One device that will work on both VZ and AT&T network
2. 32GB and 64G storage.
3. 1080P recording with 8 megapixel camera
4. A5 chip
5. Maybe higher ram or maybe not.
6. Throw in something new... like better gyroscope or something to just make iPhone 4 outdated, but nothing major.
This is BS. It's not good enough, apple.
More or less what companies have been doing in computing since 1980. What is your point?
Having said that, when people will realize that computer usability lies in the software and not the hardware?
1. the A5 is more than a minor spec bump - it's a serious spec bump.
2. WHY would we want LTE when Android phones have already shown how bad is for battery life? Moreover, not all countries have LTE and even in the US is not widely adopted. Is useless have not optimized technology this time that also cannot be used but by few.
There is only one thing I could disagree on the A5 adoption on the iPhone. If you have seen the iPhone4 and iPad2 internals you should think about this:
a. The iPhone4 was so packed you could not fit an hair in it. The A5 is way bigger than the A4.
b. The solution for the iPad2 problem with the more demanding A5 consumption was to add a third pack of battery.
This means that the iPhone4 design cannot allow the A5 chip, let alone a bigger battery. I believe that Apple has surely an internal redesign; however, I feel that they will not use the same exact A5 found in the iPad2.
So, it's most likely they are going do these things.
1. One device that will work on both VZ and AT&T network
2. 32GB and 64G storage.
3. 1080P recording with 8 megapixel camera
4. A5 chip
5. Maybe higher ram or maybe not.
6. Throw in something new... like better gyroscope or something to just make iPhone 4 outdated, but nothing major.
This is BS. It's not good enough, apple.
More or less what companies have been doing in computing since 1980. What is your point?
Having said that, when people will realize that computer usability lies in the software and not the hardware?
more...
GregA2
Nov 11, 02:26 AM
That sucks Justin Long isn't going to be in the ads anymore. I hope they don't stop them altogether- I was looking forward to some really good ones once Zune and Vista get here... :D
menziep
Sep 25, 10:57 AM
Good eye! Thanks for the heads up.
Sure.
Sure.
more...
atticus1178
Sep 19, 04:27 PM
I'm in the same boat. It beeps, I see the update bar but the DVD drive pops open and then shuts -- then normal boot. Ugh!
that is what mine did and was fine, it popped up a windows saying the update was complete, check your firmware version in System Profiler
that is what mine did and was fine, it popped up a windows saying the update was complete, check your firmware version in System Profiler
robogobo
Apr 19, 02:57 PM
64GB would be enough reason to get a white one if that's how they're going to market it.
more...
willybNL
Apr 19, 10:18 AM
I see Philips screws on the bottom.... remarkably (noticing the news lately).
And the camera on the back has strange artifact around it.
And the camera on the back has strange artifact around it.
leekohler
May 5, 02:59 PM
Oh please. If the NDP had got in then Canada would be royally screwed. The NDP has a poor record in a number of provinces of running the provincial governments into deep deficits and scaring away businesses.
I would take the opinion piece from someone with the Toronto Star with a little bit of salt. They are like the Huffington Post of Canada or a left leaning Canadian version of those British tabloids that they try to pass for "newspapers" in England.
So, I should not take Harper's word on his beliefs regarding social issues? Really? Do you really want to put money down that he won't act on those beliefs?
I would take the opinion piece from someone with the Toronto Star with a little bit of salt. They are like the Huffington Post of Canada or a left leaning Canadian version of those British tabloids that they try to pass for "newspapers" in England.
So, I should not take Harper's word on his beliefs regarding social issues? Really? Do you really want to put money down that he won't act on those beliefs?
more...
tablo13
Nov 14, 10:11 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
So 2011 will be like 1984
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYecfV3ubP8
Or more like the book Little Brother by Cory Doctorow.
So 2011 will be like 1984
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYecfV3ubP8
Or more like the book Little Brother by Cory Doctorow.
rshullic
Jul 14, 01:40 PM
Sort of.
Lets separate reading and writing exFAT. If I can read it, I can pull stuff off of it. So OS X will require the ability to read exFAT in order to make it compatible with non apple devices that will be using this format. HOWEVER, it is not required that Apple choose to read exFAT. You could format with HFS+. Then any device that can read HFS+ could read and write to it.
If I can write to exFAT, then I can place data (even 4GB+ media files) on the card. Apple may create a driver that allows you to read exFAT but not write to it.
This matters if you are going to use the card to store media files (4 GB+), or are planning on using the card with non Apple devices. I could get a 128 GB SDXC card, format 100 GB in FAT32 for a user directory, and format 3 8GB swap spaces (one for OS X, one for Windows, and one for Unix). Then I'd have my user files and swap space with me wherever I go, and it would be cross platform compatible (everyone reads and writes FAT32). Yes, FAT32 does have a maximum partition size, this is why I used a 128 GB SDXC card as the example. And yes, I wouldn't have my media files (movies) on the card (I'd need one of the 2 TB cards to do this).
Since Pretec is selling an ExpressCard SDXC reader, this is what I plan to do with my triple boot MBP (see sig). I'll point my OS X user directory to the directory that will be on this card, I'll do the same for Win7, and BackTrack. Each OS will also have swap space on the card. This increases security too. If I have my SDXC card with me, someone using the laptop can't see my files at all. It also increases speed (maybe and a little) because I'm using a different storage device and bus to put my user files/swap space on.
Let's take a closer look at what we have here.
For references we have: http://www.sans.org/reading_room/whitepapers/forensics/reverse-engineering-microsoft-exfat-file-system_33274 and the blog rshullic.wordpress.com
First, the SDXC card is set to be exclusively exFAT. You may be able to format the card as FAT32, or HFS or NTFS as FAT32 can be formatted to 2TB although you can't use Microsoft utilities to do so. Microsoft will read a 2TB FAT32 file system and write to it, they just won't let you create anything over 32GB. If you want to use the SDXC card exclusively with the Mac, then you could format the card with almost any file system. I have formated a 256MB (yes MB, it is SD Version 1.00) SD card as exFAT. But put that card with exFAT into a camera, like the Panasonic Lumix which has SDXC support, and it says that the card is not formatted properly and won't let you use the card until you reformat it. A SD card is speced for FAT, a SDHC card is speced for FAT32 and a SDXC card is speced for exFAT, and some camera manufacturers enforce the proper file system. So, if you intend to use the sdxc in a camera or a phone or other consumer device, formatting it as anything other than exFAT may not be an option.
And Apple might need to license exFAT just to read it even if not to write. (might need, I don't really know as there are now forensics tols that read exfat but I don't think those guys are licensing it, maybe read only is ok and doesn't violate licensing agreements?)
The SDXC card actually begins at 48GB, which is the equivalent of a dual layer Blu-Ray disc. I have seen 48GB and 64GB so far, and the 64GB (at a low i/o speed) can be gotten at amazon for about $200. But the card are running in the $350-$600 range with speeds claimed to be 30MBs (that is mega-bytes per second) so it will be a while for the prices to come down and the speeds to increase near the SD 3.0 level of 104 MBs, let alone the SD 4.00 spec of 300 MBs.
Lets separate reading and writing exFAT. If I can read it, I can pull stuff off of it. So OS X will require the ability to read exFAT in order to make it compatible with non apple devices that will be using this format. HOWEVER, it is not required that Apple choose to read exFAT. You could format with HFS+. Then any device that can read HFS+ could read and write to it.
If I can write to exFAT, then I can place data (even 4GB+ media files) on the card. Apple may create a driver that allows you to read exFAT but not write to it.
This matters if you are going to use the card to store media files (4 GB+), or are planning on using the card with non Apple devices. I could get a 128 GB SDXC card, format 100 GB in FAT32 for a user directory, and format 3 8GB swap spaces (one for OS X, one for Windows, and one for Unix). Then I'd have my user files and swap space with me wherever I go, and it would be cross platform compatible (everyone reads and writes FAT32). Yes, FAT32 does have a maximum partition size, this is why I used a 128 GB SDXC card as the example. And yes, I wouldn't have my media files (movies) on the card (I'd need one of the 2 TB cards to do this).
Since Pretec is selling an ExpressCard SDXC reader, this is what I plan to do with my triple boot MBP (see sig). I'll point my OS X user directory to the directory that will be on this card, I'll do the same for Win7, and BackTrack. Each OS will also have swap space on the card. This increases security too. If I have my SDXC card with me, someone using the laptop can't see my files at all. It also increases speed (maybe and a little) because I'm using a different storage device and bus to put my user files/swap space on.
Let's take a closer look at what we have here.
For references we have: http://www.sans.org/reading_room/whitepapers/forensics/reverse-engineering-microsoft-exfat-file-system_33274 and the blog rshullic.wordpress.com
First, the SDXC card is set to be exclusively exFAT. You may be able to format the card as FAT32, or HFS or NTFS as FAT32 can be formatted to 2TB although you can't use Microsoft utilities to do so. Microsoft will read a 2TB FAT32 file system and write to it, they just won't let you create anything over 32GB. If you want to use the SDXC card exclusively with the Mac, then you could format the card with almost any file system. I have formated a 256MB (yes MB, it is SD Version 1.00) SD card as exFAT. But put that card with exFAT into a camera, like the Panasonic Lumix which has SDXC support, and it says that the card is not formatted properly and won't let you use the card until you reformat it. A SD card is speced for FAT, a SDHC card is speced for FAT32 and a SDXC card is speced for exFAT, and some camera manufacturers enforce the proper file system. So, if you intend to use the sdxc in a camera or a phone or other consumer device, formatting it as anything other than exFAT may not be an option.
And Apple might need to license exFAT just to read it even if not to write. (might need, I don't really know as there are now forensics tols that read exfat but I don't think those guys are licensing it, maybe read only is ok and doesn't violate licensing agreements?)
The SDXC card actually begins at 48GB, which is the equivalent of a dual layer Blu-Ray disc. I have seen 48GB and 64GB so far, and the 64GB (at a low i/o speed) can be gotten at amazon for about $200. But the card are running in the $350-$600 range with speeds claimed to be 30MBs (that is mega-bytes per second) so it will be a while for the prices to come down and the speeds to increase near the SD 3.0 level of 104 MBs, let alone the SD 4.00 spec of 300 MBs.
ergdegdeg
Feb 15, 04:06 PM
OSX has this tool built in. It's DigitalColor Meter in the Utilites folder.
bretm
Apr 16, 03:03 PM
I can't say I am a fan of Adobe Flash as I am a big supporter of an open web, but I must say that if cross-compiled apps are inferior then the customers in the app store will certainly vote with their dollars to favor the natively written apps.
However, I can see Apple putting this new restriction in their license agreement so as to protect themselves in case the Adobe folks find some way to sneak things onto the iPhone via their cross-compiling tools. Apple is protecting their turf, but by error on the side of caution they set themselves up for bad PR even if they intend to be more lax in acting on those restrictions.
Here is another example of that occurring.... certainly Apple is choosing to reserve the right to bend the rules where they see fit. But without the strict wording in the developer agreement they really wouldn't have a leg to stand on. They are doing the same with pornography by revoking/rejecting all those junk porn apps that polluted the app store while still allowing the "main stream" stuff from established publishers.
On one hand, its Apple's store and if they don't want to pollute their shelves with garbage then I applaud them. However, somebody is going to cry foul since there is not another legitimate store for iPhone apps, and I wonder if this will eventually blow-up as some sort of new anti-trust thing.
Here's what I think the cross-compiler issue is. Adobe had the same sort of problem before they bought flash, with their app that made flash files. It was called LiveMotion and it was great. The problem with that app though, was that Macromedia controlled flash, and adobe could only reverse engineer it after the latest version had been released. So, the features of Flash 7 couldn't be realized by the Adobe LiveMotion app until waaaay after the release of Flash 7. Usually near Flash 8, etc. Adobe was essentially always a version behind. Not such a big deal with apps made for desktops and laptops. But if Apple wants to control the experience and have all it's apps updated very quickly for new OS updates, they'd have to reveal all the new features to Adobe way beforehand so that all the people making apps via Adobe's compilier could update them quickly. And of course Apple would be reliant on those developers actually desiring to pay Adobe for an upgrade to flash, which usually only comes out every year and a half or so. Much slower than updates to iPhone and it's OS. So instead, if all the developers are using Apple's tools, Apple can simply slide them a free SDK update and have them recompile. Since updating apps is so simple this way, Apple can easily require that the developers recompile in a certain time frame. Pretty hard to do for the developers that would be going through Flash, and if Adobe didn't update their tools, then the devs couldn't update, and you've got a mess and the only people losing would be the iPhone users, and then of course Apple.
Not saying it's right or wrong. Just saying that's where Apple's coming from. I really don't think they are trying to piss off Adobe in particular. Why should they be angry at Adobe anyway? They're the ones that didn't allow flash. Adobe should be angry at Apple.
However, I can see Apple putting this new restriction in their license agreement so as to protect themselves in case the Adobe folks find some way to sneak things onto the iPhone via their cross-compiling tools. Apple is protecting their turf, but by error on the side of caution they set themselves up for bad PR even if they intend to be more lax in acting on those restrictions.
Here is another example of that occurring.... certainly Apple is choosing to reserve the right to bend the rules where they see fit. But without the strict wording in the developer agreement they really wouldn't have a leg to stand on. They are doing the same with pornography by revoking/rejecting all those junk porn apps that polluted the app store while still allowing the "main stream" stuff from established publishers.
On one hand, its Apple's store and if they don't want to pollute their shelves with garbage then I applaud them. However, somebody is going to cry foul since there is not another legitimate store for iPhone apps, and I wonder if this will eventually blow-up as some sort of new anti-trust thing.
Here's what I think the cross-compiler issue is. Adobe had the same sort of problem before they bought flash, with their app that made flash files. It was called LiveMotion and it was great. The problem with that app though, was that Macromedia controlled flash, and adobe could only reverse engineer it after the latest version had been released. So, the features of Flash 7 couldn't be realized by the Adobe LiveMotion app until waaaay after the release of Flash 7. Usually near Flash 8, etc. Adobe was essentially always a version behind. Not such a big deal with apps made for desktops and laptops. But if Apple wants to control the experience and have all it's apps updated very quickly for new OS updates, they'd have to reveal all the new features to Adobe way beforehand so that all the people making apps via Adobe's compilier could update them quickly. And of course Apple would be reliant on those developers actually desiring to pay Adobe for an upgrade to flash, which usually only comes out every year and a half or so. Much slower than updates to iPhone and it's OS. So instead, if all the developers are using Apple's tools, Apple can simply slide them a free SDK update and have them recompile. Since updating apps is so simple this way, Apple can easily require that the developers recompile in a certain time frame. Pretty hard to do for the developers that would be going through Flash, and if Adobe didn't update their tools, then the devs couldn't update, and you've got a mess and the only people losing would be the iPhone users, and then of course Apple.
Not saying it's right or wrong. Just saying that's where Apple's coming from. I really don't think they are trying to piss off Adobe in particular. Why should they be angry at Adobe anyway? They're the ones that didn't allow flash. Adobe should be angry at Apple.
tazinlwfl
May 2, 01:07 PM
My buddy posted this (http://noeruiz.com/white-iphone-4-not-thicker/), and I tried to tell Engadget -- they wouldn't hear it.
Kind of ridiculous.
Kind of ridiculous.
kainjow
Sep 27, 12:21 PM
<snip>
I thought the difference between little/big endian was that the byte order was flipped, not the bit order. So 01 in BE/LE would always be 1, 10 - 2, etc. Or am I wrong?
Anyways, back on topic, I hope the updates improves Rosetta performance. Office and Photoshop run too slow.. and take up too much memory/CPU to keep open..
I thought the difference between little/big endian was that the byte order was flipped, not the bit order. So 01 in BE/LE would always be 1, 10 - 2, etc. Or am I wrong?
Anyways, back on topic, I hope the updates improves Rosetta performance. Office and Photoshop run too slow.. and take up too much memory/CPU to keep open..
trainguy77
Jun 2, 07:34 PM
That was wierd. When i came to this forum just now. I thing stuck to my screen even when i scolled up and down, it said "macrumors - FoldingTracker (a widget just for you!)"
anyone had this before. It does not do it again. I got a screen shot of it. I will post it later.
(i did a fast crop of it)
anyone had this before. It does not do it again. I got a screen shot of it. I will post it later.
(i did a fast crop of it)
autrefois
Nov 15, 11:23 AM
Well, let's see... the Zune comes out today. The iPod has been out for about 5 years (?) now. So it took Apple 5 years to have them integrate with airplanes. Shame on Apple for not innovating quicker. Shame, shame, shame. And shame on MS for not innovating quicker too. The Zune's only been out, what,... a few hours and it still can't integrate with planes? Shame on MS. :rolleyes:
Seriously.... what's with all this Zune bashing? This story isn't even about the Zune, yet someone just had to post something about it. I'm not defending MS or anyone. It's just that I get's pretty redundant when everyone praises Apple and bashes on everyone else (especially MS), like Apple can do no wrong. I bet you haven't even played with a Zune yet. It's like people who say they don't like Japanese food or something. And when asked if they've tried it, they say no. How the hell do you know whether you like somethinig or not when you haven't even tried it yet?
Apple fan boys...... :rolleyes:
That's about the funniest thing I've heard, being called an Apple fanboy. Since you replied to my post, I assume you're at least in part referring to me.
I am almost always critical of Apple here on Macrumors, either directly or indirectly, in my posts. Either that, or trying to poke fun at Apple's expense. Their business practices, their business partners, their pricing, their overheating laptops, etc. I'm always worried people with think I'm a troll, which I'm not. I love Apple products, and have given them (entirely too much of) my money over the years, but I realize the company is not perfect and can get better. I occasionally am under the RDF, but try to keep a reasonably critical mind about things.
My post was just meant to be funny. MS's Zune wasn't even out yet, so no I didn't expected airplane integration immediately. And apparently Apple even make sure all their partners knew about the announcement before making it, so that's rather embarrassing for them.
I agree the Zune should be judged on its own merit. My guess is that as an MS product it will probably not be as good as the iPod (heck, Microsoft doesn't even put their name on the box for the Zune) but it will probably gain ground sooner rather than later since people will assume (correctly or not) that Microsoft works better with Microsoft, just like Apple works better with Apple.
Seriously.... what's with all this Zune bashing? This story isn't even about the Zune, yet someone just had to post something about it. I'm not defending MS or anyone. It's just that I get's pretty redundant when everyone praises Apple and bashes on everyone else (especially MS), like Apple can do no wrong. I bet you haven't even played with a Zune yet. It's like people who say they don't like Japanese food or something. And when asked if they've tried it, they say no. How the hell do you know whether you like somethinig or not when you haven't even tried it yet?
Apple fan boys...... :rolleyes:
That's about the funniest thing I've heard, being called an Apple fanboy. Since you replied to my post, I assume you're at least in part referring to me.
I am almost always critical of Apple here on Macrumors, either directly or indirectly, in my posts. Either that, or trying to poke fun at Apple's expense. Their business practices, their business partners, their pricing, their overheating laptops, etc. I'm always worried people with think I'm a troll, which I'm not. I love Apple products, and have given them (entirely too much of) my money over the years, but I realize the company is not perfect and can get better. I occasionally am under the RDF, but try to keep a reasonably critical mind about things.
My post was just meant to be funny. MS's Zune wasn't even out yet, so no I didn't expected airplane integration immediately. And apparently Apple even make sure all their partners knew about the announcement before making it, so that's rather embarrassing for them.
I agree the Zune should be judged on its own merit. My guess is that as an MS product it will probably not be as good as the iPod (heck, Microsoft doesn't even put their name on the box for the Zune) but it will probably gain ground sooner rather than later since people will assume (correctly or not) that Microsoft works better with Microsoft, just like Apple works better with Apple.
No comments:
Post a Comment