NoSmokingBandit
Aug 16, 02:18 PM
Shift was good, but i thought it was really easy. Its also very forgiving, you dont need to have a lot of driving skill to finish the top races because drifting is really easy to control, you can enter turns quite a bit faster than you should, and you'll have more money than you know what to do with.
are you rich then? :p
i only hope that GT5 is more realistic then simulated this time..
I drive a Focus, so... no :D
Most people will never be able to afford a ford GT, but most people would be able to save up and buy a WRX and put a little work into it (even if it does take a few years of saving extra money), so i just find it more fun to push a WRX to its limits instead of a GT.
are you rich then? :p
i only hope that GT5 is more realistic then simulated this time..
I drive a Focus, so... no :D
Most people will never be able to afford a ford GT, but most people would be able to save up and buy a WRX and put a little work into it (even if it does take a few years of saving extra money), so i just find it more fun to push a WRX to its limits instead of a GT.
nightcap965
Apr 25, 02:27 PM
Lawsuits are filed against Apple every week. That's why they have their own legal department and engage powerful firms as outside counsel. Any idiot can file suit. Nothing to see here, move along.
Personally, if anyone were to gain unauthorized access to either my computers or my iPhone, I've got far more serious problems than someone knowing my day-to-day travels. Hacker's Law: Once I have physical access to your computer, it is no longer your computer. Anyone who doesn't treat his smartphone with the same care and attention he gives his wallet will soon have neither.
Personally, if anyone were to gain unauthorized access to either my computers or my iPhone, I've got far more serious problems than someone knowing my day-to-day travels. Hacker's Law: Once I have physical access to your computer, it is no longer your computer. Anyone who doesn't treat his smartphone with the same care and attention he gives his wallet will soon have neither.
braddouglass
Apr 6, 12:56 PM
A hard drive uses less than 2 Watts while reading or writing. Flash uses the same or more when it is used; it only has an advantage when it is not used, where the hard disk drive has to spend energy to keep the drive spinning (less than 1 Watt).
So I suppose that standby temp would be low. and that operation temp would be about the same as any other lap top. Sounds good to me haha.
All I want is a faster processor and a backlit keyboard and I'll be happy with it.
Already with Flash HD and 4GB ram it should be wicked fast, but I'd like an i5 at least...
So I suppose that standby temp would be low. and that operation temp would be about the same as any other lap top. Sounds good to me haha.
All I want is a faster processor and a backlit keyboard and I'll be happy with it.
Already with Flash HD and 4GB ram it should be wicked fast, but I'd like an i5 at least...
NoSmokingBandit
Aug 21, 03:10 PM
The pic you provided, with the RX7, Supra, etc, as with all the images shown recently from GC10, is of Premium� cars. Can you see in the windows? If so, then it is a Premium� car with a fully modeled interior. If not, they are a Standard� car, and have the dark tinted windows.
That doesnt really make sense though, because in GT4 cars had interiors (even if generic seats) as you can see in this stupidly large screenshot:
http://i28.tinypic.com/2lm7uht.jpg
So Polyphony took the gt4 models, removed the interior, then pasted them into Gt5?
That doesnt really make sense though, because in GT4 cars had interiors (even if generic seats) as you can see in this stupidly large screenshot:
http://i28.tinypic.com/2lm7uht.jpg
So Polyphony took the gt4 models, removed the interior, then pasted them into Gt5?
Reach9
Apr 11, 01:33 PM
The iPhone 4 is still the best smartphone in the market, so not surprising.
As for people expecting a 4" screen on the next iPhone dream on. They are not going to make an iPhone with a bigger screen.
You're kidding right? iPhone 4 and iOS 4 are incredibly stale. Apple has realized this and hence strong rumors suggest a total revamped iOS 5. Anyway i don't agree with you, i don't think the iPhone 4 is the best smartphone in the market.
What is the best smartphone in the market? The major Android phones (Thunderbolt, EVO etc.)
I wouldn't put that much thought into the OP guys. No way Apple would not take advantage of the Holiday season. Do you think people will actually buy the over-a-year old iPhone 4?
Remember how many sources said that the iPad 2 wouldn't be released until September? Remember how many people said there won't be an iPhone 4, until Gizmodo leaked the 'prototype'?
We'll see about the iPhone 5 in WWDC.
If anything Apple could have kept their iPad 2 for a September launch, but Apple is actually losing big time in the smartphone market, imo.
If i don't see an iPhone 5 in WWDC, then i'll consider jumping ship.
Apple has never been one to react to competition in the recent years. They seem to do what they think is best and let others follow them.
I think they know that if they bring out the best one when it is released, they will sell as many as they can make for a long time.
Of course Apple reacts to competition, every company in a market economy does. Apple might not blatantly say "the competition has a faster processor, that's why we made the A4 chip" but a basic University Econ class will teach you that every company reacts to the competition. Apple is no different.
Even if they do what they think is best, then they're greatly failing.
As a smartphone it is the iPhone that is following the competition, such as the lack of a notification system.
As for people expecting a 4" screen on the next iPhone dream on. They are not going to make an iPhone with a bigger screen.
You're kidding right? iPhone 4 and iOS 4 are incredibly stale. Apple has realized this and hence strong rumors suggest a total revamped iOS 5. Anyway i don't agree with you, i don't think the iPhone 4 is the best smartphone in the market.
What is the best smartphone in the market? The major Android phones (Thunderbolt, EVO etc.)
I wouldn't put that much thought into the OP guys. No way Apple would not take advantage of the Holiday season. Do you think people will actually buy the over-a-year old iPhone 4?
Remember how many sources said that the iPad 2 wouldn't be released until September? Remember how many people said there won't be an iPhone 4, until Gizmodo leaked the 'prototype'?
We'll see about the iPhone 5 in WWDC.
If anything Apple could have kept their iPad 2 for a September launch, but Apple is actually losing big time in the smartphone market, imo.
If i don't see an iPhone 5 in WWDC, then i'll consider jumping ship.
Apple has never been one to react to competition in the recent years. They seem to do what they think is best and let others follow them.
I think they know that if they bring out the best one when it is released, they will sell as many as they can make for a long time.
Of course Apple reacts to competition, every company in a market economy does. Apple might not blatantly say "the competition has a faster processor, that's why we made the A4 chip" but a basic University Econ class will teach you that every company reacts to the competition. Apple is no different.
Even if they do what they think is best, then they're greatly failing.
As a smartphone it is the iPhone that is following the competition, such as the lack of a notification system.
Popeye206
Apr 19, 02:10 PM
Is that your vetted legal opinion?
We have a lot of couch lawyers in this group. :rolleyes:
We have a lot of couch lawyers in this group. :rolleyes:
63dot
Apr 30, 03:05 PM
I wonder what it would be like to go through life looking for racism around every corner? Constantly seeing the world in these glasses would have to be very tiresome and frustrating. Pretty sad really. People need to stop thinking about themselves and others as being members of groups, and start thinking of everyone as individuals. We're a society of individuals, we get our rights and our liberties as individuals, not because we're part of group A or group B.
If liberals would stop 'crying wolf' ('claiming racism') at every corner, we might actually take them seriously and help out when there's actual evidence.
Though I don't agree with you much on some issues (except for the anti-nation building stuff), I have to say you have it right. We are individuals.
While there are some racists who tried to jump on the birther bandwagon, I did see plenty of non-racists have some concern about where Obama was born, or if in Hawaii, being born there before it was a state and then being a coverup to put his age right after statehood.
To be fair, some judges and constitutional experts were not quite sure about John McCain and his "eligibility" to run for office. Con law textbooks give both sides about this issue but are not declarative on what the answer is as to who is eligible to run. Can a person who committed perjury run for president? Then how did America let Clinton run after all the apparent lies he told federal prosecutors about Whitewater and his supposed ties to Tyson and letting them get by on environmental regs while he was governor or Arkansas?
During the 2008 election, these birther issues only came up sporadically, and America was far more interested in the important issues (Iraq, the recession, and finding somebody to put us out of the mess that W put us in).
If liberals would stop 'crying wolf' ('claiming racism') at every corner, we might actually take them seriously and help out when there's actual evidence.
Though I don't agree with you much on some issues (except for the anti-nation building stuff), I have to say you have it right. We are individuals.
While there are some racists who tried to jump on the birther bandwagon, I did see plenty of non-racists have some concern about where Obama was born, or if in Hawaii, being born there before it was a state and then being a coverup to put his age right after statehood.
To be fair, some judges and constitutional experts were not quite sure about John McCain and his "eligibility" to run for office. Con law textbooks give both sides about this issue but are not declarative on what the answer is as to who is eligible to run. Can a person who committed perjury run for president? Then how did America let Clinton run after all the apparent lies he told federal prosecutors about Whitewater and his supposed ties to Tyson and letting them get by on environmental regs while he was governor or Arkansas?
During the 2008 election, these birther issues only came up sporadically, and America was far more interested in the important issues (Iraq, the recession, and finding somebody to put us out of the mess that W put us in).
rjohnstone
Apr 25, 03:11 PM
While I would also like to know why, I'm not sure this is a big deal as it seems to me that the remedy to going to be very simple: a) encryption is on by default, and/or b) flushing the database after, say, six months.
Oh I agree, it's not as big a deal as some are making it out to be.
I would still like to know the "why" part. If anything just to satisfy my own curiosity.
Oh I agree, it's not as big a deal as some are making it out to be.
I would still like to know the "why" part. If anything just to satisfy my own curiosity.
Acorn
Apr 9, 07:25 PM
The backlit keyboard thing kinda makes me laugh. Every macbook Ive ever owned has not had the backlit keyboard. I even bought a aluminum unibody and still got screwed out of a backlit keyboard. Finally I got a 2010 mac pro and got the backlit keyboard. what did i do? enjoy it for 2 days then turn it off to save battery life. the keyboard light is always off now and the brightness is set to minimum. so much for that.
GFLPraxis
Mar 31, 02:39 PM
You could say the same thing about Apple though. The Apple fad will go away and the extremely closed ecosystem which seems to not be really developing much in terms of UI or having an actual roadmap could end iOS.
I don't understand why people can't just see the pros and cons of both and accept both are great platforms. Its always a WAR with Apple fans. Apple against EVERYONE!
Wars are great for the economy. This IS a war. But we're the economy that benefits from it. And it doesn't have that "people dying" downside to traditional wars.
Yay for corporate wars, since the winner is us!
I don't understand why people can't just see the pros and cons of both and accept both are great platforms. Its always a WAR with Apple fans. Apple against EVERYONE!
Wars are great for the economy. This IS a war. But we're the economy that benefits from it. And it doesn't have that "people dying" downside to traditional wars.
Yay for corporate wars, since the winner is us!
dethmaShine
Apr 12, 03:11 PM
3am.
Thanks.
And that's not good.
Thanks.
And that's not good.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 05:50 PM
Here we have an article laying out the case for non intervention (http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/03/2011322135442593945.html) by a Princeton law professor (emeritus) published by Al Jazeera. A worthy read, and here are two exerpts I've commented on.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
ender land
Apr 27, 10:05 AM
I would have waited till after I was out of office.
But meh, this whole thing was so outrageously stupid and the total amount of press time and money spent on something relatively obvious (how the @#%$ would someone actually be allowed in the White House by the gov if they were not a citizen?) is just saddening.
But meh, this whole thing was so outrageously stupid and the total amount of press time and money spent on something relatively obvious (how the @#%$ would someone actually be allowed in the White House by the gov if they were not a citizen?) is just saddening.
Amazing Iceman
Apr 7, 10:50 PM
Don't be a troll :rolleyes:
Obviously you know little about trolls... :D (JK!)
Obviously you know little about trolls... :D (JK!)
Denarius
Mar 22, 07:15 PM
I'm willing to accept the current level of US involvment, provided it is short-term and really is part of a broader coalition with UN backing. Whether it turns out to be justified depends on subsequent events.
Poor old Obama has been dragged into this kicking and screaming by Sarkozy, Cameron, the Arab League request for a no-fly zone and the request by the Libyan revolutionaries themselves. He's been stressing all the way that he wants another nation to take the lead and now nobody can decide who. The Italian's want NAC to be in control, whereas the French don't. The Arab League doesn't want NATO running it so the French are proposing that we do it by committee. :confused:
I think they need to offer a deal to Gadaffi of some sort. He needs to go, but if there are charges against him in the international courts then it'll be a fight to the death. Offer him an amnesty if he agrees to go into exile quickly.
Poor old Obama has been dragged into this kicking and screaming by Sarkozy, Cameron, the Arab League request for a no-fly zone and the request by the Libyan revolutionaries themselves. He's been stressing all the way that he wants another nation to take the lead and now nobody can decide who. The Italian's want NAC to be in control, whereas the French don't. The Arab League doesn't want NATO running it so the French are proposing that we do it by committee. :confused:
I think they need to offer a deal to Gadaffi of some sort. He needs to go, but if there are charges against him in the international courts then it'll be a fight to the death. Offer him an amnesty if he agrees to go into exile quickly.
georgi0
Sep 19, 01:08 AM
i agree and i believe that Apple should keep at least for 1 year the same models before updating, except when a new tech comes out like true 64 bit support.
let's see now....
let's see now....
CaoCao
Feb 28, 08:56 PM
Isn't it all hormonal mishaps in the womb? Does your God control that? If so, he is predisposing people to sin, and isn't that unfair that not all are exposed to that disposition?
We all have our crosses to bear. Ultimately it is up to the homosexual to sin or not
...And the Oscar for "Greatest Generalization In An Online Forum" goes to...
You.
:rolleyes:
What does my post have to do with cinema excellence?
And your proof of this is......??
Heterosexuality is the default way your brain may work. But just because it's like that for you, doesn't mean it's like that for us all.
default: a preselected option adopted by a computer program or other mechanism when no alternative is specified by the user or programmer.
Unless influenced otherwise the brain develops heterosexually
We all have our crosses to bear. Ultimately it is up to the homosexual to sin or not
...And the Oscar for "Greatest Generalization In An Online Forum" goes to...
You.
:rolleyes:
What does my post have to do with cinema excellence?
And your proof of this is......??
Heterosexuality is the default way your brain may work. But just because it's like that for you, doesn't mean it's like that for us all.
default: a preselected option adopted by a computer program or other mechanism when no alternative is specified by the user or programmer.
Unless influenced otherwise the brain develops heterosexually
ddekker
Oct 22, 01:21 PM
I heard Leo Laporte talking about this on his KFI podcast... exciting... one question... how many softwares take advantage of multi cores? I understand that the OS can deal with it for multi tasking, but how many programs multi thread?
DD
DD
koobcamuk
Apr 8, 01:12 AM
To be fair - Apple themselves were doing the same thing - in the UK at least.
I experienced, on a number of occasions, Apple Stores actually had stock in store available for reservation, but were forcing an entirely unnecessary, half an hour 'unboxing and setup' appointment.
With only a few of these slots available - more often than not - the store would have plenty of iPad 2 stock available, but no appointments, so reservations were stopped and Apple Staff denying (and laughing in my face) that they had any remaining stock.
I dislike Apple staff everywhere except Japan.
I experienced, on a number of occasions, Apple Stores actually had stock in store available for reservation, but were forcing an entirely unnecessary, half an hour 'unboxing and setup' appointment.
With only a few of these slots available - more often than not - the store would have plenty of iPad 2 stock available, but no appointments, so reservations were stopped and Apple Staff denying (and laughing in my face) that they had any remaining stock.
I dislike Apple staff everywhere except Japan.
kentkomine
Apr 11, 03:42 PM
Aww, I was really hoping/expecting for a summer release :( But with all the other rumors suggesting that WWDC 2011 will be software-oriented, it makes sense. The iPhone 5 better be AWESOME, or else!!
NoSmokingBandit
Dec 10, 07:07 PM
I finished the Sebastien Loeb Challenge. It was incredible.
I got a few decent shots along the way. I have more but i got tired of the copy/paste routine.
I think they turned out alright, its the first time i've actually played with all of the settings.
Clicky for 1920x1080
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a93/canada2113/gt5/EigerNordwandKTrail.jpg
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a93/canada2113/gt5/ChamonixMain.jpg
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a93/canada2113/gt5/Toscana.jpg
(it was in the middle of the day. filters are fun)
I got a few decent shots along the way. I have more but i got tired of the copy/paste routine.
I think they turned out alright, its the first time i've actually played with all of the settings.
Clicky for 1920x1080
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a93/canada2113/gt5/EigerNordwandKTrail.jpg
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a93/canada2113/gt5/ChamonixMain.jpg
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a93/canada2113/gt5/Toscana.jpg
(it was in the middle of the day. filters are fun)
Soba
Jul 28, 01:02 PM
you can't make a statement like that. that's like saying "i hate general electric air conditioners." what the heck? all CPU's (and air conditioners) do the same thing.
I'm not sure if this was intended as some kind of throwaway comment or not, but this is not even remotely true.
The original poster said he hated the P4, and honestly, the P4 was a lousy chip design from day 1. The original Pentium 4 chips released about 5 1/2 years ago were outperformed in some instances by an original Pentium chip running at 166MHz. The Pentium 4 was an awful architecture in many respects that simply could not be cleaned up enough to be viable; that would be why Intel abandoned it and based its current designs on the Pentium Pro's core (which was really a very decent server chip in the nineties).
When Apple announced last year they were going with Intel, a lot of people agreed it was a good choice based on the current state of the PowerPC architecture and based on Intel's planned chip designs. Personally, I was a bit unsure at the time, but was optimistic about the switch and figured we could scarcely do much worse than sticking with the G5, which was languishing. Turning back the clock a bit, if instead of releasing the G5, Apple had announced a switch to Intel in I would have thought they were crazy. Intel's chips were awful at that time and there wasn't much of a light at the end of the tunnel, either.
CPUs can be very, very different even if the overall system architecture is similar. And I side with the original poster. The P4 was a dog, and thankfully it is about to be buried forever.
I'm not sure if this was intended as some kind of throwaway comment or not, but this is not even remotely true.
The original poster said he hated the P4, and honestly, the P4 was a lousy chip design from day 1. The original Pentium 4 chips released about 5 1/2 years ago were outperformed in some instances by an original Pentium chip running at 166MHz. The Pentium 4 was an awful architecture in many respects that simply could not be cleaned up enough to be viable; that would be why Intel abandoned it and based its current designs on the Pentium Pro's core (which was really a very decent server chip in the nineties).
When Apple announced last year they were going with Intel, a lot of people agreed it was a good choice based on the current state of the PowerPC architecture and based on Intel's planned chip designs. Personally, I was a bit unsure at the time, but was optimistic about the switch and figured we could scarcely do much worse than sticking with the G5, which was languishing. Turning back the clock a bit, if instead of releasing the G5, Apple had announced a switch to Intel in I would have thought they were crazy. Intel's chips were awful at that time and there wasn't much of a light at the end of the tunnel, either.
CPUs can be very, very different even if the overall system architecture is similar. And I side with the original poster. The P4 was a dog, and thankfully it is about to be buried forever.
bretm
Apr 11, 08:03 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
How about an interim update? All they need really is a software update to bring all the little widgets and candy that clutter up the androids. Their camera is still the best IMHO. And ease of syncing is still the best. And don't forget- it's an iPod. Seriously the android is just more complicated for most things. It doesn't do well (anything) with embedded QT and it's insanely lacking in consistency- which is why it's the love of techie IT types. They love to be in the know. It's PC vs Mac all over again.
How about an interim update? All they need really is a software update to bring all the little widgets and candy that clutter up the androids. Their camera is still the best IMHO. And ease of syncing is still the best. And don't forget- it's an iPod. Seriously the android is just more complicated for most things. It doesn't do well (anything) with embedded QT and it's insanely lacking in consistency- which is why it's the love of techie IT types. They love to be in the know. It's PC vs Mac all over again.
Elvin77
Mar 22, 01:24 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
1) Battery life IS a big deal
2) Are we forgetting about apps? The best hardware in the world is useless unless there are apps to make it sing. A $200 tablet can surf the web just as good as the playbook.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
1) Battery life IS a big deal
2) Are we forgetting about apps? The best hardware in the world is useless unless there are apps to make it sing. A $200 tablet can surf the web just as good as the playbook.
No comments:
Post a Comment