okboy
Apr 23, 06:28 PM
The iPhone, before the current model had a screen res of 320 x 480
I think he's thinking of pixel density.
I think he's thinking of pixel density.
Jape
Nov 4, 06:25 PM
Gave it a brief test around town this afternoon. MotionX GPS lite status screen reported an accuracy (radius?) of between 30 feet to 50 feet, whereas without the TomTom mount it ranged from about 75 ft to 256 ft or worse. So, yeah, it improves GPS accuracy, and I did notice the difference when using the TomTom app.
The thing is well built and elegant, the nicest carphone mount design I've ever seen. You have to be gentle sticking the iPhone into the mount, but you can do it with one hand. You have to think about where to install the mount in your car -- window, dash, left or right of the wheel etc. -- and you can't leave the iPhone in a case (OK for me, might not be for others). The power and audio cables stick out of the side, which is a bit awkward, especially when you rotate it; I'm thinking of picking up some adhesive-backed clips at RadioShack to keep the wires out of the way as they wind their way down to the power and aux jacks. I've made only one phone call so far, which worked fine, but the phone uses the mount's speaker even when you're plugged into the car stereo (music and/or Tomtom app voice stops in the car speakers, and then the phone call comes out of the mount speaker). I could hear the phone call fine driving around town, but I'm a little worried about how well I'll be able to hear phone calls at freeway speeds in my noisy little car (a Honda Fit).
The acid test will be a substantial trip that includes some skyscraper canyons in a big city.
Last I checked it looked like BLT had sold out and was awaiting more shipments.
Thanks a ton for for your review, I am now going to buy the kit from BLT. They are on backorder with the product and will be recieving a shipment in on the 11 of nov, but for this low price I believe it is worth the wait ( about %30 off). Thanks again.
The thing is well built and elegant, the nicest carphone mount design I've ever seen. You have to be gentle sticking the iPhone into the mount, but you can do it with one hand. You have to think about where to install the mount in your car -- window, dash, left or right of the wheel etc. -- and you can't leave the iPhone in a case (OK for me, might not be for others). The power and audio cables stick out of the side, which is a bit awkward, especially when you rotate it; I'm thinking of picking up some adhesive-backed clips at RadioShack to keep the wires out of the way as they wind their way down to the power and aux jacks. I've made only one phone call so far, which worked fine, but the phone uses the mount's speaker even when you're plugged into the car stereo (music and/or Tomtom app voice stops in the car speakers, and then the phone call comes out of the mount speaker). I could hear the phone call fine driving around town, but I'm a little worried about how well I'll be able to hear phone calls at freeway speeds in my noisy little car (a Honda Fit).
The acid test will be a substantial trip that includes some skyscraper canyons in a big city.
Last I checked it looked like BLT had sold out and was awaiting more shipments.
Thanks a ton for for your review, I am now going to buy the kit from BLT. They are on backorder with the product and will be recieving a shipment in on the 11 of nov, but for this low price I believe it is worth the wait ( about %30 off). Thanks again.
itcheroni
Apr 21, 12:50 AM
I'd love it if you could point out where you addressed this, because as a tax accountant, I'm having a hard time thinking of a time when a realized capital gain isn't income - if you have a realized net gain (ie amount realized is greater than your basis in the capital asset), you certainly have income. Certainly you could reinvest that net gain, but that doesn't mean you don't have income, that just means you realized a gain and reinvested the old basis and the gain (income). You're only taxed on realized gains that are recognized by the code (and you can net against realized losses) - sure, I could have an unrealized capital gain that isn't income, but I wouldn't be taxed on it either. Not that I don't agree with some of your points, but I'd really love the same clarification on this that most other posters have been asking for.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
bella92108
Apr 5, 02:48 PM
At least on iPhone you can apply the updates on the day they come out (well, JB versions have to wait a couple of days) ... compare this to Android and WinMobile7 where you are at the mercy of the carrier to 'enrich' the update with their 'features' which might take many weeks or month - if it ever comes.
You seriously see this as a feature? Apple only is able to do this by signing agreements with a carrier, and being on a 1-product line. Why do you think you get that release so quickly on your AT&T iPhone? Because they don't offer a T-Mobile iPhone, nor does T-Mobile or anyone else support it (until Verizon agreed to Apple's terms)... An android device is available on any carrier, and in this country we have multiple technologies (CDMA, IDEN, GSM 1700, GSM 2100, LTE, WiMax, etc etc)... if you're comparing the iPhone which has been offered on ONE network with ONE technology (which isn't even the latest as of 2010), that's a bad comparison. Furthermore, it's not difficult to release an all-device software update when "all devices" consist of ONE device.
If you're going to make a comparison, at least make it legit.
You seriously see this as a feature? Apple only is able to do this by signing agreements with a carrier, and being on a 1-product line. Why do you think you get that release so quickly on your AT&T iPhone? Because they don't offer a T-Mobile iPhone, nor does T-Mobile or anyone else support it (until Verizon agreed to Apple's terms)... An android device is available on any carrier, and in this country we have multiple technologies (CDMA, IDEN, GSM 1700, GSM 2100, LTE, WiMax, etc etc)... if you're comparing the iPhone which has been offered on ONE network with ONE technology (which isn't even the latest as of 2010), that's a bad comparison. Furthermore, it's not difficult to release an all-device software update when "all devices" consist of ONE device.
If you're going to make a comparison, at least make it legit.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 18, 02:49 PM
Samsung will come up with actual numbers sold, not shipped, finally. Apple will see how few it is and drop the suit.
Saladinos
Apr 26, 02:45 PM
Apple needs to respond. I would prefer them to do it with an iOS overhaul and some diversification of their product line. Apple won't sacrifice margins significantly, so to expand market share they should appeal to more people and step up advertising on the cheaper previous-gen models.
Apple will still rule the tablet space though.
Apple will still rule the tablet space though.
puuukeey
Jul 30, 12:28 PM
If apple can make it so that cellphones don't suck the user into a void where s/he unaware that they are pissing the living ***** out of everyone around them, well then they are TRUE gods
JAT
Apr 20, 12:02 PM
You're just screwing with me, right? Because this has nothing to do with what I actually wrote.
Yes, the US is literally the entire world. There are no other countries, let alone other countries with 12-month contracts. Why, Sir, that would be inconceivable!
I think it does. Obviously, so did others.
Yes, the US is literally the entire world. There are no other countries, let alone other countries with 12-month contracts. Why, Sir, that would be inconceivable!
I think it does. Obviously, so did others.
blakbyrd
Aug 5, 10:49 PM
Can Adium do videchat to MSN? (with audio! There's no audio on the videochat's in aMSN:mad: :p )
You can't do video or audio chat with Adium, and won't be able to for a year or two at least. :(
I'm just hoping for some official support sooner or later with iChat or the official standalone clients. :)
You can't do video or audio chat with Adium, and won't be able to for a year or two at least. :(
I'm just hoping for some official support sooner or later with iChat or the official standalone clients. :)
Jape
Nov 12, 08:29 AM
So now BTL says that the shipment is coming in on 12-2. What happend to 11-11? How do you all feel about this? I personally am not sure if I should cancel or not.
uaecasher
May 4, 03:23 PM
I think a lot of fans would rather to get the physical media which gives the feel of buying a new apple product (and opening it).
Akme
Mar 30, 08:23 PM
Yes I did, it was still grayed out.
And yes, you can remove Launchpad from the dock.
And yes, you can remove Launchpad from the dock.
RalfTheDog
Apr 7, 12:52 PM
it was a joke in reference to your snarky comment relax.
It might be a joke, but you did have a point. If you don't like the products Apple makes, buy something else. I don't like many choices Microsoft makes with their operating systems. I don't buy them.
It might be a joke, but you did have a point. If you don't like the products Apple makes, buy something else. I don't like many choices Microsoft makes with their operating systems. I don't buy them.
ChrisA
Aug 4, 12:19 PM
My best gues is that Apple will make their entire lineup 64 bit. This should be easy for them to do and at the same time will give them a way to distance themselves from all the other PC makers. Apple would have a very easy to understand advertizing statment "All macs are 64 bit" Easy to understand is key.
cciliberto33
Apr 9, 07:13 PM
Well if that is acting as a fraction bar which acts like a grouping symbol (parentheses). So if then 9+3 = 12 12*2 = 24. 48/24 = 2. However, if that was a normal division symbol. then 9+3 = 12. 48/2 = 24 24*12 = 288. So is it a fraction bar or a division symbol yo.
BenRoethig
May 6, 07:23 AM
Makes sense in that apple could control their own destiny in chipsets and CPUs, but it just seems like the PowerPC days all over again.
davidgrimm
Apr 26, 04:32 PM
Is anybody truly surprised by this? Droid phones are on almost every single carrier and come in every price point (including free). There is essentially one iPhone that comes at a premium price. Its like figuring out that there are far more chevy's on the road than Mercedes. Not a surprise at all.
It would be nice to see the numbers broken out by phone and carrier costs. Those would be meaningful market share numbers.
It would be nice to see the numbers broken out by phone and carrier costs. Those would be meaningful market share numbers.
Plutonius
May 3, 11:14 PM
No, I don't understand it that way. I understand that each group (one if we stay together, multiple if we split up) designates a leader. We do ALL of our conversation in the thread. Only the group leaders communicate the wishes of their group to the Game Gods via PM. They may take the consensus of the group, or they may implement decisions unilaterally without regard to group majority.
Good job of explaining it.
Good job of explaining it.
AppleMacFinder
Apr 10, 02:01 PM
The official Mac answer is: 2
We are at MacRumors! Finder says 2, that's why we should accept 2.
We are at MacRumors! Finder says 2, that's why we should accept 2.
synagence
Mar 28, 10:49 AM
I'm on the iPhone 4S boat .... given Apple is driving its pricing by scale to simply include the A5 chip inside the iPhone4 chassis with little else to bump specs (maybe increased display size but same res so its just a new front-panel rather than entire body) makes most sense
They need to re-up people on contracts, they need to maintain momentum regardless of whether the iPhone4 is still competitive .... Android phones like the Atrix are already dual-core Tegra2 based devices and developers will start exploiting the new iPad2 chipset (gfx+cpu) and to not have a phone for another year incapable of maintaining that, not to mention the knock-on effect of iPod touch in september being based on current hardware just doesn't add up....
Apple has already said it likes its release cycle ... it'll just be a bump in the speeds'n'feeds to maintain relative position in the market
They need to re-up people on contracts, they need to maintain momentum regardless of whether the iPhone4 is still competitive .... Android phones like the Atrix are already dual-core Tegra2 based devices and developers will start exploiting the new iPad2 chipset (gfx+cpu) and to not have a phone for another year incapable of maintaining that, not to mention the knock-on effect of iPod touch in september being based on current hardware just doesn't add up....
Apple has already said it likes its release cycle ... it'll just be a bump in the speeds'n'feeds to maintain relative position in the market
GFLPraxis
Mar 29, 09:11 AM
nope, they've just restricted it.
I wonder if Atomic Browser could view it with a faked browser ID...
I wonder if Atomic Browser could view it with a faked browser ID...
Piggie
Apr 23, 06:05 PM
Ok, I'll try this question, which is a fair question...............
Everyone says again and again, Apple does not aim for the high end.
If we put Mac Pro's to one side as they are the proper PC's of the Apple Mac world.
Let's speak about iMac's
They are Apple mass consumer, man/woman in the street computers.
They type of customers who just want to enjoy their computer and be able to get the jobs they want done in a nice and easy way.
I think that's a fair statement.
Also, as has been said, over and over and OVER again, these customers, that the iMac's are aimed at, are not Nerds, Not Tech Freaks, Not spec junkies.
They are just normal people who probably don't want to be worried about specs and to be honest as long as it looks nice and moves smoothy on screen, don't care what's inside the case.
Given this. If these "typical consumers, who don't care or really know about specs" are today, looking at their current 1920x1080 screens, or 1920x1200 screens, and they cannot see the individual pixels from their normal, let's say two feet away viewing distance, then what on earth would be the point in increasing costs, and slowing down an iMac by lumbering it with a higher resolution screen?
What is the point, for these consumers, to increase the screen resolution when they can't make out the individual pixels currently?
Everyone says again and again, Apple does not aim for the high end.
If we put Mac Pro's to one side as they are the proper PC's of the Apple Mac world.
Let's speak about iMac's
They are Apple mass consumer, man/woman in the street computers.
They type of customers who just want to enjoy their computer and be able to get the jobs they want done in a nice and easy way.
I think that's a fair statement.
Also, as has been said, over and over and OVER again, these customers, that the iMac's are aimed at, are not Nerds, Not Tech Freaks, Not spec junkies.
They are just normal people who probably don't want to be worried about specs and to be honest as long as it looks nice and moves smoothy on screen, don't care what's inside the case.
Given this. If these "typical consumers, who don't care or really know about specs" are today, looking at their current 1920x1080 screens, or 1920x1200 screens, and they cannot see the individual pixels from their normal, let's say two feet away viewing distance, then what on earth would be the point in increasing costs, and slowing down an iMac by lumbering it with a higher resolution screen?
What is the point, for these consumers, to increase the screen resolution when they can't make out the individual pixels currently?
ChickenSwartz
Aug 11, 09:26 AM
It sure does. Quite exciting really. I think all consumer products will get Core 2 Duo (merom + conroe) in September. Although, seeing as Merom is socket compatable with the current line up, I dont think we will see a Conroe in the iMac.
It seems to me that waiting until Paris might be too long. Plus, Merom is just marginally better than Yonah so that's not much of a show for a Keynote, unless there is a enclosure redesign....:D . Well, Conroe in iMacs would be something to show since it is considerably faster than Yonah.
If no redesign, I see it being released...umm...Next Tuesday.
This would leave Paris open for new iPods
It seems to me that waiting until Paris might be too long. Plus, Merom is just marginally better than Yonah so that's not much of a show for a Keynote, unless there is a enclosure redesign....:D . Well, Conroe in iMacs would be something to show since it is considerably faster than Yonah.
If no redesign, I see it being released...umm...Next Tuesday.
This would leave Paris open for new iPods
AppleIntelRock
Sep 15, 11:48 PM
Hm, I just bought the macbook pro with the intel core duo (1) ... will it be able to run the new lepord or will the speed be hampered? :confused:
haha you'll be FINE trust me. you bought a very high end laptop and it will happily run leopard. when apple introduces leopard it will want to get as many people as possible to use it, alienating owners of a macbook pro they bought a little over a year ago is not a path they will take.
haha you'll be FINE trust me. you bought a very high end laptop and it will happily run leopard. when apple introduces leopard it will want to get as many people as possible to use it, alienating owners of a macbook pro they bought a little over a year ago is not a path they will take.
No comments:
Post a Comment