63dot
Mar 4, 11:40 AM
When I talk to most people in my liberal town, they agree with me and say, "Those states are crazy and it's the state of today's republican party". That's what I think and what many posters are saying on these forums. It appears most of us, from what I gather, support unions.
So when I talk to my 28 year old son in law school, it becomes a different issue. He's a 3L in the thick of things seeing "both" sides of everything, without any moral consideration, and his conservative leanings tend to buy the myth that unions and "liberals" are anti-business. He can talk the liberal argument, because he may have to one day, but his conservative bias is hard to break. I wish him all the best, always, but God help us should he ever make the bench anywhere. ;)
Anytime I take a liberal point of view, he brings back the conservative argument, or platform, but then uses his great skills of persuasion to actually make his side sound correct. But come on, we are in the 21st century, and yes there were mafia thugs in the early union history, but to equate that "thuggishness" to today is trying to rewrite history. The unions are not that "Jack Nicholson and Danny DeVito" movie but conservatives will want to push that ridiculous stereotype. His undergrad was history (from a liberal school, oddly enough) and mine was labor law/employment law (also ironically from a very conservative school) and if anything, he should know better. Neither of us were swayed by our professors and school leanings, but at least I try and take a middle ground where he won't. I try and see the good in both sides, but conservatives I talk to, whether it's him, or posters on Macrumors, are glacial in their ability to change. And political leanings, if gone unchecked, can wipe out a lot of great education, however expensive it was. "But I studied under so and so and they have Nobels!" and my school is tops he declares, where I answer back and say, "But they left your school to work for Clinton's administration". :)
The unions are now legitimate organizations and while not perfect, they are a pillar of our society which we can't live without (regardless of what 18th century politicians believed unions to be back in the day).
So when I talk to my 28 year old son in law school, it becomes a different issue. He's a 3L in the thick of things seeing "both" sides of everything, without any moral consideration, and his conservative leanings tend to buy the myth that unions and "liberals" are anti-business. He can talk the liberal argument, because he may have to one day, but his conservative bias is hard to break. I wish him all the best, always, but God help us should he ever make the bench anywhere. ;)
Anytime I take a liberal point of view, he brings back the conservative argument, or platform, but then uses his great skills of persuasion to actually make his side sound correct. But come on, we are in the 21st century, and yes there were mafia thugs in the early union history, but to equate that "thuggishness" to today is trying to rewrite history. The unions are not that "Jack Nicholson and Danny DeVito" movie but conservatives will want to push that ridiculous stereotype. His undergrad was history (from a liberal school, oddly enough) and mine was labor law/employment law (also ironically from a very conservative school) and if anything, he should know better. Neither of us were swayed by our professors and school leanings, but at least I try and take a middle ground where he won't. I try and see the good in both sides, but conservatives I talk to, whether it's him, or posters on Macrumors, are glacial in their ability to change. And political leanings, if gone unchecked, can wipe out a lot of great education, however expensive it was. "But I studied under so and so and they have Nobels!" and my school is tops he declares, where I answer back and say, "But they left your school to work for Clinton's administration". :)
The unions are now legitimate organizations and while not perfect, they are a pillar of our society which we can't live without (regardless of what 18th century politicians believed unions to be back in the day).
Clive At Five
Jan 5, 03:00 PM
What an awesome idea. Show up to your local Apple Store to watch the keynote and buy the product(s) that are available that day as soon as Steve says, "See you again soon."
Doesn't anyone remember that this used to be the case? Right in the beginning, there was a live video feed to all the Apple stores... I went to two of them, both at the Mall of America store (and both times sat next to some very quirky Mac users... y'know... the regular type). Then one year, I went and it wasn't on. I was pissed. Then I learned Apple wasn't doing that because it was too expensive or something.
Seeing the floor traffic of those places, I don't see how it couldn't be lucrative to get passers-by excited about fresh products...
Whatever, I guess.
-Clive
Doesn't anyone remember that this used to be the case? Right in the beginning, there was a live video feed to all the Apple stores... I went to two of them, both at the Mall of America store (and both times sat next to some very quirky Mac users... y'know... the regular type). Then one year, I went and it wasn't on. I was pissed. Then I learned Apple wasn't doing that because it was too expensive or something.
Seeing the floor traffic of those places, I don't see how it couldn't be lucrative to get passers-by excited about fresh products...
Whatever, I guess.
-Clive
iJohnHenry
Apr 25, 05:49 PM
That lady has "issues", just looking at her demeanour. :eek:
jestershinra
Sep 7, 11:02 PM
Personally, I just laughed. I was a bit surprised to see him saying n-this and f-that; although I'm not sure why I expected otherwise. It was a very strange scene with all those folks in the audience. I like it, though- it's a fun departure for Apple, I think. I can't stand U2, so maybe that's it.
more...
whooleytoo
Apr 13, 08:04 AM
That again? You do realize that 9/11 had very little to do with airport security but everything to do with incompetence on the side of the secret service and negligence on the side of the US government? TSA has not made airtravel any safer than prior to 9/11.
The secret service might get lucky and stop a terrorist organisation before they do any harm, but they can do nothing to prevent a nutter getting on a plane if he doesn't have any record. It's up to the airport security to limit the weapons available to him on the plane, it's the best they can do.
And it's up to everyone to decide what the 'best balance' is between privacy and safety. One thing is certain - the TSA (or any other airport authorities around the world) are always wrong: searches like this are wrong/if a weapon slips through and is used in a hijacking they're wrong.
The secret service might get lucky and stop a terrorist organisation before they do any harm, but they can do nothing to prevent a nutter getting on a plane if he doesn't have any record. It's up to the airport security to limit the weapons available to him on the plane, it's the best they can do.
And it's up to everyone to decide what the 'best balance' is between privacy and safety. One thing is certain - the TSA (or any other airport authorities around the world) are always wrong: searches like this are wrong/if a weapon slips through and is used in a hijacking they're wrong.
patrick0brien
Aug 6, 02:49 PM
I would normally not consider purchasing a GM vehicle, but the Volt looks really good.
The U.S. can build cars just as good as the best of the rest of the world, but only when we want to - which is a shame, because we historically haven't wanted to.
The U.S. can build cars just as good as the best of the rest of the world, but only when we want to - which is a shame, because we historically haven't wanted to.
more...
maveness
Nov 16, 04:52 PM
Store still down for me...
berkleeboy210
Sep 12, 10:45 AM
Must be alot coming out today, if the store is down 1hr and 15min before the actual event.
more...
Eye4Desyn
Sep 28, 04:36 PM
The house is a little bigger than those drawings depict, as there are stairs leading to a downstairs that is not shown. Probably to the 5th bedroom that is mentioned, likely a downstairs guest room of sorts or something.
Agree with everyone else though. Simple, not over the top. I like.
Those stairs lead to the iBunker :p
Agree with everyone else though. Simple, not over the top. I like.
Those stairs lead to the iBunker :p
villanova329
Nov 16, 12:46 PM
Do they have to remake a new "Universal Binary?" Because aren't the current UB's for Intel and PPC? Please tell me they wont. I don't wnat to have to wait again for new UB's
more...
Xian Zhu Xuande
Jul 21, 10:27 AM
I'm a Mac raised the bar, this thing just pulls the bar down.
No, it raises the bar, because the bar was about as far down as it can get due to media attention and representation. Apple's decision, speaking from an advertising perspective, to demonstrate to people the attenuation issues present in all phones, seeks to strike out the negative that our mothers have been hearing about while the rest of the phone continues to shine for itself. Besides, what would the alternative be? Pretending the attenuation doesn't exist? What would be a representation of holding to the highest standard? Saying they're the best in this regard? That would be a lie. And they couldn't ignore the issue.
No, it raises the bar, because the bar was about as far down as it can get due to media attention and representation. Apple's decision, speaking from an advertising perspective, to demonstrate to people the attenuation issues present in all phones, seeks to strike out the negative that our mothers have been hearing about while the rest of the phone continues to shine for itself. Besides, what would the alternative be? Pretending the attenuation doesn't exist? What would be a representation of holding to the highest standard? Saying they're the best in this regard? That would be a lie. And they couldn't ignore the issue.
kevinliu4
Oct 11, 05:25 AM
initially i was skeptical of the design as i was wondering how anyone is supposed to hold this thing (while watching video) without blocking the screen. then i realised when i use the ipod to watch video, it's usually resting on a table (at work) or in my palm (on the train). i don't actually watch video while i'm walking down the street for example.
however, i think with a virtual touch screen click wheel, the screen of the ipod is gonna be a mess in no time...fingerprint city. i also have visions of me forgetting to click hold as i wipe the screen to remove the finger prints, then inadvertently blasting my ears off as the volume on the virtual wheel goes up. i dunno. having said that, can't wait to see it!
however, i think with a virtual touch screen click wheel, the screen of the ipod is gonna be a mess in no time...fingerprint city. i also have visions of me forgetting to click hold as i wipe the screen to remove the finger prints, then inadvertently blasting my ears off as the volume on the virtual wheel goes up. i dunno. having said that, can't wait to see it!
more...
WildPalms
Jan 15, 04:10 PM
iPhone and Touch: Stay jailbroken.
MBA: Sexy but no use to me.
The rest: Meh...
That pretty much summarizes my feelings too :(
MBA: Sexy but no use to me.
The rest: Meh...
That pretty much summarizes my feelings too :(
sunfast
Sep 25, 12:43 PM
The reasons people HATE this new version so much:
1. It adds a lot of features and answers requests.
2. It's a free update.
3. This is a photography event, and people were caught off guard when Apple showed their photography product, despite the Aperture image right on the invitation.
4. Apple never releases hardware on Tuesdays, so there is no hope for any MacBook Pro updates tomorrow.
5. There will never be another chance for new MacBook Pros. We now know that the current models will be sold forever and ever, even after Apple goes out of business, which will happen by the end of the year.
:p
This is a FANTASTIC post.
1. It adds a lot of features and answers requests.
2. It's a free update.
3. This is a photography event, and people were caught off guard when Apple showed their photography product, despite the Aperture image right on the invitation.
4. Apple never releases hardware on Tuesdays, so there is no hope for any MacBook Pro updates tomorrow.
5. There will never be another chance for new MacBook Pros. We now know that the current models will be sold forever and ever, even after Apple goes out of business, which will happen by the end of the year.
:p
This is a FANTASTIC post.
more...
NebulaClash
May 4, 09:15 AM
Does anybody know what apps are featured in this commercial? I was able to identify a few of them, but not all, and are not yet listed in the AppStore.
In iTunes you can see a banner ad that says "Apps from iPad TV ads." That will take you to a page where you will see the apps.
In iTunes you can see a banner ad that says "Apps from iPad TV ads." That will take you to a page where you will see the apps.
brenden
Apr 8, 10:57 AM
i5 27" and i love it. Replaced my 24"
more...
applebum
Aug 5, 12:09 PM
I was thinking, ( always a dangerous activity).
There IS one thing that could make me switch over to the cross platform compatibility side of this argument.
That would be if the CC of Norway enforced it ACROSS THE BOARD!
My first MP3 player was a Creative Zen Micro. The only reason I have an iPod is because when I switched to Macs, the nice people at Creative Labs informed me that their sync software DID NOT SUPPORT MAC OS.
I can't even access Sony's Connect music store on my Mac. I'm told I need to "upgrade to Internet Explorer 5.5 or higher". (Upgrade to IE??? Bwahahahahaha!!! Those silly wabbits. :D)
I have a couple of programs I used in my PC days that are completely useless now, they won't run on Mac OS. Why not? I bought them! I paid for them! What right do these software companies have to lock me into a single platform?
I have, at last count, 317 files on my comp with the extension .xls. If I should decide I prefer to use Lotus, will I be able to open these files as is? Or will I have to take the time to convert them to XML format? Will I lose any of the custom formatting these files contain? ( I honestly don't know. I'm just beginning to learn the ODF stuff. Beside, current version of Lotus appears to be Windows only!) And these files aren't something I paid for, they are my own creations!
I'd be more than willing to see Apple surrender some iPod sales, (given the quality of the product, I don't think it would be much), if it would remove the single largest block against switching to Mac OS; the availabilty of software! Then the OS's could compete on other planes; features, ease of use, quality of computing experience, stability, etc. All of which would be, dare I say, good for the consumer?
Maybe I'm just a silly dreamer, but imagine the boon to Mac and Linux users if all these software development companies were forced to make their products interoperable, with the same functionality, and price.
What a beautiful place the world would be! :cool:
dsnort - finally, someone has hit the nail on the head. A standard DRM does not help ALL consumers - only those using Windows. This is why I see these rules/laws as fluff. There has to be 2 parts to any law before I will see it as positive. First - the law must insist on OS Neutrality. Meaning, if you want to have an online music store, it must work on Linux, Mac, and Windows. You make a music player, then it must have drivers or work on Linux, Mac and Windows. Once you have that, then let's get a universal DRM that is used by all these music stores and all these music players. Until both things happen, these laws do not help all consumers. And isn't what these laws are supposed to do - help the consumer???
My household has nothing but Macs. If these "laws" were enacted and we suddenly had a universal DRM, it would NOT help me as a consumer. I would still only be able to use iTunes, as none of the other big music stores (Sony, Yahoo, Napster, Real, Microsoft, Walmart) work on a Mac. I could perhaps buy a different player, but that would only help if that player had drivers or software that would work on a Mac.
These "laws" seemed to be created by Windows using politicians who don't truly understand what it would take to be fair to ALL consumers. It seems that they only care about whether Windows users get all the bells, whistles, and benefits. So I say leave it the way it is until it will help everyone.
There IS one thing that could make me switch over to the cross platform compatibility side of this argument.
That would be if the CC of Norway enforced it ACROSS THE BOARD!
My first MP3 player was a Creative Zen Micro. The only reason I have an iPod is because when I switched to Macs, the nice people at Creative Labs informed me that their sync software DID NOT SUPPORT MAC OS.
I can't even access Sony's Connect music store on my Mac. I'm told I need to "upgrade to Internet Explorer 5.5 or higher". (Upgrade to IE??? Bwahahahahaha!!! Those silly wabbits. :D)
I have a couple of programs I used in my PC days that are completely useless now, they won't run on Mac OS. Why not? I bought them! I paid for them! What right do these software companies have to lock me into a single platform?
I have, at last count, 317 files on my comp with the extension .xls. If I should decide I prefer to use Lotus, will I be able to open these files as is? Or will I have to take the time to convert them to XML format? Will I lose any of the custom formatting these files contain? ( I honestly don't know. I'm just beginning to learn the ODF stuff. Beside, current version of Lotus appears to be Windows only!) And these files aren't something I paid for, they are my own creations!
I'd be more than willing to see Apple surrender some iPod sales, (given the quality of the product, I don't think it would be much), if it would remove the single largest block against switching to Mac OS; the availabilty of software! Then the OS's could compete on other planes; features, ease of use, quality of computing experience, stability, etc. All of which would be, dare I say, good for the consumer?
Maybe I'm just a silly dreamer, but imagine the boon to Mac and Linux users if all these software development companies were forced to make their products interoperable, with the same functionality, and price.
What a beautiful place the world would be! :cool:
dsnort - finally, someone has hit the nail on the head. A standard DRM does not help ALL consumers - only those using Windows. This is why I see these rules/laws as fluff. There has to be 2 parts to any law before I will see it as positive. First - the law must insist on OS Neutrality. Meaning, if you want to have an online music store, it must work on Linux, Mac, and Windows. You make a music player, then it must have drivers or work on Linux, Mac and Windows. Once you have that, then let's get a universal DRM that is used by all these music stores and all these music players. Until both things happen, these laws do not help all consumers. And isn't what these laws are supposed to do - help the consumer???
My household has nothing but Macs. If these "laws" were enacted and we suddenly had a universal DRM, it would NOT help me as a consumer. I would still only be able to use iTunes, as none of the other big music stores (Sony, Yahoo, Napster, Real, Microsoft, Walmart) work on a Mac. I could perhaps buy a different player, but that would only help if that player had drivers or software that would work on a Mac.
These "laws" seemed to be created by Windows using politicians who don't truly understand what it would take to be fair to ALL consumers. It seems that they only care about whether Windows users get all the bells, whistles, and benefits. So I say leave it the way it is until it will help everyone.
swarmster
Apr 5, 03:52 PM
Thanks for the passing insult however I think I was pretty clear that your use for it was one I hadn't considered and also a rare case that made this app actually useful. I apologize for recognizing your rare and interesting situation.
I think you're missing the source of the issue here. The problem you and vast majority of people commenting here have is that anything that doesn't apply to you or interest you is met with hatred and ridicule. Instead of apologizing for overlooking the one use you consider acceptable, apologize for looking down on everything you don't understand and accepting that most things in life have applicability to someone.
But hey, here's another example, from before your post:
haha this is as lame as a tv station bringing out a half hour of the most "unique" and "fascinating" ads, wow.
also, maybe if they were some good, funny ads it would be ok, but no. The ads shown in the pic are just "EAT MCRIB" and "MAYBELLINE"...
This person doesn't realize that iAds aren't just a banner, but can actually contain some pretty complex and varied app-like content. Maybe if they downloaded this they'd learn something.
I think you're missing the source of the issue here. The problem you and vast majority of people commenting here have is that anything that doesn't apply to you or interest you is met with hatred and ridicule. Instead of apologizing for overlooking the one use you consider acceptable, apologize for looking down on everything you don't understand and accepting that most things in life have applicability to someone.
But hey, here's another example, from before your post:
haha this is as lame as a tv station bringing out a half hour of the most "unique" and "fascinating" ads, wow.
also, maybe if they were some good, funny ads it would be ok, but no. The ads shown in the pic are just "EAT MCRIB" and "MAYBELLINE"...
This person doesn't realize that iAds aren't just a banner, but can actually contain some pretty complex and varied app-like content. Maybe if they downloaded this they'd learn something.
SuperCachetes
Apr 17, 09:23 AM
You completely missed the point. Let me be more specific for comprehension purposes. There is no way to teach the persecution of all peoples throughout the history of our planet with the way the school system is today. So where should the line be drawn? You never answered the question. Do gays deserve more attention than say slavery or the holocaust? It appears to me that you feel that a select few individuals, that may have been gay, deserve more attention than the plight of entire civilizations or race of people?
And this is not ignorance. Pointing out the sexuality of a person that made a contribution to society is irrelevant. Completely and utterly irrelevant! Do people remember Einstein for being a Jew or as the father of modern physics? You would prefer he was remembered as a Jew first?
I doubt Lee missed your point; maybe your point is just undefendable. For example, explain how you can prove that adding a bit of content about modern history will somehow force something else out of the curriculum. That there are a finite amount of class hours isn't good enough.
As we march through history, we have to condense more and more of it into a class. It wasn't that long ago that we added the space program to our description of modern history. Then JFK. MLK. Civil rights. Space shuttles. John Hinckley Jr. Fall of communism. Berlin Wall. Iraq. 9/11. Tsunamis. Egypt. What did these things take the place of or force out of the curriculum?
Incidentally, when I came through school many years ago, it was mentioned that Einstein was a Jew. It's not irrelevant - it's part of his story and part of who he was. In my classes, it wasn't swept under the rug, but neither was it mentioned "first" nor did it make me want to convert to Judaism. Adding a facet to our understanding of a person in history is not promotion.
Most people here really don't get that accomplishments aren't being promoted so much as the homosexuality of the historical figures.
You really don't get that it's not promotion. There is a big swath of gray area between promotion and concealment. The GLBT struggle for equality is part of our culture whether you are involved in it or not. It should be entered into the records.
And this is not ignorance. Pointing out the sexuality of a person that made a contribution to society is irrelevant. Completely and utterly irrelevant! Do people remember Einstein for being a Jew or as the father of modern physics? You would prefer he was remembered as a Jew first?
I doubt Lee missed your point; maybe your point is just undefendable. For example, explain how you can prove that adding a bit of content about modern history will somehow force something else out of the curriculum. That there are a finite amount of class hours isn't good enough.
As we march through history, we have to condense more and more of it into a class. It wasn't that long ago that we added the space program to our description of modern history. Then JFK. MLK. Civil rights. Space shuttles. John Hinckley Jr. Fall of communism. Berlin Wall. Iraq. 9/11. Tsunamis. Egypt. What did these things take the place of or force out of the curriculum?
Incidentally, when I came through school many years ago, it was mentioned that Einstein was a Jew. It's not irrelevant - it's part of his story and part of who he was. In my classes, it wasn't swept under the rug, but neither was it mentioned "first" nor did it make me want to convert to Judaism. Adding a facet to our understanding of a person in history is not promotion.
Most people here really don't get that accomplishments aren't being promoted so much as the homosexuality of the historical figures.
You really don't get that it's not promotion. There is a big swath of gray area between promotion and concealment. The GLBT struggle for equality is part of our culture whether you are involved in it or not. It should be entered into the records.
iShater
Jul 28, 12:36 PM
I think the Volt is a success in terms of meeting it's intended design parameters. However, I think the whole notion of the all-electric car and plug-in hybrids are flawed due to our current infrastructure.
As long as we burn fossil fuels to get the electricity, the electric car is just sweeping the fossil fuel/pollution problem under the rug by putting the "dirty" side of power consumption out of sight (back at the power plant). Also, there's no way our current power generation infrastructure could support even a fraction of the population switching to electric cars. California already has rolling blackouts - if people stopped burning gas and switched to electrics, the problem would get drastically worse.
I think electric cars are a dead end for the present...At least until our entire power grid makes large-scale switches to alternative energy, and there is no timeline for that currently. Also, there is currently no guarantee that practical fuel-cell systems will ever be truly affordable or mass-producable. The current offerings are all extremely expensive, proof-of-concept vehicles with short useful lives.
We'd be better off with diesels or diesel hybrids. People don't want to admit it, but those are currently our best options IMO.
I really wish I didn't sound so cynical, but that's the picture as I understand it.
All very valid points. However, keep in mind that even how we get our power varies from state to state. Switching to electric vehicles does need to come hand in hand with a change on not only how we generate electricity, but also how we consume it.
As long as we burn fossil fuels to get the electricity, the electric car is just sweeping the fossil fuel/pollution problem under the rug by putting the "dirty" side of power consumption out of sight (back at the power plant). Also, there's no way our current power generation infrastructure could support even a fraction of the population switching to electric cars. California already has rolling blackouts - if people stopped burning gas and switched to electrics, the problem would get drastically worse.
I think electric cars are a dead end for the present...At least until our entire power grid makes large-scale switches to alternative energy, and there is no timeline for that currently. Also, there is currently no guarantee that practical fuel-cell systems will ever be truly affordable or mass-producable. The current offerings are all extremely expensive, proof-of-concept vehicles with short useful lives.
We'd be better off with diesels or diesel hybrids. People don't want to admit it, but those are currently our best options IMO.
I really wish I didn't sound so cynical, but that's the picture as I understand it.
All very valid points. However, keep in mind that even how we get our power varies from state to state. Switching to electric vehicles does need to come hand in hand with a change on not only how we generate electricity, but also how we consume it.
lmalave
Oct 3, 02:31 PM
This is a little disappointing that Steve is confirming to keynote MWSF 2007 when it's just October, which means he probably wants us to wait (I hope not). :(
Besides, hasn't Steve keynoted MWSF every year?
Apple has already gone on record as saying that they are moving away from tying product releases to MWSF. I think updates to products before MWSF could happen only if Apple thinks that it'll help them sell more product overall. For example, Apple is *not* going to release the iPhone before because they want consumers to buy the new iPod nanos for this Christmas *and* buy a new iPhone next year. That way they dip into your wallet twice within a year.
I think that for Macs, though, they could upgrade to Core 2 Duo for all macs (except maybe the MacBook and Mac mini initially). As part of that upgrade, I predict they will also update to 802.11n across the whole line, in preparation for the iTV launch. If they wanted to be really jerky, they could launch Core 2 Duo sometime soon (November the latest), and then early next year upgrade to 802.11n (providing a dongle for older laptops). I think iTV is too important, though, to play games like that, so I think that Apple will integrate 802.11n into its Macs as quickly as is practical...
Besides, hasn't Steve keynoted MWSF every year?
Apple has already gone on record as saying that they are moving away from tying product releases to MWSF. I think updates to products before MWSF could happen only if Apple thinks that it'll help them sell more product overall. For example, Apple is *not* going to release the iPhone before because they want consumers to buy the new iPod nanos for this Christmas *and* buy a new iPhone next year. That way they dip into your wallet twice within a year.
I think that for Macs, though, they could upgrade to Core 2 Duo for all macs (except maybe the MacBook and Mac mini initially). As part of that upgrade, I predict they will also update to 802.11n across the whole line, in preparation for the iTV launch. If they wanted to be really jerky, they could launch Core 2 Duo sometime soon (November the latest), and then early next year upgrade to 802.11n (providing a dongle for older laptops). I think iTV is too important, though, to play games like that, so I think that Apple will integrate 802.11n into its Macs as quickly as is practical...
dethmaShine
Apr 25, 11:52 AM
3.7" is the most appropriate phone size imo. I use htc trophy 7 which is 3.8" and it's just a bit bigger. 3.5" is a bit small though.
Anything greater than 3.8" is a giant screen. Can't imagine using one of those.
Anything greater than 3.8" is a giant screen. Can't imagine using one of those.
LightSpeed1
Apr 13, 06:04 PM
thought about getting those but im getting the samson 3i's instead. lmk how they areAfter listening to them for a couple hours now, I can say that that they the clarity is absolutely beautiful. If you like lots of bass I wouldn't recommend these speakers, but it is good. For what they cost I think that you definitely get your money's worth.
slffl
Jan 5, 04:31 PM
Great idea Macrumors! I hope I can hold out that long, but it would be even more exciting watching a video stream rather than refreshing a webpage. Hopefully the stream will work.
