Go Back  Bike Forums > The Lounge > Foo
Reload this Page >

Looks like the iPad has some barbarians at the gate...

Foo Off-Topic chit chat with no general subject.

Looks like the iPad has some barbarians at the gate...

Old 06-28-12, 09:11 AM
  #26  
himespau 
Senior Member
 
himespau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 10,935
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1332 Post(s)
Liked 21 Times in 14 Posts
Originally Posted by patentcad View Post
And of course it's quite possible Apple will respond with its own 7" tablet this Fall in that $200-$249 price range. Widely rumored.
Vaporware

Two can play at that game.
himespau is online now  
Old 06-28-12, 09:24 AM
  #27  
eja_ bottecchia
Senior Member
 
eja_ bottecchia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 5,273
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 728 Post(s)
Liked 90 Times in 68 Posts
Originally Posted by Indy_Rider View Post
Shouldn't this be in Politics in Religion?

Nothing says religious cult like the mention of Apple and their products.
I disagree, nothing says religious cult like Campagnolo...and Colnago...or Campy + Colnago.

For the record I also own an iPad3 and an iPhone.

I have drank the KoolAid.
eja_ bottecchia is offline  
Old 06-28-12, 10:27 AM
  #28  
dcrowell
Fat Guy Rolling
 
dcrowell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Louisville Kentucky
Posts: 2,434

Bikes: Bacchetta Agio, 80s Raleigh Record single-speed, Surly Big Dummy

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I have an iPhone. I've been wanting an iPad. I do think a 7" iPad would sell well, even at $299. The $199 Nexus 7 is cheap enough to be an impulse buy. I may get one next month, then spring for an iPad later in the year.

I don't get into religious arguments about tech gear. I like it all.
dcrowell is offline  
Old 06-28-12, 10:42 AM
  #29  
chris.....
Banned.
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Illinois
Posts: 2

Bikes: Cannondale Caad4, Schwinn moab

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I have the original ipad, my wife has a HP touchpad and my son has the kindle fire. I wouldn't say the ipad is that much better than the other 2, if all you want to do is surf the web. I don't use them for much else.
chris..... is offline  
Old 06-28-12, 10:55 AM
  #30  
downtube42
Senior Member
 
downtube42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 1,940

Bikes: Volae Team, '74ish Windsor Carrera Sport, Priority Eight, Nimbus MUni

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 68 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 24 Times in 16 Posts
When Apple and PC had different endianness, there was something real to argue about. Now it's just marketing and image.
downtube42 is offline  
Old 06-28-12, 11:15 AM
  #31  
RubenX 
Look! My Spine!
 
RubenX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Kissimmee, FL
Posts: 620
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by downtube42 View Post
When Apple and PC had different endianness, there was something real to argue about. Now it's just marketing and image.
Can you dumbify that term a little... wiki page went to techie on me and I don't get it.
__________________
"Hoy es un dia normal, pero yo voy a hacerlo intenso" ~ Juanes
RubenX is offline  
Old 06-28-12, 11:22 AM
  #32  
chris.....
Banned.
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Illinois
Posts: 2

Bikes: Cannondale Caad4, Schwinn moab

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by downtube42 View Post
When Apple and PC had different endianness, there was something real to argue about. Now it's just marketing and image.
That's not 100% true. Apple still has control over most, if not all of the components that make up their computers. Microsoft does not.
chris..... is offline  
Old 06-28-12, 12:29 PM
  #33  
x136 
phony collective progress
 
x136's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Hoosey
Posts: 2,973

Bikes: http://velospace.org/user/36663

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by patentcad View Post
And of course it's quite possible Apple will respond with its own 7" tablet this Fall in that $200-$249 price range. Widely rumored.
Don't hold your breath. Apple couldn't give less of a crap about the low end these days. The iBook/Macbook is gone, the iMac's days as "the affordable Macintosh" are long gone, and instead of making low-end iOS devices, they just drop the price on the old stuff when they release something new.

Not that I blame them, mind you. When people are falling all over themselves to buy $500 iPads, $700 iPhones, and whatever it takes to get their hands on a MBP/MBA or an iMac, why bother with the R&D for lower-end models?

Plus, anything they come out with now is going to have a Retina-level display. The iPad Jr. ain't going to have no 1280x800 or 1024x768 screen. Maybe 1600x1200 or1920x1440, and neither such panel is going to fit into a $249 device.
__________________
x136 is offline  
Old 06-28-12, 01:32 PM
  #34  
RubenX 
Look! My Spine!
 
RubenX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Kissimmee, FL
Posts: 620
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Retina-level display... meh.. .paying extra money for pixels that no human eye will ever be able to see (said the dead guy himself):


If Nexus 7's screen is 7x4 inches... that's 28sqr inches....
If Nexus 7's resolution is 1280x800 pixels... that's 1,024,000 pixels (my math right?)

an area of 28sqr inches that contains 1,024,000 pixels in it should have a pixel density of about 36,571 pixels per sqr inch. So why is the apple dude bragging about 300ish pixels per sqr inch? Is my math wrong or something?

PS: watch how it says "4x the normal amount" but never said what the "normal amount" was to begin with. Marketing at it's best.
__________________
"Hoy es un dia normal, pero yo voy a hacerlo intenso" ~ Juanes
RubenX is offline  
Old 06-28-12, 01:37 PM
  #35  
Indy_Rider
Banned
 
Indy_Rider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: On a boat
Posts: 56

Bikes: 2000 Fisher Paragon, 2005 Giant OCR2, 2006 Bianchi SASS, numerous others

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by RubenX View Post
Retina-level display... meh.. .paying extra money for pixels that no human eye will ever be able to see (said the dead guy himself):


If Nexus 7's screen is 7x4 inches... that's 28sqr inches....
If Nexus 7's resolution is 1280x800 pixels... that's 1,024,000 pixels (my math right?)

an area of 28sqr inches that contains 1,024,000 pixels in it should have a pixel density of about 36,571 pixels per sqr inch. So why is the apple dude bragging about 300ish pixels per sqr inch? Is my math wrong or something?

PS: watch how it says "4x the normal amount" but never said what the "normal amount" was to begin with. Marketing at it's best.
But the Apple fan's eat it up. That many pixels on that small of screen, so overkill, but it's an excuse for people to line up to fork even more money over to Apple.
Indy_Rider is offline  
Old 06-28-12, 01:43 PM
  #36  
windhchaser 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: baned from foo so for sure im not there .
Posts: 620

Bikes: Felt nine flow

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 648 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
all you need is 640x480
windhchaser is offline  
Old 06-28-12, 02:50 PM
  #37  
x136 
phony collective progress
 
x136's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Hoosey
Posts: 2,973

Bikes: http://velospace.org/user/36663

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by RubenX View Post
If Nexus 7's screen is 7x4 inches... that's 28sqr inches....
If Nexus 7's resolution is 1280x800 pixels... that's 1,024,000 pixels (my math right?)

an area of 28sqr inches that contains 1,024,000 pixels in it should have a pixel density of about 36,571 pixels per sqr inch. So why is the apple dude bragging about 300ish pixels per sqr inch? Is my math wrong or something?
According to the formula here, and assuming the Nexus 7's screen is exactly seven inches diagonally, it has a pixel density of 215.63 PPI.

Originally Posted by RubenX View Post
PS: watch how it says "4x the normal amount" but never said what the "normal amount" was to begin with. Marketing at it's best.
That one's even easier. iPhone 3GS: 320x480 3.5" display. iPhone 4: 640x960 3.5" display. Exactly four times the number of pixels (and double the PPI, since it's a linear measurement).


As for those pooh-poohing high-resolution displays, ha! You keep buying giant monitors with baby-fist-sized pixels, then. Personally, I'm sick of pretending that "HD" is high-resolution for a computer display. I'm using a 23" 1920x1200 display that was introduced in 2004 which itself is a refresh of a previous display introduced in 2002. So we've been using 1920x1200 displays for ten years at the very least (and they're even lower resolution now, at 1920x1080), and that number of pixels can't be packed into anything smaller than 21.5/22/23/24"? To hell with that. I want a 15" 1920x1440/1200/1080 display. Something as large as 23" should be available in WQUXGA by now, or at least QFHD (aka 4K).

Display resolutions have been stalled for so long. I'm excited for the 9.7" 2048x1536 display in the iPad 3, the 10.1" 1920x1200 display in the Asus Transformer Prime TF700T, and some of the more high-resolution computerphones like Samsung's Galaxy Nexus, S III, and Galaxy Note, LG's Optimus Vu, etc.
__________________
x136 is offline  
Old 06-28-12, 04:01 PM
  #38  
RubenX 
Look! My Spine!
 
RubenX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Kissimmee, FL
Posts: 620
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by x136 View Post
According to the formula here, and assuming the Nexus 7's screen is exactly seven inches diagonally, it has a pixel density of 215.63 PPI.
No no no... no fancy Apple(TM) formulas allowed. Use the middle school math we all know and love.

Area = Height x Width
Total Pixels = Columns x Rows
Pixels Per Area = Total Pixels / Area
__________________
"Hoy es un dia normal, pero yo voy a hacerlo intenso" ~ Juanes
RubenX is offline  
Old 06-28-12, 04:34 PM
  #39  
bigbenaugust 
always rides with luggage
 
bigbenaugust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: KIGX
Posts: 2,106

Bikes: 2007 Trek SU100, 2009 Fantom CX, 2012 Fantom Cross Uno, Bakfiets

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 249 Post(s)
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by RubenX View Post
Can you dumbify that term a little... wiki page went to techie on me and I don't get it.
Once upon a time, Apple and the PC world were on different architectures. The Apples started out as Motorola 680x0 processors, switching to IBM PowerPC processors in the mid-1990's. the PCs have been all Intel x86 (or x86 compatible, like x86_64/amd64) the whole time. In late 2005, Apple announced machines running on the Intel processor architecture and dumped the PowerPC like a bad habit a few months later.

Apple had some valid reasons for this transition. The PowerPCs ran very hot, weren't very efficient on the laptops, and lost out in performance to the early dual-core processors of the time. Don't quote me on that, it's been a while.

So basically, Since 2006 an Apple computer is just an expensive PC in a pretty box with OpenFirmware instead of a BIOS and a magic chip that allows booting of MacOS X. Windows XP and 7 are supported on all Apple machines (depending on when you bought them, and I don't know about Vista).

I am typing this on a Mac Mini Server running Linux for the x86_64. At home, I still have a PowerBook G4 with the PowerPC 7450 processor that I ordered from Apple has a refurb about 2 weeks before they announced the switch to Intel.
__________________
--Ben
2006 Trek SU100, 2009 Motobecane Fantom CX, 2011 Motobecane Fantom Cross Uno, and a Bakfiets
Previously: 2000 Trek 4500 (2000-2003), 2003 Novara Randonee (2003-2006), 2003 Giant Rainier (2003-2008), 2005 Xootr Swift (2005-2007), 2007 Nashbar 1x9 (2007-2011), 2011 Windsor Shetland (2011-2014), 2008 Citizen Folder (2015)
Non-Bike hardware: MX Linux / BunsenLabs Linux / Raspbian / Mac OS 10.6 / Android 7
bigbenaugust is offline  
Old 06-28-12, 04:42 PM
  #40  
RubenX 
Look! My Spine!
 
RubenX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Kissimmee, FL
Posts: 620
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Apple has intel processors now?
/scratches head
really?
/scratches head a little more
what the heck was I doing in 2005-2006 that I missed this?
__________________
"Hoy es un dia normal, pero yo voy a hacerlo intenso" ~ Juanes
RubenX is offline  
Old 06-28-12, 04:50 PM
  #41  
bigbenaugust 
always rides with luggage
 
bigbenaugust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: KIGX
Posts: 2,106

Bikes: 2007 Trek SU100, 2009 Fantom CX, 2012 Fantom Cross Uno, Bakfiets

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 249 Post(s)
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by RubenX View Post
Apple has intel processors now?
/scratches head
really?
/scratches head a little more
what the heck was I doing in 2005-2006 that I missed this?
Having kids?
__________________
--Ben
2006 Trek SU100, 2009 Motobecane Fantom CX, 2011 Motobecane Fantom Cross Uno, and a Bakfiets
Previously: 2000 Trek 4500 (2000-2003), 2003 Novara Randonee (2003-2006), 2003 Giant Rainier (2003-2008), 2005 Xootr Swift (2005-2007), 2007 Nashbar 1x9 (2007-2011), 2011 Windsor Shetland (2011-2014), 2008 Citizen Folder (2015)
Non-Bike hardware: MX Linux / BunsenLabs Linux / Raspbian / Mac OS 10.6 / Android 7
bigbenaugust is offline  
Old 06-28-12, 05:28 PM
  #42  
RubenX 
Look! My Spine!
 
RubenX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Kissimmee, FL
Posts: 620
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by bigbenaugust View Post
Having kids?
Oh yes... that... the girl... the girl happened.
__________________
"Hoy es un dia normal, pero yo voy a hacerlo intenso" ~ Juanes
RubenX is offline  
Old 06-28-12, 07:20 PM
  #43  
downtube42
Senior Member
 
downtube42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 1,940

Bikes: Volae Team, '74ish Windsor Carrera Sport, Priority Eight, Nimbus MUni

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 68 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 24 Times in 16 Posts
Originally Posted by bigbenaugust View Post
Once upon a time, Apple and the PC world were on different architectures. The Apples started out as Motorola 680x0 processors, switching to IBM PowerPC processors in the mid-1990's. the PCs have been all Intel x86 (or x86 compatible, like x86_64/amd64) the whole time. In late 2005, Apple announced machines running on the Intel processor architecture and dumped the PowerPC like a bad habit a few months later.

Apple had some valid reasons for this transition. The PowerPCs ran very hot, weren't very efficient on the laptops, and lost out in performance to the early dual-core processors of the time. Don't quote me on that, it's been a while.

So basically, Since 2006 an Apple computer is just an expensive PC in a pretty box with OpenFirmware instead of a BIOS and a magic chip that allows booting of MacOS X. Windows XP and 7 are supported on all Apple machines (depending on when you bought them, and I don't know about Vista).

I am typing this on a Mac Mini Server running Linux for the x86_64. At home, I still have a PowerBook G4 with the PowerPC 7450 processor that I ordered from Apple has a refurb about 2 weeks before they announced the switch to Intel.
True enough, but still pretty techie.

The term was borrowed from Gulliver's Travels, and is explained here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lilliput_and_Blefuscu. The Liliputians had a dispute as to whether a boiled egg should be broken from the big end or the little end. Emperors lost their lives and wars were fought over this dispute. And so, Intel and Motorola disagreed regarding how a byte of data should be stored; Apple being Motorola based and PCs being Intel based. And to those of us who had to move data between Motorola and Intel systems... well it was a decent living for a few years.
downtube42 is offline  
Old 06-28-12, 07:28 PM
  #44  
downtube42
Senior Member
 
downtube42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 1,940

Bikes: Volae Team, '74ish Windsor Carrera Sport, Priority Eight, Nimbus MUni

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 68 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 24 Times in 16 Posts
Originally Posted by chris..... View Post
That's not 100% true. Apple still has control over most, if not all of the components that make up their computers. Microsoft does not.
Kind of an amazing PR success that Apple has turned being highly vertical integrated into a feel-good story. Typically such companies are widely despised.
downtube42 is offline  
Old 06-28-12, 07:56 PM
  #45  
AEO
Senior Member
 
AEO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: A Coffin Called Earth. or Toronto, ON
Posts: 12,258

Bikes: Bianchi, Miyata, Dahon, Rossin

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by patentcad View Post
And of course it's quite possible Apple will respond with its own 7" tablet this Fall in that $200-$249 price range. Widely rumored.
vapourware.
__________________
Food for thought: if you aren't dead by 2050, you and your entire family will be within a few years from starvation. Now that is a cruel gift to leave for your offspring. ;)
http://sanfrancisco.ibtimes.com/arti...ger-photos.htm
AEO is offline  
Old 06-28-12, 08:00 PM
  #46  
x136 
phony collective progress
 
x136's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Hoosey
Posts: 2,973

Bikes: http://velospace.org/user/36663

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by RubenX View Post
No no no... no fancy Apple(TM) formulas allowed. Use the middle school math we all know and love.

Area = Height x Width
Total Pixels = Columns x Rows
Pixels Per Area = Total Pixels / Area
Won't work.

a) Screens are measured diagonally, so you'd still need a formula to determine the height and width of a screen given its diagonal size and screen size ratio.
b) Like the DPI of a printer, pixel density in PPI is a linear measurement, not one of area. A 300 DPI printer doesn't print 300 dots in a square inch, it prints 90,000 (300x300). Therefore a screen is referred to as being 216 PPI, not a confusing and ultimately useless measure like 46,656 pixels per square inch

So you need a formula either way. What on Earth makes you think the formula has anything at all to do with Apple? It's posted on Wikipedia in an article completely unrelated to Apple. It's just math, and not that complex.

Square root of 1280+800.
Divided by 7.
215.633854.
Or about 216 PPI.
__________________
x136 is offline  
Old 06-28-12, 08:04 PM
  #47  
AEO
Senior Member
 
AEO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: A Coffin Called Earth. or Toronto, ON
Posts: 12,258

Bikes: Bianchi, Miyata, Dahon, Rossin

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by bigbenaugust View Post
Once upon a time, Apple and the PC world were on different architectures. The Apples started out as Motorola 680x0 processors, switching to IBM PowerPC processors in the mid-1990's. the PCs have been all Intel x86 (or x86 compatible, like x86_64/amd64) the whole time. In late 2005, Apple announced machines running on the Intel processor architecture and dumped the PowerPC like a bad habit a few months later.

Apple had some valid reasons for this transition. The PowerPCs ran very hot, weren't very efficient on the laptops, and lost out in performance to the early dual-core processors of the time. Don't quote me on that, it's been a while.

So basically, Since 2006 an Apple computer is just an expensive PC in a pretty box with OpenFirmware instead of a BIOS and a magic chip that allows booting of MacOS X. Windows XP and 7 are supported on all Apple machines (depending on when you bought them, and I don't know about Vista).

I am typing this on a Mac Mini Server running Linux for the x86_64. At home, I still have a PowerBook G4 with the PowerPC 7450 processor that I ordered from Apple has a refurb about 2 weeks before they announced the switch to Intel.
one thing macs do come with, are better displays.
especially their mac book pro lineup.

They have no competition in terms of display quality for laptops.
There are a few that come close, but by far and away, most windows laptops come equipped with garbage TN panels.

I am just so sick of garbage TN panels on laptops.
__________________
Food for thought: if you aren't dead by 2050, you and your entire family will be within a few years from starvation. Now that is a cruel gift to leave for your offspring. ;)
http://sanfrancisco.ibtimes.com/arti...ger-photos.htm
AEO is offline  
Old 06-28-12, 08:15 PM
  #48  
AEO
Senior Member
 
AEO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: A Coffin Called Earth. or Toronto, ON
Posts: 12,258

Bikes: Bianchi, Miyata, Dahon, Rossin

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by x136 View Post
Won't work.

a) Screens are measured diagonally, so you'd still need a formula to determine the height and width of a screen given its diagonal size and screen size ratio.
b) Like the DPI of a printer, pixel density in PPI is a linear measurement, not one of area. A 300 DPI printer doesn't print 300 dots in a square inch, it prints 90,000 (300x300). Therefore a screen is referred to as being 216 PPI, not a confusing and ultimately useless measure like 46,656 pixels per square inch

So you need a formula either way. What on Earth makes you think the formula has anything at all to do with Apple? It's posted on Wikipedia in an article completely unrelated to Apple. It's just math, and not that complex.

Square root of 1280+800.
Divided by 7.
215.633854.
Or about 216 PPI.
my S3... when it gets here... will have 306ppi

oh, you can actually buy a google galaxy nexus phone (OEM samsung galaxy nexus), which has 1280x720 on a 4.65" screen, for $350 now. That has 316ppi.
pretty good deal for a phone with those specs.
__________________
Food for thought: if you aren't dead by 2050, you and your entire family will be within a few years from starvation. Now that is a cruel gift to leave for your offspring. ;)
http://sanfrancisco.ibtimes.com/arti...ger-photos.htm

Last edited by AEO; 06-28-12 at 08:18 PM.
AEO is offline  
Old 06-28-12, 08:25 PM
  #49  
patentcad
Peloton Shelter Dog
 
patentcad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Chester, NY
Posts: 90,401

Bikes: 2017 Scott Foil, 2016 Scott Addict SL, 2018 Santa Cruz Blur CC MTB

Mentioned: 70 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1027 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by AEO View Post
vapourware.
Incorrect.

Vaporware is when a company announces a product and it never materializes. Any 7" tablet from Apple remains pure speculation in the Apple rumor community at large, the company has nothing to do with it. If and when Apple announces anything, you can count on the fact that it will be shipping either the same day or shortly thereafter.

Apple doesn't generally do vaporware, many companies could take a cue from them.
__________________
http://www.cotsiscad.com
patentcad is offline  
Old 06-28-12, 08:30 PM
  #50  
no1mad 
Thunder Whisperer
Thread Starter
 
no1mad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: NE OK
Posts: 8,853

Bikes: '06 Kona Smoke

Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 270 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by AEO View Post
my S3... when it gets here... will have 306ppi

oh, you can actually buy a google galaxy nexus phone (OEM samsung galaxy nexus), which has 1280x720 on a 4.65" screen, for $350 now. That has 316ppi.
pretty good deal for a phone with those specs.
Don't know about the others, but I'm not interested in a smartphone. However, I did go check out Samsung's website last night after you extolled the virtues of the S3. Those little media players looked nice- I liked the Player 5 myself. My guess it's their take on the iPod Touch. Might get one someday whenever I actually have disposable income again.
__________________
Community guidelines
no1mad is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.