ChazUK
Apr 18, 04:49 PM
+1 for great common sense that some people aer lacking on here so far...
Do you really think the Galaxy tab and iPhone 3g/3gs aer<sic> "identical"?
Do you really think the Galaxy tab and iPhone 3g/3gs aer<sic> "identical"?
McGiord
Apr 9, 08:24 PM
Mac'nCheese: I think that in elementary school you first learn to multiply and then to divide. So first you multiply and then you divide.
That left to right rule is not following the order of the letters.
So for this case it is not PEMDAS but PEDMAS...
The Arabs give us the numbers that we use nowadays, and they do write from right to left.
So your math teacher is telling us that Mac OS X is giving us a wrong answer...You might need to watch waiting for Superman.
That left to right rule is not following the order of the letters.
So for this case it is not PEMDAS but PEDMAS...
The Arabs give us the numbers that we use nowadays, and they do write from right to left.
So your math teacher is telling us that Mac OS X is giving us a wrong answer...You might need to watch waiting for Superman.
Coolerking
Sep 11, 12:33 PM
I bet ya a Core 2 Duo processor in my new macbook that Apple will be showcasing some more (of the cooler) applications in Leopard. I wouldn't be suprised if they sync up to a new Ipod or Iphone.
You heard it here first.
:cool:
You heard it here first.
:cool:
tstreete
Nov 9, 07:21 AM
Phone calls are routed exclusively through the Car Kit's speakers, whether or not music etc. is routed through the output jack to speakers. A lot of smartphones are like the iPhone in that they won't run phone calls through the base/charger port, but will run the "computer" output, i.e., music and other programs. Has to do with the separate computer/phone circuits, I suppose.
Thanks for that info. I was wondering if I plug an fm transmitter into the car kit and play my music through my car speakers, will incoming phone calls also be sent through the car speakers or the Tomtom speaker? I prefer the phone calls just come through the car kit's speaker alone.
Thanks for that info. I was wondering if I plug an fm transmitter into the car kit and play my music through my car speakers, will incoming phone calls also be sent through the car speakers or the Tomtom speaker? I prefer the phone calls just come through the car kit's speaker alone.
MartiNZ
May 4, 08:39 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)
Would be my preferred way. Enough with physical media. Very progressive of Apple.
And in a much more prepared way than progressive has been in the past - people are more prepared to lose the optical drive now than they were to lose the floppy drive back in '98. We have such good alternatives now!
I look forward to dling and presumably making a bootable memory stick. And hopefully we don't have to wait much longer :).
Would be my preferred way. Enough with physical media. Very progressive of Apple.
And in a much more prepared way than progressive has been in the past - people are more prepared to lose the optical drive now than they were to lose the floppy drive back in '98. We have such good alternatives now!
I look forward to dling and presumably making a bootable memory stick. And hopefully we don't have to wait much longer :).
EricNau
May 3, 09:48 PM
I don't have the time to write an exhaustive response to this magnum opus, but I'm going to leave with a few concluding points:
It doesn't matter what normal body temperature is because that's not what people are looking for when they take a temperature; they're looking for what's not normal. If it can be helped, the number one is seeking should be as flat as possible.
There is a distinctive quality about 100 that is special. It represents an additional place value and is a line of demarcation for most people. For a scientist or professional, the numbers seem the same (each with 3 digits ending in the tenths place), but to the lay user they are very different. The average person doesn't know what significant digits are or when rounding is appropriate. It's far more likely that someone will falsely remember "37.2" as "37" than they will "99" as "98.6." Even if they do make an error and think of 98.6 as 99, it is an error on the side of caution (because presumably they will take their child to the doctor or at least call in).
I realize this makes me seem like I put people in low regard, but the fact is that most things designed for common use are meant to be idiot-proof. Redundancies and warnings are hard to miss in such designs, and on a temperature scale, one that makes 100 "dangerous" is very practical and effective. You have to keep in mind that this scale is going to be used by the illiterate, functionally illiterate, the negligent, the careless, the sloppy, and the hurried.
The importance of additional digits finds its way into many facets of life, including advertising and pricing. It essentially the only reason why everything is sold at intervals of "xx.99" instead of a flat price point. Marketers have long determined that if they were to round up to the nearest whole number, it would make the price seem disproportionately larger. The same "trick" is being used by the Fahrenheit scale; the presence of the additional digit makes people more alarmed at the appropriate time.
I believe the discussion of body temperature has reached a senseless level. I disagree with your claim that body temperatures in celsius are more difficult to remember, and I don't believe there's any substatial evidence to support this claim. Regardless, Celsius seems to work just fine for the entire world (...practically), unless you know something about European mothers that I don't.
Of course any amateur baker has at least a few cups of both wet and dry so they can keep ingredients separated but measured when they need to be added in a precise order. It just isn't practical to bake with 3 measuring devices and a scale (which, let's be real here, would cost 5 times as much as a set of measuring cups).
I see no reason why baking with a scale is impractical. It's not what you're used to, but that doesn't reflect upon the merits of a metric system.
This also relies on having recipes with written weights as opposed to volumes. It would also be problematic because you'd make people relearn common measurements for the metric beaker because they couldn't have their cups (ie I know 1 egg is half a cup, so it's easy to put half an egg in a recipe-I would have to do milimeter devision to figure this out for a metric recipe even though there's a perfectly good standard device for it).
Written weights are more accurate. What's problematic is that there's an additional requirement for measuring volumes of dry goods. Flour must be measured after sifting, brown sugar must be packed, etc. Not only does weighing dry goods eliminate the need to standardization of volume, but it's always going to be more accurate.
So what would you call 500ml of beer at a bar? Would everyone refer to the spoon at the dinner table as "the 30?" The naming convention isn't going to disappear just because measurements are given in metric. Or are you saying that the naming convention should disappear and numbers used exclusively in their stead?
As balmaw explained, it doesn't really matter what you call a pint of beer at a bar. Every culture and language has their own name for it.
In that case, what would I call 1 cup of a drink? Even if it is made flat at 200, 250, or 300ml, what would be the name? I think by and large it would still be called a cup. In that case you aren't really accomplishing much because people are going to refer to it as they will and the metric quantity wouldn't really do anything because it's not something that people usually divide or multiply by 10 very often in daily life.
If you ask for a "cup of water" at a restaurant, will you be given exactly 8oz? I don't think so.
Most cups hold more than a cup. So, in the absence of a measuring cup, there's really no need for such a designation. So, assuming we do away with the customary system, why do you need a word to describe 8oz of water? You would stop thinking in cups and start thinking in quarter liter intervals (which is equally, if not more, convenient).
No, that would be 1/4 of a liter, not 4 liters. I'm assuming that without gallons, the most closely analogous metric quantity would be 4 liters. What would be the marketing term for this? The shorthand name that would allow people to express a quantity without referring to another number?
I believe milk in Germany is bought by the liter, though I'm sure European members here could elaborate on that.
You might find purchasing milk by the liter cumbersome, but it works well for them.
Well I'm assuming that beer would have to be served in metric quantities, and a pint is known the world over as a beer. You can't really expect the name to go out of use just because the quantity has changed by a factor of about 25ml.
Beer is served in metric quantities all over the world. ...And there are plenty of names for it that aren't "pint." Additionally, I assure you that an American pint of beer is served with less precision than 25ml from bar to bar.
Except you can't divide the servings people usually take for themselves very easily by 2, 4, 8, or 16. An eighth of 300ml (a hypothetical metric cup), for example, is a decimal. It's not very probable that if someone was to describe how much cream they added to their coffee they'd describe it as "37.5ml." It's more likely that they'll say "1/4 of x" or "2 of y." This is how the standard system was born; people took everyday quantities (often times as random as fists, feet, and gulps) and over time standardized them.
And metric units, too, are used the world over to describe household amounts.
Also, dividing 300ml (though, I find it interesting that you keep choosing to compare metric units to customary units, since this is counter-productive) can easily be rounded to 38 or even 40ml, which is precise enough even for baking.
Though it's entirely a moot point. Metric recipes are normalized to "easy" measurements, just like American recipes are normalized to the nearest cup or 1/2 for items like flour and sugar.
Every standard unit conforms to a value we are likely to see to this day (a man's foot is still about 12 inches, a tablespoon is about one bite, etc). Granted it's not scientific, but it's not meant to be. It's meant to be practical to describe everyday units, much like "lion" is not the full scientific name for panthera leo. One naming scheme makes sense for one application and another makes sense for a very different application. I whole heartedly agree that for scientific, industrial, and official uses metric is the way to go, but it is not the way to go for lay people. People are not scientists. They should use the measuring schemes that are practical for the things in their lives.
I don't find the customary system practical. To the contrary, I find it convoluted with no consistency.
It's onerous to learn how to multiply and divide by 10 + 3 root words? :confused: Besides, so many things in our daily lives have both unit scales. My ruler has inches and cm and mm. Bathroom scales have pounds and kg. Even measuring cups have ml written on them.
I've witnessed many students struggle with it. When you grow up using Fahrenheit, feet, miles, inches, cups, teaspoons, etc. you get a sense of what each one means; you can "feel" it. The same can't be said about the metric system for most Americans, and it's extremely difficult to teach yourself what each unit intuitively represents as a high school student, for example.
It's something many of us will never get. Kilometers, Celsius, liters, centimeters, etc. will always "feel" foreign because of the units we were raised with at home. We owe our kids better.
It doesn't matter what normal body temperature is because that's not what people are looking for when they take a temperature; they're looking for what's not normal. If it can be helped, the number one is seeking should be as flat as possible.
There is a distinctive quality about 100 that is special. It represents an additional place value and is a line of demarcation for most people. For a scientist or professional, the numbers seem the same (each with 3 digits ending in the tenths place), but to the lay user they are very different. The average person doesn't know what significant digits are or when rounding is appropriate. It's far more likely that someone will falsely remember "37.2" as "37" than they will "99" as "98.6." Even if they do make an error and think of 98.6 as 99, it is an error on the side of caution (because presumably they will take their child to the doctor or at least call in).
I realize this makes me seem like I put people in low regard, but the fact is that most things designed for common use are meant to be idiot-proof. Redundancies and warnings are hard to miss in such designs, and on a temperature scale, one that makes 100 "dangerous" is very practical and effective. You have to keep in mind that this scale is going to be used by the illiterate, functionally illiterate, the negligent, the careless, the sloppy, and the hurried.
The importance of additional digits finds its way into many facets of life, including advertising and pricing. It essentially the only reason why everything is sold at intervals of "xx.99" instead of a flat price point. Marketers have long determined that if they were to round up to the nearest whole number, it would make the price seem disproportionately larger. The same "trick" is being used by the Fahrenheit scale; the presence of the additional digit makes people more alarmed at the appropriate time.
I believe the discussion of body temperature has reached a senseless level. I disagree with your claim that body temperatures in celsius are more difficult to remember, and I don't believe there's any substatial evidence to support this claim. Regardless, Celsius seems to work just fine for the entire world (...practically), unless you know something about European mothers that I don't.
Of course any amateur baker has at least a few cups of both wet and dry so they can keep ingredients separated but measured when they need to be added in a precise order. It just isn't practical to bake with 3 measuring devices and a scale (which, let's be real here, would cost 5 times as much as a set of measuring cups).
I see no reason why baking with a scale is impractical. It's not what you're used to, but that doesn't reflect upon the merits of a metric system.
This also relies on having recipes with written weights as opposed to volumes. It would also be problematic because you'd make people relearn common measurements for the metric beaker because they couldn't have their cups (ie I know 1 egg is half a cup, so it's easy to put half an egg in a recipe-I would have to do milimeter devision to figure this out for a metric recipe even though there's a perfectly good standard device for it).
Written weights are more accurate. What's problematic is that there's an additional requirement for measuring volumes of dry goods. Flour must be measured after sifting, brown sugar must be packed, etc. Not only does weighing dry goods eliminate the need to standardization of volume, but it's always going to be more accurate.
So what would you call 500ml of beer at a bar? Would everyone refer to the spoon at the dinner table as "the 30?" The naming convention isn't going to disappear just because measurements are given in metric. Or are you saying that the naming convention should disappear and numbers used exclusively in their stead?
As balmaw explained, it doesn't really matter what you call a pint of beer at a bar. Every culture and language has their own name for it.
In that case, what would I call 1 cup of a drink? Even if it is made flat at 200, 250, or 300ml, what would be the name? I think by and large it would still be called a cup. In that case you aren't really accomplishing much because people are going to refer to it as they will and the metric quantity wouldn't really do anything because it's not something that people usually divide or multiply by 10 very often in daily life.
If you ask for a "cup of water" at a restaurant, will you be given exactly 8oz? I don't think so.
Most cups hold more than a cup. So, in the absence of a measuring cup, there's really no need for such a designation. So, assuming we do away with the customary system, why do you need a word to describe 8oz of water? You would stop thinking in cups and start thinking in quarter liter intervals (which is equally, if not more, convenient).
No, that would be 1/4 of a liter, not 4 liters. I'm assuming that without gallons, the most closely analogous metric quantity would be 4 liters. What would be the marketing term for this? The shorthand name that would allow people to express a quantity without referring to another number?
I believe milk in Germany is bought by the liter, though I'm sure European members here could elaborate on that.
You might find purchasing milk by the liter cumbersome, but it works well for them.
Well I'm assuming that beer would have to be served in metric quantities, and a pint is known the world over as a beer. You can't really expect the name to go out of use just because the quantity has changed by a factor of about 25ml.
Beer is served in metric quantities all over the world. ...And there are plenty of names for it that aren't "pint." Additionally, I assure you that an American pint of beer is served with less precision than 25ml from bar to bar.
Except you can't divide the servings people usually take for themselves very easily by 2, 4, 8, or 16. An eighth of 300ml (a hypothetical metric cup), for example, is a decimal. It's not very probable that if someone was to describe how much cream they added to their coffee they'd describe it as "37.5ml." It's more likely that they'll say "1/4 of x" or "2 of y." This is how the standard system was born; people took everyday quantities (often times as random as fists, feet, and gulps) and over time standardized them.
And metric units, too, are used the world over to describe household amounts.
Also, dividing 300ml (though, I find it interesting that you keep choosing to compare metric units to customary units, since this is counter-productive) can easily be rounded to 38 or even 40ml, which is precise enough even for baking.
Though it's entirely a moot point. Metric recipes are normalized to "easy" measurements, just like American recipes are normalized to the nearest cup or 1/2 for items like flour and sugar.
Every standard unit conforms to a value we are likely to see to this day (a man's foot is still about 12 inches, a tablespoon is about one bite, etc). Granted it's not scientific, but it's not meant to be. It's meant to be practical to describe everyday units, much like "lion" is not the full scientific name for panthera leo. One naming scheme makes sense for one application and another makes sense for a very different application. I whole heartedly agree that for scientific, industrial, and official uses metric is the way to go, but it is not the way to go for lay people. People are not scientists. They should use the measuring schemes that are practical for the things in their lives.
I don't find the customary system practical. To the contrary, I find it convoluted with no consistency.
It's onerous to learn how to multiply and divide by 10 + 3 root words? :confused: Besides, so many things in our daily lives have both unit scales. My ruler has inches and cm and mm. Bathroom scales have pounds and kg. Even measuring cups have ml written on them.
I've witnessed many students struggle with it. When you grow up using Fahrenheit, feet, miles, inches, cups, teaspoons, etc. you get a sense of what each one means; you can "feel" it. The same can't be said about the metric system for most Americans, and it's extremely difficult to teach yourself what each unit intuitively represents as a high school student, for example.
It's something many of us will never get. Kilometers, Celsius, liters, centimeters, etc. will always "feel" foreign because of the units we were raised with at home. We owe our kids better.
ECUpirate44
Apr 9, 08:36 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PEMDAS#Mnemonics
(Not saying this is your case McGiord)
I am.
(Not saying this is your case McGiord)
I am.
tblrsa
Dec 15, 12:37 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; de-de) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
I don't, either. That's why I'm polite enough to make sure my PC friends are running anti-virus software, to protect them from malware, no matter where it may come from.
Eventually Macs will get viruses too.
What's the big deal? It's free and it runs well on my Mac. It's just extra protection for my Mac and for my PC friends.
The big deal is that i do not want buggy, resource stealing software on my mac. Simple as that.
I don't, either. That's why I'm polite enough to make sure my PC friends are running anti-virus software, to protect them from malware, no matter where it may come from.
Eventually Macs will get viruses too.
What's the big deal? It's free and it runs well on my Mac. It's just extra protection for my Mac and for my PC friends.
The big deal is that i do not want buggy, resource stealing software on my mac. Simple as that.
JGowan
Mar 29, 01:56 PM
Not much good in hyping up new products if many of your core components are unobtainable.Don't know if this is a blanket statement or if you're talking about Apple specifically. "Hyping" is an odd word and very negative. If you're talking about Apple marketing and advertising a product, that's hardly fair. Why? For one, it's their product so they need to advertise it. Secondly, they hardly advertise. I see from time to time a commercial on TV and from time to time, an ad. Hardly "hyping". They get most of their best advertisement from happy customers and those predicting Apple news. They're one company who doesn't really have to remind people that they are around. When they want free publicity, they just hold a press conference and the message gets out.
The Japanese are resilient, but it will take years for them to fully recover.For some, yes. But for those that are dynamic to the economies of other big companies/countries, they will get the support they need to get back into production of all the things that the world needs.
The Japanese are resilient, but it will take years for them to fully recover.For some, yes. But for those that are dynamic to the economies of other big companies/countries, they will get the support they need to get back into production of all the things that the world needs.
dukebound85
Apr 10, 12:14 PM
I agree with I student UK using the constraints of / makes it rather ambiguos (did I spell that right) as I originally read it. I believed the 2(9+3) to be in the denominator in which case the answer is clearly 2
You can't assume that 2(9+3) is under the denominator
They way it is explicitly written is interpreted to be (48/2)*(9+3)
You can't assume that 2(9+3) is under the denominator
They way it is explicitly written is interpreted to be (48/2)*(9+3)
addicted44
Mar 26, 11:11 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8C148)
Yay let us all surrender our privacy to the cloud...
Cloud Focused OS != Cloud OS.
Yay let us all surrender our privacy to the cloud...
Cloud Focused OS != Cloud OS.
CalBoy
May 3, 12:58 AM
SI is superior in conversions only
Imperial is superior as I actually have a feel for the numbers
Please tell me that's sarcasm. :rolleyes:
I have a "feel" for Imperial measurements, and they are a pain in the ***.
I don't think so, and I'm not being sarcastic.
Temperature is a great example. Celsius and Kelvin are fantastic for science and engineering for obvious reasons, but when it comes to everyday uses, Fahrenheit makes more sense. It's very intuitive to think of numbers on a 100 scale. That's why when you're looking at the weather or taking someone's body temperature, it's easier to get a grasp of what is "high" or "low." Fahrenheit is also more accurate for casual uses because it can express smaller changes more easily than Celsius.
The metric system also lacks easy naming schemes for everyday sizes. Recipes, for example, would have to be written out in ml rather than cups or spoons. In such a situation, base 10 is not helpful at all because recipes are rarely divided or multiplied by 10. The metric system could in fact be worse for such applications because cutting 473 ml in half is more of a pain than cutting 2 cups in half (and yes, while recipes could theoretically be modified to be in flat metric ratios, the fact is that there are far too many recipes in existence already for that to be realistic in the short-medium term).
However, we have been seeing the transition to metric in some subtler ways. Soda, water, and juice have been sold in metric quantities for a while now, and I've even seen more and more bags of chips, boxes of cereal, and some candy bars (mind you not popular ones) come in metric sizes. This is obviously advantageous for manufacturers because it means a streamlined production line. I just don't think we're going to get most people to use the metric system for non-scientific daily tasks because it may not be as superior as it would seem at first blush.
Imperial is superior as I actually have a feel for the numbers
Please tell me that's sarcasm. :rolleyes:
I have a "feel" for Imperial measurements, and they are a pain in the ***.
I don't think so, and I'm not being sarcastic.
Temperature is a great example. Celsius and Kelvin are fantastic for science and engineering for obvious reasons, but when it comes to everyday uses, Fahrenheit makes more sense. It's very intuitive to think of numbers on a 100 scale. That's why when you're looking at the weather or taking someone's body temperature, it's easier to get a grasp of what is "high" or "low." Fahrenheit is also more accurate for casual uses because it can express smaller changes more easily than Celsius.
The metric system also lacks easy naming schemes for everyday sizes. Recipes, for example, would have to be written out in ml rather than cups or spoons. In such a situation, base 10 is not helpful at all because recipes are rarely divided or multiplied by 10. The metric system could in fact be worse for such applications because cutting 473 ml in half is more of a pain than cutting 2 cups in half (and yes, while recipes could theoretically be modified to be in flat metric ratios, the fact is that there are far too many recipes in existence already for that to be realistic in the short-medium term).
However, we have been seeing the transition to metric in some subtler ways. Soda, water, and juice have been sold in metric quantities for a while now, and I've even seen more and more bags of chips, boxes of cereal, and some candy bars (mind you not popular ones) come in metric sizes. This is obviously advantageous for manufacturers because it means a streamlined production line. I just don't think we're going to get most people to use the metric system for non-scientific daily tasks because it may not be as superior as it would seem at first blush.
iStudentUK
Apr 10, 01:17 PM
To get 2 requires you to make assumptions about the equation. If you make no assumptions and simply apply the rules then you get 288
No matter what you do you have to make an assumption as to what "/" means. Nobody over the age of 10 should be using that notation for this exact reason.
Therefore, assume that author wanted to use "_" but couldn't as this is a forum not suited to equation writing and work from there. I believe the logical conclusion is 288, but that is not the same as saying the answer is 288.
No matter what you do you have to make an assumption as to what "/" means. Nobody over the age of 10 should be using that notation for this exact reason.
Therefore, assume that author wanted to use "_" but couldn't as this is a forum not suited to equation writing and work from there. I believe the logical conclusion is 288, but that is not the same as saying the answer is 288.
Hattig
Aug 7, 06:31 PM
Does anyone know if this systems absolutely *REQUIRES* ECC RAM?
ECC is very expensive!
Wait until you see the FBDIMM pricing ...
ECC is very expensive!
Wait until you see the FBDIMM pricing ...
digitalbiker
Aug 11, 03:36 PM
Jesus! How much more expensive do you want it to be! the price diff is already almost �500 from top whitebook to bottom MBP!
You are quoting out of context. The original post was about lowering the MB cost and retaining the Yonah cpu.
The MBP would move to Merom and stay near the same price. Therefore the result would be a larger price differentiation and a larger performance differentiation.
You are quoting out of context. The original post was about lowering the MB cost and retaining the Yonah cpu.
The MBP would move to Merom and stay near the same price. Therefore the result would be a larger price differentiation and a larger performance differentiation.
ssk2
Mar 30, 06:55 AM
I'm not going to give a full critique to Amazon's UI and UX design, but when you look at Apple's UIs and Apple's apps next to these Amazon one's do you not notice a major difference in simplicity, fit and finish, and polish???
I'm not saying you can't use the Amazon stuff, but Apple has powerfully demonstrated many times over now for years, that user experience and beautiful design ABSOLUTELY DOES make a big impact!
Take a look at the UI of iBooks, or the new iMovie and Garage Band, or Contacts, or all of the iWork apps on iPad, etc. etc. BEAUTIFUL UIs and very creative, cultural, simplistic and elegant! Also WebOS has some beautiful UI design.
I don't see how Amazon's Cloud UI could be much better. It does follow Apple's UI, but hey, guess what? They're not Apple. Their UI IS very simple, I'd argue elegant and looks functional. As for a UI being 'cultural', you'll have to explain that one...
I'm not saying you can't use the Amazon stuff, but Apple has powerfully demonstrated many times over now for years, that user experience and beautiful design ABSOLUTELY DOES make a big impact!
Take a look at the UI of iBooks, or the new iMovie and Garage Band, or Contacts, or all of the iWork apps on iPad, etc. etc. BEAUTIFUL UIs and very creative, cultural, simplistic and elegant! Also WebOS has some beautiful UI design.
I don't see how Amazon's Cloud UI could be much better. It does follow Apple's UI, but hey, guess what? They're not Apple. Their UI IS very simple, I'd argue elegant and looks functional. As for a UI being 'cultural', you'll have to explain that one...
Rdclark
Mar 29, 01:38 PM
...obviously, is the rollout of a "Kindle Tablet" running Honeycomb.
The custom Amazon front end would have icons for:
Kindle Reading App (and Kindle Store)
Amazon Music Player (with cloud storage) and MP3 Store
Amazon Prime Streaming Video (and the Amazon Video Store)
Amazon Android App Store
Cloud Storage Manager
Some sort of Web Browser
And underneath that is Honeycomb. Maybe they throw in a free Amazon Prime subscription with purchase (free 2-day shipping on Amazon purchases).
Here would be Amazon leveraging all their strengths into a physical device that could seriously challenge the iPad in ways that no other vendor can, because it creates an Amazon "ecosystem" with the worlds biggest store for physical goods attached.
People like to shop.
The custom Amazon front end would have icons for:
Kindle Reading App (and Kindle Store)
Amazon Music Player (with cloud storage) and MP3 Store
Amazon Prime Streaming Video (and the Amazon Video Store)
Amazon Android App Store
Cloud Storage Manager
Some sort of Web Browser
And underneath that is Honeycomb. Maybe they throw in a free Amazon Prime subscription with purchase (free 2-day shipping on Amazon purchases).
Here would be Amazon leveraging all their strengths into a physical device that could seriously challenge the iPad in ways that no other vendor can, because it creates an Amazon "ecosystem" with the worlds biggest store for physical goods attached.
People like to shop.
artifex
Jul 31, 06:31 AM
I don't understand how this made it off Page 2.
Clive At Five
Nov 22, 12:42 PM
There's no reason why they will choose to exclude syncing with mac applications.
I never said they would.
-Clive
I never said they would.
-Clive
mikemac11
Mar 30, 07:47 PM
Mac rumors please stop listening to TechCrunch.
OneMike
Apr 5, 01:20 PM
another reason why it pays to think before you act
LightSpeed1
Mar 31, 04:35 AM
Unsurprising.
At least 95% of rumors posted here and other Apple-related forums end up being wrong.
That's not hard to believe.
At least 95% of rumors posted here and other Apple-related forums end up being wrong.
That's not hard to believe.
RebeccaL
Apr 5, 06:56 PM
Leave the jailbreak community alone Apple!! What is your ****ing problem??? Can't we just coexist???:mad:
The problem is jailbreking violates the iOS end user license agreement. Apple is just defending themselves. Just as if any person violates an agreement.
The problem is jailbreking violates the iOS end user license agreement. Apple is just defending themselves. Just as if any person violates an agreement.
SandynJosh
Apr 23, 07:48 PM
The past year my right eye's vision has decreased. Interestingly enough that is around when i got my iphone 4, can lack of my eye working and the phone making it easier make my vision worse? Probably not and just a coincidence.
It's probably a brain tumor due to the RF energy, not at all related to the screen resolution. Nothing to worry about. :rolleyes:
It's probably a brain tumor due to the RF energy, not at all related to the screen resolution. Nothing to worry about. :rolleyes: