Songs as Ringtones
Games
Any flash support
Instant Messaging
Picture messages (MMS)
Video recording
Voice recognition or voice dialing
Wireless Bluetooth Stereo Streaming (A2DP)
One-size-fits-all headset jack (May have to buy an adapter for certain headphones)
3G (EV-DO/HSDPA)
GPS
A real keyboard
Removable battery
Expandable Storage
Direct iTunes Music Store Access (Over Wi-Fi or EDGE)
All of those things can be done by the HTC Mogul and I even think the PPC-6700 which has been around for a while now can do most of that. I don't think Apple is trying to push the boundaries or up the bar with the iPhone. I think Apple is trying to do what it always does, make a product that just works and is simple. Multitouch and the visual voicemail seem to be about the only things that it has that nothing else has.
I agree with you. It's just that it's so new it still has the showroom shine to it so it hasn't had a chance to show it's true colors yet. Actually that's probably why Apple is still around, they aren't trying to cater to what everyone wants but instead doing what they think is necessary and doing it very well.
I can only go by my previous experiences with products because unfortunately I don't have $600 to risk on a device that I might not like.
I'm aware that the haptic touch screens require all that but you can also remove the vibrating mechanism from the device since the haptic touch screens can do that as well. I'm sure there is a reason that it's not in there, perhaps the product is premature, the added expense isn't worth it, or it doesn't work with the multitouch screen. Hence why I was wondering why it wasn't included since I think it would make the overall product much better. I don't need to look at my phone whenever I'm texting on it because I know where the keys are and I know when I have pressed one. It's the same reason I don't like remotes that have LCD screens instead of traditional buttons. I don't want to have to always look at the device in order to use it.
Personally I think the iPhone is a good product, it just isn't for me and I know I'm far from the mainstream.
I'm not surprised people like it, actually I'd be more surprised if people didn't like it. We really won't know how well it is until it has been in the wild for a while. That's when you'll start finding out the things that really bother people.
I'm sure it will be popular and I'm sure it will be successful but it's not for me. For the same reasons I didn't buy an iPod I'm not going to buy this. It's just too expensive and too locked down for me. Now don't get me wrong that is pretty good for the mainstream market because the less they can do the less they can break but I like a device that bends to my will and will do most things I want it to. Just like the iPod makes you use iTunes the iPhone makes it so you can't run whatever software you choose on it. It's not that it's not good it's just that this is Slashdot and well we like to make technology do whatever we want.
I have to agree with you that scratches and the lack of a tactile feedback is reason alone for me not to want it. I text a lot and I know a lot of my generation, I'm only 21 by the way, does as well. I have a feeling texting is going to be cumbersome with this phone.
I know some company designed a haptic feedback system for touch screens that makes you think you are actually pushing a button. I wonder why Apple didn't include that in this device.
It will always be possible to frame someone. At some level you just have to make a reasonable assesment as to whether witnesses are telling the truth in everything from copyright cases to murders.
Exactly, at least we are agree on something, lol. I was merely trying to say that past cases have shown the RIAA to be less than credible and that is why they should be required to have more than just a screenshot. I honestly agree with you that the RIAA should defend the rights of the organizations that have employed them but I also feel that they are going about it in the wrong way.
Theoretically at least they should only be going after people who were sharing copyrighted files on line. I dont see anything wrong with looking for people who are doing this, downloading the files from them, taking a few screenshots as this is happening to document what happened and sending a subpoena to a university. Do you have a better method? How do you think they should be pursuing violaters?
I don't have a better method but that doesn't mean I can't say the current method is wrong. A screenshot shouldn't be accepted as proof because it's too easy to fake. What if I were to type up a letter that said, "I have illegal items in my house. Sincerely, jorghis" and then I went to a judge and said look I have proof that he has illegal items lets take him to court and then search his house.
So its pretty clear that going after individual copyright violaters is looked down upon on slashdot. I also remember back when napster was big everyone on here was upset that they were getting sued because they werent actually breaking the law, it was just the individual users.
So is it just one group who thinks that indivuals shouldnt be sued and a different group who thinks that the companies should be immune? How should the RIAA protect its intellectual property rights? Is it just a fundamental belief on here that copyright holders should have no recourse against violaters?
I don't think anyone on Slashdot is against the RIAA going after copyright violators it's just how they are going about doing it that bothers people. The RIAA is exploiting the ignorance of the justice system in order to get what it wants. Also, they seem to mostly go after those who lack the ability to adequately defend themselves. Then when someone does try to defend themselves the RIAA tries to have the case dismissed.
The RIAA has shown time and time again that their methodology to figure out who is infringing on copyright is flawed at best. I would have no problem with them going after someone if they brought more to the table than just a screenshot with an IP address or at least were held more accountable for when they are wrong. Their so called expert was anything but and they have sued dead people, minors, and those who have never even owned a computer.
Going after college students is just another extension of this. Lets say the RIAA sends some random IP addresses that they know are in use to a university. These are college students, relatively up on todays technology, what do you think is the probability that they will have one or more songs that the RIAA says they have allegedly downloaded? Pretty darn high you think? And if they don't have all of the songs they just say that they deleted them. Just because they have the songs doesn't mean they downloaded/uploaded them from/to a P2P network. Maybe they made a digital copy of a CD they own. So while you ask how can the RIAA protect its property rights I ask how do I protect my rights?
If it's piracy to redownload songs that I own on cassette (and still have the cassette, mind you), then yes, it's piracy to download cracked and modded versions of software that you already own.
Of course that is piracy/copyright infringement. If you were to make a digital copy of your cassette tape though that wouldn't be. It'd be like owning the license to Photoshop 6 and downloading Photoshop 7.
And normally you can just download a crack for the software instead of having to download the software also. It would be akin to you downloading software to allow you to copy the cassette to your computer.
Also interesting, but I'm skeptical. Turning on AA is just one API call, how does AA affect overhead?
I'm wondering if this has more to do with an architectural change than just a software modification. Maybe DirectX 10 specifications just require the board to have a daughter die similar to what the graphics processor in the 360 has.
Isn't the ESRB rating voluntary just like the rating the MPAA gives out? I don't see what power the ESRB has to stop this sort of thing short of refusing to rate the games for which the trailer is for.
According to the article it seems they are even going past just rating and deciding what trailers should or shouldn't be allowed: "We recently received a ruling from the ESRB," the statement reads, "...stating that the two officially released Dark Sector gameplay montages have been deemed to contain excessive or offensive content; and to this end are not to be available for download or viewing, regardless of being placed behind an age gate."
I apologize. I didn't mean to say that people are going to lose faith in Sony just that stocks are a good way of telling how people feel about particular companies. It won't give you a long term picture of the way people feel about the company but more of a day to day reflection.
I think it more or less just puts into perspective how well Nintendo is doing and how poorly Sony is doing. People aren't going to invest in a company that they don't have faith in.
As long as AMD can beat Intel's design then I have a feeling they will be all right. They don't have to beat them on price or on volume to stay in the game.
I do soffit and fascia construction work. Now I could buy my own equipment and make my soffit and fascia in house and save a little bit but the difference will never make up the cost of the machines because my volume isn't great enough. Instead I charge a little bit more than some people but builders go with me because I beat the others in service and quality.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly and it's also why it will be successful.
No offense but the iPhone really isn't that great. There is still a lot of stuff it can't do that other PDA phones can. Here is a list from Gizmodo http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/apple/what-the-iphone-d oesnt-have-272571.php:
Songs as Ringtones
Games
Any flash support
Instant Messaging
Picture messages (MMS)
Video recording
Voice recognition or voice dialing
Wireless Bluetooth Stereo Streaming (A2DP)
One-size-fits-all headset jack (May have to buy an adapter for certain headphones)
3G (EV-DO/HSDPA)
GPS
A real keyboard
Removable battery
Expandable Storage
Direct iTunes Music Store Access (Over Wi-Fi or EDGE)
All of those things can be done by the HTC Mogul and I even think the PPC-6700 which has been around for a while now can do most of that. I don't think Apple is trying to push the boundaries or up the bar with the iPhone. I think Apple is trying to do what it always does, make a product that just works and is simple. Multitouch and the visual voicemail seem to be about the only things that it has that nothing else has.
Haven't you seen the commercials? It just works don't ask questions.
What if you have a titanium kneecap worth $3,000 to $5,000?
I agree with you. It's just that it's so new it still has the showroom shine to it so it hasn't had a chance to show it's true colors yet. Actually that's probably why Apple is still around, they aren't trying to cater to what everyone wants but instead doing what they think is necessary and doing it very well.
I can only go by my previous experiences with products because unfortunately I don't have $600 to risk on a device that I might not like.
I'm aware that the haptic touch screens require all that but you can also remove the vibrating mechanism from the device since the haptic touch screens can do that as well. I'm sure there is a reason that it's not in there, perhaps the product is premature, the added expense isn't worth it, or it doesn't work with the multitouch screen. Hence why I was wondering why it wasn't included since I think it would make the overall product much better. I don't need to look at my phone whenever I'm texting on it because I know where the keys are and I know when I have pressed one. It's the same reason I don't like remotes that have LCD screens instead of traditional buttons. I don't want to have to always look at the device in order to use it.
Personally I think the iPhone is a good product, it just isn't for me and I know I'm far from the mainstream.
I'm not surprised people like it, actually I'd be more surprised if people didn't like it. We really won't know how well it is until it has been in the wild for a while. That's when you'll start finding out the things that really bother people.
I'm sure it will be popular and I'm sure it will be successful but it's not for me. For the same reasons I didn't buy an iPod I'm not going to buy this. It's just too expensive and too locked down for me. Now don't get me wrong that is pretty good for the mainstream market because the less they can do the less they can break but I like a device that bends to my will and will do most things I want it to. Just like the iPod makes you use iTunes the iPhone makes it so you can't run whatever software you choose on it. It's not that it's not good it's just that this is Slashdot and well we like to make technology do whatever we want.
I have to agree with you that scratches and the lack of a tactile feedback is reason alone for me not to want it. I text a lot and I know a lot of my generation, I'm only 21 by the way, does as well. I have a feeling texting is going to be cumbersome with this phone.
I know some company designed a haptic feedback system for touch screens that makes you think you are actually pushing a button. I wonder why Apple didn't include that in this device.
It will always be possible to frame someone. At some level you just have to make a reasonable assesment as to whether witnesses are telling the truth in everything from copyright cases to murders.
Exactly, at least we are agree on something, lol. I was merely trying to say that past cases have shown the RIAA to be less than credible and that is why they should be required to have more than just a screenshot. I honestly agree with you that the RIAA should defend the rights of the organizations that have employed them but I also feel that they are going about it in the wrong way.
Theoretically at least they should only be going after people who were sharing copyrighted files on line. I dont see anything wrong with looking for people who are doing this, downloading the files from them, taking a few screenshots as this is happening to document what happened and sending a subpoena to a university. Do you have a better method? How do you think they should be pursuing violaters?
I don't have a better method but that doesn't mean I can't say the current method is wrong. A screenshot shouldn't be accepted as proof because it's too easy to fake. What if I were to type up a letter that said, "I have illegal items in my house. Sincerely, jorghis" and then I went to a judge and said look I have proof that he has illegal items lets take him to court and then search his house.
So its pretty clear that going after individual copyright violaters is looked down upon on slashdot. I also remember back when napster was big everyone on here was upset that they were getting sued because they werent actually breaking the law, it was just the individual users.
So is it just one group who thinks that indivuals shouldnt be sued and a different group who thinks that the companies should be immune? How should the RIAA protect its intellectual property rights? Is it just a fundamental belief on here that copyright holders should have no recourse against violaters?
I don't think anyone on Slashdot is against the RIAA going after copyright violators it's just how they are going about doing it that bothers people. The RIAA is exploiting the ignorance of the justice system in order to get what it wants. Also, they seem to mostly go after those who lack the ability to adequately defend themselves. Then when someone does try to defend themselves the RIAA tries to have the case dismissed.
The RIAA has shown time and time again that their methodology to figure out who is infringing on copyright is flawed at best. I would have no problem with them going after someone if they brought more to the table than just a screenshot with an IP address or at least were held more accountable for when they are wrong. Their so called expert was anything but and they have sued dead people, minors, and those who have never even owned a computer.
Going after college students is just another extension of this. Lets say the RIAA sends some random IP addresses that they know are in use to a university. These are college students, relatively up on todays technology, what do you think is the probability that they will have one or more songs that the RIAA says they have allegedly downloaded? Pretty darn high you think? And if they don't have all of the songs they just say that they deleted them. Just because they have the songs doesn't mean they downloaded/uploaded them from/to a P2P network. Maybe they made a digital copy of a CD they own. So while you ask how can the RIAA protect its property rights I ask how do I protect my rights?
If it's piracy to redownload songs that I own on cassette (and still have the cassette, mind you), then yes, it's piracy to download cracked and modded versions of software that you already own.
Of course that is piracy/copyright infringement. If you were to make a digital copy of your cassette tape though that wouldn't be. It'd be like owning the license to Photoshop 6 and downloading Photoshop 7.
And normally you can just download a crack for the software instead of having to download the software also. It would be akin to you downloading software to allow you to copy the cassette to your computer.
Also interesting, but I'm skeptical. Turning on AA is just one API call, how does AA affect overhead?
I'm wondering if this has more to do with an architectural change than just a software modification. Maybe DirectX 10 specifications just require the board to have a daughter die similar to what the graphics processor in the 360 has.
Isn't the ESRB rating voluntary just like the rating the MPAA gives out? I don't see what power the ESRB has to stop this sort of thing short of refusing to rate the games for which the trailer is for.
According to the article it seems they are even going past just rating and deciding what trailers should or shouldn't be allowed:
"We recently received a ruling from the ESRB," the statement reads, "...stating that the two officially released Dark Sector gameplay montages have been deemed to contain excessive or offensive content; and to this end are not to be available for download or viewing, regardless of being placed behind an age gate."
I apologize. I didn't mean to say that people are going to lose faith in Sony just that stocks are a good way of telling how people feel about particular companies. It won't give you a long term picture of the way people feel about the company but more of a day to day reflection.
I think it more or less just puts into perspective how well Nintendo is doing and how poorly Sony is doing. People aren't going to invest in a company that they don't have faith in.
As long as AMD can beat Intel's design then I have a feeling they will be all right. They don't have to beat them on price or on volume to stay in the game.
I do soffit and fascia construction work. Now I could buy my own equipment and make my soffit and fascia in house and save a little bit but the difference will never make up the cost of the machines because my volume isn't great enough. Instead I charge a little bit more than some people but builders go with me because I beat the others in service and quality.