I could agree with that concept only if the employee would also have to dip into their savings and pay for the losses the company sees during down turns.
Excuse me, but where don't they do that anyway? Does GM keep people employed at the same lousy pay when they sell less cars, or do the lay off some and pay the rest less?
Front facing cameras and video conferencing have been on almost every 3G capable phone since circa 2003.
Yes, but it's entirely new and worthy of discussion when the sodding iPhone adds that feature.
Actually, FaceTime is entirely new (in a way) and worthy of discussion because it is not the video telephony found in most 3G phones. It's actually IP video telephony on a mobile phone. Which uses a very easy user interface, including using just the phone number to initiate the video call, doing all the actual connection set-up including NAT, Firewalls, etc. in the background.
I suppose we can assume that they imply "at the typical distance at which you hold your iPhone" because otherwise the claim would be nonsense.
Yeah, that's the thing: You can't really talk about this sort of issue with pixel density alone. You can only talk about it as a function of both pixel density and viewing distance.
Actually, you also have to include the individuals visual acuity into the picture (pun intended). Which Mr. Soneira for the sake of argument simply assumes to be what a perfect eye would project onto a perfect retina.
Let me fix that for you:
When you have absolute perfect vision, an image is 8 inches away from your face, you need a minimum of 716 ppi in order to not be able to distinguish individual dots. At 12 inches, you need a minimum 477 ppi, and 18 inches needs a minimum of 318 ppi. The iPhone has a ppi of 318, but most people with perfect vision hold it close enough that the individual pixels would be distinguishable. People with 20/18 vision or worse should have no problem.
So, if you hold an iPhone at the typical 12 inches from your eyes that works out to 477 pixels per inch and at 8 inches it's 716 ppi. You have to hold iPhone 4 out about 18 inches before it falls to 318 ppi. So the iPhone has significantly lower resolution than the retina
No, no, no! Mr. Soneira has it all wrong! The math works out if you are inside a reality-distortion field, since all physical laws either change or do not apply inside said field!
Inside a "reality distortion field" where people don't all have 20/12 vision. Yeah, it looks like the reality distortion is strongest for the haters - they are completely detached from reality.
The standard definition of normal visual acuity (20/20 vision) is the ability to resolve a spatial pattern separated by a visual angle of one minute of arc. Since one degree contains sixty minutes, a visual angle of one minute of arc is 1/60 of a degree.
[...]
When visually inspecting an object for a defect such as a crack, the distance (d) might be around 12 inches. This would be a comfortable viewing distance. At 12 inches, the normal visual acuity of the human eye is 0.00349 inch. What this means is that if you had alternating black and white lines that were all 0.00349 inch wide, it would appear to most people as a mass of solid gray.
In case you wondered: a pixel 0.00349 inch wide gives you 286.5 pixel per inch
There really aren't first to the really high rez phone business though - my nexus one's amoled screen is about as high rez as the new iPhone's display.
Suuuure. And since, as you claim, 252 ppi is about as high as 326 ppi, 252 ppi is also about as high as 163 ppi - IOW the iPhone4 has about the same resolution as the old iPhone.
What does that translate to in terms of halftone printing? There's a world of difference between 90000 dye-sublimation continuous tones per square inch, and 90000 little squares that can be exactly black, cyan, magenta, or yellow.
What exactly does dye-sublimation have to do with actual (magazine) printing?
Yeah, I mean, who wants the world's largest selection of quality apps, all vetted to be reasonably sure of being malware-free and of at least a minimum level of quality and stability!
Yeah, because fart apps are considered quality. Quantity != quality.
Yeah, the dozens of fart apps for Android - now that is both proof of quality and diversity! And that's just the ones available from Google's store - the porn fart apps are even better!
I don't care what the best possible image the phone can take is. I care about day to day use. How well does it do in non-ideal conditions (Something that Jobs is very unlikely to show during a keynote). That's why I am reserving judgment until reviews start coming in...
Assuming Gizomod is willing to pay enough, there's sure to be some WWDC attendee willing to give up their tickets, for some price.
according to themselves, they paid $5000 for the story of somebody finding what likely was just a Chinese knockoff. They should pay at least $20k for a genuine WWDC ticket.
This kind of shit is par for the course today, and it's the reason it is hard to trust journalists these days. Most so-called reviews out there - especially larger sites - are essentially paid-for ads.
It's quite hilarious that you got +4 mods for whining that not allowing "journalists" to a keynote (IOW a PR event) would force them to write reviews that are like ads - when the reason for their kicking was them writing a review just to sell more adds.
Actually, it's genius marketing by Apple at work - nobody cared about the demos at http://developer.apple.com/safaridemos/ even so they have been up for months. Now that Apple created a page to access the exact same demos, but only if you use Safari, people suddenly care.
The way they say it, makes it seem that you know any HTML5 enabled browser should run HTML5 enabled content.
And they do. What does that have to do with Apple blocking access to their showcase - at least for the lazy ones? See what they also say?
The demos below show how the latest version of Apple’s Safari web browser, new Macs, and new Apple mobile devices all support the capabilities of HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript. Not all browsers offer this support.
The showcase does exactly what it says on the box. When you go around the block, it does even more - what they said before.
It got old years ago and if I hear "zero day" one more time I'm going to go nuts and take a sniper rifle up to the top of a bell tower and start picking off wannabe technology journalists.
Wouldn't that qualify as a "zero day" sniping attack?
No, the bulletin is already out before the attack. Well, if he's already climbing the stairs, we can talk about it...
Anyone who was going to buy an iMaxipad for heavy day use that hears about this will have second thoughts. So even for Apple, this is an Apple issue.
Apple shouldn't have locked in with a douchbag company, although douchbag and iMaxiPad do go together.
The use of the term "iMaxipad" probably explains why the fuck you don't know that the iPad isn't exclusive to AT&T in any way.
Slashdot Mirror
I could agree with that concept only if the employee would also have to dip into their savings and pay for the losses the company sees during down turns.
Excuse me, but where don't they do that anyway? Does GM keep people employed at the same lousy pay when they sell less cars, or do the lay off some and pay the rest less?
1) they crash (apple doesn't want rotten fruit in its shop)
Okay... it's a good policy for most users, but there's only one shop! So if for example my tastes don't quite match Steves, I'm out of luck?
So you like crashing apps. I bet the Android developers are thrilled about the information.
Front facing cameras and video conferencing have been on almost every 3G capable phone since circa 2003.
Yes, but it's entirely new and worthy of discussion when the sodding iPhone adds that feature.
Actually, FaceTime is entirely new (in a way) and worthy of discussion because it is not the video telephony found in most 3G phones. It's actually IP video telephony on a mobile phone. Which uses a very easy user interface, including using just the phone number to initiate the video call, doing all the actual connection set-up including NAT, Firewalls, etc. in the background.
I suppose we can assume that they imply "at the typical distance at which you hold your iPhone" because otherwise the claim would be nonsense.
Yeah, that's the thing: You can't really talk about this sort of issue with pixel density alone. You can only talk about it as a function of both pixel density and viewing distance.
Actually, you also have to include the individuals visual acuity into the picture (pun intended). Which Mr. Soneira for the sake of argument simply assumes to be what a perfect eye would project onto a perfect retina.
Or to put it into more direct words...
Let me fix that for you: When you have absolute perfect vision, an image is 8 inches away from your face, you need a minimum of 716 ppi in order to not be able to distinguish individual dots. At 12 inches, you need a minimum 477 ppi, and 18 inches needs a minimum of 318 ppi. The iPhone has a ppi of 318, but most people with perfect vision hold it close enough that the individual pixels would be distinguishable. People with 20/18 vision or worse should have no problem.
So, if you hold an iPhone at the typical 12 inches from your eyes that works out to 477 pixels per inch and at 8 inches it's 716 ppi. You have to hold iPhone 4 out about 18 inches before it falls to 318 ppi. So the iPhone has significantly lower resolution than the retina
No, no, no! Mr. Soneira has it all wrong! The math works out if you are inside a reality-distortion field, since all physical laws either change or do not apply inside said field!
Inside a "reality distortion field" where people don't all have 20/12 vision. Yeah, it looks like the reality distortion is strongest for the haters - they are completely detached from reality.
The standard definition of normal visual acuity (20/20 vision) is the ability to resolve a spatial pattern separated by a visual angle of one minute of arc. Since one degree contains sixty minutes, a visual angle of one minute of arc is 1/60 of a degree.
[...]
When visually inspecting an object for a defect such as a crack, the distance (d) might be around 12 inches. This would be a comfortable viewing distance. At 12 inches, the normal visual acuity of the human eye is 0.00349 inch. What this means is that if you had alternating black and white lines that were all 0.00349 inch wide, it would appear to most people as a mass of solid gray.
In case you wondered: a pixel 0.00349 inch wide gives you 286.5 pixel per inch
There really aren't first to the really high rez phone business though - my nexus one's amoled screen is about as high rez as the new iPhone's display.
Suuuure. And since, as you claim, 252 ppi is about as high as 326 ppi, 252 ppi is also about as high as 163 ppi - IOW the iPhone4 has about the same resolution as the old iPhone.
What does that translate to in terms of halftone printing? There's a world of difference between 90000 dye-sublimation continuous tones per square inch, and 90000 little squares that can be exactly black, cyan, magenta, or yellow.
What exactly does dye-sublimation have to do with actual (magazine) printing?
Yeah, I mean, who wants the world's largest selection of quality apps, all vetted to be reasonably sure of being malware-free and of at least a minimum level of quality and stability!
Yeah, because fart apps are considered quality. Quantity != quality.
Yeah, the dozens of fart apps for Android - now that is both proof of quality and diversity! And that's just the ones available from Google's store - the porn fart apps are even better!
So, do ads use up your data? That seems like a bad situations, but it's not clear how it could be avoided.
You mean apart from not clicking on the damn ads? Or not using apps with ads in the first place?
Wow. the keynote isn't even finished and the post went up.
Yeah, I also like it better when they sit on the articles a couple of days before posting them. Let them ripen.
You won't get a significantly better picture without increasing the size of the lens, which it doesn't look like Apple is doing.
Actually, looking at pictures of the back of the 3GS and the iPhone 4 - that's exactly what they have been doing. Compare http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_iphone/family/iphone#iphone-compare to http://images.apple.com/iphone/gallery/images/gallery01-20100607.jpg
I don't care what the best possible image the phone can take is. I care about day to day use. How well does it do in non-ideal conditions (Something that Jobs is very unlikely to show during a keynote). That's why I am reserving judgment until reviews start coming in...
http://www.apple.com/iphone/features/camera.html - the examples are under "Built-in LED flash." Also one bigger low light in the gallery.
-1 offtopic for talking about what Jobs is showing in the unveiling powerpoint presentation? Apple fanboys have raided Slashdot, and they're retarded.
Powerpoint? Who is retarded, Tard?
What would be interesting is Adblock Plus for the iPhone.
Heh! Odds of that being approved for the App Store are approximately 3,720 to 1.
http://www.icab.de/mobile.html
http://www.appbird.com/adblockweb/
From article: By Dan Tynan Created 2009-05-04
I became suspicious when he predicted the resurgence of palm.
That's why it's also a dupe: http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/04/2039219 - note that it was posted on the same day.
Assuming Gizomod is willing to pay enough, there's sure to be some WWDC attendee willing to give up their tickets, for some price.
according to themselves, they paid $5000 for the story of somebody finding what likely was just a Chinese knockoff. They should pay at least $20k for a genuine WWDC ticket.
I hope you were joking.
This kind of shit is par for the course today, and it's the reason it is hard to trust journalists these days. Most so-called reviews out there - especially larger sites - are essentially paid-for ads.
It's quite hilarious that you got +4 mods for whining that not allowing "journalists" to a keynote (IOW a PR event) would force them to write reviews that are like ads - when the reason for their kicking was them writing a review just to sell more adds.
Actually, it's genius marketing by Apple at work - nobody cared about the demos at http://developer.apple.com/safaridemos/ even so they have been up for months. Now that Apple created a page to access the exact same demos, but only if you use Safari, people suddenly care.
The way they say it, makes it seem that you know any HTML5 enabled browser should run HTML5 enabled content.
And they do. What does that have to do with Apple blocking access to their showcase - at least for the lazy ones? See what they also say?
The demos below show how the latest version of Apple’s Safari web browser, new Macs, and new Apple mobile devices all support the capabilities of HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript. Not all browsers offer this support.
The showcase does exactly what it says on the box. When you go around the block, it does even more - what they said before.
Criticizing Apple for making a showcase of what they can do with standards not comply with standard browsers is trolling?!
Since "comply with standard browsers" is complete gibberish - yes.
Wouldn't that qualify as a "zero day" sniping attack?
No, the bulletin is already out before the attack. Well, if he's already climbing the stairs, we can talk about it...
>The MPG of even the most efficient vehicle is at zero when it is stopped by a red light.
Nope. Not if the engine is turned off. Now you've got 0/0, is that zero or infinity?
As soon as it has to start moving again, that falls apart.
Anyone who was going to buy an iMaxipad for heavy day use that hears about this will have second thoughts. So even for Apple, this is an Apple issue. Apple shouldn't have locked in with a douchbag company, although douchbag and iMaxiPad do go together.
The use of the term "iMaxipad" probably explains why the fuck you don't know that the iPad isn't exclusive to AT&T in any way.