A "teenage boy" at 17 who is taller than Zimmerman. A 6' tall, 17 year old wearing a hoodie walking around a gated neighborhood in the middle of the night, in sweltering Florida, in a high crime area = totally normal.
Lol @ cornering him.
Zimmerman confronted him, Trayvon tried to keep it real and got blown away.
Yeah, because he was totally going to commit "crime" with his ice tea and skittles. Wearing a hoodie is not a crime. Being black is not a crime. Walking on the street at night is not a crime.
Following a guy in your car, getting out, confronting him and then shooting him in the event of a struggle is a crime. Given that Zimmerman is using the "stand your ground" defence, why not Martin? What else is he meant to do when a guy gets out of his car carrying a gun and marching over to him. Why no " stand your ground" defence for Martin who now has to decide whether to fight or run away from a guy coming after him with a gun? You can''t claim self defence if you were the aggressor. The holes in Zimmerman's story and the absurd decisions he made (even if they were totally legal and "his right" to do, like getting out of his car) really don't bode well for him, especially when his "dangerous, suspicious, violence-prone" suspect was armed with a can of ice tea and some candy. What was his game plan? Give people diabetic comas and then rob them?
1st degree murder...whaaaat? That's premeditated murder, like when you lie in wait for someone. Sorry, you have no business discussing this situation with adults.
He's talking about the night of the shooting. Despite being asked (not told, since a 911 dispatcher cannot give you orders) to not follow the kid, he got out of the car anyway and then somehow the kid ended up dead after being shot with George's gun. There's potential cause for a charge of premeditation - (why did he get out of the car? Even if it's his "legal right" to get out of the car, as some/. posters have been using as justification for killing the kid, why did he get out and go after him if he thought Trayvon was dangerous or suspicious - he's not a cop himself, so what is he going to do when he catches up to him?) , however I doubt very much that he would have been charged with such a thing had this all been handled properly at the time - hence the holding of the suspect for 24 hours and the following investigation of the crime that should have happened but did not.
If you think an unmarked police car's primary purpose is catching people "driving 5 mph over the speed limit" then you've been listening to too much reactionary "why don't they go after real criminals?!" and "don't they have anything better to do?!" arguments, usually heavily promoted by people who have been caught breaking the law for 'trivial' reasons like speeding.
Unmarked cars *are* used for "better things" than catching speeding motorists (even ones doing a mere 5 over - no cop stops you for 5 over, especially not an unmarked unit, you also get a 10% leeway to account for speedometer inaccuracy so the only time that "5 over" would be even close to something you could be pulled for would be in a 30 mph zone) - they're used primarily in the investigation and containment of stolen cars and for major crimes involving motor vehicles such as drugs, burglaries, etc.
They certainly do stop ordinary motorists if something flags you to them (impaired driving, excessive speed, tax/insurance issues etc) but they're not there to "catch you out" - you make it sound like it's some trick to make you break the law when you think they're not looking.
I know for a fact that Cheshire Police in the UK doesn't care if you know what unmarked cars they use - I have seen them personally show large, unobscured photographs of them with number plates showing clearly in public settings - because they're not designed to trick you, they're designed to be less visible than a panda car so they can tail suspect vehicles more easily, and your "5 over" driver is not such a motorist.
Especially since there are rumours of MS Office for iOS that simply won't die. The beta has supposedly been seen and is "almost ready".
Someone mentioned early 2013 as a possible release date, but who knows. If they release Office on iOS (and if they do it will make money hand over fist) it'll just further push people away from Surface.
How about if you require t1 = t2 and t2 = t3 ? Then you have five equations and four unknowns.Maybe this would break due to special relativistic effects.
It does. The clocks in the satellites themselves have to be continually adjusted to account for relativistic effects. That's what the GPS master ground station is for. You can't assume they are all the same.
"Simple geometry states you need three satellites for an accurate 2D fix, and four satellites for a 3D fix, not whether you have access to the encrypted P(Y) code."
Um... Duh... simple geometry doesn't apply here, because these are TRANSMITTERS THAT KNOW THEIR OWN LOCATION IN SPACE AND TIME.
Get that?
They know their location in space and time, but they cannot tell you what it is before it changes. The speed of light is not instant.
You have four unknowns - x, y, z and time. You can't solve those with only three equations, unless you can make a reasonable guess about one of them, thus either you need an extremely accurate clock (an atomic one) or you need to know either x, y or z to high accuracy - laser altimeter, being at sea level, knowing a point due to a separate beacon that knows its position (eg, a phone mast or a battlefield command post with a transmitter).
There's simply no way around this. There is plenty of information about the maths behind the GPS system. You might want to check it out before you start insulting people for correcting you; it just makes you look foolish.
"You can't carry atomic clocks in your pocket, they're a tad too big for that. There is no way to know the time on the satellites from the ground, because you don't know where you are, and hence how far the satellites are from you, and hence the delay added to the signals."
Proof you are a moron.
These can be CALCULATED from 3 satellites. You don't need to know them in advance, and you don't need a value from outside the satellites themselves.
Repeat: the military GPS system was designed to operate on 3 satellite locks. Sorry if your tiny brain can't wrap itself around the concept that there is more information here than simple geometry.
My goodness. Do you want a fresh spade? You seem determined to keep digging.
3 satellites are all that are necessary to pinpoint you in any 3D position. Period.
(Technically they can only put you in 1 of 2 positions, but the other one is off in space so not very likely.)
The 4th satellite is only necessary for civilian systems to correct for timing that was very much intentionally made ambiguous for civilian receivers, since GPS was made by and for the military.
This is the second time you've brought this up. The US stopped deliberately degrading the signal for civilian uses years ago, mostly because it was simply pointless to keep doing it since most civvy receivers were able to overcome the problem with assisted GPS and other methods.
You are technically correct that you only require three satellites to get a 3D position but *only* if you know your local time extremely accurately. It has nothing to do with only three satellites being "deliberately bad" at positioning on civilian equipment - it's the laws of physics.
"No, you're not correct. The 3D information that you'd get without the fourth satellite would be so inaccurate as to be meaningless. You need the fourth satellite for a 3D fix that puts you in the right city, let alone the right street. That's qualitatively different from 'only for precision'."
Then why do the military only require 3 satellite locks? Eh? Answer me that, you fucking genius.
They have accurate clocks?
I don't know, maybe I'm not a "fucking genius" enough for that to be the right answer.
The "high precision" part of the GPS system was opened up to the public by Clinton back when he was president. Birds launched since then lack the capability to restrict civilians to the lower quality fix.
Amazing how reasonable you can be when it comes to defending Apple from unreasonable claims.
Too bad that capacity for reason completely goes away when it comes to defending Apple from reasonable claims.
--Jeremy
Such as? Give me a reasonable claim where you think my reason will elude me, or better a CID link to a post or two. Is this going to hinge on the definition of "reasonable"?
And before an iFanboy complains, I would point out that they do the same. They buy the iDevice specifically because it is from Apple, runs iOS, is high priced, takes away their freedom, etc etc.
Why would they complain? Those are all perfectly valid positions to take. Your choice of platform and the criteria that are involved in its selection have nothing to do with anyone else - I just with that certain Android "fans" would appreciate that people who don't ultimately choose Android also have equally valid reasons and criteria.
I didn't go for an iPhone because it "is high priced, takes away their freedom, etc etc." - that's simply a nonsense statement. My iPhone (in fact, my last two iPhones) have been free, and I'm not on a subsidised phone plan, and I didn't decide "oh, I want a phone that removes my freedom". iOS is certainly more curated than Android, but that does not mean I chose it because of that - I chose it because it does everything I want it to do and works well *for me*. Other people might find that the inability to sideload apps is something they can't live with, and good for them if that's something that is important to you, the iPhone is not for you, but that does not mean people who do not need that feature are somehow having their freedom "taken away". It's a phone, not a career or mortgage. If I find that I run into something that I can't do that I want to then I'll look at other options.
It seems fashionable right now to bash anyone who didn't choose Android as someone who either a) was clueless about their options and "obviously" chose the inferior option or b) somehow set their criteria to "I want to be overcharged and to have my freedom removed" as you just suggested.
Telling an iOS user that they selected the iPhone because they wanted to overpay and be restricted is like telling an Android user they they chose an Android handset because they love fragmentation and being trapped on 2.2 because there's no carrier or manufacturer update on locked handsets. Neither situation is true and you know it.
I'm a little surprised iOS is getting some love here. I guess without knowing it I had assumed it's just used for the saturated "app" market where everything sells for $2 or less? Are there any Real Jobs in iOS?
You can make more money with a free, ad-supported app. There have been a few stories back when all the talk was about how viable the earning potential of the App Store was a a hot topic (ie, was the bulk of that 3 billion dollars Apple says it has paid out to developers all going to big shops like EA and Rovio) and an interesting tidbit I read was that some developers had noted they were making more from the free version of their app than from the $0.99 version, and that the sums were not small.
I don't know if there are any Real Jobs for a guy who really needs money quickly (by the sounds of things), but it certainly can't hurt. The barrier to entry is reasonably low.
Of course I knew you were referring to the two separate (and thusfar only) Lightning adapters
No you didn't which is why you didn't address the issue and instead claimed you didn't know what i was talking about.
Explain where there is "apple hate", all i see is you being called out on your incompetence and lack of mental capacity.
Which scenario is more likely?
1) that I don't know that you were talking about the Lightning adapters, despite this whole trivial slashdot story being about Apple finally shipping them, a story in which (check the timestamps) I already participated in extensively, and in this very *thread* I was the first reply to the original author whose direct question was about a money grab because the adapters cost money, and since I was getting an extremely brave attack from the sidelines by an anonymous coward I figured I'd troll a bit since you don't know the pricing of said adapters yet still claim to be informed.
2) That I suddenly have no idea what you are talking about for just two comments, having already participated heavily in this story in numerous threads, going into detail about Apple's possible motives for their choice of connector and its relative pros and cons vs microUSB. Also, that I've never heard of sarcasm.
One of those is the way this went down. Which one is left as an exercise to the reader. It's not surprising that you're having trouble understanding subtlety.
The $35 adapter with the authentication chip to prevent anyone else from doing a cheaper one, so yes, it is a money grab.
Apple doesn't sell any adapters the the iPhone 5 that cost $35.
Then you're ignorant and if you're assuming everyone speaks in American dollars and the variance of $6 was enough to have you so confused you don't even know what i'm talking about then clearly you lack the cognitive ability to have this discussion.
Still no idea what you mean.
Really? The price wasn't in American dollars (thus a variance of $6) and renders you so confused that you have "no idea" what i mean? Either you're being a clear apologist by way of acting intentionally obtuse or you're just way below the bar in terms of intelligence and cognitive reasoning, i'm assuming it's the latter.
Man, you apple haters are easy to whip up into a frenzy. You just love the rant! Trolling you is like beating your grandma at Mario Kart and declaring yourself awesome.
Of course I knew you were referring to the two separate (and thusfar only) Lightning adapters - what else do you think is the entire topic of this discussion? I figured since you didn't log in you were simply in a foaming Apple hate rant and in your rush to spread vitriol you were just ignorant of the price - most apple hate trolls fall into this category so it was a safe bet, but what I didn't figure was that you were just being non-specific.
You should be aware that the general custom when the dollar sign is unspecified that it refers to the US dollar, and is otherwise specified as HKD, CAD, AUD etc when listed alone. You should know this if you're genuinely from Australia.
I know MicroUSB has features that allow it to adapt and output HDMI, or analog audio etc, but Apple wanted a more adaptable (although obviously proprietary) connector.
Interestingly Samsung also wanted a more adaptable connector for the Galaxy S3, so they developed a MicroUSB compatible socket with more pins. You can connect a standard MicroUSB cable, but they can also make proprietary connectors supporting other functions, just like Apple's Lightning connector.
Indeed, but then you're still left with the microUSB connector which they obviously didn't want given the design brief of their chosen direction - much more sturdy, ability to insert in either orientation, slightly bigger etc. Apple is usually all about small, small, small, but this time it seems microUSB was just too small for what they wanted.
I'm going to assume that one of the biggest points on the checklist was "support for more current and/or voltage than USB" since the connector is designed for all iOS devices and the current generation iPad is already struggling with the meagre amount they can push over USB (even when already exceeding the original 500 mA limit).
Standard MicroUSB supports up to 1.8A, but you can in fact easily push more than that over it with a slightly uprated connector. Charging current is a complete non-issue.
The iPad and iPhone already charge at 2 A. If Apple thought they could push it any higher then they would because the iPad 3 is right on the limit if you are trying to charge the battery and use it at the same time in a demanding application like a game or something. They kept it at 2 amps, which is already way over the official spec. So if they went for microUSB then they'd have to go down a little bit from a position they already don't really like much. Better to start off with something that can handle much more current to begin with rather than continue to bodge the USB spec.
Because MicroUSB is a terrible connector. They already had a proprietary connector and just swapped it for another type with the function they wanted.
I know MicroUSB has features that allow it to adapt and output HDMI, or analog audio etc, but Apple wanted a more adaptable (although obviously proprietary) connector.
Does MicroUSB allow this? I thought MicroUSB only handled USB data transfers, if it can handle more that would be very useful... and it also affects the reason I believe Apple chose another connector: It does many other things, like video and audio.
Yes it does - I was also under the impression that it couldn't do more than USB but someone else posted a link to MHL which is a standard on some Android and other handsets that can reassign the pins to enable HDMI and other protocols with the right cables and adapters.
The physical port itself is just not very nice though, and when going for a huge change they might as well go for something that has good physical characteristics.
Slashdot Mirror
A "teenage boy" at 17 who is taller than Zimmerman. A 6' tall, 17 year old wearing a hoodie walking around a gated neighborhood in the middle of the night, in sweltering Florida, in a high crime area = totally normal.
Lol @ cornering him.
Zimmerman confronted him, Trayvon tried to keep it real and got blown away.
Yeah, because he was totally going to commit "crime" with his ice tea and skittles. Wearing a hoodie is not a crime. Being black is not a crime. Walking on the street at night is not a crime.
Following a guy in your car, getting out, confronting him and then shooting him in the event of a struggle is a crime. Given that Zimmerman is using the "stand your ground" defence, why not Martin? What else is he meant to do when a guy gets out of his car carrying a gun and marching over to him. Why no " stand your ground" defence for Martin who now has to decide whether to fight or run away from a guy coming after him with a gun? You can''t claim self defence if you were the aggressor. The holes in Zimmerman's story and the absurd decisions he made (even if they were totally legal and "his right" to do, like getting out of his car) really don't bode well for him, especially when his "dangerous, suspicious, violence-prone" suspect was armed with a can of ice tea and some candy. What was his game plan? Give people diabetic comas and then rob them?
1st degree murder...whaaaat? That's premeditated murder, like when you lie in wait for someone. Sorry, you have no business discussing this situation with adults.
He's talking about the night of the shooting. Despite being asked (not told, since a 911 dispatcher cannot give you orders) to not follow the kid, he got out of the car anyway and then somehow the kid ended up dead after being shot with George's gun. There's potential cause for a charge of premeditation - (why did he get out of the car? Even if it's his "legal right" to get out of the car, as some /. posters have been using as justification for killing the kid, why did he get out and go after him if he thought Trayvon was dangerous or suspicious - he's not a cop himself, so what is he going to do when he catches up to him?) , however I doubt very much that he would have been charged with such a thing had this all been handled properly at the time - hence the holding of the suspect for 24 hours and the following investigation of the crime that should have happened but did not.
If you think an unmarked police car's primary purpose is catching people "driving 5 mph over the speed limit" then you've been listening to too much reactionary "why don't they go after real criminals?!" and "don't they have anything better to do?!" arguments, usually heavily promoted by people who have been caught breaking the law for 'trivial' reasons like speeding.
Unmarked cars *are* used for "better things" than catching speeding motorists (even ones doing a mere 5 over - no cop stops you for 5 over, especially not an unmarked unit, you also get a 10% leeway to account for speedometer inaccuracy so the only time that "5 over" would be even close to something you could be pulled for would be in a 30 mph zone) - they're used primarily in the investigation and containment of stolen cars and for major crimes involving motor vehicles such as drugs, burglaries, etc.
They certainly do stop ordinary motorists if something flags you to them (impaired driving, excessive speed, tax/insurance issues etc) but they're not there to "catch you out" - you make it sound like it's some trick to make you break the law when you think they're not looking.
I know for a fact that Cheshire Police in the UK doesn't care if you know what unmarked cars they use - I have seen them personally show large, unobscured photographs of them with number plates showing clearly in public settings - because they're not designed to trick you, they're designed to be less visible than a panda car so they can tail suspect vehicles more easily, and your "5 over" driver is not such a motorist.
Small company supports obscure operating system.
Stop the presses!
The announced Mac OS X support, not Linux support.
Oh, I see what you were trying to do there.
This is terrible, a left paren may be yearning to be closed but a right paren, that requires a time machine.
Well, given you're username you're the expert in that arena.
It sounds like your cat-alyst was already saturated.
Especially since there are rumours of MS Office for iOS that simply won't die. The beta has supposedly been seen and is "almost ready".
Someone mentioned early 2013 as a possible release date, but who knows. If they release Office on iOS (and if they do it will make money hand over fist) it'll just further push people away from Surface.
How about if you require t1 = t2 and t2 = t3 ? Then you have five equations and four unknowns.Maybe this would break due to special relativistic effects.
It does. The clocks in the satellites themselves have to be continually adjusted to account for relativistic effects. That's what the GPS master ground station is for. You can't assume they are all the same.
"Simple geometry states you need three satellites for an accurate 2D fix, and four satellites for a 3D fix, not whether you have access to the encrypted P(Y) code."
Um... Duh... simple geometry doesn't apply here, because these are TRANSMITTERS THAT KNOW THEIR OWN LOCATION IN SPACE AND TIME.
Get that?
They know their location in space and time, but they cannot tell you what it is before it changes. The speed of light is not instant.
You have four unknowns - x, y, z and time. You can't solve those with only three equations, unless you can make a reasonable guess about one of them, thus either you need an extremely accurate clock (an atomic one) or you need to know either x, y or z to high accuracy - laser altimeter, being at sea level, knowing a point due to a separate beacon that knows its position (eg, a phone mast or a battlefield command post with a transmitter).
There's simply no way around this. There is plenty of information about the maths behind the GPS system. You might want to check it out before you start insulting people for correcting you; it just makes you look foolish.
"You can't carry atomic clocks in your pocket, they're a tad too big for that. There is no way to know the time on the satellites from the ground, because you don't know where you are, and hence how far the satellites are from you, and hence the delay added to the signals."
Proof you are a moron.
These can be CALCULATED from 3 satellites. You don't need to know them in advance, and you don't need a value from outside the satellites themselves.
Repeat: the military GPS system was designed to operate on 3 satellite locks. Sorry if your tiny brain can't wrap itself around the concept that there is more information here than simple geometry.
My goodness. Do you want a fresh spade? You seem determined to keep digging.
"So some of the military only need 3."
Nice conjecture, but not correct.
3 satellites are all that are necessary to pinpoint you in any 3D position. Period.
(Technically they can only put you in 1 of 2 positions, but the other one is off in space so not very likely.)
The 4th satellite is only necessary for civilian systems to correct for timing that was very much intentionally made ambiguous for civilian receivers, since GPS was made by and for the military.
This is the second time you've brought this up. The US stopped deliberately degrading the signal for civilian uses years ago, mostly because it was simply pointless to keep doing it since most civvy receivers were able to overcome the problem with assisted GPS and other methods.
You are technically correct that you only require three satellites to get a 3D position but *only* if you know your local time extremely accurately. It has nothing to do with only three satellites being "deliberately bad" at positioning on civilian equipment - it's the laws of physics.
"No, you're not correct. The 3D information that you'd get without the fourth satellite would be so inaccurate as to be meaningless. You need the fourth satellite for a 3D fix that puts you in the right city, let alone the right street. That's qualitatively different from 'only for precision'."
Then why do the military only require 3 satellite locks? Eh? Answer me that, you fucking genius.
They have accurate clocks?
I don't know, maybe I'm not a "fucking genius" enough for that to be the right answer.
The "high precision" part of the GPS system was opened up to the public by Clinton back when he was president. Birds launched since then lack the capability to restrict civilians to the lower quality fix.
(additional: that comment (41636511) came off more adversarial than I intended)
Amazing how reasonable you can be when it comes to defending Apple from unreasonable claims.
Too bad that capacity for reason completely goes away when it comes to defending Apple from reasonable claims.
--Jeremy
Such as? Give me a reasonable claim where you think my reason will elude me, or better a CID link to a post or two. Is this going to hinge on the definition of "reasonable"?
And before an iFanboy complains, I would point out that they do the same. They buy the iDevice specifically because it is from Apple, runs iOS, is high priced, takes away their freedom, etc etc.
Why would they complain? Those are all perfectly valid positions to take. Your choice of platform and the criteria that are involved in its selection have nothing to do with anyone else - I just with that certain Android "fans" would appreciate that people who don't ultimately choose Android also have equally valid reasons and criteria.
I didn't go for an iPhone because it "is high priced, takes away their freedom, etc etc." - that's simply a nonsense statement. My iPhone (in fact, my last two iPhones) have been free, and I'm not on a subsidised phone plan, and I didn't decide "oh, I want a phone that removes my freedom". iOS is certainly more curated than Android, but that does not mean I chose it because of that - I chose it because it does everything I want it to do and works well *for me*. Other people might find that the inability to sideload apps is something they can't live with, and good for them if that's something that is important to you, the iPhone is not for you, but that does not mean people who do not need that feature are somehow having their freedom "taken away". It's a phone, not a career or mortgage. If I find that I run into something that I can't do that I want to then I'll look at other options.
It seems fashionable right now to bash anyone who didn't choose Android as someone who either a) was clueless about their options and "obviously" chose the inferior option or b) somehow set their criteria to "I want to be overcharged and to have my freedom removed" as you just suggested.
Telling an iOS user that they selected the iPhone because they wanted to overpay and be restricted is like telling an Android user they they chose an Android handset because they love fragmentation and being trapped on 2.2 because there's no carrier or manufacturer update on locked handsets. Neither situation is true and you know it.
I saw it as Apples attempt to keep the larger screen Samsung phone from hitting the market before the iPhone5.
Well, then they were late in getting the ban - the Galaxy Nexus has been on sale for almost a year already.
I'm a little surprised iOS is getting some love here. I guess without knowing it I had assumed it's just used for the saturated "app" market where everything sells for $2 or less? Are there any Real Jobs in iOS?
You can make more money with a free, ad-supported app. There have been a few stories back when all the talk was about how viable the earning potential of the App Store was a a hot topic (ie, was the bulk of that 3 billion dollars Apple says it has paid out to developers all going to big shops like EA and Rovio) and an interesting tidbit I read was that some developers had noted they were making more from the free version of their app than from the $0.99 version, and that the sums were not small.
I don't know if there are any Real Jobs for a guy who really needs money quickly (by the sounds of things), but it certainly can't hurt. The barrier to entry is reasonably low.
So that he can get his point across.
Seconded (or thirded by this point maybe?) - I really enjoyed that.
Of course I knew you were referring to the two separate (and thusfar only) Lightning adapters
No you didn't which is why you didn't address the issue and instead claimed you didn't know what i was talking about.
Explain where there is "apple hate", all i see is you being called out on your incompetence and lack of mental capacity.
Which scenario is more likely?
1) that I don't know that you were talking about the Lightning adapters, despite this whole trivial slashdot story being about Apple finally shipping them, a story in which (check the timestamps) I already participated in extensively, and in this very *thread* I was the first reply to the original author whose direct question was about a money grab because the adapters cost money, and since I was getting an extremely brave attack from the sidelines by an anonymous coward I figured I'd troll a bit since you don't know the pricing of said adapters yet still claim to be informed.
2) That I suddenly have no idea what you are talking about for just two comments, having already participated heavily in this story in numerous threads, going into detail about Apple's possible motives for their choice of connector and its relative pros and cons vs microUSB. Also, that I've never heard of sarcasm.
One of those is the way this went down. Which one is left as an exercise to the reader. It's not surprising that you're having trouble understanding subtlety.
What do you mean?
The $35 adapter with the authentication chip to prevent anyone else from doing a cheaper one, so yes, it is a money grab.
Apple doesn't sell any adapters the the iPhone 5 that cost $35.
Then you're ignorant and if you're assuming everyone speaks in American dollars and the variance of $6 was enough to have you so confused you don't even know what i'm talking about then clearly you lack the cognitive ability to have this discussion.
Still no idea what you mean.
Really? The price wasn't in American dollars (thus a variance of $6) and renders you so confused that you have "no idea" what i mean? Either you're being a clear apologist by way of acting intentionally obtuse or you're just way below the bar in terms of intelligence and cognitive reasoning, i'm assuming it's the latter.
Man, you apple haters are easy to whip up into a frenzy. You just love the rant! Trolling you is like beating your grandma at Mario Kart and declaring yourself awesome.
Of course I knew you were referring to the two separate (and thusfar only) Lightning adapters - what else do you think is the entire topic of this discussion? I figured since you didn't log in you were simply in a foaming Apple hate rant and in your rush to spread vitriol you were just ignorant of the price - most apple hate trolls fall into this category so it was a safe bet, but what I didn't figure was that you were just being non-specific.
You should be aware that the general custom when the dollar sign is unspecified that it refers to the US dollar, and is otherwise specified as HKD, CAD, AUD etc when listed alone. You should know this if you're genuinely from Australia.
What do you mean?
The $35 adapter with the authentication chip to prevent anyone else from doing a cheaper one, so yes, it is a money grab.
Apple doesn't sell any adapters the the iPhone 5 that cost $35. Still no idea what you mean.
I know MicroUSB has features that allow it to adapt and output HDMI, or analog audio etc, but Apple wanted a more adaptable (although obviously proprietary) connector.
Interestingly Samsung also wanted a more adaptable connector for the Galaxy S3, so they developed a MicroUSB compatible socket with more pins. You can connect a standard MicroUSB cable, but they can also make proprietary connectors supporting other functions, just like Apple's Lightning connector.
Indeed, but then you're still left with the microUSB connector which they obviously didn't want given the design brief of their chosen direction - much more sturdy, ability to insert in either orientation, slightly bigger etc. Apple is usually all about small, small, small, but this time it seems microUSB was just too small for what they wanted.
I'm going to assume that one of the biggest points on the checklist was "support for more current and/or voltage than USB" since the connector is designed for all iOS devices and the current generation iPad is already struggling with the meagre amount they can push over USB (even when already exceeding the original 500 mA limit).
Standard MicroUSB supports up to 1.8A, but you can in fact easily push more than that over it with a slightly uprated connector. Charging current is a complete non-issue.
The iPad and iPhone already charge at 2 A. If Apple thought they could push it any higher then they would because the iPad 3 is right on the limit if you are trying to charge the battery and use it at the same time in a demanding application like a game or something. They kept it at 2 amps, which is already way over the official spec. So if they went for microUSB then they'd have to go down a little bit from a position they already don't really like much. Better to start off with something that can handle much more current to begin with rather than continue to bodge the USB spec.
Because MicroUSB is a terrible connector. They already had a proprietary connector and just swapped it for another type with the function they wanted.
I know MicroUSB has features that allow it to adapt and output HDMI, or analog audio etc, but Apple wanted a more adaptable (although obviously proprietary) connector.
Does MicroUSB allow this? I thought MicroUSB only handled USB data transfers, if it can handle more that would be very useful... and it also affects the reason I believe Apple chose another connector: It does many other things, like video and audio.
Yes it does - I was also under the impression that it couldn't do more than USB but someone else posted a link to MHL which is a standard on some Android and other handsets that can reassign the pins to enable HDMI and other protocols with the right cables and adapters.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_High-Definition_Link
The physical port itself is just not very nice though, and when going for a huge change they might as well go for something that has good physical characteristics.