the better discussion is why we have not punished our civil leaders for putting us into this system where there is NO protectionism of the American economy and production system.
A better discussion is that protectionism harms the economy. Try it some tyme. Look up the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 and what it did. Because the US passed a protectionist law other nations did the same in retaliation. Some economists, though not all, blame protectionism on causing the Great Depression.
Also, what happens to our "neighbours"... our FUCKING neighbours! Flooding Mexico with our governments subsidized corn has repurcussions.
Ah, something we agree with. I have railed on about how because of NAFTA Mexican farmers are being driven off their farms because NAFTA allows large US agricultural businesses to export food and sell it in Mexico cheaper than Mexicans can grow it because of the massive subsidies these businesses get.
However you talk about "libertarian think-tanks that live in a dream world" but Libertarians, large and small "l", have called those subsidies corporate welfare. The article "Confessions of a Welfare Queen: How rich bastards like me rip off taxpayers for millions of dollars" was published in one of those libertarian magazine, "Reason". The libertarian think-tank CATO Institute has the article Archer Daniels Midland:
A Case Study In Corporate Welfare on it's website as well as the CATO Handbook For Congress on corporate welfare. For more on what CATO has about corporate welfare check out the link.
Of course I don't expect anything more than "libertarians are evil" from many slashdotters.
Anyone who has been paying attention to the way that the whole 'green technologies' work could see this coming.
Anyone who looked into the rest of the story would know that Lotus is building the Roadster for Tesla at a plant in England but will stop building them in 2011. Lotus will instead build 2 Lotus models at the plant.
I didn't advocate giving billions of dollars to the failed companies in Detroit, either. Who should produce cars, of what types, and in what quantity is something the consumers in the market should decide, not the politicians who are sucking up to the unions for votes.
I couldn't let this partisan rhetoric slip by without commenting. Yes, Democrats are in power now but a Republican president, Bush, first stepped in to bailout Detroit. Another republican president, Reagan, bailed out Chrysler.
let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution
Neither Democrats nor Republicans know what the Constitution says or means.
People who regularly travel for work should really take the train for the long part of the trip and pick up a car closer to the destination
What I'd love is to be able to drive my car onto the train then take the train the 25, 50, 100, or even 200 miles into downtown then drive off the train. The only train that does this now is Amtrack's Auto Train and it has only one route, between Lorton, Virginia and Sanford, Florida. And that is a non-stop route.
unfortunately our government has spent the last 80 years dismantling our rail system
In the US or UK? This may be true in the UK but it's not true in the US. The reason rail travel has declined in the US is 2-fold, the federal highway system and airplanes. Heck, as a teenager I rode a train from Michigan to Mass. While I loved it it was only cheaper than flying because a relative worked for the railroad company and got me a discount ticket.
and it's going to be a lot of effort to repair it.
Obama is fixing that for you, if you mean the US that is. He was just in Tampa where his stimulus plan is paying for a new high speed train that will run between Tampa and Orlando. And that just one route in his plan. I hope it doesn't end up with another Gilded Age of railroad robber barons.
not very recent, and does not answer the question of how often very long trips occur, but still, range does not seem to matter a whole lot.
While I applaud EV's and admit most people can get by with the driving range of them there are some like me who like if not love just jumping in a car and taking a long drive. And though I haven't done it yet I want to get into astrophotography but because I live in a large metro area I may have a long drive to get to where I can shoot the stars without light pollution. I don't know of any places to go now but there's an astronomy group in the area I want to get the info from. A hybrid could help with getting to good places.
I think the issue is more about getting to a point where it makes economical and practical sense to have an electric car for daily use, and rent a fuel car for longer trips.
For many people I agree, this could be a practical solution. Another one may be carsharing.
My Grand Prix only has about a 300 mile range of city driving, but the advantage is that I can replenish its fuel supply in about 5 minutes at any number of fueling stations located strategically throughout the city. With the electric car, when your battery is dead, it's dead and you're going to be spending hours, or perhaps all night, waiting for it to recharge. That's not a viable alternative to gasoline-powered cars in my opinion.
Will you still feel the same when gas cost $10 a gallon? How about $50? At least with diesel engines, vehicles can be fueled with waste vegetable oil. I agree about electric cars though, until the driving range improves significantly or fuel cells become competitive, they are not feasible for many drivers.
As for myself, I'm like a diesel hybrid.
Falcon
Oh, BTW, what year's your Grand Prix? I was disappointed when I had to sell my '78 Monte Carlo, especially after I rebuilt the engine. But because I was injured while riding my bike I was unable to drive it so it just sat in the backyard.
Oh, then I wouldn't ever buy -- or recommend -- one, and I'm certainly not alone.
And I'm not alone in saying I don't recommend matte screens. For those who want high contrast matte screens do not cut it. However there are filters that can be bought and placed over glossy screens to cut glare. When I ordered the laptop I'm typing this on I had a choice between glossy and matte screens and I specifically chose the glossy screen.
Apple has wasted an opportunity to redefine the tablet market, and instead given us an oversized iPod Touch that doesn't fit in anyone's pocket. This assessment might not go down well with the fanboys, but although I don't have any animus against Apple in particular (I have an iPod and a 2nd-hand MacBook) I won't be buying this gadget.
Same here. When I first heard of the possibility of a tablet Mac I was gungho. But the iPad disappointed me. Now if Apple had married a Wacom tablet to the MacBook Pro, that would be a different story. I'm pretty sure Apple could do a better job than Axiotron did with the Modbook.
I think the backlit LCD screen is the achilles heel of the iPad as a e-book reader.
Personally I think the cost of e-book readers are achilles heel of them.
Being readable outdoors, and consuming no power at all unless turning pages, is what virtually defines the usefulness of an ebook.
Being able to read a book period is what defines it's usefulness. No battery or a dead battery doesn't work. However I can grab one of my print books and take it outside to read by star/moonlight. Growing up I did precisely that, grab a book, walk out the front door, lay in the grass, and read the book. That is when I wasn't star gazing.
CNN is running an iPad vs Kindle fluff piece thought experiment this morning and give virtually no weight to the utility of e-paper vs. the pizzazz of color, and unfortunately I expect the same from most consumers
And what of the utility of being able to use a tablet and not just an e-book reader? Personally I have no interest in getting an iPad, however if Apple were to take a Wacom tablet and marry it to a MacBook Pro (the MacBook Pro Tablet) then I, and probably lots of other photographers, would be interested.
So you think the titles are too expensive, then you lambast Amazon for dropping a publisher which tried to hike their prices by 50%?
Exactly. eBooks are _already_ overpriced. Not available AND overpriced is even worse.
If $9.99 is too expensive isn't $15 even more expensive? That's an increase of 150%. The Gizmoto article says this though: "Update: It's known Amazon loses money offering some bestsellers at $9.99". Now I don't know how many tymes I've heard, er read, it but a number of people have said low cost e-books drive sales for printed books. If so then the question that should be asked is if the increase in sales of printed books offsets the loss from e-books.
It seems the publishers have the upper hand, now that they can play them against Apple.
Steve Jobs stood up to the music industry, and told them how much music downloads would cost, but he's rolling over for book publishers and letting them set e-book prices?
I don't want a pony, but I don't go onto MySpace and post "OMG! Ponies are so lame!
Now where did I say iPads were lame? Hint, nowhere. What I have said was that Apple was missing a market for larger tablets, photographers who are a natural market for them.
Not at all. Actually if all you want is something small and portable to surf the web, a netbook makes more since than an iPad. All it adds is a tablet, but it uses a crippled OS. Actually after he saw a netbook in Target my brother-in-law asked me what I thought of it, he said he thought about getting one. But I hadn't seen one there so I couldn't say. I did tell him they were fine for causal web surfing and editing simple documents. Now I don't know if he got the one Target had but my sister now carries one around.
I've seen complete computer novices go out and buy those, and be completely fine with 10'' screens
I want something I can use for photography as well as development, a 10" screen does not cut it. Actually many photographers say the minimum size of monitor for editing photos is 21". Photo.net has a number of threads on monitors in it's forums, in some people ask what size monitor they should use, in some people say they use 27", 30", or bigger monitors that cost above US$2000. I want one 24" and am thinking of getting a 24" HP LP2475w, which costs about $600. It has an H-IPS panel, is wide gamut, and has been gotten good reviews from photographers. I'd then use my MBP's LCD to hold the panels and toolbars. That is when using my laptop. When using my desktop, er tower, PC I can use my 21" monitor, an old CRT, for them.
And I've never seen a website tell me to update my version of Flash, unless you're running an entire version behind.:P
I posted the Flash player version, 10,0,42,34, which is the latest. I even copied and pasted it from the Adobe test page I linked to.
...so use your iPad to stream your video from your media server as H264.
Why would I get one? For half the price I can get a 12" Wacom tablet. I don't have a media server either, besides my laptop what I have is a Linux tower PC I may setup as a file and webserver for photography.
Folks, this isn't a laptop replacement or a phone replacement.
Agreed, it has a crippled OS and can't make phone calls.
It's in your pocket anyways because you need a phone.
This iPad doesn't have that advantage.
A device that doesn't address the shortcomings of the iphone is just... redundant.
Gee, I didn't know you can draw or write on an iPhone. That is what I want an Apple tablet for. Unfortunately the iPad is too small. And has the iPhone OS, not a full blown OS. I don't know for sure but I bet you're also locked into using Apple's app store to download and install software.
Of course, this device is a solution in search of a problem, with or without Flash. It's too big to really be a good portable device,
I don't think so, it's no bigger than any of the clip boards and paper notebooks I've carried as well as seen others carry whether working, in school, or relaxing. Now the big users I can see who'd be interested are artist but I can see it being said by a lot of them is that the iPad is too small. Both the screen and storage. The biggest storage is a 64GB flash drive? I replaced the 160GB drive in my MBP with a 320GB drive, and it's too small for me.
even with that, it's still got very limited disk space (why no rotational drive option?), and the limited iphone style OS (why not full mac OS).
I'd rather have something that can hold at least a 250GB hdd and full MacOS/Windows.
Actually, with those, and give it at least a 14" screen, and they would switch me away from Toshiba.
Apple already makes such a device! It's called a "Macbook Pro".
Except a MacBook Pro also requires a Wacom tablet. Now if Apple made a 17" MBP with a built-in tablet like Wacom's Cintiq I'd try to find a way to buy it. Even more if it were 21" instead.
While I am not the person you replied to, I believe I can help you interpret his post. Basically, he seemed to be saying that most of the iPhone apps/games/etc could be just as easily implemented in flash and stuck on a webpage somewhere. If the iPhone could run flash, then popcap (for example) would simply host its own games, keep all of its tasty revenue and Apple wouldn't get its 30%.
If I can develop and test my own software on an iPhone you should be able to install said software on an iPhone too. On the other hand I don't see how software can be installed, other than by the app store, in Apple's support section.
While I'm disappointed it appears most people can only install software on their iPhone by using Apple's app store, it doesn't affect me much now. I love my Mac but I do not have nor have any desire to buy either an iPhone or an iPod. For a cellphone all I want is one I can make calls on. And my Walkman CD player works fine as well. The only reason I see for getting something else is for longer battery life.
Yes, but they still sold music with DRM until the labels agreed to sell it without. Right now, they sell movies and TV shows with DRM. This leads me to believe that, though they'd rather go without DRM, Apple is willing to use DRM if content owners insist.
And I agree. Though I don't like DRM Apple is a business. Like they say in politics, if you don't like it try to change it from within.
Oh, all those killed in Afghanistan and Iraq were terrorists? And Bush didn't do his part in killing the economy? Didn't the recession start when he was president? And didn't he give out Billions of taxpayer dollars to those businesses who caused the problems?
And don't get the idea I support Obama, I didn't and don't.
Yea, my mistake. I didn't see "LCD" and missed "IPS". As I told the person who's reply is above yours I wonder if it's an older IPS, H-IPS, or an S-IPS.
True but the spec page specifically states "9.7-inch (diagonal) LED-backlit glossy widescreen Multi-Touch display with IPS technology". Cut and paste, there is no mention of LCD. On the other hand it does say it's an IPS which is an LCD technology. I wonder if it's the old IPS, H-IPS, or S-IPS.
I've been looking for an IPS panel monitor myself and have been thinking I'll get the HP HP LP2475w which is a 24" with an H-IPS panel.
I'm sure Apple would be willing to work with studios to make sure their content is protected if it meant they could get free (ad-supported) streaming to the iPad and Apple TV.
While Apple developed and uses Fairplay DRM Steve Jobs also wrote that open letter asking media businesses to publish music without DRM.
Slashdot Mirror
the better discussion is why we have not punished our civil leaders for putting us into this system where there is NO protectionism of the American economy and production system.
A better discussion is that protectionism harms the economy. Try it some tyme. Look up the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 and what it did. Because the US passed a protectionist law other nations did the same in retaliation. Some economists, though not all, blame protectionism on causing the Great Depression.
Also, what happens to our "neighbours" ... our FUCKING neighbours! Flooding Mexico with our governments subsidized corn has repurcussions.
Ah, something we agree with. I have railed on about how because of NAFTA Mexican farmers are being driven off their farms because NAFTA allows large US agricultural businesses to export food and sell it in Mexico cheaper than Mexicans can grow it because of the massive subsidies these businesses get.
However you talk about "libertarian think-tanks that live in a dream world" but Libertarians, large and small "l", have called those subsidies corporate welfare. The article "Confessions of a Welfare Queen: How rich bastards like me rip off taxpayers for millions of dollars" was published in one of those libertarian magazine, "Reason". The libertarian think-tank CATO Institute has the article Archer Daniels Midland: A Case Study In Corporate Welfare on it's website as well as the CATO Handbook For Congress on corporate welfare. For more on what CATO has about corporate welfare check out the link.
Of course I don't expect anything more than "libertarians are evil" from many slashdotters.
Falcon
Cars were first made using private loans, not government loans.
And guess what those cars were...
They were steam. The first electric car was made in 1838. With private money.
Thomas Jefferson warned about the corporate aristocracy, now they get government to fund them.
Falcon
Anyone who has been paying attention to the way that the whole 'green technologies' work could see this coming.
Anyone who looked into the rest of the story would know that Lotus is building the Roadster for Tesla at a plant in England but will stop building them in 2011. Lotus will instead build 2 Lotus models at the plant.
Falcon
I didn't advocate giving billions of dollars to the failed companies in Detroit, either. Who should produce cars, of what types, and in what quantity is something the consumers in the market should decide, not the politicians who are sucking up to the unions for votes.
I couldn't let this partisan rhetoric slip by without commenting. Yes, Democrats are in power now but a Republican president, Bush, first stepped in to bailout Detroit. Another republican president, Reagan, bailed out Chrysler.
let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution
Neither Democrats nor Republicans know what the Constitution says or means.
Falcon
People who regularly travel for work should really take the train for the long part of the trip and pick up a car closer to the destination
What I'd love is to be able to drive my car onto the train then take the train the 25, 50, 100, or even 200 miles into downtown then drive off the train. The only train that does this now is Amtrack's Auto Train and it has only one route, between Lorton, Virginia and Sanford, Florida. And that is a non-stop route.
unfortunately our government has spent the last 80 years dismantling our rail system
In the US or UK? This may be true in the UK but it's not true in the US. The reason rail travel has declined in the US is 2-fold, the federal highway system and airplanes. Heck, as a teenager I rode a train from Michigan to Mass. While I loved it it was only cheaper than flying because a relative worked for the railroad company and got me a discount ticket.
and it's going to be a lot of effort to repair it.
Obama is fixing that for you, if you mean the US that is. He was just in Tampa where his stimulus plan is paying for a new high speed train that will run between Tampa and Orlando. And that just one route in his plan. I hope it doesn't end up with another Gilded Age of railroad robber barons.
Falcon
he said 'car' not 'truck' or 'van', which serves a different purpose (carrying things as opposed to carrying people).
"Car" is used generically by many people. Many people say, some even call their trucks, "cars". "Unload the car", when it's a SUV.
Falcon
http://www.bts.gov/publications/bts_special_report/2007_10_03/html/table_02.html
not very recent, and does not answer the question of how often very long trips occur, but still, range does not seem to matter a whole lot.
While I applaud EV's and admit most people can get by with the driving range of them there are some like me who like if not love just jumping in a car and taking a long drive. And though I haven't done it yet I want to get into astrophotography but because I live in a large metro area I may have a long drive to get to where I can shoot the stars without light pollution. I don't know of any places to go now but there's an astronomy group in the area I want to get the info from. A hybrid could help with getting to good places.
I think the issue is more about getting to a point where it makes economical and practical sense to have an electric car for daily use, and rent a fuel car for longer trips.
For many people I agree, this could be a practical solution. Another one may be carsharing.
Falcon
My Grand Prix only has about a 300 mile range of city driving, but the advantage is that I can replenish its fuel supply in about 5 minutes at any number of fueling stations located strategically throughout the city. With the electric car, when your battery is dead, it's dead and you're going to be spending hours, or perhaps all night, waiting for it to recharge. That's not a viable alternative to gasoline-powered cars in my opinion.
Will you still feel the same when gas cost $10 a gallon? How about $50? At least with diesel engines, vehicles can be fueled with waste vegetable oil. I agree about electric cars though, until the driving range improves significantly or fuel cells become competitive, they are not feasible for many drivers.
As for myself, I'm like a diesel hybrid.
Falcon
Oh, BTW, what year's your Grand Prix? I was disappointed when I had to sell my '78 Monte Carlo, especially after I rebuilt the engine. But because I was injured while riding my bike I was unable to drive it so it just sat in the backyard.
Obvious AND trivial math error. It's a 50% increase.
The error is yours. $10 X 1.50 = $15.
Troll
Falcon
Oh, then I wouldn't ever buy -- or recommend -- one, and I'm certainly not alone.
And I'm not alone in saying I don't recommend matte screens. For those who want high contrast matte screens do not cut it. However there are filters that can be bought and placed over glossy screens to cut glare. When I ordered the laptop I'm typing this on I had a choice between glossy and matte screens and I specifically chose the glossy screen.
Falcon
Apple has wasted an opportunity to redefine the tablet market, and instead given us an oversized iPod Touch that doesn't fit in anyone's pocket. This assessment might not go down well with the fanboys, but although I don't have any animus against Apple in particular (I have an iPod and a 2nd-hand MacBook) I won't be buying this gadget.
Same here. When I first heard of the possibility of a tablet Mac I was gungho. But the iPad disappointed me. Now if Apple had married a Wacom tablet to the MacBook Pro, that would be a different story. I'm pretty sure Apple could do a better job than Axiotron did with the Modbook.
I think the backlit LCD screen is the achilles heel of the iPad as a e-book reader.
Personally I think the cost of e-book readers are achilles heel of them.
Being readable outdoors, and consuming no power at all unless turning pages, is what virtually defines the usefulness of an ebook.
Being able to read a book period is what defines it's usefulness. No battery or a dead battery doesn't work. However I can grab one of my print books and take it outside to read by star/moonlight. Growing up I did precisely that, grab a book, walk out the front door, lay in the grass, and read the book. That is when I wasn't star gazing.
CNN is running an iPad vs Kindle fluff piece thought experiment this morning and give virtually no weight to the utility of e-paper vs. the pizzazz of color, and unfortunately I expect the same from most consumers
And what of the utility of being able to use a tablet and not just an e-book reader? Personally I have no interest in getting an iPad, however if Apple were to take a Wacom tablet and marry it to a MacBook Pro (the MacBook Pro Tablet) then I, and probably lots of other photographers, would be interested.
Falcon
So you think the titles are too expensive, then you lambast Amazon for dropping a publisher which tried to hike their prices by 50%?
Exactly. eBooks are _already_ overpriced. Not available AND overpriced is even worse.
If $9.99 is too expensive isn't $15 even more expensive? That's an increase of 150%. The Gizmoto article says this though: "Update: It's known Amazon loses money offering some bestsellers at $9.99". Now I don't know how many tymes I've heard, er read, it but a number of people have said low cost e-books drive sales for printed books. If so then the question that should be asked is if the increase in sales of printed books offsets the loss from e-books.
It seems the publishers have the upper hand, now that they can play them against Apple.
Steve Jobs stood up to the music industry, and told them how much music downloads would cost, but he's rolling over for book publishers and letting them set e-book prices?
Falcon
I don't want a pony, but I don't go onto MySpace and post "OMG! Ponies are so lame!
Now where did I say iPads were lame? Hint, nowhere. What I have said was that Apple was missing a market for larger tablets, photographers who are a natural market for them.
Is this a troll?
Falcon
Not at all. Actually if all you want is something small and portable to surf the web, a netbook makes more since than an iPad. All it adds is a tablet, but it uses a crippled OS. Actually after he saw a netbook in Target my brother-in-law asked me what I thought of it, he said he thought about getting one. But I hadn't seen one there so I couldn't say. I did tell him they were fine for causal web surfing and editing simple documents. Now I don't know if he got the one Target had but my sister now carries one around.
I've seen complete computer novices go out and buy those, and be completely fine with 10'' screens
I want something I can use for photography as well as development, a 10" screen does not cut it. Actually many photographers say the minimum size of monitor for editing photos is 21". Photo.net has a number of threads on monitors in it's forums, in some people ask what size monitor they should use, in some people say they use 27", 30", or bigger monitors that cost above US$2000. I want one 24" and am thinking of getting a 24" HP LP2475w, which costs about $600. It has an H-IPS panel, is wide gamut, and has been gotten good reviews from photographers. I'd then use my MBP's LCD to hold the panels and toolbars. That is when using my laptop. When using my desktop, er tower, PC I can use my 21" monitor, an old CRT, for them.
And I've never seen a website tell me to update my version of Flash, unless you're running an entire version behind. :P
I posted the Flash player version, 10,0,42,34, which is the latest. I even copied and pasted it from the Adobe test page I linked to.
Google has many more results for need to upgrade flash player.
Falcon
...so use your iPad to stream your video from your media server as H264.
Why would I get one? For half the price I can get a 12" Wacom tablet. I don't have a media server either, besides my laptop what I have is a Linux tower PC I may setup as a file and webserver for photography.
Folks, this isn't a laptop replacement or a phone replacement.
Agreed, it has a crippled OS and can't make phone calls.
Falcon
It's in your pocket anyways because you need a phone.
This iPad doesn't have that advantage.
A device that doesn't address the shortcomings of the iphone is just... redundant.
Gee, I didn't know you can draw or write on an iPhone. That is what I want an Apple tablet for. Unfortunately the iPad is too small. And has the iPhone OS, not a full blown OS. I don't know for sure but I bet you're also locked into using Apple's app store to download and install software.
Falcon
Of course, this device is a solution in search of a problem, with or without Flash. It's too big to really be a good portable device,
I don't think so, it's no bigger than any of the clip boards and paper notebooks I've carried as well as seen others carry whether working, in school, or relaxing. Now the big users I can see who'd be interested are artist but I can see it being said by a lot of them is that the iPad is too small. Both the screen and storage. The biggest storage is a 64GB flash drive? I replaced the 160GB drive in my MBP with a 320GB drive, and it's too small for me.
Falcon
even with that, it's still got very limited disk space (why no rotational drive option?), and the limited iphone style OS (why not full mac OS).
I'd rather have something that can hold at least a 250GB hdd and full MacOS/Windows.
Actually, with those, and give it at least a 14" screen, and they would switch me away from Toshiba.
Apple already makes such a device! It's called a "Macbook Pro".
Except a MacBook Pro also requires a Wacom tablet. Now if Apple made a 17" MBP with a built-in tablet like Wacom's Cintiq I'd try to find a way to buy it. Even more if it were 21" instead.
Falcon
While I am not the person you replied to, I believe I can help you interpret his post. Basically, he seemed to be saying that most of the iPhone apps/games/etc could be just as easily implemented in flash and stuck on a webpage somewhere. If the iPhone could run flash, then popcap (for example) would simply host its own games, keep all of its tasty revenue and Apple wouldn't get its 30%.
If I can develop and test my own software on an iPhone you should be able to install said software on an iPhone too. On the other hand I don't see how software can be installed, other than by the app store, in Apple's support section.
While I'm disappointed it appears most people can only install software on their iPhone by using Apple's app store, it doesn't affect me much now. I love my Mac but I do not have nor have any desire to buy either an iPhone or an iPod. For a cellphone all I want is one I can make calls on. And my Walkman CD player works fine as well. The only reason I see for getting something else is for longer battery life.
Yes, but they still sold music with DRM until the labels agreed to sell it without. Right now, they sell movies and TV shows with DRM. This leads me to believe that, though they'd rather go without DRM, Apple is willing to use DRM if content owners insist.
And I agree. Though I don't like DRM Apple is a business. Like they say in politics, if you don't like it try to change it from within.
Falcon
Oh, all those killed in Afghanistan and Iraq were terrorists? And Bush didn't do his part in killing the economy? Didn't the recession start when he was president? And didn't he give out Billions of taxpayer dollars to those businesses who caused the problems?
And don't get the idea I support Obama, I didn't and don't.
Falcon
with an LED backlight .
Yea, my mistake. I didn't see "LCD" and missed "IPS". As I told the person who's reply is above yours I wonder if it's an older IPS, H-IPS, or an S-IPS.
Falcon
True but the spec page specifically states "9.7-inch (diagonal) LED-backlit glossy widescreen Multi-Touch display with IPS technology". Cut and paste, there is no mention of LCD. On the other hand it does say it's an IPS which is an LCD technology. I wonder if it's the old IPS, H-IPS, or S-IPS.
I've been looking for an IPS panel monitor myself and have been thinking I'll get the HP HP LP2475w which is a 24" with an H-IPS panel.
Falcon
I'm sure Apple would be willing to work with studios to make sure their content is protected if it meant they could get free (ad-supported) streaming to the iPad and Apple TV.
While Apple developed and uses Fairplay DRM Steve Jobs also wrote that open letter asking media businesses to publish music without DRM.
Falcon