I think the bulk of the Gmail users probably don't really know what IMAP is so they'll never enable it. Also, the more technical crowd or power-users that would like to use IMAP is more likely also capable of filtering out advertisements already. That very same group may also be consuming a lot of disk space and I have the impression that just by trying to use IMAP from Apple Mail with my Gmail account for a few moments that I'm already deleting e-mail instead of the archiving as I would do through the web. So, I think they hope it may cut on the ever increasing storage trend.
Microsoft only controls the OEMs, that's all. Windows is everywhere only because of that, not because customers want it. The rising popularity of Ubuntu among the joe sixpack of us, increasing marketshare of Mac OS X at the expense of Vista adoption. Those things scare the shit out of them. If Redmond can't grow their business in the next 5 years, they're doomed. Microsoft is fatally wounded, hence their blind attacks. Same shit with the OOXML soap, they're desperate as ODF will ruin their dominance in the office market fast.
Can't we just switch to IPv6 and be done with it? Then chances are probably significantly lower we're accidentally using the same IP as the nutty chairthrower professor.
Only techies would care about that. Ultimately, it's about the quality of the content and if you can't spot the difference at first sight, who cares? I don't. This is the same crap as with audio encoding. The original songs downloaded from iTunes in 128 kbps were good enough for me (supposedly, double blind test at Dolby labs confirmed there was no noticable difference). I don't really need 256 kbps encoding which some people were begging for (apparently). It only fills up my iPod a lot quicker which is more expensive or less convenient in the long run. If you *can* see the difference, you should defend your rights obviously. Otherwise, get a life please.
I fear Apple's going to piss off European customers by charging the same amount of euros as dollars. 399 = $554. For that extra $155 I expect 3G to be part of the deal.
It ain't over till the fat lady smiles... I'm sure Darl McBribe will make a last appearance in true Hans Gruber style. Or was it Heinrich? Can't remember.
Slashdot Mirror
I suspect this is all set up by 3D Realms. They obviously need to do some real life testing with the jet pack in order to fix that 11 year old bug.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uwOL4rB-go
You're clearly comparing Apples and Oranges here.
I think the bulk of the Gmail users probably don't really know what IMAP is so they'll never enable it. Also, the more technical crowd or power-users that would like to use IMAP is more likely also capable of filtering out advertisements already. That very same group may also be consuming a lot of disk space and I have the impression that just by trying to use IMAP from Apple Mail with my Gmail account for a few moments that I'm already deleting e-mail instead of the archiving as I would do through the web. So, I think they hope it may cut on the ever increasing storage trend.
Sure, except for this one.
Microsoft only controls the OEMs, that's all. Windows is everywhere only because of that, not because customers want it. The rising popularity of Ubuntu among the joe sixpack of us, increasing marketshare of Mac OS X at the expense of Vista adoption. Those things scare the shit out of them. If Redmond can't grow their business in the next 5 years, they're doomed. Microsoft is fatally wounded, hence their blind attacks. Same shit with the OOXML soap, they're desperate as ODF will ruin their dominance in the office market fast.
Can't we just switch to IPv6 and be done with it? Then chances are probably significantly lower we're accidentally using the same IP as the nutty chairthrower professor.
Only techies would care about that. Ultimately, it's about the quality of the content and if you can't spot the difference at first sight, who cares? I don't. This is the same crap as with audio encoding. The original songs downloaded from iTunes in 128 kbps were good enough for me (supposedly, double blind test at Dolby labs confirmed there was no noticable difference). I don't really need 256 kbps encoding which some people were begging for (apparently). It only fills up my iPod a lot quicker which is more expensive or less convenient in the long run.
If you *can* see the difference, you should defend your rights obviously. Otherwise, get a life please.
I fear Apple's going to piss off European customers by charging the same amount of euros as dollars. 399 = $554. For that extra $155 I expect 3G to be part of the deal.
It ain't over till the fat lady smiles ... I'm sure Darl McBribe will make a last appearance in true Hans Gruber style. Or was it Heinrich? Can't remember.
I even heard a rumor that Miguel has a brown Zune!
Steve Jobs is partially deaf, and he tested the iPod before it was released.
Which, interestingly, might prove that briefly testing the iPod can already cause partial deafness?