imahawki
May 5, 01:40 PM
I didn't read the whole thread so maybe someone already said it but if they put 30 crapware and trial programs on Macs they could probably drop the price... but they don't want to. The Windows machines should say $1200 - $400 from crapware vendors to be more fair.
As far as why people buy Macs? Windows has gotten a TON better but a lot of the same problems still apply. I got tired of trying to make backup rotation work on my Win7 machine (it won't do it you can only backup to ONE destination. If you want to change that you edit your ONE allowed backup policy but you can't even have multiple policies to allow for not changing the policy every time you rotate your disk), I got tired of driver problems with my Wacom Intuous (certain apps wouldn't let you click buttons with the mouse but worked with the pen [random crap like that]) I got tired of all the registry trash that every program you want to demo leaves behind, I enjoyed the alleged openness but honestly got tired of the lack of real-world compatibility (the esata card I bought "worked" but not in AHCI mode so I couldn't hot swap. And even just leaving it in IDE mode I got a BIOS error every time I booted).
I could go on. I'm pretty objective and there are areas where Windows and generic hardware provide advantages but its not that cut and dried and people aren't suckers for paying more for a mac.
As far as why people buy Macs? Windows has gotten a TON better but a lot of the same problems still apply. I got tired of trying to make backup rotation work on my Win7 machine (it won't do it you can only backup to ONE destination. If you want to change that you edit your ONE allowed backup policy but you can't even have multiple policies to allow for not changing the policy every time you rotate your disk), I got tired of driver problems with my Wacom Intuous (certain apps wouldn't let you click buttons with the mouse but worked with the pen [random crap like that]) I got tired of all the registry trash that every program you want to demo leaves behind, I enjoyed the alleged openness but honestly got tired of the lack of real-world compatibility (the esata card I bought "worked" but not in AHCI mode so I couldn't hot swap. And even just leaving it in IDE mode I got a BIOS error every time I booted).
I could go on. I'm pretty objective and there are areas where Windows and generic hardware provide advantages but its not that cut and dried and people aren't suckers for paying more for a mac.
robertcoogan
Jun 11, 04:54 AM
I really hope T-Mobile isn't chosen...I had them for a year and a half and what horrible customer service. Not to mention that their coverage in Palm Springs, CA is horrible. Apple should go with Verizon, I did go with AT&T myself, but Verizon is rated highest of all the carriers for customer satisfaction and coverage.
sartis
Apr 12, 02:17 PM
It seems snappier!
J/K
J/K
robbieduncan
Sep 25, 11:16 AM
the 'what's new' page says "Work with RAW images from more than 50 camera models, including the Fuji S2, Fuji S3 Pro, and Sony A100." but i don't know which ones exactly .. i know the Fujis are new because i have the S9000/9500 which is still not supported and it didn't support any Fujis before
Did you read the previous posts? The complete list of supported cameras (http://www.apple.com/aperture/raw/cameras.html) was posted on the previous page...
Did you read the previous posts? The complete list of supported cameras (http://www.apple.com/aperture/raw/cameras.html) was posted on the previous page...
more...
eawmp1
Apr 9, 05:34 AM
Considering we have evidence to suggest PP workers aiding and abetting pimps and child prostitutes (fake) in acquiring abortion I don't see how lying and doctoring documents is above them. A lie from the physician and the paperwork for that abortion getting "misplaced" are all it takes.
Also I'm very surprised at only one website "exposing" her and a couple sites commenting on it. Abby Johnson lying would come out as a bang not a whimper.
In most cases, it is a prosecutor's (or is that persecutor's) responsibility to produce evidence of wrongdoing.
Also I'm very surprised at only one website "exposing" her and a couple sites commenting on it. Abby Johnson lying would come out as a bang not a whimper.
In most cases, it is a prosecutor's (or is that persecutor's) responsibility to produce evidence of wrongdoing.
simsaladimbamba
Apr 12, 07:59 AM
No, but you may use Winclone to backup your BC Windows partition.
more...
roylong
Dec 1, 11:13 AM
I can sell you a can of spray paint and some masking covers so you can do the job yourself for about $20 :eek:
Rodimus Prime
May 5, 07:50 PM
The "Apple Tax" is largely just in the mind. PC Magazine, and several tech blogs, have had comparisons and found that a Mac is cheaper than machines from some Windows machines (I think Sony and Dell were more expensive but I could be wrong). Out of five tested, the Mac was in the middle.
I did the math, and gave it up after I had consistently lousy experiences with every version of Windows I used, with hardware from a variety of well known manufacturers.
I will happily spend the imaginary premium if it provides with a stable operating system.
if maybe if you go spec for spec but often times you end up having to pay for a bunch of crap you do not need or want to get what you want from Apple.
Take this. I needed/wanted a 15in Laptop higher res screen and i7 processor. I bought it for around $1500. Same laptop from Apple over 2 grand. I was willing to give up the alumium body and battery life because they were not as high on my list.
Or try this one. Someone wants a 17 (hell even 15 in) screen but only really need a core duo or a i3 processor. If they went Apple they have to pay a huge tax to pay for all the extra crap they do not want/need just to get that 15 or 17 in screen they want/need.
Apple Tax is in the form of having to buy a bunch of extra crap you do not need/want to get the few items that you do need/want.
I did the math, and gave it up after I had consistently lousy experiences with every version of Windows I used, with hardware from a variety of well known manufacturers.
I will happily spend the imaginary premium if it provides with a stable operating system.
if maybe if you go spec for spec but often times you end up having to pay for a bunch of crap you do not need or want to get what you want from Apple.
Take this. I needed/wanted a 15in Laptop higher res screen and i7 processor. I bought it for around $1500. Same laptop from Apple over 2 grand. I was willing to give up the alumium body and battery life because they were not as high on my list.
Or try this one. Someone wants a 17 (hell even 15 in) screen but only really need a core duo or a i3 processor. If they went Apple they have to pay a huge tax to pay for all the extra crap they do not want/need just to get that 15 or 17 in screen they want/need.
Apple Tax is in the form of having to buy a bunch of extra crap you do not need/want to get the few items that you do need/want.
more...
Gasu E.
Sep 26, 10:08 AM
OI! APPLE LAWERS!!! YEAH YOU!!! Read some Mintzberg, or Mead, or (and I'd strongly advise this) Andrew Bailey. Basically, get those HBS grads out of your org and stop using crappy outdated Business School Methods. It was once the way to go. But what they don't consider are Gender and Cultures! You wanna piss me off: You loose my custom.
Sorry for the moan, but the litigation era was over in the 90's.
It's about Love Marks now, and your Lawers are hurting your brand!!! Fix it before it's too late!
Oh, calm down and read all the links. There's been no litigation. Apple was pretty damn polite in its one cease-and-desist. Under US law, if you don't defend your trademarks you lose them, and the links discussing their trademark applications indicate that Apple may already be in trouble on that score already.
P.S. I read Mintzberg in business school in 1981. "Gender and Cultures" is a non sequiter right out of a university course catalog. ROFL. YDKWTFYATA.
Sorry for the moan, but the litigation era was over in the 90's.
It's about Love Marks now, and your Lawers are hurting your brand!!! Fix it before it's too late!
Oh, calm down and read all the links. There's been no litigation. Apple was pretty damn polite in its one cease-and-desist. Under US law, if you don't defend your trademarks you lose them, and the links discussing their trademark applications indicate that Apple may already be in trouble on that score already.
P.S. I read Mintzberg in business school in 1981. "Gender and Cultures" is a non sequiter right out of a university course catalog. ROFL. YDKWTFYATA.
bella92108
Apr 1, 12:58 PM
Woohoo! I have always wanted to be able to watch C-SPAN from somewhere besides my living room. Nothing will help you to fall asleep on the train better than some C-SPAN. C-SPAN 2! and 3! even better!:D
I find listening to HSN is quite entertaining actually... It's funny to watch their middle age post-C-section Real Housewives of Scranton, PA (HSN home, right?) try to fumble through presenting the latest $499 laptop from Dell. Comical... sure is funnier than anything that's come from Fox int he last 5 years, hehe.
I find listening to HSN is quite entertaining actually... It's funny to watch their middle age post-C-section Real Housewives of Scranton, PA (HSN home, right?) try to fumble through presenting the latest $499 laptop from Dell. Comical... sure is funnier than anything that's come from Fox int he last 5 years, hehe.
more...
jaw04005
Oct 10, 04:15 PM
I can't wait. I love this game and played it not too long ago on emulation. I hope it translates well. A lot of the arcade ports don't translate well since they were designed with a higher level of difficulity in order to force you to spend more money.
I guess the Konami code would work though. I want X-Men Children of the Atom next.
I guess the Konami code would work though. I want X-Men Children of the Atom next.
thatisme
Mar 29, 12:37 PM
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/reviews/canon-ef-s-55-250mm-f-4-5.6-is-lens-review.aspx
go down to COMPARED ..
now roll over the images.. if you tell me that that 55-250 shot is a 1.6 crop and the 70-X shots are very different you DO live on another plant (the 55-250 shot was manualy zoomed to match the 70-X shot hence the SLIGHT difference in focal length).. I am assuming same camera..as the review is about the lens and the FoV is too close to be recreated beteen full frame and crop.
you are twisting things nicely around now..
@Cliff, my bad I remember seen the high speed crop also on the D3 series but I might be wrong. The D700 however does have a crop but also allows you to shoot your DX lens on full frame (which will vignette) but has no speed increase over the full frame mode.
Thatisme:
It is kind of funny how you try to wiggle yourself out of this though...
We (a buddy and me here, pro photographer but you would dismiss this anyway as him not knowing either, are having a great time with your "knowledge" and your way of going from the 200mm debacle to IMAGE... and no, the image will still not be different between an EF-s and an EF lens at the same focal length on the same body.
End of story..if you are so sure.. why don't YOU prove ME wrong? you posted 1 picture of a modified 5d, which wasnt even yours. there is no 10mm on full frame (hence the vigneting) so you would have to shoot that 52 with the 10-22 at 22mm and then use a full frame 22 milimeter lens and compare it, because you ARE arguing, at least now, that the image will be different. It won't except for the vignetting.. re-read your own statements from before and watch how you ended up now on the "image" :)
Don't worry, by Monday I will prove it to you but why don't you prove me wrong before?.. I dare you.
EF-s lens and EF (or DX and FX for me) at the same focal length on the same camera, same f stop, same shutter speed... Exif data intact.
To the OP: I have to apologize for this and this is the last post related to Thats me from my side:
To answer your question: EF-s is cheaper as stated before the mess and is targeted specifically for the crop sensor bodies. You CAN fit both EF-s and EF on a crop sensor body and you will get the same image. EF lenses are just made for full frame as also stated before.
sorry for the mess.
With your link provided, I agree there is a slight difference there, but as you said, you ASSUME that it was with the same camera.... That would be my assumption as well, however, that example hardly makes your case, as the 70mm had to be manually dialed in... a small change has a big effect at long distances.... just saying... Show it using a prime (can't) or at the long end of the lens where there is no room for error or adjustment (200mm example). Eliminate all variables.
So, quit your arguing and prove it with a real world example with your gear. I don't own any EF-S lenses anymore, so let's get that in the great wide open, so I can't run this comparison for you. There is a fundamental reason for that, which gets more to the point of the OP... Image quality is flat out crap as compared with Canon's L glass, which just so happens to be only in the EF mount. Right, wrong or somewhere in-between, this discussion has no bearing for me, since I will never own another EF-S lens anyway. To that point, I won't ever own a 1.6 crop camera again either, for what it's worth.
I have no further interest in this discussion, so have fun. Enjoy.
go down to COMPARED ..
now roll over the images.. if you tell me that that 55-250 shot is a 1.6 crop and the 70-X shots are very different you DO live on another plant (the 55-250 shot was manualy zoomed to match the 70-X shot hence the SLIGHT difference in focal length).. I am assuming same camera..as the review is about the lens and the FoV is too close to be recreated beteen full frame and crop.
you are twisting things nicely around now..
@Cliff, my bad I remember seen the high speed crop also on the D3 series but I might be wrong. The D700 however does have a crop but also allows you to shoot your DX lens on full frame (which will vignette) but has no speed increase over the full frame mode.
Thatisme:
It is kind of funny how you try to wiggle yourself out of this though...
We (a buddy and me here, pro photographer but you would dismiss this anyway as him not knowing either, are having a great time with your "knowledge" and your way of going from the 200mm debacle to IMAGE... and no, the image will still not be different between an EF-s and an EF lens at the same focal length on the same body.
End of story..if you are so sure.. why don't YOU prove ME wrong? you posted 1 picture of a modified 5d, which wasnt even yours. there is no 10mm on full frame (hence the vigneting) so you would have to shoot that 52 with the 10-22 at 22mm and then use a full frame 22 milimeter lens and compare it, because you ARE arguing, at least now, that the image will be different. It won't except for the vignetting.. re-read your own statements from before and watch how you ended up now on the "image" :)
Don't worry, by Monday I will prove it to you but why don't you prove me wrong before?.. I dare you.
EF-s lens and EF (or DX and FX for me) at the same focal length on the same camera, same f stop, same shutter speed... Exif data intact.
To the OP: I have to apologize for this and this is the last post related to Thats me from my side:
To answer your question: EF-s is cheaper as stated before the mess and is targeted specifically for the crop sensor bodies. You CAN fit both EF-s and EF on a crop sensor body and you will get the same image. EF lenses are just made for full frame as also stated before.
sorry for the mess.
With your link provided, I agree there is a slight difference there, but as you said, you ASSUME that it was with the same camera.... That would be my assumption as well, however, that example hardly makes your case, as the 70mm had to be manually dialed in... a small change has a big effect at long distances.... just saying... Show it using a prime (can't) or at the long end of the lens where there is no room for error or adjustment (200mm example). Eliminate all variables.
So, quit your arguing and prove it with a real world example with your gear. I don't own any EF-S lenses anymore, so let's get that in the great wide open, so I can't run this comparison for you. There is a fundamental reason for that, which gets more to the point of the OP... Image quality is flat out crap as compared with Canon's L glass, which just so happens to be only in the EF mount. Right, wrong or somewhere in-between, this discussion has no bearing for me, since I will never own another EF-S lens anyway. To that point, I won't ever own a 1.6 crop camera again either, for what it's worth.
I have no further interest in this discussion, so have fun. Enjoy.
more...
Lacero
Sep 17, 12:18 PM
Trying to, and successfully making eye contact on the 2nd and 3rd visit would have freaked me out. And I'm a guy! Making eye contact after having purchased something probably would have been the more appropriate action to take. Ah well...
A gorgeous girl like gets hit on constantly. She's developed a few skills to deal with it.
The worse I've had was when I asked a girl (similar to your situation) for her number and she said, "What for?" LOL. :o
A gorgeous girl like gets hit on constantly. She's developed a few skills to deal with it.
The worse I've had was when I asked a girl (similar to your situation) for her number and she said, "What for?" LOL. :o
re2st
Apr 12, 07:45 PM
Personally, I chose Verizon over AT&T simply because my new iPad 2 drops no calls. Love the reliability.
Um.. the iPad does NOT even make calls. How could it drop them to begin with? *duh*
Um.. the iPad does NOT even make calls. How could it drop them to begin with? *duh*
more...
Designer Dale
Mar 22, 02:40 PM
Never review your pictures.
After college I had to sell my wet darkroom and rely on outside labs. I suffered from not reviewing my photos to a serious degree, they just sat in those white envelopes with the sticky glue on top. Digital has saved me as a photographer.
Dale
After college I had to sell my wet darkroom and rely on outside labs. I suffered from not reviewing my photos to a serious degree, they just sat in those white envelopes with the sticky glue on top. Digital has saved me as a photographer.
Dale
clintob
Oct 27, 01:40 PM
I really want .mac, but it's just not compelling enough.
I keep my bookmarks sync'd between my Mac at home and my PC at work in Firefox with Foxmarks. Free extension.
I use gmail and yahoo for webmail. 2+gb of storage each. I'm debating which to stick with for calendar. I can use gmail and sync ical to it right now. However someone is already starting a service (http://groups-beta.google.com/group/spanningsync/browse_thread/thread/33374a59c38cbe15)which will let you completely sync Google cal and ical by being able to make changes to both (effectively duplicating what .mac gives you)
I could convert another gmail account into storage space with a plug in. Right now I use mediamax (http://www.mediamax.com/) for 25gb of FREE storage.
Flickr offers ways to publish right from iphoto for a very easy and free way to share photos online.
So for me to cough up the dough, .mac needs more, much more.
All of the above are compeltely valid points. However, there are two large weaknesses to this idea.
First, you're assuming that .mac users want to use Firefox as their browser. Many of us believe strongly that Safari is a better browser. I don't use plugins or extensions - I want my browser clean, slick, and simple. I like my fonts to appear the way they're intended. I was my interface consistent with the rest of my Apps.
Second, and more importantly, look at what you've done in each point. You've addressed each of .mac's features using a separate third party. Sure, you can duplicate any number of the features elsewhere. The reason .mac is useful is because it's all in one place. For many users, the idea of having to to Google for their Mail, Flickr for their photos, MediaMax for their storage, and all the while depend on third-party plugins to make it go round... it all just sounds like a headache. Sure, if you know what you're doing it works fine. But $8.25 a month really isn't that much for the simplicity and ease-of-use that .mac offers the average user.
Sure, we'd all love to see .mac get better. And I'm sure in time it will, but let's stop hating on it so much. For the day-to-day user, .mac is a great tool, simple and easy to use, and really isn't all that expensive in the scheme of things. It's two latte's a month... big deal.
I keep my bookmarks sync'd between my Mac at home and my PC at work in Firefox with Foxmarks. Free extension.
I use gmail and yahoo for webmail. 2+gb of storage each. I'm debating which to stick with for calendar. I can use gmail and sync ical to it right now. However someone is already starting a service (http://groups-beta.google.com/group/spanningsync/browse_thread/thread/33374a59c38cbe15)which will let you completely sync Google cal and ical by being able to make changes to both (effectively duplicating what .mac gives you)
I could convert another gmail account into storage space with a plug in. Right now I use mediamax (http://www.mediamax.com/) for 25gb of FREE storage.
Flickr offers ways to publish right from iphoto for a very easy and free way to share photos online.
So for me to cough up the dough, .mac needs more, much more.
All of the above are compeltely valid points. However, there are two large weaknesses to this idea.
First, you're assuming that .mac users want to use Firefox as their browser. Many of us believe strongly that Safari is a better browser. I don't use plugins or extensions - I want my browser clean, slick, and simple. I like my fonts to appear the way they're intended. I was my interface consistent with the rest of my Apps.
Second, and more importantly, look at what you've done in each point. You've addressed each of .mac's features using a separate third party. Sure, you can duplicate any number of the features elsewhere. The reason .mac is useful is because it's all in one place. For many users, the idea of having to to Google for their Mail, Flickr for their photos, MediaMax for their storage, and all the while depend on third-party plugins to make it go round... it all just sounds like a headache. Sure, if you know what you're doing it works fine. But $8.25 a month really isn't that much for the simplicity and ease-of-use that .mac offers the average user.
Sure, we'd all love to see .mac get better. And I'm sure in time it will, but let's stop hating on it so much. For the day-to-day user, .mac is a great tool, simple and easy to use, and really isn't all that expensive in the scheme of things. It's two latte's a month... big deal.
more...
themacthinker
Oct 26, 11:32 PM
I would have like to see more of a boost on the storage side as well. It would be nice .Mac could give 5GB of storage for instance for the 99bucks.
What do you guys think?
What do you guys think?
akac
Apr 17, 02:32 PM
I could not agree with you more!
My current iPhone is my last! I disgusted with Apple's monopolist stranglehold on the product and apps. They have become total control freaks.
When this phone dies, it will NOT be replaced with another Apple product.
They have become? :) They have always been control freaks. That's why the platform is so good...
My current iPhone is my last! I disgusted with Apple's monopolist stranglehold on the product and apps. They have become total control freaks.
When this phone dies, it will NOT be replaced with another Apple product.
They have become? :) They have always been control freaks. That's why the platform is so good...
pengu
Oct 26, 11:12 PM
That's basically it. You pay the $100 because you don't want to read, learn and figure stuff out. Every Mac sold comes with enough software that you could set up your own services using your DSL or Cable Internet connection. Macs have web severs, FTP servers, email and "all the UNIX Stuff" You already have an iDisk right there on your desk that could be accessed from any computer that has a browser but it's easier for most people to pay $100 than to figure out how to make it work.
or you pay $100 because its not just $8.25 a month. how much will it cost you in time (yours), internet access costs, electricity, potential downtime etc. to "do it yourself".
I'm in australia, so its $129 here i think.
however. i currently make $50/hr so, unless i can guarantee that ALL functionality provided by .Mac will take me less than 2 1/2 hours a year (ignoring the cost of electricity for a machine running 24x7) its financially better for me to pay the $129.
and for all you google fans. fine. use it for free, but i prefer NOT to have advertising in my email thanks.
or you pay $100 because its not just $8.25 a month. how much will it cost you in time (yours), internet access costs, electricity, potential downtime etc. to "do it yourself".
I'm in australia, so its $129 here i think.
however. i currently make $50/hr so, unless i can guarantee that ALL functionality provided by .Mac will take me less than 2 1/2 hours a year (ignoring the cost of electricity for a machine running 24x7) its financially better for me to pay the $129.
and for all you google fans. fine. use it for free, but i prefer NOT to have advertising in my email thanks.
mrsir2009
Apr 28, 10:51 PM
seriously just shut ur pretty faces with the tired backlit keyboard anthem. this is like the least desirable feature esp since it has a direct impact on battery life.
You know if you were that worried about your precious battery life you could turn the keyboard lighting off.
You know if you were that worried about your precious battery life you could turn the keyboard lighting off.
MacRumors
Nov 5, 06:11 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2009/11/05/why-an-rfid-enabled-iphone/)
Multiple reports have come in that Apple is researching (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/11/05/apple-experimenting-with-rfid-enabled-iphone-prototypes/) RFID (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/07/09/new-apple-iphone-patent-applications-surface-object-and-facial-recognition-messaging-voice-modulation/) integration (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/07/02/haptic-feedback-fingerprint-identification-and-rfid-tag-readers-in-future-iphones/) into the iPhone, but some may still be wondering what such functionality would bring to the table for consumers.
Firstly, we should note that RFID is a catch-all term that describes a vast array of technologies and standards. RFID tags can be relatively large and battery-powered, such as ones used in toll collection, to small "passive" tags that can be embedded into credit cards, drivers licenses (called "Enhanced Drivers Licenses" in the U.S.), passports, or stuck onto a piece of merchandise.
Currently, cell-phone usage of RFID technology is centered around Near Field Communication (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_Field_Communication) (NFC). NFC has three main usage scenarios: a phone acting as an RFID tag; a phone acting as an RFID reader; and peer to peer communication (P2P).
In RFID tag mode, a phone could be used as a payment device (like a credit card), an identity card, or act as a car key. In RFID reader mode the phone would be able to interact with tags in its vicinity. This article and video (http://www.nearfield.org/2009/04/iphone-rfid-nfc) demonstrates how an iPhone with RFID could use physical objects to control media playback. And in P2P mode, Bluetooth pairing can be streamlined.
These are just a few ways that RFID could be used in an iPhone. When or if it becomes a reality isn't clear, but hopefully now you have a better idea of what the potential is for Apple's research in this area.
Article Link: Why an RFID-enabled iPhone? (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2009/11/05/why-an-rfid-enabled-iphone/)
Multiple reports have come in that Apple is researching (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/11/05/apple-experimenting-with-rfid-enabled-iphone-prototypes/) RFID (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/07/09/new-apple-iphone-patent-applications-surface-object-and-facial-recognition-messaging-voice-modulation/) integration (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/07/02/haptic-feedback-fingerprint-identification-and-rfid-tag-readers-in-future-iphones/) into the iPhone, but some may still be wondering what such functionality would bring to the table for consumers.
Firstly, we should note that RFID is a catch-all term that describes a vast array of technologies and standards. RFID tags can be relatively large and battery-powered, such as ones used in toll collection, to small "passive" tags that can be embedded into credit cards, drivers licenses (called "Enhanced Drivers Licenses" in the U.S.), passports, or stuck onto a piece of merchandise.
Currently, cell-phone usage of RFID technology is centered around Near Field Communication (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_Field_Communication) (NFC). NFC has three main usage scenarios: a phone acting as an RFID tag; a phone acting as an RFID reader; and peer to peer communication (P2P).
In RFID tag mode, a phone could be used as a payment device (like a credit card), an identity card, or act as a car key. In RFID reader mode the phone would be able to interact with tags in its vicinity. This article and video (http://www.nearfield.org/2009/04/iphone-rfid-nfc) demonstrates how an iPhone with RFID could use physical objects to control media playback. And in P2P mode, Bluetooth pairing can be streamlined.
These are just a few ways that RFID could be used in an iPhone. When or if it becomes a reality isn't clear, but hopefully now you have a better idea of what the potential is for Apple's research in this area.
Article Link: Why an RFID-enabled iPhone? (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2009/11/05/why-an-rfid-enabled-iphone/)
Bubba Satori
Mar 28, 08:57 AM
Maybe I'm reading too much into it but it is sad the Mac OS is mentioned after iOS.:(
Be grateful it gets mentioned at all.
In a few years...
Be grateful it gets mentioned at all.
In a few years...
itcheroni
Apr 13, 04:10 AM
Look, this is the second time you've told me, incorrectly, what you think I believe.
"Informed people" is self-explanatory. I don't intend to spoon-feed you a response just so you can intentionally misrepresent it a third time.
What I'm trying to do is understand your logic. The reason I'm summarizing your position is because I want to avoid misrepresenting you before I go on to explain my own point of view. Please show me where I misrepresented you. This isn't a political debate. I am only asking questions because I actually want to know the answers, not because I'm trying to "win". If you look back on our posts, I don't think you'll find any point where I intentionally misrepresented your posts. The fact that you're reacting defensively is surprising to me.
Let's just forget it. It's my fault for expecting a rational conversation on a message board.
The American government taxes less and serves less than any other western industrialized country, while spending over a trillion dollars a year trying to control foreign affairs through military might.
That my friend, is a recipe for financial disaster.
Have you been studying Mises?
"Informed people" is self-explanatory. I don't intend to spoon-feed you a response just so you can intentionally misrepresent it a third time.
What I'm trying to do is understand your logic. The reason I'm summarizing your position is because I want to avoid misrepresenting you before I go on to explain my own point of view. Please show me where I misrepresented you. This isn't a political debate. I am only asking questions because I actually want to know the answers, not because I'm trying to "win". If you look back on our posts, I don't think you'll find any point where I intentionally misrepresented your posts. The fact that you're reacting defensively is surprising to me.
Let's just forget it. It's my fault for expecting a rational conversation on a message board.
The American government taxes less and serves less than any other western industrialized country, while spending over a trillion dollars a year trying to control foreign affairs through military might.
That my friend, is a recipe for financial disaster.
Have you been studying Mises?
Doylem
Mar 18, 05:25 AM
Get lost in the world of gear. Spend your time reading about the specs of forthcoming cameras and lenses, instead of actually taking pics. Denigrate the gear you have; fantasise about a fancier camera. That would make you a better photographer, surely? ;)
No comments:
Post a Comment