MrCrowbar
Oct 27, 03:40 PM
http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j49/ed_rossignol/untitled.jpg
~Ed~
I wish I had this many sensor readings. All I get is the themperature in once CPU core. :-(
Is there any kenel extention to install so I can get the hard drive temp (more important to me than the cpu) and the other stuff? Or the fan readings?
I have a stock black Macbook with some more RAM (see sig). PLease PM me if you know something for getting all the sensor readings.
~Ed~
I wish I had this many sensor readings. All I get is the themperature in once CPU core. :-(
Is there any kenel extention to install so I can get the hard drive temp (more important to me than the cpu) and the other stuff? Or the fan readings?
I have a stock black Macbook with some more RAM (see sig). PLease PM me if you know something for getting all the sensor readings.
darwen
Nov 7, 12:19 PM
I dont want new MacBooks! :mad:
I already have my MacBook so that may be influencing me but there is my gripe. There is finally a separation between the MacBook and the MacBook Pro. There is an obvious reason for why the MacBook Pro costs more. Bringing them both to the same level creates the same problem Apple used to have... many (including myself) can easily justify getting MacBook instead of the MacBook Pro because the MacBook does everything you need the Pro version to do.
I already have my MacBook so that may be influencing me but there is my gripe. There is finally a separation between the MacBook and the MacBook Pro. There is an obvious reason for why the MacBook Pro costs more. Bringing them both to the same level creates the same problem Apple used to have... many (including myself) can easily justify getting MacBook instead of the MacBook Pro because the MacBook does everything you need the Pro version to do.
micahR
Oct 20, 07:11 AM
Firefight is great fun, especially Score Attack. I play the crap out of that. There was another playlist update today, tweaking Firefight, along with some other things. They have bumped regular Firefight up from 1 round to a full set, so that is nice. Also, Bungie mentioned in an update recently that they were going to probably down the road add in a "Firefight Classic" mode to Matchmaking. That would be like it was in ODST, where your team has a limited number of lives for the team. They also said they will probably be adding a Legendary difficulty option as well, so that will bump up the challenge quite a lot.
I played the updated firefight last night and it was 10 times better with the new tweaks. I love the fact that if you don't kill all of the covies with the allotted time, the game is over. I just need sniperfight and rocketfight to be moved into their own category.
If they add in a limited number of lives, then I will definitely have to change my play style.
I played the updated firefight last night and it was 10 times better with the new tweaks. I love the fact that if you don't kill all of the covies with the allotted time, the game is over. I just need sniperfight and rocketfight to be moved into their own category.
If they add in a limited number of lives, then I will definitely have to change my play style.
Zadkpro
Mar 12, 07:38 AM
the apple website tab bar is all messed up.. and once again. disappointment no.100th. no mbps. back to our wondering lifes
buffalo
Sep 12, 06:16 PM
Can someone give me some idea when the Apple Store Birmingham UK will get the new nano's in stock?
You could always call the store and ask... Might be quicker and more accurate than waiting for someone else from MR to answer.
Also some questions... (continued from my post on the previous page)
Is there anyway to get the new earbuds? The original buds do not fit my (small) ears, and I would like to try something new. Right now I'm using some Sony (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=4503996&st=headphones&lp=10&type=product&cp=2&id=1051806136350) over-the-head headphones.
Will there be a software update that will bring gapless playback and the other new features to the original nanos?
Will the original nano dock work with the new nanos?
You could always call the store and ask... Might be quicker and more accurate than waiting for someone else from MR to answer.
Also some questions... (continued from my post on the previous page)
Is there anyway to get the new earbuds? The original buds do not fit my (small) ears, and I would like to try something new. Right now I'm using some Sony (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=4503996&st=headphones&lp=10&type=product&cp=2&id=1051806136350) over-the-head headphones.
Will there be a software update that will bring gapless playback and the other new features to the original nanos?
Will the original nano dock work with the new nanos?
crap freakboy
Oct 26, 05:34 PM
As long as Apple are being above board on this design flaw and offering a repair for those affected at no cost then alls well and good I say.
Must be a pain to have to wait for the repair though.
Must be a pain to have to wait for the repair though.
rovex
Apr 26, 10:33 AM
Britain is very class based, and is probably racist too. Black people here are generally poor and don't do particularly well at school as well.
It's Highly exaggerated the racism amongst Brits, just go to Italy or Spain or eastern Europe where racism against Blacks and non Whites is truly visible. In fact, I actually believe Britain is one of the very few countries that welcomes Black people as well as they do.
By the way, isn't it quite ironical how little racism against whites is highlighted? For example, I know in western Africa They don't particular welcome white people, Which is why many white French who live there have been killed or attacked.
It's Highly exaggerated the racism amongst Brits, just go to Italy or Spain or eastern Europe where racism against Blacks and non Whites is truly visible. In fact, I actually believe Britain is one of the very few countries that welcomes Black people as well as they do.
By the way, isn't it quite ironical how little racism against whites is highlighted? For example, I know in western Africa They don't particular welcome white people, Which is why many white French who live there have been killed or attacked.
fivepoint
Mar 28, 08:19 PM
Take 5 minutes and watch this outstanding response to Obama's speech by Freshman Senator Rand Paul:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrrV_Txg47Q
Intervening in a civil war in a tribal society in which our government admits we have no vital interests to help people we do not know, simply does not make any sense.
What did you think of Obama's speech? Of Paul's? Which one more reflects your own worldview?
For me personally, this really emphasizes to me that 'change' isn't just a slogan; its an ideology, it's a worldview. It's time to start standing up for smaller government, less foreign entanglements, less debt, less stimulus, less handouts, less, less, less. Obama won't get you there, he's just more of the same... only worse. People like Rand Paul and his father represent real change, beyond what either two major parties have been able to offer during the past 100 years.
Complete Transcript:
The President of the United States often faces unforeseeable dilemmas that demand tough decisions based on reliable intelligence. The recent events in Libya presented President Obama with such a scenario. But how our Commander in Chief chose to handle this new dilemma raises serious questions about his understanding of constitutional checks and balances.
Libyan President Moammar Gadhafi is every bit the madman Ronald Reagan once said he was, but are the rebels adherents to Jeffersonian democracy or Bin Laden's radical jihad?
In then-candidate Obama said that "The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation."
I agree with candidate Obama. Unfortunately, President Obama has failed to heed his own advice. He has ignored our constitution and engaged us in a military conflict without congressional debate and approval
What imminent threat did Gadhafi or Libya pose to the United States? Obviously, the decision to take military action of this magnitude is something that should not be taken lightly, and should first require determining whether it is in the United States' vital national interest.
Over the weekend, even Defense Secretary Robert Gates admitted that America has no vital interest in Libya.
Our brave men and women in uniform are patriotic defenders of our nation. They are members of the greatest military in the world, and in times of war, I am confident of their willingness and ability to ensure that our vital interests are protected.
But they should not be asked to be nation-builders or the world's policemen. And they should serve in wars authorized and called for by the United States Congress, not the United Nations.
At the moment, there are uprisings taking place across the Middle East. The problem with sending U.S. military to help rebels in Libya or anywhere else is that we are taking sides in a conflict and on behalf of a people whom we know nothing about.
When, or if, there is regime change in Libya, what kind of leadership, exactly, will replace Gadhafi? Who are the Libyan rebels exactly? The Daily Telegraph newspaper in London reported over the weekend that some Libyan rebel leaders now claim they have members of al-Qaida within their ranks and are glad to have them. Why do we have American soldiers, our best and bravest, helping people in Libya who may be the very same people we ask our military to fight in Afghanistan and Iraq?
Intervening in a civil war in a tribal society in which our government admits we have no vital interests to help people we do not know, simply does not make any sense. Libyan society is complicated, and we simply do not know enough about the potential outcomes or leaders to know if this will end up in the interests of the United States, or if we are in fact helping to install a radical Islamic government in the place of a secular dictatorship.
Of even more lasting concern is how our troops were committed to this battle by President Obama.
The Founding Fathers understood the seriousness of war and thus included in our Constitution a provision stating that only Congress can declare war. The decision to wage war should not be taken cavalierly. As Madison wrote:
"The Constitution supposes what the history of all Governments demonstrates, that the executive is the branch of power most interested in war and most prone to it. It has accordingly with studied care vested the question of war in the Legislature."
If President Obama had consulted Congress, as our Constitution requires him to do, perhaps we could have debated these questions before hastily involving ourselves in yet another Middle Eastern conflict.
The Constitution doesn't say the president can wage war after he talks to a handful of Congressional leaders.
The Constitution says Congress - all of Congress - is responsible for declaring war.
While the President is the commander of our armed forces, he is not a king. He may involve those forces in military conflict only when authorized by Congress or in response to an imminent threat. Neither was the case here.
We are already in two wars that we are not paying for. We are waging war across the Middle East on a credit card, one whose limit is rapidly approaching. And this is just wrong.
We already borrow money from countries like China to pay for our wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and it would be interesting to know how many Americans believe we should continue borrowing money and saddling future generations with debt to pay for our current actions in Libya.
The subtext to the President's speech concerning Libya tonight was "What if we had done nothing?" But a better question might be, What if helping Libya's interest actually hurts America's interests? What if we are sending our military to places where we might actually be helping the same terrorists we fight in other countries or potential future terrorists?
It's time that we re-examine these policies by once again consulting the Constitution on such matters and the common-sense principles that made this country great. We can no longer afford to spend what we don't have. And we can't afford to address every other nation's problems before we can address our own.
Over the coming days and weeks, Congress will force President Obama to confront these questions. Our brave young men and women have answered the call of duty time and time again over the past decade. Our soldiers deserve, at the very least, that before we send them into a third war that Congress - the People's House - deliberate, debate, and decide whether this war is in our vital national interests.
We will gather information, ask questions, and deliver our best advice about whether we, as the people's representatives, believe we should be at war. Whatever the outcome, we stand square behind our troops, and seek that their mission be clear and true.
Thank you for listening tonight, and God bless the United States of America.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrrV_Txg47Q
Intervening in a civil war in a tribal society in which our government admits we have no vital interests to help people we do not know, simply does not make any sense.
What did you think of Obama's speech? Of Paul's? Which one more reflects your own worldview?
For me personally, this really emphasizes to me that 'change' isn't just a slogan; its an ideology, it's a worldview. It's time to start standing up for smaller government, less foreign entanglements, less debt, less stimulus, less handouts, less, less, less. Obama won't get you there, he's just more of the same... only worse. People like Rand Paul and his father represent real change, beyond what either two major parties have been able to offer during the past 100 years.
Complete Transcript:
The President of the United States often faces unforeseeable dilemmas that demand tough decisions based on reliable intelligence. The recent events in Libya presented President Obama with such a scenario. But how our Commander in Chief chose to handle this new dilemma raises serious questions about his understanding of constitutional checks and balances.
Libyan President Moammar Gadhafi is every bit the madman Ronald Reagan once said he was, but are the rebels adherents to Jeffersonian democracy or Bin Laden's radical jihad?
In then-candidate Obama said that "The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation."
I agree with candidate Obama. Unfortunately, President Obama has failed to heed his own advice. He has ignored our constitution and engaged us in a military conflict without congressional debate and approval
What imminent threat did Gadhafi or Libya pose to the United States? Obviously, the decision to take military action of this magnitude is something that should not be taken lightly, and should first require determining whether it is in the United States' vital national interest.
Over the weekend, even Defense Secretary Robert Gates admitted that America has no vital interest in Libya.
Our brave men and women in uniform are patriotic defenders of our nation. They are members of the greatest military in the world, and in times of war, I am confident of their willingness and ability to ensure that our vital interests are protected.
But they should not be asked to be nation-builders or the world's policemen. And they should serve in wars authorized and called for by the United States Congress, not the United Nations.
At the moment, there are uprisings taking place across the Middle East. The problem with sending U.S. military to help rebels in Libya or anywhere else is that we are taking sides in a conflict and on behalf of a people whom we know nothing about.
When, or if, there is regime change in Libya, what kind of leadership, exactly, will replace Gadhafi? Who are the Libyan rebels exactly? The Daily Telegraph newspaper in London reported over the weekend that some Libyan rebel leaders now claim they have members of al-Qaida within their ranks and are glad to have them. Why do we have American soldiers, our best and bravest, helping people in Libya who may be the very same people we ask our military to fight in Afghanistan and Iraq?
Intervening in a civil war in a tribal society in which our government admits we have no vital interests to help people we do not know, simply does not make any sense. Libyan society is complicated, and we simply do not know enough about the potential outcomes or leaders to know if this will end up in the interests of the United States, or if we are in fact helping to install a radical Islamic government in the place of a secular dictatorship.
Of even more lasting concern is how our troops were committed to this battle by President Obama.
The Founding Fathers understood the seriousness of war and thus included in our Constitution a provision stating that only Congress can declare war. The decision to wage war should not be taken cavalierly. As Madison wrote:
"The Constitution supposes what the history of all Governments demonstrates, that the executive is the branch of power most interested in war and most prone to it. It has accordingly with studied care vested the question of war in the Legislature."
If President Obama had consulted Congress, as our Constitution requires him to do, perhaps we could have debated these questions before hastily involving ourselves in yet another Middle Eastern conflict.
The Constitution doesn't say the president can wage war after he talks to a handful of Congressional leaders.
The Constitution says Congress - all of Congress - is responsible for declaring war.
While the President is the commander of our armed forces, he is not a king. He may involve those forces in military conflict only when authorized by Congress or in response to an imminent threat. Neither was the case here.
We are already in two wars that we are not paying for. We are waging war across the Middle East on a credit card, one whose limit is rapidly approaching. And this is just wrong.
We already borrow money from countries like China to pay for our wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and it would be interesting to know how many Americans believe we should continue borrowing money and saddling future generations with debt to pay for our current actions in Libya.
The subtext to the President's speech concerning Libya tonight was "What if we had done nothing?" But a better question might be, What if helping Libya's interest actually hurts America's interests? What if we are sending our military to places where we might actually be helping the same terrorists we fight in other countries or potential future terrorists?
It's time that we re-examine these policies by once again consulting the Constitution on such matters and the common-sense principles that made this country great. We can no longer afford to spend what we don't have. And we can't afford to address every other nation's problems before we can address our own.
Over the coming days and weeks, Congress will force President Obama to confront these questions. Our brave young men and women have answered the call of duty time and time again over the past decade. Our soldiers deserve, at the very least, that before we send them into a third war that Congress - the People's House - deliberate, debate, and decide whether this war is in our vital national interests.
We will gather information, ask questions, and deliver our best advice about whether we, as the people's representatives, believe we should be at war. Whatever the outcome, we stand square behind our troops, and seek that their mission be clear and true.
Thank you for listening tonight, and God bless the United States of America.
ComputersaysNo
Mar 21, 02:18 PM
Last year a girl from the UK (if i remember correctly) wrote a letter to Jack Sparrow that she would love to meet him as she wanted him to lead a mutiny against her teachers.
...and so he did
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHiB0z2ulf8
...and so he did
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHiB0z2ulf8
CavemanUK
Aug 8, 04:00 AM
anyone else notice that on the leopard server sneak preview video on apples website, at the end of the intro, she guy shows a widget that doesnt look like its running in a background layer
faroZ06
May 4, 11:10 PM
What? Blu Ray failed? When?:rolleyes:
Are you kidding? Netflix destroyed it with streaming. Disney and Sony aren't even advertising for it anymore. The Blu Ray players are being sold dirt cheap at clearance sales because it's a dying/dead format. I haven't heard a word about it on TV ads to further seal the deal.
And I never liked it anyway, the 25 GB disc wasn't filled all the way because of the stupidly lossy compression, and it was expensive. We unplugged our Blu Ray player and replaced it with a TiVo box with Netflix streaming, which happens to be a lot cheaper than Blu Ray and much easier.
And Apple never used it :)
Are you kidding? Netflix destroyed it with streaming. Disney and Sony aren't even advertising for it anymore. The Blu Ray players are being sold dirt cheap at clearance sales because it's a dying/dead format. I haven't heard a word about it on TV ads to further seal the deal.
And I never liked it anyway, the 25 GB disc wasn't filled all the way because of the stupidly lossy compression, and it was expensive. We unplugged our Blu Ray player and replaced it with a TiVo box with Netflix streaming, which happens to be a lot cheaper than Blu Ray and much easier.
And Apple never used it :)
Moyank24
Nov 23, 04:33 PM
The Beatles: Four guys who needed each other, because individually they were musical infants.
No, thanks.
I'm not going to pretend to be a huge fan, or even a fan. They were before my time, but I think that's a bit of a reach.
I mean, Imagine...not exactly a nursery rhyme.
No, thanks.
I'm not going to pretend to be a huge fan, or even a fan. They were before my time, but I think that's a bit of a reach.
I mean, Imagine...not exactly a nursery rhyme.
sierra oscar
Aug 24, 12:22 PM
The BBC link below - seems to suggest it's all batteries including the latest portables.... however it could be a reporter just not knowing the difference between a PB/iBook and MBP etc
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/5283424.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/5283424.stm
Konfabulation
Oct 15, 04:42 PM
Bear in mind, Jobs is making fun of wireless capacities today. Apple probably waited for the right time to release the "video" iPod (IMHO they could've waited for at least 640x480), so it's not as bad as you describe it.
There are other wireless capacities that wuld be much more useful, for example, wirless bluetooth headphones. (Like logitech makes, but without the external transmitter)
There are other wireless capacities that wuld be much more useful, for example, wirless bluetooth headphones. (Like logitech makes, but without the external transmitter)
dale223223
May 3, 12:49 PM
If you can't pay for medical care then you should just suffer and die as well.
F ************ oxygen thieves. Survival of the fittest doesn't include the weak & poor.
Hitler knew it best.
Seriously... you all keep doing what you are doing... modern civilization will fall either way. We've been thieving from mother earth pretty heavily over the past 150 years so we'll get our's collectively as a species soon... no need to feel left out. In the meantime... I'll be keeping my $1500. Thanks.
F ************ oxygen thieves. Survival of the fittest doesn't include the weak & poor.
Hitler knew it best.
Seriously... you all keep doing what you are doing... modern civilization will fall either way. We've been thieving from mother earth pretty heavily over the past 150 years so we'll get our's collectively as a species soon... no need to feel left out. In the meantime... I'll be keeping my $1500. Thanks.
Keleko
Mar 5, 04:11 PM
Miserable weather here today, with heavy rain when it should be snowing :(
Cardinals in my backyard are rain soaked.
http://www.robertgravel.ca/Animals/Oiseaux/MG6964/1206550494_eTRxH-XL.jpg
This... this... ... niiiiiiiice...
Cardinals in my backyard are rain soaked.
http://www.robertgravel.ca/Animals/Oiseaux/MG6964/1206550494_eTRxH-XL.jpg
This... this... ... niiiiiiiice...
chaosbunny
Apr 12, 12:39 PM
All this moral discussion about stealing a 1500,- bucks suite of software is pretty ridiculous if you put it into a relation to the billions of dollars/euros stolen from our tax money by the private central banks.
If a corporation steals billions that's ok, but if someone pirates a single piece of software that's theft.
The same rules should apply to everyone.
Btw, I have only legit software on my computer.
If a corporation steals billions that's ok, but if someone pirates a single piece of software that's theft.
The same rules should apply to everyone.
Btw, I have only legit software on my computer.
farleysmaster
Mar 18, 04:54 PM
As I eagerly await delivery of my first iPad, I know that I want an iPod that will only play music. When I am exercising, I don't want to receive phone calls or emails, I just want music, and I want a device that will hold all of my 12,145 songs, with room to grow.
I don't needs apps, I don't want communication...I just want music.
Airplane mode?
I don't needs apps, I don't want communication...I just want music.
Airplane mode?
G5isAlive
Mar 20, 08:23 AM
Old timer here, I still have a first gen iPod. The kind with a mechanical jog wheel...
What you're all forgetting is that, before the iPod, MP3 players were either the size of a Diskman (remember those), or only held 16 songs. The iPod was entering a market that didn't exist, and it was also the first iProduct Apple Computer Inc released. Nobody expected it, nobody cared about it.
You still see the same attitude on these boards, when someone says "I don't care about the iPad 2, I just want my Core i7 MBP!" There's no difference, except now we've seen that iProducts do sell, and don't laugh them off so easily...
You can't tell me you wouldn't laugh and make the same sort of comments if Apple released a clothing line. ;)
if the clothesline held 5000 pieces of clothes, put them up for me, dried them quickly, and then folded them in baskets? I wouldn't laugh.
Your point about hindsight is well taken but some of us didn't pay attention to the nay sayers then, and still don't. I bought gen 1 iPod as well, and loved it. And the point those old comments make clear, as more than one person pointed out, people will always naysay the new... and still do today. Except today they go to extremes to find flaws as well and insist 'fail'
Bah
What you're all forgetting is that, before the iPod, MP3 players were either the size of a Diskman (remember those), or only held 16 songs. The iPod was entering a market that didn't exist, and it was also the first iProduct Apple Computer Inc released. Nobody expected it, nobody cared about it.
You still see the same attitude on these boards, when someone says "I don't care about the iPad 2, I just want my Core i7 MBP!" There's no difference, except now we've seen that iProducts do sell, and don't laugh them off so easily...
You can't tell me you wouldn't laugh and make the same sort of comments if Apple released a clothing line. ;)
if the clothesline held 5000 pieces of clothes, put them up for me, dried them quickly, and then folded them in baskets? I wouldn't laugh.
Your point about hindsight is well taken but some of us didn't pay attention to the nay sayers then, and still don't. I bought gen 1 iPod as well, and loved it. And the point those old comments make clear, as more than one person pointed out, people will always naysay the new... and still do today. Except today they go to extremes to find flaws as well and insist 'fail'
Bah
darrens
Jul 24, 01:06 AM
I'm not sure about novels but I would love to be able to read articles from Time, Wired, New Yorker et cetera on my iPod. In the past I've copied them from the web and transferred them into a 'note' file for viewing on my iPod. However I'd love to be able to download them from iTunes like a podcast. 99 cents wouldn't be un-reasonable if it's a well written article and it's advertisement free.
I think this would be great - I already read news articles on my 3G phone, and the iPod screen is bigger than that. Novels? No thanks.
Syncing today's news to my iPod in the morning to read on the way to work sounds great. No need for pesky slow download from a 3G network, or fiddly applescripts to download a website to notes on the iPod (sure someone would suggest it - sounds pretty awful to me!).
I think this would be great - I already read news articles on my 3G phone, and the iPod screen is bigger than that. Novels? No thanks.
Syncing today's news to my iPod in the morning to read on the way to work sounds great. No need for pesky slow download from a 3G network, or fiddly applescripts to download a website to notes on the iPod (sure someone would suggest it - sounds pretty awful to me!).
emotion
Jan 11, 05:25 PM
..hmm... as many of you know .mac has really been struggling in the past few months.
Prediction:
Steve will announce an all new .mac service, with web based applications reserved solely for .mac members. Also a new feature will be the ability to store videos on your .mac which can be streamed to your iphone and AppleTV 2.
j.
I like the sound of that. I'd love apple to do something progressive with .mac.
Prediction:
Steve will announce an all new .mac service, with web based applications reserved solely for .mac members. Also a new feature will be the ability to store videos on your .mac which can be streamed to your iphone and AppleTV 2.
j.
I like the sound of that. I'd love apple to do something progressive with .mac.
Roessnakhan
Mar 29, 10:03 AM
2)localized social awareness: discover what music people around you are listening to/what sites they're surfing on, etc (opt-in), would be a nice leap in the social network area (where Apple is a bit stagnating)
I can't see many people opting into that, at least the latter part.
I can't see many people opting into that, at least the latter part.
kntgsp
Apr 2, 10:03 AM
So why not fit the Proven iPhone4 camers in the iPad then?
The cost had been ramped down due to the camera being out virtually a year, so it's all done and dusted and just needed fitting.
Price wise about $5 dollars more.
I can't see any real reason to hold it back apart from a deliberate ploy to fit something bad to give people a strong reason to upgrade to iPad3.
Unless there are negatives in doing so, Price, Weight etc? Why deliberately fit something bad?
The negatives in doing so are Steve Jobs' and Johnny Ive's egos.
Stuffing the Iphone4 camera into the Ipad2 would have required them to increase the overall depth of the unit to accommodate it. Then again with the laughably piss poor camera app implementation on the Ipad it's a wonder anyone wants to take photo stills with it at all. Hold it lengthwise (which seems to be the natural position that everyone tries to hold it in every review, and should be the natural position since it's widescreen) and the UI rotates to the bottom, meaning there's no way to touch the "capture" button without letting go of it with one hand.
The cost had been ramped down due to the camera being out virtually a year, so it's all done and dusted and just needed fitting.
Price wise about $5 dollars more.
I can't see any real reason to hold it back apart from a deliberate ploy to fit something bad to give people a strong reason to upgrade to iPad3.
Unless there are negatives in doing so, Price, Weight etc? Why deliberately fit something bad?
The negatives in doing so are Steve Jobs' and Johnny Ive's egos.
Stuffing the Iphone4 camera into the Ipad2 would have required them to increase the overall depth of the unit to accommodate it. Then again with the laughably piss poor camera app implementation on the Ipad it's a wonder anyone wants to take photo stills with it at all. Hold it lengthwise (which seems to be the natural position that everyone tries to hold it in every review, and should be the natural position since it's widescreen) and the UI rotates to the bottom, meaning there's no way to touch the "capture" button without letting go of it with one hand.
iSMH
Nov 6, 10:51 PM
...finally...
Apple has dropped the ball here. Now that most laptops ship with the same chips, Apple can't claim the "Mhz Myth" or anything like that. They will have to keep up to speed, no pun intended.
Apple has dropped the ball here. Now that most laptops ship with the same chips, Apple can't claim the "Mhz Myth" or anything like that. They will have to keep up to speed, no pun intended.