Language:
switch to room list switch to menu My folders
Go to page: First ... 63 64 65 66 [67] 68 69 70 71
[#] Tue Aug 02 2016 12:55:21 EDT from Ragnar Danneskjold @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Exactly. Tablets may be able to function as replacement computers, but they aren't computers for the purposes of most discussions.

If we're going that low, even a calculator these days is a "computer".

As for living in on a tablet - I did it recently for a week.

I quickly found scenarios where I missed a real computer. Photo edits, emailed documents and remote access to other systems were all sorely wanting.

But I survived, on a iPad Pro with keyboard and pencil.

That being said, I think that I would have preferred a Microsoft Surface for a lightweight travel system where I still wanted real computer functionality.


[#] Wed Aug 03 2016 05:02:12 EDT from LoanShark @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

There was a discussion about "real computers" but it was skewed by a

confirmation bias attempting to place iOS devices in that category and


Yeah, skewed... by a trollin' ;)

[#] Wed Aug 03 2016 09:41:05 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


There's no point in trying to define a "real computer" because it's an ambiguous term. As I pointed out above, a device becomes a "real computer" when it has enough power to perform the workload *you* need it for.

Is it a "real computer" when it can go online and access a larger host system?
Is it a "real computer" when it has a web browser and javascript stack?
Is it a "real computer" when arbitrary software can be loaded onto it?
Is it a "real computer" when it can crunch exabyte-size data sets?

A phone or tablet meets the first three criteria, but fails the fourth. But so does a Macbook.

[#] Wed Aug 03 2016 12:31:54 EDT from Ragnar Danneskjold @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

How about the fact that you don't need another computer to program it as a standard. You're not developing iOS or Android apps on iOS or Android.

[#] Wed Aug 03 2016 13:24:49 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

By that standard, a Macintosh is not a real computer because you need a Lisa to develop for it.

I hear they may have worked around that limitation but I haven't seen it yet myself.



[#] Wed Aug 03 2016 15:58:05 EDT from Ragnar Danneskjold @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Yes, the original Macintosh was barely a computer in any sense of the word.

[#] Wed Aug 03 2016 22:25:25 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

The original Macintosh wasn't even Apple's best computer at the time. The Apple IIgs blew it away in most regards ... twice the maximum RAM capacity (8 GB), 4096 color graphics, a 16-bit sound synthesizer chip with 32 oscillators, and a bunch of card slots ... and it cost less than half the price of a Mac.
So why did they focus on the Mac, which was sort of an experimental side project at the time? There is some speculation that it was internal politics from The Steve Jobs throwing his weight around during his second tenure at the company.

[#] Wed Aug 03 2016 22:54:59 EDT from zooer @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

It was no Lisa....



[#] Thu Aug 04 2016 01:15:26 EDT from LoanShark @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


//gs was released a few years after the first Mac

[#] Thu Aug 04 2016 16:06:38 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


Yup. The timing was pretty bad. Bottom line is that the //gs was "Woz Apple" while the Mac was "Jobs Apple" ... and it showed.

[#] Thu Sep 08 2016 11:06:40 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

It seems Apple has released a spiffy new set of wireless earphones.  This by itself seems reasonable enough, but to punctuate this release they've removed the headphone jack from the iPhone 7.

WTF?

If you want to plug in a set of wired earphones, you need to use their $9 dongle.  No word yet on how you might fare if you want to charge the phone and listen to audio at the same time.

This isn't innovative.  It's stupid.



[#] Thu Sep 08 2016 11:10:35 EDT from zooer @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Think differently.



[#] Fri Sep 09 2016 09:16:08 EDT from the_mgt @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Yeah! definetly! they also do not offer a cassette or vhs player and I can't use my vast collection of low quality porn stored on 5" disks. they are such a clueless company! 



[#] Fri Sep 09 2016 09:36:10 EDT from Freakdog @ Dog Pound BBS II

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

If you want to plug in a set of wired earphones, you need to use
their $9 dongle.  No word yet on how you might fare if you want to
charge the phone and listen to audio at the same time.

Has NOBODY paid attention to their announcement that the dongle would be included in the box with the phone?

[#] Fri Sep 09 2016 11:31:35 EDT from zooer @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I was listening and what I heard was "Can you charge your phone while listening to music?"



[#] Fri Sep 09 2016 12:00:17 EDT from LoanShark @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


I don't know, can you charge a defibrillator while listening to Eminem?

[#] Sun Sep 11 2016 15:02:14 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Do they also include a splitter dongle so that you can charge the phone and listen with earphones at the same time? The issue here is that they've removed an interface that is NOT by any measure obsolete.

Look ... I have OWNED a phone line this. The HTC G1, which was released in 2008, had a special connector [ http://tinyurl.com/htykob5 ] that could accept either a USB mini or a special headphone adapter. From first hand experience I can tell you it was a royal pain in the ass. They realized it was a mistake and no sensible manufacturer ever did it again.

This isn't innovation on Apple's part, it's snobbery. They're like the restaurant that charges you $50 for half an ounce of food on a plate.

[#] Sun Sep 11 2016 17:43:56 EDT from the_mgt @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Your argument is "2008"? Technology has advanced a bit since that time, BT is ubiquitous.

In the living room we have a Marantz NR-1605 from 2014 which has Wifi, BT and AirPlay. It was the first in the NR series where you didn't have to buy an extra bt adapter for around 100€. It has an USB and a HDMI input on the front, but not a single analog one. (Well, technically, one for the Audyssey setup mic, but that has no other use.)

I own Parrot Zik 1 headphones, which are BT and wired, but i never use the wires. I hate wires on headphones, they introduce noise through friction on my close, they get tangled. BT headphones are a blessing, especially when they have ANC. (Ambient noise cancelation, not african national congress...).

I also have a Philips ShoqBox SB7300 (which sounds like shit but looks cool) with BT and audio jack.

We own a car from 2006 which has an aftermarket radio with bt, because BT wasn't wide spread in 2006. BT was just a bonus, it is one of those crappy chinese double-din multimedia monsters, with dvd playback, gps navigation, running Windows CE.

The inlaws own a Fiat Panda with an ubar-el-cheapo aftermarket radio which has BT. It was so cheap that nobody even noticed it had BT as an extra feature.

We have a JBL speaker in the kitchen witch has BT, a lightning dock and a 3,5mm audio jack. This speakers is awesome, it is loud and rocks. It is no audiophile device, but you can listen to music while the exhaust hood runs at full power.

All of these audio devices were made after 2008, all of them are not "the future", but the present. Instead of blaming Apple for removing something that I can easily live without, I'd rather blame Skoda for manufacturing a car in 2013 which does NOT have a fucking BT connection! It is probably the single most expensive new technological device we bought in the last years and it is incompatible with the state of the art in mobile devices. I love the car, but the missing BT is like a sore wound on your butt, you notice it every time you sit down behind the wheel. So this is the only place where a bt2audiojack adapter would be needed to ease the pain.

For the record, the only two non-bt devices in the house are the iPod classic 5th gen from 2005, belonging to my son and an iPod mini from 2004 attached to the JBL in the kitchen. Both pimped with a CF Card to 64gb storage. I know for certain that there was a BT module available for the mini.



[#] Sun Sep 11 2016 20:33:27 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

My argument is that the 3.5mm stereo jack is not by any means obsolete.  This isn't like removing the floppy disk on the iMac, where everyone had already stopped using them but no one except Apple was brave enough to be the first to remove the drive.  Look around at people listening to music on their phones, and most of them are still using wired earbuds -- or even a full size set of cans.

I believe they've removed a feature that is still widely used and desired, and that this was a bad move.  Some buyers will not care either way; some will select a different phone; some will modify their needs to fit the product.



[#] Sun Sep 11 2016 23:52:03 EDT from wizard of aahz @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Or be like me and have bluetooth cans!!

Go to page: First ... 63 64 65 66 [67] 68 69 70 71