JAT
Apr 20, 10:29 AM
I would like the same specs but 2x batt life.
Get a battery pack to charge it at some point. The iPhone 4 is pretty high up on the scale of battery life among smartphones. I don't think it's going to increase because we all seem to be happy with this general battery life area.
They can keep the form factor, just give us a bigger screen. Stretch it to the bezel.
That thing is dying for a 4", hell even a 3.7" screen.
No. Don't stretch to the bezel, unless the bezel is getting bigger, which is the same bloody thing as making a bigger phone. I don't want the screen at the edge of the phone, and nobody makes this, for good reason. You have to be able to hold onto something on the phone. Really.
This update is not good enough, apple. Do more.
8 megapixel camera with 1080P recording.
1080p recording has nothing to do with the camera. It is 2592x1936 on the iPhone 4, so 1080 is possible.
You're a ****ing idiot. I'm not acting as if I were entitled to anything, I'm just pointing out that a large part of the world doesn't give a crap about 2-year contracts. My upgrade cycle for iPhones is every 12 months, and the same goes for most people I know.
So, we aren't allowed to talk about contracts? On the internet? Because you might come by and read about it? Yes, that is what "entitlement" is, get over yourself and skip over the posts that don't apply to you. Christ, esp when it is a positive for you.
Get a battery pack to charge it at some point. The iPhone 4 is pretty high up on the scale of battery life among smartphones. I don't think it's going to increase because we all seem to be happy with this general battery life area.
They can keep the form factor, just give us a bigger screen. Stretch it to the bezel.
That thing is dying for a 4", hell even a 3.7" screen.
No. Don't stretch to the bezel, unless the bezel is getting bigger, which is the same bloody thing as making a bigger phone. I don't want the screen at the edge of the phone, and nobody makes this, for good reason. You have to be able to hold onto something on the phone. Really.
This update is not good enough, apple. Do more.
8 megapixel camera with 1080P recording.
1080p recording has nothing to do with the camera. It is 2592x1936 on the iPhone 4, so 1080 is possible.
You're a ****ing idiot. I'm not acting as if I were entitled to anything, I'm just pointing out that a large part of the world doesn't give a crap about 2-year contracts. My upgrade cycle for iPhones is every 12 months, and the same goes for most people I know.
So, we aren't allowed to talk about contracts? On the internet? Because you might come by and read about it? Yes, that is what "entitlement" is, get over yourself and skip over the posts that don't apply to you. Christ, esp when it is a positive for you.
SandynJosh
Apr 23, 09:41 PM
I will be honest and truthful and say for a mobile device on batteries, I'm very impressed as what the iPhone and iPad can do gaming wise.
However I will also state, and I think we all should be honest, that at the moment, Apple are bringing the games DOWN to what their hardware can do, as opposed to making Hardware so great that gaming is being pushed UP to take advantage of Apples industry leading performance.
In your first paragraph you talk about Apple's mobile products, which is where Apple will be putting most of their effort in the foreseeable future. To have successful portable products, having a long time between charges is highly important. The old brute force methods of throwing power and RAM at the gaming performance problem can not be part of the design mindset. Game designers know this and are becoming much better at coding for portable games, but they are not quite there yet. Meanwhile Apple is working to find ways to build in performance and not increase power draw.
THIS is the future as Apple sees it, and their acceptance in the broad general market shows that they are on the right track.
When Apple release GTX580 beating desktops, and/or Xbox360 / PS3 beating gaming devices, I will happily bow down to them being the greatest in graphics.
NOW you have switched to talking about desktop and console gaming computers. THIS is a whole different area. First off, it's a tiny segment of the whole computer market. It's big, but not nearly as huge as what Apple is aiming for with their products.
In a nutshell, Apple's strategy is to capture the mobile device market as completely as they can. They are being highly successful at that strategy from iPods to iPhones, to iPads, to Laptops.
Meanwhile they are growing rapidly in the iMac desktop and tower market due primarily to the halo effect of their success in the portable arena. They are doing this even while the desktop and tower markets are shrinking overall. Can you see why Apple will not be putting a lot of effort into this segment?
But right now, they are trailing by miles due to years of neglect as they just did not have products that could compete, and their one semi attempt at a console got nowhere.
Note: I would LOVE LOVE LOVE Apple to turn this around.
You are right. Apple did not have products that could compete in the desktop and console markets. This was primarily due to game developers not interested in writing games for Intel chips and PowerPC chips. Since the installed base for Intel-based computers was more then a order-of-magnitude larger than the installed base of Macs. Apple was never going to enjoy being a suitable gaming platform until they switched to Intel CPUs.
Once Apple made the switch, they have come a long way towards being an acceptable gaming computer, but they have no desire or plans to go after the high end of this market... it's just not that profitable or large. Remember AlienWare? They had the best gaming computer, IMO, and they had to sell themselves to another company to stay alive.
As for the console market, it's crowded with established competitors and will likely see one squeezed out. Not the kind of market that Apple or anyone else should want to jump into.
They need to ditch the "Laptops on a Stand" design of the iMac for starters, but I feel they never will as they have decided they won't compete and they cannot compete in this sector of the market.
I addressed this above. As for the "Laptops on a Stand" design, it's such a bad design that the largest computer company, HP, as well as others, have copied it.
Console wise, I'm not sure they could compete against a 360 or a PS3. Let's say Apple against a PS4 or a Xbox720
Nope, can't see that happening either.
I address this above. Apple doesn't want to be in this arena. It's small and the competition is deadly.
The low power/trimmed down, casual gamers games, seems to be the only area they are going for.
Once more you are correct. There are many many times more gamers that want a short diversion while they have a few minutes away from home, then those who want to spend thousands on an immersive game experience that requires a larger block of time. "Portability with games optional" trumps "wired to the wall and game-focused" all the way to the bank.
But Again, I would LOVE Apple to turn this around and take high end graphics seriously in their future products.
The high-end gamer is not on Apple's radar at the moment and likely never will be unless a way is found to address hi-end graphics on a portable device without impacting battery life.
I know you'd like Apple to chase this rainbow, but they won't, there's no pot of gold at the end.
However I will also state, and I think we all should be honest, that at the moment, Apple are bringing the games DOWN to what their hardware can do, as opposed to making Hardware so great that gaming is being pushed UP to take advantage of Apples industry leading performance.
In your first paragraph you talk about Apple's mobile products, which is where Apple will be putting most of their effort in the foreseeable future. To have successful portable products, having a long time between charges is highly important. The old brute force methods of throwing power and RAM at the gaming performance problem can not be part of the design mindset. Game designers know this and are becoming much better at coding for portable games, but they are not quite there yet. Meanwhile Apple is working to find ways to build in performance and not increase power draw.
THIS is the future as Apple sees it, and their acceptance in the broad general market shows that they are on the right track.
When Apple release GTX580 beating desktops, and/or Xbox360 / PS3 beating gaming devices, I will happily bow down to them being the greatest in graphics.
NOW you have switched to talking about desktop and console gaming computers. THIS is a whole different area. First off, it's a tiny segment of the whole computer market. It's big, but not nearly as huge as what Apple is aiming for with their products.
In a nutshell, Apple's strategy is to capture the mobile device market as completely as they can. They are being highly successful at that strategy from iPods to iPhones, to iPads, to Laptops.
Meanwhile they are growing rapidly in the iMac desktop and tower market due primarily to the halo effect of their success in the portable arena. They are doing this even while the desktop and tower markets are shrinking overall. Can you see why Apple will not be putting a lot of effort into this segment?
But right now, they are trailing by miles due to years of neglect as they just did not have products that could compete, and their one semi attempt at a console got nowhere.
Note: I would LOVE LOVE LOVE Apple to turn this around.
You are right. Apple did not have products that could compete in the desktop and console markets. This was primarily due to game developers not interested in writing games for Intel chips and PowerPC chips. Since the installed base for Intel-based computers was more then a order-of-magnitude larger than the installed base of Macs. Apple was never going to enjoy being a suitable gaming platform until they switched to Intel CPUs.
Once Apple made the switch, they have come a long way towards being an acceptable gaming computer, but they have no desire or plans to go after the high end of this market... it's just not that profitable or large. Remember AlienWare? They had the best gaming computer, IMO, and they had to sell themselves to another company to stay alive.
As for the console market, it's crowded with established competitors and will likely see one squeezed out. Not the kind of market that Apple or anyone else should want to jump into.
They need to ditch the "Laptops on a Stand" design of the iMac for starters, but I feel they never will as they have decided they won't compete and they cannot compete in this sector of the market.
I addressed this above. As for the "Laptops on a Stand" design, it's such a bad design that the largest computer company, HP, as well as others, have copied it.
Console wise, I'm not sure they could compete against a 360 or a PS3. Let's say Apple against a PS4 or a Xbox720
Nope, can't see that happening either.
I address this above. Apple doesn't want to be in this arena. It's small and the competition is deadly.
The low power/trimmed down, casual gamers games, seems to be the only area they are going for.
Once more you are correct. There are many many times more gamers that want a short diversion while they have a few minutes away from home, then those who want to spend thousands on an immersive game experience that requires a larger block of time. "Portability with games optional" trumps "wired to the wall and game-focused" all the way to the bank.
But Again, I would LOVE Apple to turn this around and take high end graphics seriously in their future products.
The high-end gamer is not on Apple's radar at the moment and likely never will be unless a way is found to address hi-end graphics on a portable device without impacting battery life.
I know you'd like Apple to chase this rainbow, but they won't, there's no pot of gold at the end.
fastlane1588
Aug 12, 11:08 AM
i think a new mpb w/Black Anodized Aluminum and an easy HD swap out capability would be awsome!
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 11:18 PM
thats wat im talking abooot, but i hope apple cleans up the interface a bit... hehe
Ok, how about this:
http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/720/shoephonezt7.png
Ok, how about this:
http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/720/shoephonezt7.png
iphone3gs16gb
Mar 26, 09:34 PM
Don't listen to this crap...
Multimedia
Aug 3, 07:50 PM
I see that you misunderstood the context of the 2.33Ghz but you are still incorrect. You can buy a 2.33Ghz Yonah today, its called the T2700. I know there are not any T2700's in a MBP but Apple could have done so if they wanted.
Now, back to your 1.67X Battery life…
Straight from a "Merom vs. Yonah" AnandTech article (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2808&p=15) released earlier today
OK Thank you. I was WRONG. INTEL Lied to us. Sorry. :confused: My first expectation is to see the isight in the MacBook Pros improved 1.3MP/2.0MP resolutions.
Mac Pro in some form or another.
but to see Multimedia & Teblah goto war after the keynote finishes?
... Priceless!;) :D :pI dont' think either one of us are feeling angry toward one another are we? I like Treblah. Why would anyone here think we want to fight? :confused:
Now, back to your 1.67X Battery life…
Straight from a "Merom vs. Yonah" AnandTech article (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2808&p=15) released earlier today
OK Thank you. I was WRONG. INTEL Lied to us. Sorry. :confused: My first expectation is to see the isight in the MacBook Pros improved 1.3MP/2.0MP resolutions.
Mac Pro in some form or another.
but to see Multimedia & Teblah goto war after the keynote finishes?
... Priceless!;) :D :pI dont' think either one of us are feeling angry toward one another are we? I like Treblah. Why would anyone here think we want to fight? :confused:
BC2009
Mar 28, 11:13 AM
The iPhone 4 is already dated relative to other phones on the market. To have a phone on the market for 18 months without an update is insane.
You're missing something here.... The iPhone actually gets updates over its lifespan rather than promises of updates followed up by the requirement to buy a new phone in order to install the latest version of an open Android operating system on a closed manufacturer's phone. All-to-frequent updates make buyers feel like they have been tricked, especially when they cannot upgrade their phone to do the same things the new phones are doing because the manufacturer prevents it.
Not to mention that most folks have 2 year contracts and don't like to pay the penalty to upgrade early. The notion that 15 months between upgrades (not 18 months -- if you are counting June 2010 to September 2011) is not bad at all -- especially to the masses who are not early adopters. The iPhone 4 is still holding its own against the competition and its better than it was when it released because of software upgrades. It still does many things better than phones that have released since (like take better photos). Heck, I am still using my iPhone 3GS and I still love it because it gets new features every few months and has even improved on performance.
Do I think a dual-core 1Gz iPhone with 1GB of RAM would stack up better statistically against the competition? Yes. Do I think that phone will do more things and be faster? Yes. Do I think 3 months will matter all that much in the long run? No. If it means some vast improvements are coming (including LTE) -- then I am willing to wait 3 months.
You're missing something here.... The iPhone actually gets updates over its lifespan rather than promises of updates followed up by the requirement to buy a new phone in order to install the latest version of an open Android operating system on a closed manufacturer's phone. All-to-frequent updates make buyers feel like they have been tricked, especially when they cannot upgrade their phone to do the same things the new phones are doing because the manufacturer prevents it.
Not to mention that most folks have 2 year contracts and don't like to pay the penalty to upgrade early. The notion that 15 months between upgrades (not 18 months -- if you are counting June 2010 to September 2011) is not bad at all -- especially to the masses who are not early adopters. The iPhone 4 is still holding its own against the competition and its better than it was when it released because of software upgrades. It still does many things better than phones that have released since (like take better photos). Heck, I am still using my iPhone 3GS and I still love it because it gets new features every few months and has even improved on performance.
Do I think a dual-core 1Gz iPhone with 1GB of RAM would stack up better statistically against the competition? Yes. Do I think that phone will do more things and be faster? Yes. Do I think 3 months will matter all that much in the long run? No. If it means some vast improvements are coming (including LTE) -- then I am willing to wait 3 months.
ricosuave
May 6, 01:44 AM
Here we go again...
Hint: Intel is your winner, AAPL. Understand that.
Edit: for you young'ins, this a panel of IBM G5 processors. Specifically designed for Apple. The processor partnership was supposed to be groundbreaking.
Soon after, Apple went begging to Intel and, well, what's the processor brand in the Mac you are reading this on?
Funny you should ask, I'm running a dual Core A5 ARM chip on this here iPad.
Additionally, I would love a Mac Mini running Lion Server on a super efficient and low power ARM chip.
Hint: Intel is your winner, AAPL. Understand that.
Edit: for you young'ins, this a panel of IBM G5 processors. Specifically designed for Apple. The processor partnership was supposed to be groundbreaking.
Soon after, Apple went begging to Intel and, well, what's the processor brand in the Mac you are reading this on?
Funny you should ask, I'm running a dual Core A5 ARM chip on this here iPad.
Additionally, I would love a Mac Mini running Lion Server on a super efficient and low power ARM chip.
Diengts
Apr 25, 09:28 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)
Pff I don't get the privacy thing but if I get lost in the woods with my iPhone I want to be found and yes all phones track you.. To a Cretan extent
Pff I don't get the privacy thing but if I get lost in the woods with my iPhone I want to be found and yes all phones track you.. To a Cretan extent
lgutie20
Mar 29, 02:32 PM
Note that MS is dropping the standalone Zune hardware, and moving the Zune interface into Windows Phone 7.
If your phone can do it all, why make standalone music players?
They exist for the real music addicts. I really believe that if there is an iPod that will be the first to disappear it will be the Touch.
If your phone can do it all, why make standalone music players?
They exist for the real music addicts. I really believe that if there is an iPod that will be the first to disappear it will be the Touch.
frankie
Sep 16, 10:10 AM
The 2GHz downgrade is $300 not $75. Where did you get that number? Apple probably pays a lot less for each so this discount seems fair to me. Oops, right, it's -$75 for the smaller HD. Nevertheless -$300 for the slower Xeons is at best HALF of what Apple is saving. For the CPUs I'm quoting from Intel's published wholesale prices, in lots of 1000, which is officially what their major customers pay.
Lots of people assume that Apple is getting a huge discount off that; not a single one of them has professed to inside knowledge of facts. I don't have any connections either, but without direct info on either side I think it's more likely that Apple is paying pretty close to what Intel says they're paying. Even if Apple is somehow getting a 20+% discount, the price difference between 2.0 Xeon and 2.66 is over $300 each, $600 per Mac Pro.
But in any case, I agree it's true that BTO laptops would be harder to manufacture, so it probably isn't worth it for either Apple or the customer.
Lots of people assume that Apple is getting a huge discount off that; not a single one of them has professed to inside knowledge of facts. I don't have any connections either, but without direct info on either side I think it's more likely that Apple is paying pretty close to what Intel says they're paying. Even if Apple is somehow getting a 20+% discount, the price difference between 2.0 Xeon and 2.66 is over $300 each, $600 per Mac Pro.
But in any case, I agree it's true that BTO laptops would be harder to manufacture, so it probably isn't worth it for either Apple or the customer.
KnightWRX
May 6, 06:52 AM
Google is allready running their data centres on ARM based servers
Citation needed. Especially in light of this 2 month old article :
Intel, Google Doubt ARM and Atom Have Chances in Servers (http://www.cpu-wars.com/2011/03/intel-google-doubt-arm-and-atom-have.html)
Citation needed. Especially in light of this 2 month old article :
Intel, Google Doubt ARM and Atom Have Chances in Servers (http://www.cpu-wars.com/2011/03/intel-google-doubt-arm-and-atom-have.html)
billyjoegibsonx
Apr 20, 04:11 AM
Seems about right :) iPhone 4S (or something similiar) I think it'll be called. Not iPhone 5. I think this will be the name of the 2012 iPhone :)
I was so excited waiting for iPhone 4S (let's just call it that) I sold my iPhone 4, for an Android & found myself wanting my iPhone 4 back :( seemed silly to splash out on cash for a phone that would be updated. My android was doing my head in, & having heard the rumors that the new iPhone wouldn't be out till later than usual, I decided to just pass on iPhone this year :)
I will be keeping an eye on iOS & the iPhone :) I can't wait to see the new iPhone and iOS 5, but iPhone 2012 and iOS 6 is where it is for me :) so excited :D It'll be 2 Major OS updates worth & a whole new design (i hope :D)
I was so excited waiting for iPhone 4S (let's just call it that) I sold my iPhone 4, for an Android & found myself wanting my iPhone 4 back :( seemed silly to splash out on cash for a phone that would be updated. My android was doing my head in, & having heard the rumors that the new iPhone wouldn't be out till later than usual, I decided to just pass on iPhone this year :)
I will be keeping an eye on iOS & the iPhone :) I can't wait to see the new iPhone and iOS 5, but iPhone 2012 and iOS 6 is where it is for me :) so excited :D It'll be 2 Major OS updates worth & a whole new design (i hope :D)
reubs
Mar 27, 02:21 PM
I'm not too concerned with a fall release of iOS 5, but I worry about the idea of it being "cloud based". I want my data with me locally, and I don't want to have to stream it because I don't want to pay data rates for it.
I wonder, though, if it will introduce some kind of cloud-based syncing that means downloading of apps and music and other kinds of media show up instantly on another system logged in to the same account. That would eliminate a need for syncing and would mean that connecting to a computer would only be for purposes of a local back-up. I could handle that.
I'm really hoping, though, that the release of the phone is not pushed back to fall. I'm all prepared to take the iPhone plunge this summer, and I don't want that to get held back at all. I watch my wife with her iPhone, and it kills me that she uses it for only facebook and browsing!
I wonder, though, if it will introduce some kind of cloud-based syncing that means downloading of apps and music and other kinds of media show up instantly on another system logged in to the same account. That would eliminate a need for syncing and would mean that connecting to a computer would only be for purposes of a local back-up. I could handle that.
I'm really hoping, though, that the release of the phone is not pushed back to fall. I'm all prepared to take the iPhone plunge this summer, and I don't want that to get held back at all. I watch my wife with her iPhone, and it kills me that she uses it for only facebook and browsing!
itcheroni
Apr 21, 12:50 AM
I'd love it if you could point out where you addressed this, because as a tax accountant, I'm having a hard time thinking of a time when a realized capital gain isn't income - if you have a realized net gain (ie amount realized is greater than your basis in the capital asset), you certainly have income. Certainly you could reinvest that net gain, but that doesn't mean you don't have income, that just means you realized a gain and reinvested the old basis and the gain (income). You're only taxed on realized gains that are recognized by the code (and you can net against realized losses) - sure, I could have an unrealized capital gain that isn't income, but I wouldn't be taxed on it either. Not that I don't agree with some of your points, but I'd really love the same clarification on this that most other posters have been asking for.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
Marx55
Aug 7, 05:05 PM
Anyone specs about noise level (db) when..?:
- Sleep.
- Idle.
- Low load.
- Medium load.
- High load.
- Maximum load
Thanks.
- Sleep.
- Idle.
- Low load.
- Medium load.
- High load.
- Maximum load
Thanks.
iliketyla
Mar 29, 02:06 PM
Up to another 50% on what they already cost?
Well even though my argument was already refuted by the citizens of other continents on here, in a perfect world the products would cost more yes, but we'd also be making more money with employment here in the U.S.
Unfortunately we don't live in a perfect world, and the U.S. makes products that other countries have no interest in buying due to poor quality.
Well even though my argument was already refuted by the citizens of other continents on here, in a perfect world the products would cost more yes, but we'd also be making more money with employment here in the U.S.
Unfortunately we don't live in a perfect world, and the U.S. makes products that other countries have no interest in buying due to poor quality.
ikir
Apr 20, 04:36 AM
Why do we still call it iPhone 5? Everything points to iPhone 4S.
Indeed, I agree. I hope form factor stay the same as now since I have 4 bumpers, I will gift iPhone and a pink bumper to my girl. iPhone 4 is awesome it doesn't need a big revamp now... Sure more power always the better but I think users (me too) pretend too much nowadays.
Indeed, I agree. I hope form factor stay the same as now since I have 4 bumpers, I will gift iPhone and a pink bumper to my girl. iPhone 4 is awesome it doesn't need a big revamp now... Sure more power always the better but I think users (me too) pretend too much nowadays.
bella92108
Apr 5, 02:22 PM
It's: "Do not buy iPhone. Go with Android." That's how I see it. Companies like Toyota will have no choice but to double their efforts in serving Android users.
They pushed me away, I'm Android on my phone, iPad 2 on my tablet. If I can't jailbreak my iPad 2 in the next week, HELLO ANDROID XOOM :-)
They pushed me away, I'm Android on my phone, iPad 2 on my tablet. If I can't jailbreak my iPad 2 in the next week, HELLO ANDROID XOOM :-)
tuna
Mar 29, 09:51 AM
I still don't get how this is better than Dropbox, hopefully it can compete with Dropbox though to make the service better.
I am up to 7GB I believe of free storage on Dropbox too.
And what's the point of having 5GB of data in the cloud if mobile data plans only allow you to download 2GB?
I am so tired of hearing about this.... Do you think that when somebody makes a game for the Wii, 360 or PS3, that Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony don't make any money from it?
Its a false analogy. Game systems are developed and marketed at a loss (at least for a while) and royalties on game sales help make up for it. This is how it has been historically.
iOS is a computing platform. It is not the status quo for the OS developer to seek royalties from the software that runs on it. And further, iOS hardware is outrageously profitable in itself.
I am up to 7GB I believe of free storage on Dropbox too.
And what's the point of having 5GB of data in the cloud if mobile data plans only allow you to download 2GB?
I am so tired of hearing about this.... Do you think that when somebody makes a game for the Wii, 360 or PS3, that Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony don't make any money from it?
Its a false analogy. Game systems are developed and marketed at a loss (at least for a while) and royalties on game sales help make up for it. This is how it has been historically.
iOS is a computing platform. It is not the status quo for the OS developer to seek royalties from the software that runs on it. And further, iOS hardware is outrageously profitable in itself.
Eidorian
Aug 11, 10:57 AM
Have you seen the size of the heat sink in the Mac Pro? ;)Why yes. :D
wildmac
Aug 7, 09:00 PM
These sound sweet, I want one.
But it's funny how the whole Mac Pro is a killer machine but they still neglect the video cards, seriously a nVidia Geforce 7300GT.
REPEAT AFTER ME: NOT EVERYONE NEEDS A VIDEO CARD WITH 512RAM. NOT EVERYONE IS PLAYING DOOM.
Seriously, a lot of these WORKSTATIONS will never use apps that require more than that video card. Many will be headless. Why put a $350 video card in there?..
It's called CHOICE.
But it's funny how the whole Mac Pro is a killer machine but they still neglect the video cards, seriously a nVidia Geforce 7300GT.
REPEAT AFTER ME: NOT EVERYONE NEEDS A VIDEO CARD WITH 512RAM. NOT EVERYONE IS PLAYING DOOM.
Seriously, a lot of these WORKSTATIONS will never use apps that require more than that video card. Many will be headless. Why put a $350 video card in there?..
It's called CHOICE.
-aggie-
May 4, 07:50 PM
Anon proceed forthwith lest I transmute DP to a small rat.
G4-power
Nov 7, 06:43 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etCqq3-7ixo (in German)
I'm really sorry but I couldn't resist correcting. :D After I was halfway through the video I thought "why the heck don't I understand this if it's supposed to be German?" It was Danish. :D
I'm really sorry but I couldn't resist correcting. :D After I was halfway through the video I thought "why the heck don't I understand this if it's supposed to be German?" It was Danish. :D
No comments:
Post a Comment