No USB ports on Ipad!
in [Mac Systems]
|
From: nospam on 23 Mar 2010 14:56 In article <hob2k7$t4h$02$2(a)news.t-online.com>, Peter K�hlmann <peter-koehlmann(a)t-online.de> wrote: > Amazon does not attribute all kinds of capabilities to its machine. neither does apple. > It is a eBook reader. And for that task, it is *better* than the iPad. except when the books have colour in them, which many do. or when ambient light is low. or when you want higher contrast than the kindle screen, for those with vision that's not perfect. but other than that. > Too bad that the iPad isn't doing anything particularly well nonsense.
From: Rex Ballard on 23 Mar 2010 15:10 On Mar 20, 6:16 pm, Lloyd Parsons <lloydpars...(a)mac.com> wrote: > In article <ctKdnW0vQLhr3jjWnZ2dnUVZ_h6jn...(a)bresnan.com>, > GreyCloud <m...(a)cumulus.com> wrote: > > Lloyd Parsons wrote: > > > In article <ScSdna2FdZZouDjWnZ2dnUVZ_j-dn...(a)supernews.com>, > > > Rick <n...(a)mail.invalid> wrote: > > >> On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 12:05:52 -0700, KDT wrote: > > >> ... and the return rates are a non-issue ... > > >> <http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS5214623279.html> > > > I'd have to agree. I have Ubuntu Netbook Remix on my Netbook and it is > > > quite good. If it had Netflix capability I would never run W7 on it > > > again. Have you looked at any of the Movie vending services designed for Linux? There are several services that only require an MPEG4 player (commercial software, but can often be downloaded from the service provider). Ironically, there are several Linux powered MPEG4 player devices on the market already. > > win7 must be pretty bad. What does Netflix need in order for it to run > > on Ubuntu? NetFlix is just one vendor http://www.mplayerhq.hu/design7/news.html http://www.yolinux.com/TUTORIALS/LinuxTutorialVideo.html http://linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2001/09/06/crossover_partone.html http://www.governmentsecurity.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=2514 The specific NetFlix question is deliberately loaded and biased. NetFlix made a deal to use Microsoft's technology exclusively. Without SilverLight, you can't play it. http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS9198444724.html BlockBuster uses a Linux based player for their video on demand. http://openboxeebox.com/new-blockbuster-vod-box-runs-linux/ Flash can play movies from several services In case Flash didn't come with your distribution. http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/alternates/ > You need Silverlight and drm. The Moonlight project is behind one > version level with the current Silverlight, and doesn't do the DRM. > There is ongoing work, but at the moment the luck isn't working well. > And no, W7 isn't so bad, in fact it is the best MS has done. I supposed it depends on your definition and criteria of "Best". Windows 2000 was much more efficient, gave outstanding performance for the resources consumed, and could run in as little as 64 Meg of RAM and use as much as 3 Gigabytes. Windows 2000 server could use 8 Gigabytes. Windows 7 consumes absurd amounts of resources, and wastes most of that on nonproductive eye-candy designed to entertain you so that you won't be as annoyed by the absurdly slow disk I/O. I went to the MarketPro show in Meadowlands New Jersey this week-end. The hot seller wasn't Windows 7, it was Windows XP professional. It seems that many people are not that happy with Windows 7 either. This may be a boon for Microsoft, since they will be able to collect revenue for the OEM version AND the Windows XP "Upgrade". > But online, windows is still windows and all the malware writers love to flock to it. Windows, even Windows 7 has some very well-known back doors that Microsoft insists on keeping open and unlocked - so they can audit for piracy and see where competitive threats are coming from and spot emerging markets and kill them before they get too entrenched. Windows 7 does seem to have made several good improvements. They seem to have cleaned up their garbage collection so that it doesn't stop multi-media or 3D animation in sudden "pauses". It's also much faster in games than Vista, and much more reliable than Vista. Unfortunately, it still doesn't compare to a Mac as shown by the actual profits and revenues of Apple compared to the PC divisions of Windows-only PC manufacturers. People are still willing to spend $1800 for a Mac Notebook but they are mostly buying Windows 7 laptops for around $450. Given the total costs of parts, assembly, inventory, shipping, and retailer costs, it looks like Windows 7 will be another money loser for Retailers and OEMs alike. Has anybody played with the Windows 7 hypervisor to see if you could run Linux and Windows concurrently using a dual-partition configuration? Rex Ballard http://www.open4success.com
From: Mocassin joe on 23 Mar 2010 15:25 "nospam" <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote in message news:230320101144151031%nospam(a)nospam.invalid... > In article <0f2iq5lar13nser90n13971r06r7h9clha(a)4ax.com>, chrisv > <chrisv(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: > >> Idiot. Have you no idea of the usefulness of removable storage? You >> are utterly without a clue. > > if the built-in space is never filled, why do you need more? What if it is though? What makes you even think it will never be filled?
From: Mocassin joe on 23 Mar 2010 15:30 "chrisv" <chrisv(a)nospam.invalid> wrote in message news:4d1iq55r1l3qpv8kncqvv22tgeiuipo3mp(a)4ax.com... > nospam wrote: > >>In article <kiehq5hskdftph79hpq0odta61cd4uvt1l(a)4ax.com>, chrisv >><chrisv(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: >> >>> >> Yet the sell an overpriced keyboard accessory. >>> > >>> >it's only overpriced if nobody buys it. >>> >>> That is *not* the definition of "overpriced" you fscking *idiot". >> >>take an economics class sometime. > > I have, idiot. Take your own advice. > >>> You *seriously* think that if a product sells unit one, that it's not >>> "overpriced"? >> >>the ipad is not a single unit sale. > > Idiot. At issue was the keyboard, and your idiotic claim that "it's > only overpriced if nobody buys it". > >>> You don't think people ever cough-up the money for >>> "overpriced" products, especially when the available products that >>> meet their needs are artificially restricted? >> >>learn what supply and demand is, > > I know better than you do, idiot. > >>and that different people have different needs. > > Evasion of my point noted. > >>> God damn,you are stupid. "Every single user will want to use this" is >>> *not* the criteria for including a feature. Face it, USB devices are >>> useful and ubiquitous. >> >>that must be why the kindle has usb ports. oh wait, it doesn't. > > The Kindle is merely an e-reader, idiot, not the muli-function device > that the iPad is. Sorry - correction. The iPad doesn't seem to be so multi-function. It lacks just about everything.
From: nospam on 23 Mar 2010 15:32
In article <9B8qn.78117$wr5.47817(a)newsfe22.iad>, Mocassin joe <joemocasanto(a)aol.com> wrote: > > if the built-in space is never filled, why do you need more? > > What if it is though? What makes you even think it will never be filled? because the best selling ipods (nano) are not the largest capacity ipods (classics). in fact, the ipad with the least capacity is as big as the highest capacity ipod nano. also, the top complaints on the ipod touch and iphone are not the lack of a card slot. |