No USB ports on Ipad!
in [Mac Systems]
|
From: chrisv on 24 Mar 2010 09:17 nospam wrote: > Peter K�hlmann wrote: > >> Thats fine. Please list the makes of cameras which will connect to the >> iPad via WiFi > >any camera with an eye-fi card, any nikon or canon dslr with a wifi >attachment, and there are some compact digicams with wifi too, with >more coming in the future. A very few exception-to-the-rule products. God forbid they simply add an inexpensive USB interface, which would allow the connection of an order-of-magnitude more devices... Idiot.
From: chrisv on 24 Mar 2010 09:21 nospam wrote: >In article <lv9qn.6898$Ek4.1729(a)newsfe24.iad>, Mocassin joe ><joemocasanto(a)aol.com> wrote: > >> But you didn't answer my question; what if the built-in space is exceeded? > >what if the external storage is exceeded? there's a limit to >everything. Removable storage devices are *not* generally used to "add" storage, you clueless fscking idiot. That's *not* what people use them for.
From: chrisv on 24 Mar 2010 09:25 nospam wrote: >windows phone 7 can only run one app at a time too, but of course, you >don't hear anyone bitching, do you. I know of no such device, and the current topic of discussion is the iPad. >bunch of hypocrites. Nope. You are lying again, fanboi. If anyone else produces an iPad-like device, with similar limitations, it will receive the *exact* same criticisms. Why do you feel that you have to lie to win your arguments, fanboi?
From: Peter Köhlmann on 24 Mar 2010 09:46 chrisv wrote: > nospam wrote: > >>windows phone 7 can only run one app at a time too, but of course, you >>don't hear anyone bitching, do you. > > I know of no such device, Because there isn't any. The current win-mobile devices all run win-mobile 6. And *that* can multitask > and the current topic of discussion is the iPad. Which can't multitask, except the apple supplied services. All third party apps run singletask, just like the iPhone does >>bunch of hypocrites. > > Nope. You are lying again, fanboi. If anyone else produces an > iPad-like device, with similar limitations, it will receive the > *exact* same criticisms. Exactly. Either the iPad is simply a vastly overpriced eBook reader. Then it is OK to have the limitations it has. Or it is designed to be more than that. Then there is *no* excuse, however contrieved, for building such a highpriced device with such extremely constraining limits > Why do you feel that you have to lie to win your arguments, fanboi? Because he feels his cargo cult threatened -- Only two things are infinite, the Universe and Stupidity. And I'm not quite sure about the former. - Albert Einstein
From: chrisv on 24 Mar 2010 09:59
chrisv wrote: >nospam wrote: >> >>bunch of hypocrites. > >Nope. You are lying again, fanboi. If anyone else produces an >iPad-like device, with similar limitations, it will receive the >*exact* same criticisms. And no, the Kindle is *not* an iPad-like device. It's designed to be only an e-reader, not a multi-function device like the iPad. |