No USB ports on Ipad!
in [Mac Systems]
|
From: nospam on 28 Mar 2010 20:59 In article <419587-aae.ln1(a)spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarnason(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Then you're simply not intelligent enough to bother continuing with. > Sorry, but that's the reality of it. Netbooks *alone* do far more than > the MaxiPad can, and the fact the MaxiPad can perhaps do one or two > things - such as GPS - which a netbook typically can't doesn't change > that. at least you admit the ipad can do things the netbook can't. that's progress (but only marginally). if someone wants to do the things the ipad does well, the ipad will be a better choice. if they want to do the things the netbook does well, then the netbook would be a better choice. why can't you accept that not everyone has the same needs or desires that you do and that different products have different design goals?
From: Kelsey Bjarnason on 28 Mar 2010 20:51 Tim Murray wrote: > Kelsey Bjarnason wrote: >> For those who *do* use them, however... most mobo's still have a >> connector for them, so you *can* hook one up if you need, and for >> portables, there are external floppy drives available - using those same >> standard connectors, such as USB. You know, the ones everyone else >> uses, but Apple seems to think are worthless. > > You can hook up an external USB diskette drive to any Mac with a USB port. Another Apple Fanboi incapable of reading. Here's a hint, goober, we're discussing the MaxiPad. Before you open your yap again, go look at one, then point out where the USB port on it is. Now shut up, your betters are speaking.
From: -hh on 28 Mar 2010 22:03 Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarna...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > [snips] > > -hh wrote: > >> And completely unusable with standard devices - which also use ports and > >> mechanisms long standardized - and even known by Apple - meaning they > >> can leverage their existing technologies for those, and provide _useful_ > >> connectors. > > > Where "long standardized" is that USB2 only lasted 7 years before its > > replacement was announced > > Hmm? You mean USB 3? Which is backwards compatible? And supports the > approximately 10 *billion* USB devices shipped thus far? USB3 is pulling a subtle hand-wave with their claims, since its 'backwards' claim unfortunately doesn't include legacy cables. > Oh, but yes, makes perfect sense to not include even the most basic > hookup for any of those devices. Nobody, anywhere, would ever want > something as silly as a USB port. Ten years ago, no one was. Do you really think that USB2 will still be supported 10 years from now? > > and SDHC cards has lasted only 3 years > > until its replacement was announced. > > You mean SDXC, which is backwards-compatible with SDHC? Meaning all > your existing SDHC cards will work just fine? An SDHC card may work in an SDXC reader for awhile, but its support will - - invariably - - be eventually dropped. Plus, not all current SDHC hardware will support SDXC - - the same problem existed with the SD to SDHC transition: some hardware could be upgraded with new drivers, but not all. Currently, I have three bad SD card readers, only one of which is a cheap USB dongle...that all cannot be upgraded to support SDHC. In the meantime, you might want to go check to see if l an SD (not SDHC) card work today in an SDXC reader. The basic lesson is that obsolescence happens - - and it will take the USB too that you're worshipping. The only question is when. YMMV, but I don't think that it is 10+ years away, since the pattern I see is that USB is being usurped today by wireless. > One argues that the problem with USB keys is they stick out, therefore > being susceptible to damage, so it makes (some sort of) sense not to > risk it - particularly if the "damage" means lifting the port off the > mobo. > > Sounds good... except we note the device - as you point out - does in > fact "support USB", but to do so requires an adapter... which makes the > situation *worse* than if it had just had a USB connector. As in > adapter + USB device (or cable) sticking out *further*, thus > *increasing* the risk... which was the very argument used to not include > the USB port in the first place. Yes, but you've assumed that I endorse the camera & SD adaptor for the iPad. Why don't you try to find a cite that shows that I've ever made such a claim. > In order for the argument to make sense... Hint: if you don't find that cite, perhaps its because I'm not a "mindless Apple Fanboi" who finds no wrong from anything Apple. While you're at it, perhaps you can find a post where I've ever said that I'm going to run out and pre-order an iPad. > >> Oh, yes, do keep right on explaining the stupidities behind this asinine > >> port on the MaxiPad. > > > It may very well be a poor decision - - but there's no logical need to > > childishly call an inanimate object offensive names, unless you really > > want to illustrate how non-credible you are. > > It's a Pad. It's huge. What do you _expect_ people to refer to it as? At ~1.5lbs, its a lot lighter than conventional Laptops. Its not a Netbook, so perhaps one could simply call it by its name. > This should have been a no-brainer. You know, like people referring to > "plug-format computers" as "wall warts". YMMV. to me, a "wall wart" was the derogatory name for the cheap iron- core version of transformer. > >> On the iPhone, it may well have made sense - there isn't physical space > >> for much more. The MaxiPad has no such limitation. > > > And yet that's also not a prohibition to doing it. > > No, but we've yet to see a sensible justification for doing it. And this is absence of information is: (a) something totally unique to Apple? (b) something you have an inalienable right to have? (c) critically important to EVERY possible consumer? > USB support is dirt cheap, as evidenced by the fact even sub-$100 boards > (and even sub-$50 boards!) can offer anywhere from four to a dozen. USB > connectors don't add significant mass. But its still not zero for either. > The argument about "risk" is shown patently absurd by the mechanism > offered to get the USB support... There's other forms of risk than just this. > >> I see. In your demented world view, only a person who runs an entire > >> computer design and production company can possibly have any ability to > >> figure out that something as basic as including industry standard > >> connectors is a good idea. > > > That's not at all what it means. It was an invitation for you to > > provide some credible basis to show that you have any relevant > > professional expertise in *any* of these areas ... and you chose to > > fail. > > Actually, it wasn't. It was a pathetic failure pretending to be an > argument, to wit, "If you can't produce your own competing device, you > can't have an opinion". I wasn't setting the bar that high. But your second opportunity to provide some relevant qualifications ... you have now squandered. > > this no longer includes Linux. I dropped Linux because it simply > > didn't have adequate benefits for my needs vs the alternatives, so it > > effectively only added complexity which could be avoided. To put > > this in smaller words that you're more likely to understand, Linux > > simply was no longer worth the effort required to save a very trivial > > couple of bucks. > > Heh. Another classic example of the Apple Fanboi elitism: "It's not the > job, it's how much you *spend* on the job." Or its a classical Linux Fanboi projection of his own situation, where it invariably comes down to money. Money that he doesn't have. > Here's a hint, numbnuts, I don't use Linux because it's cheap. I use it > because it's *good*, and because it's Free. Free as in freedom. Yes, I hear what you're saying, but the truth is that part of all such statements are real and the rest is rationalization. Specifically, if it was really about freedom, you wouldn't care how much it cost, and not even bother to mention cost at all. And as I mentioned previously, I dabbled in Linux for awhile: I didn't find it to be all that great - - and more importantly, it wasn't clearly any better than the "less free" choices. Given that there's a lot more to IP than merely who "owns" an OS, the overall premise of the Open Source movement has its limitations. For a simple example, you still are still running on hardware that has non-Open IP restrictions, even if it has been commoditized in the marketplace. If you don't believe me, take your own mask of that Intel or AMD CPU chip and go to a Foundry to have them make your own copy. > Now you run along with your silly Apple elitism about paying more to get > less and being proud of it, and we'll just stick around laughing at you > behind your back. But do, please, take your other cult members with you > - they're polluting COLA. If you haven't yet noticed, this thread has been continuously cross- posted to COLA and CSMA since it started 9 days ago. Maybe it would behoove you to go back and re-read the whole thing? -hh
From: Kelsey Bjarnason on 28 Mar 2010 22:11 Peter K�hlmann wrote: > nospam wrote: > >> In article <cv2587-09a.ln1(a)spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason >> <kbjarnason(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Apparently, the whole Apple Fanboi mentality is so used to not having >>> industry-standard connectors that crippling the ones they do have isn't >>> seen as much of an issue - after all, all you need to do is replace all >>> your other hardware with stuff supporting WiFi or bluetooth - *much* >>> more sensible than simply leaving the USB ports enabled but disabling >>> auto-run. >> >> you don't have any wifi or bluetooth devices? maybe it's time to step >> into this century. > > So reading comprehension is just another area you are totally at a loss No kidding. He's too freaking stupid to tell the difference between _all_ one's devices supporting bluetooth or wifi, versus _some_ devices supporting it? It's amazing these people can breathe without constant reminders.
From: Kelsey Bjarnason on 28 Mar 2010 22:13
[snips] -hh wrote: >> So nice to know that these devices simply won't work with the MaxiPad >> unless you buy a completely pointless extra piece of junk hardware. > > This assumes that one actually wants to, and doesn't have an > alternative way to skin the cat. Also as previously discussed. > Yeah, really, I mean, who would *ever* want to plug their existing collection of perfectly good accessories in? *Much* better to throw them all out and replace them with the Apple Idiocy of the Week, right? Or to fork over dough for a completely pointless adapter. Yes, obviously, these are vastly better solutions than simply including a standard port like the rest of the universe manages quite handily. |