No USB ports on Ipad!
in [Mac Systems]
|
From: JEDIDIAH on 29 Mar 2010 16:07 On 2010-03-28, Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarnason(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > [snips] > > nospam wrote: > >>> My machine regularly has a USB wireless mouse, an external drive (which >>> happens to be eSata, but supports USB), and a 16Gb USB key hanging off >>> it. >> >> doesn't sound like a laptop. nice try though. > > Don't care what it sounds like - it's a laptop. And when it goes mobile > with me, those devices generally all go with it. Even if they don't. They don't all have to be connected all the time in order to be useful. The iPad itself is a great demonstration of this. Although more complete networking protocol support also eliminates some of the need for USB connectivity. The less open a device is, the more useful it will be to direct connect things. It's a nasty little feedback loop. [deletia] It will be interesting to see what the pregnant ipod does with peripherals connected over a LAN. -- ....as if the ability to run Cubase ever made or broke a platform. ||| / | \
From: ZnU on 29 Mar 2010 17:02 In article <eo3387-8o5.ln1(a)spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarnason(a)gmail.com> wrote: > -hh wrote: > > > Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarna...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> Could you kindly point out where the cables are on my USB key? �I've > >> never noticed them before. > > > > The problem with USB thumb drives is that they typically stick out ~2 > > inches, as an unsupported cantilever off of your expensive device's > > motherboard. > > > > If you've never seen damaged equipment as a consequence, you don't get > > out enough. > > Maybe, maybe not. I do know that our laptops - complete with thumb > drives and (at the time) "two inch" USB mouse dongles, went on a road > trip across the country and back, often bouncing around on the > passenger's lap, not to mention being jostled about as we snuggled in > for the night, usually in a makeshift bed in the back of the van - all > prime candidates for such damage - without a lick of a problem. > > Of course, one could extend your logic. After all, the screen is > usually the most fragile part, so, because there is some risk of it > being damaged, we should abolish the screen, rather than, oh, include it > on the theory someone might actually want to *use* a bog-standard > interface device. That *is* your argument, right? That because a USB > dongle _might_ lead to damages, this explains the asinine decision not > to incldue it, despite it being nigh-on necessary for devices such as > this? > > Yes, well, one can see the Apple Fan Club is out in full swing tonight. > Must be a full moon. You're calling a USB port "nigh-on necessary" for the iPad, but it's already clear they're going to sell millions of units without one. If they sell 5M units in 2010, do you think they'd have been able to sell, say, 50M with a USB port? I mean, "nigh-on necessary" sure sounds like at least 9 of every 10 people would need it, right? The truth, of course, is that this is yet another example of the geeks completely misunderstanding the priorities of mainstream users, and focusing on tech specs and edge cases. Yes, one can think of a few use cases for a USB port on an iPad, but there are also many significant use cases that don't require one. -- "The game of professional investment is intolerably boring and over-exacting to anyone who is entirely exempt from the gambling instinct; whilst he who has it must pay to this propensity the appropriate toll." -- John Maynard Keynes
From: JEDIDIAH on 29 Mar 2010 16:22 On 2010-03-28, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: > > > In article <slrnhqt9s1.2tl.jedi(a)nomad.mishnet>, JEDIDIAH ><jedi(a)nomad.mishnet> wrote: > >> Wifi is insecure, slow and unreliable. > > nonsense, and you can use vpn if you're that paranoid. Or I can not need to worry in the first place. > >> Then there's that whole "standard of the month" nonsense. Have >> they finalized the most recent one yet? Have they started working >> on the next one? > > long ago. I don't think you have any clue what you're talking about. -- ....as if the ability to run Cubase ever made or broke a platform. ||| / | \
From: JEDIDIAH on 29 Mar 2010 16:09 On 2010-03-28, D.F. Manno <dfmanno(a)mail.com> wrote: > > > In article <6mj287-tmq.ln1(a)spanky.localhost.net>, > Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarnason(a)gmail.com> wrote: [deletia] >> And let's not forget the USB phones, which we transfer contacts, photos, >> etc, to and from. >> >> Or the USB digital camera. > > If you're already lugging that much stuff around with you, what's one > more adapter? It's more expensive and more difficult to replace. That's kind of the first 2 bulletpoints for USB in general. Nevermind the maxipad. -- ....as if the ability to run Cubase ever made or broke a platform. ||| / | \
From: -hh on 29 Mar 2010 17:52
Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarna...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > [snips] > > -hh wrote: > > Ah, finally a claim of something halfway close to relevance. Given > > that you're still taking trips sleeping in a pile of rags in the back > > of a van, you've obviously done _very well_ for yourself :-) > > There goes that Apple elitism again. The notion someone would *choose* > to sleep in a van in the middle of nowhere, rather than in a hotel, > *must* mean no money, no means. My, my...a hot button. > And, of course, people who enjoy tenting obviously *can't* afford to > stay in a hotel or rent or buy an RV. And those that can't even afford a tent cram themselves into the back of an old van :-) > After all, nobody could ever *choose* to do anything other than spend, > spend, spend, and always go for the super-deluxe acoomodations package. More of your blindness from your lack of objectivity, since its about *value*, not cost. BTW, here's a not-so-recent camp photo; mine was second from the right: <http://www.huntzinger.com/photo/2004/peru/SV_camp3_(36_0493).jpg> > >> Sorry, numbnuts, I've been employed - in the IT field, and frequently in > >> *security* in the IT field - for decades. > > > That simply makes your situation worse, since you're still acting like > > a naïve undergrad, where every problem is to be solved by throwing > > more IT complexity at it. > > Banning USB, and having to figure out a way to enforce it - plus the > same for eSata, and firewire, and any other way to mount a partition - > is *more complex* than simply disabling autorun? Still asking the wrong questions, Mr. "IT Expert"? You're still jumping to the wrong conclusions, even though you've already received your free clue (or two). Of course, maybe the lack of certain technical details on Google is a possibly relevant clue, too. And of course, you'll reply with YA predicably lame Ad Hom namecalling because you still can't figure this problem out..hooty hoo! -hh |