Oh, yeah? Wait 'til You see Microsoft's Tablet!
in [Mac Systems]
|
Prev: The New Apple Tablet - $499!
Next: iPad is supercool
From: nospam on 28 Jan 2010 15:42 In article <slrnhm3st1.254.t-usenet(a)ID-685.user.individual.de>, Martin Trautmann <t-usenet(a)gmx.net> wrote: > Apps would be poorly designed if they would run on a certain screen size > only. Maybe PS is one of the applications where a bigger would be more > than appropriate - but there are plenty of Macs around which use > 1024x768 only and do run OS-X nevermind the apps, os x itself doesn't support 1024x768 anymore. there are some windows that are bigger than that and that change happened a long time ago, tiger i think. > No mouse, no cursor, why? because that makes no sense for a touch based user interface. > Why can't a touchpad be used exactly as a > mouse with cursor? It's more complicated to have a second mouse button - > but even Win7 does manage this, while those users may have mouses with > much more than just two buttons. it can but it's a bad user interface. ever wonder why tablet pcs never sold well? a lot of it has to do with them being very clunky to use. > > when apple ported iwork to the ipad, they *rewrote* the user interface. > > simply running the existing version would have been stupid. > > I don't accept your claim that a tablet pc has to work the way the iPad > does. i didn't make that claim.
From: Tom Stiller on 28 Jan 2010 15:50 In article <slrnhm3rmb.254.t-usenet(a)ID-685.user.individual.de>, Martin Trautmann <t-usenet(a)gmx.net> wrote: > On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 14:56:36 -0500, nospam wrote: > > In article <slrnhm3q17.254.t-usenet(a)ID-685.user.individual.de>, Martin > > Trautmann <t-usenet(a)gmx.net> wrote: > > > > > Steve claimed on the iPhone introduction: > > > > > > "iPhone runs OS X!" > > > > it does. > > No, it doesn't. It may share some parts with OS-X. But which univeral > binaries do you know which do run both on a MacBook and an iPhone? Can you define the essence of "Mac OS X"? What constitutes the OS and separates it from the applications and installed drivers? > > > > The iPad would be nice if it actually would support the full range of > > > OS-X applications. > > > > that would be stupid. > > Why? > > > > But being a huge iPhone only, I don't have any need > > > for it, > > > > yet you want it to support it?? > > Support what "it"? -- Tom Stiller PGP fingerprint = 5108 DDB2 9761 EDE5 E7E3 7BDA 71ED 6496 99C0 C7CF
From: nospam on 28 Jan 2010 15:51 In article <slrnhm3ttv.254.t-usenet(a)ID-685.user.individual.de>, Martin Trautmann <t-usenet(a)gmx.net> wrote: > > nevermind the apps, os x itself doesn't support 1024x768 anymore. there > > are some windows that are bigger than that and that change happened a > > long time ago, tiger i think. > > Amazing, I do type on this iBook G4, 12", running 10.4 and actually > can't do so? so maybe it was leopard. the fact remains that apple hasn't made a mac with a screen that small for several *years*.
From: Tom Harrington on 28 Jan 2010 15:58 In article <280120101551555595%nospam(a)nospam.invalid>, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: > In article <slrnhm3ttv.254.t-usenet(a)ID-685.user.individual.de>, Martin > Trautmann <t-usenet(a)gmx.net> wrote: > > > > nevermind the apps, os x itself doesn't support 1024x768 anymore. there > > > are some windows that are bigger than that and that change happened a > > > long time ago, tiger i think. > > > > Amazing, I do type on this iBook G4, 12", running 10.4 and actually > > can't do so? > > so maybe it was leopard. the fact remains that apple hasn't made a mac > with a screen that small for several *years*. That has nothing to do with whether OSX supports that size. -- Tom "Tom" Harrington Independent Mac OS X developer since 2002 http://www.atomicbird.com/
From: Nick Naym on 28 Jan 2010 18:12
In article 1jd0vmp.n918mdfmgmk3N%per(a)RQNNE.invalid, Per R�nne at per(a)RQNNE.invalid wrote on 1/28/10 3:30 AM: .... .... > >> The iPhone was revolutionary because it made a pocket-sized touch-screen >> both elegant and commonplace. Making an iPhone bigger is not impressive >> and maybe even counter-productive. Making a larger iPhone that runs on >> any GSM network as long as it's AT&T is just pissing customers off. > > Most GSM networks don't run AT&T, and they run the iPhone perfectly > well. Don't mistake the US for the world ... Viewing the world and its problems through US-centric glasses is a self-centered cultural habit we've gotten into...we have a difficult time understanding why the rest of the world doesn't adopt/conform to our obviously superior socio-political-economic norms and values. -- iMac (24", 2.8 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 2GB RAM, 320 GB HDD) � OS X (10.5.8) |