cere
Apr 14, 12:29 PM
You made a simple claim:
"Thunderbolt will be 'Mac only'"
It won't be, you were proven wrong, now get over it. Maybe you missed the title of this topic?
"Intel to Support Both USB 3.0 and Thunderbolt in 2012 'Ivy Bridge' Platform"
First, no I made no such claim. I responded to one. And the claim wasn't that it will be restricted to being Mac only, but that it will end up being Mac only, in the same sense that FW is. Some PC ship with FW, but not many. It is considered a Mac only interface. The gist is that TB may as well, if history repeats. You didn't prove anything. You see many PC's shipping with TB right now? How many PC vendors have announces support for TB? The unfortunate fact is that consumers know the USB brand, so the vendors will support it. TB might be in Intel's spec, but that doesn't mean every system will support it nor that many drive vendors will either.
See econgeek's post. It explains is pretty well.
"Thunderbolt will be 'Mac only'"
It won't be, you were proven wrong, now get over it. Maybe you missed the title of this topic?
"Intel to Support Both USB 3.0 and Thunderbolt in 2012 'Ivy Bridge' Platform"
First, no I made no such claim. I responded to one. And the claim wasn't that it will be restricted to being Mac only, but that it will end up being Mac only, in the same sense that FW is. Some PC ship with FW, but not many. It is considered a Mac only interface. The gist is that TB may as well, if history repeats. You didn't prove anything. You see many PC's shipping with TB right now? How many PC vendors have announces support for TB? The unfortunate fact is that consumers know the USB brand, so the vendors will support it. TB might be in Intel's spec, but that doesn't mean every system will support it nor that many drive vendors will either.
See econgeek's post. It explains is pretty well.
JeffDM
Sep 17, 12:02 PM
(by the way, they do make 10 megapixel camera phones now) if you buy them online, paying retail prices.
Are they any good? I've never seen a phone with a good camera, 10MP phone sounds like 10MP of grainy nasty pictures to me.
If the iPhone is half of the product that the iPod is, it should have a decent harddrive. I think that this would allow for whatever software, songs, movies,or whatever you want. Just take 2 gigsof the drive and partition it off for the OS. But, I could be wrong.
That would make the phone way too large. Unfortunately, the market has shifted to smaller phones such that they are harder to use than necessary, but that makes them easier to carry. A phone that's a little larger than a nano might be accepted, something that's as large as the 5G probably won't, that would make it the largest phone on the market.
Are they any good? I've never seen a phone with a good camera, 10MP phone sounds like 10MP of grainy nasty pictures to me.
If the iPhone is half of the product that the iPod is, it should have a decent harddrive. I think that this would allow for whatever software, songs, movies,or whatever you want. Just take 2 gigsof the drive and partition it off for the OS. But, I could be wrong.
That would make the phone way too large. Unfortunately, the market has shifted to smaller phones such that they are harder to use than necessary, but that makes them easier to carry. A phone that's a little larger than a nano might be accepted, something that's as large as the 5G probably won't, that would make it the largest phone on the market.
MacRumors
Apr 22, 01:33 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/22/more-details-on-apples-cloud-based-music-locker/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2010/07/02/114402-itunes_devices.jpg
Apple seems (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/21/apples-cloud-based-music-service-ready-to-go/) to be getting ready to launch their cloud-based digital music "locker" service that has been rumored for many months. But contrary to an earlier Reuters report, All Things D (http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/20110421/one-difference-between-apples-music-locker-and-amazons-label-deals/) has heard that Apple has already come to terms with two of the four major record labels about the service, and that Apple's Eddy Cue will be in New York tomorrow to try to finalize the remaining deals.
The negotiating of these deals is in contrast to Amazon's music storage service (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/29/amazon-launches-cloud-based-storage-service-and-music-player/) which notably launched last month without any deals in place -- a fact that the record labels were not very happy about (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/29/us-amazon-idUSTRE72S13H20110329). Apple is said to have been "very aggressive and thoughtful about it" and "It feels like they want to go pretty soon", according to an unnamed music executive. All Things D also provides some details about how the service might work from Apple:The industry executives I've talked to haven't seen Apple’s service themselves, but say they're aware of the broad strokes. The idea is that Apple will let users store songs they’ve purchased from its iTunes store, as well as others songs stored on their hard drives, and listen to them on multiple devices.All Things D points out that having official licenses can allow Apple to store a single master copy of a song rather than storing individual copies for every user. Amazon's original argument against needing the licenses was that their service was the same as any upload storage service. This meant that users needed to upload copies of their old music to be able to stream them. With the proper deals, Apple could avoid the need to upload individual copies and simply allow users to stream off of the single master copy. This could save on significant upload time for the user and storage requirements for Apple.
Article Link: More Details on Apple's Cloud-based Music Locker (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/22/more-details-on-apples-cloud-based-music-locker/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2010/07/02/114402-itunes_devices.jpg
Apple seems (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/21/apples-cloud-based-music-service-ready-to-go/) to be getting ready to launch their cloud-based digital music "locker" service that has been rumored for many months. But contrary to an earlier Reuters report, All Things D (http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/20110421/one-difference-between-apples-music-locker-and-amazons-label-deals/) has heard that Apple has already come to terms with two of the four major record labels about the service, and that Apple's Eddy Cue will be in New York tomorrow to try to finalize the remaining deals.
The negotiating of these deals is in contrast to Amazon's music storage service (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/29/amazon-launches-cloud-based-storage-service-and-music-player/) which notably launched last month without any deals in place -- a fact that the record labels were not very happy about (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/29/us-amazon-idUSTRE72S13H20110329). Apple is said to have been "very aggressive and thoughtful about it" and "It feels like they want to go pretty soon", according to an unnamed music executive. All Things D also provides some details about how the service might work from Apple:The industry executives I've talked to haven't seen Apple’s service themselves, but say they're aware of the broad strokes. The idea is that Apple will let users store songs they’ve purchased from its iTunes store, as well as others songs stored on their hard drives, and listen to them on multiple devices.All Things D points out that having official licenses can allow Apple to store a single master copy of a song rather than storing individual copies for every user. Amazon's original argument against needing the licenses was that their service was the same as any upload storage service. This meant that users needed to upload copies of their old music to be able to stream them. With the proper deals, Apple could avoid the need to upload individual copies and simply allow users to stream off of the single master copy. This could save on significant upload time for the user and storage requirements for Apple.
Article Link: More Details on Apple's Cloud-based Music Locker (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/22/more-details-on-apples-cloud-based-music-locker/)
jjhny
Mar 23, 06:23 PM
Drunk people aren't gonna be coherent enough to check their phones for check points. Let's the other sane people avoid the added traffic.
Exactly correct. I am actually more afraid of someone texting while driving. Now that actually scares me more... and how do we stop that? Make handheld devices illegal! There, more lives saved. Outlaw the iphone, android, etc.
I would say outlaw all cell phones that have text capability (/sarc).
Exactly correct. I am actually more afraid of someone texting while driving. Now that actually scares me more... and how do we stop that? Make handheld devices illegal! There, more lives saved. Outlaw the iphone, android, etc.
I would say outlaw all cell phones that have text capability (/sarc).
aly
Sep 14, 09:04 AM
I doubt we'll see some headless tower (apart from the macpro) i honestly don't think its in apple's interest to openup a new price point. Mac mini provides a nice entry for windows users, people wanting something next to their tv, or have the monitor etc already. MacBook provides mobile low end. iMac allows a bit more power and features over the mini for home users wanting a bit more and companies and people who dont need the power of the Mac Pro. MacBook Pro is high end portable allowing for graphics, photography, design, etc, and to some extent gaming on the go. The Mac Pro is the beast, a workstation more than a desktop and therefore is over specced for the normal user. But why put in a new model in between a imac and a mac pro when having the gap forces people looking for more than an imac to go for the mac pro and increase revenue. By creating an 'in between' model it takes sales away from the popular imac and the expensive mac pro, would probably have to have lower margins to get people to buy it and would just float about in the middle. Maybe die a fate similar to the cube? I don't see it being a smart move.
balamw
Sep 6, 12:15 PM
I came across this interesting article which says that Amazon is also planning to offer movies online in its store and that it has almost finalized deals with at least 3 of the big studios.
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-fi-movies6sep06,0,6420529.story?coll=la-home-headlines
Amazon was also suppsedly working on an iTMS/iPod killer that was to have launched this summer, with a subsidized/free player so perhaps the movie bit is linked to that?
B
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-fi-movies6sep06,0,6420529.story?coll=la-home-headlines
Amazon was also suppsedly working on an iTMS/iPod killer that was to have launched this summer, with a subsidized/free player so perhaps the movie bit is linked to that?
B
simonthewolf
Aug 24, 09:59 AM
So what happens if Uncle Bill buys Creative? :eek:
Evangelion
Aug 23, 11:45 PM
Steve Jobs knew this was a BS patent and it shows in his comments. Absolutely Stupid. Hell, the LISA had a Hierarchal File System.
Not Hierarchial File System! Hierarchial MENU System!
Now, we can freely discuss the "merits" of this patent, but fact is that Apple lost, fair 'n square. If Apple thought that Creatives patent was bogus, they would have NOT paid. 100 million dollars is a lot of cash, no matter how you slice it. If the patent was bogus, and they still paid, Apple would be sending other companies a message that said "Want some cash? Sue us with bogus patents, we'll gladly pay!". No, Apple paid because they felt that they were really infringing and that if they had proceedd with the lawsuit, they would have lost a lot more than 100 million.
Bottom line: Creative knew this was a BS patent, too, but they figured they had to try.
If it's a BS patent, why did Apple pay? Clearly, it was NOT a BS patent. Truem the patent-system might be screwed up, but that is not the point of this discussion.
The question is: Will they go after Microsoft, too? It would be hypocritical not to, after all.
If it's UI infringes on the patentt, sure. If it doesn't, why sue?
Creative is only worth $500 million, how come Apple didn't just buy them?
Because it would have cost the five times more than it did now? Because Creative has very little of interest for Apple? Because if they did that, everyone would be suing Apple with hopes that Apple would just buy them as well?
Wong Hoo to Creative engineer: "This is no good, i give you $1000000 more and i want something much much better"
unCreative engineer: "Wooo Hooo, thanks Mr, Hoo, i'll do it in 128 different colors, am sure that it will turn the market upside-down"
As Jobs said in his most recent keynote more money in R&D isn't everything, and if he says so i believe him.
Unless Woo has something extraordinary under his sleeve - which he doesn't cause if he did he would not need more money - i see Creative in the same position in a couple of years from now. And then they'll try to sue somebody else.
The article you are quoting was published two years ago....
Not Hierarchial File System! Hierarchial MENU System!
Now, we can freely discuss the "merits" of this patent, but fact is that Apple lost, fair 'n square. If Apple thought that Creatives patent was bogus, they would have NOT paid. 100 million dollars is a lot of cash, no matter how you slice it. If the patent was bogus, and they still paid, Apple would be sending other companies a message that said "Want some cash? Sue us with bogus patents, we'll gladly pay!". No, Apple paid because they felt that they were really infringing and that if they had proceedd with the lawsuit, they would have lost a lot more than 100 million.
Bottom line: Creative knew this was a BS patent, too, but they figured they had to try.
If it's a BS patent, why did Apple pay? Clearly, it was NOT a BS patent. Truem the patent-system might be screwed up, but that is not the point of this discussion.
The question is: Will they go after Microsoft, too? It would be hypocritical not to, after all.
If it's UI infringes on the patentt, sure. If it doesn't, why sue?
Creative is only worth $500 million, how come Apple didn't just buy them?
Because it would have cost the five times more than it did now? Because Creative has very little of interest for Apple? Because if they did that, everyone would be suing Apple with hopes that Apple would just buy them as well?
Wong Hoo to Creative engineer: "This is no good, i give you $1000000 more and i want something much much better"
unCreative engineer: "Wooo Hooo, thanks Mr, Hoo, i'll do it in 128 different colors, am sure that it will turn the market upside-down"
As Jobs said in his most recent keynote more money in R&D isn't everything, and if he says so i believe him.
Unless Woo has something extraordinary under his sleeve - which he doesn't cause if he did he would not need more money - i see Creative in the same position in a couple of years from now. And then they'll try to sue somebody else.
The article you are quoting was published two years ago....
MacMan86
Apr 12, 06:21 AM
Unless, as mentioned earlier in this thread, that 3rd party hardware includes the ability to upgrade its firmware. In that case, all customers will be required to install a mandatory "security" bug fix which installs support for a new private key, and everything proceeds as normal.
Heck, it's even possible that Apple might already have planned for this contingency, and instead of just having one private key, they may have come up with a set of many private keys to choose from, and also preprogrammed support for all of those keys into every properly licensed accessory. Maybe they just planned to use the first key up until it was compromised, and then move on to another.
Now, they might just push a new iTunes upgrade that blacklists the compromised key and moves on to another one -- and at the same time, instruct all licensed equipment to also add that key to their own blacklist (while continuing to maintain seamless support for all the remainder of the preprogrammed keys) the next time the licensed equipment connects to an authorized audio source.
(Unless, maybe the reverse engineer in this case already anticipated such an eventuality, and actually extracted all of the keys -- assuming, of course, that there really are multiple keys. If that were the case, then the reverse engineer hypothetically might have defeated the entire benefit that Apple might have derived from hypothetically having multiple keys to choose from in the first place...)
What's a little crazy with that is you start to believe your own hypothetical, made-up engineering. Now, no one here knows anything for sure, but, I think we can say with some certainty that Apple won't be changing the key in iTunes.
3rd party hardware includes the ability to upgrade its firmware
Sweeping generalisation. Those simple iHome AirPlay speakers can be connected to a computer and then firmware upgraded? Very unlikely. Not every AirPlay licensed hardware is an expensive Hi-Fi amp with upgradable firmware.
Heck, it's even possible that Apple might already have planned for this contingency, and instead of just having one private key, they may have come up with a set of many private keys to choose from
Near enough pointless. If someone is able to get hold of one private key, they're in a position to get hold of any others. This guy dumped the ROM after all.
The biggest reason for Apple not to change the key is it would break everything. A "mandatory "security" bug fix" isn't feasible for hardware, it would be like trying to organise a product recall - you could never tell everyone, and everyone would be wondering why their product suddenly broke - the companies behind these products would be swamped with support calls. You simply can't just bring out an update that breaks everything, hoping that customers will somehow update hardware that might not even be up-dateable.
tl;dr - However Apple engineered this, it's almost certainly not like that ^
Heck, it's even possible that Apple might already have planned for this contingency, and instead of just having one private key, they may have come up with a set of many private keys to choose from, and also preprogrammed support for all of those keys into every properly licensed accessory. Maybe they just planned to use the first key up until it was compromised, and then move on to another.
Now, they might just push a new iTunes upgrade that blacklists the compromised key and moves on to another one -- and at the same time, instruct all licensed equipment to also add that key to their own blacklist (while continuing to maintain seamless support for all the remainder of the preprogrammed keys) the next time the licensed equipment connects to an authorized audio source.
(Unless, maybe the reverse engineer in this case already anticipated such an eventuality, and actually extracted all of the keys -- assuming, of course, that there really are multiple keys. If that were the case, then the reverse engineer hypothetically might have defeated the entire benefit that Apple might have derived from hypothetically having multiple keys to choose from in the first place...)
What's a little crazy with that is you start to believe your own hypothetical, made-up engineering. Now, no one here knows anything for sure, but, I think we can say with some certainty that Apple won't be changing the key in iTunes.
3rd party hardware includes the ability to upgrade its firmware
Sweeping generalisation. Those simple iHome AirPlay speakers can be connected to a computer and then firmware upgraded? Very unlikely. Not every AirPlay licensed hardware is an expensive Hi-Fi amp with upgradable firmware.
Heck, it's even possible that Apple might already have planned for this contingency, and instead of just having one private key, they may have come up with a set of many private keys to choose from
Near enough pointless. If someone is able to get hold of one private key, they're in a position to get hold of any others. This guy dumped the ROM after all.
The biggest reason for Apple not to change the key is it would break everything. A "mandatory "security" bug fix" isn't feasible for hardware, it would be like trying to organise a product recall - you could never tell everyone, and everyone would be wondering why their product suddenly broke - the companies behind these products would be swamped with support calls. You simply can't just bring out an update that breaks everything, hoping that customers will somehow update hardware that might not even be up-dateable.
tl;dr - However Apple engineered this, it's almost certainly not like that ^
Evangelion
Sep 14, 04:03 AM
My friend has that phone, it's amazing.
THESE SLIDER PHONES ARE A HUGE HIT RIGHT NOW!
I wished Nokia came up with a successor to Nokia 7110. That phone ROCKED! Remember the stiletto-phones from The Matrix? Those phones didn't really exist. They were modified 8110's, real 8110 had a "manual" slide-mechanism. But the 7110... That's how they worked. You pushed a button, and the phone just snapped open. Very cool, and very, very sexy.
They had such a great design years ago, and it just boggles the mind that they are not using it anymore. 8800 does have something similar, but it opens "gracefully", whereas 7110 snapped open.
THESE SLIDER PHONES ARE A HUGE HIT RIGHT NOW!
I wished Nokia came up with a successor to Nokia 7110. That phone ROCKED! Remember the stiletto-phones from The Matrix? Those phones didn't really exist. They were modified 8110's, real 8110 had a "manual" slide-mechanism. But the 7110... That's how they worked. You pushed a button, and the phone just snapped open. Very cool, and very, very sexy.
They had such a great design years ago, and it just boggles the mind that they are not using it anymore. 8800 does have something similar, but it opens "gracefully", whereas 7110 snapped open.
dondark
Sep 14, 12:01 AM
I dont like American Tele company, they only have ugly phone to offer. I like those beautiful phones like Sharp, SonyErison or Samsung
darthcarto
Mar 29, 12:34 PM
As someone who used a Samsung Focus for 5 long, painful months, only to switch back to my old 3GS this past weekend, I say: "Umm... NO!" I don't see that happening.
Koodauw
Sep 15, 05:46 PM
A shame about scrapping the idea of a ground up design - I hope that doesn't lead to a lack of innovation. That's what really leads Apple along! Although if they just make a killer phone (I'm sure they will at some point...) it's bound to sell buckets loads!
Uber
It just said it was going with off the shelf parts, so hopefully the design can boast innovation.
Uber
It just said it was going with off the shelf parts, so hopefully the design can boast innovation.
roadbloc
May 3, 10:15 AM
Does anything use Thunderbolt yet? Will anything ever?
bdj21ya
Sep 15, 05:51 PM
I hear that in Japan 6 to 7 megapixels is more common for the phones.
gugy
Sep 5, 07:03 PM
I think this is totally feasible, but one question that many of you haven't addressed is: "Do you see this interaction and interface happening for the Windows users?"
I know we're all Apple fans here, but in order for the iTunes Movie Store to be successful, it will have to include "them."
w00master
very true, unfortunately those bastards dictate what will be successful. :eek:
another thing is make sure any video transmitted wirelessly will work perfect.
I had my airport xpress 30 feet from my computer hooked up to my stereo and the signal would drop all the time. This to work it needs to work flawlessly, if not forget it. I rather have the media center hooked up on my stereo and TV without the wireless crap.
I know we're all Apple fans here, but in order for the iTunes Movie Store to be successful, it will have to include "them."
w00master
very true, unfortunately those bastards dictate what will be successful. :eek:
another thing is make sure any video transmitted wirelessly will work perfect.
I had my airport xpress 30 feet from my computer hooked up to my stereo and the signal would drop all the time. This to work it needs to work flawlessly, if not forget it. I rather have the media center hooked up on my stereo and TV without the wireless crap.
valiar
Sep 27, 04:18 PM
You do realize DVD itself is heavily DRMed, although its CSS is easily cracked. Its Macrovision protection is flawed, and regional coding can be circumvented.
If iTS movie DRM can be cracked, would it make it a better value for you? Why are we even comparing it to DVDs? If you wish to have the convenience of portable digital downloads, then it is a great service.
I am comparing this iTMS stuff to DVDs because, duh, it costs the same.
And media companies think that I should pay the same money for less stuff in return.
The answer to your second question is YES. iTMS WILL be a better value for me if DRM was cracked, and Apple was not releasing iTunes nerfs to kill the DRM holes.
DVDs are DRMed, but this DRM is hard-coded, cannot be updated, and has already been cracked. Apple, on the other hand, plays cat-and-mouse games with crackers and does update their DRM periodically (of course, to avoid troubles with RIAA/MPAA).
Thus, no matter what they do, I am not buying their stuff. Until the price goes significantly down (read: cheaper than AllOfMP3.com).
If iTS movie DRM can be cracked, would it make it a better value for you? Why are we even comparing it to DVDs? If you wish to have the convenience of portable digital downloads, then it is a great service.
I am comparing this iTMS stuff to DVDs because, duh, it costs the same.
And media companies think that I should pay the same money for less stuff in return.
The answer to your second question is YES. iTMS WILL be a better value for me if DRM was cracked, and Apple was not releasing iTunes nerfs to kill the DRM holes.
DVDs are DRMed, but this DRM is hard-coded, cannot be updated, and has already been cracked. Apple, on the other hand, plays cat-and-mouse games with crackers and does update their DRM periodically (of course, to avoid troubles with RIAA/MPAA).
Thus, no matter what they do, I am not buying their stuff. Until the price goes significantly down (read: cheaper than AllOfMP3.com).
maflynn
Mar 23, 04:32 PM
The seemingly only purpose of this app is to avoid the checkpoints could be dangerous to those of us who don't drink and drive. They should pull any app.
toddybody
Apr 22, 11:35 AM
Should I be pissed having bought the new SSD MB Air 4 months ago?:confused: I deserved some TB speeds.
Why? Do you have an external SSD array with a Thunderbolt interface? Power to you if so ;)
Why? Do you have an external SSD array with a Thunderbolt interface? Power to you if so ;)
cadillaccactus
Sep 5, 12:30 PM
Think Steve will still have a beard?
I predict, if he doesn't we'll see a fullscreen ipod, if he does we won't lol :D
This is precisely the kind of reconassiance that rumor websites should be providing. We need to start making serious wagers on the hygenic habits of Apple employees, it is the natural progression of product rumors. I'm talking about sitting in a smokey room, piling cash in the center of a table, greasy hair and big rings type of wagering. I'm talking fantasy rumor line ups.
I predict, if he doesn't we'll see a fullscreen ipod, if he does we won't lol :D
This is precisely the kind of reconassiance that rumor websites should be providing. We need to start making serious wagers on the hygenic habits of Apple employees, it is the natural progression of product rumors. I'm talking about sitting in a smokey room, piling cash in the center of a table, greasy hair and big rings type of wagering. I'm talking fantasy rumor line ups.
rtkane
Apr 4, 12:49 PM
Coming from a "Gun Person" (Own a HK .45 USP Tactical w/ GEMTECH Suppressor)
...the would be robbers better have been armed, to warrant the Rent-a-Cop shooting them in the head. He should be prosecuted for manslaughter if not. All this "well they had it coming" BS is totally misplaced, the man who died was a human being.
Read the article. Why do people comment when they don't even read the article?
...the would be robbers better have been armed, to warrant the Rent-a-Cop shooting them in the head. He should be prosecuted for manslaughter if not. All this "well they had it coming" BS is totally misplaced, the man who died was a human being.
Read the article. Why do people comment when they don't even read the article?
AidenShaw
Mar 22, 02:38 PM
I want to know where to get a list of products that hook onto Thunderbolt.
Rocketman
From terminal, to see all the shipping Thunderbolt products use the command
cat /dev/null
http://www.lacie.com/us/index.htm
Coming summer 2011 - at least 3 months away.
Rocketman
From terminal, to see all the shipping Thunderbolt products use the command
cat /dev/null
http://www.lacie.com/us/index.htm
Coming summer 2011 - at least 3 months away.
iMacZealot
Sep 17, 11:23 PM
Amen. the US dont use GSM, do they, it's CDMA, right?
Here (australia) we have both, kinda. All carriers run GSM, and while there is some locking of handsets (if you get a "free" phone on a contract) you can pay it out early, or move to a different carrier when the contract expires, or just buy your own phone.
I could NEVER imagine this whole "i want that phone by xyz carrier doesnt have it". Aren't you americans supposed to demand the best of everything!?
Dear God, please check your info before posting. We have many GSM carriers, and you can buy certain CDMA phones and use them on a different CDMA network. And you were talking about international roaming in other posts, well, we have that, here. Even CDMA that you bash so much has roaming options. My brother is using a dual CDMA/GSM phone on Sprint right now in London. And the international roaming rates are cheaper with US carriers compared to Vodafone Australia, depending on countries. We also have 3G CDMA and GSM based Cingular uses W-CDMA, so you're not the only ones there, either.
Here (australia) we have both, kinda. All carriers run GSM, and while there is some locking of handsets (if you get a "free" phone on a contract) you can pay it out early, or move to a different carrier when the contract expires, or just buy your own phone.
I could NEVER imagine this whole "i want that phone by xyz carrier doesnt have it". Aren't you americans supposed to demand the best of everything!?
Dear God, please check your info before posting. We have many GSM carriers, and you can buy certain CDMA phones and use them on a different CDMA network. And you were talking about international roaming in other posts, well, we have that, here. Even CDMA that you bash so much has roaming options. My brother is using a dual CDMA/GSM phone on Sprint right now in London. And the international roaming rates are cheaper with US carriers compared to Vodafone Australia, depending on countries. We also have 3G CDMA and GSM based Cingular uses W-CDMA, so you're not the only ones there, either.
mr.steevo
Apr 20, 09:58 AM
Ask Josh Harris what he thinks of this and he'll tell you we're right on track with losing all anonymity due to technology.
Buckle up.
Buckle up.
No comments:
Post a Comment