JF Mezei

SMS wrote:

> Not much of an announcement yesterday. All minor evolution, no revolution.

I think this is bigger event for Apple than for the customers. If they
truly made the nano an IOS device, it would be a big change to the
actual product. The ipod touch has new display, camera etc.

So for Apple, they are big changes.

For the nano, I would rather have something with tactile feedback
(buttons) than a touchscreen for something this small.

When you have something good, you shouldn't mess with it just for the
sake of making a splash at some keynote presentation.

Lloyd Parsons

In article <michelle-C0F505.14273902092010@news.eternal-september.org>,
Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <lloydparsons-F8BFF5.15552302092010@port80.individual.net>,
> Lloyd Parsons <lloydparsons@mac.com> wrote:
>
> > Since Flash isn't working worth a crap on handhelds now, of any brand,
> > which moron would be 'begging' for it to not work well on the iOS
> > devices?
>
> Larry, and other morons like him; they don't use any iOS devices, so of
> course they want Flash on them.

Oh, THAT kind of moron!!

--
Lloyd

Michelle Steiner

In article <4c8023d8$0$32564$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>,
JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> I think this is bigger event for Apple than for the customers. If they
> truly made the nano an IOS device,

They didn't.

--
Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
<http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

JF Mezei

Lloyd Parsons wrote:

> Since Flash isn't working worth a crap on handhelds now, of any brand,
> which moron would be 'begging' for it to not work well on the iOS
> devices?

Just because Adobe has not been able to make a proper mobile
implementation of flash does not mean that there is no demand for flash.


Apple may be correct in blocking piss poor implementation of flash that
would eat up the battery in 10 minutes. But it doesn't mean that people
prefer not to have flash.

George Kerby

On 9/2/10 3:27 PM, in article
duKdnVYv6fFflR3RnZ2dnUVZ_oOdnZ2d@speakeasy.net, "News" <News@Group.Name>
wrote:

> Michelle Steiner wrote:
>> In article <6aqdnVfCqKiBnh3RnZ2dnUVZ_tednZ2d@speakeasy.net> ,
>> News <News@Group.Name> wrote:
>>
>>>> Sorry, but I haven't been able to figure out your warped mind yet.
>>>> But I noticed that you haven't been able to show where your alleged
>>>> continuity problem lies. Heck, you haven't even tried.
>>> I leave you to stew in your stupor.
>>
>> In other words, you're full of shit and too fucking insecure to admit it.
>>
>
>
> Watching you and Georgie stew and blather. PRICELESS.

I thought you said you were gone, numb-nuts.

I guess the mental condition leads to such behavior...

George Kerby

On 9/2/10 5:46 PM, in article 4c802957$0$5498$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com, "JF
Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> Lloyd Parsons wrote:
>
>> Since Flash isn't working worth a crap on handhelds now, of any brand,
>> which moron would be 'begging' for it to not work well on the iOS
>> devices?
>
> Just because Adobe has not been able to make a proper mobile
> implementation of flash does not mean that there is no demand for flash.
>
>
> Apple may be correct in blocking piss poor implementation of flash that
> would eat up the battery in 10 minutes. But it doesn't mean that people
> prefer not to have flash.

More than a few hundred people have told me "Flash is Trash".

Due to that, web designers started building in an opt out in later years.

Your Name

In article <4c7fb769$0$1651$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>, SMS
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>
> Everyone expected more yesterday than just cameras on the iPod Touch,
> and a new version of Apple TV which few people can figure out why they
> need.
<snip>
> I was hoping for a revamped MacBook line that would bring the Macbook
> up to the hardware standards of high end Core i3, i5, and i7 Windows
> laptops.

"Everyone"?!?!? Nobody who knows Apple products expected more. The rumours
for weeks (if not months) have been updated iPods and Apple TV.

Apple tends to keep the updates for their various "divisions" separated:

- iPod & Apple TV
- iPhone & iPad
- iMac & Mac Mini
- MacBook
- MacBook Pro
- Mac Pro & displays

They rarely mix updates.

The MacBooks Pros (which is what I guess you mean) were updated in April,
so you've got another eight months, at least, before there's another
update (although possibly a "speed bump" update in October / November, but
don't hold your breath for it). The next update is likely to be "speed
bumped" iMacs.

Your Name

In article <Xns9DE77BA0B9E80noonehomecom@74.209.131.13>, Larry
<noone@home.com> wrote:

> Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote in
> news:michelle-293A39.21520101092010@news.eternal-september.org:
>
> > In article <Xns9DE6EDADBD90Bnoonehomecom@74.209.131.13>,
> > Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
> >
> >> > it will allow wireless printing from the device
> >>
> >> WOW! They ARE reading my posts!
> >
> > Guess what Larry? iPhone, iPod Touch, and (more recently) iPad owners
> > have been requesting that functionality. But we do it where it counts,
> > and don't bother to do it here, where Apple doesn't pay any attention.
> >
>
> Yeah, but, outside the reality distortion field they've all been begging
> for Flash, too, but he ignores that....

No they aren't.

Besides Adobe and a few others who make money out of Flash, it's only a
few squeaky wheels complaining about a lack of Flash in iOS devices, and
just like the so called "antenna problem", they make it seem like there
are more, but most users are perfectly happy without Flash (in fact most
would probably have no clue what Flash even is, let alone miss it).

Lloyd Parsons

In article <4c802957$0$5498$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>,
JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> Lloyd Parsons wrote:
>
> > Since Flash isn't working worth a crap on handhelds now, of any brand,
> > which moron would be 'begging' for it to not work well on the iOS
> > devices?
>
> Just because Adobe has not been able to make a proper mobile
> implementation of flash does not mean that there is no demand for flash.
>
>
> Apple may be correct in blocking piss poor implementation of flash that
> would eat up the battery in 10 minutes. But it doesn't mean that people
> prefer not to have flash.

Other than more than a few wintrolls in some of the advocacy groups, I
haven't seen anyone really care about Flash at all.

--
Lloyd

sbt

In article <lloydparsons-5BB13C.22011302092010@port80.individual.net>,
Lloyd Parsons <lloydparsons@mac.com> wrote:

> Other than more than a few wintrolls in some of the advocacy groups, I
> haven't seen anyone really care about Flash at all.

Then you haven't been paying much attention. There are at least two or
three of us who are avid bridge players and we really hate being unable
to participate on BridgeBaseOnline due to the lack of flash support.
There are a few other sites where the absence is a minor annoyance, but
BBO's inaccessibility is a major pain.

--
Spenser