SMS

On 9/1/2010 8:19 PM, Larry wrote:
> Michelle Steiner<michelle@michelle.org> wrote in news:michelle-
> 732DED.11242001092010@news.eternal-september.org:
>
>> it will allow wireless printing from the device
>
> WOW! They ARE reading my posts!

I could print wirelessly from my Palm Pilot about ten years ago.

But actually the new iPod Touches have features that my kids have been
waiting for for more than a year before they got new iPods to replace
the failing iPod Nano and Sandisk Sansa that they have now.

Michelle Steiner

In article <Xns9DE6EE4CABD74noonehomecom@74.209.131.13>,
Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:

> > I don't see anything that would need to be changed in the software. My
> > concern is whether it will still be possible to buy movies and TV shows
> > with the older versions.
> >
> >
>
> What "old versions"? They no longer exist!

Yet again Larry shows that he doesn't know what he's talking about.

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

Michelle Steiner

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.

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

Michelle Steiner

In article
<your.name-0209101436300001@203-109-170-131.dial.dyn.ihug.co.nz>,
your.name@isp.com (Your Name) wrote:

> > Um, why can't they add the streaming feature to the existing model?
>
> It's a totally different OS, so it's unlikely they'll waste time adding
> new features to the now discontinued model.

Oh, I figure that they'll likely do it because it will generate more
revenue.

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

JF Mezei

MBT, Steve Jobs clearly states that ALL Ipods have been revamped. And
there is a slide which says it.

But he only mentioned the shuffle, nano and ipod touch. No mention of
the classic. So it would be easy to get the impression that the classic
is being abandonned.

Jobs could have said "today, we are announcing an update to the shuffle,
nano and touch" instead of "today we are announcing an update to all our
ipod products".

BTW, the nano's touch screen would make one think it runs IOS. If so, I
wonder if this could be the smallest unix machine ever built !

Your Name

"nospam" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:010920101444521217%nospam@nospam.invalid...
> In article <i5mgr4$ln$1@lust.ihug.co.nz>, Your Name <your.name@isp.com>
> wrote:
>
> > > > On the AppleTV, I wonder if the older versions are software
updateable
> > > > to this new level of functionality?
> > >
> > > The new model has a different processor (A4 instead of Intel), so the
> > > software will be completely incompatible.
> >
> > Yep, it's basically a completely new device. Some hacker might get the
old
> > model to run the new software (in a similar way to the iPhone emulator
> > running on Mac OS X), but it's unlikely there will ever be an official
way.
>
> not without a shitload of work. it's much easier to spend $99 and get
> the new one.

True, but some people simply enjoy the challenge of getting it to work ...
just look at all the freeware / shareware emulators there are out there
which let you run various old devices / systems on your newer computer. :-)

Father Guido Sarducci

In message news:michelle-D1502B.09530001092010@news.eternal-september.org,
Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> said:

> A live band was playing "We Can Work it Out"

Jobs only listens to the first line of that song.

SMS

On 9/1/2010 10:32 PM, JF Mezei wrote:
> MBT, Steve Jobs clearly states that ALL Ipods have been revamped. And
> there is a slide which says it.
>
> But he only mentioned the shuffle, nano and ipod touch. No mention of
> the classic. So it would be easy to get the impression that the classic
> is being abandonned.

I was hoping that they'd make the low end iPod Touch 16GB, eliminate the
32GB iPod Touch, and announce a 128GB iPod Touch to replace the 120GB
Classic, leaving 16GB, 64GB, and 128GB at $200, $300, and $400 price
points. Guess flash is a bit too expensive for that to happen.

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

nospam

In article <4c7f92a9$0$1594$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>, SMS
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> I was hoping that they'd make the low end iPod Touch 16GB,

they should have. the gap is dumb. the extra 8 gig of flash on the nano
only increases its price by $30.

> eliminate the
> 32GB iPod Touch, and announce a 128GB iPod Touch to replace the 120GB
> Classic, leaving 16GB, 64GB, and 128GB at $200, $300, and $400 price
> points. Guess flash is a bit too expensive for that to happen.

it's also that most people don't care about that much capacity. don't
forget that the 8 & 16 gig nanos were the best selling ipods until very
recently.

News

John McWilliams wrote:
> On 9/1/10 PDT 3:20 PM, Michelle Steiner wrote:
>> In article<hPidnRbPorOmP-PRnZ2dnUVZ_oSdnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>> News<News@Group.Name> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> Apple is live streaming the special event today. I started watching
>>>>>> it at 9:50 am. ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Only seven minutes until it starts...
>>>>>>
>>>>> Looks like a continuity problem.
>>>>
>>>> What you talking about, Willis?
>>>
>>> Time continuity, skippy. Strain your intellect much?
>>
>> What time continuity? You on drugs?
>
> He could well have whooshed himself and can't admit it.....
>


You on drugs?