|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
Re: Civilized rich? (Was: Apple plans cheaper, Nano-based phone) |
 |

07-13-2007, 02:45 AM
|
|
|
Re: Civilized rich? (Was: Apple plans cheaper, Nano-based phone)
none wrote:
> ultimauw@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>>> None, you really need to spend time in areas such as post-Katrina Gulf
>>>> Coast. You are really immature and need to learn how other people live
>>>> who must work to support their children by putting food on the table and
>>>> a roof over their heads. After all, spoiled rich brats like Paris
>>>> Hilton, Nicole Richie, Lindsay Lohan, etc. are far less civilized than
>>>> the people who are paid to cook their food and make their beds.
>>> listen thomas, you create your own reality... and for me, i do not
>>> choose to live in scummy areas like the katrina gulf coast. if it were
>>> up to me, i'd bulldoze everything 150 miles in from the coast, make it a
>>> national park and be done with. trying to rebuild america's worst
>>> societal wort, is non-productive and unhealthy for everyone.
>> Thanks for reminding us why we need to fight the elite and not let
>> them get away with the shit
>> they are pulling. Additudes like this are the reason why the elite is
>> so hated among decent people.
>
> i didn't sense any "elite" talk in my post, it was all about being
> rational with "money". That area has NEVER BEEN FIT to live in, for
> 1000's of years, it's a freaking swamp! so why should tax payers rebuild
> in an area that even the Indians avoided?
>
Obviously to shove the fucking niggers in, to rot?
I would have thought that you, of all people, would have got that one
worked out...;-)
> Think before you post, thanks!
>
> You must be from the south? is that the problem?
|
 |
Re: Apple plans cheaper, Nano-based phone |
 |

07-13-2007, 02:45 AM
|
|
|
Re: Apple plans cheaper, Nano-based phone
Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
> none <a@b.com> wrote:
> > yes, there is some of that, i'll agree. but ALL
> > phones will now work like the iPhone in 10 years,
>
> Nope, just like all computers dont work like the Mac
> and all music players dont work like ipods either.
And yet almost all try to work like the Mac. Have you heard about that
thing called Windows yet? DOS lost. Even most Linux boxen run a GUI
(imitating the imitation).
--
Lars T.
|
 |
Re: Apple plans cheaper, Nano-based phone |
 |

07-13-2007, 02:45 AM
|
|
|
Re: Apple plans cheaper, Nano-based phone
Scott <how.do@you.do> wrote:
> "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:5fkvidF3d847cU1@mid.individual.net:
>
> >
> > Phones havent changed that much in 10 years.
> >
>
> Not much, except for:
>
> Cameras
> Customizable Screens
> Customizable [url=http://www.unlimitedcomplimentaryringtones.com]Ringtones[/url]
> Email capability
> Internet capability
> Calendars
> GPS
> Music capability
> Video capability
> Bluetooth capability
>
> to name a few.
You forgot "much harder to make phone calls with".
--
Lars T.
|
 |
Re: Apple plans cheaper, Nano-based phone |
 |

07-13-2007, 02:45 AM
|
|
|
Re: Apple plans cheaper, Nano-based phone
On 2007-07-12 16:22:12 -0700, Lars.Traeger@epost.de
(=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lars_Tr=E4ger?=) said:
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> none <a@b.com> wrote:
>>> yes, there is some of that, i'll agree. but ALL
>>> phones will now work like the iPhone in 10 years,
>>
>> Nope, just like all computers dont work like the Mac
>> and all music players dont work like ipods either.
>
> And yet almost all try to work like the Mac. Have you heard about that
> thing called Windows yet? DOS lost. Even most Linux boxen run a GUI
> (imitating the imitation).
Don't be too smug.. Apple didn't invent the GUI. Don't get me wrong.
I'm firmly in the Apple camp. But let credit lie where it deserves to
be.
--
thepixelfreak
|
 |
Re: Apple plans cheaper, Nano-based phone |
 |

07-13-2007, 02:45 AM
|
|
|
Re: Apple plans cheaper, Nano-based phone
Lars Träger wrote:
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> none <a@b.com> wrote:
>>> yes, there is some of that, i'll agree. but ALL
>>> phones will now work like the iPhone in 10 years,
>> Nope, just like all computers dont work like the Mac
>> and all music players dont work like ipods either.
>
> And yet almost all try to work like the Mac. Have you heard about that
> thing called Windows yet? DOS lost. Even most Linux boxen run a GUI
> (imitating the imitation).
You left out one level of imitation.
|
 |
Re: Apple plans cheaper, Nano-based phone |
 |

07-13-2007, 02:45 AM
|
|
|
Re: Apple plans cheaper, Nano-based phone
Lars Träger <Lars.Traeger@epost.de> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> none <a@b.com> wrote
>>> yes, there is some of that, i'll agree. but ALL
>>> phones will now work like the iPhone in 10 years,
>> Nope, just like all computers dont work like the Mac
>> and all music players dont work like ipods either.
> And yet almost all try to work like the Mac.
No they dont, Win has been off on a completely
different route for a hell of a long time now.
> Have you heard about that thing called Windows yet?
That didnt end up like the Mac at the time it started.
> DOS lost.
Different matter entirely.
> Even most Linux boxen run a GUI (imitating the imitation).
Its been hilarious that they imitate Win, not the Mac.
And phones certainly arent going to all end up working like the iphone either.
There will be plenty with physical buttons in 10 years, you watch.
There will be some high end PDAs with real keyboards too, you watch.
And laptops wont be doing without physical keyboards either, you watch.
|
 |
Re: Apple plans cheaper, Nano-based phone |
 |

07-13-2007, 02:45 AM
|
|
|
Re: Apple plans cheaper, Nano-based phone
"Lars Träger" <Lars.Traeger@epost.de> wrote:
> Scott <how.do@you.do> wrote:
>
>> "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in
>> news:5fkvidF3d847cU1@mid.individual.net:
>>
>>>
>>> Phones havent changed that much in 10 years.
>>>
>>
>> Not much, except for:
>>
>> Cameras
>> Customizable Screens
>> Customizable [url=http://www.unlimitedcomplimentaryringtones.com]Ringtones[/url]
>> Email capability
>> Internet capability
>> Calendars
>> GPS
>> Music capability
>> Video capability
>> Bluetooth capability
>>
>> to name a few.
>
> You forgot "much harder to make phone calls with".
Nope, much easier actually, most obviously with speed dial keys and voice dialing etc.
|
 |
Re: Apple plans cheaper, Nano-based phone |
 |

07-13-2007, 02:45 AM
|
|
|
Re: Apple plans cheaper, Nano-based phone
"none" <a@b.com> wrote in message
news:a-918EDA.20583311072007@mpls-nnrp-06.inet.qwest.net...
> Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote:
>
>> No, he's saying iPhone owners will be stuck using EDGE often, because Wi-
>> Fi is often unavailable, so they won't see the snappy performance
>> displayed in the iPhone commercials.
>>
>> iPhone owners don't get the luxury of subscribing to EVDO.
>
> 90% of your waking life, you have access to free wifi, home of course
> you do and at work you do, so sure while driving you don't, but you
> shouldn't be chatting while driving, so it doesn't matter.
Get a clue. In most of north america, wi-fi just isn't that common. Only
recent (last 3-4 years) broadband users likely have wi-fi at home. Many,
many corporate networks, and virtually all government networks, consider
wi-fi a security risk and do not use it. Those that do, lock it down
heavily. The whole world ain't silicon valley or whatever snooty geek
paradise you are posting from. Unless you live in a library or coffee shop
(or around here, Salvation Army, of all places), free wi-fi just isn't that
common.
aem sends.....
|
 |
Re: Apple plans cheaper, Nano-based phone |
 |

07-13-2007, 02:45 AM
|
|
|
Re: Apple plans cheaper, Nano-based phone
Shawn Hirn <srhi@comcast.net> wrote
> aemeijers <aemeijers@att.net> wrote
>> none <a@b.com> wrote
>>> Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote
>>>> No, he's saying iPhone owners will be stuck using EDGE often,
>>>> because Wi- Fi is often unavailable, so they won't see the snappy
>>>> performance displayed in the iPhone commercials.
>>>> iPhone owners don't get the luxury of subscribing to EVDO.
>>> 90% of your waking life, you have access to free wifi, home of
>>> course you do and at work you do, so sure while driving you don't,
>>> but you shouldn't be chatting while driving, so it doesn't matter.
>> Get a clue. In most of north america, wi-fi just isn't that common.
>> Only recent (last 3-4 years) broadband users likely have wi-fi at
>> home. Many, many corporate networks, and virtually all government
>> networks, consider wi-fi a security risk and do not use it. Those
>> that do, lock it down heavily. The whole world ain't silicon valley
>> or whatever snooty geek paradise you are posting from. Unless you
>> live in a library or coffee shop (or around here, Salvation Army, of
>> all places), free wi-fi just isn't that common.
> There's just one problem with your statement.
We'll see...
> More and more cities are gearing up to provide
> free or reduce cost wi-fi coverage, city-wide.
Bullshit on that city wide claim.
> In many areas, its damned near impossible to go
> without finding some idiot's unsecured wi-fi router.
Thats theft.
> Even more and more corporate campuses are going with wi-fi.
And fuck all of those are open to everyone.
> I recently attended a meeting on a Saturday in a corporate park a few
> miles outside of Philly and I had no problem finding wi-fi access there.
Doesnt say a damned thing about what he said.
|
 |
Re: Apple plans cheaper, Nano-based phone |
 |

07-13-2007, 02:45 AM
|
|
|
Re: Apple plans cheaper, Nano-based phone
In article <5fo2mnF39q6h4U1@mid.individual.net>,
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
> Kurt <labolide@spacegmail.com> wrote
> > Lars.Traeger@epost.de (Lars Träger) wrote
> >> Scott <how.do@you.do> wrote
> >>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>
> >>>> Phones havent changed that much in 10 years.
>
> >>> Not much, except for:
>
> >>> Cameras
> >>> Customizable Screens
> >>> Customizable [url=http://www.unlimitedcomplimentaryringtones.com]Ringtones[/url]
> >>> Email capability
> >>> Internet capability
> >>> Calendars
> >>> GPS
> >>> Music capability
> >>> Video capability
> >>> Bluetooth capability
>
> >>> to name a few.
>
> >> You forgot "much harder to make phone calls with".
>
> > Which is why the iPhone is so successful.
>
> Bullshit, none of the suckers bought it for that reason.
>
> > No other phone comes close for simple ease of use and functionality.
>
> Bare faced lie with making phone calls.
I actually used one. You have never even touched one. Right?
Aren't you in UK (no iPhones)? LOL.
--
To reply by email, remove the word "space"
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:15 PM. |
|
|
|
|