iphone

thirsty wrote:
I only ask that apple adopt bluray already so I can go along with my pirating.

Yeah what's up with that?

chaz wrote:

thirsty wrote:
I only ask that apple adopt bluray already so I can go along with my pirating.

Yeah what's up with that?

From my earlier post….

vansmack wrote:
Jason O'Grady woke up on the wrong side of the Book of Jobs this week…

Apple's Blu-ray fiasco: the iTunes conflict

Thanks vansmack. How's your media center working out?

It's on…Windows Phone 7 Series

Not that I haven't been telling you this for some time, but Opera is good.  Really good.

Opera Mini on iPhone is fast, but why?
By Thomas Ricker  posted Feb 17th 2010 at 8:01AM

We came, we saw, and we're still scratching our heads over what Opera is up to with its Mobile World Congress demonstration of its Opera Mini browser running on the iPhone 3GS. But before we get into that, let's talk performance: it's fast. Opera Mini is very, very fast on the iPhone. Loading the New York Times, for example, was about 5x faster than loading the same page in the iPhone 3GS' stock browser.

….

So why is Opera making such a fuss about this before it has even submitted to Apple for approval?

The answer is simple.  To build fan support ahead of the approval process so Apple has no choice but to approve it.  So long Safari….

It will be VERY interesting to see how this plays out….

Co-signed on opera,  although I did notice there is WAP browser out there, although it may just be a modified ver of safari

So Ive been using Opera 10 Beta (now version 3) for some time and it's very interesting how it works. 

First, here's how engadget described it:

"It's not doing any rendering of the pages or code processing locally. Web pages are processed by Opera's servers before sending just the results to the iPhone. Not only does this speed up the local processing but it also limits the amount of data sent – a potential big money saver for people browsing while data roaming (like us in Barcelona) or for those without unlimited data plans."

But more important to me is the push technology it uses for my saved tabs.  I chose to tab 3 websites (or pages) that I visit most often and during downtime the phone checks and updates those pages so when I open it (like nextbus) it's already populated with the data I need.  It's incredibly fast.

http://www.opera.com/mobile/

I'd really like to stop using safari on my phone. Hope opera moves along quickly.

sweetcell wrote:
the real reason why smackie hates iphones

One of the many, but stuff like that ranks high.  You can replace "boobies" with just about anything that I like that Apple doesn't want me to like and I'd react the same way.  Just build a device for me and let me decide how to use it…

That's solely a data comparison, and yes at&t has made strides in the largest markets (there's a map for that).  As for nationwide coverage, there's no comparison - they get killed.  The real killer here of course is that they're phone calls are handled of their earlier generation network, which clearly can't handle the rise in subscribers as is evident by the high number of dropped calls.

That being said, I always tell people to go with which ever provider has the best coverage at your home and your place of work.  For me that's Sprint as evidenced by the reliability numbers - I've never lost a call on Sprint in San Francsico in the 7 years I've been here.  I dare any at&t customer to claim the same.  I'll sacrifice 150kbps for that kind of reliability, especially with WiMax around the corner.  Right?  It's still coming soon, right?  Eee ghads.

vansmack wrote:
I've never lost a call on Sprint in San Francsico in the 7 years I've been here.  I dare any at&t customer to claim the same. 

Way to go out on a limb by throwing it down such a dare on a DC nightclub board.  ::)

cool app, but heaven help me if someone sits beside me on a plane and break this out:

http://www.wavemachinelabs.com/voiceband/

vansmack wrote:
I'll sacrifice 150kbps for that kind of reliability, especially with WiMax around the corner.  Right?  It's still coming soon, right?  Eee ghads.

i've had quite a few people in a few meetings tell me that wimax is right around the corner. . .in the meantime, they are also trying to get the FCC to get moving on auctioning more spectrum. 

Venerable wrote:
i've had quite a few people in a few meetings tell me that wimax is right around the corner. . .in the meantime, they are also trying to get the FCC to get moving on auctioning more spectrum. 

Yes, Sprint is saying 2010 for WiMax in SF, but it's too late.  My two year Mobile broadband contract is up and since we have to move to Comcast anyway, there's no way I'm going to wait any longer for 4Mbs when I can have 15-21Mbs.

I guess my next handset will have to be WiMax running Win7 Phone Series…

Apple Sues HTC Over many things, mostly Android

This tells Smackie one thing: Apple is worried, and tried to hit a manufacturer to scare other manufacturers off adding an Android phone to their lineup.  Most interestingly, they didn't sue Google directly (deep pockets? part of an agreement? Existing litigation?  Either way, it's telling).

Smackie is 10 hours or so into his first Android Experience (HTC Hero on Sprint) and I must say, I'm impressed.  Very impressed.

But one HUGE thing that I find an unacceptable oversight - one sound option for "notifications."  The same sound file for a new text, a new email, a new voicemail message or a calendar update is plain silly.  I need a different sound for each and it doesn't make sense to not have that option in 2010.  Anyone know if that is fixed in 2.1?

Otherwise, I love the customization options available to me from HTC Sense - a great expansion on what I saw in the original Android OS.  For my first non-WinMo phone in years, this is quite the treat.

EDIT: One other annoying thing - requiring me to have a Gmail account (not just my google account email address) to download from the app store. I relly don't want or need another email adress in my life….

New Phones Still Sold With Old Versions of Android

why can't the phones' software be upgradeable remotely?  is that simply the nature of the construction of the phone; the software has to be hard-wired into the programming?