|
-
Apr 6th, 2010, 03:38 PM
#41
Re: iPad looks like a terrible design.
 Originally Posted by GaryMazzone
We will add an attachement to the side that will hold a supply of lint free wipes to use on the screen every 5 minutes or so. The cost will not be too much.... say $300 for the holder and another $50 or 100 wipes (all cost in US dollars).
Long live Apple 
Better yet, have it auto-eject a lint-free wipe every 5 minutes or so.
Of course, that will do wonders for the battery-life.
-
Apr 6th, 2010, 03:46 PM
#42
Fanatic Member
Re: iPad looks like a terrible design.
Fingerprints are annoying
Once you've used the iPad for a few minutes, among the most glaring shortcomings (besides the screen glare) are the fingerprints on the screen. With a smartphone, you can wipe the screen on your shirt or pants. The iPad is too big for that. We're wondering what exactly to clean it with and where we'll keep the cleaning supplies.
Any person who complains about fingerprints on the screen on a touchscreen device needs to be drug out to the street and shot. It really does make me wonder about the mactards, how in gods name did they figure they wouldn't get fingerprints on the screen after touching it with their fingers?
Where I'm from we only have one bit of advice for new comers: "If you hear banjos, turn and run".
VS 2008 .NetFW 2.0
-
Apr 6th, 2010, 04:38 PM
#43
Re: iPad looks like a terrible design.
There is a surface (coming soon to public restrooms near you) that has been found to shed bacteria. They can't attach to it, and just slough off. I wonder if something like that could be added to a touchscreen and have it be less quickly dirtied. Of course, the surface is a texture, which might make the visibility less than ideal.
My usual boring signature: Nothing
 
-
Apr 6th, 2010, 04:58 PM
#44
Re: iPad looks like a terrible design.
X64 is simply more memory-hungry than X86. I don't think it makes sense on a portable device.
Office 2010 comes in a 64-bit version largely for marketing reasons. An exception may be Excel 2010 for people who use Excel for insane things and need more rows.
Note:
In a default installation of Office 2010, the 32-bit version is installed, even on 64-bit systems. You must explicitly select the Office 2010 64-bit version installation option.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/libr...ffice.14).aspx
The same article goes on to describe numerous headaches when using VBA7 in 64-bit Office 2010, such as the controls you lose.
-
Apr 6th, 2010, 05:35 PM
#45
Re: iPad looks like a terrible design.
If ya can't stand the heat... stay outta the kitchen... and the living room... and the park... and the pool...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ytech_gadg/2...ch_gadg_tc1486
-tg
-
Apr 6th, 2010, 05:53 PM
#46
Re: iPad looks like a terrible design.
 Originally Posted by dilettante
X64 is simply more memory-hungry than X86. I don't think it makes sense on a portable device.
Office 2010 comes in a 64-bit version largely for marketing reasons. An exception may be Excel 2010 for people who use Excel for insane things and need more rows.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/libr...ffice.14).aspx
The same article goes on to describe numerous headaches when using VBA7 in 64-bit Office 2010, such as the controls you lose.
I would imagine that outlook would benefit from 64 bits as well, considering the size some PST files tend to grow to. As far as 64 bit office though, yes I think most people are better off with x86 versions regardless of OS. MS is even advising x86 still due to the fact that no native COM plugins work in x64 office. (I would imagine most .NET AnyCPU compiled assemblies would be ok though, however most plugins are COM still)
But they had to make the transition at some point, and it is nice to see they are offering both versions so people have time to migrate into a 64 bit world. It is better than all of a sudden, they are ONLY offering 64 bit versions, and everyone has to scramble to get up to speed (sort of like how windows phone development is going right now).
I plan to just install x86, even though I run Win7 x64 and likely I will just install x64 on a virtual machine, just to have it for development purposes.
-
Apr 6th, 2010, 11:25 PM
#47
Hyperactive Member
Re: iPad looks like a terrible design.
Let's face it, nice shiny device with apple logo on it = a million bogans immediatly buying it. As long as they can twitter about their new purchase they will be happy.
"Brought an iTab"
"Anyone know what I can do with it"
What's with multi-tasking, Apple users don't get the whole thing with dual buttons on a mouse.
-
Apr 7th, 2010, 08:50 AM
#48
Re: iPad looks like a terrible design.
A device that can't multi-task is bogus. I bought the HTC Desire. Snapdragon FTW.
-
Apr 7th, 2010, 05:45 PM
#49
Hyperactive Member
Re: iPad looks like a terrible design.
 Originally Posted by MaximilianMayrhofer
A device that can't multi-task is bogus. I bought the HTC Desire. Snapdragon FTW.
Max it's call sarcasm, unless of course Apple are going all retro on us and taking us back to the early 1980s.
Honest Question; What the heck are you meant to use them for? With no USB ports severly limited for data transfer via sneaker net.
-
Apr 8th, 2010, 12:50 PM
#50
Re: iPad looks like a terrible design.
And now comes what I'm calling the "iPiddle" - http://tinyurl.com/ybtfq9s
-tg
-
Apr 8th, 2010, 01:09 PM
#51
Re: iPad looks like a terrible design.
.. or maybe the "iPutz" ?
-
Apr 8th, 2010, 01:55 PM
#52
Re: iPad looks like a terrible design.
I'm still waiting for the iMacTard device...
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width
|