-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
WWDC10 Thread of iPhones and iProducts galore
- Thread starter celebi23
- Start date
PhoncipleBone
Banned
That would be nice as well. Really, they need to do a big update to iLife stuff. But if it were just an iTunes update to multicore and 64bit that would be oh so nice.scorcho said:
And put me on the wagon for loving the dissing of Gizmodo.
Gary Whitta said:
They need as much signal transparency as they can get. The 3g antenna "window" on the top of the 3g iPad is probably the same size as the surface area of the entire back of the iPhone. I doubt we will ever see a full metal uni-body iPhone.... not until they can come up with some crazy way to make the case itself the antenna.
That being said, a unibody iPhone would shit hot.
Gary Whitta
Member
Typically that stuff gets rolled out at the iPod presentation in September.PhoncipleBone said:
DrFunk said:
There are few things on this earth as rich as epic pwnage on a shit site.
I probably wont get an iPhone 4 as I'm jumping to Android, but it's still so sweet that Gizmodo has killed itself with Apple in the future for what, 5 million hits? I guess that being iced out on Apple coverage for the next fifty years or so is worth that... LOL :lol
Alfarif said:
It's hilariously sad thinking that Gizmodo, a tech blog, can not cover one of the official reveal of one of the biggest pieces of tech that will come out in 2010. They won't be able to review it early, they won't be able to get a Hands-on on Monday, they will only be able to live-blog in proxy of the show. Was it really worth 5 million hits for this? And this will happen again next year, and next year, and next year. And all they can do is sit and take it up the ass.
This has to be the most satisfying karmic comeuppance that I've witnessed on the internet yet. Never has a ho been bitch-slapped by a pimp as Giz has by Apple. The whole arrest plus charges thing was good enough, but this, this is icing on the cake.
It's kind of amazing that Giz hadn't looked at the opportunity cost of the whole iPhone 4 and trying to get Jobs to say it was real. I mean, they may have gotten 5 million hits off of the coverage, but how much will they lose when their faithful readers can't read an iPhone 4 Hands-on on their site, and they go to Engadget. Multiply that by a few years, and the hits you got will pale in comparison to the hits that you lost. Whose fucking bright idea was it to piss off the CEO of one of the leading companies in the world? What a bunch of fucking idiots.
TheGreatDave
Banned
The "yeah, fuck Gizmodo over, Apple!" attitude here is so precious. You were given pictures of a device you probably want earlier than you would otherwise have had them. Unless you REALLY feel sorry for the idiot who left the phone in the first place, why all the glee over Gizmodo not getting to cover a press event? Shitty site or not (and yeah, for the most part Gawker is shit), they've gave you something you presumably wanted.
On topic, I'm finally able to upgrade on the 27th or so, so I'm hyped to finally see the phone proper any hopefully some secret tricks.
On topic, I'm finally able to upgrade on the 27th or so, so I'm hyped to finally see the phone proper any hopefully some secret tricks.
Gary Whitta
Member
I'd quite like an Audi R8 too but I don't want someone to steal one for me and then publicly ridicule the guy they stole it from.
I dont believe most here felt sorry for Apple for the device being revealed early (read the original giz thread). Its just the things that happened afterwards (extortion, checkbook journalism, general jackassery) combined with their already tarnished reputation that left people with a bad taste.TheGreatDave said:
Burger
Member
DMeisterJ said:
It's not like Gizmodo recently became a bunch of douchebags. Remember during CES when they got a bunch of those TV B Gone remotes, and went around switching off whole banks of TV's, and even doing it at a keynote for some company (LG/Phillips?).
From memory, only a staffer was banned from CES, and not Gizmodo as a whole. Shame.
TheGreatDave
Banned
You'd turn away the car in that scenario?Gary Whitta said:
I'm sceptical. Even if it was stolen, I'm taking the free car.
Gary Whitta
Member
Really? You'd knowingly accept stolen goods? While the guy who owned the car was made fun of all over the internet for having it stolen? I guess we differ there, then.TheGreatDave said:
PhoncipleBone
Banned
It was the exposing of the guy who lost it that irked me. Them getting the scoop was a nice get, but outing the poor guy who left it behind was a dick move.TheGreatDave said:
Then reading about the CES stunt they pulled just showed that they are just immature jackasses (that I still read almost daily).
Even knowing that by doing that, you're likely making another guy miserable? Let's be real for a minute, chances that the man who lost the iPhone still has a job are slim to none because he accidentally created such a massive incident. And to top it off, his name is all over the internet as the idiot who got drunk in a bar then left a top secret device prototype behind...TheGreatDave said:
TheGreatDave
Banned
There's a big moral difference between stealing a car from some guy who lives on your street and feeling sorry for Audi because one of their cars got misplaced. Ultimately this phone wasn't stolen from Random Apple Guy, because it didn't belong to him. The idea of Steve Jobs being pissed off that something fell in to the wrong hands, and people on the Internet seeing pictures of it, doesn't exactly force upon me moral dilemas.Gary Whitta said:
CharminUltra
Member
I didn't know there were Gizmodo fanboys, The more you know.TheGreatDave said:
Liu Kang Baking A Pie
Member
They didn't just reveal a product. They revealed and mocked a poor guy who didn't deserve the infamy.jey_16 said:
They even censored themselves when it made them look bad. On the Gizmodo site, they had this up as part of their response to Apple's request for the phone back:
In reality, they had written this to Apple:
What the fuck?
TheGreatDave
Banned
My yearly page views for Gizmodo are probably around 7.ridley182 said:
giga said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the prototype version of an unfinished iPhone wasn't the property of this man, but rather the company he worked for. It's not like he was the victim of theft. Unless the idiot left his wallet around too.
PhoncipleBone
Banned
Let's not let this dovetail into a moral discussion like the iPhone leak thread. A few posts here and there (which I was guilty of too)in here are one thing, but I dont think we need a few pages of the same stuff we can read in the other thread.
Now, back on topic! New phone! WOOT! I still wont switch to AT&T to get it! It will be sexy and tempting, but in a few years when it goes multicarrier (I pray), then I will jump in.
Now, back on topic! New phone! WOOT! I still wont switch to AT&T to get it! It will be sexy and tempting, but in a few years when it goes multicarrier (I pray), then I will jump in.
Honestly I dont know how some one can support Gizmodo after this episode? Unless ofcourse you are one of those numbnuts like the Herr Steve one posted on the last page. :lolridley182 said:
Looking forward to iPhone 4 and AppleTV. For the latter mainly interesting because thats the second frontier that Apple is going to fight Google.
PhoncipleBone
Banned
I just go there for some of the random stories. Part of me feels bad for giving the site clicks, but I just look for all the tech news I can find. I just usually jump between them and Engadget. Giz is a once a day check, where Engadget is frequently.irfan said:
It has nothing to do with it being in the wrong hands and everything to do with the extortion campaign and criminal damage that followed.TheGreatDave said:
The irony is that other sites who appear to have sources on the production line have been able to get their hands on the thing and disseminated it to a far more thorough degree than Gizmodo managed to.
TheGreatDave
Banned
"Supporting" a side is borderline retarded. Apple are drama queens, Gizmodo are pricks. Point is there's no reason for random GAF member to be happy Apple aren't letting Gizmodo help them sell their products.irfan said:
Apple would have the legal rights to the device yes, but they would have extended permission to that employee for whatever field testing he was doing. Either way, does it really matter who the owner is because in the end it was still a theft. (where the thief tried to even remove/damage the evidence!)TheGreatDave said:
TheGreatDave said:
No one is supporting anything though. It's just a hilarious situation when you consider how a site fucks over a company and then gets fucked over themselves. And that wouldn't be news, unless said site decided to try to blackmail said company during the whole process, oust the guy that lost the phone, and then thought said company was going to act like nothing was wrong and let them come to the conference. Giz definitely costed Apple some sales from people who would have bought an iPhone during the last 2 months (how much will never be known), and this is their repayment for it. I don't support either side, because I don't care about multi-billion dollar corporations or shitty sites.
I just care about the lulz, and this has much.
brotkasten
Member
I hope Jobs will finally gain some weight. He still looks horrible.
Jill Sandwich
the turds of Optimus Prime
^^^
All gizmodo had to do was buy a wwdc dev pass and they would have gotten in the keynote.DMeisterJ said:
They didn't bother to do that and they must have known they werent going to get invited as press so it seems pretty obvious that they're running this just to get more attention.
It's the future product reveal events where they'll get hit harder as there's no other option to get in except a press invite (perhaps one more reason apple dropped out of macworld - they couldn't control who got in the macworld keynote)
brotkasten
Member
I watched his D1 interview and the difference is pretty big.Jill Sandwich said:
Burai said:
fixed.
Jill Sandwich
the turds of Optimus Prime
brotkasten said:
My post referred to the Gizmodo drama rehashing.
might as well post my predictions and unrealistic hopes.
predictions:
iPhone 4 hardware release date and process announced
iPhone OS 4.0 new features for new hardware
Preview of OS 4.0 on iPad
lots of dev demos! (yaaaaay! ugh)
Some Mac hardware update. Pro or Air or both
unrealistic hopes:
10.7 sneak peak
iTunes going cocoa and 64 bit.
predictions:
iPhone 4 hardware release date and process announced
iPhone OS 4.0 new features for new hardware
Preview of OS 4.0 on iPad
lots of dev demos! (yaaaaay! ugh)
Some Mac hardware update. Pro or Air or both
unrealistic hopes:
10.7 sneak peak
iTunes going cocoa and 64 bit.
Supposed Safari 5 features
http://www.macgeneration.com/news/voir/157341/exclu-mac-os-10.6.4-et-safari-5-pour-la-wwdc
http://www.macgeneration.com/news/voir/157341/exclu-mac-os-10.6.4-et-safari-5-pour-la-wwdc
Technosteve
Banned
which live blog should i follow? i usually do engadget, the best seems to be mac rumors.
Kung Fu Jedi
Member
What is the under and over on the number of times we're going to have to remind random Gaffers that this is a DEV conference, when they start bitching about how shitty the keynote is?
Mr. Wonderful
Member
Big internet browser updates (IE Safari 3.x to 4, etc.) are almost a bigger deal than OS updates, they make the biggest difference in everyday computing. Same reason I want iTunes to get updated.giga said:
badcrumble
Member
That's all great, and so is the prospect that it'll be able to have the Flash plugin crash without taking out the browser (apparently), but I want a damn plugin architecture >:Ogiga said:Supposed Safari 5 features
http://www.macgeneration.com/news/voir/157341/exclu-mac-os-10.6.4-et-safari-5-pour-la-wwdc
I would be utterly stunned if that happened.Solideliquid said:
The pattern in the past has been to give the final version of the new OS to devs at WWDC, and then release the new OS to everyone else coincident with the availability of the new iPhone hardware several weeks later. Continuing this pattern makes a lot of sense:
1) Although developers have been working with betas of OS 4 for a while, there are always changes in the final version. (Especially since there are almost certainly secret features that have been held back.) The developers need some time to test their apps with the final OS 4 and then resubmit for approval.
2) Apple also needs time to review and approve all of the "tested with OS 4" app submissions. I hear the app review process has gotten much faster, but when you consider that basically the entire store would need some kind of update, that's a non-trivial task.
3) There is no advantage to rushing out the new OS. One of Apple's key strengths is the stability and reliability of its OS. If they release it before the apps that people use have been thoroughly tested, that would damage that reputation...and people have known about OS 4 for months anyway. So why not save the release for another few weeks to ensure that the upgrade is smooth for everyone? (Also, releasing the new OS at roughly the same time as the new iPhone hardware just adds to the "iPhone hype week" effect.)
For what it's worth, I don't buy any of the "new iPhone is available starting day 1 of WWDC" rumors either. The new hardware presumably requires OS 4 to run. So, releasing that device immediately would be basically the same situtation as an existing iPhone upgrading to OS 4 without having fully tested apps...doesn't make any sense. Also, it allows zero time to fulfill pre-orders, staff up retail stores, etc. Hell, it pushes sales of new iPhones early enough so that they might have to report on them in their 2Q earnings, which normally they don't like to do -- better to drop amazing numbers from the new launch as a bullet point for 3Q results. Apple can obviously do whatever it wants, and maybe I'll be surprised with everyone else on Monday, but to me it just doesn't make any sense as a scenario.
SuperPac
Member
irfan said:
Yeah iPhone 4/OS4 is expected, but I'm looking forward to Apple TV stuff as well. We have our Apple TV in the living room and my wife sometimes wants to watch some of the TV shows we've bought via iTunes before going to bed. I don't necessarily wanna buy a whole 'nutha Apple TV to go in the bedroom but if they do that just-streaming device like the one that's rumored, for $99, I'd gladly jump on a second one.