- 01-09-2007, 01:49 PM #101
- 01-09-2007, 01:52 PM #103
EDIT ... and one percent as pretty
- 01-09-2007, 01:52 PM #104
This is what I mean by innovation.
- 01-09-2007, 01:55 PM #106
- 01-09-2007, 01:57 PM #107
- 01-09-2007, 01:59 PM #108
- 01-09-2007, 02:00 PM #109
- 01-09-2007, 02:03 PM #110
All of which many of us have been doing on much lower res screens.
- 01-09-2007, 02:06 PM #111
- 01-09-2007, 02:26 PM #113
- 01-09-2007, 02:32 PM #114
As for running Entourage (what Outlook is called on the Mac), you'd probably have to ask Microsoft. I imagine that there will be basic syncing of PIM with Windows Outlook (just as there is with current iPods) but then you'd need to view, manage and use the data from the in-built apps - iCal (seems to be called just 'Calendar'), Address Book, Notes.
- 01-09-2007, 02:42 PM #115
"Runs version of OSX. "Full desktop-class applications"
"Full desktop-class applications" is quite different to "Full desktop applications"
- 01-09-2007, 04:04 PM #116
- 01-09-2007, 04:30 PM #117
- 01-09-2007, 04:33 PM #118
- 01-09-2007, 04:47 PM #119
soft keyboard could spell its demise for the business user....not sure how they could design the onscreen keyboard to allow accurate and effective typing. my experience is that the soft keyboards don't work very well given the size/proximity of the keys.
- 01-09-2007, 04:48 PM #120
- 01-09-2007, 04:57 PM #121
wider than a treo 680, taller than a treo 680. not as thin as a MotoQ/Jack... Pearl is still smallest and lightest (i think, or close to). i still like the design but really hate the idea of the soft-keyboard. email still a question mark but all the other creature comforts would be lots of fun to have when on the go. i don't think it could replace my primary business device at this point.
the thing is slick
- 01-09-2007, 06:24 PM #122
"What you cannot appreciate looking at iPhone photographs on your computer display is how amazing its screen is. 166 DPI is an amazing resolution — tiny, tiny text is amazingly legible. And the device itself is very thin."
This is the oppisite of what to expect from every other manufacturer - using fake screens in photo shots, the real screen always holds a disappointment when compared to photography shots; where as with Apple's phone, you will not be disappointed, you will be impressed because it will look better in person.
- 01-09-2007, 06:26 PM #123
- 01-09-2007, 06:37 PM #124
The sentence that follows was to talk about how the OS effects this.
One other point that I didn't mention are hardware specs that are not listed as specs. Things like the quality of the screen (ie: say the space between each of the screen pixels, not pixel density- on Apple's phone this space is practically 0, certainly 0 to the naked eye).
- 01-09-2007, 06:38 PM #125