| Xbox 360 | 86% | 86% - 159 | ||||
| Iphone | 13% | 13% - 25 | ||||
| Total: 184 | ||||||
Last edited by lavadisk (2007-07-17 10:00:10)
Because it freakin' has ultra in the name, okay?!?! He also put it in bold, capital letters... doesn't that mean anything to you?joker8baller wrote:
Why the Ultra? Not really significant over the GTX.... Plus the 9 series are gonna come out soon.
Last edited by xBlackPantherx (2007-07-17 11:23:59)
Lemme guess, you dont have one. Plus, of fucking course you're going to pay more. Actually no, it all depends. Are you telling me you would buy an x-box 360 (atleast $400 vs iphone - $500) and not buy atleast TEN $50 games for the 360? It all depends how long you use it. iPhone per month is $30 a month for a good plan (like 450 minutes and unlimited text and whatnot) then 360 = $50 a game which you could get for the PC, Wii, or Mac.loubot wrote:
Getting an IPhone will cost you more in the long run, especially with service fee and any other fee.
Yes gotta agree with that. But, I think wasting money on a mobile phone is just wrong, not just iphone, I hate these fancy stuff, like 2 MP camera, 3G, to get faster connection ect... ect... I have a sharp GX15, I bought it about 3 years ago. And it still works fine. Never used the camera, although I admit it's SHITE!xBlackPantherx wrote:
I can also guarantee you EVERYONE who has talked shit about an iPhone doesn't even have one or havn't used it for more than a little while.
1. Your best reasoning for not investing is that you might die prematurely? Unless you are inheriting a great wealth, you my friend will always be poor or struggling to maintain middle class status. gL.twiistaaa wrote:
not if he dies before then. then he had no xbox and 0.0000000001% of a company.Ironsteed wrote:
Neither... invest it. 20 years from now when no one remembers what the iphone or xbox 360 were you will be happy you did.
Actually, quite wrong. It's cheaper to get an Iphone than say... a Free Treo...loubot wrote:
REASON WHY NOT TO GET AN IPHONE:
AT&T's iPhone fees don't make sense
Posted Jul 12th 2007 11:39AM by Brian White
Filed under: Bad news, Products and services, Consumer experience, Apple Inc (AAPL), AT and T (T), iPhone
One thing I've never understood is the fact that AT&T (NYSE: T) wants to charge iPhone customers a $175 "termination fee" if the two-year contract signed when activating that shiny new iPhone is broken. Apple's (NASDAQ: AAPL) iPhone handset is not subsidized at all by AT&T, unlike every other phone the wireless carrier offers. That $49 generic handset you may have gotten when you signed up for cell phone service costs way more than that to make, but the lucrative two years of service you sign on for gives the carrier time to recoup that cost and more. If you leave the contract early, you pay a cancellation fee to make up for that lost revenue. With the iPhone, you're paying a full, unsubsidized price up front -- but for some reason, there is still a cancellation fee. That perturbs me, and I don't even own an iPhone or have a AT&T subscription.
What kind of goofy tactic is this? Welcome to Apple's world, folks. While I highly admire the company's innovative and stylish products, they do operate in a closed vacuum most of the time. Can you use any other music service outside iTunes with the iPod? Nope. How about using any other wireless company other than AT&T for that new iPhone? Nope. Apple loves creating the best overall user experience by tightly controlling all aspects of its products once they reach the consumer.
This is opposite to many companies that market the "use anywhere with any service" precept to consumers as a marketing pitch. The wireless carrier industry is different, though. Wireless carriers in the U.S. have tight control over the phones they sell and deny control to the consumer. It's all about maximizing revenue and providing a consistent user experience -- not giving the customer freedom. This is nothing new for most phones sold in the U.S., iPhone or not.
The difference here is that AT&T is not losing a thing if you buy that iPhone -- it's marked at full retail. This is not a "free phone" that requires a calling contract to ensure the money is made elsewhere. It's an undiscounted retail purchase that should come with no contract and in an unlocked version that allows any iPhone customer to use that new piece of equipment with any compatible carrier. This is not the case with the iPhone, though, and the locked ecosystem Apple and AT&T created to control the customer experience is now biting them both in the butt a little. Will the iPhone's stance change as a result? Of course not. At least not until 2012, when the AT&T exclusivity contract ends.
http://aapl.bloggingstocks.com/2007/07/ … ake-sense/
Getting an IPhone will cost you more in the long run, especially with service fee and any other BS fee.
lmao. maddox ftw!!!DK_Vision wrote:
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=iphone
Enjoy.
I guarantee you that anyone who buys an iPhone is either completely ignorant of the technology they contain or an idiot.xBlackPantherx wrote:
I can also guarantee you EVERYONE who has talked shit about an iPhone doesn't even have one or havn't used it for more than a little while.
Last edited by HSG (2007-07-17 12:46:36)
Good link Shiro....TREO is another money-pit phone. My co-worker often complains about his billing. Anyway this is from your article:shirosham wrote:
Actually, quite wrong. It's cheaper to get an Iphone than say... a Free Treo...loubot wrote:
REASON WHY NOT TO GET AN IPHONE:
AT&T's iPhone fees don't make sense
Posted Jul 12th 2007 11:39AM by Brian White
Filed under: Bad news, Products and services, Consumer experience, Apple Inc (AAPL), AT and T (T), iPhone
One thing I've never understood is the fact that AT&T (NYSE: T) wants to charge iPhone customers a $175 "termination fee" if the two-year contract signed when activating that shiny new iPhone is broken. Apple's (NASDAQ: AAPL) iPhone handset is not subsidized at all by AT&T, unlike every other phone the wireless carrier offers. That $49 generic handset you may have gotten when you signed up for cell phone service costs way more than that to make, but the lucrative two years of service you sign on for gives the carrier time to recoup that cost and more. If you leave the contract early, you pay a cancellation fee to make up for that lost revenue. With the iPhone, you're paying a full, unsubsidized price up front -- but for some reason, there is still a cancellation fee. That perturbs me, and I don't even own an iPhone or have a AT&T subscription.
What kind of goofy tactic is this? Welcome to Apple's world, folks. While I highly admire the company's innovative and stylish products, they do operate in a closed vacuum most of the time. Can you use any other music service outside iTunes with the iPod? Nope. How about using any other wireless company other than AT&T for that new iPhone? Nope. Apple loves creating the best overall user experience by tightly controlling all aspects of its products once they reach the consumer.
This is opposite to many companies that market the "use anywhere with any service" precept to consumers as a marketing pitch. The wireless carrier industry is different, though. Wireless carriers in the U.S. have tight control over the phones they sell and deny control to the consumer. It's all about maximizing revenue and providing a consistent user experience -- not giving the customer freedom. This is nothing new for most phones sold in the U.S., iPhone or not.
The difference here is that AT&T is not losing a thing if you buy that iPhone -- it's marked at full retail. This is not a "free phone" that requires a calling contract to ensure the money is made elsewhere. It's an undiscounted retail purchase that should come with no contract and in an unlocked version that allows any iPhone customer to use that new piece of equipment with any compatible carrier. This is not the case with the iPhone, though, and the locked ecosystem Apple and AT&T created to control the customer experience is now biting them both in the butt a little. Will the iPhone's stance change as a result? Of course not. At least not until 2012, when the AT&T exclusivity contract ends.
http://aapl.bloggingstocks.com/2007/07/ … ake-sense/
Getting an IPhone will cost you more in the long run, especially with service fee and any other BS fee.
http://palmaddict.typepad.com/palmaddic … y-36179098
Cheers.
Last edited by loubot (2007-07-17 12:58:15)
Last edited by docnutz (2007-07-17 15:47:43)
Iphones suck, period.Slickdawg8 wrote:
I would get the iphone. I have a 360 and its awesome, but the iphone is just incredible. It is pretty much like 4 or 5 devices in one... a phone, ipod, portable video/dvd player, maps/gps system, web browser. I watched a 20 minute demonstration of it on iphone.com and it is just awesome, you should look for the video if you can.
okay i must have missed where this was talked about... but the ultra is ONE OF THE BIGGEST WASTES OF MONEY IVE EVER SEEN!!!!Noobpatty wrote:
Because it freakin' has ultra in the name, okay?!?! He also put it in bold, capital letters... doesn't that mean anything to you?joker8baller wrote:
Why the Ultra? Not really significant over the GTX.... Plus the 9 series are gonna come out soon.
why didnt i think of that?Volatile_Squirrel wrote:
/thread continues
Get neither. Buy a new quad core next week when the prices drop. Or....
Tandem skydive - $120
Day of paintball fun - $150
Get rope and harness to repel down your nearest cliff face - $150
Go to your local gun store to shoot off one of their fully automatic ak47s -$70
Stop by Chipotle and get yourself a carnitas burrito, chips, and a tasty beverage -$10
You'll have some cool memories and something to actually talk about.
What did i hear? Oh, thats right, "Please jihad me"mafropetee wrote:
why didnt i think of that?Volatile_Squirrel wrote:
/thread continues
Get neither. Buy a new quad core next week when the prices drop. Or....
Tandem skydive - $120
Day of paintball fun - $150
Get rope and harness to repel down your nearest cliff face - $150
Go to your local gun store to shoot off one of their fully automatic ak47s -$70
Stop by Chipotle and get yourself a carnitas burrito, chips, and a tasty beverage -$10
You'll have some cool memories and something to actually talk about.
i dont care much for chipotle though. im a moe's kinda guy.
Thats why they sold like 750,000 in the first 4 days with almost no returns, right? Like I said before, these forums are flooded with people who like to kiss Bill Gates's wrinkly ass. I run every single game I have (including all BF's, BF2 and after) on high with no lag, good ping and fps. I didn't have to put a single thing extra on my mac except Windows XP (not vista, that shit blows.) Face it, Mac is better. I've used only PC approved devices on my Mac that have been easier to set up on there then on my PC. The PC half of my computer has completely crashed 3 times with high maintenance and had to completely reload everything. Do you know how many times all of our families computers ( 4 Apple computers ) have crashed TOTAL? Three times for four computers over the span of 2 years. I've had Windows on one of the Macs for 7 months and its crashed as many times as 4 Macs have in 2 years. The only reason people like PC better, is that they're cheaper to make so everyone makes them, therefore, they USUSALLY sell cheaper. I can almost guarantee you that for the price of my computer and the general specs (mine cost $2000 US for a 24" screen iMac with nVidia Geforce something 7 series, dual core, 2 gig of ram, etc.) that I could match or outperform you're computer. Furthermore, since everyone makes PC's because they're cheaper (it's cheaper to make pieces of crap than something good), more people make software for PC's. Here's an interesting fact. With out Apple, you wouldn't have Battlefield or any other EA game. Or possibly ANY other game besides Pong for that matter. For one thing, Mac used to be partners with Gates. Apple sold them the software for PC's. Another thing, I believe the co-founder of Apple went on to be the Founder of EA. EA used to be solely Mac, then they went into PC, and now they're getting into both. Soon to be releasing hot new games for both Mac and PC (one of them I think is 2142.) Anyways, it's just a fact that Mac is better.Bertster7 wrote:
I guarantee you that anyone who buys an iPhone is either completely ignorant of the technology they contain or an idiot.xBlackPantherx wrote:
I can also guarantee you EVERYONE who has talked shit about an iPhone doesn't even have one or haven't used it for more than a little while.
There is no other way of putting it. The iPhone is shockingly bad. Apple should be ashamed of themselves.
How about you be quiet redneck. BTW, learn how to spell and use grammar.lavadisk wrote:
Somebody's mr.mad mac fan (xBlackPantherx, xBlackPantherx,xBlackPantherx,xBlackPantherx)
lavadisk wrote:
Somebody's Mr. Mad Mac fan (xBlackPantherx,it's called "Space Bar" xBlackPantherx, xBlackPantherx, xBlackPantherx.)
Last edited by xBlackPantherx (2007-07-18 11:57:23)