241–250 of 255 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I still think a robotics company for the masses is something waiting for a billionare to indulge in. Its 2017 and where is my "Rosie the maid" from jetsons? It should be here by now. I hate doing house chores.
100% agreed. The pieces are there, someone needs to put them together. It's VR in 2009.
> Why didn’t I just travel the world, ride my motorcycle, tinker with my robots, hang out at my bakery with friends and family. Was Andy a douche before he got rich or is that the price of success?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just want a phone that: - Lasts a full day - Looks nice That's all. Currently I can buy various 8mm phones with various bad-to-OK cases. Give me a beautiful 16mm phone and software updates and I'll give you my 700 bucks.
> - Lasts a full day Many phones do this. Both my iPhone 6 and my iPhone 6s do this and more (usually two days). The issue here is that your use case is likely different than mine. It isn't enough to just say, "full day" without specifying full day doing what.
Chrome 40, so all I see is menu headings. Anyone got a summary?
it's a pretty and expensive android phone
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Moreover, their whole website is not accessible when JavaScript is blocked, leaving the impression that security-minded people are not their target audience at all - which is really a pity!
Do you think the guy that designs their web site and the guy that works on phone security are even remotely related?
> Why didn’t I just travel the world, ride my motorcycle, tinker with my robots, hang out at my bakery with friends and family. Was Andy a douche before he got rich or is that the price of success?
Personal attacks will get you banned on HN, so please don't do this again. It doesn't matter if the other person is rich or even if they deserve it; what matters is that it poisons the community, and we don't want that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can buy an external case for the iPhone which fits this description, e.g. at http://mophie.com (I have no relation to that site). I'd be happy to sell you one for 700 bucks. Looks like an easy way to make a few hundred dollar profit :)
Yes. I own two. Hence: > Currently I can buy various 8mm phones with various bad-to-OK cases. In the post you're replying to.
What's the problem with the cases on the market that make them unacceptable? I haven't tried the one I linked to but it looks good, seems to be well designed, and is around the total thickness you're aiming fora
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Personal attacks will get you banned on HN, so please don't do this again. It doesn't matter if the other person is rich or even if they deserve it; what matters is that it poisons the community, and we don't want that.
Dang, you have a lot of rules that you enforce but don't write down. Any criticism could be called an attack and everyone is a person so you're being arbitrary. My stance is that I'm doing some guy who refers to "my engineers" like they're his royal subjects, the favor his copy editor should do him in letting him know how aragance plays with the audience. I'm arbitrarily enforcing our culture's unwritten sanction aga…
> don't write down
It's impossible to write everything down, it would be boring to try, and the reward for such foolishness would be even worse behavior. The commenters who most poison internet forums are experts in adapting to rules so they're technically not violating them.
> I'm arbitrarily enforcing our culture's unwritten sanction
Sure, there are many such values and there are tradeoffs between them. In this case the need to protect the commons takes precedence, because it's fragile and worth protecting. There were other ways to make the substantive point behind your comment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most consumers don't want to "tell a story" but record memories. The auteurs who wish to "tell a story" can crop the viewport to their hearts desire without limiting choices for everyone else who isn't a tortured genius.
So you've never posed for a photo? Waited until the giraffe was looking right at you before you took a picture at the zoo? You're comfortable just snapping a picture, any old picture, and calling it good enough? You just want a picture of your kid, it doesn't matter if they're in focus, or looking at you, or picking their nose. It'll go on the christmas card anyway, right? You don't have to be a "tortured genius" to…
Not everyone wants to take a picture where things are in frame, in focus, and the setting is controlled - but they want a picture when the conditions are right: this is why burst-mode-with-auto-best selection is a thing. When I'm taking a picture, please don't make me think too hard, work tor hard, or it or hope to get the timing exactly right. I don't have a clue why fidelity-loss at point of capture is romanticized when you can do it in 'post'. It is also not future-proof for no good reason, IMO. My argument is an extension of why you would want to shoot and save pictures in RAW, rather than JPEG.
My personal holy grail would be a continuous, high-quality 360-degree video on which I can go back in time and frame a specific area at a given time to put on the Christmas card/push in the gallery. Bonus point would be opening the framed-image in a gallery and being able to see the context around it (360-video with sound).