Verizon Wireless thumbs its nose at the iPhone

ed <news@no-atwistedweb-spam.com> wrote:
> "SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
> news:468be6de$0$27199$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
>> Matthew T. Russotto wrote:
> <snip>
>> Even with 300-400, that's talking 8 hours a day, 365 days a
>>> year, to run a battery out in a year. Even most teenaged girls have
>>> trouble talking quite that much.
>>
>> I agree, that's why the one year prediction of battery life is so
>> bogus.
>
> except this thing is also being positioned as an ipod replacement /
> web browser, so it's much more likely to need a charge every day,
> right?

Yep, that fool has never ever had a fucking clue about even the simplest stuff like that.

"Todd Allcock" <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote in message
news:468a4de9$0$8555
> Edison invented the lightbulb- users of modern CFL tubes don't run
> around denying that.

Except Edison didn't invent the lightbulb. He just succeeding in brute
force attempts to find a material that'd last long enough to be commercially
viable. Much like Windows being quit a bit more viable commercially than
anything apple's come up with.

ed wrote:

> except this thing is also being positioned as an ipod replacement / web
> browser, so it's much more likely to need a charge every day, right?

Or more than once a day in some cases. Once the initial excitement of
the device wears off, it's unlikely to need a charge every day. When
you're at home, or at work, you're not going to use it for web browsing,
which takes most of the power. It's a huge battery, and if the iPhone is
used just as an audio iPod, the battery will last a very long time.

ed wrote:
> "SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
> news:468be6de$0$27199$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
>> Matthew T. Russotto wrote:
> <snip>
>> Even with 300-400, that's talking 8 hours a day, 365 days a
>>> year, to run a battery out in a year. Even most teenaged girls have
>>> trouble talking quite that much.
>>
>> I agree, that's why the one year prediction of battery life is so bogus.
>
> except this thing is also being positioned as an ipod replacement / web
> browser, so it's much more likely to need a charge every day, right?

Look at "http://ipodbatteryfaq.com/ipodbatteryandpower.html"

24 hours of audio per charge.

On Jul 3, 5:36 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> It does in a practical sense, once you have ripped your CDs,
> >> you're going to be reluctant to do that again, and so your NEXT
> > wrong. misinformation. fraud.
>
> If this is the best you can manage, here goes the chain on your mindless silly shit.

bah. you were flat out wrong. i cant believe youve lived your whole
life thinking ripping w/ itunes would entail re-ripping when moving
away from itunes.


sm

On Jul 3, 4:57 pm, Walter Bushell <p...@oanix.com> wrote:
> "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > It does in a practical sense, once you have ripped your CDs,
> > you're going to be reluctant to do that again, and so your NEXT
> > media player will need to be able to use iTunes too, and so
> > you'll be reluctant to have other than an ipod or iphone.
>
> Not if you rip your CDs to a lossless format like Apple Lossless. You
> can then convert them to any format you choose as a batch job.

if you wanted to. but Rowdy Roddy's assertion that itunes rips are
proprietary is just plain false. you can rip to MP3, and use that w/
any media player on the market, bar none.

re-ripping is absolutely not necessary..


sm

SpaceMarine <spacemarine@mailinator.com> wrote:
> On Jul 3, 5:36 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> It does in a practical sense, once you have ripped your CDs,
>>>> you're going to be reluctant to do that again, and so your NEXT
>>> wrong. misinformation. fraud.
>>
>> If this is the best you can manage, here goes the chain on your
>> mindless silly shit.

<reams of your mindlessly silly shit flushed where it belongs>

Whoops, nothing left. Wota surprise.

SpaceMarine <spacemarine@mailinator.com> wrote:
> On Jul 3, 4:57 pm, Walter Bushell <p...@oanix.com> wrote:
>> "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> It does in a practical sense, once you have ripped your CDs,
>>> you're going to be reluctant to do that again, and so your NEXT
>>> media player will need to be able to use iTunes too, and so
>>> you'll be reluctant to have other than an ipod or iphone.
>>
>> Not if you rip your CDs to a lossless format like Apple Lossless. You
>> can then convert them to any format you choose as a batch job.
>
> if you wanted to. but Rowdy Roddy's assertion that itunes rips are
> proprietary is just plain false.

Never ever said anything even remotely resembling anything like that, liar.

<reams of your mindlessly silly shit/lies flushed where it belongs>

On Jul 5, 11:09 am, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> ed wrote:
> > "SMS" <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote in message
> >news:468be6de$0$27199$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net.. .
> >> Matthew T. Russotto wrote:
> > <snip>
> >> Even with 300-400, that's talking 8 hours a day, 365 days a
> >>> year, to run a battery out in a year. Even most teenaged girls have
> >>> trouble talking quite that much.
>
> >> I agree, that's why the one year prediction of battery life is so bogus.
>
> > except this thing is also being positioned as an ipod replacement / web
> > browser, so it's much more likely to need a charge every day, right?
>
> Look at "http://ipodbatteryfaq.com/ipodbatteryandpower.html"
>
> 24 hours of audio per charge.

only if you don't use the other features, eh?

On Jul 5, 2:27 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:

> Whoops, nothing left. Wota surprise.

i see youve accepted your ignorance w/o actually acknowledging it.
bahahahah


sm

SpaceMarine <spacemarine@mailinator.com> wrote:

<reams of your mindlessly silly juveline shit flushed where it belongs>

Whoops, nothing left. Wota surprise.

On Jul 5, 2:28 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > if you wanted to. but Rowdy Roddy's assertion that itunes rips are
> > proprietary is just plain false.
>
> Never ever said anything even remotely resembling anything like that, liar.

rubbish. lesse...:

> Yes, but thats a separate issue to whether those who have already
> done that will be biased towards a second media player that can use
> the existing iTunes library, so you dont have to fart around and ripp
> all the CDs again, or convert them to another format etc.

key phrase being, "so you dont have to fart around and ripp all the
CDs again". this is where you suggest itunes rips are proprietary to
apple media players. and here again your ignorance loudly parades
itself:

> It does in a practical sense, once you have ripped your CDs,
> you're going to be reluctant to do that again, and so your NEXT
> media player will need to be able to use iTunes too, and so
> you'll be reluctant to have other than an ipod or iphone.

key phase here: "once you have ripped your CDs, you're going to be
reluctant to do that again". as any child can tell you, after ripping
your CDs w/ itunes you do not need re-rip them for use on a non-ipod.


....but dont let that stop ya from living in that dream world of
ignorance & denial, tho. send us a postcard, even. i hear the view is
great.

sm

SpaceMarine <spacemarine@mailinator.com> wrote:

<reams of your mindlessly silly juvenile shit/lies flushed where it belongs>

Whoops, nothing left. Wota surprise.

On Jul 5, 5:23 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Whoops, nothing left. Wota surprise.

i see youve accepted your ignorance w/o actually acknowledging it.
bahahahah


sm

Justin <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:
> Rod Speed wrote on [Fri, 6 Jul 2007 07:28:03 +1000]:
>> SpaceMarine <spacemarine@mailinator.com> wrote:
>>
>> <reams of your mindlessly silly juveline shit flushed where it
>> belongs>
>>
>> Whoops, nothing left. Wota surprise.
>
> A 2 year old could leave that for dead.

Can't even manage its own lines, or anything else at all, either.

SpaceMarine <spacemarine@mailinator.com> wrote:

<reams of your mindlessly silly juvenile shit/lies flushed where it belongs>

Whoops, nothing left. Wota surprise

SpaceMarine wrote:

> key phase here: "once you have ripped your CDs, you're going to be
> reluctant to do that again". as any child can tell you, after ripping
> your CDs w/ itunes you do not need re-rip them for use on a non-ipod.

The real issue is if you have a lot of DRM protected M4P iTunes songs.
While removing the DRM isn't all that difficult, it's still beyond the
ability of many users. If you do an MP3 conversion then it's lossy.

However it's true that what the other poster wrote is incorrect, you
would not have to rip your CDs again.

In article <5f5ekjF3aq9l9U2@mid.individual.net>,
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:

> SpaceMarine <spacemarine@mailinator.com> wrote:
>
> <reams of your mindlessly silly juvenile shit/lies flushed where it belongs>
>
> Whoops, nothing left. Wota surprise

Jeez this pre-teen flame war in tedious.

Isn't there a chat room you guys can go to?

I'll even vouch for you being 18 if your parents won't.

--
To reply by email, remove the word "space"

In article <labolide-E9B0FE.17401105072007@news.giganews.com>,
Kurt <labolide@spacegmail.com> wrote:

> In article <5f5ekjF3aq9l9U2@mid.individual.net>,
> "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > SpaceMarine <spacemarine@mailinator.com> wrote:
> >
> > <reams of your mindlessly silly juvenile shit/lies flushed where it belongs>
> >
> > Whoops, nothing left. Wota surprise
>
> Jeez this pre-teen flame war in tedious.
>
> Isn't there a chat room you guys can go to?
>
> I'll even vouch for you being 18 if your parents won't.

Nothing quite so riveting as a battle of the posts by macro is there?

In article <1183666065.923611.90800@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.c om>,
ed <news@atwistedweb.com> wrote:

> On Jul 5, 11:09 am, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> > ed wrote:
> > > "SMS" <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote in message
> > >news:468be6de$0$27199$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net.. .
> > >> Matthew T. Russotto wrote:
> > > <snip>
> > >> Even with 300-400, that's talking 8 hours a day, 365 days a
> > >>> year, to run a battery out in a year. Even most teenaged girls have
> > >>> trouble talking quite that much.
> >
> > >> I agree, that's why the one year prediction of battery life is so bogus.
> >
> > > except this thing is also being positioned as an ipod replacement / web
> > > browser, so it's much more likely to need a charge every day, right?
> >
> > Look at "http://ipodbatteryfaq.com/ipodbatteryandpower.html"
> >
> > 24 hours of audio per charge.
>
> only if you don't use the other features, eh?

Sure. But it's not hard to do a little math to see what a mix looks
like. For instance, you should be able to do an hour of web browsing,
two hours of talking, and a couple of hours of music playing, and still
have half your charge left.

Also note that the iPhone works perfectly well while plugged in. When
I'm at my desk I leave mine in its cradle; it acts as a neat little
stand and turns the thing into the world's coolest desk phone. So,
that's a decent fraction of my calls that aren't using battery power at
all.

--
"That's George Washington, the first president, of course. The interesting thing
about him is that I read three--three or four books about him last year. Isn't
that interesting?"
- George W. Bush to reporter Kai Diekmann, May 5, 2006

ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote:
> In article <1183666065.923611.90800@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.c om>,
> ed <news@atwistedweb.com> wrote:
>
>> On Jul 5, 11:09 am, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
>>> ed wrote:
>>>> "SMS" <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:468be6de$0$27199$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
>>>>> Matthew T. Russotto wrote:
>>>> <snip>
>>>>> Even with 300-400, that's talking 8 hours a day, 365 days a
>>>>>> year, to run a battery out in a year. Even most teenaged girls
>>>>>> have trouble talking quite that much.
>>>
>>>>> I agree, that's why the one year prediction of battery life is so
>>>>> bogus.
>>>
>>>> except this thing is also being positioned as an ipod replacement
>>>> / web browser, so it's much more likely to need a charge every
>>>> day, right?
>>>
>>> Look at "http://ipodbatteryfaq.com/ipodbatteryandpower.html"
>>>
>>> 24 hours of audio per charge.
>>
>> only if you don't use the other features, eh?
>
> Sure. But it's not hard to do a little math to see what a mix looks
> like. For instance, you should be able to do an hour of web browsing,
> two hours of talking, and a couple of hours of music playing, and
> still have half your charge left.

No one ever said that most will need to charge it every day, just that SOME are likely to do that
and that THEN the battery may well have seen reduced capacity before the warranty runs out.

> Also note that the iPhone works perfectly well while plugged in. When
> I'm at my desk I leave mine in its cradle; it acts as a neat little stand
> and turns the thing into the world's coolest desk phone. So, that's a
> decent fraction of my calls that aren't using battery power at all.

Pity the whole point of it is as a portable device.

In article <G8GdnTaGCf6ZZRHbnZ2dnUVZ_iydnZ2d@speakeasy.net> , Bill
Kearney <wkearney-99@hot-mail-com> wrote:

> "Todd Allcock" <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote in message
> news:468a4de9$0$8555
> > Edison invented the lightbulb- users of modern CFL tubes don't run
> > around denying that.
>
> Except Edison didn't invent the lightbulb. He just succeeding in brute
> force attempts to find a material that'd last long enough to be commercially
> viable. Much like Windows being quit a bit more viable commercially than
> anything apple's come up with.
>
Erroneous comparison; Windows isn't more commercially viable, and never
had to prove itself against any other product. It simply had a better
start in a market that wasn't prepared to develop competitors.
MS-DOS and the Windows products following it were presumed into the
clone market, and that is where the growth was.

(I don't count Apple as a competitor then, because they refused to
compete in the market that provided the growth -- low-end units en
masse.)

Apple's actual product may always ave been much more practical,
useable, and viable than Windows -- but the fact that quantity
purchases are usually for low-end computers prevents them from being
considered.

It's silly to compare 'commercial viability' of two products in
different market segments and with different requirements.

In article <468d8c43$0$27170$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>, SMS
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> The real issue is if you have a lot of DRM protected M4P iTunes songs.
> While removing the DRM isn't all that difficult, it's still beyond the
> ability of many users.
I wonder how many would really have trouble. It may not be obvious, but
it's just three steps:
select or make a playlist for those tracks (or just select them)
make sure the import format is in what you want to end with.
Choose Advanced>Convert to

The first is natural for all iTunes users; the third is labelled very
well. The way to change formats (step 2) is very simple, but not
obvious. It is very clear in Help.

> If you do an MP3 conversion then it's lossy.
From one format to another? Not much. If it's significant, the source
is probably already unacceptable. This conversion isn't going to change
a good file to junk.
(Unless, of course, you actually use setting to do so; I know lots of
people who use only low settings like MP3 @ 64 for their portables,
because it's loud where they are and they want more files.)

In article <5f5k2eF3ak1a1U1@mid.individual.net>,
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:

> ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote:
> > In article <1183666065.923611.90800@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.c om>,
> > ed <news@atwistedweb.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Jul 5, 11:09 am, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> >>> ed wrote:
> >>>> "SMS" <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote in message
> >>>> news:468be6de$0$27199$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> >>>>> Matthew T. Russotto wrote:
> >>>> <snip>
> >>>>> Even with 300-400, that's talking 8 hours a day, 365 days a
> >>>>>> year, to run a battery out in a year. Even most teenaged
> >>>>>> girls have trouble talking quite that much.
> >>>
> >>>>> I agree, that's why the one year prediction of battery life is
> >>>>> so bogus.
> >>>
> >>>> except this thing is also being positioned as an ipod
> >>>> replacement / web browser, so it's much more likely to need a
> >>>> charge every day, right?
> >>>
> >>> Look at "http://ipodbatteryfaq.com/ipodbatteryandpower.html"
> >>>
> >>> 24 hours of audio per charge.
> >>
> >> only if you don't use the other features, eh?
> >
> > Sure. But it's not hard to do a little math to see what a mix looks
> > like. For instance, you should be able to do an hour of web
> > browsing, two hours of talking, and a couple of hours of music
> > playing, and still have half your charge left.
>
> No one ever said that most will need to charge it every day, just
> that SOME are likely to do that and that THEN the battery may well
> have seen reduced capacity before the warranty runs out.

Not much. Apple says it'll be at 80% capacity after 400 charges. Even if
your usage is twice what's mentioned above, and your iPhone operates
exclusively off batteries, it still takes over a year to go through that
many charge cycles.

> > Also note that the iPhone works perfectly well while plugged in.
> > When I'm at my desk I leave mine in its cradle; it acts as a neat
> > little stand and turns the thing into the world's coolest desk
> > phone. So, that's a decent fraction of my calls that aren't using
> > battery power at all.
>
> Pity the whole point of it is as a portable device.

Meh. One of the major purposes of a cell phone is that you're available
at the same number regardless of location. Sometimes that location
happens to be your desk. And the iPhone works better as a desk phone
standing upright in its cradle with the headset hooked up, IMO, than
lying flat on the desk top. The fact that it runs off outlet power (or,
actually, USB power) in that configuration is just a nice bonus.

--
"That's George Washington, the first president, of course. The interesting thing
about him is that I read three--three or four books about him last year. Isn't
that interesting?"
- George W. Bush to reporter Kai Diekmann, May 5, 2006

"ZnU" <znu@fake.invalid> wrote in message
news:znu-E45111.01065206072007@individual.net...
> In article <5f5k2eF3ak1a1U1@mid.individual.net>,
> "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
>> No one ever said that most will need to charge it every day, just
>> that SOME are likely to do that and that THEN the battery may well
>> have seen reduced capacity before the warranty runs out.
>
> Not much. Apple says it'll be at 80% capacity after 400 charges. Even if
> your usage is twice what's mentioned above, and your iPhone operates
> exclusively off batteries, it still takes over a year to go through that
> many charge cycles.

you act like a year's a long time- that's only half your contract.

<snip>

In article <4lkji.3613$rL1.131@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net>,
"ed" <news@no-atwistedweb-spam.com> wrote:

> "ZnU" <znu@fake.invalid> wrote in message
> news:znu-E45111.01065206072007@individual.net...
> > In article <5f5k2eF3ak1a1U1@mid.individual.net>,
> > "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
> <snip>
> >> No one ever said that most will need to charge it every day, just
> >> that SOME are likely to do that and that THEN the battery may well
> >> have seen reduced capacity before the warranty runs out.
> >
> > Not much. Apple says it'll be at 80% capacity after 400 charges. Even if
> > your usage is twice what's mentioned above, and your iPhone operates
> > exclusively off batteries, it still takes over a year to go through that
> > many charge cycles.
>
> you act like a year's a long time- that's only half your contract.

Sure, but most people won't kill their batteries every day. I figure
I'll get three years, by which time I'll probably want the new model
with GPS, 40 GB storage, 3G, and video conferencing features.

--
"That's George Washington, the first president, of course. The interesting thing
about him is that I read three--three or four books about him last year. Isn't
that interesting?"
- George W. Bush to reporter Kai Diekmann, May 5, 2006

In article <znu-3E816A.02234906072007@individual.net>, ZnU
<znu@fake.invalid> wrote:

> > you act like a year's a long time- that's only half your contract.
>
> Sure, but most people won't kill their batteries every day. I figure
> I'll get three years, by which time I'll probably want the new model
> with GPS, 40 GB storage, 3G, and video conferencing features.

In one year, no one will want 3G networking.
The industry runs on tricking you with buzzwords -- they'll be selling
you the idea that 4G systems are necessary by then, even if they aren't
much faster.

I think 40 GB storage is too much to hope for in any case.

I'd still like someone to explain to me how a cell phone can access a
GPD system without separate circuitry for GPS and a satellite antenna.

ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote
>>> ed <news@atwistedweb.com> wrote
>>>> SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote
>>>>> ed wrote
>>>>>> SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote
>>>>>>> Matthew T. Russotto wrote

>>>>>>> Even with 300-400, that's talking 8 hours a day, 365 days a
>>>>>>>> year, to run a battery out in a year. Even most teenaged
>>>>>>>> girls have trouble talking quite that much.

>>>>>>> I agree, that's why the one year prediction of battery life is so bogus.

>>>>>> except this thing is also being positioned as an ipod replacement / web
>>>>>> browser, so it's much more likely to need a charge every day, right?

>>>>> Look at "http://ipodbatteryfaq.com/ipodbatteryandpower.html"

>>>>> 24 hours of audio per charge.

>>>> only if you don't use the other features, eh?

>>> Sure. But it's not hard to do a little math to see what a mix looks
>>> like. For instance, you should be able to do an hour of web
>>> browsing, two hours of talking, and a couple of hours of music
>>> playing, and still have half your charge left.

>> No one ever said that most will need to charge it every day, just
>> that SOME are likely to do that and that THEN the battery may
>> well have seen reduced capacity before the warranty runs out.

> Not much.

We'll see...

> Apple says it'll be at 80% capacity after 400 charges.

Pity that the two year warranty is well over 400 daily charges.

> Even if your usage is twice what's mentioned above, and
> your iPhone operates exclusively off batteries, it still takes
> over a year to go through that many charge cycles.

Which is STILL within the warranty.

>>> Also note that the iPhone works perfectly well while plugged in.
>>> When I'm at my desk I leave mine in its cradle; it acts as a neat
>>> little stand and turns the thing into the world's coolest desk
>>> phone. So, that's a decent fraction of my calls that aren't using
>>> battery power at all.

>> Pity the whole point of it is as a portable device.

> Meh.

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

> One of the major purposes of a cell phone is that
> you're available at the same number regardless of
> location. Sometimes that location happens to be your desk.

Irrelevant to how many want to fart around
and put it on the charger other than overnight.

> And the iPhone works better as a desk phone standing upright
> in its cradle with the headset hooked up, IMO, than lying flat on
> the desk top. The fact that it runs off outlet power (or, actually,
> USB power) in that configuration is just a nice bonus.

See above and SOME users.

ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote:
> In article <4lkji.3613$rL1.131@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net>,
> "ed" <news@no-atwistedweb-spam.com> wrote:
>
>> "ZnU" <znu@fake.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:znu-E45111.01065206072007@individual.net...
>>> In article <5f5k2eF3ak1a1U1@mid.individual.net>,
>>> "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
>> <snip>
>>>> No one ever said that most will need to charge it every day, just
>>>> that SOME are likely to do that and that THEN the battery may well
>>>> have seen reduced capacity before the warranty runs out.
>>>
>>> Not much. Apple says it'll be at 80% capacity after 400 charges.
>>> Even if your usage is twice what's mentioned above, and your iPhone
>>> operates exclusively off batteries, it still takes over a year to
>>> go through that many charge cycles.
>>
>> you act like a year's a long time- that's only half your contract.
>>

> Sure, but most people won't kill their batteries every day.

Irrelevant to what will likely happen with SOME users.

> I figure I'll get three years, by which time I'll probably want the new
> model with GPS, 40 GB storage, 3G, and video conferencing features.

Irrelevant to what will likely happen with SOME users.

Mitch <mitch@hawaii.rr> wrote:
> In article <znu-3E816A.02234906072007@individual.net>, ZnU
> <znu@fake.invalid> wrote:
>
>>> you act like a year's a long time- that's only half your contract.
>>>
>>
>> Sure, but most people won't kill their batteries every day. I figure
>> I'll get three years, by which time I'll probably want the new model
>> with GPS, 40 GB storage, 3G, and video conferencing features.
>
> In one year, no one will want 3G networking.
> The industry runs on tricking you with buzzwords -- they'll be selling
> you the idea that 4G systems are necessary by then, even if they
> aren't much faster.
>
> I think 40 GB storage is too much to hope for in any case.
>
> I'd still like someone to explain to me how a cell phone can access a
> GPD system without separate circuitry for GPS and a satellite antenna.

Have a look at the Nokia N95 some time.