Who bares the burden for your moral stance?

The problem is that aperture isn't really discussed as high/low, but as big/small, or wide/narrow. So if you say "low aperture," it's easily misconstrued to mean "small aperture." I think most of the pro-reading you'll see around the web regarding photography takes care to avoid mixing the two terms, so you won't see…

"I think it you need to narrow the depth of field with a higher aperture setting and faster shutter speed so l can see the subject more clearly..."

Let's also note that it's extraordinarily rare for any mother to consider aborting a child that late unless there was some significant risk to the mother.

But the search engine isn't called "Cha," it's called "ChaCha." I'm not saying Gizmodo's interpretation is right, but yours seems less right.

The iPhone had voice powers before Apple introduced Siri. WAY before, actually. Siri isn't just "voice activated commands." That ability has existed in computers for decades, in fact. You're missing the point when you oversimplify what Siri is.

Why are you looking at the site? If you want to challenge the article, you need to use the app and repeat the test that Gizmodo performed.

Thank you.

The problem is that those "philosophical, moral grounds," upon any inspection, are always rooted in misogyny. One should not avoid calling someone out on the fear that they'll be offended.

"Yup, check out Air Display"

You should read the patent application some time. It would help you understand what is being patented. I'm not interested in discussing your shifting argument. My comment to you was in reponse to this comment: "This is EXACTLY how the samsung remote app works with all my Samsung smart devices. No set up.. auto…

Actually, I just saw something about that the other day. I can't remember the name of the app, though.

Thank you. This is hardly secret info. Gruber and others have documented that Apple is "proactive" in preparing processor alternatives, should they need them.

This is the patent application:

Really? You support this:

1. I said it is for auto-detection

Um, I don't know? Why does anyone care about anything? What is the point of your question?

Go back on what decision?

It happened recently when Facebook updated their app. Same headlines about Android "getting it first." It's such a non story, but whatever.

"If that was really Apple's argument, no new features would come to old iPhones with software updates because they wouldn't run as well than they do on new iPhones. The 3GS wouldn't have gotten multitasking because it's got less RAM and wouldn't run as many applications in the background as it is on an iPhone 4."