I know, I know. I've been doing a lot of shopping lately. The guitar deposit, the amp deposit, the figures - Big Boss Jungle Fatigue model and Resident Evil 5's Chris Redfield.
Oh, and the gorgeous (smart, but stupid) iPhone 4.
Smart but stupid? Why? I love Macs and I am using an iPad like nobody's business at the moment, but the fact lies that Apple made an engineering genius design for the iPhone 4's antenna.
If you are one of those thousand people who are sick and tired of the whole death grip issues, and the antennagate problem, you can gladly leave this site and not learn about what people did not criticize about.
The position OF the antenna.
For years, all phone manufactures have been putting their "weak spots" at the place where nobody would touch them. The back. And more specifically, the back area, opposite of the highest point of the display unit, which is the screen.
And out of nowhere, Apple became a genius by putting the antenna at a place where everybody else's hands are going to be at.
The signal is strong, just that with human contact, it gets weaker. My remedy is, get a cover, OR don't you even dare touch or cover the antenna.
That settles it all. I mean, nobody manufactures a car with the wheels on top of the roof. Why? Because the wheels are supposed to drive the car and it's supposed to be.. Well, at the bottom.
So what if nobody's perfect?
Anyways, to the next point.
If you remember the plan for myself, I say that I will be getting the Nikon D300S which has downgraded to the D90, which costs at $1499 that includes a $200 cash back.
So what is this all about? Another plan that is going to suffer from an unusual downgrade?
Did I order an iPhone 3GS instead of the 4? Wait a minute, I cant do that. I already paid for it. But unlike the iPad, I didn't see a reason for it to be at a maxed out capacity like my 64GB wifi iPad. Like the same reason I don't see a reason why I should stuff in a 3G sim card and go online everywhere, when I can't - until I take a seat, or a crap on the toilet bowl in my university.
There is a slight change of plans. I have decided to give up on the dreams of owning a MacBook Pro. The 17inch, i7 intel processor with 8GBs of DDR3 RAM, with 500GB SATA @ 7200rpm. I have been eyeing on that machine for months now, and today's the day I decided to give up.
Which means one thing. I am going back to the operating system (Microsoft Windows) that I have heavily criticized since the breakdown of my HP on the 22nd June 2010.
.. So, is it a Dell? An Acer? A HP? An Asus? A Toshiba?
Neither. Over my dead body I'll go for another Microshit OS.
I decided to go for an iMac.
Yes yes, I know, I know. It's a desktop Mac. It's not even mobile anymore, but I usually leave my laptop or netbook at home now, and I just use my iPad wherever I do. And because I HAVE a netbook, I can bring that one out instead and use that to download my microshit applications..
Wait, its called PROGRAMMES. Applications are for Macs.
More over, it's $500 cheaper, with the specs all maxed out.
The question now lies if it were to be the 21.5 inch, or 27 inch.
I asked my brother, who surprisingly gave a bias-free advice about the Macs, although he has completely no idea how it'd turn out, but I needed his knowledge on the hardware that they fitted onto Macs.
I'm desperate for the i7 processors, but that's only available at the highest end for the iMac. Sadly.
The reason why I decided to change is that the MacBook Pro supports up to 1440*900 resolution, and if I were to work on my brother's pictures, boy, is that going to piss me off big time, because of the bloody resolution.
The iMac starts on 1080p onwards, and lots of other things.
Of course, the 27 inch one has a higher resolution.
The price tag is a bit hefty, but hell, it's 500$ cheaper compared to the MacBook Pro.
So, I'd say it's a win win situation :)