Well, quite. The crop factor on Canon DSLRs is 1.6, so a 200mm would be equivalent to 320mm on a Full Frame.

Umm, maybe I'm missing something. But given that iTunes is the application for syncing your iPhone with your computer, why were you (a) uninstalling in the first place, and then (b) suprised when you couldn't sync?

There are apps you can't remove under iOS - basically anything that comes pre-installed to the first screenful of stuff. App Store, iTunes (meaning the store, not your music), Game Center, Weather, Stocks, Face Time and YouTube all strike me as apps that not everyone would want, but can't be removed.

However, two ways that these are vastly better than the Sony instance is that none of them are running in the background stealing your CPU cycles and memory, and that all of them can be tucked away in an "undeletable crap" folder if their icons offend you.

True, true. All I really meant was that I'm one of the 35%, because I'm assuming that the next iPhone will be at least as good as the current one, and I'm not in enough of a rush to not find out exactly how much better before signing a 2-year contract.

Since "warm" means a louder mid-low end, how do you pair that with blaming CD's lack of frequencies above 22kHz as being responsible for lower sound quality?

I mean, I get that vinyl has a warmer sound; I have enough of it. And I get that some people prefer the sound of vinyl. But I can get a sound that replicates that (to the point where I can't blind differentiate) by recording my vinyl to CD and playing that back. You can even break out the graphic EQ and roll off high frequency response and boosting the low end, to get a similar outcome.

So feel free to say you don't like CD sound. But the problem almost certainly seems to be one of mastering - far from CD's frequency response being lacking, it seems to be its superior high-end response that has led engineers to pile everything in the mid-high frequencies in search of tiresome, but attention-grabbing mixes.

Or alternatively, 35% of consumers assume that Apple will not make the next version of the iPhone worse than the current one, and aren't in a desperate rush to buy a model that will be obsolete in two months.

Thanks - I didn't know that.

Although I suppose my point is really that the 99 cent price is without any sales tax included, and the UK price is less than 20% extra. It's not Apple's fault we have VAT that high.

At the first result in Google I found, 69p = $1.13, so considering VAT it at 20% we've still got a better deal than the tax-free 99 cents Americans pay.

Not that we know of yet, but it has been revealed this morning that Glen Mulcaire, the man who performed both the Dowler and Soham hacks, also did the same to relatives of victims of the London 7/7 terrorist bombings.

It was my understanding that ISPs were generally ridiculing Conroy's attempts to censor the internet. As such, this looks a lot like a deliberate implementation that gives parents who want their kids not finding porn "by accident, Mum, honest" what they're after, while not getting in the way of anyone with full control of their own OS too much.

Games involve an awful lot more than spitting a bunch of polys at the GPU, though; if calculating where all that geometry needs to be takes too long the GPU has nothing to do.

5570-class graphics in a laptop add an AWFUL lot more than $60 to the price, however. It's there the difference will be made; I'm not too fussed at needing discrete graphics in a tower case.

Since it would appear that the same people who DDOSed cia.gov also did the same to the Serious and Organised Crime Agency (SOCA), the UK equivalent, there's plenty of local criminality to arrest him for, even before we get as far as extradition.

Ryan Clearly housed a lulz IRC chatroom. That's easily enough to count as 'something to do with lulzsec' as far as the law is concerned.

Lulzsec have just pissed off the CIA, and got themselves regarded as terrorists. If Clearly was also on IRC duties for Al Qaeda he'd already be in Guantanamo, and you know it.

MS made Silverlight, which was proprietary, but did stuff that standard HTML couldn't. It was also less of a security disaster than Flash, and less hideous than Java.

Now there's a standards-compliant way of doing things with HTML5, they're using it. You might as well complain that it's possible to get somewhere on the Adobe website without having Flash installed. I'm sure MS still recommend using Silverlight if you have a task HTML5 can't perform.