Re: [討論] 如果真的只有4.7 和5.5 大家還會買嗎
先說我是微果粉
也先說我從來都不認為3.5吋是黃金比例
但是我絕對認為單手操控的必要性(對我來說)
4吋對我來說真的是極限了 甚至我都覺得4吋稍大了點
所以4.7和5.5這兩個我是不會考慮的
但是致命點並不是尺寸 而是外型
我當初這麼喜歡iPhone就是因為它俐落的外表
結果改得跟韓國手機有點像 圓圓鈍鈍的
當然外型和尺寸這很主觀 我不是要戰這個
我只是不爽老是有人拿"3.5是黃金比例"這句話來放大絕
除了賈伯斯之外 我還沒有實際聽到有人說過這句話
說這麼多
等iPhone新一代出來如果真的是這尺吋
我當然還是會買
不過不是買新的
我會買iPhone 5S
※ 引述《OneOkRock (一好搖滾)》之銘言:
: 新iphone的傳言很多 但都沒看過有4吋的殼
: 看來應該是大勢底定了 就是這兩個尺寸了
: 可是我真的覺得4吋剛剛好 不想換大尺寸 但同時又被ios系統和 appstore綁架了
: 我只希望新iphone上市後5s不要下架QQ
: 大家呢
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 118.163.177.150
※ 文章網址: http://www.ptt.cc/bbs/iPhone/M.1409710468.A.E9F.html
推
09/03 10:20, , 1F
09/03 10:20, 1F
→
09/03 10:21, , 2F
09/03 10:21, 2F
→
09/03 10:22, , 3F
09/03 10:22, 3F
推
09/03 10:23, , 4F
09/03 10:23, 4F
→
09/03 10:23, , 5F
09/03 10:23, 5F
推
09/03 10:25, , 6F
09/03 10:25, 6F
推
09/03 10:33, , 7F
09/03 10:33, 7F
→
09/03 10:33, , 8F
09/03 10:33, 8F
→
09/03 10:36, , 9F
09/03 10:36, 9F
→
09/03 10:38, , 10F
09/03 10:38, 10F
→
09/03 10:40, , 11F
09/03 10:40, 11F
推
09/03 10:43, , 12F
09/03 10:43, 12F
推
09/03 10:50, , 13F
09/03 10:50, 13F
→
09/03 10:50, , 14F
09/03 10:50, 14F
推
09/03 11:00, , 15F
09/03 11:00, 15F
推
09/03 11:10, , 16F
09/03 11:10, 16F
推
09/03 11:23, , 17F
09/03 11:23, 17F
→
09/03 11:25, , 18F
09/03 11:25, 18F
→
09/03 11:25, , 19F
09/03 11:25, 19F
推
09/03 11:30, , 20F
09/03 11:30, 20F
推
09/03 11:32, , 21F
09/03 11:32, 21F
→
09/03 11:34, , 22F
09/03 11:34, 22F
→
09/03 11:34, , 23F
09/03 11:34, 23F
→
09/03 11:35, , 24F
09/03 11:35, 24F
推
09/03 11:36, , 25F
09/03 11:36, 25F
推
09/03 11:36, , 26F
09/03 11:36, 26F
推
09/03 11:47, , 27F
09/03 11:47, 27F
→
09/03 12:02, , 28F
09/03 12:02, 28F
推
09/03 12:07, , 29F
09/03 12:07, 29F
推
09/03 12:08, , 30F
09/03 12:08, 30F
推
09/03 12:22, , 31F
09/03 12:22, 31F
噓
09/03 12:32, , 32F
09/03 12:32, 32F
推
09/03 12:35, , 33F
09/03 12:35, 33F
→
09/03 12:35, , 34F
09/03 12:35, 34F
→
09/03 12:39, , 35F
09/03 12:39, 35F
→
09/03 12:39, , 36F
09/03 12:39, 36F
→
09/03 12:40, , 37F
09/03 12:40, 37F
推
09/03 12:41, , 38F
09/03 12:41, 38F
當然他不可能講出"黃金比例"這四個字 因為他不會講中文XD
http://bw.businessweekly.com.tw/webarticle2.php?id=17729
我找不到影片 不過相信商業週刊的公信力應該是可以仰賴的
請看文章的第2點 相信可以解答你的疑惑
推
09/03 12:42, , 39F
09/03 12:42, 39F
→
09/03 12:43, , 40F
09/03 12:43, 40F
→
09/03 12:44, , 41F
09/03 12:44, 41F
→
09/03 12:44, , 42F
09/03 12:44, 42F
→
09/03 12:44, , 43F
09/03 12:44, 43F
→
09/03 12:44, , 44F
09/03 12:44, 44F
→
09/03 12:45, , 45F
09/03 12:45, 45F
推
09/03 12:54, , 46F
09/03 12:54, 46F
→
09/03 12:54, , 47F
09/03 12:54, 47F
噓
09/03 12:57, , 48F
09/03 12:57, 48F
推
09/03 13:04, , 49F
09/03 13:04, 49F
→
09/03 13:05, , 50F
09/03 13:05, 50F
推
09/03 13:06, , 51F
09/03 13:06, 51F
推
09/03 13:06, , 52F
09/03 13:06, 52F
※ 編輯: gssatan (118.163.177.150), 09/03/2014 13:11:25
→
09/03 13:19, , 53F
09/03 13:19, 53F
→
09/03 13:19, , 54F
09/03 13:19, 54F
推
09/03 13:20, , 55F
09/03 13:20, 55F
→
09/03 13:21, , 56F
09/03 13:21, 56F
推
09/03 13:22, , 57F
09/03 13:22, 57F
→
09/03 13:23, , 58F
09/03 13:23, 58F
→
09/03 13:23, , 59F
09/03 13:23, 59F
→
09/03 13:24, , 60F
09/03 13:24, 60F
→
09/03 13:25, , 61F
09/03 13:25, 61F
→
09/03 13:25, , 62F
09/03 13:25, 62F
推
09/03 13:37, , 63F
09/03 13:37, 63F
→
09/03 13:38, , 64F
09/03 13:38, 64F
推
09/03 13:55, , 65F
09/03 13:55, 65F
推
09/03 14:39, , 66F
09/03 14:39, 66F
推
09/03 14:40, , 67F
09/03 14:40, 67F
→
09/03 14:40, , 68F
09/03 14:40, 68F
推
09/03 14:41, , 69F
09/03 14:41, 69F
推
09/03 15:08, , 70F
09/03 15:08, 70F
推
09/03 15:12, , 71F
09/03 15:12, 71F
→
09/03 15:15, , 72F
09/03 15:15, 72F
噓
09/03 15:18, , 73F
09/03 15:18, 73F
推
09/03 15:24, , 74F
09/03 15:24, 74F
→
09/03 15:33, , 75F
09/03 15:33, 75F
→
09/03 18:14, , 76F
09/03 18:14, 76F
噓
09/03 18:29, , 77F
09/03 18:29, 77F
推
09/03 21:08, , 78F
09/03 21:08, 78F
推
09/03 21:32, , 79F
09/03 21:32, 79F
噓
09/04 01:55, , 80F
09/04 01:55, 80F
噓
09/04 04:04, , 81F
09/04 04:04, 81F
推
09/04 08:14, , 82F
09/04 08:14, 82F
→
09/04 22:26, , 83F
09/04 22:26, 83F
討論串 (同標題文章)
本文引述了以下文章的的內容:
完整討論串 (本文為第 2 之 2 篇):