@xbryan
Not quite. You would still have the rest of the OS using system resources and whatever background processes your apps require as well. Running Chrome full screen on the Windows platform with no other apps open might look pretty similar, but it's another story behind the scenes.

I think Engadget needs to do one of the "How Would You Change" features on the new site. It seems that lots of people have feedback to give.

After reading through the other comments, the most common complaint seems to be the font choices. I know you can't please everyone all the time, but I think there is a relatively simple solution. Just let people customize what font(s) the site uses in their profile settings and, as long as the reader is logged in, the font will change dynamically. Take it one step further and there could be user-selectable skins.

Personally, I don't care about the font so much. My biggest complaints are with navigating comments. I don't like being redirected to the most recent comment, regardless of which one you replied to, and I wish there were links to navigate the pages of comments at the top of the page and not just at the bottom. It becomes more laborious than it needs to be to reply to an older comment and then get back to where you left off.

@CCKRause
While you wait for an actual fix to this issue, I suggest using the RSS feed instead of Twitter as a workaround. I don't even have a smartphone and the RSS works fine for me(on my enV Touch).

... says the unverified user.

@Nilay Patel
Of course he wouldn't say it himself. It would make him seem conceited. I know from experience how much work it is to redesign a website and I am sure that everyone involved in the new Engadget redesign deserves the credit given in this post.

P.S. Can someone on staff please speak to all the requests for the ability to edit comments? I've seen lots of readers mention it but I have not seen any response from the staff.

I think this Verizon ad campaign is brilliant and I am also impressed at their candid language in those legal statements. Whether or not the ads are misleading, they are still true. They are only misleading to the ignorant masses who do not understand what 3G means. The ads are not comparing general data service coverage. They are not comparing voice service coverage. They are only talking about 3G coverage. EDGE has nothing to do with it. I think at&t basically got caught with their pants down. If at&t wants to retaliate, they could show a coverage map based on theoretical data transfer speeds above the EVDO Rev A threshold. Their map would be the same one Verizon used to show at&t 3G coverage but Verizon's map would be blank. That would be just as misleading, while still true- but hey, that's marketing. Either that or they could actually, you know, make their network better and expand their 3G coverage area. I guess they can get away with poor service as long as they have the iPhone, right? If they don't invest more in their network, I can't wait to see how many subscribers they have in a year or two, when all those new contracts the iPhone 3G brought them come up for renewal. Then we'll see just how powerful the iPhone really is.

Regardless of whatever fine print you claim to have read, at&t itself makes a distinction between 3G and EDGE. The icons that indicate signal on the iPhone change when you switch from HSPA to EDGE. The icon that says 3G doesn't show up on EDGE. The iPhone 3G is basically named for this distinction as well. Even if the term 3G is nothing more than marketing, it is still at&t marketing that is using it. IT would be very hypocritical of them to argue that EDGE is 3G.

OTA purchases/downloads were not available on the iPhone at first, but I think they added that with OS 3 or some other OS update. I think it came for music first and then apps. Actual OS updates still require syncing with iTunes, though. I'm just going off of my own memory here, so someone correct me if I'm wrong.

There are so many misinformed people in this topic it's ridiculous. First of all, 3G is mostly just a buzz word but it means third generation. It covers EVDO Rev 0, EVDO Rev A, UMTS, HSPA, and HSPA+(although some people consider HSPA+ to be 3.5G, but it's just semantics). I think dminc was actually comparing EDGE to EVDO Rev 0. That is a very misleading comparison because Verizon has upgraded its entire network to EVDO Rev A. The reason the map in the Verizon ads does not include EDGE is because it is a map of 3G coverage. EDGE would be considered 2G. As for the statement that at&t's EDGE is actually faster, that is just plain bullshit, totally pulled straight out of dminc's ass. He even stated himself that EDGE is slower than EVDO. Then he has the gall to accuse everyone else of not doing research? That's just hilarious.

You're talking about an issue that no longer exists. Verizon partnered with Rhapsody a year or two ago and all the phones since then have had access to the Rhapsody music catalog and Rhapsody software for Windows(and Mac, I think) that allows you to sync between your phone, your computer, and your Rhapsody account if you have one. I think the files have DRM, but I'm not sure. Either way, you can now move them from your phone to your computer easier than before. It was still possible to copy music from your phone to your computer using BitPIM, but of course that is not supported by Verizon.

That being said, I still don't understand why someone would buy their music from Verizon/Rhapsody when it's so much cheaper to buy from Amazon, iTunes, or just about anywhere else. I know there is a convenience factor, but I don't mind waiting. I'd rather just get my music for free via bittorrent anyway.