weckart
Apr 23, 04:33 PM
That colour scheme for the Lion background artwork is hideous.
Burger King
Apr 25, 09:13 AM
I'm guessing silence, since burgers don't talk. ;)
D.
I do and No I didn't steal anything!
D.
I do and No I didn't steal anything!
Snowy_River
Jul 22, 10:58 AM
...
The Pro Mac is overdue, but the software isn�t ready. Maybe keep a G5 in the works, for people who work and move on with the new Pro Macs.
...
Overdue? How do you figure that? If anything, the entire line is being changed faster than anyone expected. And, given the faster pace, most people have guessed that the MP will arrive at WWDC. So how can it be overdue?
The Pro Mac is overdue, but the software isn�t ready. Maybe keep a G5 in the works, for people who work and move on with the new Pro Macs.
...
Overdue? How do you figure that? If anything, the entire line is being changed faster than anyone expected. And, given the faster pace, most people have guessed that the MP will arrive at WWDC. So how can it be overdue?
aohus
Apr 18, 05:23 PM
LG should sue all Mobile Phone Hardware Makers for using capacitive displays on their phones. LG was the first to do it. SUE EM ALL!
To Apple, please don't bite the hand that feeds you (Samsung fabbed your A5 chip, flash memory)
To Apple, please don't bite the hand that feeds you (Samsung fabbed your A5 chip, flash memory)
SandynJosh
Apr 7, 06:37 PM
And how would Microsoft go about "leveraging the desktop"? People throw out computers and buy an iPad. People don't say "well, I have a Windows PC, I will buy a Microsoft tablet to go with it". They say "well, I have a Windows PC, I will buy an iPad so I can get rid of that old PC".
You ask a very good question iin that first sentence. MS must have wrestled with that very same question and came up with the horrible solution carefully reiterated in the following wordy advertising (http://www.microsoft.com/Windows/buy/featured/asus/default.aspx?CMXID=2120.win7_75299592-4B77-4AD0-853B-DCCAD1A1CAB3&WT.srch=1).
The Windows tablet/slate expects everyone to keep their PC nearby in order to enjoy the utility of their slablet. There is also an awful short video advertisement on YouTube for the Asus slablet.
You ask a very good question iin that first sentence. MS must have wrestled with that very same question and came up with the horrible solution carefully reiterated in the following wordy advertising (http://www.microsoft.com/Windows/buy/featured/asus/default.aspx?CMXID=2120.win7_75299592-4B77-4AD0-853B-DCCAD1A1CAB3&WT.srch=1).
The Windows tablet/slate expects everyone to keep their PC nearby in order to enjoy the utility of their slablet. There is also an awful short video advertisement on YouTube for the Asus slablet.
EscobarFilms
Mar 26, 10:38 PM
ios 5 alongside with iphone 5 -.- that is obvious come on people..
liphonearth
Apr 26, 04:27 PM
Yes,
Android takes over greater share of the market, while Apple retains the bulk of the revenues / profits.
Just as Apple retains a small slice of the PC market while selling over 60% of $1,000+ computers, they will maintain superior revenues/profits no matter how "small" their share of the telecom market turns out to be.
Ideal, as Apple stock prices might temporarily drop in price while their EPS continues to sky-rocket.
T
Android takes over greater share of the market, while Apple retains the bulk of the revenues / profits.
Just as Apple retains a small slice of the PC market while selling over 60% of $1,000+ computers, they will maintain superior revenues/profits no matter how "small" their share of the telecom market turns out to be.
Ideal, as Apple stock prices might temporarily drop in price while their EPS continues to sky-rocket.
T
mdlooker
Apr 7, 12:13 PM
Though competition is a desired aspect in any market, from a buyers standpoint, there is still that demand variable.
I believe that even if Apple takes total market consumption, because it seems to be going that way, the price will dictate how sturdy the dominance will be. So long as they keep the prices affordable, they will have no problems.
Same applies with with their Macs. If they were to lower the prices, the profit margin would take a big hit but a slow market saturation would occur.
We need innovation and great experiences, but price moves that demand curve.
I believe that even if Apple takes total market consumption, because it seems to be going that way, the price will dictate how sturdy the dominance will be. So long as they keep the prices affordable, they will have no problems.
Same applies with with their Macs. If they were to lower the prices, the profit margin would take a big hit but a slow market saturation would occur.
We need innovation and great experiences, but price moves that demand curve.
ShnikeJSB
Aug 11, 01:40 PM
In other words, G5 PowerBooks next tuesday ;)
Man, I tell ya... 2 years+ ago when I wanted a new laptop, that's ALL I ever heard... I think Apple should build a one-off G5 laptop just to appease us crazy people in here, LOL! It would be an awesome tip-of-the-hat to us, don'tcha think? ;)
Man, I tell ya... 2 years+ ago when I wanted a new laptop, that's ALL I ever heard... I think Apple should build a one-off G5 laptop just to appease us crazy people in here, LOL! It would be an awesome tip-of-the-hat to us, don'tcha think? ;)
PlipPlop
Apr 26, 03:11 PM
Well done Android, long may you reign over the smartphones.
Josias
Sep 16, 02:55 AM
I believe the new macbook pro merom's will be .1-.3 inches thicker, and POSSIBLY incorporate a new blu-ray DVD burner, 160GB HD, ATI X1800 Graphics card, and improved display to 1920X1200 for 17". I believe this to be true based on the information gathered from brenthaven's website, showing the 12/15 pro case that is out of stock is 1/4" thicker in the space needed to hold the macbook. The only reason for this is if they know "something" we don't...such as a thicker machine. Also, they are coming out around the 26th-30th. Maybe? what do you guys think?
Hello
My name is Mr. Burns.
Goodday Mr. Burns, may I ask what your first name is?
...I don't know.
WTF?!!?
The 12/15" Pro cases are designed for the 12/15" PowerBooks which were 2.8 and 3.0 cm thick.
You may be right about the 160 GB HDD option and the X1800.
There is no way the MBP's will recieve resolution upgrades before Leopard. Santa Rosa MBP's will definiantly be bumped to 1680x1050 and 1920x1200. Tiger is resolution dependent, which means that a higher DPI would make it nearly impossible to see anything.
Why would they put Blu-Ray drives in? And where would they get them from? Sony just moved the release of PS3 in Europe to March '07 duo to lack of sufficient Blu Ray readers.
At last, why 26th-30th? Why would Apple have a large event where it would be appropriate to release MBP's, and then instead announce 1-4 days after? I believe it might be a few days prior to Photokina, as the iMac was before the Paris Expo.;)
Hello
My name is Mr. Burns.
Goodday Mr. Burns, may I ask what your first name is?
...I don't know.
WTF?!!?
The 12/15" Pro cases are designed for the 12/15" PowerBooks which were 2.8 and 3.0 cm thick.
You may be right about the 160 GB HDD option and the X1800.
There is no way the MBP's will recieve resolution upgrades before Leopard. Santa Rosa MBP's will definiantly be bumped to 1680x1050 and 1920x1200. Tiger is resolution dependent, which means that a higher DPI would make it nearly impossible to see anything.
Why would they put Blu-Ray drives in? And where would they get them from? Sony just moved the release of PS3 in Europe to March '07 duo to lack of sufficient Blu Ray readers.
At last, why 26th-30th? Why would Apple have a large event where it would be appropriate to release MBP's, and then instead announce 1-4 days after? I believe it might be a few days prior to Photokina, as the iMac was before the Paris Expo.;)
Works4Me
Apr 21, 03:05 PM
totally gonna happen
It's totally maybe gonna happen! Seriously, I can see both pros and cons to this.
It's totally maybe gonna happen! Seriously, I can see both pros and cons to this.
rjohnstone
Apr 18, 03:28 PM
Apple is devoid of morals and innovation? Are you kidding me? Do you have any idea of Apple's philanthropy? Also, Apple INVENTED the whole concept of touch UI for iPhone and iPad - now the rest of the industry is scrambling to catch up by copying the leader. While imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery, the imitators are simply copying for free what took Apple years to develop at a likely cost of several hundred million dollars. And Apple does not have a right to protect its investment?
Apple should just buy Samsung. That will get them a big foot in the consumer electronics sector.
Wrong... Apple didn't invent the concept of the touch UI, they bought most of what they have and own very little rights to it.
Apple should just buy Samsung. That will get them a big foot in the consumer electronics sector.
Wrong... Apple didn't invent the concept of the touch UI, they bought most of what they have and own very little rights to it.
Ommid
Apr 25, 08:08 AM
Bit harsh, but true.
Probably because there is no need for it in that range? Plus most Mac Pro users won't use Apple displays IMO
Probably because there is no need for it in that range? Plus most Mac Pro users won't use Apple displays IMO
cactus33
Apr 23, 10:31 PM
Although I'd absolutely love this, I highly doubt it'll be here for a while.
I think the first step would be increasing displays to like 1800x1080 on the 13", and 1900x1200 on the 15" and 2400x1440 on the 17" - while keeping the same user interface size. That would be awesome.
Then in the next 5-10 years, I'd expect full retina.
I doubt it would be a full jump from 1440x900 --> 3200x2000 on a 15" or something like that.
I think the first step would be increasing displays to like 1800x1080 on the 13", and 1900x1200 on the 15" and 2400x1440 on the 17" - while keeping the same user interface size. That would be awesome.
Then in the next 5-10 years, I'd expect full retina.
I doubt it would be a full jump from 1440x900 --> 3200x2000 on a 15" or something like that.
iStudentUK
Apr 11, 06:32 AM
That statement means that 2(12) should be done before the division.
So then the answer is 2.
That's not what his comment said.
So then the answer is 2.
That's not what his comment said.
Eolian
Mar 29, 01:01 PM
Access to Your Account and Content
You acknowledge and agree that Apple may access, use, preserve and/or disclose your account information and Content if legally required to do so or if we have a good faith belief that such access, use, disclosure, or preservation is reasonably necessary to: (a) comply with legal process or request; (b) enforce these TOS, including investigation of any potential violation thereof; (c) detect, prevent or otherwise address security, fraud or technical issues; or (d) protect the rights, property or safety of Apple, its users or the public as required or pemitted by law.
That reads quite a bit different from Amazon's "... or as we determine is necessary to provide the Service ..."
You acknowledge and agree that Apple may access, use, preserve and/or disclose your account information and Content if legally required to do so or if we have a good faith belief that such access, use, disclosure, or preservation is reasonably necessary to: (a) comply with legal process or request; (b) enforce these TOS, including investigation of any potential violation thereof; (c) detect, prevent or otherwise address security, fraud or technical issues; or (d) protect the rights, property or safety of Apple, its users or the public as required or pemitted by law.
That reads quite a bit different from Amazon's "... or as we determine is necessary to provide the Service ..."
Small White Car
Apr 5, 01:31 PM
But Toyota wasn't jailbreaking. Didn't the courts rule that Apple couldn't stop the jailbreak community?
Yes, but the ruling was based on the fact that it's all for 'personal use.'
Once they start taking $$$ from multinational corporations it sure seem less like 'personal use,' doesn't it?
I'm not a lawyer so I can't say for sure, but I sure thought Cydia was opening up a can of worms when I read about this yesterday. It's probably good for them that Toyota pulled out. I could see the jailbreak community getting less leeway with courts in the future if they start raking in millions of dollars. Then they suddenly start looking like a competing company trying to steal Apple's business, don't they?
It may be legal for Cydia to do this, but I was quite worried that it would make their lives very unpleasent in the future if they kept it up. I like how all the jailbreakers in this thread are acting like this was a good thing. It honestly could have ended up being the thing that caused the most damage to jailbreaking!
Yes, but the ruling was based on the fact that it's all for 'personal use.'
Once they start taking $$$ from multinational corporations it sure seem less like 'personal use,' doesn't it?
I'm not a lawyer so I can't say for sure, but I sure thought Cydia was opening up a can of worms when I read about this yesterday. It's probably good for them that Toyota pulled out. I could see the jailbreak community getting less leeway with courts in the future if they start raking in millions of dollars. Then they suddenly start looking like a competing company trying to steal Apple's business, don't they?
It may be legal for Cydia to do this, but I was quite worried that it would make their lives very unpleasent in the future if they kept it up. I like how all the jailbreakers in this thread are acting like this was a good thing. It honestly could have ended up being the thing that caused the most damage to jailbreaking!
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 4, 05:22 AM
Why not? They did it with the iBooks for quite some time...
It is a new game after PPC->x86.
Apple is now competing directly with all other PC manufacturers. You can easily compare the hardware between different computers.
Hence, I am sure Apple will upgrade all MBs to Merom as soon as they have made sure they will get enough Meroms to satisfy the need of MBP.
Besides since both the iBook and 12'' PB seems to have merged into the 13'' MB, it is vital to keep this line updated for demanding users with a need for a smaller form factor.
It is a new game after PPC->x86.
Apple is now competing directly with all other PC manufacturers. You can easily compare the hardware between different computers.
Hence, I am sure Apple will upgrade all MBs to Merom as soon as they have made sure they will get enough Meroms to satisfy the need of MBP.
Besides since both the iBook and 12'' PB seems to have merged into the 13'' MB, it is vital to keep this line updated for demanding users with a need for a smaller form factor.
Skika
Apr 24, 06:13 PM
WOW!
This would be AWESOME!
I can't imagine my 27" iMac with the same resolution as an iPhone 4!:eek:
This said, it could potentially make macs more expensive in the future.....:(
Well Done Apple! You've done it again!
Wow, that would look rly horrible, i mean 960x640 on a 27 inch screen:eek:
Just joking, u probably meant DPI.
This would be AWESOME!
I can't imagine my 27" iMac with the same resolution as an iPhone 4!:eek:
This said, it could potentially make macs more expensive in the future.....:(
Well Done Apple! You've done it again!
Wow, that would look rly horrible, i mean 960x640 on a 27 inch screen:eek:
Just joking, u probably meant DPI.
wovel
Apr 7, 12:00 PM
They can have my screen. It only bleeds on the edges. Still enough real estate for a seven inch model.
Let's see a picture of you holding your iPad 2 demonstrating this :)
I don't understand, Apple can't let RIM have 12 panels? When they sell off those 12 units, Apple can let them have 12 more.
They need to make display models as well. They need 1012 to cover the display models and the 12 that will sell.
I see the short sighted Apple pom-pom shakers are once again giddy with excitement. The juvenile remarks are embarrassing.
For some strange reason you think monopolies are good for consumers.
Strategic planning does not make a monopoly, you appear to have no concept of what a monopoly actually is.
So you want Apple to be forced by the government to reduce its manufacturing, tell its customers "sorry, no iPad for you" because the competition needs to catch up? How stupid is that?:rolleyes:
They want Apple to fall, since no one can do it in the free market, they want government intervention. They might have a point if they were engaged in anti-competitive behaviors like Microsoft did. Like telling PC manufacturers all of theirs products had to come with only Windows pre-installed. Buying capacity that is not even sufficient to meet demand is in no way anti-competitive.
I suspect THIS is why HP chose to use a 9.7" 4:3 display on their TouchPad tablet. When all of Asia is stamping out iPad screens it would be a lot easier for HP to acquire iPad panels, using the manufacturer's economies of scale, than to have them manufacture different panels alongside iPad panels.
HP and Amazon are the only ones that have any hope of competing anyway. Everyone else would just be wasting Apple's panels.
^This.
Unfortunately, most posters here think Apple always acts in the best interests of its customers. Kind of cute, actually.
Corporations tend to act in the best interest of theirs owners. It is actually a requirement for corporate officers in public companies. Having said that, Apple is the most customer focused company in the mobile device market. Sales show this and so does every independent customer satisfaction survey performed in the past few years.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
iPad 3 to be a small update like iPad 2? I wouldn't doubt it with the lack of competition.
This is just silly. They mad a 9x leap in graphics performance in less then 12 months without a single credible competitor.
Let's see a picture of you holding your iPad 2 demonstrating this :)
I don't understand, Apple can't let RIM have 12 panels? When they sell off those 12 units, Apple can let them have 12 more.
They need to make display models as well. They need 1012 to cover the display models and the 12 that will sell.
I see the short sighted Apple pom-pom shakers are once again giddy with excitement. The juvenile remarks are embarrassing.
For some strange reason you think monopolies are good for consumers.
Strategic planning does not make a monopoly, you appear to have no concept of what a monopoly actually is.
So you want Apple to be forced by the government to reduce its manufacturing, tell its customers "sorry, no iPad for you" because the competition needs to catch up? How stupid is that?:rolleyes:
They want Apple to fall, since no one can do it in the free market, they want government intervention. They might have a point if they were engaged in anti-competitive behaviors like Microsoft did. Like telling PC manufacturers all of theirs products had to come with only Windows pre-installed. Buying capacity that is not even sufficient to meet demand is in no way anti-competitive.
I suspect THIS is why HP chose to use a 9.7" 4:3 display on their TouchPad tablet. When all of Asia is stamping out iPad screens it would be a lot easier for HP to acquire iPad panels, using the manufacturer's economies of scale, than to have them manufacture different panels alongside iPad panels.
HP and Amazon are the only ones that have any hope of competing anyway. Everyone else would just be wasting Apple's panels.
^This.
Unfortunately, most posters here think Apple always acts in the best interests of its customers. Kind of cute, actually.
Corporations tend to act in the best interest of theirs owners. It is actually a requirement for corporate officers in public companies. Having said that, Apple is the most customer focused company in the mobile device market. Sales show this and so does every independent customer satisfaction survey performed in the past few years.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
iPad 3 to be a small update like iPad 2? I wouldn't doubt it with the lack of competition.
This is just silly. They mad a 9x leap in graphics performance in less then 12 months without a single credible competitor.
justinLONG
Mar 29, 10:56 PM
I would not want to work in an american plant that manufactured apple products. could you imagine that?. there would probably be an apple union i'd have to join. :eek:
peharri
Nov 25, 09:06 PM
Consider this. Let's say Apple does something along the lines we're predicting, and sells their phones. Before we plunk down our money, we go around to the various cell carriers and inquire if they'll let us bring our phone to their network. They say either "NO!" or "Not at this time."
The only mobile carriers in a position to do this are the cdmaOne/CDMA2000 ones (Verizon, Sprint PCS, etc.) If Apple makes a GSM or UMTS phone, the carrier has little or no say in whether you use it. T-Mobile and Cingular will, by next year, be running both types of network in the US, and both already run GSM.
The real influence the cellphone companies (at least, the ones not stuck in the 1980s as far as their network infrastructure goes) have on phone purchasing is the ability to subsidize phones that fit their model. This, in practice, usually means rebranding. Cingular is pretty good on that score and rarely insists on more than some ugly logos printed on the phone (unfortunately their network is not the greatest GSM implementation in the world.) T-Mobile, in my experience, is somewhat worse, though not always for bad reasons. For example, they'd probably insist on "My Faves", a proprietary five person phonebook, being grafted on to whatever UI an "iPhone" has, in return for any substantial subsidy.
The fact Apple can't expect carriers to subsidize their phones is one issue they have to deal with. I'm more concerned though with Apple becoming a minority player, with its phone tied to a music store whose success was, in major part, to do with the giant marketshare it had, and thus Jobs's ability to force the labels to compromise on prices.
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
Apple would need not merely infrastructure but spectrum to actually start a carrier. They have neither.
Purchasing a carrier is an interesting pipe dream and would terrify the crap out of most shareholders. Mobile telephony is a long term thing, with very little return on investment yet for most people who've invested in it. It's not even a good time to get involved, most companies are rolling out 3G networks and 4G, in the shape of WiMAX, is already being released in some areas.
Were they to do the carrier thing, the best they could hope for would be to be an MVNO. This would be a major change of business model. It has so many ramifications I don't know where to begin.
The only mobile carriers in a position to do this are the cdmaOne/CDMA2000 ones (Verizon, Sprint PCS, etc.) If Apple makes a GSM or UMTS phone, the carrier has little or no say in whether you use it. T-Mobile and Cingular will, by next year, be running both types of network in the US, and both already run GSM.
The real influence the cellphone companies (at least, the ones not stuck in the 1980s as far as their network infrastructure goes) have on phone purchasing is the ability to subsidize phones that fit their model. This, in practice, usually means rebranding. Cingular is pretty good on that score and rarely insists on more than some ugly logos printed on the phone (unfortunately their network is not the greatest GSM implementation in the world.) T-Mobile, in my experience, is somewhat worse, though not always for bad reasons. For example, they'd probably insist on "My Faves", a proprietary five person phonebook, being grafted on to whatever UI an "iPhone" has, in return for any substantial subsidy.
The fact Apple can't expect carriers to subsidize their phones is one issue they have to deal with. I'm more concerned though with Apple becoming a minority player, with its phone tied to a music store whose success was, in major part, to do with the giant marketshare it had, and thus Jobs's ability to force the labels to compromise on prices.
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
Apple would need not merely infrastructure but spectrum to actually start a carrier. They have neither.
Purchasing a carrier is an interesting pipe dream and would terrify the crap out of most shareholders. Mobile telephony is a long term thing, with very little return on investment yet for most people who've invested in it. It's not even a good time to get involved, most companies are rolling out 3G networks and 4G, in the shape of WiMAX, is already being released in some areas.
Were they to do the carrier thing, the best they could hope for would be to be an MVNO. This would be a major change of business model. It has so many ramifications I don't know where to begin.
kntgsp
Apr 24, 04:52 AM
Apple's problem is that they put "Looks" before performance.
They crippled their chances of ever becoming a serious competitor to the PC for games due to deciding to use giant laptops on a stand which meant they could not cool any decent graphics cards, handing the gaming crown to the PC for years on a plate.
As for the future who knows.
That issue could have been largely solved if they had just faced a standard high end GPU with the intake facing towards the back and the exhaust on the side. But Apple is too vain to put a vent on the rear of the iMac to accomodate the intake of a high quality GPU, let alone a slim exhaust vent on the side.
If they had simply used a standard GPU like that it would have opened up quality gaming on the Mac and made it simple to upgrade to newer cards so that people didn't have to chuck the entire computer every time they wanted a new video card.
They crippled their chances of ever becoming a serious competitor to the PC for games due to deciding to use giant laptops on a stand which meant they could not cool any decent graphics cards, handing the gaming crown to the PC for years on a plate.
As for the future who knows.
That issue could have been largely solved if they had just faced a standard high end GPU with the intake facing towards the back and the exhaust on the side. But Apple is too vain to put a vent on the rear of the iMac to accomodate the intake of a high quality GPU, let alone a slim exhaust vent on the side.
If they had simply used a standard GPU like that it would have opened up quality gaming on the Mac and made it simple to upgrade to newer cards so that people didn't have to chuck the entire computer every time they wanted a new video card.