parkds
Oct 12, 01:48 PM
Why is U2 so big with iPods anyways? The only group to have their own iPod. :confused:
(I don't mean to be disrespectful to the U2 fanboys out there)
Could be because Bono bought Steve Jobs apartment in New York City from him.
(I don't mean to be disrespectful to the U2 fanboys out there)
Could be because Bono bought Steve Jobs apartment in New York City from him.
BornAgainMac
Sep 26, 09:01 AM
I wonder when exactly this Vista phone will come out.
WildCowboy
Aug 23, 04:45 PM
Creative's stock up 30% in after-hours trading. The $100 million is a drop in the bucket for Apple, but it will certainly help Creative...
rowlands
Nov 13, 08:29 PM
This will continue until the Google Android threatens the iPhone. Then Apple will change their policy. Right now Apple simply does not have to care.
I agree, as much as I prefer Apple products over others, this app store rejection malarky seems to be getting funkier and funkier. I can understand it from both sides. However it ain't gonna change until it has to change.
I'm confident that given time Apple will change their policy. At least RA understand why their software was rejected. A website rejected one of our Mac products, we received a "your app was rejected because of one of these reasons". Then it listed 8 reasons, almost all were in bad Chinglish!
I agree, as much as I prefer Apple products over others, this app store rejection malarky seems to be getting funkier and funkier. I can understand it from both sides. However it ain't gonna change until it has to change.
I'm confident that given time Apple will change their policy. At least RA understand why their software was rejected. A website rejected one of our Mac products, we received a "your app was rejected because of one of these reasons". Then it listed 8 reasons, almost all were in bad Chinglish!
Squire
Sep 3, 07:13 PM
This may be a really dumb question, but when the new MBP comes out, do y'all think it'll stay aroudn the same price range or increase?:confused:
I'd guess stay the same or maybe even decrease depending on the price Apple gets on Merom chips.
-Squire
I'd guess stay the same or maybe even decrease depending on the price Apple gets on Merom chips.
-Squire
afd
Apr 11, 11:47 AM
if you have marantz speakers...... you have 40 dollars.
True, but if you've just spent �450 on the receiver and another �100 or so on speakers you'd maybe resent having to shell out more for AirPlay.
True, but if you've just spent �450 on the receiver and another �100 or so on speakers you'd maybe resent having to shell out more for AirPlay.
Harthansen
Sep 12, 07:19 PM
Wasting breath on a comment like this isn't even worth it.
OH whatever Apple is great. Apple is god. Apple can do no wrong. It was that way for a while, and they will always be better then Windows, god knows I hate windows. Now, they are slipping.
-Hart
OH whatever Apple is great. Apple is god. Apple can do no wrong. It was that way for a while, and they will always be better then Windows, god knows I hate windows. Now, they are slipping.
-Hart
milo
Sep 5, 05:19 PM
I've seen some posts about transferring "that much data" in disbelief. I calculate that a two hour movie will no more about 450MB. I hope it is, of course. This is based on a 1-hr episode of Lost is about 200MB. I fudge in 50MB for the fact that each Lost episode never is EXACTLY 1 hour.
I can transfer that size (450MB) from my ReplayTV wirelessly to my PowerBook in less than a half hour with my Airport Extreme Basestation.
So... I see no problem. Perhaps the show will be delayed a little but not more than a few minutes
Lost runs about 42 minutes, so more like 600 meg. And you're assuming they'll ship movies at 320x240, which I doubt. If they up the quality to anything approaching DVD, file sizes will go way up. But I still think a well implemented wireless solution should be able to keep up, people are doing it already.
I can transfer that size (450MB) from my ReplayTV wirelessly to my PowerBook in less than a half hour with my Airport Extreme Basestation.
So... I see no problem. Perhaps the show will be delayed a little but not more than a few minutes
Lost runs about 42 minutes, so more like 600 meg. And you're assuming they'll ship movies at 320x240, which I doubt. If they up the quality to anything approaching DVD, file sizes will go way up. But I still think a well implemented wireless solution should be able to keep up, people are doing it already.
JGowan
Sep 5, 05:14 PM
I've seen some posts about transferring "that much data" in disbelief. I calculate that a two hour movie will no more about 450MB. I hope it is, of course. This is based on a 1-hr episode of Lost is about 200MB. I fudge in 50MB for the fact that each Lost episode never is EXACTLY 1 hour.
I can transfer that size (450MB) from my ReplayTV wirelessly to my PowerBook in less than a half hour with my Airport Extreme Basestation.
So... I see no problem. Perhaps the show will be delayed a little but not more than a few minutes
I can transfer that size (450MB) from my ReplayTV wirelessly to my PowerBook in less than a half hour with my Airport Extreme Basestation.
So... I see no problem. Perhaps the show will be delayed a little but not more than a few minutes
kryca
Apr 23, 02:31 PM
Yes, built-in 3G is more costly to buy, usually locked into a particular carrier (what do you mean I can't switch my 1500$ laptop to a new carrier ?) and with the Rev D's 2nd USB port being next to a display port, the "extension" cable is moot.
So you are quite missing tons of things. The current scheme of "get a stick from your carrier" is the best as far as costs and carrier non-attachment go. I tether to my iPhone using Bluetooth anyhow, making the USB thing even more moot.
Built-in 3G is overrated.
It's just not up-to-date anymore. At least for a company that claims to be on the bleeding edge.
My iPad is not locked into a specific carrier and it's a officially fully supported configuration. So it's not really alchemy involved. Same could be done for the MBA. I also do not intend to abuse my iphone as a modem - I don't see why I do have to keep two devices going to get *one* of them online. That iPhone workaround sounds like a real bad excuse to me - it's just a way of keeping carriers happy (because phones usually are bought directly from the carriers with a 1+ year lock-in and for computers I assume people would rather turn to the AppleStore).
For my laptop I also want to have a different carrier and price plan.
Video Of Selena Gomez And
+selena+gomez+2011+grammys
+and+selena+gomez+2011+
+justin+ieber+2011+march
Selena Receiving Death Threats
justin bieber and selena
Justin Bieber sits on Selena
Justin Bieber and Selena
Selena Gomez Justin Bieber and
So you are quite missing tons of things. The current scheme of "get a stick from your carrier" is the best as far as costs and carrier non-attachment go. I tether to my iPhone using Bluetooth anyhow, making the USB thing even more moot.
Built-in 3G is overrated.
It's just not up-to-date anymore. At least for a company that claims to be on the bleeding edge.
My iPad is not locked into a specific carrier and it's a officially fully supported configuration. So it's not really alchemy involved. Same could be done for the MBA. I also do not intend to abuse my iphone as a modem - I don't see why I do have to keep two devices going to get *one* of them online. That iPhone workaround sounds like a real bad excuse to me - it's just a way of keeping carriers happy (because phones usually are bought directly from the carriers with a 1+ year lock-in and for computers I assume people would rather turn to the AppleStore).
For my laptop I also want to have a different carrier and price plan.
lilo777
Apr 25, 01:23 PM
"which is already under development at Quanta in Taiwan"
And I was naive enough to think that Apple developed their cases themselves. And if they don't it means that they do not design any hardware at all.
And I was naive enough to think that Apple developed their cases themselves. And if they don't it means that they do not design any hardware at all.
mlochm
Sep 13, 11:34 PM
I just do not think Apple is going to introduce a cellular phone. The ideas sound great around here, but I don't see any good busness model for such a device. What is Apple going to make money on selling such a product?
everything- thats the point. It completes the picture, as SJ has said. They make money on increasing the functionality of everything. Now that you can use an iPod to transport songs seemlessly into iTunes on other computers (authorized ones...) I'm sure that this will be something of use in the iPhone- For example- if you're out and about in the world, and someone gives you their phone number, you save it to your contacts. When you get home and plug in your phone to the computer to charge, it syncs with address book. In turn, address book syncs the phone number you were emailed this morning to your iPhone. I don't even use address book but I would under those conditions. Thing I would love to see in the phone is bluetooth connectivity. as in it could be a bluetooth handset for a phone you already have. And when your contract is up with -insert your provider- you can get service with apple. That would be be nifty.
everything- thats the point. It completes the picture, as SJ has said. They make money on increasing the functionality of everything. Now that you can use an iPod to transport songs seemlessly into iTunes on other computers (authorized ones...) I'm sure that this will be something of use in the iPhone- For example- if you're out and about in the world, and someone gives you their phone number, you save it to your contacts. When you get home and plug in your phone to the computer to charge, it syncs with address book. In turn, address book syncs the phone number you were emailed this morning to your iPhone. I don't even use address book but I would under those conditions. Thing I would love to see in the phone is bluetooth connectivity. as in it could be a bluetooth handset for a phone you already have. And when your contract is up with -insert your provider- you can get service with apple. That would be be nifty.
milo
Sep 5, 01:53 PM
Do you know a Tivo is a computer? It has a microprocessor and runs Linux. However, they don't try to make it a computer. That is why their idea has caught on.
That, and they keep the cost low by subsidizing it with subscriptions. A box for sale has to be cheap, and a device that just streams video, no hard drive at all, could be even cheaper than a tivo.
Is a streaming box really what you want? I mean, it's one thing to connect my airport express to my bose stereo system and let it play a playlist from my computer in my office, but if we have a streaming video, we still have to go to our office and start the video from the other room. If that's the case, I might as well move my computer to my living room.
They will have to have something that allows you to access your audio and video files with a remote. Maybe an aiport express with a remote control and user interface similar, but better than frontrow.
Right now a mac mini can do all of the things you need it to. You can stream video from another computer on the network, you can connect it to your T.V. and stereo. What would be the point of a new airport extreme if for $200 more you can get an entire compuer.
just some random thoughts...
A streaming box is DEFINITELY what I want. I assume they will have a remote available for this, not having one would be a deal breaker and I doubt they'd release this half baked.
A mini can do this, but starting at $599, it's going to be more than $200 more than an airport video. And I'd much rather have my mini somewhere else in the house so I don't have to try and read the menus on my NTSC TV, or have a monitor next to my TV.
That, and they keep the cost low by subsidizing it with subscriptions. A box for sale has to be cheap, and a device that just streams video, no hard drive at all, could be even cheaper than a tivo.
Is a streaming box really what you want? I mean, it's one thing to connect my airport express to my bose stereo system and let it play a playlist from my computer in my office, but if we have a streaming video, we still have to go to our office and start the video from the other room. If that's the case, I might as well move my computer to my living room.
They will have to have something that allows you to access your audio and video files with a remote. Maybe an aiport express with a remote control and user interface similar, but better than frontrow.
Right now a mac mini can do all of the things you need it to. You can stream video from another computer on the network, you can connect it to your T.V. and stereo. What would be the point of a new airport extreme if for $200 more you can get an entire compuer.
just some random thoughts...
A streaming box is DEFINITELY what I want. I assume they will have a remote available for this, not having one would be a deal breaker and I doubt they'd release this half baked.
A mini can do this, but starting at $599, it's going to be more than $200 more than an airport video. And I'd much rather have my mini somewhere else in the house so I don't have to try and read the menus on my NTSC TV, or have a monitor next to my TV.
lsvtecjohn3
Apr 28, 03:22 PM
Sad day for dem boys in Redmond
TheKrillr
Sep 5, 06:12 PM
I don't think there will be anything with that name.
Apple did just very recently file for a new iMovie trade mark in Europe, through Italy. They already had the name registered in 2000/2001. This new application is from 22 August, and no real details are currently published.
How does trademarking work in Europe? Here in the US you trademark something, and you don't have to specify what industry its in, or what the trademark is used for. in Europe do you have to register it for each unique industry? Otherwise, why would they be reapplying if they already have it?
Apple did just very recently file for a new iMovie trade mark in Europe, through Italy. They already had the name registered in 2000/2001. This new application is from 22 August, and no real details are currently published.
How does trademarking work in Europe? Here in the US you trademark something, and you don't have to specify what industry its in, or what the trademark is used for. in Europe do you have to register it for each unique industry? Otherwise, why would they be reapplying if they already have it?
Teddy's
Sep 12, 09:16 PM
However, the Intel Mac's are buggy as hell.
NO!
my MacBook Pro is solid and strong as my previous PowerBook
No complains here
NO!
my MacBook Pro is solid and strong as my previous PowerBook
No complains here
vouder17
Sep 15, 05:31 PM
I don't really see this happening, if apple is going to take the risk of entering this competitive market, I see them doing it with a very innovative 'new' product.
Silentwave
Sep 13, 10:13 PM
There are a lot of sound business reasons for Apple to release an iPhone. But the biggest reason is that Steve must have a cell phone and you know he probably hates the industrial design and functionality.
I agree. That's our steve all right :D
I agree. That's our steve all right :D
rileyes
Mar 29, 03:47 PM
Oracle's lawsuit against Google is airtight. Android's use of a non-compliant virtual machine (the Dalvik VM) is a clear violation of the Java license agreement. And there's legal precedent: Microsoft paid Sun $20 million back in 2001 when Sun successfully sued them for trying to "embrace, extend, and extinguish" Java.
Google will lose the lawsuit. And nobody has ever accused Larry Ellison of being Mr. Nice Guy. He doesn't want money this time. He wants to protect the intellectual property Oracle acquired from Sun. He wants all copies of Android to be "impounded and destroyed" (a direct quote from text of the suit.) Because if Google is allowed to plagiarize and distort Java, others will follow. Ellison is making an example of Google, and it's going to be a law school textbook IP case study for the ages.
Soon Android will be off the market while Google is forced to retool their JVM to be 100% Java compliant. Google is already scrambling to get rid of their non-compliant Dalvik VM. They actually hired James Gosling, the "inventor" of Java, so they've got religion now.
And, although money isn't the motivating factor behind the Oracle lawsuit, it is a factor nonetheless. Google will end up paying Oracle a license fee for each and every generic me-too Android iPhone clone and iPad clone that their hardware partners can mash up. And that erases Android's only advantage over WP7. Android will no longer be free.
So, when Android is off the market, Nokia's WP7 phones will have a chance to avoid becoming KIN 2.0. There will be a window of opportunity for Nokia and Microsoft to build up a little market share. Some corporations and consumers will buy Nokia WP7 phones just because Nokia and Microsoft are "too big to die." (And just when Google thinks it's safe, when they've implemented a 100% compliant JVM, Apple can sue them for GUI patent infringement. But that's another story...)
In the meantime, both WP7 and Nokia will have zero market presence. For all of 2011 and part of 2012. That's an eternity.
Even if Google loses any patent lawsuit, the phone wont go off the market.
Google will lose the lawsuit. And nobody has ever accused Larry Ellison of being Mr. Nice Guy. He doesn't want money this time. He wants to protect the intellectual property Oracle acquired from Sun. He wants all copies of Android to be "impounded and destroyed" (a direct quote from text of the suit.) Because if Google is allowed to plagiarize and distort Java, others will follow. Ellison is making an example of Google, and it's going to be a law school textbook IP case study for the ages.
Soon Android will be off the market while Google is forced to retool their JVM to be 100% Java compliant. Google is already scrambling to get rid of their non-compliant Dalvik VM. They actually hired James Gosling, the "inventor" of Java, so they've got religion now.
And, although money isn't the motivating factor behind the Oracle lawsuit, it is a factor nonetheless. Google will end up paying Oracle a license fee for each and every generic me-too Android iPhone clone and iPad clone that their hardware partners can mash up. And that erases Android's only advantage over WP7. Android will no longer be free.
So, when Android is off the market, Nokia's WP7 phones will have a chance to avoid becoming KIN 2.0. There will be a window of opportunity for Nokia and Microsoft to build up a little market share. Some corporations and consumers will buy Nokia WP7 phones just because Nokia and Microsoft are "too big to die." (And just when Google thinks it's safe, when they've implemented a 100% compliant JVM, Apple can sue them for GUI patent infringement. But that's another story...)
In the meantime, both WP7 and Nokia will have zero market presence. For all of 2011 and part of 2012. That's an eternity.
Even if Google loses any patent lawsuit, the phone wont go off the market.
jettredmont
Aug 23, 09:35 PM
The question is: Will they go after Microsoft, too? It would be hypocritical not to, after all.
IMHO, this is the primary motivation for the settlement from Apple's perspective. $100M isn't really "nothing" as others have suggested (believe me, Steve fights for every $100M going into the bank, and doubly hard when it leaves again!) However, it's a fairly cheap obstruction to throw down on Zune.
Will MS license Creative's patent too? Note that the press release says that if others license then Apple gets some reimbursement.
If MS refuses to license, will that $100M fund a legal battle against them next? It will go a ways towards that battle, anyway. And, Creative vs MS is a lot more likely for Creative to win than Creative vs (MS and Apple). This settlement adds credibility to Creative's claims.
IMHO, $100M spent here will help Apple in the iPod:Zune battle at least as much as $100M spent on marketing would have. Plus, it eliminates the overhang of the legal action and potential settlement/decision down the line.
IMHO, this is the primary motivation for the settlement from Apple's perspective. $100M isn't really "nothing" as others have suggested (believe me, Steve fights for every $100M going into the bank, and doubly hard when it leaves again!) However, it's a fairly cheap obstruction to throw down on Zune.
Will MS license Creative's patent too? Note that the press release says that if others license then Apple gets some reimbursement.
If MS refuses to license, will that $100M fund a legal battle against them next? It will go a ways towards that battle, anyway. And, Creative vs MS is a lot more likely for Creative to win than Creative vs (MS and Apple). This settlement adds credibility to Creative's claims.
IMHO, $100M spent here will help Apple in the iPod:Zune battle at least as much as $100M spent on marketing would have. Plus, it eliminates the overhang of the legal action and potential settlement/decision down the line.
topmounter
Apr 4, 12:15 PM
Maybe you're right, maybe not... I mean, I doubt the guys went in in Kevlar suit saying "we take the loot, not matter what. If someones try to stop us, we kill him". In a bank robbery maybe they would but I doubt they were ready to kill somebody only for a few iPads...
But that's just me.
Feel free to sympathize with the crooks, but this does not sound like a case of "Han shot first".
But that's just me.
Feel free to sympathize with the crooks, but this does not sound like a case of "Han shot first".
CalfCanuck
Sep 14, 04:43 PM
One thing I noted on the old page 2 thread was the possibility of a REAL Photo iPod - more like my Epson P-4000. It could double as a video player for the new "higher res" iTunes video downloads.
But back to the photo crowd. Wouldn't it be sweet to have a larger Photo iPod that was integrated into Aperture ...
1. High speed internal CF and SD card inputs in this larger case
2. Full support for RAW and RAW zooming
3. Under a pound / 450 g in weight
4. Large, bright 640 x 480 screen
5. Killer feature: Aperture keyword / ranking / stacking functions on the iPod!!
You're on the road shooting, and traveling light. During breaks you upload your CF/SD cards to the new "Aperture.iPod". When you're sitting in a cafe, back at your hotel, or taking a train home you whip out the Aperture.iPod and using the Keywords.plist you uploaded from Aperture before you left you start Stacking, key-wording, and ranking images.
Next day you head to your studio, upload the new images from the Aperture.iPod to your MP 3Ghz (w/16 GB RAM and 3 TB of HDs!), and the first pass of your sorting is already done!
Aperture is SUPPOSED to be about meshing cool software with Apple hardware to make the professional (and dedicated amateur) photographer's life easier. I'm 99% sure this press conference will be about how Aperture and Apple hardware let's you focus on creative shooting, not IT issues.
But back to the photo crowd. Wouldn't it be sweet to have a larger Photo iPod that was integrated into Aperture ...
1. High speed internal CF and SD card inputs in this larger case
2. Full support for RAW and RAW zooming
3. Under a pound / 450 g in weight
4. Large, bright 640 x 480 screen
5. Killer feature: Aperture keyword / ranking / stacking functions on the iPod!!
You're on the road shooting, and traveling light. During breaks you upload your CF/SD cards to the new "Aperture.iPod". When you're sitting in a cafe, back at your hotel, or taking a train home you whip out the Aperture.iPod and using the Keywords.plist you uploaded from Aperture before you left you start Stacking, key-wording, and ranking images.
Next day you head to your studio, upload the new images from the Aperture.iPod to your MP 3Ghz (w/16 GB RAM and 3 TB of HDs!), and the first pass of your sorting is already done!
Aperture is SUPPOSED to be about meshing cool software with Apple hardware to make the professional (and dedicated amateur) photographer's life easier. I'm 99% sure this press conference will be about how Aperture and Apple hardware let's you focus on creative shooting, not IT issues.
fetchmebeers
Sep 12, 03:00 PM
Off Apple's website that he pointed you to:
Playback time (30GB model)
Playback time (30GB model)
zacman
Mar 30, 11:54 AM
We all called those things "windows operating systems" or "windows-based operating systems" (and "graphical operating systems") in the IT industry back in the day when Microsoft got the trademark.
Again that doesn't matter as the word Windows doesn't come from the IT industry but existed before. App however was created within the IT industry.
Again that doesn't matter as the word Windows doesn't come from the IT industry but existed before. App however was created within the IT industry.