Winni
Nov 14, 12:37 PM
Lets see how long they will stay away. There are buckets of DOLLARS waiting to be made in the App Store.
Yes, but only for Apple, because they own the infrastructure. We still haven't heard of a company that can really make a living with software for the iPhone/iPod Touch platform. So far, it's all just hype and even though there are hundreds of thousands of apps distributed through the AppStore, the only winner at this point in time is Apple.
And to be honest, from a customer's perspective, I do hope that that the AppStore concept will fail. The AppStore as it is manifest a distribution monopoly for Apple, and monopolies -always- hurt the customer and prevent innovation. Imagine you could only obtain Mac application through the AppStore with similar rules: There wouldn't be a Firefox for the Mac because it competes with Apple's Safari. There wouldn't be an Adobe Lightroom for the Mac because it competes with Apple's Aperture. There wouldn't be any DVD or CD ripping software for the Mac because those apps could hurt Apple's iTunes sales. There probably wouldn't even be a Microsoft Office anymore because it competes with Apple's (inferior) iWork Suite. And, worst of all, all software authors would be FORCED to distribute their apps through the AppStore which would impose an Apple distribution tax on their software. As a result, they would all run away and write their apps for Windows instead. And Apple probably wouldn't even care because most of their customers are Internet-surfing consumers anyway who don't need much more than Safari, Mail and iLife to play with their photos and iPods.
Yes, but only for Apple, because they own the infrastructure. We still haven't heard of a company that can really make a living with software for the iPhone/iPod Touch platform. So far, it's all just hype and even though there are hundreds of thousands of apps distributed through the AppStore, the only winner at this point in time is Apple.
And to be honest, from a customer's perspective, I do hope that that the AppStore concept will fail. The AppStore as it is manifest a distribution monopoly for Apple, and monopolies -always- hurt the customer and prevent innovation. Imagine you could only obtain Mac application through the AppStore with similar rules: There wouldn't be a Firefox for the Mac because it competes with Apple's Safari. There wouldn't be an Adobe Lightroom for the Mac because it competes with Apple's Aperture. There wouldn't be any DVD or CD ripping software for the Mac because those apps could hurt Apple's iTunes sales. There probably wouldn't even be a Microsoft Office anymore because it competes with Apple's (inferior) iWork Suite. And, worst of all, all software authors would be FORCED to distribute their apps through the AppStore which would impose an Apple distribution tax on their software. As a result, they would all run away and write their apps for Windows instead. And Apple probably wouldn't even care because most of their customers are Internet-surfing consumers anyway who don't need much more than Safari, Mail and iLife to play with their photos and iPods.
HecubusPro
Sep 17, 04:29 PM
Are they any good? I've never seen a phone with a good camera, 10MP phone sounds like 10MP of grainy nasty pictures to me.
I agree. There's no way I would ever want a 10mp camera. I think 5 or 6 tops for me, and that might be pushing it for a normal camera. I like to send a lot of the pictures I take through phone mail, and it just seems a 10mp photo would take a long time to send due the large size of the file. A 1.5mp camera on my cell phone works good for me right now.
I agree. There's no way I would ever want a 10mp camera. I think 5 or 6 tops for me, and that might be pushing it for a normal camera. I like to send a lot of the pictures I take through phone mail, and it just seems a 10mp photo would take a long time to send due the large size of the file. A 1.5mp camera on my cell phone works good for me right now.
PeterQVenkman
Mar 22, 03:29 PM
What about the Mac Pro? It's way past due, would that come first, before the iMac?
Probably not until August at the earliest.
Probably not until August at the earliest.
Optimus Frag
Apr 23, 12:54 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Aren't intel in the process on implementing Open CL?
1 revision, 39 KB
It all ends here
IT ALL ENDS HERE
the Deathly Hallows poster
harry potter 7 poster it all
It all ends here.
harry potter and the deathly
It all ends here.
It all ends here
It all ends here:
It all ends here
It all ends here.
The Bloody New Harry Potter
Final Harry Potter movie
It All Ends Here
Aren't intel in the process on implementing Open CL?
hayesk
May 3, 12:41 PM
but i thought half the point of TB was that you would only need one output from the computer, and since we don't have any TB displays (or anything for that matter) how do we know that the ports are limited to one display?
TB has two 10 Gbps channels. A display takes up one of them. To power a second display, you could use the other channel, but you'd need some kind of breakout box that housed a video card.
TB has two 10 Gbps channels. A display takes up one of them. To power a second display, you could use the other channel, but you'd need some kind of breakout box that housed a video card.
roland.g
Aug 28, 02:40 PM
Unfortunately, cats are known liars.
Cinch
Oct 12, 02:40 PM
It makes me so happy to know that there are still plenty of stupid people in the world.
Thank you
no need to respond to such obvious bait
;)
Cinch
Thank you
no need to respond to such obvious bait
;)
Cinch
Chundles
Aug 31, 10:28 PM
Nike kit for 5G iPod
Oh hell no. Apple are never going to release the Nike kit for HDD-based iPods. That would constitute an admission that running with the iPod is a normal activity and that any damage to the HDD from jolts and shock would need to be covered by Apple Care, ie A VERY BAD IDEA.
Oh hell no. Apple are never going to release the Nike kit for HDD-based iPods. That would constitute an admission that running with the iPod is a normal activity and that any damage to the HDD from jolts and shock would need to be covered by Apple Care, ie A VERY BAD IDEA.
toddybody
Apr 22, 12:29 PM
The TDPs are around the same as with previous gen, or possibly even less (the TDP of 320M is unknown). Also, Turbo Boost will only be activated if the thermals allow that. If your CPU is already running at 90�C, then Turbo most likely won't kick in.
I doubt SB will make MBA run noticeably hotter.
Agreed. Though I thought SB was roughy 10% more efficient in regards to TDP, than previous core gens...thereby making it a thermal improvement. Also, no cooling requirements for a 320m...all on the SB chip.
I doubt SB will make MBA run noticeably hotter.
Agreed. Though I thought SB was roughy 10% more efficient in regards to TDP, than previous core gens...thereby making it a thermal improvement. Also, no cooling requirements for a 320m...all on the SB chip.
MonkeySee....
May 3, 10:17 AM
wow thats pretty cool with the option of the trackpad. I think its a must on any iMac. I couldn't live without it. :)
wnurse
Aug 24, 08:48 AM
I think you are seriously underestimating how expensive these type of patent battles can be. Check out the following story:
http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/3402321
So SCO obviously expected its legal costs to spiral beyond $31 million to make a special deal with its law firm to cap costs. The fact they are willing to give as much as 33% of any potential winnings with the legal firm indicates that the final tally could easily approach $100 million if not for the cap.
It is quite clear that Apple would have made life very, very expensive and excruciating for Creative's legal team. $100 million in legal costs is not unrealistic considering that you not only had the original suit, but countersuits by Apple involving 4 bonafide patents.
What would creative legal cost have been. I seriously doubt apple legal cost would have approached 100 million but for the sake of argument, lets say it did, would creative cost also have approached 100 million. Could creative have paid that much?. If apple legal cost could escalate to that amount, creative would have dropped the case long before the cost approached that amount. Creative does not have 100 mil to blow on lawyers. Either way you look at it, apple legal cost would not have approached 100 mil. The point of the settlement was not to avoid legal cost (as many of you fondly point out, apple has 10 billion in cash, why should legal cost even worry them?). No, the problem was that creative might have won. Then apple would have had a problem.
http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/3402321
So SCO obviously expected its legal costs to spiral beyond $31 million to make a special deal with its law firm to cap costs. The fact they are willing to give as much as 33% of any potential winnings with the legal firm indicates that the final tally could easily approach $100 million if not for the cap.
It is quite clear that Apple would have made life very, very expensive and excruciating for Creative's legal team. $100 million in legal costs is not unrealistic considering that you not only had the original suit, but countersuits by Apple involving 4 bonafide patents.
What would creative legal cost have been. I seriously doubt apple legal cost would have approached 100 million but for the sake of argument, lets say it did, would creative cost also have approached 100 million. Could creative have paid that much?. If apple legal cost could escalate to that amount, creative would have dropped the case long before the cost approached that amount. Creative does not have 100 mil to blow on lawyers. Either way you look at it, apple legal cost would not have approached 100 mil. The point of the settlement was not to avoid legal cost (as many of you fondly point out, apple has 10 billion in cash, why should legal cost even worry them?). No, the problem was that creative might have won. Then apple would have had a problem.
cube
Mar 30, 01:33 PM
But MS never consistently used the term App to describe any part of their business. Sure it pops up occasionally here and there, almost at random, but that's about it. Historically they've always used 'Programs'. So to use your example, why couldn't they say: "We have this thing called Marketplace. What is it? Well, it's a place where you can buy programs.....". Why are they not happy with that? It will line up so much better with their software genealogy.
I suspect the truth of the matter is they now want to start using 'App' for everything (instead of Programs), because Apple has popularized the term. Its on everybody's tongue now. And MS wants in on it. They want their stuff to be associated with the buzz that Apple created. That's borderline parasitic to me.
Then why doesn't Apple just trademark the word "App"?
I suspect the truth of the matter is they now want to start using 'App' for everything (instead of Programs), because Apple has popularized the term. Its on everybody's tongue now. And MS wants in on it. They want their stuff to be associated with the buzz that Apple created. That's borderline parasitic to me.
Then why doesn't Apple just trademark the word "App"?
koskesh
Apr 4, 12:52 PM
Just wow to the morons who are questioning if it was necessary to shoot him in the head. If the security guard had been killed you would be like "oh that's just sad. He's a hero". WTF kinda a$$ backward thinking is that?
He's a "SECURITY" guard for fock's sake. it's what he's there for. These guys threatened to kill people and yet it's wrong to shoot one in the head.
I personally would prefer the criminal social parasites to die than the security guard. And why the fock are you so concerned about a security guard carrying a weapon? The poor guy is putting his life out there to bring some bread to his home while protecting your moron a$$. He's offering the society a legitimate service instead of joining a gang and you're worried about him having a gun? My god people. This country is going to ***** if we have people this dumb doing any kind of work and having this kind of mentality.
And I'm a complete liberal, btw, but I do have a sense of the real world.
He's a "SECURITY" guard for fock's sake. it's what he's there for. These guys threatened to kill people and yet it's wrong to shoot one in the head.
I personally would prefer the criminal social parasites to die than the security guard. And why the fock are you so concerned about a security guard carrying a weapon? The poor guy is putting his life out there to bring some bread to his home while protecting your moron a$$. He's offering the society a legitimate service instead of joining a gang and you're worried about him having a gun? My god people. This country is going to ***** if we have people this dumb doing any kind of work and having this kind of mentality.
And I'm a complete liberal, btw, but I do have a sense of the real world.
Warbrain
Apr 20, 12:35 PM
and btw, google stores location data allll the time.
Every single search is localized in some sense. Google is keeping track of where you are based off GPS or IP address. This is why I don't have an issue with this; I'd rather have the file on my computer than with a company that we aren't sure is going to be on the good side for long.
Every single search is localized in some sense. Google is keeping track of where you are based off GPS or IP address. This is why I don't have an issue with this; I'd rather have the file on my computer than with a company that we aren't sure is going to be on the good side for long.
cmaier
Nov 13, 05:26 PM
Well that might a the case in your situation but it this case Rogue Amoeba is using Apple's own copyright images in a client server application where the API on OS X does not confer the right to use those images on other devices by third party developers.
You're missing the point. Yes, Apple, as the copyright holder, can define the extent of its license (assuming they haven't already waived the right to do so, which they may have, and assuming it isn't fair use, which it almost certainly is), and, yes, they can decide what goes into the app store, making the extent of the copyright license moot.
But it doesn't make sense for them to do so! Integration between iphone and mac would only sell more of each. They don't lose money on this sort of use of the icons - it's not like they offer a paid license for those images.
There is no duty to police copyrights to avoid losing them.
And, there is no rational alternative to using those icons (despite your repeated "all they had to do is create their own icons" argument) because Apple is likely to turn around and assert trademark/trade dress.
So all you can do is use words, or images unrelated to the appearance of the machines being represented. If the words say "Macbook Pro," e.g., APple can turn around and say you can't do THAT, either, because that's a trademark. If your handmade image looks too much like a mac, that's trademark infringement too (according to Apple). So you have to make it NOT look like the thing it represents. That totally defeats the POINT of the images in this use.
It's like having to write an article in a newspaper reviewing a concert without mentioning the name of the band or the names of any of the band members.
And Apple is doing it for absolutely no good reason.
You're missing the point. Yes, Apple, as the copyright holder, can define the extent of its license (assuming they haven't already waived the right to do so, which they may have, and assuming it isn't fair use, which it almost certainly is), and, yes, they can decide what goes into the app store, making the extent of the copyright license moot.
But it doesn't make sense for them to do so! Integration between iphone and mac would only sell more of each. They don't lose money on this sort of use of the icons - it's not like they offer a paid license for those images.
There is no duty to police copyrights to avoid losing them.
And, there is no rational alternative to using those icons (despite your repeated "all they had to do is create their own icons" argument) because Apple is likely to turn around and assert trademark/trade dress.
So all you can do is use words, or images unrelated to the appearance of the machines being represented. If the words say "Macbook Pro," e.g., APple can turn around and say you can't do THAT, either, because that's a trademark. If your handmade image looks too much like a mac, that's trademark infringement too (according to Apple). So you have to make it NOT look like the thing it represents. That totally defeats the POINT of the images in this use.
It's like having to write an article in a newspaper reviewing a concert without mentioning the name of the band or the names of any of the band members.
And Apple is doing it for absolutely no good reason.
rtkane
Apr 4, 12:49 PM
Coming from a "Gun Person" (Own a HK .45 USP Tactical w/ GEMTECH Suppressor)
...the would be robbers better have been armed, to warrant the Rent-a-Cop shooting them in the head. He should be prosecuted for manslaughter if not. All this "well they had it coming" BS is totally misplaced, the man who died was a human being.
Read the article. Why do people comment when they don't even read the article?
...the would be robbers better have been armed, to warrant the Rent-a-Cop shooting them in the head. He should be prosecuted for manslaughter if not. All this "well they had it coming" BS is totally misplaced, the man who died was a human being.
Read the article. Why do people comment when they don't even read the article?
Lesser Evets
Mar 22, 02:56 PM
I wouldn't be surprised if the iMac and new Mac mini are the replacement for the Mac Pro...
By the time November comes around, Thunderbolt may cause the death of the Mac Pro.
Your logic is half-baked. The MacPro has one specific function which the iMac will probably never have: instant customization. You can stack tons of drive space in them, tons of RAM, and choose any sort of monitor config.
Sure, iMacs might be able to do something like that, but with a lot of garbage floating around and cluttering everything. Also, the processors in the Pro are always beefier.
However, I'd agree that for almost all people in the market, an iMac would be just as good as a MacPro. In 4 years I will probably replace my 2007 Pro with an iMac. Spending $4000 for a good Pro isn't worth it compared to $2000 for an iMac.
By the time November comes around, Thunderbolt may cause the death of the Mac Pro.
Your logic is half-baked. The MacPro has one specific function which the iMac will probably never have: instant customization. You can stack tons of drive space in them, tons of RAM, and choose any sort of monitor config.
Sure, iMacs might be able to do something like that, but with a lot of garbage floating around and cluttering everything. Also, the processors in the Pro are always beefier.
However, I'd agree that for almost all people in the market, an iMac would be just as good as a MacPro. In 4 years I will probably replace my 2007 Pro with an iMac. Spending $4000 for a good Pro isn't worth it compared to $2000 for an iMac.
shadowx
Sep 19, 02:23 PM
Probably at the same time as the Merom MBP. :eek:
I bought one, just to test. Wasn't bad, would buy more if they add a title I want.
Hmm... your actions are supporting my thoughts... how many of those 125,000 downloads were simply to try it out - probably a lot of them. I'm more interested to see how many downloads have been sold after the first 90 days.
I bought one, just to test. Wasn't bad, would buy more if they add a title I want.
Hmm... your actions are supporting my thoughts... how many of those 125,000 downloads were simply to try it out - probably a lot of them. I'm more interested to see how many downloads have been sold after the first 90 days.
DrFrankTM
Sep 10, 05:19 AM
If my memory serves me correctly Conroe will not be pin compatible with Merom, is that right? I just can't remember what's what anymore. Old age.
As far as I know, the first generation Merom is pin-compatible with Yonah, the Core Duo mobile processor that is in the MacBook, MacBook Pro and Mac Mini at the moment. And if I'm not mistaken, Kentsfield will be pin-compatible with Conroe, which is not used in any Mac at the moment.
EDIT: But no, Conroe and Merom are not pin-compatible.
As far as I know, the first generation Merom is pin-compatible with Yonah, the Core Duo mobile processor that is in the MacBook, MacBook Pro and Mac Mini at the moment. And if I'm not mistaken, Kentsfield will be pin-compatible with Conroe, which is not used in any Mac at the moment.
EDIT: But no, Conroe and Merom are not pin-compatible.
bdj21ya
Sep 15, 06:57 PM
Apple being a California based company certainly must know about the new law just signed that prohibits hand held cell phone use while driving a car. (Reasonable law if you ask me) with this new law we can assume the phone will have some kind of "hands free" interface. It would be very hard to sell a high end phone that can't be used in a car in California. Apple must know this, the law has been in the works for some time.
It's a stupid law and not enforced. I talk on my phone all the time, while driving a stick shift with no problems. You just have to be willing to take the phone away from your ear when you need two hands.
That said, I really prefer using my bluetooth headset, and I hope Apple does include bluetooth with the phone, if only just for voice.
Also, Apple should look into the idea of wireless headphones/controllers while ignoring battery problems. Who cares if you have to double the size of the device as long as you're just leaving the device in your pocket or backpack, controlling it with a wireless remote, and experiencing it with wireless headphones. I'm not saying there aren't other problems with this, but I am saying that Apple shouldn't be afraid of the iPod getting bigger again to provide battery life for some new features (e.g. widescreen)
It's a stupid law and not enforced. I talk on my phone all the time, while driving a stick shift with no problems. You just have to be willing to take the phone away from your ear when you need two hands.
That said, I really prefer using my bluetooth headset, and I hope Apple does include bluetooth with the phone, if only just for voice.
Also, Apple should look into the idea of wireless headphones/controllers while ignoring battery problems. Who cares if you have to double the size of the device as long as you're just leaving the device in your pocket or backpack, controlling it with a wireless remote, and experiencing it with wireless headphones. I'm not saying there aren't other problems with this, but I am saying that Apple shouldn't be afraid of the iPod getting bigger again to provide battery life for some new features (e.g. widescreen)
milbournosphere
Apr 20, 12:42 PM
android enthusiast here.
everyone here is on facebook, exposing their real names, friends, user uploaded photos that are under the control of facebook under the new TOS agreement, where they live, phone numbers, what they like, what they dislike, their status updates, etc.
Speak for yourself. I'm on Facebook, but take care to limit what data of mine is given to them. They don't have my phone number, they don't have my address, my profile is private, they don't have ANY work info, I only post what I want to be public, and I only friend people I know in the flesh. Everybody should do the same. It all comes down to owning and caring for one's own data, not allowing somebody else to do it.
everyone here is on facebook, exposing their real names, friends, user uploaded photos that are under the control of facebook under the new TOS agreement, where they live, phone numbers, what they like, what they dislike, their status updates, etc.
Speak for yourself. I'm on Facebook, but take care to limit what data of mine is given to them. They don't have my phone number, they don't have my address, my profile is private, they don't have ANY work info, I only post what I want to be public, and I only friend people I know in the flesh. Everybody should do the same. It all comes down to owning and caring for one's own data, not allowing somebody else to do it.
macenforcer
Sep 1, 11:38 AM
Bring on the 30" imac.
devman
Sep 26, 09:26 AM
Yeah, but not if it's locked. I had to call up my provider and beg for my unlock code so that I could use *my* phone in Asia, and then they said yes, and never sent it to me. Call them back, and...well..rinse, repeat.
What about people like me who travel a lot and want to pop in SIM cards in other places? I'm sick and tired of the U.S. market and all of its stupid contract / vendor lock-in ********.
Pity to see Apple on that bandwagon; I hope they just sell the phone in the Apple Store unlocked, and let us choose the carrier we want.
I had no trouble getting an unlock code from Cingular for a SLVR I bought from them. Here's pix I just took showing it in use back home on the Telstra network.
What about people like me who travel a lot and want to pop in SIM cards in other places? I'm sick and tired of the U.S. market and all of its stupid contract / vendor lock-in ********.
Pity to see Apple on that bandwagon; I hope they just sell the phone in the Apple Store unlocked, and let us choose the carrier we want.
I had no trouble getting an unlock code from Cingular for a SLVR I bought from them. Here's pix I just took showing it in use back home on the Telstra network.
supermacdesign
Sep 6, 12:04 AM
Don't forget the 42" HD monitor Apple will drop at the event. What else did you think Apple would let you watch a movie on? (beside your iPod of course)