aeaglex07
Apr 20, 01:16 PM
Wow, this is really, really bad. I've no idea how any company would think this was acceptable. There's no way this was simply an oversight.
Absolutely unacceptable.
go buy a Droid and let Google sell your personal info:D
Absolutely unacceptable.
go buy a Droid and let Google sell your personal info:D
~Shard~
Aug 28, 11:51 PM
Anyone else voting that they drop the price on the BlackBook to match the white MB? What are the chances, eh?
It's tough for Apple to justify the higher price to begin with, so, in their minds, why should they bother justifying a price cut? :p ;) :D
It's tough for Apple to justify the higher price to begin with, so, in their minds, why should they bother justifying a price cut? :p ;) :D
berkleeboy210
Sep 4, 07:31 PM
With all these rumors around, I feel like this event is Tomorrow, and not next week, but still we don't even have a confirmed date yet.
Now don't get me wrong, I'd love to see everything happen in one event that AppleInsider recently predicted.
But I just there are too many rumors floating around at this point.
Anyone agree w/ me on this one?
Now don't get me wrong, I'd love to see everything happen in one event that AppleInsider recently predicted.
But I just there are too many rumors floating around at this point.
Anyone agree w/ me on this one?
*LTD*
Apr 19, 09:27 PM
but there are ways to make Apple life hell and cause huge amounts of problems with out breaking the contract.
Examples are shipments get delayed. Takes longer to process orders.
Apple needs to rush order something and get it quickly..... Guess what not going to happen.
I have seen the back world of things like this. Samsung can do a lot with out breaking the contract. Apple is gaining a reputation not to be trusted in any way shape or form.
No. There aren't. Unless they've gone crazy and don't need a $5 billion partner. Money talks. Not hurt feelings over phone patents.
It really makes no difference. No amount of you wishing hardship on Apple will cause them actual hardship.
Apple has the iPhone and untouchable mindshare.
Samsung is a parts supplier that can be replaced.
Guess who my money's on to come out of this laughing?
There is only one group who's trust Apple actually needs: consumers.
Apple's got that locked. As a result, there are always suppliers wanting to cash in. Apple doesn't need their partners. Apple's partners need Apple. It starts with great ideas for great products. That begins with Apple. The rest is logistics.
Samsung is just sabre-rattling. This in fact, will have ZERO effect on their supply agreements with Apple. It's about a phone. Samsung isn't going to sacrifice their $5+ billion partner when consumers can't get enough of all things Apple. Samsung needs Apple's business.
With that in mind, the fact that Apple insists on fostering negative energy, launching a law suit, and showing their pro war position to the world, is very revealing of who they are.
Unable to be a good corporate citizen, unable to satisfy their greed as they rake in more profits than the competition, Apples looking rather desperate. Nothing will ever be enough.
Are you new?
They have always been this way. And the result: PROFIT.
All Apple needs are customers. And they've got no shortage of them. Customers like YOU, for example. You paid for Apple gear, you consent to what they do. You have no cause to complain.
There is no such thing as a "good corporate citizen." It's competitive and very cutthroat.
Samsung will not make things difficult for Apple, or covertly enact some form of vengeance by deliberately messing with supply agreements. That is simply inviting more legal trouble. This is a PHONE issues, NOT a supply agreement issue.
Examples are shipments get delayed. Takes longer to process orders.
Apple needs to rush order something and get it quickly..... Guess what not going to happen.
I have seen the back world of things like this. Samsung can do a lot with out breaking the contract. Apple is gaining a reputation not to be trusted in any way shape or form.
No. There aren't. Unless they've gone crazy and don't need a $5 billion partner. Money talks. Not hurt feelings over phone patents.
It really makes no difference. No amount of you wishing hardship on Apple will cause them actual hardship.
Apple has the iPhone and untouchable mindshare.
Samsung is a parts supplier that can be replaced.
Guess who my money's on to come out of this laughing?
There is only one group who's trust Apple actually needs: consumers.
Apple's got that locked. As a result, there are always suppliers wanting to cash in. Apple doesn't need their partners. Apple's partners need Apple. It starts with great ideas for great products. That begins with Apple. The rest is logistics.
Samsung is just sabre-rattling. This in fact, will have ZERO effect on their supply agreements with Apple. It's about a phone. Samsung isn't going to sacrifice their $5+ billion partner when consumers can't get enough of all things Apple. Samsung needs Apple's business.
With that in mind, the fact that Apple insists on fostering negative energy, launching a law suit, and showing their pro war position to the world, is very revealing of who they are.
Unable to be a good corporate citizen, unable to satisfy their greed as they rake in more profits than the competition, Apples looking rather desperate. Nothing will ever be enough.
Are you new?
They have always been this way. And the result: PROFIT.
All Apple needs are customers. And they've got no shortage of them. Customers like YOU, for example. You paid for Apple gear, you consent to what they do. You have no cause to complain.
There is no such thing as a "good corporate citizen." It's competitive and very cutthroat.
Samsung will not make things difficult for Apple, or covertly enact some form of vengeance by deliberately messing with supply agreements. That is simply inviting more legal trouble. This is a PHONE issues, NOT a supply agreement issue.
berkleeboy210
Sep 5, 08:49 AM
If we see new macs when the store is up. then it will be clear that the upcoming event will be only iPod related. here's to mac updates this morning!:D
rstansby
Apr 22, 02:22 AM
Actually, Amazon gives you 5 gigs of space on your cloud drive for your own MP3s. When/if you buy songs from them, you get additional space for the songs you've purchased.
A lot of people have more than 5GB in their music collection, so for these people the Amazon service doesn't work.
A lot of people have more than 5GB in their music collection, so for these people the Amazon service doesn't work.
NT1440
Apr 19, 04:07 PM
Of course that is ridiculous, and I totally agree there should be a line, but where do we draw it? Who gets to draw it?
There is this funny phenomena where workers get together and meet with their employers to negotiate these things.
Lucky for us, the Republi****s are actively pushing incredibly hard to rid the country of such an evil phenomenon.
There is this funny phenomena where workers get together and meet with their employers to negotiate these things.
Lucky for us, the Republi****s are actively pushing incredibly hard to rid the country of such an evil phenomenon.
lilo777
Apr 19, 04:08 PM
Yeah cause a contract breach takes just as long to prove a IP suite. They'd get slapped so fast they wont know what hit them, not to mention other companies would see it as samsung being cowboys for mixing their two business up.
I doubt those contracts last longer than one year and this is how long it will probably take for this lawsuit to get to court hearing. Samsung will be in a great bargaining position then.
I doubt those contracts last longer than one year and this is how long it will probably take for this lawsuit to get to court hearing. Samsung will be in a great bargaining position then.
mdntcallr
Sep 14, 12:38 AM
sounds like a nice starter level phone/ipod.
but what I and many other people want is a smart phone, for:
Treo/Blackberry like functionality
Camera with decent megapixel, maybe 3 megapixels (settle for 1.3) that moves.
so you can have "isight" built in. also ichatav with video.
Ipod, with 80 gb hard drive.
Video capability, both from itunes, and even with streamed cellular broadband via slingbox or from more
oh well... to dream
but what I and many other people want is a smart phone, for:
Treo/Blackberry like functionality
Camera with decent megapixel, maybe 3 megapixels (settle for 1.3) that moves.
so you can have "isight" built in. also ichatav with video.
Ipod, with 80 gb hard drive.
Video capability, both from itunes, and even with streamed cellular broadband via slingbox or from more
oh well... to dream
rychencop
Jan 3, 12:33 AM
The McAfee free trial versions for Mac should be out any day now. :cool:
exactly ;)
exactly ;)
Multimedia
Sep 10, 08:48 AM
Software will also have to keep up and unless your software becomes massively multithreaded and what you're doing can actually be multi threaded there's no real advantage to multi-core CPUs.
This is already a problem with Quicktime in that it doesn't scale past 2 cores. You'll find half of your computer under utilised for instance when transcoding video in Quicktime.Not if you transcode multiple files simultaneously - which is what I do with multiple instances of Toast 7 and Handbrake..
Plus that will probably be fixed in QuickTime 8 which is likely to come with Leopard.
This is already a problem with Quicktime in that it doesn't scale past 2 cores. You'll find half of your computer under utilised for instance when transcoding video in Quicktime.Not if you transcode multiple files simultaneously - which is what I do with multiple instances of Toast 7 and Handbrake..
Plus that will probably be fixed in QuickTime 8 which is likely to come with Leopard.
pyroza
Apr 25, 06:19 PM
Getting rid of the optical drive would be stupid. No way to burn CDs (yes, I buy CDs because I like supporting artists and I like higher quality music) and no way to watch DVDs (no DVD player or TV here in my dorm room).
Northgrove
Apr 19, 07:52 AM
Samsung running Android look very very similar to Apple's, to the point where it causes confusion in the marketplace for consumers. I've seen several people mistake one of these things for an iPhone because they look that similar. It's a combination of Google's Android and Samsung's hardware.
This confusion is no accident, that was the intent all along. There is no reason why they could not create their own look and feel... change it up enough so it's not an obvious copy. Other handset makers have been able to do that.
I agree. Sometimes I think this kind of lawsuits are a stretch and a bit silly, but not this time. When there's confusion even to me as a geek after a quick glance on these smarthpones, I have to agree that it's gone too far. It's obvious that Samsung is simply mimicking Apple at this point to ride on their popularity wave, and thus leeching off their profits. That just can't be right.
I've seen other comments in this thread, comments saying that iPhone UI's haven't changed the last four years, so Apple aren't actually renewing themselves. This is however completely besides the point -- no company has an obligation to do so, especially when the UI is part of their brand and image, like in Apple's case. Then it's counterproductive to change UI drastically bi-yearly. Their patents are invalidated even if they don't renew themselves.
I like how the iPhone revolutionized the idea with apps and app markets, and still maintaining ease-of-use, but I had really assumed that major competitors like Samsung would be able to keep competing while not starting their carbon copiers. Yes -- there are many undiscovered ways of building a smartphone, especially in terms of the software which I imagine is what Apple is getting at here.
This confusion is no accident, that was the intent all along. There is no reason why they could not create their own look and feel... change it up enough so it's not an obvious copy. Other handset makers have been able to do that.
I agree. Sometimes I think this kind of lawsuits are a stretch and a bit silly, but not this time. When there's confusion even to me as a geek after a quick glance on these smarthpones, I have to agree that it's gone too far. It's obvious that Samsung is simply mimicking Apple at this point to ride on their popularity wave, and thus leeching off their profits. That just can't be right.
I've seen other comments in this thread, comments saying that iPhone UI's haven't changed the last four years, so Apple aren't actually renewing themselves. This is however completely besides the point -- no company has an obligation to do so, especially when the UI is part of their brand and image, like in Apple's case. Then it's counterproductive to change UI drastically bi-yearly. Their patents are invalidated even if they don't renew themselves.
I like how the iPhone revolutionized the idea with apps and app markets, and still maintaining ease-of-use, but I had really assumed that major competitors like Samsung would be able to keep competing while not starting their carbon copiers. Yes -- there are many undiscovered ways of building a smartphone, especially in terms of the software which I imagine is what Apple is getting at here.
HecubusPro
Sep 1, 11:38 AM
The way I see it is why buy a product when it is being improved (no matter how little or much) and should be the same price or lower... most likely within the next few weeks?
Unless Apple adds a Blu-ray drive in their MBP's (not gonna happen, at least at this point) I doubt we'll see a price increase in those systems when they get teh C2D upgrade. As far as other computers are concerned, I'm not sure--doubt macbooks will increase either since their price tag is so attractive to consumers and competitve with other brands. It seems that the mini has had the most fluid pricing structure, but I could be wrong.
Unless Apple adds a Blu-ray drive in their MBP's (not gonna happen, at least at this point) I doubt we'll see a price increase in those systems when they get teh C2D upgrade. As far as other computers are concerned, I'm not sure--doubt macbooks will increase either since their price tag is so attractive to consumers and competitve with other brands. It seems that the mini has had the most fluid pricing structure, but I could be wrong.
Reverendrun
May 3, 10:20 AM
what about target display mode on the 21/24" models?
I'm curious about this as well. Can you use the target display mode on the 21.5" model?
I'm curious about this as well. Can you use the target display mode on the 21.5" model?
macintel4me
Sep 4, 09:40 PM
A FrontRow AirPort Express device (with remote) is a much more cost effective way than buying a Mac Mini. Personally, I would love to play music, show my family pics and videos on my living room TV, but found a $600 Mac Mini too pricey for that. To be honest, I don't need (nor want to pay for) video editing software, music editing software, etc for my living room. An XBox can do that for half the price and it does games. I haven't gone the XBox route because it just seems too 'weird' and I'm waiting for the 'right' device to come out. I hoping this is it. :)
I would have to see however how 320x240 would look on my plasma. I have a feeling I'd be disappointed....especially for $10...so the Movie Store thing may not be for me!!
I would have to see however how 320x240 would look on my plasma. I have a feeling I'd be disappointed....especially for $10...so the Movie Store thing may not be for me!!
scoobydoo99
Apr 20, 02:09 PM
You have no proof of this.
I'm sure they do... but for the most part they just subpoena the telecom provider for whatever records they require.
lol. they don't even have to subpoena these days. just ask nicely and the companies simply hand over anything they want (all in the name of being good patriots.) Of course, sometimes they charge the government for it:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm
I'm sure they do... but for the most part they just subpoena the telecom provider for whatever records they require.
lol. they don't even have to subpoena these days. just ask nicely and the companies simply hand over anything they want (all in the name of being good patriots.) Of course, sometimes they charge the government for it:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm
asdf542
Apr 14, 04:24 PM
No. You are confusing these with facts. I've pointed out to you each time you have made something up in my reply.LOL, and yet you still haven't given any examples.
Person 1: Thunderbolt = Mac Only True. In the same way FW is 'Mac only'. You perhaps don't understand the difference between speaking literally and effectively. Effectively, FW is considered 'Mac only' yet is available to any vendor that wants to implement it. But the lack of interest has resulted in it being considered 'Mac only'. Not literally, but effectively. See the difference?
Right, and no where was this specified at this point in the conversation. You are simply fitting it in for your argument. FireWire was not mentioned in the original post.
You: Bingo True.
Me: Post to an article showing that it won't be Mac only False. You posted an article that said others could use it. Nowhere in your article did it say others would use it. I explained this to you, but again, you missed the point. Firewire isn't literally Mac only either. I knew what article I posted and I knew what it contained and it served its purpose perfectly fine. I don't need to show you who's going to use it because it's going to be native in Ivy Bridge ALONGSIDE USB 3 as the title would suggest. There's no reason NOT to use it as the superior IO and it's already there. This isn't rocket science.
You: Claim you were talking metaphorically to save your ass False. I don't think you understand what a metaphor is, because you aren't using it right. I claimed, and the OP later explained, it was meant, in context, effectively Mac only. Seriously, this is highschool english. Wow, what a surprise. The OP decided to choose the route that served him better for the discussion. :rolleyes:
Myself and Econgeek: Explain to you why what you saved your ass with won't be trueFalse. Econogeek did well in explaining how the situations differ. You explained nothing.I explained why ThunderBolt wouldn't be another FireWire. You weren't having it and decided to pull strawman attacks.
You: Go on a rampage of insults False. No insults. Just observations. If you made a lot of spelling errors and I pointed them out, that would be an observation, not an insult. You both misunderstood posts and made up claims of statements that did not exist. I pointed that out. If you felt insulted, you are being overly sensitive.Pointing out spelling errors and telling someone that they belong on the short bus are two different things. :rolleyes: Sounds like you have some self-esteem issues if you feel the need to tell someone they're mentally retarded over an IO discussion.
Person 1: Thunderbolt = Mac Only True. In the same way FW is 'Mac only'. You perhaps don't understand the difference between speaking literally and effectively. Effectively, FW is considered 'Mac only' yet is available to any vendor that wants to implement it. But the lack of interest has resulted in it being considered 'Mac only'. Not literally, but effectively. See the difference?
Right, and no where was this specified at this point in the conversation. You are simply fitting it in for your argument. FireWire was not mentioned in the original post.
You: Bingo True.
Me: Post to an article showing that it won't be Mac only False. You posted an article that said others could use it. Nowhere in your article did it say others would use it. I explained this to you, but again, you missed the point. Firewire isn't literally Mac only either. I knew what article I posted and I knew what it contained and it served its purpose perfectly fine. I don't need to show you who's going to use it because it's going to be native in Ivy Bridge ALONGSIDE USB 3 as the title would suggest. There's no reason NOT to use it as the superior IO and it's already there. This isn't rocket science.
You: Claim you were talking metaphorically to save your ass False. I don't think you understand what a metaphor is, because you aren't using it right. I claimed, and the OP later explained, it was meant, in context, effectively Mac only. Seriously, this is highschool english. Wow, what a surprise. The OP decided to choose the route that served him better for the discussion. :rolleyes:
Myself and Econgeek: Explain to you why what you saved your ass with won't be trueFalse. Econogeek did well in explaining how the situations differ. You explained nothing.I explained why ThunderBolt wouldn't be another FireWire. You weren't having it and decided to pull strawman attacks.
You: Go on a rampage of insults False. No insults. Just observations. If you made a lot of spelling errors and I pointed them out, that would be an observation, not an insult. You both misunderstood posts and made up claims of statements that did not exist. I pointed that out. If you felt insulted, you are being overly sensitive.Pointing out spelling errors and telling someone that they belong on the short bus are two different things. :rolleyes: Sounds like you have some self-esteem issues if you feel the need to tell someone they're mentally retarded over an IO discussion.
Evangelion
Sep 5, 09:03 AM
If we see new macs when the store is up. then it will be clear that the upcoming event will be only iPod related. here's to mac updates this morning!:D
If there are Mac updates coming, why is only US store down?
If there are Mac updates coming, why is only US store down?
gnasher729
Jul 14, 09:33 AM
Why does the high-end Conroe cost more than the high-end Woodcrest?
Because Intel is trying to maximise their profit.
Conroes will be in relatively affordable computers, and there will be some people who spend hundreds of dollars extra for the fastest graphics card possible, and hundreds for the fastest processor possible. It will be sold to people who are willing to pay over the top for highest performance.
Woodcrest will be sold in expensive servers to businesses, who will _not_ pay for bragging rights, but only as much as the extra performance is worth.
Two relatively slow Woodcrests could be used to build a system that is faster and possibly cheaper than the Conroe Extreme Edition.
Because Intel is trying to maximise their profit.
Conroes will be in relatively affordable computers, and there will be some people who spend hundreds of dollars extra for the fastest graphics card possible, and hundreds for the fastest processor possible. It will be sold to people who are willing to pay over the top for highest performance.
Woodcrest will be sold in expensive servers to businesses, who will _not_ pay for bragging rights, but only as much as the extra performance is worth.
Two relatively slow Woodcrests could be used to build a system that is faster and possibly cheaper than the Conroe Extreme Edition.
LagunaSol
Apr 29, 04:03 PM
You do understand that 2008 minus 2001 plus development time is more than 1 or 2, right? That's 7, maybe 9 years of losses.
My original comment was that this is a poor way to do it, from a finance perspective. There was no guarantee, and if Sony and M$ didn't have profit elsewhere, these wouldn't even exist. Nintendo made money on the Wii almost immediately, as you've claimed M$ did. It sounds like you are talking about Nintendo.
And the beauty of this business model is Microsoft and Sony will start the bleeding all over again in a couple of years with the next console generation.
My original comment was that this is a poor way to do it, from a finance perspective. There was no guarantee, and if Sony and M$ didn't have profit elsewhere, these wouldn't even exist. Nintendo made money on the Wii almost immediately, as you've claimed M$ did. It sounds like you are talking about Nintendo.
And the beauty of this business model is Microsoft and Sony will start the bleeding all over again in a couple of years with the next console generation.
7on
Sep 13, 08:24 AM
This is the first time I've thought about getting an iPod since the 4G.
First time I've thought about getting an iPod since the 2G
First time I've thought about getting an iPod since the 2G
AppleScruff1
Apr 19, 11:16 PM
Where did anyone say that?
I thought that cover had photos of the Beatles on it?
And red or green, their logo still looks nothing like the Apple Computer logo.
The logo on the center of the record, not the album artwork. The Beatle's logo looks like an apple to me, Apple's logo looks like an apple to me. We both know if the sides were reversed, Apple would have filed a suit.
I thought that cover had photos of the Beatles on it?
And red or green, their logo still looks nothing like the Apple Computer logo.
The logo on the center of the record, not the album artwork. The Beatle's logo looks like an apple to me, Apple's logo looks like an apple to me. We both know if the sides were reversed, Apple would have filed a suit.
Hardtimes
Apr 20, 01:08 PM
Just don't go anywhere
Steve
Sent from my iphone
Steve
Sent from my iphone