ZilogZ80
Apr 14, 04:56 AM
Would only make sense when combining Mac App Store and iOS App Store someway while keeping the syncing of the iOS devices in iTunes.
Or just do away with iTunes entirely and choose which available (i.e. purchased) apps you want to install directly in App Store on the device. Let any backups be cloud or Time Machine based.
Or just do away with iTunes entirely and choose which available (i.e. purchased) apps you want to install directly in App Store on the device. Let any backups be cloud or Time Machine based.
jessica.
Dec 29, 11:18 AM
Christ, may be old news but new to me. I like to eat but after a plate (a standard sized plate) of Turkey dinner I was stuffed. She is definitely a sick woman. I was just thinking about lunch, not so much any more.
Jetson
Jul 11, 09:30 PM
I read some of the reader comments at the end of that article. This "Argo" is just vaporware, yet people are saying they'd rush out and buy it.
Other commenters got upset because someone pointed out how the "Argo" is an iPod ripoff. It IS a ripoff - you'd have to be as blind as a mole to not realize that Microsoft wouldn't have a clue of how to build this thing without copying the iPod. That's what Microsoft does - copy.
Another thing Microsoft does well is to market a product as a loss leader - for years if necessary. Remember how they started giving away their IE browser and just buried poor Netscape. Microsoft has money to burn.
Microsoft doesn't mind putting a piece of crap on the market. They know that the lemmings will buy anything with the MS logo on it. Then they will take years to iron out the bugs and end up with a fairly serviceable product. Not a great product, but one that works well enough for a world that follows the crowd.
And why is Microsoft supposedly launching their "iPod killer"? Because they just can't stand the thought of Apple dominating the market that Apple built. Ballmer says they are going after this market because it's there. He says they want 90% of the market or nothing.
Other commenters got upset because someone pointed out how the "Argo" is an iPod ripoff. It IS a ripoff - you'd have to be as blind as a mole to not realize that Microsoft wouldn't have a clue of how to build this thing without copying the iPod. That's what Microsoft does - copy.
Another thing Microsoft does well is to market a product as a loss leader - for years if necessary. Remember how they started giving away their IE browser and just buried poor Netscape. Microsoft has money to burn.
Microsoft doesn't mind putting a piece of crap on the market. They know that the lemmings will buy anything with the MS logo on it. Then they will take years to iron out the bugs and end up with a fairly serviceable product. Not a great product, but one that works well enough for a world that follows the crowd.
And why is Microsoft supposedly launching their "iPod killer"? Because they just can't stand the thought of Apple dominating the market that Apple built. Ballmer says they are going after this market because it's there. He says they want 90% of the market or nothing.
mrblah
Jul 26, 07:43 PM
A tower is more disirable to people who are new to computers because it looks like youre getting more for your money. Obviously this doesnt apply to everyone, and saying such sacrilige on a Mac forum is going to get a lot of strange looks since the audience would be part of the "not everyone" crowd. But if you actually look at what SELLS rather than what you think people want then youll see that towers are the most sought after among the people looking for maximum value rather than style. People dont care what their computers look like, if they did then why would Dell have such a big market share with their ass ugly cases? PC's arent a fashion statement, theyre a tool. PowerMacs are absurdly priced and will never make a dent in the market share, so those are only options for rich people or enthusiasts that are willing to pay such prices.
Regardless of anyones opinion on how perfect iMacs are for new computer users, new computer users dont see it that way. They want value and upgradability since that means even more value in the long run. They dont know if they are going to upgrade anything in the future, the fact is that they buy a computer THINKING they will. You cant expect these people to know what you know, or to know that Apple has better quality parts than Dell or HP, they look at things and see computers and thats it. Not Windows, not OSX, just computers with already high prices.
Regardless of anyones opinion on how perfect iMacs are for new computer users, new computer users dont see it that way. They want value and upgradability since that means even more value in the long run. They dont know if they are going to upgrade anything in the future, the fact is that they buy a computer THINKING they will. You cant expect these people to know what you know, or to know that Apple has better quality parts than Dell or HP, they look at things and see computers and thats it. Not Windows, not OSX, just computers with already high prices.
more...
Lurchdubious
Sep 14, 12:28 PM
Halo: Reach Legendary Edition
Halo: Reach Limited Edition Xbox 360 S
Replacing my old Xbox 360 Elite. Can't wait to get all this set up and play.
http://i51.tinypic.com/334uhbo.jpg
PERFECT! Now you can eat while you play! I really should have done mine this way.
:D
p.s. I'm jealous. I can't justify trying to sell my Resident Evil Elite to jump back on the Halo train.
Halo: Reach Limited Edition Xbox 360 S
Replacing my old Xbox 360 Elite. Can't wait to get all this set up and play.
http://i51.tinypic.com/334uhbo.jpg
PERFECT! Now you can eat while you play! I really should have done mine this way.
:D
p.s. I'm jealous. I can't justify trying to sell my Resident Evil Elite to jump back on the Halo train.
daveschroeder
Oct 23, 08:35 AM
Dave,
I understand where you are coming from, but I still don't interpret the EULA as you do. Neither does Paul Thurrott http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_licensing.asp. Can you please provide links to others who think like you, preferably if they happen to work for MS. ;)
Coincidentally, I had just emailed Paul.
He already responded:
From: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Subject: RE: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:23:04 AM CDT
To: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Microsoft told me that the retail EULA forbids the installation of Windows
Vista Home Basic or Home Premium in virtual machines. They said that if
developers wanted to do this, they should get an MSDN subscription, which
has a different license allowing such an install. All that said, there's
nothing technical from preventing users from installing any Vista version in
a virtual machine.
Paul
...to which I replied:
From: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Subject: Re: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:30:57 AM CDT
To: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Security: Signed
So Microsoft actually does intend the EULA to prohibit someone from, say, buying Vista Home as a retail box and then installing it in Parallels Desktop on a Mac? (I know there is nothing technical preventing that.)
This still seems curious, given that in that scenario, not only does Vista Ultimate allow VM use, but also includes an additional license specifically so that same copy can be installed in a VM on the same device. Why wouldn't Home's license allow a single instance of itself to be used in a VM as long as it's not already installed somewhere else? The language all revolves around "the software installed on the licensed device", and I take that to mean the software *already* installed on that device, but I suppose that could be argued to mean that it can't be installed on *any* device where it would be used in a virtualization environment...
Update: Paul's response:
From: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Subject: RE: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:34:07 AM CDT
To: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Yeah, that's what they told me. My guess is that they don't want people
purchasing the low-cost versions, installing them on virtual machine
environments they don't understand (like Parallels) and then demanding
support.
You can understand why this is an issue, given that the Business and Ultimate EULAs not only explicitly allow VM use, but also include additional licenses to use that copy a second time in a VM, legally (on the same device). Also, all the language, as I said, revolves around using "the software installed on the licensed device" (implying that it's an installation that already exists on a licensed device) in a VM.
So I'll say that, if this is accurate, I stand corrected. After a few years of reading Microsoft (and other) EULAs, even I thought Microsoft wouldn't be that retarded. ;-)
Given the language, and given the additional-license situation with Business and Ultimate, I still have to say I'm surprised.
I understand where you are coming from, but I still don't interpret the EULA as you do. Neither does Paul Thurrott http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_licensing.asp. Can you please provide links to others who think like you, preferably if they happen to work for MS. ;)
Coincidentally, I had just emailed Paul.
He already responded:
From: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Subject: RE: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:23:04 AM CDT
To: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Microsoft told me that the retail EULA forbids the installation of Windows
Vista Home Basic or Home Premium in virtual machines. They said that if
developers wanted to do this, they should get an MSDN subscription, which
has a different license allowing such an install. All that said, there's
nothing technical from preventing users from installing any Vista version in
a virtual machine.
Paul
...to which I replied:
From: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Subject: Re: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:30:57 AM CDT
To: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Security: Signed
So Microsoft actually does intend the EULA to prohibit someone from, say, buying Vista Home as a retail box and then installing it in Parallels Desktop on a Mac? (I know there is nothing technical preventing that.)
This still seems curious, given that in that scenario, not only does Vista Ultimate allow VM use, but also includes an additional license specifically so that same copy can be installed in a VM on the same device. Why wouldn't Home's license allow a single instance of itself to be used in a VM as long as it's not already installed somewhere else? The language all revolves around "the software installed on the licensed device", and I take that to mean the software *already* installed on that device, but I suppose that could be argued to mean that it can't be installed on *any* device where it would be used in a virtualization environment...
Update: Paul's response:
From: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Subject: RE: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:34:07 AM CDT
To: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Yeah, that's what they told me. My guess is that they don't want people
purchasing the low-cost versions, installing them on virtual machine
environments they don't understand (like Parallels) and then demanding
support.
You can understand why this is an issue, given that the Business and Ultimate EULAs not only explicitly allow VM use, but also include additional licenses to use that copy a second time in a VM, legally (on the same device). Also, all the language, as I said, revolves around using "the software installed on the licensed device" (implying that it's an installation that already exists on a licensed device) in a VM.
So I'll say that, if this is accurate, I stand corrected. After a few years of reading Microsoft (and other) EULAs, even I thought Microsoft wouldn't be that retarded. ;-)
Given the language, and given the additional-license situation with Business and Ultimate, I still have to say I'm surprised.
more...
gkarris
May 1, 10:58 PM
So this obviously means a US Economic Recovery and we all get our old jobs and careers back...
:rolleyes:
:rolleyes:
steve_hill4
Aug 15, 05:27 PM
What's the next logical step in a computer interface? I used to say "Computer, show me the money" to open Quicken back in pre-OS X days. More of a gimmick than anything else, but imagine if the Finder and maybe even other apps became "speakable."
Me: "Check mail"
Computer: "You have nine new messages. Would you like me to read them?"
Me: "No, thanks."
(clicks on an email, reads message)
Me: "Reply to this message"
Computer: "Type or speak?
Me: "Type"
type-type-type
Me: "Computer, I'd like to add a photo of the kids to this email."
Computer: "iphoto has 6,813 pictures of the kids, which one would you like?"
Me: "One from the birthday party last week."
Computer: (a strip from iphoto appears) "Here are 23 from last week. I've highlighted the one where your wife fixed the red eye. Is that the one you want?"
Me: "Yes, that will be fine."
Computer adds the picture to stationery in the email, other pictures go away.
Me: "Send the email"
Me: "...and order me a pizza."
This kind of thing can't be too far off. A 75 mhz Performa could do it in a rudimentary way. Imagine what a modern Mac may be able to do. "Speakeasy" has a nice ring to it.
That sounds similar to that Apple advert from years ago whcih showed a concept of the future where you would have a true conversation way of working with a computer. We are slowly, but surely moving there.
Me: "Check mail"
Computer: "You have nine new messages. Would you like me to read them?"
Me: "No, thanks."
(clicks on an email, reads message)
Me: "Reply to this message"
Computer: "Type or speak?
Me: "Type"
type-type-type
Me: "Computer, I'd like to add a photo of the kids to this email."
Computer: "iphoto has 6,813 pictures of the kids, which one would you like?"
Me: "One from the birthday party last week."
Computer: (a strip from iphoto appears) "Here are 23 from last week. I've highlighted the one where your wife fixed the red eye. Is that the one you want?"
Me: "Yes, that will be fine."
Computer adds the picture to stationery in the email, other pictures go away.
Me: "Send the email"
Me: "...and order me a pizza."
This kind of thing can't be too far off. A 75 mhz Performa could do it in a rudimentary way. Imagine what a modern Mac may be able to do. "Speakeasy" has a nice ring to it.
That sounds similar to that Apple advert from years ago whcih showed a concept of the future where you would have a true conversation way of working with a computer. We are slowly, but surely moving there.
more...
marksman
Apr 28, 05:41 PM
If apple got their dual-band world phone out a year earlier, for all carriers, it would have made a huge difference!!!! I can't believe apple is delaying the iPhone 5!!!!!!!!!!
I am not apple, so I am probably wrong, but delaying the IPhone 5 seems like the worst business decision ever!!!!!!!!!
The iPhone 5 better be a major upgrade that makes it better than all the other devices out there, and better be on all carriers!!!!
They have the number 1 and number 2 top selling smartphones out there.
Bringing out the iPhone 5 now would be a mistake when you are sitting at the top of the heap with your current hardware.
So you push it back a bit and make the devices even better, giving you an even bigger advantage in the next generation.
Imagine the iPhone 4 sitting in the 3GS position a year from now. It will be amazing you can get a phone like that for the price it will be available for...
The android handset makers don't jump up and down with glee because Android has more overall users. It is not good for any of them individually. In fact it is bad for them.
I am not apple, so I am probably wrong, but delaying the IPhone 5 seems like the worst business decision ever!!!!!!!!!
The iPhone 5 better be a major upgrade that makes it better than all the other devices out there, and better be on all carriers!!!!
They have the number 1 and number 2 top selling smartphones out there.
Bringing out the iPhone 5 now would be a mistake when you are sitting at the top of the heap with your current hardware.
So you push it back a bit and make the devices even better, giving you an even bigger advantage in the next generation.
Imagine the iPhone 4 sitting in the 3GS position a year from now. It will be amazing you can get a phone like that for the price it will be available for...
The android handset makers don't jump up and down with glee because Android has more overall users. It is not good for any of them individually. In fact it is bad for them.
br0adband
Nov 4, 10:43 PM
Hmmm, and I thought it was down to me running it on a MacBook ( 2Ghz,2GB ). For the money I paid for it, it's a useful ( but not great ) product. However, I've found the support to be abysmal, and that's as important to me, as how it runs.
I've only had a quick scan of this thread, but does anyone with a C2D based machine have it running? Any problems? ( thinking of Parallels C2D debacle, here ).
I have a 20" iMac Core 2 Duo with 2GB and the stock 250GB hard drive. I'm running Parallels 24/7 with XP on a second 20" LCD monitor - OSX on the left on the iMac itself, XP on the right with the second LCD dedicated to running XP fullscreen.
I've rebooted twice in 3 weeks just because some software on the OSX side required a reboot.
To be honest, I've had more application crashes and restarts on OSX than I have under XP/Windows in the past 3 years. So much for "crash resistant" - and yes, I've had 4 kernel panics since I got this iMac home; that's more than the number of BSODs I've had under XP in 4 years.
So, in the next day or so I'll be doing the following test batch and making a thread here for the results:
- I'll be installing Parallels build 1970 clean
- I'll be installing the current beta build of VMWare Fusion clean
- I'll be installing XP SP2 *only* in default VMs under each of those two applications
- I will not be updating the SP2 at all, in fact neither VM will have Internet access to keep that aspect out of the testing
- I will install Windows Media Player 10 and Windows Media Encoder 9 as supplied by Microsoft for testing (see the next step)
- I will be installing PCMark05 from Futuremark into each VM for comprehensive testing under both applications (WMP10 and WME9 are required components of PCMark05, hence me installing them in the prior step)
I will then run the default benchmark in PCMark05 with the following stipulations:
more...
oprah winfrey crazy
*Oprah Winfrey#39;s final talk
more...
queen Oprah Winfrey#39;s life
Oprah Winfrey biography
more...
oprah
Oprah Winfrey Lost A Baby At
more...
Oprah Winfrey
oprah winfrey as a child.
Oprah Winfrey Exposed
I've only had a quick scan of this thread, but does anyone with a C2D based machine have it running? Any problems? ( thinking of Parallels C2D debacle, here ).
I have a 20" iMac Core 2 Duo with 2GB and the stock 250GB hard drive. I'm running Parallels 24/7 with XP on a second 20" LCD monitor - OSX on the left on the iMac itself, XP on the right with the second LCD dedicated to running XP fullscreen.
I've rebooted twice in 3 weeks just because some software on the OSX side required a reboot.
To be honest, I've had more application crashes and restarts on OSX than I have under XP/Windows in the past 3 years. So much for "crash resistant" - and yes, I've had 4 kernel panics since I got this iMac home; that's more than the number of BSODs I've had under XP in 4 years.
So, in the next day or so I'll be doing the following test batch and making a thread here for the results:
- I'll be installing Parallels build 1970 clean
- I'll be installing the current beta build of VMWare Fusion clean
- I'll be installing XP SP2 *only* in default VMs under each of those two applications
- I will not be updating the SP2 at all, in fact neither VM will have Internet access to keep that aspect out of the testing
- I will install Windows Media Player 10 and Windows Media Encoder 9 as supplied by Microsoft for testing (see the next step)
- I will be installing PCMark05 from Futuremark into each VM for comprehensive testing under both applications (WMP10 and WME9 are required components of PCMark05, hence me installing them in the prior step)
I will then run the default benchmark in PCMark05 with the following stipulations:
more...
HMFIC03
Apr 13, 04:56 PM
top ten apple branded tv features.
10. Requires itunes $500 remote.
9. Costs twice as much and has half as many channels as other tvs.
8. Can't watch bd movies on it.
7. No pron.
6. Requires 7 apple adapters to access all features.
5. Tv bezel constantly runs iads.
4. Not able to display politically incorrect programming.
3. Al gore circuit turns off tv after 200 watts are consumed.
2. Comes in only one size.
1. Wooooo!!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juh6ldz177k
+1 - #3 lmfao
10. Requires itunes $500 remote.
9. Costs twice as much and has half as many channels as other tvs.
8. Can't watch bd movies on it.
7. No pron.
6. Requires 7 apple adapters to access all features.
5. Tv bezel constantly runs iads.
4. Not able to display politically incorrect programming.
3. Al gore circuit turns off tv after 200 watts are consumed.
2. Comes in only one size.
1. Wooooo!!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juh6ldz177k
+1 - #3 lmfao
tny
Oct 24, 08:04 AM
Slightly off-topic: does anyone have an opinion on getting software (in this case logic express) preinstalled? Is there any benefit or would it be better to just buy the app seperately?
The only benefit it gets you is the time savings of not having to install it yourself - and of being able to jump right in and use it when you get the machine.
The only benefit it gets you is the time savings of not having to install it yourself - and of being able to jump right in and use it when you get the machine.
more...
dkoralek
Oct 24, 08:55 AM
And they delayed this update by 6-8 weeks for ... ?
Would/Should we have waited if we knew then what we know now and will know in the future ?
:(
Probably because they needed to wait for sufficient stocks of the faster merom chips (you don't see many of the 2.3GHz offerings from other manufacturers, either). Now I just have to decide if I want to lug a macpro across the pond or go for a 17" mbp.
cheers.
Would/Should we have waited if we knew then what we know now and will know in the future ?
:(
Probably because they needed to wait for sufficient stocks of the faster merom chips (you don't see many of the 2.3GHz offerings from other manufacturers, either). Now I just have to decide if I want to lug a macpro across the pond or go for a 17" mbp.
cheers.
(eciv)
Apr 5, 08:15 PM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5230/5594013398_365372cba1_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/57812430@N07/5594013398/)
more...
MrNomNoms
Apr 15, 04:58 PM
The "view" buttons in finder changed back to the old style.
I always found the 'slider' buttons really out of place and difficult to get my head around - they always seemed to be out of place when it came to how one navigated the UI. The kind of 'slider' approach seemed to be more appropriate for a touch screen approach than if you were using a mouse or touchpad considering that you'll need 'click and movement' occurring at the same time which is difficult using the existing hardware (holding down the pad button then moving ones finger at the same time).
OK, here is a historic example:
"Apple missed Leopard's release time frame as originally announced by Apple�s CEO Steve Jobs. When first discussed in June Jobs had stated that Apple intended to release Leopard at the end of 2006 or early 2007. A year later, this was amended to Spring 2007; however on 12 April Apple issued a statement that its release would be delayed until October 2007 because of the development of the iPhone."
(from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X_Leopard)
I do not believe that Adobe, Microsoft and other big companies need just a few months to make their apps Lion-compatible. Will Apple release Lion, if major companies do not support it? Unlikely. Q1 2012 is more likely.
I highly doubt it given that the changes made in Leopard were a lot more substantial when compared to Snow Leopard and Lion. If you look through the WWDC sessions for that year there were many lower level parts that were completely removed and replaced, file notification API's (of which there were many) being replaced with a �ber one to rule them all, changes in the kernel for UNIX compatibility etc. Even if Apple didn't re-allocate some developers to iOS it is doubtful they could have pulled off an early Leopard release given what they had decided to change in the underlying operating system.
Regarding the re-allocation of resources to iOS, to be fair iOS needed a heck of a lot of TLC given how far behind other smart phone operating systems it was at the time. Fast forward to today and you'll see that there isn't the same level of urgency given that both iOS and Mac OS X are pretty mature. Where as 2-3 years ago there was a massive laundry list of features that were missing from iOS it has pretty much developed into a list of 'it would be nice to have' rather than 'really need this or the platform will fail'. For Mac OS X it is the final stretch of Cocoa-ilsation which is the completing of the last remaining frameworks developers have been waiting for (AV Foundation pretty much replaces QuickTime Framework) with Apple upgrading their own applications so their middleware is end to end Cocoa based.
I always found the 'slider' buttons really out of place and difficult to get my head around - they always seemed to be out of place when it came to how one navigated the UI. The kind of 'slider' approach seemed to be more appropriate for a touch screen approach than if you were using a mouse or touchpad considering that you'll need 'click and movement' occurring at the same time which is difficult using the existing hardware (holding down the pad button then moving ones finger at the same time).
OK, here is a historic example:
"Apple missed Leopard's release time frame as originally announced by Apple�s CEO Steve Jobs. When first discussed in June Jobs had stated that Apple intended to release Leopard at the end of 2006 or early 2007. A year later, this was amended to Spring 2007; however on 12 April Apple issued a statement that its release would be delayed until October 2007 because of the development of the iPhone."
(from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X_Leopard)
I do not believe that Adobe, Microsoft and other big companies need just a few months to make their apps Lion-compatible. Will Apple release Lion, if major companies do not support it? Unlikely. Q1 2012 is more likely.
I highly doubt it given that the changes made in Leopard were a lot more substantial when compared to Snow Leopard and Lion. If you look through the WWDC sessions for that year there were many lower level parts that were completely removed and replaced, file notification API's (of which there were many) being replaced with a �ber one to rule them all, changes in the kernel for UNIX compatibility etc. Even if Apple didn't re-allocate some developers to iOS it is doubtful they could have pulled off an early Leopard release given what they had decided to change in the underlying operating system.
Regarding the re-allocation of resources to iOS, to be fair iOS needed a heck of a lot of TLC given how far behind other smart phone operating systems it was at the time. Fast forward to today and you'll see that there isn't the same level of urgency given that both iOS and Mac OS X are pretty mature. Where as 2-3 years ago there was a massive laundry list of features that were missing from iOS it has pretty much developed into a list of 'it would be nice to have' rather than 'really need this or the platform will fail'. For Mac OS X it is the final stretch of Cocoa-ilsation which is the completing of the last remaining frameworks developers have been waiting for (AV Foundation pretty much replaces QuickTime Framework) with Apple upgrading their own applications so their middleware is end to end Cocoa based.
Sodner
Apr 12, 09:22 AM
Aren't we quickly getting to the point where it's all about the software?
Ok, so we know iPhone 5 will get dual core A5....big deal. It'll be nice to have the extra power, but the iPhone 4 now is no slouch.
Added RAM.....yeah, that would be nice....but not going to suddenly sell more phones because it has more RAM :p
Display won't get any better resolution-wise. Doubt they'd go with a larger screen either.
Better cameras....ok.....still, the iPhone 4 cameras are no slouch, and it's not like it will reach the quality of a nice DSLR with those tiny sensors.
Better graphics processing.....sure.....but it's not like it has to drive a 9.7" screen like the iPad.
I'd say Apple is smartly switching into software mode. Kick ass with iOS5, revamp notifications, make some much needed overhauls to the system, and optimize performance for todays devices (iPhone 4, iPad & iPad 2).
Apple is going to stay ahead with software. That's the way Apple is and always has been.
-Kevin
Pretty much agree with everything you said though I do HOPE for a increased screen size on the 5.
Ok, so we know iPhone 5 will get dual core A5....big deal. It'll be nice to have the extra power, but the iPhone 4 now is no slouch.
Added RAM.....yeah, that would be nice....but not going to suddenly sell more phones because it has more RAM :p
Display won't get any better resolution-wise. Doubt they'd go with a larger screen either.
Better cameras....ok.....still, the iPhone 4 cameras are no slouch, and it's not like it will reach the quality of a nice DSLR with those tiny sensors.
Better graphics processing.....sure.....but it's not like it has to drive a 9.7" screen like the iPad.
I'd say Apple is smartly switching into software mode. Kick ass with iOS5, revamp notifications, make some much needed overhauls to the system, and optimize performance for todays devices (iPhone 4, iPad & iPad 2).
Apple is going to stay ahead with software. That's the way Apple is and always has been.
-Kevin
Pretty much agree with everything you said though I do HOPE for a increased screen size on the 5.
more...
ciTiger
Apr 29, 03:58 PM
Competition is good... I might start looking at amazon for the next dls...
andrewbecks
May 3, 08:45 AM
Any idea when these new iMacs will begin showing up at Amazon or Best Buy? Just curious if they're usually available immediately after they are released or a few days later.
Chupa Chupa
May 2, 10:19 AM
Will an apple store employee tell me if I harass them all day or bribe them with monies? Or don't they know either? :confused:
They really do not know so you can give 'me a break and start bugging them about stock tomorrow instead (assuming it's released as rumored)
They really do not know so you can give 'me a break and start bugging them about stock tomorrow instead (assuming it's released as rumored)
AppleScruff1
Apr 13, 07:59 PM
Anyone actually planning on buying this? Especially with a refresh right around the corner?
Of course. I'll bet a lot of the true followers would still buy the original iPhone is Steve said it was better.
Of course. I'll bet a lot of the true followers would still buy the original iPhone is Steve said it was better.
DTphonehome
Apr 13, 02:58 PM
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)
This would be a good quick way for Apple to lose a couple billion dollars, and some face. As has been said, TV is a very mature market with deeply entrenched players fighting over scraps of profit. There is no way Apple could innovate enough in this area that would compel people to ditch their existing sets, and pay an Apple premium. Google is failing miserably with their attempt.
These are the strategies I see Apple taking:
1. License Airplay. Now any iOS device streams to legions of TVs, bluray decks, and receivers.
2. Enhance Apple TV with apps and games.
3. Profit.
This would be a good quick way for Apple to lose a couple billion dollars, and some face. As has been said, TV is a very mature market with deeply entrenched players fighting over scraps of profit. There is no way Apple could innovate enough in this area that would compel people to ditch their existing sets, and pay an Apple premium. Google is failing miserably with their attempt.
These are the strategies I see Apple taking:
1. License Airplay. Now any iOS device streams to legions of TVs, bluray decks, and receivers.
2. Enhance Apple TV with apps and games.
3. Profit.
Prother
Apr 28, 08:46 PM
So what you are telling me is: An iPhone 4 comes out and I buy a case. Incase makes $20. An iPhone 5 comes out the same size and I don't buy a case because I have an old one and Incase makes $0. How is that better for Incase exactly?
The point you are trying to make is FAIL, iPhone 5 and iPhone 4 are two different phones. Nobody on earth who already has a black iphone 4 would go and buy a white iphone 4. And if they did, they would need to buy another case anyways to have them on both phones. Cant protect 2 phones with one case.
Right now manufacturers need to make 3 different cases for different versions of the same phone -> confusion for customers -> lower customer satisfaction -> less money. Dont tell me manufacturers are happy at this to be able to make mountains and mountains of cash off people who get the wrong case accidentally and end up buying another one.
The point you are trying to make is FAIL, iPhone 5 and iPhone 4 are two different phones. Nobody on earth who already has a black iphone 4 would go and buy a white iphone 4. And if they did, they would need to buy another case anyways to have them on both phones. Cant protect 2 phones with one case.
Right now manufacturers need to make 3 different cases for different versions of the same phone -> confusion for customers -> lower customer satisfaction -> less money. Dont tell me manufacturers are happy at this to be able to make mountains and mountains of cash off people who get the wrong case accidentally and end up buying another one.
rmwebs
Apr 28, 05:00 PM
Here's another way to slice it (literally). Flipped half the image. Left the guidelines on this one as well.
Image (http://www.marulla.com/files/thickness2.png)
I agree that this is no substitute for measuring the actual phone, but, at least in that photo, they are identical. Certainly not off by 1mm as the original post states.
Take a closer look at those edges there...they aren't lined up correctly, still meaning the results are out. I agree that its certainly not 1mm, but its still not getting an accurate result. I might even go as far as to say the plastic is thicker, and the band is thinner.
If you look at the middle gridline, you can see very light masking from the black overlapping the white...not a major amount but enough to be a few microns out of shape.
Maybe we should just grab a couple of iphones for...ahem....testing purposes! :)
Image (http://www.marulla.com/files/thickness2.png)
I agree that this is no substitute for measuring the actual phone, but, at least in that photo, they are identical. Certainly not off by 1mm as the original post states.
Take a closer look at those edges there...they aren't lined up correctly, still meaning the results are out. I agree that its certainly not 1mm, but its still not getting an accurate result. I might even go as far as to say the plastic is thicker, and the band is thinner.
If you look at the middle gridline, you can see very light masking from the black overlapping the white...not a major amount but enough to be a few microns out of shape.
Maybe we should just grab a couple of iphones for...ahem....testing purposes! :)
thereubster
Oct 24, 08:28 AM
be satsisfied with what you have when you needed it... i got my 17" MBP only 3 weeks ago with no regrets and i love this thing, i don't need all that's there in the update, what i have now will suffice until the next time i need a new computer :D :D :D
I guess the point is that for some people this represents a considerable long term investment (like me) and they want to get the most modern hardware available if it will have to last years.
Worth noting that the projected clock speeds of Intels future laptop CPU's are not significantly faster, so there may yet be a "motorola effect"
I guess the point is that for some people this represents a considerable long term investment (like me) and they want to get the most modern hardware available if it will have to last years.
Worth noting that the projected clock speeds of Intels future laptop CPU's are not significantly faster, so there may yet be a "motorola effect"
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario