BigPrince
Apr 20, 11:22 AM
Over in the UK not remembering passwords can sometimes land you in prison. Just remove the incriminating files frequently and regularly.
In the US you have the right to not self incriminate...they can make you turn over a physical key to a safe but since a password is not physical and in your head they can't compel you to turn it over....its considered testifying against yourself...a few court cases have faced this issue.
In the US you have the right to not self incriminate...they can make you turn over a physical key to a safe but since a password is not physical and in your head they can't compel you to turn it over....its considered testifying against yourself...a few court cases have faced this issue.
rmhop81
Apr 22, 08:43 AM
This is exciting, since my music library already tops 16 GB and isn't shrinking any time soon. Now, I saw a little bit about it in the article, but does anyone else know if the general consensus is that ALL of ones music could be stored? As opposed to just iTunes-purchased songs. That's crucial.
knowing how apple is.....probably itunes purchases only.
knowing how apple is.....probably itunes purchases only.
aafuss1
Aug 31, 10:33 PM
I don't think we're getting the movie store or movie iPod just yet.
The sites that claim to have gotten an invite are French. (Not sure about Your Mac Life, though). Also, this event is being broadcat in London and Paris. This makes me think this announcement will be for downloadable European TV shows and not the iTunes Movie Store.
But - in the spirit of contradicting myself and being hopelessly optimistic, go check out the iPod refurb store. $100 off the 5G iPods instead of $50. That makes me think they're clearing inventory.
---------------
Also - In terms of branding - Quicktime Move Store perhaps?
---------------
I'm also guessing that we'll see speed bumps to the iMac and MacBook Pro (since they're the oldest) this Tuesday. The rest we may see during Apple Expo Paris.
Keep in mind that Steve doesn't do a keynote for speed bumps. Just tech advances.
Agreed-UK is next to get TV shows-perhaps BBC will offer its shows.
The sites that claim to have gotten an invite are French. (Not sure about Your Mac Life, though). Also, this event is being broadcat in London and Paris. This makes me think this announcement will be for downloadable European TV shows and not the iTunes Movie Store.
But - in the spirit of contradicting myself and being hopelessly optimistic, go check out the iPod refurb store. $100 off the 5G iPods instead of $50. That makes me think they're clearing inventory.
---------------
Also - In terms of branding - Quicktime Move Store perhaps?
---------------
I'm also guessing that we'll see speed bumps to the iMac and MacBook Pro (since they're the oldest) this Tuesday. The rest we may see during Apple Expo Paris.
Keep in mind that Steve doesn't do a keynote for speed bumps. Just tech advances.
Agreed-UK is next to get TV shows-perhaps BBC will offer its shows.
Aniday
Mar 23, 04:35 PM
Restriction of the freedom perfectly legal information on the internet is always a bad idea. Who knows what they'd ask to be pulled next.
I never understood why we let old men who know nothing about technology or the internet make up laws that govern it.
Merely trying to get rid of the apps wont solve anything and its naive to think it will.
I never understood why we let old men who know nothing about technology or the internet make up laws that govern it.
Merely trying to get rid of the apps wont solve anything and its naive to think it will.
richdun
Oct 12, 03:22 PM
I think we can call this confirmed. The Chicago Tribune has a pic of Bono and Oprah using the red Nano on the front page of their website - http://www.chicagotribune.com/
A further story by the Trib says this will happen on Friday (tomorrow) - http://www.chicagotribune.com/technology/chi-061012red-ipod-story,1,3682862.story?coll=chi-news-hed
A further story by the Trib says this will happen on Friday (tomorrow) - http://www.chicagotribune.com/technology/chi-061012red-ipod-story,1,3682862.story?coll=chi-news-hed
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.
ucfgrad93
Apr 25, 02:12 AM
If a few people on MacRumors find me to be childish, I really couldn't care less. Believe me, what you guys think of me is not going to ruin my chances of getting into an Ivy League school, or from becoming a successful adult.
-Don
No, you'll ruin them well enough on your own.:rolleyes:
-Don
No, you'll ruin them well enough on your own.:rolleyes:
HecubusPro
Aug 31, 06:59 PM
**Edit, IMO i think its silly because whos gonna pay $14.99 for a movie on a tiny screen, and if they make it to watch on your computer then its just going to take hours and hours to download if you have a slow broadband connection
$14.99 for new movies, but $9.99 for older films supposedly.
Some movies aren't much longer than hour long TV shows, and people have been downloading those regularly from iTunes. And like I said, there are a lot of people out there already downloading movies from the internet. My guess is there are also a lot of people who would love to have an easy option to get their movies online, but aren't tech savvy enough to know what bit-torrent is, or where to find illegal torrent sites, etc. Those types of people would probably jump all over an easy to access and use movie downlaod site. iTunes already has a great reputation, so consumer comfort is high with Apple in that regard.
Honestly though, it remains be seen until people are able to use the new service, but I have a feeling it will do quite well, even if it is geared for a small screen (with the option to watch fullscreen in iTunes on your computer.) Who knows though? The PSP UMD movie format is dead. But I think that's due to Sony's poor marketing and DVD comparable cost of UMD movies than anything else.
And yes, go ahead and sell your PSP. You'll feel better. I did, and I do. :)
$14.99 for new movies, but $9.99 for older films supposedly.
Some movies aren't much longer than hour long TV shows, and people have been downloading those regularly from iTunes. And like I said, there are a lot of people out there already downloading movies from the internet. My guess is there are also a lot of people who would love to have an easy option to get their movies online, but aren't tech savvy enough to know what bit-torrent is, or where to find illegal torrent sites, etc. Those types of people would probably jump all over an easy to access and use movie downlaod site. iTunes already has a great reputation, so consumer comfort is high with Apple in that regard.
Honestly though, it remains be seen until people are able to use the new service, but I have a feeling it will do quite well, even if it is geared for a small screen (with the option to watch fullscreen in iTunes on your computer.) Who knows though? The PSP UMD movie format is dead. But I think that's due to Sony's poor marketing and DVD comparable cost of UMD movies than anything else.
And yes, go ahead and sell your PSP. You'll feel better. I did, and I do. :)
Platform
Sep 26, 08:58 AM
That artists rendition posted on the front page is pointless. It's not as though that is the actual design. It looks too Nano-ish, and even the Nano look has changed.
Anyway, I'm not excited about an iPhone. It would need to give me at least one neat feature for this to be worth drooling over.
Ipod Touch 5th Generation 32gb
3rd generation iPod Touch
iPod Touch 3rd Generation 32
iPod Touch 3rd Generation 32
ipod touch 3rd generation
apple ipod touch 3rd
Apple Ipod Touch 3rd
iPod Touch 32GB (3rd Gen)
apple ipod touch 3rd
Apple iPod Touch 3rd Gen
Anyway, I'm not excited about an iPhone. It would need to give me at least one neat feature for this to be worth drooling over.
gri
Apr 25, 02:46 PM
Well they arent going to get worse are they!!
They could, e.g. by leaving out features we got used to and like (see back lit keyboard in current MBA)
They could, e.g. by leaving out features we got used to and like (see back lit keyboard in current MBA)
cube
Apr 22, 01:57 PM
An Audi R8 doesn't have any heated seats but a Honda Civic does so that means that an Audi R8 must look bad correct? So why would someone buy an Audi R8 instead of a Honda Civic? :rolleyes:
Nice job ignoring the HP Envy.
Why am I even bothering?
I heard the name HP Envy, but I never bothered looking what it is. So yes, I ignore it.
So, if there's no option to have heated seats in the Audi, that looks bad.
Nice job ignoring the HP Envy.
Why am I even bothering?
I heard the name HP Envy, but I never bothered looking what it is. So yes, I ignore it.
So, if there's no option to have heated seats in the Audi, that looks bad.
sord
Sep 10, 08:31 PM
No, PowerBook G7 on Monday's keynote
I don't know about a G7, but PowerBook G5s for sure!!!
I don't know about a G7, but PowerBook G5s for sure!!!
stol
Apr 11, 07:26 AM
This is great news, I've been waiting for something like that for ages.
For all those people that fail to see how it could be useful, consider the following scenarios:
I got my Mac connected to some great speakers.
Now, a friend comes by for a visit, brings along his laptop and we want to hear some music from his iTunes --> messy cables, my friend standing with his laptop by the amplifier because that cable is short (�)
Another friend comes over. We want to listen to music from his/her iPod/iPhone/iPad --> messy cables.
My beloved speakers are self-amplified and connected directly to my mac or say, an external sound card --> even more complicated!
Same friends, different room - let's say a living room with a HTPC --> More cables.
All this could be accomplished with a few airport express units across the house which is somehow a luxury option money-wise and somehow redundant since I already have a wireless router and at least one computer up and running. Also, it would probably create more of a mess with the aforementioned setup (I would need a multiple input amplifier for my living room or an extra mixer for self-amplified speakers). Don't get me wrong, I think AX is a great device and I'll probably get one someday, but it sounds absurd that one device cannot stream audio to a computer.
And for those suggesting third-party software, this sounds great if I were the only using them. I cannot imagine telling my friends "hey, buy this $40 software so we can stream music to each other's computer". I'm not sure I could even convince them to install free software to mess with their audio setup. iOS users are ruled out of course.
For those suggesting iTunes home sharing: this is for personal use. I don't want to share my id/pass with anyone, and no one wants to share it with me.
For all those people that fail to see how it could be useful, consider the following scenarios:
I got my Mac connected to some great speakers.
Now, a friend comes by for a visit, brings along his laptop and we want to hear some music from his iTunes --> messy cables, my friend standing with his laptop by the amplifier because that cable is short (�)
Another friend comes over. We want to listen to music from his/her iPod/iPhone/iPad --> messy cables.
My beloved speakers are self-amplified and connected directly to my mac or say, an external sound card --> even more complicated!
Same friends, different room - let's say a living room with a HTPC --> More cables.
All this could be accomplished with a few airport express units across the house which is somehow a luxury option money-wise and somehow redundant since I already have a wireless router and at least one computer up and running. Also, it would probably create more of a mess with the aforementioned setup (I would need a multiple input amplifier for my living room or an extra mixer for self-amplified speakers). Don't get me wrong, I think AX is a great device and I'll probably get one someday, but it sounds absurd that one device cannot stream audio to a computer.
And for those suggesting third-party software, this sounds great if I were the only using them. I cannot imagine telling my friends "hey, buy this $40 software so we can stream music to each other's computer". I'm not sure I could even convince them to install free software to mess with their audio setup. iOS users are ruled out of course.
For those suggesting iTunes home sharing: this is for personal use. I don't want to share my id/pass with anyone, and no one wants to share it with me.
CHSeifert
Mar 29, 11:16 AM
I think this could very well be true.
The new Windows OS is surprisingly well thought out and have a lot of the features I miss in my standard iPhone 4 iOS - and only have because of Jailbreak :)
I could very well see myself buying a windows based Nokia - if they get the interior in harmony with the exterior - I still think iPhone 4 is the best looking phone I've ever owned - but still think it lacks some basic features in the iOS - like a Lock screen with calendar and weather info, basic features like changing the mail alert tone and being able to use the outer buttons as dual buttons for a shutter button on the volume button for instance (which a camera app did have, but Apple thought their consumers were too stupid and confused to have dual function buttons, so they excluded this app from appstore until they removed the function)
All the features I miss on my iPhone are very basic features, which could easily be fixed with a tiny small software update - since these features don't seem to come on the iPhone, I could see myself getting a HTC with Windows OS maybe in a HTC Desire DeLuxe chassis :)
What really keeps me true to the iPhone is all the apps :)
The new Windows OS is surprisingly well thought out and have a lot of the features I miss in my standard iPhone 4 iOS - and only have because of Jailbreak :)
I could very well see myself buying a windows based Nokia - if they get the interior in harmony with the exterior - I still think iPhone 4 is the best looking phone I've ever owned - but still think it lacks some basic features in the iOS - like a Lock screen with calendar and weather info, basic features like changing the mail alert tone and being able to use the outer buttons as dual buttons for a shutter button on the volume button for instance (which a camera app did have, but Apple thought their consumers were too stupid and confused to have dual function buttons, so they excluded this app from appstore until they removed the function)
All the features I miss on my iPhone are very basic features, which could easily be fixed with a tiny small software update - since these features don't seem to come on the iPhone, I could see myself getting a HTC with Windows OS maybe in a HTC Desire DeLuxe chassis :)
What really keeps me true to the iPhone is all the apps :)
technicolor
Sep 12, 03:35 PM
Either the video playback code was improved to be less power hungry (maybe it uses less CPU, maybe it doesn't need to spin the disk as much), or an improved video chip was put in which uses less power.
Thanks for that explanation.
Thanks for that explanation.
dvkid
Nov 13, 01:09 PM
Lets see how long they will stay away. There are buckets of DOLLARS waiting to be made in the App Store.
The app talked about in this discussion was free, offered as an added-value feature of the desktop application. While useful, it was never the core feature of the purchased product.
Rogue Amoeba's only other app, a radio tuner, sold for $9.99 but saw only middle of the road reviews and likely did not fare as well as the $1.99 radio apps.
The app talked about in this discussion was free, offered as an added-value feature of the desktop application. While useful, it was never the core feature of the purchased product.
Rogue Amoeba's only other app, a radio tuner, sold for $9.99 but saw only middle of the road reviews and likely did not fare as well as the $1.99 radio apps.
ziggyonice
Mar 29, 11:34 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)
Well duh. iOS only runs on Apple devices. Android, Windows Mobile, etc. runs on multiple devices -- of course their shares are going to be higher.
If Apple were licensing iOS, this would be a different story. So instead of comparing marketshare of phone operating systems, let's compare share of the phones themselves.
Well duh. iOS only runs on Apple devices. Android, Windows Mobile, etc. runs on multiple devices -- of course their shares are going to be higher.
If Apple were licensing iOS, this would be a different story. So instead of comparing marketshare of phone operating systems, let's compare share of the phones themselves.
dime21
Apr 14, 12:39 PM
Some PC ship with FW, but not many. It is considered a Mac only interface.
That's because intel and the peecee vendors crippled it. Mac's all have normal firewire ports. Every peecee and windows laptop I've ever seen has the micro-firewire ports that are normally only for portable end devices like video cameras and camcorders. The micro ports do not provide bus power either!
Imagine if they did that with USB, instead of putting the normal USB ports on your Dell or HP laptop, they put the micro USB ports like you find on a cell phone, and also took away the bus-power, so thumb drives wouldn't work, and any USB device would require an external A/C adapter. That would have completely destroyed USB as a technology and nobody would have used it. Well, that's *exactly* what they did to Firewire.
That's because intel and the peecee vendors crippled it. Mac's all have normal firewire ports. Every peecee and windows laptop I've ever seen has the micro-firewire ports that are normally only for portable end devices like video cameras and camcorders. The micro ports do not provide bus power either!
Imagine if they did that with USB, instead of putting the normal USB ports on your Dell or HP laptop, they put the micro USB ports like you find on a cell phone, and also took away the bus-power, so thumb drives wouldn't work, and any USB device would require an external A/C adapter. That would have completely destroyed USB as a technology and nobody would have used it. Well, that's *exactly* what they did to Firewire.
LagunaSol
Apr 19, 09:01 AM
The tablet is a different matter, and doesn't have the same look.
This doesn't look like an iPhone 3GS? :confused:
http://www.parallelimported.co.nz/media/catalog/product/cache/1/thumbnail/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/s/a/samsung_galaxy_tab_white_back.jpg
This doesn't look like an iPhone 3GS? :confused:
http://www.parallelimported.co.nz/media/catalog/product/cache/1/thumbnail/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/s/a/samsung_galaxy_tab_white_back.jpg
LaMerVipere
Sep 12, 02:08 PM
I hope Apple releases an iPod software update so those of us who already own 5th generation iPods can take advantage of all these new features.
BRLawyer
Sep 9, 10:10 AM
Good - now we won't have to wade through any arguments with fanbois who claim that the iMac is the "most powerful desktop on the planet"....
:D
As previously confirmed, the iMac is the most powerful AIO desktop...the title you just mentioned belongs to the MacPro...sorry for the misunderstanding...:rolleyes:
How is Winblows going on your side, Aiden? Many BSODs today?
PowerBooks G5, oops, Mini Tower Macs next Tuesday!!!! :rolleyes:
:D
As previously confirmed, the iMac is the most powerful AIO desktop...the title you just mentioned belongs to the MacPro...sorry for the misunderstanding...:rolleyes:
How is Winblows going on your side, Aiden? Many BSODs today?
PowerBooks G5, oops, Mini Tower Macs next Tuesday!!!! :rolleyes:
samiwas
Apr 20, 02:47 PM
The free market would suck if it were run in the way your brain imagines it. But imagine if you ran a company, and your chief goal is to make a profit. Having happy employees who are payed fairly and receive vacation days, benefits, etc, is definitely a better business model than working your employees like slaves.
OK, so why don't more businesses do that, instead of doing everything they can to "cut costs" to "generate higher profits"? Obviously, a business needs to make a profit. But instead of just making a profit, it seems that nowadays a business is not considered successful unless that business generates massive profits, or highly increased profits over the previous year. And if a business doesn't make as much as they thought they might (even though they've pulled in billions in profit), they are considered failed and their stock tumbles.
Honestly, I don't believe the "free market" that you or any Republican/Tea Partier/Libertarian believes in would work either, except for funneling even more dough to the top (which I actually think might be the way you want to see it, and thus believe would be successful). If you really believe that without some sort of regulation, all businesses would be spending MORE on their employees, you are hopeless.
Benefits shouldn't be government regulated. However, the slave labor that you describe should most certainly not be allowed, duh. Try cutting back on the straw man argument some.
My example may have been a little over the top, but let's not pretend for one second that plenty of employers out there would think nothing of asking their employees to come in on weekends or stay late nights with no extra compensation.
Benefits should have some sort of MINIMAL regulation. The US has pretty much the fewest benefits of any developed nation, and this is considered a good thing....because it benefits the business and not the worker.
It's humorous that when people imagine a free market, they ignore that in a free market, employers would be fighting for good employees as much as employees are fighting for the employers.
Wait...what?? Employers are currently not trying to get good employees? What does this even mean?
It's sad that the government is the largest charity, because it's just so darn inefficient. I have an idea. Private charity.
Somehow, I can't imagine a private charity large enough to take care of all of America's bottom class or replace existing "entitlement programs". The largest charity in the US is the United Way with $3.8billion in income. As for current government program expenses, even Tenant-based Rental Assistance is at $18.2billion, and that's just a single line item in a portion of one part of programs. I just cannot see how private charity could have the kind of reach that the government does. And I'm guessing that the people who do run the government programs make a little less than the $715,000 salary of the head of the United Way.
For all the bleeding heart liberals I've spoken with over the years, who want crazy amounts taxed in order to support social uplift programs, I never see any of them giving away 50+% of their income to charity. It's a lot easier to ask the government to give other peoples money to charity.
I can tell you right now that my family gives >50% of its total income.
However, if you think that taxes = charity, what incentive do you have to give? (to the organizations that are 90+% efficient rather than whatever the crap the government is)
So, AFTER paying 30% in federal and state income taxes, whatever percentage in sales and property tax, you are still able give away an additional 50% or more to charity? So you are able to live on like 3% of your earnings? I would LOVE to be in that position! It's very admirable, but hardly reachable for the average person. I try to give whenever I can, but I can admit that's it's usually around $2k a year.
Anyway, the topic is about the influx of low-wage, no-benefit jobs with no worker protections during times of high profitability and skyrocketing leadership pay. Some people actually see this as good. Some see it as bad. If you see this as a good thing, then we're at an impasse.
OK, so why don't more businesses do that, instead of doing everything they can to "cut costs" to "generate higher profits"? Obviously, a business needs to make a profit. But instead of just making a profit, it seems that nowadays a business is not considered successful unless that business generates massive profits, or highly increased profits over the previous year. And if a business doesn't make as much as they thought they might (even though they've pulled in billions in profit), they are considered failed and their stock tumbles.
Honestly, I don't believe the "free market" that you or any Republican/Tea Partier/Libertarian believes in would work either, except for funneling even more dough to the top (which I actually think might be the way you want to see it, and thus believe would be successful). If you really believe that without some sort of regulation, all businesses would be spending MORE on their employees, you are hopeless.
Benefits shouldn't be government regulated. However, the slave labor that you describe should most certainly not be allowed, duh. Try cutting back on the straw man argument some.
My example may have been a little over the top, but let's not pretend for one second that plenty of employers out there would think nothing of asking their employees to come in on weekends or stay late nights with no extra compensation.
Benefits should have some sort of MINIMAL regulation. The US has pretty much the fewest benefits of any developed nation, and this is considered a good thing....because it benefits the business and not the worker.
It's humorous that when people imagine a free market, they ignore that in a free market, employers would be fighting for good employees as much as employees are fighting for the employers.
Wait...what?? Employers are currently not trying to get good employees? What does this even mean?
It's sad that the government is the largest charity, because it's just so darn inefficient. I have an idea. Private charity.
Somehow, I can't imagine a private charity large enough to take care of all of America's bottom class or replace existing "entitlement programs". The largest charity in the US is the United Way with $3.8billion in income. As for current government program expenses, even Tenant-based Rental Assistance is at $18.2billion, and that's just a single line item in a portion of one part of programs. I just cannot see how private charity could have the kind of reach that the government does. And I'm guessing that the people who do run the government programs make a little less than the $715,000 salary of the head of the United Way.
For all the bleeding heart liberals I've spoken with over the years, who want crazy amounts taxed in order to support social uplift programs, I never see any of them giving away 50+% of their income to charity. It's a lot easier to ask the government to give other peoples money to charity.
I can tell you right now that my family gives >50% of its total income.
However, if you think that taxes = charity, what incentive do you have to give? (to the organizations that are 90+% efficient rather than whatever the crap the government is)
So, AFTER paying 30% in federal and state income taxes, whatever percentage in sales and property tax, you are still able give away an additional 50% or more to charity? So you are able to live on like 3% of your earnings? I would LOVE to be in that position! It's very admirable, but hardly reachable for the average person. I try to give whenever I can, but I can admit that's it's usually around $2k a year.
Anyway, the topic is about the influx of low-wage, no-benefit jobs with no worker protections during times of high profitability and skyrocketing leadership pay. Some people actually see this as good. Some see it as bad. If you see this as a good thing, then we're at an impasse.
dukebound85
Apr 11, 10:31 PM
Well, if we're talking about ideal conditions...
;)
The Shell Opel got close to 400mpg back in the 70s. Now Shell sponsors the Eco Challenge and the top internal combustion car for 2010 was over 6000mpg while the top fuel cell car was over 10,000mpg.
No... those aren't typos.
http://www.sonoma.fr/projects/SECOM_EU/src/iFrame.php?f_compGroup=7vtbzw2hj2&f_DispUnits=mpg&
Well dang, I wouldn't mind paying 3.60 for a years worth of driving for me lol
;)
The Shell Opel got close to 400mpg back in the 70s. Now Shell sponsors the Eco Challenge and the top internal combustion car for 2010 was over 6000mpg while the top fuel cell car was over 10,000mpg.
No... those aren't typos.
http://www.sonoma.fr/projects/SECOM_EU/src/iFrame.php?f_compGroup=7vtbzw2hj2&f_DispUnits=mpg&
Well dang, I wouldn't mind paying 3.60 for a years worth of driving for me lol
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.