J@ffa
Sep 9, 10:20 AM
I think they'd have to let you stream anything you want over it. The only problem I could see is that maybe it wouldn't support DivX or some other formats. Quicktime doesn't support DivX without plug-ins, right?
That's right. But, with the plugins, it plays them just fine, so in theory it should be perfectly streamable, right?
That's right. But, with the plugins, it plays them just fine, so in theory it should be perfectly streamable, right?
IJ Reilly
Aug 23, 08:28 PM
As has been mentioned the typical patent litigation is in the $5-$10 M range paid to the attorneys. With the main lawsuit and 5 countersuits they could have made a big dent in that $100M. Even when you have a large legal staff, litigation is usually handled by outside firms that specialize in those kinds of trials. With 32 million iPods sold in 2005 even a $3 licensing fee (~1% on average is not an atypical licensing fee) you'd easily surpass $100M if you were planning to sell iPods for more than 1 more year. A lump sum is preferable.
There are also less obvious or tangible costs. Uncertainty is never good buyers may shy away from a purchase if they feel there is a potential that the product will soon be abandoned/unavailable. There's also the fact that the discovery process in such lawsuits is often used as a tool to try and pry information out from the other side, such as future product plans, etc. that might well be worth big $ keeping undr wraps. And last but not least is the distraction that such a suit tends to place on the key employees who may be involved in designing a workaround or simply being deposed and directly involved with the trial.
B
True, but let's put it this way: Apple didn't settle for $100 million because winning would have cost them as much as 10% of that sum. Remember, Apple was going up against a much smaller company with far less in the way of resources. If Apple could have ground Creative down over years of protracted litigation with some assurance of getting a better deal, then I have little doubt that they probably would have done so. I suspect Apple saw a RIM-like situation, where they were unlikely to prevail in court and in the meantime the litigation environment would create opportunities for competitors.
There are also less obvious or tangible costs. Uncertainty is never good buyers may shy away from a purchase if they feel there is a potential that the product will soon be abandoned/unavailable. There's also the fact that the discovery process in such lawsuits is often used as a tool to try and pry information out from the other side, such as future product plans, etc. that might well be worth big $ keeping undr wraps. And last but not least is the distraction that such a suit tends to place on the key employees who may be involved in designing a workaround or simply being deposed and directly involved with the trial.
B
True, but let's put it this way: Apple didn't settle for $100 million because winning would have cost them as much as 10% of that sum. Remember, Apple was going up against a much smaller company with far less in the way of resources. If Apple could have ground Creative down over years of protracted litigation with some assurance of getting a better deal, then I have little doubt that they probably would have done so. I suspect Apple saw a RIM-like situation, where they were unlikely to prevail in court and in the meantime the litigation environment would create opportunities for competitors.
Westside guy
Sep 14, 08:38 AM
:eek: I just literally finished ordering a new battery and 1gb memory upgrade so my ibook would last a little longer. If they release a tablet (which is what I'm holding on for) I'll cry!
Don't cry - a tablet would be the absolute worst interface for edit digital photos, so there's absolutely no chance that'll be happening at photokina.
Don't cry - a tablet would be the absolute worst interface for edit digital photos, so there's absolutely no chance that'll be happening at photokina.
fixyourthinking
Sep 26, 07:59 AM
I still think Apple will go MVNO [Mobile Virtual Network Operator] and sell it exclusively though Apple Stores and "Stores Within A Store" (CompUSA, Circuit City, Best Buy, Fry's, Microcenter) - it will most likely be LEASED time from Cingular.
For those wanting it on another service like TMobile or SunCom in the US ... it's almost a certainty that someone will come up with a way to unlock it within a few weeks of release. (maybe even a few days)
For those wanting it on another service like TMobile or SunCom in the US ... it's almost a certainty that someone will come up with a way to unlock it within a few weeks of release. (maybe even a few days)
vega07
Aug 28, 03:49 PM
The new MBPs will be announced on 6th with the free 2-3 day shipping, so MBPs would arrive sooner than the PCs inspite of announcing a week later!
where'd you get that info...or is that your wishful thinking out loud?:rolleyes:
where'd you get that info...or is that your wishful thinking out loud?:rolleyes:
karthi
Sep 19, 04:20 PM
It seems to me, apple is matching video quality of the downloads exactly to what the iPod can handle...
This seems logical now, so can we expect better movies after ture video iPods.
This seems logical now, so can we expect better movies after ture video iPods.
Putzi360
Apr 22, 12:25 PM
For me I just need the backlit keyboard reintroduced into the Air.
Then my wife would get my MBp13 instantly.
Then my wife would get my MBp13 instantly.
sammyman
Apr 30, 01:11 PM
Time to buy a machine for my wife.
Just hope they don't decide to redesign the iMac the beginning of next year like they plan to do with the Macbooks.
Just hope they don't decide to redesign the iMac the beginning of next year like they plan to do with the Macbooks.
Takeo
Mar 23, 05:15 PM
People who speed and drive under the influence make me sick. Pull the apps. And when you catch the scum, throw them in jail and take away their licence. The don't deserve to walk among us.
bdj21ya
Oct 12, 04:43 PM
Dude... That has to be the most racist thing I have ever read! :eek:
Evolved???? And comparing humans to natural selection of animals????
I don't see the point of your incredulity (come on man using 4 question marks twice in one post. That's totally flagrant).
We aren't any different. Social interaction is just another aspect of biological evolution. It all breaks down to reactions between atoms and there's nothing racist about it. Are you going to tell me that the evolution of animals doesn't depend on their social interactions?
Evolved???? And comparing humans to natural selection of animals????
I don't see the point of your incredulity (come on man using 4 question marks twice in one post. That's totally flagrant).
We aren't any different. Social interaction is just another aspect of biological evolution. It all breaks down to reactions between atoms and there's nothing racist about it. Are you going to tell me that the evolution of animals doesn't depend on their social interactions?
batchtaster
Apr 11, 08:40 AM
you seem, like so many people these days, to be wanting everything while giving nothing...
Hey Apple / music / movie /etc etc industry, why cant you just let me have whatever I want, whenever I want, all for free?
And let me moan and whinge non-stop while you're doing it.
QFT.
And not just free - employ people and sink resources into it to make it happen, so that Apple (and other companies making great products) actually pays for these things they want, like they're 5 year olds pawing through the candy in the check-out line at Walgreens, demanding one more piece. You want the candy? Buy it.
On another tack, I can't help thinking this guy has opened up a can of worms for himself, DMCA-wise.
Hey Apple / music / movie /etc etc industry, why cant you just let me have whatever I want, whenever I want, all for free?
And let me moan and whinge non-stop while you're doing it.
QFT.
And not just free - employ people and sink resources into it to make it happen, so that Apple (and other companies making great products) actually pays for these things they want, like they're 5 year olds pawing through the candy in the check-out line at Walgreens, demanding one more piece. You want the candy? Buy it.
On another tack, I can't help thinking this guy has opened up a can of worms for himself, DMCA-wise.
MarcelV
Aug 31, 08:38 PM
Apple bought Worldcom's new telecom switch center.
Google is buying Nortel's dark fiber.
Google's CEO is on Apple's board.
Nobody is going to run fiber to the last mile.
The solution is Intel wimax and Samsung 4G.
I told you so.
Rocketman
While it sounds good, I don't see this happen soon at all. Also, Verizon disagrees with you, because they are pulling fiber to the homes in several (large) cities and more to come. The investment for 4G (802.16e I assume you're talking about)will be much too high while not providing enough guarantees it will be financial feasible in short and mid term to make shareholders feel confortable. But if it will, Apple will get my money :) But are there enough gadget geeks like me in the world? That will make or break the project.....
Google is buying Nortel's dark fiber.
Google's CEO is on Apple's board.
Nobody is going to run fiber to the last mile.
The solution is Intel wimax and Samsung 4G.
I told you so.
Rocketman
While it sounds good, I don't see this happen soon at all. Also, Verizon disagrees with you, because they are pulling fiber to the homes in several (large) cities and more to come. The investment for 4G (802.16e I assume you're talking about)will be much too high while not providing enough guarantees it will be financial feasible in short and mid term to make shareholders feel confortable. But if it will, Apple will get my money :) But are there enough gadget geeks like me in the world? That will make or break the project.....
iAlan
Sep 17, 06:02 AM
It may be difficult but one would hope Apple will bring the iPhone (or whatever it ends up being called) to Japan and other countries if it does in fact launch such a phone initially in the US.
Let's wait and see...
Let's wait and see...
MacPhreak
Oct 12, 01:00 PM
there is no way apple would make a product release on a pre recorded program with an audiance. Thanks to the internet the release would no longer be a surprise!
Sure there is. They released the 4g iPod in Newsweek. Think of the 100's-1000's of people who handled the Newsweeks who weren't covered by an NDA (and that announcement leaked, too, including the cover of the magazine...one day early; sounds familiar, eh?). Apple did say to expect more announcements in unconventional ways, and less at keynotes.
Sure there is. They released the 4g iPod in Newsweek. Think of the 100's-1000's of people who handled the Newsweeks who weren't covered by an NDA (and that announcement leaked, too, including the cover of the magazine...one day early; sounds familiar, eh?). Apple did say to expect more announcements in unconventional ways, and less at keynotes.
Manic Mouse
Jul 18, 05:33 PM
Any one know when the 45nm architecture processors are going to appear?
I'm gonna wait for those, for OS X 10.5 and iLife 07 to invest in a Mac
In about a years time, maybe slighly more...
I'm gonna wait for those, for OS X 10.5 and iLife 07 to invest in a Mac
In about a years time, maybe slighly more...
MagnusVonMagnum
Apr 13, 07:05 PM
MagnusVonMagnum -
Unless you've purchased / converted music in Apple lossless format it IS way better quality.
95% of my music is from my massive CD collection and it has been ripped to Apple Lossless. Does Sonos sell lossless music? If not, WTF are you talking about? You're then comparing apples to oranges. You can just as easily make an Apple lossless library on iTunes as a Flac one for Sonos or XBMC or whatever the heck you prefer to use. One review of Sonos I read says it does not support WMA Lossless (which IS sold online via Music Giants) so that is moot as well.
As for the whole "AAC versus Lossless (of any kind)" thing, I will not even bother arguing about the sonic transparency of 256kbit VBR AAC (Lets just say I've never heard about anyone proving they could tell the difference in a double blind test. I'm well aware of "audiophile" tendencies as I used to be one until I realized 80% of it is snake-oil BS. I now buy what actually makes a difference (high quality speakers and room treatments) and I've never had anyone complain about either of my two systems). I did my own extensive testing between my lossless rips and 256 AAC and I could never tell the difference. For convenience sake, my own lossless library is archive only now. iTunes lets me handle mobile/home in a seamless manner by using only one library for both (something that would be useless with Sonos as it is clearly only home use. You can't play most lossless formats in the car whereas my old JVC and my new factory Subaru WRX player's USB ports handle AAC (as well as MP3 and WMA) just fine. There's nothing quite like taking up to 64GB of music on a USB stick with you on the road. It's like having a 1000 disc CD changer in the car.
Selena Gomez Beautiful
Trend Long Haircut from Selena
selena gomez haircut short
Unless you've purchased / converted music in Apple lossless format it IS way better quality.
95% of my music is from my massive CD collection and it has been ripped to Apple Lossless. Does Sonos sell lossless music? If not, WTF are you talking about? You're then comparing apples to oranges. You can just as easily make an Apple lossless library on iTunes as a Flac one for Sonos or XBMC or whatever the heck you prefer to use. One review of Sonos I read says it does not support WMA Lossless (which IS sold online via Music Giants) so that is moot as well.
As for the whole "AAC versus Lossless (of any kind)" thing, I will not even bother arguing about the sonic transparency of 256kbit VBR AAC (Lets just say I've never heard about anyone proving they could tell the difference in a double blind test. I'm well aware of "audiophile" tendencies as I used to be one until I realized 80% of it is snake-oil BS. I now buy what actually makes a difference (high quality speakers and room treatments) and I've never had anyone complain about either of my two systems). I did my own extensive testing between my lossless rips and 256 AAC and I could never tell the difference. For convenience sake, my own lossless library is archive only now. iTunes lets me handle mobile/home in a seamless manner by using only one library for both (something that would be useless with Sonos as it is clearly only home use. You can't play most lossless formats in the car whereas my old JVC and my new factory Subaru WRX player's USB ports handle AAC (as well as MP3 and WMA) just fine. There's nothing quite like taking up to 64GB of music on a USB stick with you on the road. It's like having a 1000 disc CD changer in the car.
Chupa Chupa
Sep 5, 05:15 AM
Are you insinuating that Apple should put out a gaming system to compete for PS3 dollars, or just the holiday dollars in general and right now the PS3 is the "Hot Ticket" this coming Holiday season?
Just wondering.....:confused:
No, don't be so silly or literal. PS3 dollars are the money people have dedicated to buy the PS3 -- the defacto "big ticket" item this year. Apple needs a product that will compete for that money...and press converage. Everyone and their mother got an iPod last year. Apple needs to pull a fresh product out of Jobs pocket; not a storage bump or new skins for the nano. THAT is what I'm saying.
Just wondering.....:confused:
No, don't be so silly or literal. PS3 dollars are the money people have dedicated to buy the PS3 -- the defacto "big ticket" item this year. Apple needs a product that will compete for that money...and press converage. Everyone and their mother got an iPod last year. Apple needs to pull a fresh product out of Jobs pocket; not a storage bump or new skins for the nano. THAT is what I'm saying.
bloodycape
Aug 24, 02:34 AM
What?:)
This is true I read this a while back and it was brought up today on a d.a.p site i frequent. Creatives TravelDock 900 speakers have an ipod shuffle connected to it on the box.
Kind of an interesting history note of digital audio players made back in 2004.
http://dapreview.net/e107_plugins/content/content.php?content.90
This is true I read this a while back and it was brought up today on a d.a.p site i frequent. Creatives TravelDock 900 speakers have an ipod shuffle connected to it on the box.
Kind of an interesting history note of digital audio players made back in 2004.
http://dapreview.net/e107_plugins/content/content.php?content.90
mrsir2009
Apr 25, 12:03 AM
OP: That lady was driving the speed limit... What the ****s wrong with you?
str1f3
Nov 13, 10:54 PM
Amen! You are on the dot! Everyone (including developers) complain about their app not getting approved for one reason or another, and yet it's always because they breached the Developers Guide for the App Store. Just ******** get a printer and print the damn pdf out. Then, step two, READ it. Then, before you go and submit the app, use it yourself and see if it follows the guidelines.
It's like high school, when the teacher gives you a RUBRIC to FOLLOW, when you FAIL, it's because you didn't follow it. So shut up, or nut up. And build a better app. Hopefully one that doesn't say "that's what she says". :mad:
You're telling developers, who are the ones to deal with the policies daily, to read the SDK agreement. Rogue Amoeba, one the most respected Mac devs, did not violate the terms of the SDK agreement. They do not need to license these icons from Apple as they are being transmitted from the Mac and not by the iPhone app.
It's like high school, when the teacher gives you a RUBRIC to FOLLOW, when you FAIL, it's because you didn't follow it. So shut up, or nut up. And build a better app. Hopefully one that doesn't say "that's what she says". :mad:
You're telling developers, who are the ones to deal with the policies daily, to read the SDK agreement. Rogue Amoeba, one the most respected Mac devs, did not violate the terms of the SDK agreement. They do not need to license these icons from Apple as they are being transmitted from the Mac and not by the iPhone app.
clintob
Oct 12, 03:49 PM
You do realize HIV effects women differently than men? It also effects children differently than adults.
Do yourself a favor and do a quick google on how much money has been spent on HIV research and prevention for children and women, compare that to men with HIV. Then do a search on children/women with HIV and mortality rates compared to men w/HIV.
We live in a very sexist society. HIV research was never funded or taken seriously by society at large until heterosexual white men started to develop AIDS.
I don't want to pick a fight, because that wasn't the intention of my post, but I'm sorry - this statement is, if not patently false, at very least highly misguided and irresponsible.
The mortality rate of HIV is far higher in men than in women - and it always has been. You look this up very easily all over the web, on the CDC's website, and any number of other places... it's very clear. But if you really want to go there, here's an empirical medical fact: at its worst levels of infection (in the mid 1990s), HIV mortality rates were nearly 30 per 100,000 for men, and barely over 5 per 100,000 in women. Look it up.
As for the disease affecting men/women/children differently, sure that's true, but it's true for pretty much every disease. Children's mortality rates are almost always higher than healthy adults. They are smaller, weaker, and have less developed immune systems. That's got nothing to do with HIV.
And as for when HIV research was taken seriously, I think to make a sexist claim against that is pretty unfounded. You can certainly make the heterosexual part of the argument - that's been well documented. But to say that science discriminates between male and female disease affliction rates is completely irresponsible. Our society is sexist in many ways, no argument there, but to say that scientific research is based on the proportion of male afflictions to female afflictions is insane. If that were true, breast cancer (which, by the way, affects FAR less women than prostate cancer does men) wouldn't be on every commercial and in every fundraiser known to man.
Do yourself a favor and do a quick google on how much money has been spent on HIV research and prevention for children and women, compare that to men with HIV. Then do a search on children/women with HIV and mortality rates compared to men w/HIV.
We live in a very sexist society. HIV research was never funded or taken seriously by society at large until heterosexual white men started to develop AIDS.
I don't want to pick a fight, because that wasn't the intention of my post, but I'm sorry - this statement is, if not patently false, at very least highly misguided and irresponsible.
The mortality rate of HIV is far higher in men than in women - and it always has been. You look this up very easily all over the web, on the CDC's website, and any number of other places... it's very clear. But if you really want to go there, here's an empirical medical fact: at its worst levels of infection (in the mid 1990s), HIV mortality rates were nearly 30 per 100,000 for men, and barely over 5 per 100,000 in women. Look it up.
As for the disease affecting men/women/children differently, sure that's true, but it's true for pretty much every disease. Children's mortality rates are almost always higher than healthy adults. They are smaller, weaker, and have less developed immune systems. That's got nothing to do with HIV.
And as for when HIV research was taken seriously, I think to make a sexist claim against that is pretty unfounded. You can certainly make the heterosexual part of the argument - that's been well documented. But to say that science discriminates between male and female disease affliction rates is completely irresponsible. Our society is sexist in many ways, no argument there, but to say that scientific research is based on the proportion of male afflictions to female afflictions is insane. If that were true, breast cancer (which, by the way, affects FAR less women than prostate cancer does men) wouldn't be on every commercial and in every fundraiser known to man.
awr
Apr 4, 12:52 PM
sorry but if i'm a mall security guard and i got 3 thugs poppin off at me - i'm doing headshots all day.
some of you bleeding hearts want to be all noble - try having any mindset other than "survive" when low-lifes with nothing to lose are pointing guns at you.
some of you bleeding hearts want to be all noble - try having any mindset other than "survive" when low-lifes with nothing to lose are pointing guns at you.
apolloa
Apr 30, 06:09 PM
Thing is though... if the new top end MacBook Pro 2.3 can keep up with and beat even a current 8 core Mac Pro in some instances and trounce the quad core model, just how powerful is a top end Sandy Bridge iMac going to be :eek::confused:
And seeing as Apple blessed us with quad core in the laptops, I would bet my remainder of my hair on my head that the top end iMac option at most will have six core sandy bridge :D
And seeing as Apple blessed us with quad core in the laptops, I would bet my remainder of my hair on my head that the top end iMac option at most will have six core sandy bridge :D
Lesser Evets
Apr 25, 01:53 PM
Whatever you guys are imagining, it won't be half as good. Guaranteed.