iGary
Sep 14, 10:55 AM
That's cool, I was told I was delusional when I said that Meroms would ship in mid-2006 and the eMac would be replaced by an iMac with GMA950 too. :D
Me too, when I said iMac would never get a Conroe chip. :D
Me too, when I said iMac would never get a Conroe chip. :D
bousozoku
Aug 24, 08:35 PM
In any case, it's over and the accessories market will have another player.
Apple can add the $100 mn expense to their stock options mess, which should produce some very ugly financial statements. However, never having to worry about Creative again is a good thing.
It's not cheap but it's a sound investment in keeping their iPod business solid. If Creative go after iRiver, Archos, or anyone else, it will also help Apple indirectly.
Apple can add the $100 mn expense to their stock options mess, which should produce some very ugly financial statements. However, never having to worry about Creative again is a good thing.
It's not cheap but it's a sound investment in keeping their iPod business solid. If Creative go after iRiver, Archos, or anyone else, it will also help Apple indirectly.
steve_hill4
Aug 23, 05:40 PM
Steve Jobs knew this was a BS patent and it shows in his comments. Absolutely Stupid. Hell, the LISA had a Hierarchal File System. I'm still angry that this patent was even granted in the first place.
I agree as it is the only common sense system, but the argument is negated by the patent. That was for a portable music device with Hierarchal menu display/navigation system, (HFS is a file system Apple has used and not used in Creative's players).
The courts could have said prior art, case dismissed or patent stands, Apple owes Creative $10 for every iPod sold since day 1. Apple didn't want to take any risks and settled. Good all round as far as I can see, even if I do agree it is a stupid patent award.
I agree as it is the only common sense system, but the argument is negated by the patent. That was for a portable music device with Hierarchal menu display/navigation system, (HFS is a file system Apple has used and not used in Creative's players).
The courts could have said prior art, case dismissed or patent stands, Apple owes Creative $10 for every iPod sold since day 1. Apple didn't want to take any risks and settled. Good all round as far as I can see, even if I do agree it is a stupid patent award.
Cinch
Sep 5, 12:56 PM
attempts to unify the TV and the computer have been done for the last 15 years or so without success. I give Apple a less then 10% success. Even if they succeed, the definition of success here is greatly compromise to a point of failure.
Cinch
Cinch
dethmaShine
Apr 20, 11:02 AM
Fail. It says I can withdraw by turning off location services. It still collects even though location services are turned off. Try again Apologist.
Proof?
Proof?
Eidorian
Aug 28, 12:18 PM
Yeah for the portables, but Conroe for the desktop.Did you read the guide? You're talking about the iMac Core Duo, correct?
rtkane
Apr 4, 12:23 PM
This is a silly debate here. Having known trained officers and military people and being related to some I can tell you one thing: they are taught to neutralize the threat. They certainly don't want to but if you hesitate you die. Chest shots are preferable because it's easier to target but head shots sometimes happen. People should be thinking about the guard who will undoubtedly need time to work through this ordeal.
As a former police officer, I can verify what you're saying--police are trained to "shoot to stop" not shoot to kill and always shoot for center-mass--the largest part of the body (the torso) which provides you the greatest likelihood of hitting your target and stopping the threat. I can almost guarantee that this guy did not fire off a purposeful headshot and everyone playing Monday morning quarterback judging this guy's actions has NEVER been in a situation like it. You don't understand it until you're in it and unfortunately the milliseconds you have to make your decision affect you for the rest of your life.
As a former police officer, I can verify what you're saying--police are trained to "shoot to stop" not shoot to kill and always shoot for center-mass--the largest part of the body (the torso) which provides you the greatest likelihood of hitting your target and stopping the threat. I can almost guarantee that this guy did not fire off a purposeful headshot and everyone playing Monday morning quarterback judging this guy's actions has NEVER been in a situation like it. You don't understand it until you're in it and unfortunately the milliseconds you have to make your decision affect you for the rest of your life.
milo
Sep 5, 11:58 AM
I've been saying a video Airport is apple's best move for months now.
It doesn't seem Apple's style to make wireless n hardware when there is no standard yet, I would think they would make a Media Center Mac, possibly with a built in iPod dock, maybe adding DivX and XVid (or just sticking VLC on the damn thing).
I think a streaming box makes more sense than a media center computer. A MC box is always going to be overpriced for a single purpose box. Why have hundreds of dollars worth of hardware tethered to a TV when you can have a cheap box on the TV and put your pricey computer anywhere in the house?
Makes even more sense if you have multiple TV's in the house - you can have one server box with the hard drives and as many cheaper TV stations all around the house (including things like bringing a laptop into the backyard).
I love my mini, and it's great for TV viewing...but I HATE leaving it hooked up to the TV all the time. The TV makes a terrible monitor for any other computer use, and I just don't want the computer in my TV room.
The device would not make a lot of sense by itself. There is more to this. Most people are waiting for a Media Center system. Sounds like the device would replace some cables that you can get for 40 bucks. I am refering to the cables that allow you to connect your Mac to the TV.
You're missing the point. Most people don't want their computer in the TV room. The TV makes a terrible monitor, and most people don't want it in that room (or have to have a computer monitor next to the TV). This allows having the computer wherever you want.
I don't want to buy a Mac Mini (and then pay twice for every subsequent release OS X).
I'm sure apple would like you to buy two upgrades, but does anyone really do that?
Hmm...I think Belkin calls this 802.11n. This isn't new. Gimme a break. People are really scrounging around deep now.
Read the article again, you missed the point. This isn't just a 802.11n box, it's a box that has VIDEO outs (plus hopefully a remote, and even Front Row). Do the belkin boxes do that? Don't think so.
It doesn't seem Apple's style to make wireless n hardware when there is no standard yet, I would think they would make a Media Center Mac, possibly with a built in iPod dock, maybe adding DivX and XVid (or just sticking VLC on the damn thing).
I think a streaming box makes more sense than a media center computer. A MC box is always going to be overpriced for a single purpose box. Why have hundreds of dollars worth of hardware tethered to a TV when you can have a cheap box on the TV and put your pricey computer anywhere in the house?
Makes even more sense if you have multiple TV's in the house - you can have one server box with the hard drives and as many cheaper TV stations all around the house (including things like bringing a laptop into the backyard).
I love my mini, and it's great for TV viewing...but I HATE leaving it hooked up to the TV all the time. The TV makes a terrible monitor for any other computer use, and I just don't want the computer in my TV room.
The device would not make a lot of sense by itself. There is more to this. Most people are waiting for a Media Center system. Sounds like the device would replace some cables that you can get for 40 bucks. I am refering to the cables that allow you to connect your Mac to the TV.
You're missing the point. Most people don't want their computer in the TV room. The TV makes a terrible monitor, and most people don't want it in that room (or have to have a computer monitor next to the TV). This allows having the computer wherever you want.
I don't want to buy a Mac Mini (and then pay twice for every subsequent release OS X).
I'm sure apple would like you to buy two upgrades, but does anyone really do that?
Hmm...I think Belkin calls this 802.11n. This isn't new. Gimme a break. People are really scrounging around deep now.
Read the article again, you missed the point. This isn't just a 802.11n box, it's a box that has VIDEO outs (plus hopefully a remote, and even Front Row). Do the belkin boxes do that? Don't think so.
IntelliUser
Apr 11, 12:19 AM
Which is why the US
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/18/global-2000-10_The-Global-2000-United-States_10Rank.html
and Sweden
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/18/global-2000-10_The-Global-2000-Sweden_10Rank.html
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/18/global-2000-10_The-Global-2000-United-States_10Rank.html
and Sweden
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/18/global-2000-10_The-Global-2000-Sweden_10Rank.html
Porchland
Aug 31, 01:10 PM
Apple Insider was saying the movie price would be $14.99 -I would not pay that much to watch a movie on a small screen... no way, unless I had a hour long commute to work on a train... can't believe there are that many people like that out there!
This may be on the rosy side, but I assume that $14.99 for new titles and $9.99 for catalog titles means higher resolution. Otherwise, a movie is 7x the cost of a TV episode with no added value, which just doesn't sound like something Apple would do.
The higher resolution would allow you to (somehow) play the episode directly to your TV and burn a copy on DVD. The biggest problem is size. It would take as long to download a 2-hour movie in HD (or even SD) as it would to watch it.
I hope Apple gets this movie thing right.
This may be on the rosy side, but I assume that $14.99 for new titles and $9.99 for catalog titles means higher resolution. Otherwise, a movie is 7x the cost of a TV episode with no added value, which just doesn't sound like something Apple would do.
The higher resolution would allow you to (somehow) play the episode directly to your TV and burn a copy on DVD. The biggest problem is size. It would take as long to download a 2-hour movie in HD (or even SD) as it would to watch it.
I hope Apple gets this movie thing right.
daneoni
Sep 12, 05:04 PM
Whoopidedoo, a whole $50 off. They HAD to do that because of the lack of actually updating anything worthy on the device. One could argue that it isn't enough of a price cut the way competitors music players are priced.
Anyone with half a brain will avoid these 5th G Part 2 devices like the plague, unless they want to waste money that could be spent 4 months later on a widescreen model.
Should we set up the thread now for the people that rush out and buy this version of the iPod then get burned just after Christmas when the real new iPod comes out? They'll need someplace to vent, and it's usually all over these threads. It would be nice to condense it.
My thoughts exactly.
Anyone with half a brain will avoid these 5th G Part 2 devices like the plague, unless they want to waste money that could be spent 4 months later on a widescreen model.
Should we set up the thread now for the people that rush out and buy this version of the iPod then get burned just after Christmas when the real new iPod comes out? They'll need someplace to vent, and it's usually all over these threads. It would be nice to condense it.
My thoughts exactly.
davelanger
Mar 30, 11:51 AM
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/app
278891
I think this is enough to show that Microsoft is unequivocally correct. The term has been in use for much longer than Apple's launching of the store and it has been ubiquitous in the computer industry for a long time.
The way to distinguish (if it needs to be done) between app stores is by saying the name of the app store before hand, ie the Apple App Store, the Amazon App Store, or the Microsoft App Store.
Apple did not TM the term APP they TM APP STORE.
Its not like apple is saying they cannot call their applications apps.
They are saying they cannot call their app store the app store.
Like I said, MS should just call is the WinApp Store, problem solved.
278891
I think this is enough to show that Microsoft is unequivocally correct. The term has been in use for much longer than Apple's launching of the store and it has been ubiquitous in the computer industry for a long time.
The way to distinguish (if it needs to be done) between app stores is by saying the name of the app store before hand, ie the Apple App Store, the Amazon App Store, or the Microsoft App Store.
Apple did not TM the term APP they TM APP STORE.
Its not like apple is saying they cannot call their applications apps.
They are saying they cannot call their app store the app store.
Like I said, MS should just call is the WinApp Store, problem solved.
holmesf
Mar 29, 03:29 PM
The iPhone has gone from 0% market share in 2007 to 17.25% in 2010. Based on my projections they will reach 100% market share by 2024. That about sums up how ridiculous this article is.
Thees predictions are looking 4 years ahead. 4 years ago the iPhone was not even shipping yet! I dare anyone to accurately predict the tech world 4 years in advance. The history of technology seems to be more than anything else dominated by failed predictions. Remember a few years ago when Microsoft predicted that a typical computer running Windows Vista would operate at 6GHz? They failed to even see one year ahead of time when Intel and others would hit the power wall.
Microsoft is expected to recommend that the "average" Longhorn PC feature a dual-core CPU running at 4 to 6GHz; a minimum of 2 gigs of RAM; up to a terabyte of storage; a 1 Gbit, built-in, Ethernet-wired port and an 802.11g wireless link; and a graphics processor that runs three times faster than those on the market today.
http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/operating_systems/longhorn_to_steal_limelight_at_winhec.html
Thees predictions are looking 4 years ahead. 4 years ago the iPhone was not even shipping yet! I dare anyone to accurately predict the tech world 4 years in advance. The history of technology seems to be more than anything else dominated by failed predictions. Remember a few years ago when Microsoft predicted that a typical computer running Windows Vista would operate at 6GHz? They failed to even see one year ahead of time when Intel and others would hit the power wall.
Microsoft is expected to recommend that the "average" Longhorn PC feature a dual-core CPU running at 4 to 6GHz; a minimum of 2 gigs of RAM; up to a terabyte of storage; a 1 Gbit, built-in, Ethernet-wired port and an 802.11g wireless link; and a graphics processor that runs three times faster than those on the market today.
http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/operating_systems/longhorn_to_steal_limelight_at_winhec.html
ucfgrad93
Apr 25, 01:08 AM
The simple fact is that I should not have to obey a 70mph speed limit if I don't want to. Why would I even bother driving a car that can hit 186mph (with the speed governor removed, with the governor top speed is 155mph) at 70 mph? A Ford Fiesta can hit those speeds, what's the point of fast cars if you're going to follow the speed limit in them?
Once again you provide further evidence that you do not belong in the driver's seat of a tricycle much less a car.
Once again you provide further evidence that you do not belong in the driver's seat of a tricycle much less a car.
EagerDragon
Sep 14, 08:30 PM
There are a few nice features you get with a separate tablet. First, your hand doesn't interfere with your view of the screen. Second (and kind of related), you don't get fingerprints all over your screen. Third, there is no need to calibrate the pointer with the display (it's maddening when the cursor is a few pixels away from a stylus).
I see your points, but it would seem more natural to write on the screen (hand eye coordination) or to edit a photo, enlarge it, get rid of red eye, etc. If there was no adversed interaction with the stylus. Moving my hand while watching the cursor move far from the hand gets some getting used to. Using a stylus right on the screen would (in my mind) seem more natural. But you are the Pro, so I will defer to you.
I see your points, but it would seem more natural to write on the screen (hand eye coordination) or to edit a photo, enlarge it, get rid of red eye, etc. If there was no adversed interaction with the stylus. Moving my hand while watching the cursor move far from the hand gets some getting used to. Using a stylus right on the screen would (in my mind) seem more natural. But you are the Pro, so I will defer to you.
Al Coholic
Apr 14, 12:15 PM
USB3=native to all platforms
TB=Mac Only
Sounds like TB just died.
TB=Mac Only
Sounds like TB just died.
walleyealx
Oct 27, 04:00 PM
Greenpeace = waste of _______ (fill in the blank with anything, time, people, money, etc...)
PeterQVenkman
Apr 20, 09:59 AM
Great. I wonder why they do this, other than to boost data for iAds.
w00master
Nov 17, 03:33 PM
Boom:
http://twitter.com/kickingbear/status/5803909520
To quote:
"Good question raised by Guy English: Why is it OK for the new Star Wars: Trench Run iPhone game to include this image of an iPhone, when many other apps, like for example Instapaper, have been rejected for including original icon artwork that merely resembles an iPhone?"
Boom. So what now apologists?
w00master
http://twitter.com/kickingbear/status/5803909520
To quote:
"Good question raised by Guy English: Why is it OK for the new Star Wars: Trench Run iPhone game to include this image of an iPhone, when many other apps, like for example Instapaper, have been rejected for including original icon artwork that merely resembles an iPhone?"
Boom. So what now apologists?
w00master
Chundles
Oct 12, 01:43 PM
Except that ColorWare paints the products (AFAIK). A red iPod nano from Apple would be red anodized, not red painted.
Yeah, I posted that earlier - I want the proper matte anodised finish. But RED, not that trendy pinkish colour that's going around at the moment. Proper, primary RED.
Yeah, I posted that earlier - I want the proper matte anodised finish. But RED, not that trendy pinkish colour that's going around at the moment. Proper, primary RED.
roadbloc
Mar 29, 01:05 PM
It does have CUT and Paste.
Command-X = Cut
Command-P = Paste
Command-C = Copy
Command-X is CUT !!!!!!
Now read through the rest of the posts after that and discover that Finder does not support Cut and Paste.
Command-X = Cut
Command-P = Paste
Command-C = Copy
Command-X is CUT !!!!!!
Now read through the rest of the posts after that and discover that Finder does not support Cut and Paste.
firewood
Mar 29, 12:22 PM
It's actually a trap for Nokia. Nokia gets a substantial portion of its market share from selling low priced phones. People who buy cheap phones don't have as much money to buy apps. App developers who want to make money will develop apps for people with money who buy the more expensive (higher profit margin) smartphones. Then customers who want a rich app environment won't buy the cheap phones because they won't have as many new cool apps. They'll buy iPhones. It's a viscous circle. Apple doesn't need market share to keep printing money (and investing it in R&D and marketing for new cool products).
Repo
Apr 30, 08:46 PM
Maybe doom and gloom is just empowering for some folks. It seems short sighted to me.
There's a difference between short-sightedness and having an educated opinion.
There's a difference between short-sightedness and having an educated opinion.
rockosmodurnlif
Mar 30, 01:06 PM
MP3 player is a broad term to refer to a whole class of products just like DVD player. App Store was not a generic or broad term used to describe anything before Apple made it popular. They put those two words together and created a brand out of it.
That's like arguing no one put Apple can put "i" before a product name.
I see your point, but in that example there were already products in the market using the term "mp3 player". In the case of App Store, was that term previously in use? And by the way, "Mighty Mouse" wasn't a trademark violation, they listed that it was used with permission from day one.
I stand corrected on "Mighty Mouse". There were app stores before Apple, which is why when Apple premiered theirs I didn't get the big hub-bub. PalmGear (http://www.pocketgear.com/us,en,usd/palm/index.html), now PocketGear, was selling apps for Palms when Apple was working on OS X. Handango too I think. These were app stores before Apple's App Store.
That's like arguing no one put Apple can put "i" before a product name.
I see your point, but in that example there were already products in the market using the term "mp3 player". In the case of App Store, was that term previously in use? And by the way, "Mighty Mouse" wasn't a trademark violation, they listed that it was used with permission from day one.
I stand corrected on "Mighty Mouse". There were app stores before Apple, which is why when Apple premiered theirs I didn't get the big hub-bub. PalmGear (http://www.pocketgear.com/us,en,usd/palm/index.html), now PocketGear, was selling apps for Palms when Apple was working on OS X. Handango too I think. These were app stores before Apple's App Store.