rt_brained
Jan 12, 07:22 PM
God, I wish this keynote was all some nightmare and in the real one Apple actually gave us something we wanted.
Strawberry-flavored puppies?
Strawberry-flavored puppies?
frozzbite
Mar 17, 12:17 PM
With my flame suit on, i say this...
I might have done the same thing as the OP.
Regarding the kid, well, its probably a part time job for him. Furthermore, how much can BestBuy possibly be paying him? He could probably earn more if he worked else where. :)
I might have done the same thing as the OP.
Regarding the kid, well, its probably a part time job for him. Furthermore, how much can BestBuy possibly be paying him? He could probably earn more if he worked else where. :)
Lynxpro
Oct 20, 01:29 PM
Not just for interest though - if Apple do not take a firm presence in the rapidly developing (India, China) countries now, they may well face the same uphill battle against Windows they have been fighting for the past whatever years in the US.
India has a large tariff they impose upon computers not made/assembled in India. The only way for Apple to gain large market share in India is to either build a factory there or find a reliable Indian subcontractor to build their product for that market.
India has a large tariff they impose upon computers not made/assembled in India. The only way for Apple to gain large market share in India is to either build a factory there or find a reliable Indian subcontractor to build their product for that market.
gnasher729
Oct 2, 05:12 PM
I'm surprised how many people are interpreting this wrong.
The point of this is that Amazon can go to this new company and license Fairplay-compatable DRM. That way they can sell movies/music on their website (Unbox) and sell it with DRM that is iPod/iTV/iTunes Compatible.
This could mean, for example, Napster could be iTunes/iPod compatible.
Or Vongo (unlimited movie downloads $9.95/month) could be iPod compatible.
Personally, I'm not sure how long it will go. Either Apple will shut them down (if legally capable) or simply start licensing Fairplay themselves and cut out the middleman (which could be an inadvertant positive result of this effort)
Napster (and Vongo, never heard of them) couldn't do that. Fairplay doesn't have any time limit. If you buy a song from the iTunes Music Store, it will work forever (or as long as Apple Computer exists). If you have a Napster subscription, and Napster made it possible that you download a song and add the Fairplay DRM to it, then iTunes would play it today and forever.
The point of this is that Amazon can go to this new company and license Fairplay-compatable DRM. That way they can sell movies/music on their website (Unbox) and sell it with DRM that is iPod/iTV/iTunes Compatible.
This could mean, for example, Napster could be iTunes/iPod compatible.
Or Vongo (unlimited movie downloads $9.95/month) could be iPod compatible.
Personally, I'm not sure how long it will go. Either Apple will shut them down (if legally capable) or simply start licensing Fairplay themselves and cut out the middleman (which could be an inadvertant positive result of this effort)
Napster (and Vongo, never heard of them) couldn't do that. Fairplay doesn't have any time limit. If you buy a song from the iTunes Music Store, it will work forever (or as long as Apple Computer exists). If you have a Napster subscription, and Napster made it possible that you download a song and add the Fairplay DRM to it, then iTunes would play it today and forever.
mkrishnan
Jan 5, 08:02 PM
Too bad the keynote wasn't set for December 22nd (http://www.globalorgasm.org/) instead.
I like! I like! :D
Although I personally am a fan of the Every Day is O Day campaign. :D Gotta fight prostate cancer!
Erm, now, I hope MWSF is hawt, anyways. :)
I like! I like! :D
Although I personally am a fan of the Every Day is O Day campaign. :D Gotta fight prostate cancer!
Erm, now, I hope MWSF is hawt, anyways. :)
davepoint
Aug 14, 01:29 PM
the world sucks
ritmomundo
Mar 18, 04:15 PM
Did you even read my original post?
yes. what's your point?
yes. what's your point?
dsnort
Aug 3, 12:29 PM
I think that's the idea. The implication I got was that they were going to give Microsoft a generous stretch of rope and let them hang themselves.
And so, my friends, we see why funny comic strips don't get published widely; instead, we have to live with pablum like "Family Circus" because if it gets any funnier than that, 90% of the population doesn't even come close to getting it.
You're right, I missed that!!!:eek:
(Gads, I have GOT to quit drinking while I cruise the forum!!:D )
And so, my friends, we see why funny comic strips don't get published widely; instead, we have to live with pablum like "Family Circus" because if it gets any funnier than that, 90% of the population doesn't even come close to getting it.
You're right, I missed that!!!:eek:
(Gads, I have GOT to quit drinking while I cruise the forum!!:D )
Rodimus Prime
Oct 6, 04:25 PM
I still disagree with you. The device is material. The network is supposed to be invisible. You're not supposed to notice the network. AT&T's service isn't great, but I'll put up with it to use the device of my choice.
The mobile industry has a strange business model compared to other industries. You don't buy a desktop computer that you can only use on one ISP or a car that you can only fill up at particular gas stations (excluding electric). However, If these industries were to operate this way, I still think people would go for the product over the commodity.
To me, and apparently many others, mobile service is just a commodity. Some may be a bit better than others, but in the end you're getting a comparable service. The devices, on the other hand, vary. And, yes, I still think the iPhone was game changing. All I remember before January 2007 were RAZRs and Chocolates. Unintuitive text-based interfaces with linear button-mashing controls in a hyped-up shell.
I think your arugument would be valid if phones were not subsudized and you have to buy them at full price. Because AT&T in this case is paying Apple $400 per phone you should choose a network first.
If ISP were footing the bill for desktop then Verizon add still would work but for cell phones most of the cost of the phone is paid by the networks. Not the other way around.
The mobile industry has a strange business model compared to other industries. You don't buy a desktop computer that you can only use on one ISP or a car that you can only fill up at particular gas stations (excluding electric). However, If these industries were to operate this way, I still think people would go for the product over the commodity.
To me, and apparently many others, mobile service is just a commodity. Some may be a bit better than others, but in the end you're getting a comparable service. The devices, on the other hand, vary. And, yes, I still think the iPhone was game changing. All I remember before January 2007 were RAZRs and Chocolates. Unintuitive text-based interfaces with linear button-mashing controls in a hyped-up shell.
I think your arugument would be valid if phones were not subsudized and you have to buy them at full price. Because AT&T in this case is paying Apple $400 per phone you should choose a network first.
If ISP were footing the bill for desktop then Verizon add still would work but for cell phones most of the cost of the phone is paid by the networks. Not the other way around.
k8to
Nov 17, 11:44 AM
To software, AMD and Intel are compatable parts. They aren't identical, but most software won't care at all. So this wouldn't be a "switch" like IBM to x86. Nothing disruptive.
The question is, of course, where is the lower-power AMD cpu. Tulatins are not _bad_ chips for power efficiency, but they're certainly bested by core 2 duo. The lack of any strong competition makes this rumour just that.
The question is, of course, where is the lower-power AMD cpu. Tulatins are not _bad_ chips for power efficiency, but they're certainly bested by core 2 duo. The lack of any strong competition makes this rumour just that.
NDA74
Jan 12, 07:14 PM
Credentialed people are held to a higher standard. They are trusted to cover the event, not affect the outcome of it. Any blogger or press member should be embarrassed by this kind of behavior. As a writer and an event planner, I'm pissed in every way imaginable.
Agreed. People have argued that bloggers should not be credentialed for trade shows and sporting events because they might disrupt the event. Gizmodo's stunt adds credibility to those arguments.
I used to read Gizmodo regularly, but I deleted the RSS feed from NetNewsWire Friday.
Agreed. People have argued that bloggers should not be credentialed for trade shows and sporting events because they might disrupt the event. Gizmodo's stunt adds credibility to those arguments.
I used to read Gizmodo regularly, but I deleted the RSS feed from NetNewsWire Friday.
Chef Medeski
Nov 25, 05:57 PM
$100 off MacBook. I wish I had bought.
Glideslope
Apr 15, 05:01 PM
Ho hum...
Competition for itunes would not be a bad thing but those record companies are just too greedy!
They also know that they have been completely taken by Apple in an almost comical way.
This is the main reason the TV/Movie industry has been so leary of Apple. It's not simply greed. They don't know how to negotiate at Apple's level.
When Apple releases their new HD TV the networks will have complete control on pricing with Apple getting it's cut. Apple will provide a complete hardware delivery system for them that operates seamlessly with a click, and has a magical (could not resist) effect on the end user.
No needing to try all this crap streaming through Amazon and such BS. Could even give Netflix a run.
It's the logical next step, and Steve has already laid out the vision. :apple:
Competition for itunes would not be a bad thing but those record companies are just too greedy!
They also know that they have been completely taken by Apple in an almost comical way.
This is the main reason the TV/Movie industry has been so leary of Apple. It's not simply greed. They don't know how to negotiate at Apple's level.
When Apple releases their new HD TV the networks will have complete control on pricing with Apple getting it's cut. Apple will provide a complete hardware delivery system for them that operates seamlessly with a click, and has a magical (could not resist) effect on the end user.
No needing to try all this crap streaming through Amazon and such BS. Could even give Netflix a run.
It's the logical next step, and Steve has already laid out the vision. :apple:
t0mat0
Jan 12, 04:03 PM
Gizmodo snip What do you make of their actions?
http://gizmodo.com/343348/confessions-the-meanest-thing-gizmodo-did-at-ces
/. gizmodo ftw & ***** and giggles
http://gizmodo.com/343348/confessions-the-meanest-thing-gizmodo-did-at-ces
/. gizmodo ftw & ***** and giggles
iMikeT
Oct 3, 05:44 PM
Jobs to keynote MacWorld, that's new to me.:D
chrismacguy
Apr 25, 04:20 PM
Yes, they did. They encouraged it and called no one. This went on for a very long time too. Some of you need to go watch the video before you comment. I fixed the link. You will not believe what you see.
Dear McDonalds: Boom. You just lost a whole lot of customers. Also, you should fire those idiots you have working there and refuse to provide them a reference. They don't deserve anything more after that display of sheer inhumaneness. Even on a human level standing around laughing is wrong. Whatever "company policy" is - not even calling the cops is ridiculous, heinous and shows signs of a deep inability to be human.
Dear McDonalds: Boom. You just lost a whole lot of customers. Also, you should fire those idiots you have working there and refuse to provide them a reference. They don't deserve anything more after that display of sheer inhumaneness. Even on a human level standing around laughing is wrong. Whatever "company policy" is - not even calling the cops is ridiculous, heinous and shows signs of a deep inability to be human.
IJ Reilly
Oct 23, 10:27 AM
I would love for apple to use 10 billion to innovate fantastically, enter new markets, go green, and more. I don't think it's going to happen- the purpose of 10 billion in the bank for apple is having 10 billion in the bank. Apple's expertise is in taking big risks (at least large for a compnay of their size), a good number of which pay off very, very well. But people- investors, CEOs, are risk adverse, and a huge pile of cash to operate on, so big they can operate and continue to invest in risky and exciting products, mitigates their risks. For apple, a pile of money might actually be worth more than investing that money at a high rate of return.
Huge cash hordes are only good for three things, in order of desirability: reinvesting in future growth (which is why it's called capitalism); returning to the stockholders in the form of dividends; or holding for a rainy day. The last reason, which you seem to think is the best one, should be seen by investors as a signal that the company lacks confidence in the future.
Actually, there's a fourth use of excess cash: a stock buy-back. Apple isn't doing this with the money currently, either.
I agree, the huge stockpile of cash is an issue. That's money that should be working for Apple, and IMHO that should be in the form of purchasing other companies that will strengthen Apple in key areas, like music distribution and/or audio/video/graphics production.
And I also agree with you on the dividend issue. A small investment of that money into dividends may have the exact effect as you describe. On the other hand, putting that money into new products/enhancing existing products, may do more for Apple's long-term health vs. providing a dividend to improve the 'optics' of the company in shareholders' eyes.
New investments in technologies and products would be by far the best use of the money. With Apple's cash, they could set up a research arm similar to Xerox PARC or the old Bell Labs and place themselves in the forefront of new technology for a long time. Instead, they seem to be notably stingy with their R&D dollars. Purchasing technologies by buying out smaller companies could also be advantageous, and Apple does do some of this, but not much -- not enough to make even a dent in their cash hoard.
Huge cash hordes are only good for three things, in order of desirability: reinvesting in future growth (which is why it's called capitalism); returning to the stockholders in the form of dividends; or holding for a rainy day. The last reason, which you seem to think is the best one, should be seen by investors as a signal that the company lacks confidence in the future.
Actually, there's a fourth use of excess cash: a stock buy-back. Apple isn't doing this with the money currently, either.
I agree, the huge stockpile of cash is an issue. That's money that should be working for Apple, and IMHO that should be in the form of purchasing other companies that will strengthen Apple in key areas, like music distribution and/or audio/video/graphics production.
And I also agree with you on the dividend issue. A small investment of that money into dividends may have the exact effect as you describe. On the other hand, putting that money into new products/enhancing existing products, may do more for Apple's long-term health vs. providing a dividend to improve the 'optics' of the company in shareholders' eyes.
New investments in technologies and products would be by far the best use of the money. With Apple's cash, they could set up a research arm similar to Xerox PARC or the old Bell Labs and place themselves in the forefront of new technology for a long time. Instead, they seem to be notably stingy with their R&D dollars. Purchasing technologies by buying out smaller companies could also be advantageous, and Apple does do some of this, but not much -- not enough to make even a dent in their cash hoard.
caspersoong
May 3, 05:50 AM
I think I will just ignore this... And block it in my hosts file.
dalvin200
Sep 12, 07:52 AM
What time does it start GMT?
5PM GMT
6PM BST
5PM GMT
6PM BST
Santabean2000
Oct 4, 07:08 AM
This is the Mac mini of houses at best.
Wow. Some of you really are hooked on the bigger is better buzz.
Seriously, get out and see some of the world. Perspective people. The world is NOT just the US.
Anyone tootin' on these forums (including myself) can consider themselves truly blessed.
A Mac mini house..? Hardly. It's a mansion by any worldly measure.
Wow. Some of you really are hooked on the bigger is better buzz.
Seriously, get out and see some of the world. Perspective people. The world is NOT just the US.
Anyone tootin' on these forums (including myself) can consider themselves truly blessed.
A Mac mini house..? Hardly. It's a mansion by any worldly measure.
sotorious
May 2, 09:44 AM
How is this going to work for Verizon users im on 4.3.7 if im not mistaken...
edit scratch that its 4.2.7 and i just went into settings and it says carrier settings update if i click not now or update now will it do it Over the Air?
edit scratch that its 4.2.7 and i just went into settings and it says carrier settings update if i click not now or update now will it do it Over the Air?
pmz
Apr 16, 10:07 AM
A quick read through this thread is proof of why I normally don't bother reading or posting here.
Almost everyone has posted that they feel the next iPhone could look something like this...
...which is completely ridiculous based on logic and common sense. But it has been my experience that Macrumors forums and "logic" and "common sense" cannot exist in the same place at the same time.
Memory also seems to be a problem around here. For example, Apple's breakthrough smartphone that changed phones for forever, was completely and totally redesigned after its first year, because the design was incredibly flawed.
To not understand the significance of this, is really to forfeit your opinion on what Apple will or will not do. You CANNOT logically state that Apple would return to an aluminum iPhone (no matter how sexy it might look), after having already moved away from it.
2 straight years, the iPhone 3G and 3GS have unibody plastic design. The SAME one. This is not a coincidence, or laziness, or any other 4th grade opinion....its what the iPhone is. It's not going to change.
The most Apple will do with the design, is make it a little taller to accommodate more pixels, but the design will remain. They may offer a few more colors, or they may not.
Plastic, Unibody iPhones are here to stay. To state otherwise, is to fantasize, and ignore reality. (which is fine, just acknowledge it please).
Almost everyone has posted that they feel the next iPhone could look something like this...
...which is completely ridiculous based on logic and common sense. But it has been my experience that Macrumors forums and "logic" and "common sense" cannot exist in the same place at the same time.
Memory also seems to be a problem around here. For example, Apple's breakthrough smartphone that changed phones for forever, was completely and totally redesigned after its first year, because the design was incredibly flawed.
To not understand the significance of this, is really to forfeit your opinion on what Apple will or will not do. You CANNOT logically state that Apple would return to an aluminum iPhone (no matter how sexy it might look), after having already moved away from it.
2 straight years, the iPhone 3G and 3GS have unibody plastic design. The SAME one. This is not a coincidence, or laziness, or any other 4th grade opinion....its what the iPhone is. It's not going to change.
The most Apple will do with the design, is make it a little taller to accommodate more pixels, but the design will remain. They may offer a few more colors, or they may not.
Plastic, Unibody iPhones are here to stay. To state otherwise, is to fantasize, and ignore reality. (which is fine, just acknowledge it please).
digitalbiker
Oct 4, 02:49 PM
Squarely wrong. Even "The Inquirer" has talked about the vastly superior multitasking AND SMP features of OS X Leopard, as compared to what Vista seems to offer. Damn, even today any version of Windows crawls far behind OS X in that (XP Home didn't even have SMP support in the first place).
Second: the fact that IDF didn't have any "octo" machines derives from the simple and obvious assessment that Apple does NOT have any "octo" machines. Anything else would be just illegal.
And the lack of any OS X-running "quad" machines is not surprising either, given the usual (and) historical focus of the IDF; besides, it's an easy fallacy to assert that the non-existence of machines "running OS X" in quad configurations at a certain event means a lack of capacity by OS X to do so. This statement has no basis whatsoever.
The inquirer is definitely wrong about this! OS X is a great OS with many features but it needs a lot of work with SMP compared to 64 bit windows and Linux.
In fact, OS X is behind on being a full 64 bit OS as well.
Besides, I wouldn't contradict Aiden if I were you. The man knows of that which he speaks.
Second: the fact that IDF didn't have any "octo" machines derives from the simple and obvious assessment that Apple does NOT have any "octo" machines. Anything else would be just illegal.
And the lack of any OS X-running "quad" machines is not surprising either, given the usual (and) historical focus of the IDF; besides, it's an easy fallacy to assert that the non-existence of machines "running OS X" in quad configurations at a certain event means a lack of capacity by OS X to do so. This statement has no basis whatsoever.
The inquirer is definitely wrong about this! OS X is a great OS with many features but it needs a lot of work with SMP compared to 64 bit windows and Linux.
In fact, OS X is behind on being a full 64 bit OS as well.
Besides, I wouldn't contradict Aiden if I were you. The man knows of that which he speaks.
Stella
Mar 16, 08:55 AM
LTD blurb:
The entire industry is one big Apple "fanboi", bud. What Apple does, everyone else moves to copy or get it on. My "bubble" is the entire tech industry where it concerns the average user.
This is nonsence. If the average user was interested in just Apple, then why are Apple on a lesser market share for pretty much... everything but MP3 players? How come Android is proving more popular?
The entire industry is one big Apple "fanboi", bud. What Apple does, everyone else moves to copy or get it on. My "bubble" is the entire tech industry where it concerns the average user.
This is nonsence. If the average user was interested in just Apple, then why are Apple on a lesser market share for pretty much... everything but MP3 players? How come Android is proving more popular?
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق