vitaboy
Aug 24, 12:01 PM
No, but they lost in every other sense that matters. I am really failing to understand why some people are having such a tough time comprehending this. Apple capitulated on the patent challenge, Apple paid a huge sum of money to Creative so Apple could continue business as usual. Apple lost. That's all, folks.
Sorry, but I think you are taking the settlement at face value and making just a surface interpretation.
There are already several industry analysts who have now gone on record saying this is a win for Apple.
$100 million may be a big load of money for you, me and Creative, but it's chump change when we're talking about the fact that iPod makes $6+ BILLION PER YEAR (and growing) for Apple.
It's like Creative accused Apple of stealing the goose that lays golden eggs. In return, Apple gives Creative one of the eggs and Creative goes, "Wow! Thanks! You can keep the goose!"
The face-value interpretation says that Creative won because it was a pauper who now has a golden egg that's worth a lot of money. The deep interpretation is that Apple still has the goose and Creative just gave up all claims of ownership over it.
What's so hard to understand about that?
BTW, some months ago, Research in Motion coughed up $450 million to settle a patent dispute with NTP over the popular Blackberry devices. RIM made a total of $2 billion in fiscal 2006. NTP basically had RIM by the throat with its patents and extracted a heavy licensing fee as a result.
You're telling me Creative supposedly had Apple by the throat, and extracted 1/4 the licensing for a product that generates 4X the revenue of Blackberry? Riiiiiight....
To put it another way, $450 million was about 25% of RIM's entire annual revenue. $100 million is less than 1% of Apple's, and in fact, is less money than Apple makes on interest each year on its cash horde.
Sorry, but I think you are taking the settlement at face value and making just a surface interpretation.
There are already several industry analysts who have now gone on record saying this is a win for Apple.
$100 million may be a big load of money for you, me and Creative, but it's chump change when we're talking about the fact that iPod makes $6+ BILLION PER YEAR (and growing) for Apple.
It's like Creative accused Apple of stealing the goose that lays golden eggs. In return, Apple gives Creative one of the eggs and Creative goes, "Wow! Thanks! You can keep the goose!"
The face-value interpretation says that Creative won because it was a pauper who now has a golden egg that's worth a lot of money. The deep interpretation is that Apple still has the goose and Creative just gave up all claims of ownership over it.
What's so hard to understand about that?
BTW, some months ago, Research in Motion coughed up $450 million to settle a patent dispute with NTP over the popular Blackberry devices. RIM made a total of $2 billion in fiscal 2006. NTP basically had RIM by the throat with its patents and extracted a heavy licensing fee as a result.
You're telling me Creative supposedly had Apple by the throat, and extracted 1/4 the licensing for a product that generates 4X the revenue of Blackberry? Riiiiiight....
To put it another way, $450 million was about 25% of RIM's entire annual revenue. $100 million is less than 1% of Apple's, and in fact, is less money than Apple makes on interest each year on its cash horde.
MagnusVonMagnum
Apr 15, 06:50 PM
Even USB 2.0 has a pathetic 50% effective utilization rate, while Firewire is ~95%. USB 2.0 is 480 Mb/s, which equals 60 MB/s, yet in real world speeds, you're lucky if you see 30 MB/s - HALF it's rated bandwidth. USB is just plain horrible for bulk data transfer, and the new 3.0 iteration is no different. The protocol overhead is atrocious.
No different? What planet on you living on because it's not Earth.... The link quoted tested a slow 2.5" drive and still showed a 3.5x speed improvement. USB3 can only go as fast as the drive it's connected to. You're going to find that out with TB as well. You can't make gold out of dirt.
These people on here suggesting Intel should can USB3 are not real computer users. They're non-computer types that don't know WTF they're talking about. Period. There is NO reason to NOT use USB3 on new computers. Their cost is next to nothing. They're 100% backwards compatible with USB2.0,1.1 and 1.0 and you'll need those ports regardless whether your computer has TB or not. Not having USB3 simply means less flexibility. Even if you hate it, your friend comes over with his 7200RPM USB3 drive and connects it to your Mac using USB 2.0 and instead of going 110MB/sec as it would under USB3, it goes 30-35MB/sec under USB 2.0. He then asks you why your Mac SUCKS SO HARD and your reply will be that he should have paid $400 for that drive with a TB connector instead of $150 with a USB3 connector (even though TB will not go faster because that's the limit of the drive itself). Your friend will then suggest you give him some money since you're stinking loaded to WASTE $250 more on the TB drive when USB3 would have done just as well. But then you remind him that Apple don't support no stinking USB3 and he then tells you that his PC just 'PWNED' your 'Crapple'. :eek:
Apple isn't doing themselves ANY favors to ignore mainstream tech. They want TB? Fine, but don't leave out USB3 to spite yourself. Oh wait. They already did that with Blu-Ray.... :rolleyes:
No different? What planet on you living on because it's not Earth.... The link quoted tested a slow 2.5" drive and still showed a 3.5x speed improvement. USB3 can only go as fast as the drive it's connected to. You're going to find that out with TB as well. You can't make gold out of dirt.
These people on here suggesting Intel should can USB3 are not real computer users. They're non-computer types that don't know WTF they're talking about. Period. There is NO reason to NOT use USB3 on new computers. Their cost is next to nothing. They're 100% backwards compatible with USB2.0,1.1 and 1.0 and you'll need those ports regardless whether your computer has TB or not. Not having USB3 simply means less flexibility. Even if you hate it, your friend comes over with his 7200RPM USB3 drive and connects it to your Mac using USB 2.0 and instead of going 110MB/sec as it would under USB3, it goes 30-35MB/sec under USB 2.0. He then asks you why your Mac SUCKS SO HARD and your reply will be that he should have paid $400 for that drive with a TB connector instead of $150 with a USB3 connector (even though TB will not go faster because that's the limit of the drive itself). Your friend will then suggest you give him some money since you're stinking loaded to WASTE $250 more on the TB drive when USB3 would have done just as well. But then you remind him that Apple don't support no stinking USB3 and he then tells you that his PC just 'PWNED' your 'Crapple'. :eek:
Apple isn't doing themselves ANY favors to ignore mainstream tech. They want TB? Fine, but don't leave out USB3 to spite yourself. Oh wait. They already did that with Blu-Ray.... :rolleyes:
evilgEEk
Sep 19, 03:05 PM
I just feel like there are many more people like me that will prefer to have physical movie versus a "digital" counterpart. Songs just seem more petty and i feel more comfortable downloading them, but movies... meh.
I remember a lot of people saying that about music when iTMS first came out. ;)
As good as this news is its not likely to appear outside the US for a LONG time... heck we still dont get TV shows!
Honestly I think movies will come to other countries before TV Shows do. Movies are more universal than TV Shows are, each country has their own TV Shows but everyone wants to watch Lord of the Rings.
I remember a lot of people saying that about music when iTMS first came out. ;)
As good as this news is its not likely to appear outside the US for a LONG time... heck we still dont get TV shows!
Honestly I think movies will come to other countries before TV Shows do. Movies are more universal than TV Shows are, each country has their own TV Shows but everyone wants to watch Lord of the Rings.
bassfingers
Apr 22, 10:21 AM
I am so excited about whatever this is. So long as its more successful than game center...
AppleScruff1
Apr 22, 11:36 AM
I wonder if it will include the tracking software? :D
scoobydoo99
Apr 20, 10:16 AM
When did 'reached out' become a better phrase to use than simply 'contacted'?
When one is trying to impart a sense of altruism to the actors, one says they "reached out." This implies a wholesome, good-faith effort to initiate dialog with a possibly resistant adversary. When the adversary does not comment, the correct framing in this case will be that they "refused" to reply, even if they simply had no response at all.
Basic spin doctoring ;)
When one is trying to impart a sense of altruism to the actors, one says they "reached out." This implies a wholesome, good-faith effort to initiate dialog with a possibly resistant adversary. When the adversary does not comment, the correct framing in this case will be that they "refused" to reply, even if they simply had no response at all.
Basic spin doctoring ;)
toddybody
Apr 22, 11:33 AM
As long as it doesnt shudder with the OS X animations and it plays 1080p smoothly, why does it matter? Do people really game on an Air?
Your words disgust me sir
Your words disgust me sir
Anonymous Freak
Sep 29, 10:05 PM
Sorry if the question has been answered before, but here goes:
Is any of the film content in iTunes Store in 16x9 encoded? In other words, is it enhanced for widescreen displays (commonly known as anamorphically encoded)?
Being 16x9 encoded is not the same thing as being anaporphically encoded.
Being 16x9 encoded just means that the video is meant to be viewed at a 16x9 ratio. Yes, the movies (that I have bought, anyway,) are 16x9. Specifically, Good Will Hunting is 640x344.
Anamorphically encoded refers to the act of 'stretching' 16x9 source to the height of 4x3; so that you effectively get 33% more 'vertical' data than horizontal. The TV is then supposed to 'squish' the video back to 16x9. So, for example, if you tell your DVD player that you have a '16x9 anamorphic' TV, it will output the widescreen video to fill the entire 720x480 resolution. If you tell it you have a '16x9 non-anamorphic', it will still be outputting 720x480, but will add black bars on the top and bottom, to achive a 'video' resolution of 720x405.
My TV, for example, has a special '16x9 anamorphic' mode where it actually re-aims its electron beam so that it's only drawing in the 16x9 area, but at a higher vertical density than it normally would. Meaning that I no longer have square pixels. Instead, I have pixels that are 1.33 times wider than tall. (More data packed in height-wise.)
If iTunes movies were sold as anamorphic, then Good Will Hunting would be 640x372, and rely on the TV to 'squish' the 372 high into the height that 344 should be. Thereby displaying more vertical information in the same space.
Is any of the film content in iTunes Store in 16x9 encoded? In other words, is it enhanced for widescreen displays (commonly known as anamorphically encoded)?
Being 16x9 encoded is not the same thing as being anaporphically encoded.
Being 16x9 encoded just means that the video is meant to be viewed at a 16x9 ratio. Yes, the movies (that I have bought, anyway,) are 16x9. Specifically, Good Will Hunting is 640x344.
Anamorphically encoded refers to the act of 'stretching' 16x9 source to the height of 4x3; so that you effectively get 33% more 'vertical' data than horizontal. The TV is then supposed to 'squish' the video back to 16x9. So, for example, if you tell your DVD player that you have a '16x9 anamorphic' TV, it will output the widescreen video to fill the entire 720x480 resolution. If you tell it you have a '16x9 non-anamorphic', it will still be outputting 720x480, but will add black bars on the top and bottom, to achive a 'video' resolution of 720x405.
My TV, for example, has a special '16x9 anamorphic' mode where it actually re-aims its electron beam so that it's only drawing in the 16x9 area, but at a higher vertical density than it normally would. Meaning that I no longer have square pixels. Instead, I have pixels that are 1.33 times wider than tall. (More data packed in height-wise.)
If iTunes movies were sold as anamorphic, then Good Will Hunting would be 640x372, and rely on the TV to 'squish' the 372 high into the height that 344 should be. Thereby displaying more vertical information in the same space.
anim8or
Aug 31, 12:58 PM
No way,
Glossy screen is the worst thing for professionals that depend on color accuracy.
As for the Isight, I think they will keep off from the Cinema displays. They will make an smaller format stand alone IMHO.
I don't think a Special Event will happen for these products.
I totally wholeheartedly agree the glossy screens are not a always an advantage, if they do it as an option for those who want it then cool but not as standard please!
Glossy screen is the worst thing for professionals that depend on color accuracy.
As for the Isight, I think they will keep off from the Cinema displays. They will make an smaller format stand alone IMHO.
I don't think a Special Event will happen for these products.
I totally wholeheartedly agree the glossy screens are not a always an advantage, if they do it as an option for those who want it then cool but not as standard please!
w00master
Nov 13, 01:52 PM
Jeff LaMarche's (co-author of "Beginning iPhone Development") take on this situation:
http://iphonedevelopment.blogspot.com/2009/11/rogue-amoeba.html
I definitely can see both sides of the argument. And I speak from personal experience. One of my company's apps, CraigsHarvest, was rejected for a similar reason: we had included a cropped version of the Setting app icon in our help file, in order to better direct our users to where to changes their settings. But Apple rejected it because we were using their icon. So, we complied and removed its usage.
But there has to be some kinda happy, middle-ground here. There already are a number of Apple-owned icons that we are allowed (in fact, encouraged) to use, such as Compose, Action, Bookmark (see below attached images). Maybe Apple could expand the range of images, icons, etc. they own that we, as developers, could be allowed to use.
And Gruber's response to this response:
http://daringfireball.net/2009/11/airfoil_touch_situation
Sorry, but imho there is absolutely *no* reason to defend Apple here.
w00master
http://iphonedevelopment.blogspot.com/2009/11/rogue-amoeba.html
I definitely can see both sides of the argument. And I speak from personal experience. One of my company's apps, CraigsHarvest, was rejected for a similar reason: we had included a cropped version of the Setting app icon in our help file, in order to better direct our users to where to changes their settings. But Apple rejected it because we were using their icon. So, we complied and removed its usage.
But there has to be some kinda happy, middle-ground here. There already are a number of Apple-owned icons that we are allowed (in fact, encouraged) to use, such as Compose, Action, Bookmark (see below attached images). Maybe Apple could expand the range of images, icons, etc. they own that we, as developers, could be allowed to use.
And Gruber's response to this response:
http://daringfireball.net/2009/11/airfoil_touch_situation
Sorry, but imho there is absolutely *no* reason to defend Apple here.
w00master
iMeowbot
Sep 14, 11:14 AM
Just checked again. It does appear that laptops are ready to go on 9-22, 9-25, and 9-27, depending on which model and size. Still, that gives Apple some "breathing room" to release theirs.
Well... there is a backlog now, but Merom Dell notebooks are already shipping (http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=77155).
Well... there is a backlog now, but Merom Dell notebooks are already shipping (http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=77155).
NT1440
Apr 19, 11:33 PM
John Pilgers? Does he reside in the US? Does he have a website?
http://johnpilger.com/videos
He's even got an awesome interview with Julian Assange. His documentary "The War You Don't See" is a must watch though.
http://johnpilger.com/videos
He's even got an awesome interview with Julian Assange. His documentary "The War You Don't See" is a must watch though.
techficiency
Mar 29, 03:09 PM
hilarious! balmer's standing around somewhere squirting himself into a false sense of security. microsoft is a dinosaur and about as hip and cool as an 8track.
LarryC
Apr 22, 06:51 PM
AMD would be producing better CPU's via increased profits if Apple chose them over Intel from the start.
I always thought that if Apple ever went with something other than PPC that they would go with AMD. Better late than never.
I always thought that if Apple ever went with something other than PPC that they would go with AMD. Better late than never.
Eduardo1971
Mar 22, 01:38 PM
As someone looking forward to buying my very first Mac desktop; I must say this is a pretty lame rumour. 'Sandy Bridge'? 'Thunderbolt'? Nothing surprising; everyone here was expecting these two items. I want more specific rumours!:p
The wait continues...:(
The wait continues...:(
musiclover137
Sep 13, 09:34 PM
this is definitely a style over functionality....how da heck do you dial a number with clickwheel?
of course, if this is a slider phone like chocolate, then this is an awesome design.
Um, read the post buddy....
of course, if this is a slider phone like chocolate, then this is an awesome design.
Um, read the post buddy....
ten-oak-druid
Apr 4, 01:01 PM
So no one would have been able to shoot the 19 people who were shot (and 20 injured) in Tucson? Perhaps not the first one or two or even three, but eventually someone would have been able pull out their gun and take out the guy before he got to 5 let alone 19 or 20.
It happens quite often when there are people with CC permits around, it just isn't reported as often as the nut job - who already was a criminal - pulls out a gun and kills innocents.
It might have just happened here too - the who knows where three armed robbers were headed next. They found the 2 in a residential area and closed schools near there.
And for the people wondering, Chula Vista isn't a very nice area and I'm not surprised that guards who are guarding the area (it is not a completely inside mall if memory serves) were carrying guns at night.
Yes if five people in the area all pulled out loaded weapons and started shooting, they all would have hit the killer and no one else.
No one could prevent what happened simply by carrying a gun. He intended to kill and struck without warning.
What actually happens successfully is that criminals who do not intend to kill but threaten get thwarted. Actual killers or criminals who do not care about taking a life in the process are not actually stopped that often. It is a fantasy story concocted by wanna be heros.
Look I am not arguing to take your gun away. I want to keep my gun too. But don't tell me these fantasy stories about how we'll all save the day with our concealed weapon. And don't tell me the story about the big bad liberal who wants to take our guns away either. Its just a wedge issue.
It happens quite often when there are people with CC permits around, it just isn't reported as often as the nut job - who already was a criminal - pulls out a gun and kills innocents.
It might have just happened here too - the who knows where three armed robbers were headed next. They found the 2 in a residential area and closed schools near there.
And for the people wondering, Chula Vista isn't a very nice area and I'm not surprised that guards who are guarding the area (it is not a completely inside mall if memory serves) were carrying guns at night.
Yes if five people in the area all pulled out loaded weapons and started shooting, they all would have hit the killer and no one else.
No one could prevent what happened simply by carrying a gun. He intended to kill and struck without warning.
What actually happens successfully is that criminals who do not intend to kill but threaten get thwarted. Actual killers or criminals who do not care about taking a life in the process are not actually stopped that often. It is a fantasy story concocted by wanna be heros.
Look I am not arguing to take your gun away. I want to keep my gun too. But don't tell me these fantasy stories about how we'll all save the day with our concealed weapon. And don't tell me the story about the big bad liberal who wants to take our guns away either. Its just a wedge issue.
paradox00
Apr 14, 01:27 PM
It's pretty funny that people think that TB is designed to replace USB and therefore competing against it. Saying that is like suggesting that PCIe and DP are competing against USB, because that's what TB is. If your computer doesn't have USB 3.0 and you want it, what do you plug the USB 3.0 controller card into? PCIe of course... how is USB 3.0 competing with the thing it plugs into???
Intel announcing that their future chipsets will support TB and USB 3.0 is great news. It makes a monitor (connected to a computer through a single cable) with a USB 3.0 dock possible and it means all Intel based PCs will ship with TB standard.
TB isn't there to replace USB mice. It's there to provide high speed access to raid arrays, enable universal docking stations with a full array of ports (think USB, eSata, HDMI, audio, etc) connected to a computer through a single cable, and allow laptops to better utilize external graphics cards. The possibilities of extending the PCIe bus outside of the computer are limitless, I can't wait to see what people dream up (especially as speeds ramp up).
USB and TB are largely complimentary. One exception is external hard drives of course and TB is far superior in that aspect (theres a reason raid controllers are plugged into PCIe). Why people are opposed to this is beyond me.
Intel announcing that their future chipsets will support TB and USB 3.0 is great news. It makes a monitor (connected to a computer through a single cable) with a USB 3.0 dock possible and it means all Intel based PCs will ship with TB standard.
TB isn't there to replace USB mice. It's there to provide high speed access to raid arrays, enable universal docking stations with a full array of ports (think USB, eSata, HDMI, audio, etc) connected to a computer through a single cable, and allow laptops to better utilize external graphics cards. The possibilities of extending the PCIe bus outside of the computer are limitless, I can't wait to see what people dream up (especially as speeds ramp up).
USB and TB are largely complimentary. One exception is external hard drives of course and TB is far superior in that aspect (theres a reason raid controllers are plugged into PCIe). Why people are opposed to this is beyond me.
PlaceofDis
Oct 12, 06:57 PM
im so tired about apple having partnerships with groups i dont like. to each his own but why does U2 have to keep pushing their own ipod, i thought the last one sucked. give me a band i actually like
except this isn't about a band. its about a charity.
except this isn't about a band. its about a charity.
AppleScruff1
Apr 19, 10:54 PM
As I mentioned in the other thread, you might actually want to take a look at the Apple Records logo before you make silly arguments that the Apple Computer logo is a copy.
And as cmaier clearly explained to you, this is a different scenario entirely as they were in two completely different industries at that time.
Oh, and what do the Beatles have to do with partnering technology companies turning around and stabbing their partner in the back? Nothing.
So the Beatles didn't use an Apple? And Woolworths Australia does? Don't be so biased.
And as cmaier clearly explained to you, this is a different scenario entirely as they were in two completely different industries at that time.
Oh, and what do the Beatles have to do with partnering technology companies turning around and stabbing their partner in the back? Nothing.
So the Beatles didn't use an Apple? And Woolworths Australia does? Don't be so biased.
iPost
Sep 29, 07:49 AM
I am really looking forward to this. I have Cingular and they are actually one of the better services where I live. And, when you are talking about quality of service from carriers, it really depends on where you live.
I currently have a Blackberry. Maybe it's just me, but I find the user interface of the Blackberry very clunky. It always feel like a struggle whenever I try to do anything with it. As this is an area where Apple usually shines, I'm looking forward to a phone that will feel effortless when using its functionality. If Apple gets this right, I'll be first in line to buy the new iPhone.
I currently have a Blackberry. Maybe it's just me, but I find the user interface of the Blackberry very clunky. It always feel like a struggle whenever I try to do anything with it. As this is an area where Apple usually shines, I'm looking forward to a phone that will feel effortless when using its functionality. If Apple gets this right, I'll be first in line to buy the new iPhone.
3N16MA
Mar 30, 01:42 PM
They don't want to call their store "MobileApp" because they already have a store. It's called "Marketplace".
They would however like to describe their store that called "Marketplace" by saying that it is a store that sells apps. You know, an app store.
It is a market that sells apps. You know, and app market. No need for them to describe it as an App Store since that description would not fly over anyone's head.
They would however like to describe their store that called "Marketplace" by saying that it is a store that sells apps. You know, an app store.
It is a market that sells apps. You know, and app market. No need for them to describe it as an App Store since that description would not fly over anyone's head.
chasemac
Aug 23, 11:52 PM
Also announced is that Creative is joining Apple's "Made for iPod" program, and will be introducing an array of iPod accessories later this year.
Thats hilarious!!:) For $100 mil I would too!
Thats hilarious!!:) For $100 mil I would too!
Lepton
Sep 13, 10:11 PM
Take a PSP. Chop the two ends off that hold the game controls. You have about a 3"x4"x.75 16:9 unit, all screen. User replaceable battery, openable back. quad GSM. Bluetooth. Touch screen, pressure sensitive to sense clicks. Touch brings up on-screen controls, translucent. Can bring up traditional number buttons, or a contacts list with a click wheel scroller. Speaker makes subtle click sounds like Mighty Mouse. Internet browser. EMail. The usual phone PDA stuff. *nix OS.
Apple starts a virtual carrier in its huge new data center. Does perfect syncing, has all you can eat Internet at 3G speeds.
It's also an iPod. Hard disk. Virtual click wheel. Stereo Bluetooth. iPod dock port. Headphone jack. Hold switch. No WiFi. Bluetooth will be extended soon to have more range and speed.
It's also a video iPod. Wide screen. Virtual click wheel. Plays movies.
It's also an IR remote for CE stuff and Macs. Interface ala Harmony Remote. IR port.
It's also an Apple Remote Desktop. Links to any Mac, puts 2nd Mac screen on the device. Controls your Mac through touch guestures, Apple Speech Recognition, Apple Text to Speech, through phone mik/spkr or Bluetooth headset. Hooks over Bluetooth if Mac is close, GPRS/3G connection of Mac is distant. File transfer too.
$500.
Apple starts a virtual carrier in its huge new data center. Does perfect syncing, has all you can eat Internet at 3G speeds.
It's also an iPod. Hard disk. Virtual click wheel. Stereo Bluetooth. iPod dock port. Headphone jack. Hold switch. No WiFi. Bluetooth will be extended soon to have more range and speed.
It's also a video iPod. Wide screen. Virtual click wheel. Plays movies.
It's also an IR remote for CE stuff and Macs. Interface ala Harmony Remote. IR port.
It's also an Apple Remote Desktop. Links to any Mac, puts 2nd Mac screen on the device. Controls your Mac through touch guestures, Apple Speech Recognition, Apple Text to Speech, through phone mik/spkr or Bluetooth headset. Hooks over Bluetooth if Mac is close, GPRS/3G connection of Mac is distant. File transfer too.
$500.
0 comments:
Post a Comment