Silentwave
Sep 18, 06:44 PM
A 10megapixel phone will record more clearly the low quality picture that comes from these tiny lenses.
It will be a much larger file, and won't look much better than a 3MP. Still, as the lenses improve this will change.
There IS a limit as to what can be done at a given price point. Eventually the cost of a good lens for it will outweigh the benefits.
Sticking a 10mp sensor in a phone to me is ridiculous. Very few people ever need 10mp, and if they do they get a real camera instead. Not only does the phone have a very limited set of potential lens features, but the lens will generally be low quality and poorly corrected unless you spend a significant amount of money for a good one. Even then size will become an issue.
All a 10mp phone will do is be unusable in anything but superb light. It'll probably have even worse dynamic range than existing phones, record murky detail, and have the poorest signal to noise ratio on the planet.
It will be a much larger file, and won't look much better than a 3MP. Still, as the lenses improve this will change.
There IS a limit as to what can be done at a given price point. Eventually the cost of a good lens for it will outweigh the benefits.
Sticking a 10mp sensor in a phone to me is ridiculous. Very few people ever need 10mp, and if they do they get a real camera instead. Not only does the phone have a very limited set of potential lens features, but the lens will generally be low quality and poorly corrected unless you spend a significant amount of money for a good one. Even then size will become an issue.
All a 10mp phone will do is be unusable in anything but superb light. It'll probably have even worse dynamic range than existing phones, record murky detail, and have the poorest signal to noise ratio on the planet.
Manic Mouse
Sep 9, 08:18 AM
My first question is if the Mac Pro offers less of a performance increase than it first appeared, (for the time being at least), would Apple use this as an argument against a Conroe Tower?
I'm still behind Apple increasing their product lines, (Conroe Tower, 13" MBP, 15 & 17" MBs), and they have effectively done just this with taking teir consumer iMac offering from 2 standard models to 4. Can we expect more of the same in the future?
Roll on September 12th and beyond.
Conroe Tower FTW! ;)
I'm still behind Apple increasing their product lines, (Conroe Tower, 13" MBP, 15 & 17" MBs), and they have effectively done just this with taking teir consumer iMac offering from 2 standard models to 4. Can we expect more of the same in the future?
Roll on September 12th and beyond.
Conroe Tower FTW! ;)
dejo
Nov 13, 01:37 PM
Jeff LaMarche's (co-author of "Beginning iPhone Development") take on this situation:
http://iphonedevelopment.blogspot.com/2009/11/rogue-amoeba.html
I'm going to risk the ire of the maddening crowd once more, but I think somebody needs to come to Apple's defense this time. I love a good mob scene as much as the next guy, and I keep my pitchfork nice and sharp just in case the need should arise. But… the picture that Rogue Amoeba has painted in their farewell post doesn't look quite so black and white to me. Certainly, Apple could have handled many things about the situation better, but so could have Rogue Amoeba.
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.
http://iphonedevelopment.blogspot.com/2009/11/rogue-amoeba.html
I'm going to risk the ire of the maddening crowd once more, but I think somebody needs to come to Apple's defense this time. I love a good mob scene as much as the next guy, and I keep my pitchfork nice and sharp just in case the need should arise. But… the picture that Rogue Amoeba has painted in their farewell post doesn't look quite so black and white to me. Certainly, Apple could have handled many things about the situation better, but so could have Rogue Amoeba.
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.
OneMammoth
Mar 30, 01:32 PM
IMO it's like Publix or Kroger trying to claim the rights to "grocery store."
Or maybe more like if McDonald's tried to claim the rights to "burgers."
good point
Or maybe more like if McDonald's tried to claim the rights to "burgers."
good point
Nomadski
Apr 13, 07:07 AM
MagnusVonMagnum -
- Sonos is not "way better quality" (AppleTV2 output is DIGITAL and so the "quality" depends entirely on the stereo you connect it to. So sorry but you have no point there.
Unless you've purchased / converted music in Apple lossless format it IS way better quality. Im making the comparison of my situation listening to FLAC vs the masses who purchase mp3s on iTunes. You could rip your music in Apple Lossless for sure, but then your hooked into iTunes, cant play on WMP or most other mp3s other than iPods. Like with a lot of stuff iTunes related, if you go that route, your stuck. Even the all inclusive Sonos S5 sounds better than the best iPod dock on the market (Bose 10 / Zeppelin whichever grabs your boat the most).
- It may not be better quality, but it IS "way more expensive". AppleTV2 costs $99 (same price as an Airport Express which is "audio only" like Sonos). Sonos OTOH costs $349 for a basic receiver which then still requires to either be connected directly to a router (wired) OR you have to pay ANOTHER $99 for a "bridge" to send a separate wireless signal off your router just for Sonos devices (waste of bandwidth and clutters the band with more wireless signals instead of just using your existing wireless router, which most people already have (how many used a wired only router and if you did you cannot use the Sonos wireless for anything else). So already you are at LEAST $450 in the hole for a single room with Sonos and you have ONLY AUDIO capability.
Sonos isnt cheap for sure, but that is why I said people who have no shortage of money at the start of my thread. Some people have massive Mac systems, those people shouldn't skimp when it comes to music, if they like music, or video for that matter.
One of the big features of Sonos which you obviously arent aware of is that Sonos DOESNT hog your bandwidth. It uses its own Mesh network which works independantly of your home wireless network, hence no bandwidth constraints, which is why you can have up to 32 Sonos units all working AT THE SAME TIME on the same or different sources whilst not affecting the bandwidth capability of your home network. Try using even 2 AppleTV2s at the same time and see how much of your bandwidth is left.
Also, if you live in a large house, or one with thick walls, or you want to listen outside, because Sonos recreates its own Mesh network each time it hits a Sonos unit strength signal on the opposite side of the house to the router is still very high, each Zone Player acts like a new Sonos signal source.
Yup its expensive but I bought my first Sonos bit of kit in 2006. Since then ive added 3 more units, 2 of which were new redesigned units released a couple of years ago. Ive also added a second controller when they moved to touchscreen 2 years ago. And you know what? It all works seamlessly with each other. Old hardware, new hardware, built up over time. New features added over time (for free) seamlessly updated into even the oldest bit of hardware with a firmware update, they even added full Touch, iPhone and iPad control options so I could use any of them to control the audio around the house. Can you integrate AppleTV2 with 1? Can you honestly say in 5 years time your money spent will still work with the rest of your AppleTV system as they upgrade and add new features? When 3 year old sounddocks wont even charge new ipods I would hazard a guess...no.
-But then I would be forgetting you need a SOURCE of music. You tout the use of an NAS, but most NAS devices aren't exactly cheap or anything. For all intensive purposes they are a just a headless computer and most run Linux. AppleTV2 is out of the box a PITA if you don't want to leave a computer on, but you can put XBMC on it which will use any NAS or networked source. You then have the same functionality as Sonos BUT you also have full video capability. You could instead get a cheap Netbook for $250 (cheaper than most NAS devices) and connect a hard drive to that and run iTunes and the full Apple interface if you'd like and still have XBMC available as well. Personally, I just use an old PPC G4 PowerMac as a server and 24/7 Internet terminal. Intel machines can also be set to Wake On Lan, so you can have your machine sleep while AppleTV is not in use. In short, NAS isn't as great as you make it sound (most are also dog slow compared to a real computer) and there are alternative options even with Apple software like a cheap Netbook as a server.
NAS or WHS arent cheap but youve just contradicted yourself.
Sonos will also play from any networked PC, MAC, External hard drive on Airport, netbook. To use a NAS you dont have to install XBMC on it, it works out of the box from any source you want. That PPC G4 would also work with Sonos, or you could play Last.FM, or Pandora, or Spotify, or Napster, or unlimited internet radio (you can even add your own internet radio addresses).
Best of all, you DONT have to use iTunes. You can if you want, but you dont have to.
Sonos also gives you multi room grouping. Group 2 or more zones together and enjoy synced music wherever you want it. Not miliseconds out syncing like Sony or Logitech but 100% synced. Dropping zones can be done at the flick of the controller.
Read a review of a new album in the newspaper? Listen to it 5 seconds later on Sonos.
So the kids can listen to their own music streamed in their rooms upstairs, my wife can be listening to the TV, or some music in the living room, and I can be in my little den listening to my music whilst enjoying near full speed wireless capability on my pc or mac, or maybe my wife likes a song shes hearing upstairs and links zones so she can hear it downstairs.
You can buy a standalone unit which sounds better than the B&W Zeppelin, or get the amped unit for attaching to any speaker system you want, or get the small unit for use (as you do) with your existing stereo system. You can add these anytime you want, building up your Sonos system over time, without the fear it will be redundant over time.
Its a high end multi room music system vs a limited single streaming unit.
-Now I come to the heart of the matter...VIDEO. You suggest a Popcorn Hour in ADDITION to the already out of this world priced Sonos system. They start at $179 and go up to $299. That brings your total minimum price for a wireless system for a single room to $629 AND you have to switch between two separate devices to listen to audio and/or watch videos. With AppleTV you have all your movies, tv shows, photos, music, music videos, YouTube and Internet Radio (plus the options of XBMC with a quick hack including non-Apple formats) and your TOTAL COST for **one** room wireless using an existing wireless router is $99. $629 versus $99...Hmmmmmm. And then there's the matter of Popcorn Hour's crappy interface versus Apple's polished one. XBMC makes Popcorn Hour look bad as well. Bugs or popcorn? :confused:
Cost seems to be the big issue with you, so I wonder if you own a mac mini as opposed to 3 macbook pros, an imac, apple tv2 etc etc as many posters here have? If so, Sonos etc wont be for you. If you do own multiple Apple systems why are you so concerned with price? If you want the best you got to pay for it.
With Apple TV you DONT have all your movies or music or internet radio. you have limited experiences with all 3. No 1080p, no DVD images (Popcorn will load your dvd image in exactly the same way your dvd player would), wont play .mp4 .m4v .mkv .wmv .avi .aac .divx, doesnt have full support for all subtitle formats, wont play FLAC or anything else outside of your iTunes library audio wise and its internet radio function is gimped.
Its sure nice to have it in one box, but *it* is very very limited. Dedicated systems will always trump jack of all trade systems.
The interface is nice on AppleTV2 for sure, my popcorn looks better though with my skin on it. The default layout looks boring ill agree.
So for the price of your ONE room audio and video, I could have SIX rooms using AppleTV2 with both video and audio and still have $29 to spare
Except you couldnt do that could you? Your wireless network would be crippled with half that many running at the same time. I can assure you I can play a 1080P movie AND have 3 other Sonos units streaming at the same time. Try that sometime with 4 AppleTVs...
With XBMC installed, it can play any format (just like Popcorn Hour).
No, no it cant. DVD isos? All subtitle formats? 1080P? Also your slightly expanded feature set (not out of the box) is achieved by essentially hacking your AppleTV 2, so good luck on the next firmware update.
Hell, I can even buy a cheap 3.5" internal hard drive and slot that into my popcorn hour if I want to store the films locally, what sized hard drive does Apple TV2 have? Oh wait.
Your not seeing the advantages with zero configuration audio system, and a play all with no hassles video system? The only mucking about in my system is if you want a nice shinier interface with Popcorn Hour. You have to convert audio, replace (essentially) the OS to XBMC, have a linux system and a Crystal card to play 1080p on an OLDER Apple TV (your not factoring in this stuff with your price or integrated system arguments are you?) and you STILL have a far more limited setup.
Reading thru your post I guarantee you your costs are higher than $99 and in about 2 years time your system will be redundant.
Im not saying the AppleTV 2 is useless for everyone, for many of the dumb masses who are locked into iTunes already its probably the best thing since sliced bread, and really its only advantage is a cheap price and movie rentals, in glorious 720P, but if I want to feed my 42" 1080p plasma with subpar 720P video I could use the xbox or PS3 sitting under the TV, which I also dont bother with. For audiophiles or moviephiles it doesn't cut it.
- Sonos is not "way better quality" (AppleTV2 output is DIGITAL and so the "quality" depends entirely on the stereo you connect it to. So sorry but you have no point there.
Unless you've purchased / converted music in Apple lossless format it IS way better quality. Im making the comparison of my situation listening to FLAC vs the masses who purchase mp3s on iTunes. You could rip your music in Apple Lossless for sure, but then your hooked into iTunes, cant play on WMP or most other mp3s other than iPods. Like with a lot of stuff iTunes related, if you go that route, your stuck. Even the all inclusive Sonos S5 sounds better than the best iPod dock on the market (Bose 10 / Zeppelin whichever grabs your boat the most).
- It may not be better quality, but it IS "way more expensive". AppleTV2 costs $99 (same price as an Airport Express which is "audio only" like Sonos). Sonos OTOH costs $349 for a basic receiver which then still requires to either be connected directly to a router (wired) OR you have to pay ANOTHER $99 for a "bridge" to send a separate wireless signal off your router just for Sonos devices (waste of bandwidth and clutters the band with more wireless signals instead of just using your existing wireless router, which most people already have (how many used a wired only router and if you did you cannot use the Sonos wireless for anything else). So already you are at LEAST $450 in the hole for a single room with Sonos and you have ONLY AUDIO capability.
Sonos isnt cheap for sure, but that is why I said people who have no shortage of money at the start of my thread. Some people have massive Mac systems, those people shouldn't skimp when it comes to music, if they like music, or video for that matter.
One of the big features of Sonos which you obviously arent aware of is that Sonos DOESNT hog your bandwidth. It uses its own Mesh network which works independantly of your home wireless network, hence no bandwidth constraints, which is why you can have up to 32 Sonos units all working AT THE SAME TIME on the same or different sources whilst not affecting the bandwidth capability of your home network. Try using even 2 AppleTV2s at the same time and see how much of your bandwidth is left.
Also, if you live in a large house, or one with thick walls, or you want to listen outside, because Sonos recreates its own Mesh network each time it hits a Sonos unit strength signal on the opposite side of the house to the router is still very high, each Zone Player acts like a new Sonos signal source.
Yup its expensive but I bought my first Sonos bit of kit in 2006. Since then ive added 3 more units, 2 of which were new redesigned units released a couple of years ago. Ive also added a second controller when they moved to touchscreen 2 years ago. And you know what? It all works seamlessly with each other. Old hardware, new hardware, built up over time. New features added over time (for free) seamlessly updated into even the oldest bit of hardware with a firmware update, they even added full Touch, iPhone and iPad control options so I could use any of them to control the audio around the house. Can you integrate AppleTV2 with 1? Can you honestly say in 5 years time your money spent will still work with the rest of your AppleTV system as they upgrade and add new features? When 3 year old sounddocks wont even charge new ipods I would hazard a guess...no.
-But then I would be forgetting you need a SOURCE of music. You tout the use of an NAS, but most NAS devices aren't exactly cheap or anything. For all intensive purposes they are a just a headless computer and most run Linux. AppleTV2 is out of the box a PITA if you don't want to leave a computer on, but you can put XBMC on it which will use any NAS or networked source. You then have the same functionality as Sonos BUT you also have full video capability. You could instead get a cheap Netbook for $250 (cheaper than most NAS devices) and connect a hard drive to that and run iTunes and the full Apple interface if you'd like and still have XBMC available as well. Personally, I just use an old PPC G4 PowerMac as a server and 24/7 Internet terminal. Intel machines can also be set to Wake On Lan, so you can have your machine sleep while AppleTV is not in use. In short, NAS isn't as great as you make it sound (most are also dog slow compared to a real computer) and there are alternative options even with Apple software like a cheap Netbook as a server.
NAS or WHS arent cheap but youve just contradicted yourself.
Sonos will also play from any networked PC, MAC, External hard drive on Airport, netbook. To use a NAS you dont have to install XBMC on it, it works out of the box from any source you want. That PPC G4 would also work with Sonos, or you could play Last.FM, or Pandora, or Spotify, or Napster, or unlimited internet radio (you can even add your own internet radio addresses).
Best of all, you DONT have to use iTunes. You can if you want, but you dont have to.
Sonos also gives you multi room grouping. Group 2 or more zones together and enjoy synced music wherever you want it. Not miliseconds out syncing like Sony or Logitech but 100% synced. Dropping zones can be done at the flick of the controller.
Read a review of a new album in the newspaper? Listen to it 5 seconds later on Sonos.
So the kids can listen to their own music streamed in their rooms upstairs, my wife can be listening to the TV, or some music in the living room, and I can be in my little den listening to my music whilst enjoying near full speed wireless capability on my pc or mac, or maybe my wife likes a song shes hearing upstairs and links zones so she can hear it downstairs.
You can buy a standalone unit which sounds better than the B&W Zeppelin, or get the amped unit for attaching to any speaker system you want, or get the small unit for use (as you do) with your existing stereo system. You can add these anytime you want, building up your Sonos system over time, without the fear it will be redundant over time.
Its a high end multi room music system vs a limited single streaming unit.
-Now I come to the heart of the matter...VIDEO. You suggest a Popcorn Hour in ADDITION to the already out of this world priced Sonos system. They start at $179 and go up to $299. That brings your total minimum price for a wireless system for a single room to $629 AND you have to switch between two separate devices to listen to audio and/or watch videos. With AppleTV you have all your movies, tv shows, photos, music, music videos, YouTube and Internet Radio (plus the options of XBMC with a quick hack including non-Apple formats) and your TOTAL COST for **one** room wireless using an existing wireless router is $99. $629 versus $99...Hmmmmmm. And then there's the matter of Popcorn Hour's crappy interface versus Apple's polished one. XBMC makes Popcorn Hour look bad as well. Bugs or popcorn? :confused:
Cost seems to be the big issue with you, so I wonder if you own a mac mini as opposed to 3 macbook pros, an imac, apple tv2 etc etc as many posters here have? If so, Sonos etc wont be for you. If you do own multiple Apple systems why are you so concerned with price? If you want the best you got to pay for it.
With Apple TV you DONT have all your movies or music or internet radio. you have limited experiences with all 3. No 1080p, no DVD images (Popcorn will load your dvd image in exactly the same way your dvd player would), wont play .mp4 .m4v .mkv .wmv .avi .aac .divx, doesnt have full support for all subtitle formats, wont play FLAC or anything else outside of your iTunes library audio wise and its internet radio function is gimped.
Its sure nice to have it in one box, but *it* is very very limited. Dedicated systems will always trump jack of all trade systems.
The interface is nice on AppleTV2 for sure, my popcorn looks better though with my skin on it. The default layout looks boring ill agree.
So for the price of your ONE room audio and video, I could have SIX rooms using AppleTV2 with both video and audio and still have $29 to spare
Except you couldnt do that could you? Your wireless network would be crippled with half that many running at the same time. I can assure you I can play a 1080P movie AND have 3 other Sonos units streaming at the same time. Try that sometime with 4 AppleTVs...
With XBMC installed, it can play any format (just like Popcorn Hour).
No, no it cant. DVD isos? All subtitle formats? 1080P? Also your slightly expanded feature set (not out of the box) is achieved by essentially hacking your AppleTV 2, so good luck on the next firmware update.
Hell, I can even buy a cheap 3.5" internal hard drive and slot that into my popcorn hour if I want to store the films locally, what sized hard drive does Apple TV2 have? Oh wait.
Your not seeing the advantages with zero configuration audio system, and a play all with no hassles video system? The only mucking about in my system is if you want a nice shinier interface with Popcorn Hour. You have to convert audio, replace (essentially) the OS to XBMC, have a linux system and a Crystal card to play 1080p on an OLDER Apple TV (your not factoring in this stuff with your price or integrated system arguments are you?) and you STILL have a far more limited setup.
Reading thru your post I guarantee you your costs are higher than $99 and in about 2 years time your system will be redundant.
Im not saying the AppleTV 2 is useless for everyone, for many of the dumb masses who are locked into iTunes already its probably the best thing since sliced bread, and really its only advantage is a cheap price and movie rentals, in glorious 720P, but if I want to feed my 42" 1080p plasma with subpar 720P video I could use the xbox or PS3 sitting under the TV, which I also dont bother with. For audiophiles or moviephiles it doesn't cut it.
Ommid
Apr 25, 12:53 PM
The unibody was already a giant leap forward. How much better can Apple get?
I'm more interested in the specifications, and hardware (electronics) not so much the casing.
Well they arent going to get worse are they!!
I'm more interested in the specifications, and hardware (electronics) not so much the casing.
Well they arent going to get worse are they!!
poppe
Aug 28, 06:49 PM
hahahahahhahaha
merom is better than everyone anticipated... ---> http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/laptops/intel-core-duo-whassup-faster-197105.php
all the people who said it's only marginal at best can stick it where the sun don't shine! suckaaaaaaaaaaaaaazzzz
Cool find, but I dont much believe it completely.
Just my thought...
I just trust that Arstancia website (how ever it is spelled) They did a core 2 duo laptop review and got some performance increases of around 10-15% but never 22%...
merom is better than everyone anticipated... ---> http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/laptops/intel-core-duo-whassup-faster-197105.php
all the people who said it's only marginal at best can stick it where the sun don't shine! suckaaaaaaaaaaaaaazzzz
Cool find, but I dont much believe it completely.
Just my thought...
I just trust that Arstancia website (how ever it is spelled) They did a core 2 duo laptop review and got some performance increases of around 10-15% but never 22%...
mwayne85
Mar 22, 02:32 PM
This is good news... but they REALLY need to get rid of the chin. That would be my dream desktop aesthetically.
CplBadboy
Apr 30, 01:21 PM
Really do hope the option of a fully loaded iMac is well specced and not just the inclusion of TB and the processor. For the money Ill be spending Im expecting 8Gb RAM as standard and a rather meaty GPU. Roll on tuesday!
cmcconkey
Sep 26, 08:56 AM
You got customer service from Verizon? Is this before or after they tacked on the taxes that aren't being collected anymore? Or crippled the Bluetooth on their phones? Or put a terrible GUI on their phones? Or any other number of things that they've done that are anti-consumer?
I admit they do indeed do these things... or have done these things in the past. But the situation that I spoke of was last week, also every time I have called them they have worked with everything and entered things just right so that if I wanted to change my plan it would not be prorated at all.
Christopher
I admit they do indeed do these things... or have done these things in the past. But the situation that I spoke of was last week, also every time I have called them they have worked with everything and entered things just right so that if I wanted to change my plan it would not be prorated at all.
Christopher
mcdj
Feb 23, 04:25 PM
McAfee is the virus.
Zeiss
Mar 23, 06:14 PM
Ahh... America, the land of the free.... all rights and no responsibility. Its an insult to the concept of safe and responsible actions to think that an app that alerts you to a DUI checkpoint is OK. Speeding and red light is different, cause that STOPS people speeding and running red lights, but getting drunk (even moderately - you can still read an app and press a button on your phone) then knowing how to avoid the repercussions aint cool. And hey - try living in Australia - Random Breath tests and drug testing, but then the road toll here has significantly been reduced over the last decade - we have that wonderful campaign - 'If you drink, then drive - your a bloody idiot'!!
thejadedmonkey
Sep 4, 08:54 PM
Maybe I'm not doing this math right, but I'm not sure that's true. I can download a 4.7GB movie in about 2-3 hours over my internet connection (average speeds of 500Kb/sec). A 802.11a or g router transfers data at a max rate of 54Mbps or about 6.75MB/sec. That's about 12 times as fast, meaning that transmitting full DVD-quality video can occur in realtime, with plenty of bandwidth to spare to other functions while watching your movies. By the time HD video recording becomes standard, the Apple video airport express can be upgraded to 802.11n to provide even more bandwidth.
Do I have those figures wrong?
802.11g average transfer is 1/2 of it's max (on average). I'm too tired to do any math, but that would mean you'd only have 6 time as much speed, not 12.
Do I have those figures wrong?
802.11g average transfer is 1/2 of it's max (on average). I'm too tired to do any math, but that would mean you'd only have 6 time as much speed, not 12.
mkjellman
Aug 29, 08:22 AM
nice apple, common i really need a new computer, i feel like the original powerbook g4 al waiting game all over again!
Apple Shmapple
Sep 12, 04:59 PM
At these new lower price points that reads pretty UN-educated to me.
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.
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.
rtdunham
Sep 16, 09:28 AM
I really think the camera has to be able to swivel in some way if we want to be able to take pictures of stuff in front of us while looking at the screen, and have video chats too I don't recall seeing decent mock-ups that address this issue.
My Sprint Samsung A900 does that.
My Sprint Samsung A900 does that.
Eidorian
Aug 28, 01:06 PM
O.K....
Alright...
Gotcha, Merom. Thanks guys. :)I wonder if some people read the guide I made at all. :confused:
Alright...
Gotcha, Merom. Thanks guys. :)I wonder if some people read the guide I made at all. :confused:
rdrr
Sep 15, 06:39 PM
...
Widgets?
...
Widgets would be a phone killer... Some of the widgets out there consume a lot of memory.
Widgets?
...
Widgets would be a phone killer... Some of the widgets out there consume a lot of memory.
Cougarcat
Apr 30, 01:44 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Curious that everyone is clamoring for a thunderbolt-enabled machine, but there isn't a single thunderbolt drive available on the market.
I guess some people just need to feel like they have new stuff even if it's totally pointless.
Thunderbolt drives will be out this summer.
Curious that everyone is clamoring for a thunderbolt-enabled machine, but there isn't a single thunderbolt drive available on the market.
I guess some people just need to feel like they have new stuff even if it's totally pointless.
Thunderbolt drives will be out this summer.
Eidorian
Jul 14, 11:10 AM
I thought the Yonah was Socket 775. It's not? :confused:No, Yonah is a variant of Socket 479. The Pentium-M used it too. Yonah has the same number of pins but there placement is slightly different.
If I bought one of these, could I put it in my Intel iMac and have it work?No, the Sockets aren't compatible.
If I bought one of these, could I put it in my Intel iMac and have it work?No, the Sockets aren't compatible.
vitaboy
Aug 24, 03:49 AM
There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding about just exactly what the settlement means. But I would like to remind people not to take things at face value - Apple is smarter than that.
I suspect that it was Apple who proposed the settlement to Creative. More than that, I suspect it was Apple who dictated the actual terms. Creative had no choice but to accept, which was just as well because at first appearance, they look like the winner.
However, I believe Apple is playing corporate jujitsu here. The settlement is a strategic move that greatly benefits Apple in the long term even as Apple is willing to suffer an apparent loss of face.
Why?
Because the settlement gives Creative much needed ammunition (in both cash and legal standing) to go after every one of the iPod's competitors. You can be sure Creative is getting ready to send out letters to Sandisk, which has raced past them in the music player space this year. You can be sure Creative will be sending letters to iRiver.
And most certainly, you can be certain that Creative will be sending letters to Microsoft with regards to Zune.
Really, Apple was not playing from a weak position. There's no other way to say it, but that's a simplistic and naive interpretation. Patent battles are very, very expensive, lasting years and thousands of man-months of time. Creative not only had to fight Apple over its original patents, but simultaneously defends itself against Apple's countersuit (which were filed in a different state, just to make life more difficult for Creative's legal team).
Without any effort at all, Apple could drag the case through the courts for 5+ years and force Creative to cough up tens of millions of dollars in legal expenses. Creative simply does not have that kind of money, after blowing through $100 million in cash to write of unsold inventory last year. The company's cash position is very weak and the company was undoubtedly sweating blood trying to determine if it would have enough cash to see things through the end - an end which was far from guaranteed. Even if Creative won its original patent suit, they would have lost the countersuit for the same reasons.
The prospect of blowing $50 million over 5 years to pay lawyers for a net gain of nothing was weighing heavily on their minds, I'm sure.
I think what really motivated the settlement is the sudden appearance of Zune. That basically gave Apple the ace it needed to give it a four-of-a-kind. Why? Because while Creative might have been able to tough it out before Zune, the existence of Zune would basically kill the company before the case could wind through the court system.
I mean, we saw Creative's share of the music player market dive from 8% to just 4% in about a year. Sandisk, which was a virtually unknown brand in the music player space, went from nothing to 8% in a short time.
Even if Zune is far from being an "iPod killer", with Microsoft's marketing machine backing it up, I think any reasonable person could see that it is quite likely that Creative's marketshare would be dropping to nothing a year from now.
So Apple basically gave Creative an offer it couldn't refuse.
Settle with us now and forget this silly patent threat of yours. We'll give you $100 million to license your patents, if only because you got them first. And now that we're all family, why don't you go after some of our competitors. You'll probably be able to get just as much, if not more, which is a lot better than what you were getting trying to fight us with that Zen thing.
And if you want to let your pride get in the way, I don't think we need to remind you that Zune is just a few months away from demolishing what little is left of your company. A year from now, it will be iPod, Sandisk, Zune....everyone will have forgotten about Creative because frankly, you don't have any loyal customers like we do.
In fact, we'll be nice and help you gain some loyal customers, too. By making great iPod accessories, you'll be truly a welcome part of the family and more importantly, you'll have products that people actually buy. How about that!
Just remember, the $100 million is a kind of loan, of sorts. When you talk to that Microsoft fella, remember to share some of the payments you extract with us. We're all family, right?
Given that the writing was on the wall, I figure Creative realized that if you can't beat 'em, it was far, far better to join Apple.
I suspect that it was Apple who proposed the settlement to Creative. More than that, I suspect it was Apple who dictated the actual terms. Creative had no choice but to accept, which was just as well because at first appearance, they look like the winner.
However, I believe Apple is playing corporate jujitsu here. The settlement is a strategic move that greatly benefits Apple in the long term even as Apple is willing to suffer an apparent loss of face.
Why?
Because the settlement gives Creative much needed ammunition (in both cash and legal standing) to go after every one of the iPod's competitors. You can be sure Creative is getting ready to send out letters to Sandisk, which has raced past them in the music player space this year. You can be sure Creative will be sending letters to iRiver.
And most certainly, you can be certain that Creative will be sending letters to Microsoft with regards to Zune.
Really, Apple was not playing from a weak position. There's no other way to say it, but that's a simplistic and naive interpretation. Patent battles are very, very expensive, lasting years and thousands of man-months of time. Creative not only had to fight Apple over its original patents, but simultaneously defends itself against Apple's countersuit (which were filed in a different state, just to make life more difficult for Creative's legal team).
Without any effort at all, Apple could drag the case through the courts for 5+ years and force Creative to cough up tens of millions of dollars in legal expenses. Creative simply does not have that kind of money, after blowing through $100 million in cash to write of unsold inventory last year. The company's cash position is very weak and the company was undoubtedly sweating blood trying to determine if it would have enough cash to see things through the end - an end which was far from guaranteed. Even if Creative won its original patent suit, they would have lost the countersuit for the same reasons.
The prospect of blowing $50 million over 5 years to pay lawyers for a net gain of nothing was weighing heavily on their minds, I'm sure.
I think what really motivated the settlement is the sudden appearance of Zune. That basically gave Apple the ace it needed to give it a four-of-a-kind. Why? Because while Creative might have been able to tough it out before Zune, the existence of Zune would basically kill the company before the case could wind through the court system.
I mean, we saw Creative's share of the music player market dive from 8% to just 4% in about a year. Sandisk, which was a virtually unknown brand in the music player space, went from nothing to 8% in a short time.
Even if Zune is far from being an "iPod killer", with Microsoft's marketing machine backing it up, I think any reasonable person could see that it is quite likely that Creative's marketshare would be dropping to nothing a year from now.
So Apple basically gave Creative an offer it couldn't refuse.
Settle with us now and forget this silly patent threat of yours. We'll give you $100 million to license your patents, if only because you got them first. And now that we're all family, why don't you go after some of our competitors. You'll probably be able to get just as much, if not more, which is a lot better than what you were getting trying to fight us with that Zen thing.
And if you want to let your pride get in the way, I don't think we need to remind you that Zune is just a few months away from demolishing what little is left of your company. A year from now, it will be iPod, Sandisk, Zune....everyone will have forgotten about Creative because frankly, you don't have any loyal customers like we do.
In fact, we'll be nice and help you gain some loyal customers, too. By making great iPod accessories, you'll be truly a welcome part of the family and more importantly, you'll have products that people actually buy. How about that!
Just remember, the $100 million is a kind of loan, of sorts. When you talk to that Microsoft fella, remember to share some of the payments you extract with us. We're all family, right?
Given that the writing was on the wall, I figure Creative realized that if you can't beat 'em, it was far, far better to join Apple.
7on
Oct 27, 11:14 AM
Also people fail to point out that we don't know the other company's contracts. Someone said that other booths had free range and were giving out things all around. For all we know they negotiated for a larger handout space. If companies like LaCie and Adobe threatened to pull from the show unless they could hand out things all over the expo I'm sure MacExpo would have allowed it. If did the same, MacExpo wouldn't have any problems with not giving them a booth. They could have easily handed out fliers across the street.
TheManOfSilver
Sep 4, 09:09 PM
I'd be surprised if Apple did anything with TV tuners.
With the variety of TV services that people have (analog cable, digital cable, satellite TV, Verizon's TV over fiber, terrestrial HDTV), coming up with a device that can tune most folks TV doesn't sound easy, even for Apple.
There may be lots of TV options out there, but right now Apple isn't servicing any of them. They're losing potential business to 3rd Party companies like Elgato. If they released a simple box with analog/digital standard/hidef options, they would be servicing the overwhelming majority of the market (most digital, satelite and other special services require set-top boxes anyway).
With the variety of TV services that people have (analog cable, digital cable, satellite TV, Verizon's TV over fiber, terrestrial HDTV), coming up with a device that can tune most folks TV doesn't sound easy, even for Apple.
There may be lots of TV options out there, but right now Apple isn't servicing any of them. They're losing potential business to 3rd Party companies like Elgato. If they released a simple box with analog/digital standard/hidef options, they would be servicing the overwhelming majority of the market (most digital, satelite and other special services require set-top boxes anyway).
toddybody
Mar 22, 03:27 PM
Sounds like you'd be interested in a nice Windows7 machine. Enjoy. :rolleyes:
HA ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! What a wonderfully poignant response. You sure showed me:)
HA ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! What a wonderfully poignant response. You sure showed me:)
0 comments:
Post a Comment