KnightWRX
Apr 16, 06:23 AM
fail. google didnt make android. and the fact that you used a winking smiley to illustrate your victoryfail makes it all the more sad. :-(
How is that different from how Apple "acquired" iOS and OS X ? Yet no one is going to claim Apple didn't build those 2 OSes.
Again, some of you guys need to put the Google hate to rest. This is not the thread for it and to diminish their efforts on Chrome OS and Android is to do the same to OS X since the histories and origins are similar (acquisitions and open source projects).
And I will not stand by anyone who does that to Apple's efforts with OS X.
How is that different from how Apple "acquired" iOS and OS X ? Yet no one is going to claim Apple didn't build those 2 OSes.
Again, some of you guys need to put the Google hate to rest. This is not the thread for it and to diminish their efforts on Chrome OS and Android is to do the same to OS X since the histories and origins are similar (acquisitions and open source projects).
And I will not stand by anyone who does that to Apple's efforts with OS X.
dextertangocci
Aug 15, 01:30 PM
What is that "springing" option with the dock?
DeathChill
Apr 23, 12:11 PM
I have nothing against Apple shareholders (both shorts and longs :D). It's just this is not a forum for them. This is their forum: http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/mb/AAPL
This is my new favorite post. You, the guy who owns no Apple products (save for a battery charger) and quite clearly dislikes Apple, telling someone they are on the wrong forum.
This is my new favorite post. You, the guy who owns no Apple products (save for a battery charger) and quite clearly dislikes Apple, telling someone they are on the wrong forum.
bigandy
Nov 3, 10:58 AM
Oooh that looks better than Parallels. I like the connectivity stuff above too. :)
joepunk
May 1, 10:15 PM
Trump probably won't believe it until he sees the death certificate. ;)
The long form death certificate at that.
The long form death certificate at that.
IJ Reilly
Jan 28, 10:06 PM
Based on the verdict of the markets it would seem that Apple's potential is not so great...but you know better than that right ;)
I know better than to make to much of the market's verdict on any given week.
I know better than to make to much of the market's verdict on any given week.
Michael Scrip
Apr 30, 03:51 AM
Selling loss leaders is a very common retail tactic and is used by just about everyone (including Apple).
Very true.
Apple sells cheap songs in hopes that you'll buy an iPod.
Amazon sells even cheaper songs... ???... profit?
Very true.
Apple sells cheap songs in hopes that you'll buy an iPod.
Amazon sells even cheaper songs... ???... profit?
Dagless
Mar 31, 11:14 AM
Oh good lord no.
WildCowboy
Jul 10, 12:29 PM
Ha ha... when I glanced at the RSS feed I thought it said "Page 3 Features?". I thought: "Why the heck would MacRumors add a 'Page 3'? Much of the 'Page 1' stuff never comes to pass, and they've got 'Page 2' for the even less substantiated stuff..."
Clearly you haven't had a look at Page 3 (http://www.macrumors.com/page3/)... ;)
Clearly you haven't had a look at Page 3 (http://www.macrumors.com/page3/)... ;)
DaveGee
Jul 28, 02:49 PM
It will FAIL!!!!!!! Idiot M$:rolleyes:
But just remember (and don't ever forget), it's not just a "ham sandwich", it's a "HAM Sandwich!" :lol:
D
But just remember (and don't ever forget), it's not just a "ham sandwich", it's a "HAM Sandwich!" :lol:
D
yg17
Apr 30, 09:55 AM
The Xbox360 is only one year newer then you car, so it is not that much newer... The same for PSP too.. the first portable digital audio player to play MP3 was 1998. MP3 1995-96. AAC was 1997...
Make Your Own Iron Man Costume
Head and a Lego man,
.annnd we had a lego man
Halloween and Costume Stores
Giant Lego man that washed
Zombie Lego Man;
lego man cake. giant LEGO man.
lego man cake.
Reacent Post
Bevz
Dec 30, 06:21 AM
And i felt guilty about the pizza i had on xmas eve! LOL
Seriously though; "Daily Mail" and "Sunday Mirror"... Says everything you need to know!
Seriously though; "Daily Mail" and "Sunday Mirror"... Says everything you need to know!
MagnusVonMagnum
Apr 26, 05:07 PM
What a freaking RIP-OFF. You could buy 20 new songs a year for that instead (well not on Apple anymore sine they royally screwed everyone on some BS basis of "85 cents songs" to offset the "$1.29" ones except that as most of us predicted, there are hardly any 85 cents songs in existence yet a heck of lot of $1.29 ones. In other words, all they did was jack up prices to cover crap artists who can't sing and don't write their own songs and make farting noises and call it art.)
Meanwhile, what good would this service do? Do you seriously think they're going to let you access your music that you did NOT buy from iTunes??? (i.e. your CD collection dumped to iTunes) NO WAY. You'd have to UPLOAD the entire library first. How LONG would that take? Ridiculous. Then you miss a payment and they delete it all.... It's far more likely it's only for songs you already bought (in which case you could already just 'buy' them again and download them for free; in other words the service is worthless).
What most people would prefer I think is a flat fee music-on-demand service where you can listen to ANY music you want from the entire library. Pandora, Sonus, etc. already offer this service so Apple's "retrieve your own library online" is stupid, IMO. You could rent some storage somewhere and just upload your music there and download it anywhere on the Net WITHOUT APPLE even being involved. The whole thing strikes me as a cash grab from Apple to make you pay for the music you already paid for ALL OVER AGAIN. Bought 100 songs? 5 years you bought 'em again. No value.
My entire music library is only 70GB in AAC without music videos. That would almost fit on an iPod Touch 64GB or USB 64GB stick as it is, let alone my Netbook which has 160GB on it and my MBP which has 500GB. So the ONLY way this service could be useful is if I could access ALL MY MOVIES from anywhere on the Net. That would require 2.6TB of storage, though. I don't see Apple covering that and I wouldn't even want to TRY to upload all those movies from my own library (and Apple doesn't even sell (let alone in good quality) 40% of them and 95% of the HD ones.
No, a flat fee for unlimited rentals (music and movies) would be a good deal. I don't see Apple offering that any time soon, if EVER.
Meanwhile, what good would this service do? Do you seriously think they're going to let you access your music that you did NOT buy from iTunes??? (i.e. your CD collection dumped to iTunes) NO WAY. You'd have to UPLOAD the entire library first. How LONG would that take? Ridiculous. Then you miss a payment and they delete it all.... It's far more likely it's only for songs you already bought (in which case you could already just 'buy' them again and download them for free; in other words the service is worthless).
What most people would prefer I think is a flat fee music-on-demand service where you can listen to ANY music you want from the entire library. Pandora, Sonus, etc. already offer this service so Apple's "retrieve your own library online" is stupid, IMO. You could rent some storage somewhere and just upload your music there and download it anywhere on the Net WITHOUT APPLE even being involved. The whole thing strikes me as a cash grab from Apple to make you pay for the music you already paid for ALL OVER AGAIN. Bought 100 songs? 5 years you bought 'em again. No value.
My entire music library is only 70GB in AAC without music videos. That would almost fit on an iPod Touch 64GB or USB 64GB stick as it is, let alone my Netbook which has 160GB on it and my MBP which has 500GB. So the ONLY way this service could be useful is if I could access ALL MY MOVIES from anywhere on the Net. That would require 2.6TB of storage, though. I don't see Apple covering that and I wouldn't even want to TRY to upload all those movies from my own library (and Apple doesn't even sell (let alone in good quality) 40% of them and 95% of the HD ones.
No, a flat fee for unlimited rentals (music and movies) would be a good deal. I don't see Apple offering that any time soon, if EVER.
ghostlyorb
Apr 30, 07:54 AM
I might have to switch to Amazon now... saving money is what I love.
Major Reeves
Nov 6, 05:34 PM
Lol consumerism at it's best.
Chundles
Jul 25, 09:29 AM
Current wired Mighty Mouse is $79. Single-button Wireless Mouse is $99.
The Logitech mx1000 is about $159.
I reckon we'd be looking at about $109 or if they wanted to be good about it the Wireless Mighty Mouse could come in at the $99 mark.
Not too bad really, the competition in laser wireless mouses from MS, Logitech etc are all priced similarly but the Mighty Mouse comes with some better stuff.
The Logitech mx1000 is about $159.
I reckon we'd be looking at about $109 or if they wanted to be good about it the Wireless Mighty Mouse could come in at the $99 mark.
Not too bad really, the competition in laser wireless mouses from MS, Logitech etc are all priced similarly but the Mighty Mouse comes with some better stuff.
zap2
Apr 24, 09:35 AM
This would make a possible model for Videotron and Wind Mobile in Canada and probably give Apple more carrier options in other countries also. It makes sense in a non-US Centric view.
And looking at "carrier acquisitions" here, Rogers acquired Fido ages ago, yet even though the networks worked on the same GSM bands, they still haven't merged. An AT&T purchase of T-mobile would probably take years for a merge to even occur, and a few technology changes. AT&T isn't going to retrofit T-mobile's network and change their frequencies, requiring all the existing customer base to change phones.
So even in a US Centric view, it makes a lot of sense. Basically, don't let an AT&T acquisition of T-mobile trick you into thinking this is a false rumor.
No, it looks like AT&T is going to get ride of T Mobiles 3G so make room for 4G LTE.
Its really not a bad idea....turns the purchase of T Mobile into something more then just one time growth. Also unless everyone followed Nokia with pentaband 3G devices, it would start to become a hassle.
http://www.phonescoop.com/news/item.php?n=7762
And looking at "carrier acquisitions" here, Rogers acquired Fido ages ago, yet even though the networks worked on the same GSM bands, they still haven't merged. An AT&T purchase of T-mobile would probably take years for a merge to even occur, and a few technology changes. AT&T isn't going to retrofit T-mobile's network and change their frequencies, requiring all the existing customer base to change phones.
So even in a US Centric view, it makes a lot of sense. Basically, don't let an AT&T acquisition of T-mobile trick you into thinking this is a false rumor.
No, it looks like AT&T is going to get ride of T Mobiles 3G so make room for 4G LTE.
Its really not a bad idea....turns the purchase of T Mobile into something more then just one time growth. Also unless everyone followed Nokia with pentaband 3G devices, it would start to become a hassle.
http://www.phonescoop.com/news/item.php?n=7762
dextertangocci
Jul 28, 07:19 AM
It will FAIL!!!!!!!
Idiot M$:rolleyes:
Idiot M$:rolleyes:
commander.data
May 3, 08:25 AM
Did Canadian prices actually go down? The 27-inch: 3.1GHz is only $1999, when I think it was $2099 before the refresh.
It'd be nice to have price parity with USD given the strength of our dollar. I think that's achieved in the new iMacs, but the MacBook Pros are still unadjusted.
It'd be nice to have price parity with USD given the strength of our dollar. I think that's achieved in the new iMacs, but the MacBook Pros are still unadjusted.
itickings
Apr 14, 03:55 AM
I would think an iWatch would be a great seller for Apple.
Well, the iWatch (http://gizmodo.com/#!5634260/the-ipod-nano-watch-is-here-and-it-is-glorious) has been out for a while now, hasn't it? ;)
Well, the iWatch (http://gizmodo.com/#!5634260/the-ipod-nano-watch-is-here-and-it-is-glorious) has been out for a while now, hasn't it? ;)
bankshot
Nov 3, 06:12 PM
From the screenshots alone, it looks like a Cocoa app, which pretty much guarantees it'll be faster because it won't have the extra Qt bloated code in it ;)
Right, and Cocoa isn't the slightest bit bloated? :rolleyes: (can you say runtime messaging and binding overhead?)
Regardless of the relative difference in overhead, I'd expect it to be negligible in both cases. This is just the gui that sits around the virtual machine, a nice window dressing to make it accessible to the user. It should only be exercised when you're doing stuff like editing configurations or attaching devices. The real meat of either VMware or Parallels should have nothing to do with what gui toolkit they use to display the window.
It's exciting to see this finally moving along. I really think virtualization will play a much larger role in everyday computing in the future. Forget backwards compatibility nightmares, just virtualize it. I'm already hogging way too much disk space on my Macbook with a few Parallels VMs that I use on a regular basis. Whenever Apple releases an affordable desktop Mac that can take more than 4 GB of memory, I might check out VMware at that time and see if it's any better.
Right, and Cocoa isn't the slightest bit bloated? :rolleyes: (can you say runtime messaging and binding overhead?)
Regardless of the relative difference in overhead, I'd expect it to be negligible in both cases. This is just the gui that sits around the virtual machine, a nice window dressing to make it accessible to the user. It should only be exercised when you're doing stuff like editing configurations or attaching devices. The real meat of either VMware or Parallels should have nothing to do with what gui toolkit they use to display the window.
It's exciting to see this finally moving along. I really think virtualization will play a much larger role in everyday computing in the future. Forget backwards compatibility nightmares, just virtualize it. I'm already hogging way too much disk space on my Macbook with a few Parallels VMs that I use on a regular basis. Whenever Apple releases an affordable desktop Mac that can take more than 4 GB of memory, I might check out VMware at that time and see if it's any better.
Adidas Addict
Apr 28, 04:06 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
The apple two-for-one special - it's UGLY and FAT, and all you have to pay for is ugly.
God the iPhone 4 I'm trying this message on looks so much better than the white one.
Full of fail.....
The apple two-for-one special - it's UGLY and FAT, and all you have to pay for is ugly.
God the iPhone 4 I'm trying this message on looks so much better than the white one.
Full of fail.....
samcraig
Apr 29, 04:44 PM
Anyone arguing against this is an idiot.
First people complain about not having choices or prices being too high. Now there are more options and pricing is lower.
Wow. Just wow.
Well those addicted to Apple can still pay more for their songs. Enjoy. I won't stop you. Just like those that want to pay more for ebooks.
Personally - I'll shop it around and pay the best price whoever is selling it.
First people complain about not having choices or prices being too high. Now there are more options and pricing is lower.
Wow. Just wow.
Well those addicted to Apple can still pay more for their songs. Enjoy. I won't stop you. Just like those that want to pay more for ebooks.
Personally - I'll shop it around and pay the best price whoever is selling it.
rayz
Jul 31, 08:35 AM
I've seen the blue screen on XP. It's funny because I've been told by Windows users that it doesn't exist in XP, yet I witnessed it two weeks ago when a colleague of mine was trying to do something with Adobe Acrobat. The program just spazzed and the blue screen came up.
Entirely possible, but not necessarily a problem with XP. The operating system will immediately blue screen if an application attempts to write into an illegal memory area, which I've seem Acrobat do, and a Java application that used a native dll. I believe it's a security feature built into newer processors.
Zune?
The MS tactic will probably be the same as the one they used to defeat IBM, Apple and Palm; just keep throwing money at it, make gradual improvements until the competition makes a huge gaff and falls flat on it's face. They don't actually win; everyone else just kind of ... loses.
They've come from way behind before (remember when Palm had 90% of the PDA market) and ended up on top, but rarely on their own merits. Apple just has to keep up the marketing and keep adding value to the brand, and that should be enough to keep them ahead.
Entirely possible, but not necessarily a problem with XP. The operating system will immediately blue screen if an application attempts to write into an illegal memory area, which I've seem Acrobat do, and a Java application that used a native dll. I believe it's a security feature built into newer processors.
Zune?
The MS tactic will probably be the same as the one they used to defeat IBM, Apple and Palm; just keep throwing money at it, make gradual improvements until the competition makes a huge gaff and falls flat on it's face. They don't actually win; everyone else just kind of ... loses.
They've come from way behind before (remember when Palm had 90% of the PDA market) and ended up on top, but rarely on their own merits. Apple just has to keep up the marketing and keep adding value to the brand, and that should be enough to keep them ahead.
0 comments:
Post a Comment