BenRoethig
Aug 29, 08:00 AM
Michael Dell as a PERSON made those comments. Since then he has said that he would sell Mac OS X in a heartbeat. The public doesn't hear those comments. We hear them, but not the general public.
I am talking about messages the general public does see: magazine and TV ads.
Apple's ads are about PCs being bad and Macs being good.
They don't say Dell or HP. But who makes PC's?
I have never seen a PC manufacturer put out an ad that attacks Macs.
When Dell made those comments, Apple was a mess. Has anyone ever actually read the rest if the article for context? Beleive it or not, things actually change in a decade. If Steve Jobs had not taken over when he did, it is likely that the company would have folded. Even then it was touch and go for a couple years. What has changed? Apple has gone from behind in almost every single category to carving out its own niche of the market and releasing new innovative products.
I am talking about messages the general public does see: magazine and TV ads.
Apple's ads are about PCs being bad and Macs being good.
They don't say Dell or HP. But who makes PC's?
I have never seen a PC manufacturer put out an ad that attacks Macs.
When Dell made those comments, Apple was a mess. Has anyone ever actually read the rest if the article for context? Beleive it or not, things actually change in a decade. If Steve Jobs had not taken over when he did, it is likely that the company would have folded. Even then it was touch and go for a couple years. What has changed? Apple has gone from behind in almost every single category to carving out its own niche of the market and releasing new innovative products.
CapturedDarknes
Nov 13, 10:20 PM
99% of these are in a huff self important 'tempest in a teapot' stories;
its not required-nay not even helpful to be a fanboy to point this out-just 2 good eyes and a brain;
Alway been complainers, always will be;
If the rules are clearly spelled out and they dont follow them-then they shouldnt be crybabies in public
simple
CAREFULLY read APPLEs developers rules
follow them
dont try to breach them
Amen! You are on the dot! Everyone (including developers) complain about their app not getting approved for one reason or another, and yet it's always because they breached the Developers Guide for the App Store. Just ******** get a printer and print the damn pdf out. Then, step two, READ it. Then, before you go and submit the app, use it yourself and see if it follows the guidelines.
It's like high school, when the teacher gives you a RUBRIC to FOLLOW, when you FAIL, it's because you didn't follow it. So shut up, or nut up. And build a better app. Hopefully one that doesn't say "that's what she says". :mad:
its not required-nay not even helpful to be a fanboy to point this out-just 2 good eyes and a brain;
Alway been complainers, always will be;
If the rules are clearly spelled out and they dont follow them-then they shouldnt be crybabies in public
simple
CAREFULLY read APPLEs developers rules
follow them
dont try to breach them
Amen! You are on the dot! Everyone (including developers) complain about their app not getting approved for one reason or another, and yet it's always because they breached the Developers Guide for the App Store. Just ******** get a printer and print the damn pdf out. Then, step two, READ it. Then, before you go and submit the app, use it yourself and see if it follows the guidelines.
It's like high school, when the teacher gives you a RUBRIC to FOLLOW, when you FAIL, it's because you didn't follow it. So shut up, or nut up. And build a better app. Hopefully one that doesn't say "that's what she says". :mad:
Dmac77
Apr 25, 02:18 AM
This is the same attitude that people like Bernie Madoff, Kenneth Lay, etc had as they totally scammed thousands of people out of billions of dollars.
Well I will openly admit that I have a low opinion of those who get burned in investment scams. If you're stupid enough to think you're going to get the kind of returns promised to you by the likes of Madoff, then you deserve to lose your money. But that's off topic.
-Don
Well I will openly admit that I have a low opinion of those who get burned in investment scams. If you're stupid enough to think you're going to get the kind of returns promised to you by the likes of Madoff, then you deserve to lose your money. But that's off topic.
-Don
Jowl
Apr 11, 03:00 AM
What I don't get is why can't Apple enable any iOS device (iPod Touch, iPhone, iPad) as an Airplay target device? Obviously iOS supports it as Apple TV can be a target for Airplay from iTunes.
AirFrame (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBYQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fitunes.apple.com%2Fus%2Fapp%2Fairframe%2Fid416480052%3Fmt%3D8&rct=j&q=airframe%20itunes&ei=6bSiTYuHCZGwhAfMuaDxBA&usg=AFQjCNEFFllGAXPM2zbfQOCBM6D-_HZzHw&cad=rja) allows sending video between iOS devices. I've sucesfully used it from iPhone to iPad
AirFrame (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBYQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fitunes.apple.com%2Fus%2Fapp%2Fairframe%2Fid416480052%3Fmt%3D8&rct=j&q=airframe%20itunes&ei=6bSiTYuHCZGwhAfMuaDxBA&usg=AFQjCNEFFllGAXPM2zbfQOCBM6D-_HZzHw&cad=rja) allows sending video between iOS devices. I've sucesfully used it from iPhone to iPad
Tommyg117
Aug 31, 07:18 PM
great news on the movie store and on the core 2 duo laptops! Can't wait, better break out the paycheck!
AppleMacDudeG4
Apr 28, 07:53 PM
Apple is doing extremely we'll in a lot of markets. Microsoft does well in the corporate market but they are not flashy or innovative in terms of their core market. Microsoft does well because corporations have settled on Windows / Office combination. Since it does well for their purposes, it is enough to sustain them.
Congratulations to Apple for doing so well but do not feel bad for Microsoft.
Congratulations to Apple for doing so well but do not feel bad for Microsoft.
mikes63737
Sep 12, 05:13 PM
Can you say "One More Thing 2"? :D
I'm glad that Apple isn't forcing all you with 5G iPods to buy new ones for the new features.
I'm glad that Apple isn't forcing all you with 5G iPods to buy new ones for the new features.
TallManNY
Mar 22, 01:23 PM
Good news. My Mom needs a new iMac due to screen issues on her ancient machine, so she will be getting my hand-me-down 24-inch Core 2 and I will be buying an upgrade. I would like to see the 24-inch come back, but will probably consider and go with the 27-inch.
Hope these machines don't run too hot or have too many mechanical problems. As long as Apple doesn't unnecessarily try to make these things another 1/4 inch thin, then I'm guessing these are okay right off the bat.
Hope these machines don't run too hot or have too many mechanical problems. As long as Apple doesn't unnecessarily try to make these things another 1/4 inch thin, then I'm guessing these are okay right off the bat.
p0intblank
Sep 14, 11:32 AM
Maybe they are revealing the new iPew so that we can plug in while saying our iPenance. Apple is reaching out to the neoconservative right with their podcasts from God. New Market....We've got a new market here....;) :D :D
"Father bless me for I have iSinned. I will say my iRosary while it plays all my podcasts from iGod." ;) :rolleyes:
mT
Haha, now you're going to have me thinking about this while I am in mass next Sunday. :p
"Father bless me for I have iSinned. I will say my iRosary while it plays all my podcasts from iGod." ;) :rolleyes:
mT
Haha, now you're going to have me thinking about this while I am in mass next Sunday. :p
phatspider
Sep 14, 10:44 AM
Is that wise? The camera in cellphones is at best a sorry excuse. Introducing a crappy camera at photokina... I don't know
Still I would love to see the iPhone.
Think we've moved on some what from the crappy cameras in phones
My latest phone has a 3.2 MP cam - with optical zoom.
In fact - its better than my camera was last year!
Still I would love to see the iPhone.
Think we've moved on some what from the crappy cameras in phones
My latest phone has a 3.2 MP cam - with optical zoom.
In fact - its better than my camera was last year!
edcrosay
Aug 23, 05:37 PM
I hope this eventually leads to Sound Blaster support for macs.
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.
e28
Oct 12, 01:01 PM
Umm... how does Penelope Cruz and "convertible" have anything to do with an iPod? Just because Bono, Kanye West, and "red" are together, I don't really see how that equals a new red iPod.
/Moke
Mar 29, 02:29 PM
No. Looser and looser = extra extra baggy! :D
LOL, I guess next time I try to insult people I should show my stupidity as mooch as that looser.
LOL, I guess next time I try to insult people I should show my stupidity as mooch as that looser.
jddar
Mar 22, 01:57 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
Wish I could afford to buy a 27-inch one. I got a refund after returning several of the 2009 model for various display issues. I still lust after that computer--aside from those issues, it was by far the best computer I ever owned. I just ordered a new iPad 2. So, I'll likely have to wait for the next incarnation of the iMac. Definitely, soon, I will get another iMac. The iMac and iPad are the perfect combination for my needs.
Wish I could afford to buy a 27-inch one. I got a refund after returning several of the 2009 model for various display issues. I still lust after that computer--aside from those issues, it was by far the best computer I ever owned. I just ordered a new iPad 2. So, I'll likely have to wait for the next incarnation of the iMac. Definitely, soon, I will get another iMac. The iMac and iPad are the perfect combination for my needs.
woodman
Sep 14, 01:23 AM
Instead of having a slide-down clickwheel that reveals buttons, why not just have the clickwheel behave like those old roatary phones. You can just scroll around a circle of numbers on the screen and click to select it. That'd be cleaner. Of course text messages are a different thing :)
While I'm here, I'd just like to reiterate my belief that Apple will have it's own network and not offer its phone to other carriers (they don't want it anyway). They will lease lines like Boost or ESPN does.
Although I've been shot down on this before, I still believe it and I've even heard media mention the same thing, so I'd be willing to bet. (In fact my Jan-07 call options are a bet!).
While I'm here, I'd just like to reiterate my belief that Apple will have it's own network and not offer its phone to other carriers (they don't want it anyway). They will lease lines like Boost or ESPN does.
Although I've been shot down on this before, I still believe it and I've even heard media mention the same thing, so I'd be willing to bet. (In fact my Jan-07 call options are a bet!).
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.
Popeye206
Apr 19, 07:19 AM
I think you mean 4% of 142 million $.....
Samsung's worldwide turnover was only 138.4 billion for 2010. So I'm guessing Apple buys about $6 billion.
I was thinking the same thing... the numbers didn't make sense.
Samsung's worldwide turnover was only 138.4 billion for 2010. So I'm guessing Apple buys about $6 billion.
I was thinking the same thing... the numbers didn't make sense.
ftaok
Sep 26, 07:00 AM
who the hell are cingular? what about orange t-mobile, vodaphone or o2? I guess it's US only again...
Did you even read the link?
Speculation is that O2 will have the exclusive rights to the iPhone in Europe. You can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think O2 is somehow connected to Orange. So it looks like the iPhone will have a carrier in Europe and the UK.
Did you even read the link?
Speculation is that O2 will have the exclusive rights to the iPhone in Europe. You can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think O2 is somehow connected to Orange. So it looks like the iPhone will have a carrier in Europe and the UK.
chatin
Sep 5, 09:06 PM
They may have partnered with a network like Showtime for a movie library.
1) No HD. Way too much bandwidth here! As someone who edits HD, Mac Pro is underpowered for 1080i. (Not really!)
2) No first run movies like Walmart gets on the day of release. Although I wish, since I was capsized at Amazon, with a wrong version, scratched Poseidon.
But if one of the above proved untrue I would be very happy and start buying like crazy!! :p
1) No HD. Way too much bandwidth here! As someone who edits HD, Mac Pro is underpowered for 1080i. (Not really!)
2) No first run movies like Walmart gets on the day of release. Although I wish, since I was capsized at Amazon, with a wrong version, scratched Poseidon.
But if one of the above proved untrue I would be very happy and start buying like crazy!! :p
M-O
May 3, 10:16 AM
what about target display mode on the 21/24" models?
AidenShaw
Sep 9, 11:46 AM
Wanna bet that Napa64 is 100% identical to ordinary Napa, apart from the fact that the CPU is Merom, instead of Yonah? Since Napa is a platform, just chaning the CPU to something else would mean that the platform has been refreshed.
You may be right.
I couldn't find anything in the Intel technical documentation on the 945 to show a new revision or stepping of the chip - in fact most of the 945 docs at the Intel website don't mention the Core 2 at all....
You may be right.
I couldn't find anything in the Intel technical documentation on the 945 to show a new revision or stepping of the chip - in fact most of the 945 docs at the Intel website don't mention the Core 2 at all....
MarcelV
Sep 5, 04:59 AM
:confused:
What is this....
www.apple.com/movies
comes up with
Forbidden
You don't have permission to access /movies on this server.
What might this mean
:eek: I knew it, i knew it......... someone would find this link. It's an old link. old like in several years.
What is this....
www.apple.com/movies
comes up with
Forbidden
You don't have permission to access /movies on this server.
What might this mean
:eek: I knew it, i knew it......... someone would find this link. It's an old link. old like in several years.
macfan881
Sep 12, 03:29 PM
With The New Get Album artwork is it possible now to update the Artwork to the ipod now? :confused: cause i dont see any of the artwork that i have gotten on my ipod
0 comments:
Post a Comment