BC2009
Mar 30, 12:14 PM
Again that doesn't matter as the word Windows doesn't come from the IT industry but existed before. App however was created within the IT industry.
It does not matter if the term was created in the IT industry or not -- it matters if it has a generic defined meaning in that industry. Windows had a generic defined meaning in the IT industry before MS had a trademark. The single word in-and-of-itself was generic in that industry before any trademark existed -- and they got the trademark WITHOUT any descriptive modifiers on the end.
At least Apple is being more specific in their trademark and adding the word "store".
By the way... the term "application" and "app" were not first used in the IT industry either. People were filling out "employment apps" long before they were pounding keys on computers. Back then the word "app" meant a form you filled out (and continued to mean that even back when we referred to "apps" on computers as "programs")
I think that means I have debunked your "origin of the word in the IT industry" in two ways.
I still believe that while these terms are generic, we have many precedents (including Microsoft) of generic terms being given as trademarks.
If you were to describe the "Android Marketplace" it could still be described as an "app store" or "application store", but it could not be branded as "App Store" -- that's what a trademark means. Just like Mac OS could still be described as a "windows operating system" or OpenOffice can still be described as an "office productivity suite". Even names like "OpenOffice" "QuickOffice" are allowed as trademarks because they differentiate from the generic term for which a trademark exists.
Description and Branding/Trademarks are very different. Apple wants to use the term "App Store" as part of their brand. There will still be other things described as "app stores". Given what has been done by other companies I don't see why they should not be allowed.
It does not matter if the term was created in the IT industry or not -- it matters if it has a generic defined meaning in that industry. Windows had a generic defined meaning in the IT industry before MS had a trademark. The single word in-and-of-itself was generic in that industry before any trademark existed -- and they got the trademark WITHOUT any descriptive modifiers on the end.
At least Apple is being more specific in their trademark and adding the word "store".
By the way... the term "application" and "app" were not first used in the IT industry either. People were filling out "employment apps" long before they were pounding keys on computers. Back then the word "app" meant a form you filled out (and continued to mean that even back when we referred to "apps" on computers as "programs")
I think that means I have debunked your "origin of the word in the IT industry" in two ways.
I still believe that while these terms are generic, we have many precedents (including Microsoft) of generic terms being given as trademarks.
If you were to describe the "Android Marketplace" it could still be described as an "app store" or "application store", but it could not be branded as "App Store" -- that's what a trademark means. Just like Mac OS could still be described as a "windows operating system" or OpenOffice can still be described as an "office productivity suite". Even names like "OpenOffice" "QuickOffice" are allowed as trademarks because they differentiate from the generic term for which a trademark exists.
Description and Branding/Trademarks are very different. Apple wants to use the term "App Store" as part of their brand. There will still be other things described as "app stores". Given what has been done by other companies I don't see why they should not be allowed.
Konradx
Sep 11, 08:40 PM
anyone know the iMac 24" or 20" Response time?
Stridder44
Apr 4, 11:51 AM
The guard reportedly shot a male suspect in the head.
And nothing of value was lost.
And nothing of value was lost.
cadillaccactus
Sep 5, 03:57 PM
But as I said, for HOME viewing, is there a precedent for ads?
certainly not if you own the content. cds don't have ads, but radio does.
certainly not if you own the content. cds don't have ads, but radio does.
babyj
Sep 19, 03:44 PM
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'd of thought movies will come to the rest of the world pretty quickly. There shouldn't be any licensing issues so its probably more due to logistics than anything else.
TV is totally different as most of the main programmes are already licensed to other broadcasters for other markets. Which would make selling episodes online outside of the home market tricky, it'll happen one day but it will take time.
I doubt I'll be buying any movies or tv shows when they come to the UK, I've never bought a single tune before now from iTunes. I run about 6-12 months behind everyone else and buy cds and dvds when they've been reduced, it works out a lot cheaper.
I'd of thought movies will come to the rest of the world pretty quickly. There shouldn't be any licensing issues so its probably more due to logistics than anything else.
TV is totally different as most of the main programmes are already licensed to other broadcasters for other markets. Which would make selling episodes online outside of the home market tricky, it'll happen one day but it will take time.
I doubt I'll be buying any movies or tv shows when they come to the UK, I've never bought a single tune before now from iTunes. I run about 6-12 months behind everyone else and buy cds and dvds when they've been reduced, it works out a lot cheaper.
Multimedia
Sep 9, 02:16 PM
Heh, that's pretty funny. I have quite a few applications that'll hit one core at 100%. (Q emulator is the best example) Luckily, even though it's not multi-threaded a have another core free to do my work while Q eats up 100% of one.
I run Windows 98 in Q for laughs. I liked Windows 98...Exactly. A perfect example where one application topping out on only one core leaves the entire other one for other stuff. Probably a good thing to have that limit.
In fact, in future, I could see where application developers let the user in preferences tell the application how many cores to be allowed to use. Give the user a choice of how many cores he/she wants a particular process to use. That would be a way cool improvement in all application preferences. Would prevent any one applicaiton from hosing the computer due to core hogging.
I run Windows 98 in Q for laughs. I liked Windows 98...Exactly. A perfect example where one application topping out on only one core leaves the entire other one for other stuff. Probably a good thing to have that limit.
In fact, in future, I could see where application developers let the user in preferences tell the application how many cores to be allowed to use. Give the user a choice of how many cores he/she wants a particular process to use. That would be a way cool improvement in all application preferences. Would prevent any one applicaiton from hosing the computer due to core hogging.
3goldens
Apr 4, 12:05 PM
shot in the head! seems a little severe for a mall cop!
CalBoy
Mar 30, 11:49 AM
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/app
278891
I think this is enough to show that Microsoft is unequivocally correct. The term has been in use for much longer than Apple's launching of the store and it has been ubiquitous in the computer industry for a long time.
The way to distinguish (if it needs to be done) between app stores is by saying the name of the app store before hand, ie the Apple App Store, the Amazon App Store, or the Microsoft App Store.
278891
I think this is enough to show that Microsoft is unequivocally correct. The term has been in use for much longer than Apple's launching of the store and it has been ubiquitous in the computer industry for a long time.
The way to distinguish (if it needs to be done) between app stores is by saying the name of the app store before hand, ie the Apple App Store, the Amazon App Store, or the Microsoft App Store.
GGJstudios
Mar 17, 10:01 PM
And this idea that nothing can be done on the Mac until a virus or other malware exploit shows up on a news site is absurd.
Prove otherwise.
There are plenty of tools out there, for instance, to point out dangerous web sites that could be a threat to a computer.
Name one tool that can detect a Mac OS X virus. Just one.
Prove otherwise.
There are plenty of tools out there, for instance, to point out dangerous web sites that could be a threat to a computer.
Name one tool that can detect a Mac OS X virus. Just one.
antster94
Apr 4, 11:56 AM
Seems unfair to kill someone for robbery. Yes they're breaking the law, but only deserve a prison sentence. Do you really really think someone should be shot and killed for attempting to steal a few laptops and smash a few windows? If you do then man you have issues.
Ampidire
Apr 22, 01:43 PM
I've decided the SB refresh on this machine will be my next purchase, it's perfect for me in school and I no longer need the powerhouse MBP I have now.
I just didn't wanna buy a C2D, the nVidia IGP is nice yes, but I don't game on my MBP as it is, so what do I have to lose other than weight..
I just didn't wanna buy a C2D, the nVidia IGP is nice yes, but I don't game on my MBP as it is, so what do I have to lose other than weight..
rmhop81
Apr 22, 04:06 PM
This isn't the content of music on iTunes isn't DRM protected, furthermore I still own the content (even the DRM) as I can do exactly what I want with it. I can back it up, move it between devices, and have absolutely no dependence on sustainable bandwidth, company's servers, and policy changes revolving around the use of the server.
As for your netflix comment, there have been plenty of times that Netflix has removed content from their servers that was previously available, if I actually own the content I don't even have to worry about the company removing availability of item <x>.
Streaming content is inferior to downloaded content, it depends on a reliable connection, it depends on your bandwidth not being capped or being regulated to a lower setting because you went over (it'd be pretty easy to stream videos and go over your limit especially in HD).
With the recent iPhone privacy fiasco, APPLE would be the LAST company on earth that I would want to depend on.
As a backup option I think its great, as a primary service that eliminates the concept of downloading and owning your content, its complete bull. I'm not paying money for content that essentially stays in someone else's computer that they could do what they want with it at ANY time. Forget it.
speed, quality and reliability through internet connections is absolutely INFERIOR than when it is run from a hard drive (avg transfer for a hard drive in 2007 was 1030 MBits (128MB/sec) or flash memory (even the lowest class runs at 2MB/sec, which is more than most people can get in their internet connection).
If it goes further to where computers start using cloud services just to run and store their computer it becomes a) a privacy issue, b) a security issue. People like their privacy and like to own stuff they pay for.
who is to say you can't do the same with the cloud service? why can't you download ur music from the cloud to your computer?
Why is it now OK to be a backup service? they are still going to have your data....why does it matter if it's your primary version or a backup?
There is a reason why this has come about. if it was so stupid it wouldn't be happening. People can be really weird about "owning" things. I have friends who collect thousands of dvds. wow, to view 1-2 times. what a waste.
I guess the music and documents i have in idisk i don't own either right?
I was referring to netflix bc the content one may like is there. maybe not all of it, but with the apple option on the cloud you'd have that option to load what you want to listen to.....aka you would choose the playlist.
If netflix had that option for movies. Why would you spend thousands of dollars buying dvds when you can have it at a subscription price in the cloud?
As for your netflix comment, there have been plenty of times that Netflix has removed content from their servers that was previously available, if I actually own the content I don't even have to worry about the company removing availability of item <x>.
Streaming content is inferior to downloaded content, it depends on a reliable connection, it depends on your bandwidth not being capped or being regulated to a lower setting because you went over (it'd be pretty easy to stream videos and go over your limit especially in HD).
With the recent iPhone privacy fiasco, APPLE would be the LAST company on earth that I would want to depend on.
As a backup option I think its great, as a primary service that eliminates the concept of downloading and owning your content, its complete bull. I'm not paying money for content that essentially stays in someone else's computer that they could do what they want with it at ANY time. Forget it.
speed, quality and reliability through internet connections is absolutely INFERIOR than when it is run from a hard drive (avg transfer for a hard drive in 2007 was 1030 MBits (128MB/sec) or flash memory (even the lowest class runs at 2MB/sec, which is more than most people can get in their internet connection).
If it goes further to where computers start using cloud services just to run and store their computer it becomes a) a privacy issue, b) a security issue. People like their privacy and like to own stuff they pay for.
who is to say you can't do the same with the cloud service? why can't you download ur music from the cloud to your computer?
Why is it now OK to be a backup service? they are still going to have your data....why does it matter if it's your primary version or a backup?
There is a reason why this has come about. if it was so stupid it wouldn't be happening. People can be really weird about "owning" things. I have friends who collect thousands of dvds. wow, to view 1-2 times. what a waste.
I guess the music and documents i have in idisk i don't own either right?
I was referring to netflix bc the content one may like is there. maybe not all of it, but with the apple option on the cloud you'd have that option to load what you want to listen to.....aka you would choose the playlist.
If netflix had that option for movies. Why would you spend thousands of dollars buying dvds when you can have it at a subscription price in the cloud?
WannaGoMac
Apr 11, 08:21 AM
Because what I ultimately want is an airplay/airmusic station ready to play from any of the 9 iOS/iTunes devices in the house wirelessly in the family area.
Home sharing from your Mac won't do that?
Home sharing from your Mac won't do that?
ryantheredder
Sep 19, 03:15 PM
FWIW, the average size per minute of Apple's 720p trailers are 50MB. So a 120 minute movie would be around 6GB to download or about 2 hours on an 8Mb connection. Almost watchable in real time providing perfect network conditions.
triceretops
May 3, 11:30 AM
Who has room for two external displays on a desk that already has a 27" iMac?!
I do. Probably have room for 3.:D
I do. Probably have room for 3.:D
BRLawyer
Sep 9, 01:42 PM
Cube? 24" iMac?
Actually it's gonna the 30th Ann. Mac. Apple is not doing a mass-produced headless Mac.
Actually it's gonna the 30th Ann. Mac. Apple is not doing a mass-produced headless Mac.
La Porta
Apr 4, 11:44 AM
Wow, that's awesome! Good example for other criminals.
BrianMojo
Sep 4, 08:17 PM
TV shows are US only, but I doubt Movies will be US only. That would be like music being US only? TV shows are a different animal.
They sure are a different animal; Hollywood thrives on sales outside of the US. Even though all you often hear about is domestic US take on a movie, often the worldwide sales match and far surpass that number. So even though television studios may worry (and rightfully so) about their content translating to different cultures, Hollywood has been making movies universal for years for just that reason.
They sure are a different animal; Hollywood thrives on sales outside of the US. Even though all you often hear about is domestic US take on a movie, often the worldwide sales match and far surpass that number. So even though television studios may worry (and rightfully so) about their content translating to different cultures, Hollywood has been making movies universal for years for just that reason.
iGary
Sep 12, 02:33 PM
This update/release is lame.
cvaldes
Mar 22, 04:25 PM
There's pretty much no news in this news piece.
We know it's going to include Sandy Bridge and Thunderbolt. We know it's unlikely to be re-designed and we know it's going to be between now and May.
Where's the news here?
We need specs. Some CPU and other info, at least.
You'll find out when the rest of us find out: when Apple posts the specs to the new hardware at www.apple.com.
Don't forget: this is MacRumors.com, not MacNews.com.
And if you are looking for specs from unannounced products from Apple, you are going to quickly get used to being disappointed.
We know it's going to include Sandy Bridge and Thunderbolt. We know it's unlikely to be re-designed and we know it's going to be between now and May.
Where's the news here?
We need specs. Some CPU and other info, at least.
You'll find out when the rest of us find out: when Apple posts the specs to the new hardware at www.apple.com.
Don't forget: this is MacRumors.com, not MacNews.com.
And if you are looking for specs from unannounced products from Apple, you are going to quickly get used to being disappointed.
splogue
Apr 30, 09:03 PM
USB 3 is coming next year. The only reason Apple has yet to implement it is because Intel hasn't. But that will change in Ivy Bridge.
Agreed. USB is on its last legs, for sure, but it will be around a little while longer before it fades away.
When Intel supports it, Apple will, because it will cost essentially nothing for them to do so, and is backward compatible with previous USB devices.
But, I don't think we'll be seeing a USB 4.
Sean
Agreed. USB is on its last legs, for sure, but it will be around a little while longer before it fades away.
When Intel supports it, Apple will, because it will cost essentially nothing for them to do so, and is backward compatible with previous USB devices.
But, I don't think we'll be seeing a USB 4.
Sean
andys53
Apr 20, 12:15 PM
It's an option in iTunes, right on the main sync page when you choose your device. Nothing obscure.
Glad you noticed my advice way back on page 4 post no. 89. I know submitted it for a reason.
Glad you noticed my advice way back on page 4 post no. 89. I know submitted it for a reason.
Ugg
Sep 19, 06:32 PM
I thought TV shows in iTunes won't be a hit, why would any one need to pay $1.99 for the stuff, that is already available in cable, sat, Tivo, DVD's, Block buster, feely on the air in SDTV/HDTV, etc.. and all viewable on big screen TV.:confused:
I don't have cable and have no desire to get it. But for the roughly $50 a month that cable costs, I can buy 20 televsion shows on the iTMS, to me that's a good deal. Why spend money every month for something I'd rarely if ever use?
I don't have cable and have no desire to get it. But for the roughly $50 a month that cable costs, I can buy 20 televsion shows on the iTMS, to me that's a good deal. Why spend money every month for something I'd rarely if ever use?
cube
Apr 23, 08:14 AM
Yes, built-in 3G is more costly to buy, usually locked into a particular carrier (what do you mean I can't switch my 1500$ laptop to a new carrier ?) and with the Rev D's 2nd USB port being next to a display port, the "extension" cable is moot.
So you are quite missing tons of things. The current scheme of "get a stick from your carrier" is the best as far as costs and carrier non-attachment go. I tether to my iPhone using Bluetooth anyhow, making the USB thing even more moot.
Built-in 3G is overrated.
If you build a laptop, you're not forced to lock it to a carrier.
Cellular sticks suck.
At the least, all laptops should have ExpressCard.
So you are quite missing tons of things. The current scheme of "get a stick from your carrier" is the best as far as costs and carrier non-attachment go. I tether to my iPhone using Bluetooth anyhow, making the USB thing even more moot.
Built-in 3G is overrated.
If you build a laptop, you're not forced to lock it to a carrier.
Cellular sticks suck.
At the least, all laptops should have ExpressCard.
0 comments:
Post a Comment