doctor-don
Mar 29, 01:21 PM
Somebody got hold of Charlie's dope. :rolleyes:
rstansby
Apr 19, 11:21 PM
The logo on the center of the record, not the album artwork. The Beatle's logo looks like an apple to me, Apple's logo looks like an apple to me. We both know if the sides were reversed, Apple would have filed a suit.
Apple Corps (owned by the The Beatles) did sue Apple.
So there you have it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer
Apple Corps (owned by the The Beatles) did sue Apple.
So there you have it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer
spine
Sep 14, 06:54 AM
I think its very telling that Jobs closed the Showtime event by saying:
"Apple is in your den, living room, car, pocket. I think you see where we are going with this."
Is he saying that Apple's plan is to be everywhere?
Probably, and a cell phone certainly completes that plan.
"Apple is in your den, living room, car, pocket. I think you see where we are going with this."
Is he saying that Apple's plan is to be everywhere?
Probably, and a cell phone certainly completes that plan.
Phil A.
Aug 23, 07:07 PM
Don't 90% or more of the MP3 players on the market also infringe this patent (including the forthcoming Zune). By making this payout Apple have given Creative the means to fight other companies (such as Microsoft, Sandisk, etc) which could tie them up for years and possibly even delay the launch of Zune. Meanwhile, Apple have their nice license agreement and can continue unabated...
ClimbingTheLog
Sep 5, 11:01 AM
So with those numbers, a 720p stream with 5.1 audio should easily stream over even a 10 mbit network device. So I can easily see this working over 802.11g.
Your numbers are good but you assume 10mbps is easy with 802.11g because they advertise '54mbps' on the box.
In practice, you see half of that max, right next to the access point, without protocol overhead.
By time you get half way across a typical house from Mac to TV, you're lucky to see 3-4mpbs. I've tried this using 5-600kbps codecs and current wireless just doesn't cut it outside the lab.
That kind of reduction ratio on 802.11n is going to be fine for h.264 streaming. Apple won't wait a whole 'nother year for the standards committees to get their act in gear. When the chipset manufacturers are certain the shipping silicon will handle the release spec, Apple will release a pre-n unit. The stuff that was on the shelves last year probably is going to wind up not being upgradeable to the standard, due to silicon changes, so they were wise to wait. The timing is right.
Your numbers are good but you assume 10mbps is easy with 802.11g because they advertise '54mbps' on the box.
In practice, you see half of that max, right next to the access point, without protocol overhead.
By time you get half way across a typical house from Mac to TV, you're lucky to see 3-4mpbs. I've tried this using 5-600kbps codecs and current wireless just doesn't cut it outside the lab.
That kind of reduction ratio on 802.11n is going to be fine for h.264 streaming. Apple won't wait a whole 'nother year for the standards committees to get their act in gear. When the chipset manufacturers are certain the shipping silicon will handle the release spec, Apple will release a pre-n unit. The stuff that was on the shelves last year probably is going to wind up not being upgradeable to the standard, due to silicon changes, so they were wise to wait. The timing is right.
asphalt-proof
Sep 14, 08:10 AM
How to make it a best seller:
Being a true smart phone, capable of booting Mac OS X mobile (to be released) and thus being used as a wireless computerless remote for Keynote and PowerPoint presentations made on Mac or Windows.
Will sell millions on corporate, education and domestic markets.
With a huge halo effect!!!
That was my thought as well. Just as they did with the iPod and consumer identification. They could make serious inroads in business by showing them how to do integration right while looking cool at the same time. Blackberries and Treos are an integral part of the business person's life right now and introducing a phone with those functions (done better of course) in a beautiful form could change a lot of perceptions about Apple in the business community.
Apple could change their marketshare dramatically by getting businesses to 'switch'. With the option of running XP on Macware, its no longer an impossibility. Steve has been able to anticipate the consumer market pretty well, maybe he could do the same in the business arena.
Being a true smart phone, capable of booting Mac OS X mobile (to be released) and thus being used as a wireless computerless remote for Keynote and PowerPoint presentations made on Mac or Windows.
Will sell millions on corporate, education and domestic markets.
With a huge halo effect!!!
That was my thought as well. Just as they did with the iPod and consumer identification. They could make serious inroads in business by showing them how to do integration right while looking cool at the same time. Blackberries and Treos are an integral part of the business person's life right now and introducing a phone with those functions (done better of course) in a beautiful form could change a lot of perceptions about Apple in the business community.
Apple could change their marketshare dramatically by getting businesses to 'switch'. With the option of running XP on Macware, its no longer an impossibility. Steve has been able to anticipate the consumer market pretty well, maybe he could do the same in the business arena.
4God
Aug 28, 02:41 PM
Unfortunately, cats are known liars.
DOH!!!! 55999
DOH!!!! 55999
Coheebuzz
Aug 24, 06:18 AM
The article you are quoting was published two years ago....
Oh you are right, i didn't really check the date. But am sure it's somewhat related to this, since Woo was to invest some serious money to win the market, and now he has the serious money he needs.
100m is still a massive amount of cash, but only roughly 1/100 of Apples total cash. And Apple has gained a couple of things too like the 'made for iPod' logo on their No.1 competitor, which only standardizes the iPod even more.
Also the most important thing they gained is that they are now 'co-owners' of the patent. And when Creative decides to sue somebody else for patent infringement (Zune), Apple will join the fun too and am sure in that case they'll get most of their money back.
Oh you are right, i didn't really check the date. But am sure it's somewhat related to this, since Woo was to invest some serious money to win the market, and now he has the serious money he needs.
100m is still a massive amount of cash, but only roughly 1/100 of Apples total cash. And Apple has gained a couple of things too like the 'made for iPod' logo on their No.1 competitor, which only standardizes the iPod even more.
Also the most important thing they gained is that they are now 'co-owners' of the patent. And when Creative decides to sue somebody else for patent infringement (Zune), Apple will join the fun too and am sure in that case they'll get most of their money back.
cere
Apr 14, 02:02 PM
Yeah, it is. USB 3.0 is not that big of a step up from USB 2.0 so those that really need the extra bandwidth will not bother with it and go straight to Thunderbolt. Simple as that. Leave your rinky dink Toys R Us low bandwidth peripherals to USB and leave the big boy peripherals to Thunderbolt.
Sure you have, you've completely ignored my other post then changed the subject to reading comprehension to smokescreen the topic at hand. Oh and give me a break with your non-insult ********. You have been making jabs about short buses and taking comprehension classes over a Thunderbolt and USB discussion. If anything you are the one that needs to take some classes, maybe not on comprehension but I'm sure you get the idea.
Actually let's do a real recap:
You agree with a claim that Thunderbolt will be Mac only
I respond with an article that simply states it won't be
You respond with the reason it won't take off as manufacturers will have to add it separately
Econgeek tells you it's a completely different scenario because they don't need a license through Apple
I tell you Intel will be supporting both
You then start with your strawman argument and ignore a portion of what I stated
You also follow that up with some insults
I respond with video proof of why Thunderbolt will be popular with many devices
You ignore then respond with more insults
Honestly, can you try to post without arguing against claims I never made? That is at least 3 times now and it shows a lack of honesty or reading ability. I am not sure which.
I never said it was going to Mac only (though you have accused me of that twice). I agreed with the insinuation that it could be. I never said manufacturers would have to add it separately. I did say that the article you posted said only that it would be available to all and that it didn't say all would add it. Mainly, I said that, because you know, the article doesn't actually say that.
I think we are done. No point in debating someone that doesn't understand what he is reading and also makes up things to reply to. Arguing against someone that uses strawman arguments or misses common subtleties in language is bad enough. Arguing against someone that is making up things to argue against is pointless.
Sure you have, you've completely ignored my other post then changed the subject to reading comprehension to smokescreen the topic at hand. Oh and give me a break with your non-insult ********. You have been making jabs about short buses and taking comprehension classes over a Thunderbolt and USB discussion. If anything you are the one that needs to take some classes, maybe not on comprehension but I'm sure you get the idea.
Actually let's do a real recap:
You agree with a claim that Thunderbolt will be Mac only
I respond with an article that simply states it won't be
You respond with the reason it won't take off as manufacturers will have to add it separately
Econgeek tells you it's a completely different scenario because they don't need a license through Apple
I tell you Intel will be supporting both
You then start with your strawman argument and ignore a portion of what I stated
You also follow that up with some insults
I respond with video proof of why Thunderbolt will be popular with many devices
You ignore then respond with more insults
Honestly, can you try to post without arguing against claims I never made? That is at least 3 times now and it shows a lack of honesty or reading ability. I am not sure which.
I never said it was going to Mac only (though you have accused me of that twice). I agreed with the insinuation that it could be. I never said manufacturers would have to add it separately. I did say that the article you posted said only that it would be available to all and that it didn't say all would add it. Mainly, I said that, because you know, the article doesn't actually say that.
I think we are done. No point in debating someone that doesn't understand what he is reading and also makes up things to reply to. Arguing against someone that uses strawman arguments or misses common subtleties in language is bad enough. Arguing against someone that is making up things to argue against is pointless.
puma1552
Apr 22, 08:28 AM
Problems:
--Dependence on an internet connection. Deal breaker right there. Subways? Forget it.
--Buffer times
--Connection instability/loss
--Already way overstrained data networks contributing to the above
--Battery life will suffer if it's wifi
--And if it's 3G, well there's another bill in the mail every month. A recurring bill in the form of data charges to listen to my music I already paid for? No thank you. No, no, no thank you.
Since when did every device in the house need a monthly bill to go with it? AT&T provides a pretty crappy service as it is to begin with, why shuffle any more money right into their pockets?
Dependence on an internet connection and a bill in the mail are enormous deal breakers.
To the people saying "Oh, well Apple isn't taking your hard drive away", no, they aren't, but this is the first step. In 20 years hard drives will be obsolete, as everything will be cloud based, and you'll be forced into the cloud whether you want to be or not.
This service is a completely stupid idea for anyone who has an iPod with a big enough hard drive to store their stuff. I can see the appeal for those with more than 160 GB of music, but other than those people, I see literally zero benefits to be had by this, and a slew of problems/frustrations to be gained.
--Dependence on an internet connection. Deal breaker right there. Subways? Forget it.
--Buffer times
--Connection instability/loss
--Already way overstrained data networks contributing to the above
--Battery life will suffer if it's wifi
--And if it's 3G, well there's another bill in the mail every month. A recurring bill in the form of data charges to listen to my music I already paid for? No thank you. No, no, no thank you.
Since when did every device in the house need a monthly bill to go with it? AT&T provides a pretty crappy service as it is to begin with, why shuffle any more money right into their pockets?
Dependence on an internet connection and a bill in the mail are enormous deal breakers.
To the people saying "Oh, well Apple isn't taking your hard drive away", no, they aren't, but this is the first step. In 20 years hard drives will be obsolete, as everything will be cloud based, and you'll be forced into the cloud whether you want to be or not.
This service is a completely stupid idea for anyone who has an iPod with a big enough hard drive to store their stuff. I can see the appeal for those with more than 160 GB of music, but other than those people, I see literally zero benefits to be had by this, and a slew of problems/frustrations to be gained.
mwayne85
Apr 22, 12:54 PM
So I'm guessing the chances of them putting AMD graphics in one of these models is practically zero?
CrackedButter
Sep 19, 06:21 PM
Rather than a RAID, what they need is a foolproof NAS (Network-attached storage). A NAS is basically a special purpose computer that has a network port (wired/wireless) as well as internal/external storage through USB/SATA/eSATA. For example D-Link makes a NAS that is compatible with uPnP as well as Bonjour. This box has space for an internal hard drive (ATA) as well as USB2 for external HDs. It has 802.11g wireless as well as ethernet port. You just connect is as another network device in your home and then you can dump your media into it from your PC/Mac. So, for people with laptops, you can buy your media or RIP them into the NAS and then iTV can use it. This can work well for people with laptops. iTV should be able to work off of a NAS rather than a PC/Mac.
The current versions of NAS may not be foolproof (Apple quality standards) and therefore this is a companion product that Apple could produce for home media storage. Another advantage of the NAS is that it can be near where iTV is rather than the computer since the bandwidth requirements for iTV are more important than for the computer. You don't want glitches while playing back media. So, you could live with downloading the media from online into NAS directly (through a slower wireless connection). Then have the NAS connected through wired ethernet to iTV.
Hope this makes sense!!
Makes sense to me but you should be informing the other guy. :)
The current versions of NAS may not be foolproof (Apple quality standards) and therefore this is a companion product that Apple could produce for home media storage. Another advantage of the NAS is that it can be near where iTV is rather than the computer since the bandwidth requirements for iTV are more important than for the computer. You don't want glitches while playing back media. So, you could live with downloading the media from online into NAS directly (through a slower wireless connection). Then have the NAS connected through wired ethernet to iTV.
Hope this makes sense!!
Makes sense to me but you should be informing the other guy. :)
Gatorman
Sep 14, 09:32 AM
here we go again
apple are on fire at the moment.....bring it on
I was thinking the very same thing! :rolleyes:
apple are on fire at the moment.....bring it on
I was thinking the very same thing! :rolleyes:
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!!
cwt1nospam
Jan 12, 09:21 AM
Thanks for reminding me to put you on ignore. I know how easy it is to identify an operating system, but if they bothered to make a message just for Mac users it stands to reason they made malware for Mac users too. Or would they just make the message for fun? We all know what funny guys malware writers are.
For anyone who might buy into the above crap:
Many "virus writers" are script kiddies. They don't necessarily know much if anything about the Mac, so they assume that the virus they're using will work the same as on a PC. That's why they'll "make a message just for Mac users" even though it won't do anything. This of course doesn't mean that there aren't ever any Trojans for the Mac. There have been a few in the past and there certainly will be some in the future. There's just no need for antivirus software to detect these until and unless one or more of them become successful AND it takes Apple significantly longer to come out with a system update than it does the AV vendors to detect the threat and create a definition for it.
Why significantly longer? Because AV software costs you time and money while it slows your system down and potentially creates new vectors for viruses to attack your system! Software updates are free, don't slow your system down or make it more vulnerable, and unless they're long delayed the odds are excellent that you will not see the attack on your system before receiving the update.
This all applies to IOS too, except that because IOS is locked down to the point where the only way to get an application is through the app store it is practically impossible to create and transmit a trojan, let a lone a virus.
For anyone who might buy into the above crap:
Many "virus writers" are script kiddies. They don't necessarily know much if anything about the Mac, so they assume that the virus they're using will work the same as on a PC. That's why they'll "make a message just for Mac users" even though it won't do anything. This of course doesn't mean that there aren't ever any Trojans for the Mac. There have been a few in the past and there certainly will be some in the future. There's just no need for antivirus software to detect these until and unless one or more of them become successful AND it takes Apple significantly longer to come out with a system update than it does the AV vendors to detect the threat and create a definition for it.
Why significantly longer? Because AV software costs you time and money while it slows your system down and potentially creates new vectors for viruses to attack your system! Software updates are free, don't slow your system down or make it more vulnerable, and unless they're long delayed the odds are excellent that you will not see the attack on your system before receiving the update.
This all applies to IOS too, except that because IOS is locked down to the point where the only way to get an application is through the app store it is practically impossible to create and transmit a trojan, let a lone a virus.
bdj21ya
Oct 12, 05:13 PM
100% confirmed.
via Chicago Tribune:
http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/5016/25865863uz2.jpg
Nice! Still doesn't answer the mystery of the clickwheel color though
via Chicago Tribune:
http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/5016/25865863uz2.jpg
Nice! Still doesn't answer the mystery of the clickwheel color though
Westside guy
Sep 14, 10:59 AM
Why do people seem convinced Apple won't release something like an SLR or video camera?
If you'd followed the dSLR world at all over the past two years, you wouldn't ask this question. :) Canon and Nikon are doing well; most everyone else is dropping like flies. Sony is trying to pick up the pieces that were Konica-Minolta's dSLR business, but at best they're going to be a distant third behind the Big Two. Pentax and Olympus are holding on as far as I know, but they are not doing well.
It would be a very poor move for Apple, and I have no doubt they realize this. You might think Apple has a rabid fan base to draw on - go read any "Nikon vs. Canon" thread on any photo discussion board sometime to see REAL rabidity. :D
If you'd followed the dSLR world at all over the past two years, you wouldn't ask this question. :) Canon and Nikon are doing well; most everyone else is dropping like flies. Sony is trying to pick up the pieces that were Konica-Minolta's dSLR business, but at best they're going to be a distant third behind the Big Two. Pentax and Olympus are holding on as far as I know, but they are not doing well.
It would be a very poor move for Apple, and I have no doubt they realize this. You might think Apple has a rabid fan base to draw on - go read any "Nikon vs. Canon" thread on any photo discussion board sometime to see REAL rabidity. :D
evilgEEk
Sep 19, 03:05 PM
I just feel like there are many more people like me that will prefer to have physical movie versus a "digital" counterpart. Songs just seem more petty and i feel more comfortable downloading them, but movies... meh.
I remember a lot of people saying that about music when iTMS first came out. ;)
As good as this news is its not likely to appear outside the US for a LONG time... heck we still dont get TV shows!
Honestly I think movies will come to other countries before TV Shows do. Movies are more universal than TV Shows are, each country has their own TV Shows but everyone wants to watch Lord of the Rings.
I remember a lot of people saying that about music when iTMS first came out. ;)
As good as this news is its not likely to appear outside the US for a LONG time... heck we still dont get TV shows!
Honestly I think movies will come to other countries before TV Shows do. Movies are more universal than TV Shows are, each country has their own TV Shows but everyone wants to watch Lord of the Rings.
spicyapple
Sep 11, 09:37 PM
Since we are on the eve of the announcement, I thought I'd give my 2 cents. :)
I hoping for downloadable movies to own at either $9.99 or $14.99 and in high definition. It might be in 720P as a download service just can't compete with Netflix or walking to your friendly neighbourhood DVD rental store. And because the movies are in H.264, the download of HD movies should not take any more time than regular DVD, although if they released movies in 480P, it wouldn't be too bad, either, although with DRM and the time to download, doesn't make it competitive against DVD, plus you don't get the fancy packaging or the hard-disc copy.
I hoping for downloadable movies to own at either $9.99 or $14.99 and in high definition. It might be in 720P as a download service just can't compete with Netflix or walking to your friendly neighbourhood DVD rental store. And because the movies are in H.264, the download of HD movies should not take any more time than regular DVD, although if they released movies in 480P, it wouldn't be too bad, either, although with DRM and the time to download, doesn't make it competitive against DVD, plus you don't get the fancy packaging or the hard-disc copy.
jonregler
Apr 22, 01:43 PM
Checked these out at the airport again last week and love them. Perfect timing for me, I swore I'd hold out for Lion (unless my 2007 MBP dies by then), looks like I'll reap extra benefits for my somewhat difficult patience!
dizmonk
Jan 13, 05:20 PM
Ditto
I've been running Sophos for 3 months, with Time Machine via firewire, etc. No issues with either.
2.8ghz i7/16gb
I've been running Sophos for 3 months, with Time Machine via firewire, etc. No issues with either.
2.8ghz i7/16gb
Ugg
Apr 17, 03:23 PM
Published in USA today. An article titled "Are Lives Really an Acceptable Price for Fuel Efficiency?"
DDT's effects on malaria are well established, and the consequences of banning DDT in 1972 are also pretty widely accepted. People disagree, however, on whether it was a good thing or not.
and SuperCachetes, I was under the impression that US jobs were going out of the country bc we can't afford Union price tags. But if you "think" making labor more expensive will spur hiring, then keep "thinking" that with your "brain" ;)
Meanwhile, I'll be earning my degree from a top 25 university so that I can get a job that affords healthcare for my children
You're new here so please take a moment to read the rules. One of them quite clearly states that you need to provide links to relevant articles.
Thank You.
DDT's effects on malaria are well established, and the consequences of banning DDT in 1972 are also pretty widely accepted. People disagree, however, on whether it was a good thing or not.
and SuperCachetes, I was under the impression that US jobs were going out of the country bc we can't afford Union price tags. But if you "think" making labor more expensive will spur hiring, then keep "thinking" that with your "brain" ;)
Meanwhile, I'll be earning my degree from a top 25 university so that I can get a job that affords healthcare for my children
You're new here so please take a moment to read the rules. One of them quite clearly states that you need to provide links to relevant articles.
Thank You.
L-Fire
Apr 19, 11:25 AM
I had an iPhone 3G and even though I loved it, I decided to give Android a try. The Samsung Fascinate looked more like an iPhone than any other Android phone so I bought it.
Evangelion
Aug 29, 03:37 AM
yea, with tons of problems to the machines.
i love apple, but everytime i buy one of there laptops, they suck!
Then what is the problem here? You want Apple to announce new products "on time" and tell in advance when they are doing it. But you obviously are not interested in their laptops since "they suck". So why are you so concerned about this again?
i love apple, but everytime i buy one of there laptops, they suck!
Then what is the problem here? You want Apple to announce new products "on time" and tell in advance when they are doing it. But you obviously are not interested in their laptops since "they suck". So why are you so concerned about this again?
