diamond.g
Apr 19, 01:26 PM
Heh, if you can do it in 35 hours then it is not 40 hours worth of work, is it? :)
Touche!
Touche!
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.
Full of Win
Apr 4, 12:06 PM
Was It really necessary to kill him?
No
Yes, it was. Too bad it was not a bleeding injury so he could fell his life exiting from him. He was armed, and hence dangerous. When he, by his own volition, decided to take a gun into a crime - he surrendered any expectation of coming out of the robbery alive.
No
Yes, it was. Too bad it was not a bleeding injury so he could fell his life exiting from him. He was armed, and hence dangerous. When he, by his own volition, decided to take a gun into a crime - he surrendered any expectation of coming out of the robbery alive.
AtHomeBoy_2000
Aug 31, 01:06 PM
Apple Insider was saying the movie price would be $14.99 -I would not pay that much to watch a movie on a small screen... no way, unless I had a hour long commute to work on a train... can't believe there are that many people like that out there!
Everyone ASSUMES they will make these DVDs available via MP4. Who's to say they dont offer up an ISO file that is the FULL DVD (extra's and all)? Maybe even the full DVD encoded in MP4.
Everyone ASSUMES they will make these DVDs available via MP4. Who's to say they dont offer up an ISO file that is the FULL DVD (extra's and all)? Maybe even the full DVD encoded in MP4.
cube
May 3, 12:03 PM
Daisy chaining displays over the Display Port connector and/or the/a monitor or cabling that supports it not just Eyefinity.
:confused:
:confused:
Rodimus Prime
Apr 25, 01:11 AM
EDIT: @ Rodimus - Had she hit me when I slammed on the brakes, she would have been at fault. All I have to do is tell the cop that I thought I saw an animal run across the road. She is supposed to keep enough distance to be able to stop if I slam on the brakes. Doesn't matter than I cut her off, she has to prove that I did, and she also has to prove that I slammed on the breaks with malice.
-Don
umm good luck with that. My father has a ticket to prove other wise. He made the mistake and cut off a guy who was speeding by mistake. Cop handed him a ticket for illegal lane changed and the other guy a ticket for doing 20 over the limit.
It was declared a no fault and both were on their own. Both cars totaled.
You cut her off therefor made an unsafe lane changed. Legally you should of given her enough room to be able to adjust for you. Add to the fact you are 16 and chances are would be a witness or 2 saying you were speeding. Your word vs hers and your word is pretty worthless.
And if you did if they can prove malice or road rage you just increased your charges and heck could be nailed for insurance fraud as well.
You are proving to us all that you should not have a DL. You just are increasing the case that you should not be behind a wheel of a car.
On and do not use the argument that the car can do 186 mph. Sorry that is for another country. Top it off I am pretty sure my car can out handle your car.
I've seen people like the OP get pulled up and receive whopping great tickets from the cops. To say the least they look terrified about what their mum will say when she finds out. It makes me laugh.
Funny story. One time when I was driving back to TTU some idiot in a purple VW blew past me like I was standing still a little north of Houston. At the time I was doing 5-10 over the limit (75-80 mph). Scared the crap out me as they wiped right around me.
about 30-45 mins later I see the same purple VW pulled over and the driver was in hand cuffs. It was priceless.
-Don
umm good luck with that. My father has a ticket to prove other wise. He made the mistake and cut off a guy who was speeding by mistake. Cop handed him a ticket for illegal lane changed and the other guy a ticket for doing 20 over the limit.
It was declared a no fault and both were on their own. Both cars totaled.
You cut her off therefor made an unsafe lane changed. Legally you should of given her enough room to be able to adjust for you. Add to the fact you are 16 and chances are would be a witness or 2 saying you were speeding. Your word vs hers and your word is pretty worthless.
And if you did if they can prove malice or road rage you just increased your charges and heck could be nailed for insurance fraud as well.
You are proving to us all that you should not have a DL. You just are increasing the case that you should not be behind a wheel of a car.
On and do not use the argument that the car can do 186 mph. Sorry that is for another country. Top it off I am pretty sure my car can out handle your car.
I've seen people like the OP get pulled up and receive whopping great tickets from the cops. To say the least they look terrified about what their mum will say when she finds out. It makes me laugh.
Funny story. One time when I was driving back to TTU some idiot in a purple VW blew past me like I was standing still a little north of Houston. At the time I was doing 5-10 over the limit (75-80 mph). Scared the crap out me as they wiped right around me.
about 30-45 mins later I see the same purple VW pulled over and the driver was in hand cuffs. It was priceless.
SirROM
Aug 31, 09:53 PM
If Apple is planning to introduce a video iPod and movie service on the 12th, might it makes sense to release updates of some products, such as the MBP, the previous week, giving the full spotlight to the new products. There really doesn't need to be a special press event for an updated laptop, even if it does have a new case (as I don't expect it to be too different). It would certainly give Apple lots of positive press about the updates and fuel even more talk about what was coming the following week.
Just my usual 2� worth....
Just my usual 2� worth....
bruceyeah
Apr 27, 10:12 AM
I too am hanging out for a new MBA model before I jump in, and a backlit keyboard is the top of my list of must-have features. We have two unibody 2008 MacBooks in the house, only one of which has a backlit keyboard and not being a touch typist I really miss it when I use the other MacBook by mistake.
Anyway... has anyone else noticed that Apple will have a tricky design problem on their hands if they were to introduce a backlit keyboard into the new MBA design? Basically, they've got no room for the keyboard brightness keys!
When they brought out the 2010 MBA, they ditched the circular power button and added in a new 'power' key, to the right of the eject key. However this means that all the function keys have had their functions 'shifted' to the left, which was possible because there's no keyboard brightness up or down buttons needed in the function keys.
MacBook Pro
lt;free funny birthday cards for
top free funny birthday cards
More free email irthday cards
Funny Cat Birthday Cards
top free funny birthday cards
top free funny birthday cards
Free Printable Birthday Cards
top free funny birthday cards
best free funny birthday cards
top free funny birthday cards
Best free funny birthday cards
Anyway... has anyone else noticed that Apple will have a tricky design problem on their hands if they were to introduce a backlit keyboard into the new MBA design? Basically, they've got no room for the keyboard brightness keys!
When they brought out the 2010 MBA, they ditched the circular power button and added in a new 'power' key, to the right of the eject key. However this means that all the function keys have had their functions 'shifted' to the left, which was possible because there's no keyboard brightness up or down buttons needed in the function keys.
MacBook Pro
twoodcc
Oct 27, 11:00 AM
i'm not sure what to think about this. seems that i don't like them though
Freg3000
Nov 13, 04:05 PM
Just like every other copyright, you don't have the right to breech. If Apple doesn't defend their copyright, then they can lose it, so they HAVE to fight for it.
I believe you are mistaken. As far as I know, there is no risk of losing a copyright if you failed to defend against previous infringers. If I were to guess, I think you are talking about trademark law, which is different.
There are many classic examples, but currently Adobe has a policy where it seeks to prevent people from using "Photoshop" in a generalized way, since if it solidly becomes a synonym for digital photo manipulation in the language, they will lose their trademark. If Adobe is shown to not go after those who use Photoshop in a generalized manner, in the future they will be less able to defend against it in the future.
As far as I know, this has no relevancy to the current situation, since we are talking about copyright, not trademarks.
I believe you are mistaken. As far as I know, there is no risk of losing a copyright if you failed to defend against previous infringers. If I were to guess, I think you are talking about trademark law, which is different.
There are many classic examples, but currently Adobe has a policy where it seeks to prevent people from using "Photoshop" in a generalized way, since if it solidly becomes a synonym for digital photo manipulation in the language, they will lose their trademark. If Adobe is shown to not go after those who use Photoshop in a generalized manner, in the future they will be less able to defend against it in the future.
As far as I know, this has no relevancy to the current situation, since we are talking about copyright, not trademarks.
Intarweb
Apr 20, 10:59 AM
Section 4b: http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iphone.pdf
Fail. It says I can withdraw by turning off location services. It still collects even though location services are turned off. Try again Applogist.
Fail. It says I can withdraw by turning off location services. It still collects even though location services are turned off. Try again Applogist.
unobtainium
Apr 30, 01:16 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Just hope they don't decide to redesign the iMac the beginning of next year like they plan to do with the Macbooks.
Neither will be redesigned next year. Look at the length of time Apple stuck with the previous design. There are still a few years left to this "look."
Just hope they don't decide to redesign the iMac the beginning of next year like they plan to do with the Macbooks.
Neither will be redesigned next year. Look at the length of time Apple stuck with the previous design. There are still a few years left to this "look."
rpenzinger
Mar 23, 11:18 PM
Great news!
My six year old iMac G5 just gave up the ghost yesterday, so I am eagerly awaiting the new models.
I'm right behind you, my iMac G5 had a logic board issue...got it working though on all external drives...talk about slow
My six year old iMac G5 just gave up the ghost yesterday, so I am eagerly awaiting the new models.
I'm right behind you, my iMac G5 had a logic board issue...got it working though on all external drives...talk about slow
slackpacker
Apr 4, 12:38 PM
Obey the law or you may get shot. Rule #1
QCassidy352
Sep 9, 08:44 AM
I guess I've got mind whip lash from the transition to Intel. It's still kinda hard to wrap the mind around these speed improvments. I'm still used to the very modest speed bumps from the PPC days.
How wonderfully refreshing it is to see these leaps in speed with each product update. I hope this pace keeps up. Some may disagree, but I think it's spectacular compared to what we used to get from Moto/Freescale/IBM.
Nonsense. Maybe at the very end, but we used to see updates like 800mhz-->1Ghz. That's a 25% increase in performance (if processor power is the limiting factor). Even the G5 went dual 2.0 --> dual 2.5 in one jump, which is a bigger increase than this.
This is NOT the promised 20% increase; it's a 10% increase. Some areas may show more, but that only means that some show less.
I'm just not sure why everyone is so impressed with these imacs. The 24" was a great addition (and the low-end 17" for $1k is nice too), but the 17" and 20" are the same as the old models except for a processor speed bump and 1 GB RAM standard. All that for less money is not bad, but it's hardly thrilling considering that it's the first update in 8 months.
How wonderfully refreshing it is to see these leaps in speed with each product update. I hope this pace keeps up. Some may disagree, but I think it's spectacular compared to what we used to get from Moto/Freescale/IBM.
Nonsense. Maybe at the very end, but we used to see updates like 800mhz-->1Ghz. That's a 25% increase in performance (if processor power is the limiting factor). Even the G5 went dual 2.0 --> dual 2.5 in one jump, which is a bigger increase than this.
This is NOT the promised 20% increase; it's a 10% increase. Some areas may show more, but that only means that some show less.
I'm just not sure why everyone is so impressed with these imacs. The 24" was a great addition (and the low-end 17" for $1k is nice too), but the 17" and 20" are the same as the old models except for a processor speed bump and 1 GB RAM standard. All that for less money is not bad, but it's hardly thrilling considering that it's the first update in 8 months.
spicyapple
Sep 19, 03:52 PM
Ah, yes Casshan you are right. :) More reasons to stick with hard-copy DVDs.
ezekielrage_99
Aug 29, 08:06 AM
Me too!
Does your MacBook have a 5-7 day wait? C2D will be sweet :cool:
Does your MacBook have a 5-7 day wait? C2D will be sweet :cool:
srxtr
Mar 23, 05:44 PM
You should tell that to my son. Oh wait, you can't, he was murdered someone like you.
Is that really true? A drunk driver killed your son?
Is that really true? A drunk driver killed your son?
Multimedia
Sep 9, 12:47 PM
We won't see any real change until we hit Santa Rosa.
Kentsfield is two Conroes on a single die. They don't share cache like the previous Pentium D chips. So they'll each have 4 MB of cache and then communicate over the front side bus.This is why I think Apple has got to be thinking about how they can put Kentsfield and then Tigerton - or perhaps beginning with Tigerton if it's a lot cooler - into the next generation of iMacs. If they stick with Merom, they will not get to four mobile cores for another 1-2 years at the soonest - as I understand the roadmap.
Do we know Kentsfield pricing yet? Probably not.
I think a redesign of the iMac's cooling system is imperative so that they can keep Kentsfield/Tigerton cool inside the new design - at least in the 23" model + a 30" model next year. I like the perforated edge approach as a best possible solution depicted here in this 30" aluminum iMac mock-up (I have no idea who created this - sorry). I'm thinking the bottom and top edges would want to be perforated as well. In this mock-up, it's not clear they are.
Body could still be plastic. But Aluminum is a great heat conductor so the whole body would be air cooling the insides like non-fan aluminum hard drive cases do today.
Kentsfield is two Conroes on a single die. They don't share cache like the previous Pentium D chips. So they'll each have 4 MB of cache and then communicate over the front side bus.This is why I think Apple has got to be thinking about how they can put Kentsfield and then Tigerton - or perhaps beginning with Tigerton if it's a lot cooler - into the next generation of iMacs. If they stick with Merom, they will not get to four mobile cores for another 1-2 years at the soonest - as I understand the roadmap.
Do we know Kentsfield pricing yet? Probably not.
I think a redesign of the iMac's cooling system is imperative so that they can keep Kentsfield/Tigerton cool inside the new design - at least in the 23" model + a 30" model next year. I like the perforated edge approach as a best possible solution depicted here in this 30" aluminum iMac mock-up (I have no idea who created this - sorry). I'm thinking the bottom and top edges would want to be perforated as well. In this mock-up, it's not clear they are.
Body could still be plastic. But Aluminum is a great heat conductor so the whole body would be air cooling the insides like non-fan aluminum hard drive cases do today.
seashellz
Nov 13, 01:50 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
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
martygras9
Mar 23, 04:36 PM
Here in Sweden, the Police says that their goal is to increase safety, not catch people. I'd rather have a drunk driver stay at home because of an app warning of a checkpoint than get in the car and get caught.
That's the problem, though. People WILL go out after drinking, thinking they can circumvent the law.
That's the problem, though. People WILL go out after drinking, thinking they can circumvent the law.
chrono1081
Apr 4, 11:53 AM
Guys if you read the article the robber completely deserved it. Gunfire was exchanged, meaning they shot at the security guard who rightfully dispatched the piece of **** criminal.
I know for many in this thread its easy to play armchair security guard but in real life, if someone shoots at you and you know its you or them I'm pretty sure you'd shoot back.
I know for many in this thread its easy to play armchair security guard but in real life, if someone shoots at you and you know its you or them I'm pretty sure you'd shoot back.
whooleytoo
Oct 12, 03:58 PM
Maybe because all across the globe, women and children are hugely disadvantaged economically and socially in comparison to men? People who need more help should get more help.
Generally, that's a good point. But in this case I don't think it's significant: your average adult male in Africa is likely to be more affluent than the average adult female (or child), sure - but it's not as if he can afford quality healthcare either!
It's just people at two different levels of poverty, neither of whom can afford the healthcare they need.
Generally, that's a good point. But in this case I don't think it's significant: your average adult male in Africa is likely to be more affluent than the average adult female (or child), sure - but it's not as if he can afford quality healthcare either!
It's just people at two different levels of poverty, neither of whom can afford the healthcare they need.
Eidorian
Aug 28, 12:18 PM
Yeah for the portables, but Conroe for the desktop.Did you read the guide? You're talking about the iMac Core Duo, correct?