j26
Nov 22, 12:35 PM
Okay, I've heard here a lot, that people want simple integration/syncronization with iTunes, iPhoto, iCal, & Address Book. These are all, (minus iTunes) 100% Mac-Centric. PC users would only get integration/syncronization with iTunes. What good is that to them? At that point you only have iPod + Phone.
So Apple has a choice: Mac-Centric or not.
Knowing Apple, their first choice is "not" (which doesn't mean it will start out that way, but we'll just have to wait to find out). Apple would then have to either write iCal et al. for Windows or build in support for Outlook, ...uh... photo viewer... whatever PCs use for photos.
Both are daunting tasks.
Conclusion: In order for Apple to make a phone as good and as universal as the iPod, it will have to accomplish one of the aforementioned daunting tasks.
Making a phone for Mac users would be a walk in the park, because 1) it's such a small microcosm, 2) It's an environment that they are familiar with.
Making a phone for everyone will not be as easy. HOWEVER, Apple is great at building OSes (the iPod OS is simple & intuitive and I have no doubt that they will do the same with a phone) and Apple is great at integration with software, so even though there will be hurdles to overcome, Apple will eventually churn out a phone that is simple and is loved by everyone.
I also think there won't be a single serious Mac-User who won't have one. It'll just be too handy to have a device that will sync easily with the awesome Mac software.
-Clive
There's no reason why they will choose to exclude syncing with mac applications. iTunes for everyone, and extras for mac users. And really they would only have to write something that would deal with Outlook to cover most Windows users to keep everyone happy.
So Apple has a choice: Mac-Centric or not.
Knowing Apple, their first choice is "not" (which doesn't mean it will start out that way, but we'll just have to wait to find out). Apple would then have to either write iCal et al. for Windows or build in support for Outlook, ...uh... photo viewer... whatever PCs use for photos.
Both are daunting tasks.
Conclusion: In order for Apple to make a phone as good and as universal as the iPod, it will have to accomplish one of the aforementioned daunting tasks.
Making a phone for Mac users would be a walk in the park, because 1) it's such a small microcosm, 2) It's an environment that they are familiar with.
Making a phone for everyone will not be as easy. HOWEVER, Apple is great at building OSes (the iPod OS is simple & intuitive and I have no doubt that they will do the same with a phone) and Apple is great at integration with software, so even though there will be hurdles to overcome, Apple will eventually churn out a phone that is simple and is loved by everyone.
I also think there won't be a single serious Mac-User who won't have one. It'll just be too handy to have a device that will sync easily with the awesome Mac software.
-Clive
There's no reason why they will choose to exclude syncing with mac applications. iTunes for everyone, and extras for mac users. And really they would only have to write something that would deal with Outlook to cover most Windows users to keep everyone happy.
mdlooker
Apr 7, 12:13 PM
Though competition is a desired aspect in any market, from a buyers standpoint, there is still that demand variable.
I believe that even if Apple takes total market consumption, because it seems to be going that way, the price will dictate how sturdy the dominance will be. So long as they keep the prices affordable, they will have no problems.
Same applies with with their Macs. If they were to lower the prices, the profit margin would take a big hit but a slow market saturation would occur.
We need innovation and great experiences, but price moves that demand curve.
I believe that even if Apple takes total market consumption, because it seems to be going that way, the price will dictate how sturdy the dominance will be. So long as they keep the prices affordable, they will have no problems.
Same applies with with their Macs. If they were to lower the prices, the profit margin would take a big hit but a slow market saturation would occur.
We need innovation and great experiences, but price moves that demand curve.
KnightWRX
Apr 24, 01:26 PM
More likely that they are producing a higher res iMac display first.
Bingo. That or a higher resolution ACD (new 30" ?).
And this site has the most archaic, convoluted commenting sign-up/system I have ever seen.
I like the forum style a lot more than flat commenting a la Facebook and other blogs. Discussions are easier to follow and BBcode allows much more flexibility in posting. This is a forum, not some blog with 1-liner comments.
Bingo. That or a higher resolution ACD (new 30" ?).
And this site has the most archaic, convoluted commenting sign-up/system I have ever seen.
I like the forum style a lot more than flat commenting a la Facebook and other blogs. Discussions are easier to follow and BBcode allows much more flexibility in posting. This is a forum, not some blog with 1-liner comments.
rosalindavenue
Aug 11, 08:24 PM
I just read this whole thread (yeah, big Friday night for me) and I can't believe that there is NOT ONE POST about the repeatedly documented fact that manufacturer rumors from Asustek and Quanta in China are ALWAYS B.S. ! There has never been a decent manufacturer-based rumor in the 4 years I've been an apple rumor reader; the track record of these rumors makes macosrumors.com look reliable by comparison.
Notwithstanding the flimsy sources, however, I agree that Yonah is dead as a doornail and that apple will move to merom in all notebooks; all the other manufacturers are going to anyway...
Notwithstanding the flimsy sources, however, I agree that Yonah is dead as a doornail and that apple will move to merom in all notebooks; all the other manufacturers are going to anyway...
McGiord
May 4, 05:09 PM
You metric people ought to hook up with the military time people.
It is the international system, and it does adopt the metric units, and yes the military time is less confusing also.
It is the international system, and it does adopt the metric units, and yes the military time is less confusing also.
adrock
Jul 22, 12:55 AM
Monday is the 24th not the 23rd
jsalzer
Jul 30, 04:26 PM
i think i'll buy a Macbook instead
Ah, but the new iPhone can be purchased as a part of the package with a MacBook Pro - as it will conveniently fit into the ExpressCard/34 slot. It can be pulled out and used as a stand-alone phone, or it can be left in the slot to allow the user a full iChatAV phone experience from anywhere on the road.
That slot had to be put there for a reason - and the remote doesn't fit. Right?
:)
OK, maybe not.
Ah, but the new iPhone can be purchased as a part of the package with a MacBook Pro - as it will conveniently fit into the ExpressCard/34 slot. It can be pulled out and used as a stand-alone phone, or it can be left in the slot to allow the user a full iChatAV phone experience from anywhere on the road.
That slot had to be put there for a reason - and the remote doesn't fit. Right?
:)
OK, maybe not.
caliguy
Nov 22, 01:34 AM
palms os is severely outdated
the only thing they have going for them is the abundance of software out
i own a palm and will ditch it when something pda, osx feel comes from apple
if apple makes their phone centered on a PDA and Confrencing rather than
"its an ipod and a phone"
i think they will gain some substantial ground
having the ability to use the pda phone as an ipod would not be out of the question but solely a ipod phone ? i think they would be cutting their profits to a certain age group of potential buyers
Yeah exactly, I totally agree. I've never been turned on by the iPhone/iPod 2-in-1 rumours. To me, iLife integration and conferencing is way more important. I actually prefer they keep the two (iPod+iPhone) separate. I don't want my music listening to be disturbed by calls.
the only thing they have going for them is the abundance of software out
i own a palm and will ditch it when something pda, osx feel comes from apple
if apple makes their phone centered on a PDA and Confrencing rather than
"its an ipod and a phone"
i think they will gain some substantial ground
having the ability to use the pda phone as an ipod would not be out of the question but solely a ipod phone ? i think they would be cutting their profits to a certain age group of potential buyers
Yeah exactly, I totally agree. I've never been turned on by the iPhone/iPod 2-in-1 rumours. To me, iLife integration and conferencing is way more important. I actually prefer they keep the two (iPod+iPhone) separate. I don't want my music listening to be disturbed by calls.
hugothomsen
Apr 25, 11:17 AM
Well, I think it's great - I have just been able to track business mileage accurately, even when I have lost the exact date and route - I also can retrace my steps from that holiday 8 months ago where I went to a really nice place and forgot the name of it.
I am not too worried about anyone stealing my phone or laptop and accessing my data - I can remote wipe my phone and my laptop is fairly secure with the StorageVault and complex passwords.
If I against any presumption should be so interesting that someone would steal my Apple gear and throw a lot of resource into finding out when and how often I have been to the pub, well good luck to ya.
It is however an excellent opportunity for Apple to build in a history feature in the maps so you can see where you were - and then implement a paranoia option in a later revision of the iOS that shuts down logging altogether - then all you important folk out there that do so important things that it would be disastrous if you were tracked doing them should be happier.
I am not too worried about anyone stealing my phone or laptop and accessing my data - I can remote wipe my phone and my laptop is fairly secure with the StorageVault and complex passwords.
If I against any presumption should be so interesting that someone would steal my Apple gear and throw a lot of resource into finding out when and how often I have been to the pub, well good luck to ya.
It is however an excellent opportunity for Apple to build in a history feature in the maps so you can see where you were - and then implement a paranoia option in a later revision of the iOS that shuts down logging altogether - then all you important folk out there that do so important things that it would be disastrous if you were tracked doing them should be happier.
tjb1013
Mar 29, 11:17 AM
This looks good to me. My pain point is syncing my 120GB or so of music with a hard drive that I have at my office. I don't need to stream music from the cloud, but that's nice.
We'll soon have USB-sized drives that hold that much data. I'll probably hold out for some kind of one-time cost like that. Even now the drives that hold this stuff are about wallet sized, so it's just a matter of bringing it home once in a while and syncing it up. The price point is great, but not something I want to pay yet.
I use AWS for some Web servers and it has been a fantastic service. I agree with the poster above that this paves the way for Amazon to be the defacto content supplier on Android devices. Not a bad place to be.
We'll soon have USB-sized drives that hold that much data. I'll probably hold out for some kind of one-time cost like that. Even now the drives that hold this stuff are about wallet sized, so it's just a matter of bringing it home once in a while and syncing it up. The price point is great, but not something I want to pay yet.
I use AWS for some Web servers and it has been a fantastic service. I agree with the poster above that this paves the way for Amazon to be the defacto content supplier on Android devices. Not a bad place to be.
AZREOSpecialist
Apr 26, 03:18 PM
Baloney on so many levels. Apple doesn't need to be like Android to succeed unless you define success as market share. Market share means nothing if you have the margins like Apple does. Fake Steve Jobs (Dan Lyons) said it best last year. To paraphrase, "In three years Android will be huge but we will still have the better business." And if you want to equate market share to developer interest, well, there are articles all over today announcing that developer interest in Android is waning because of fragmentation and tablets while interest in iOS is rising.
So what's better? More people using your product than the other guy's or having sustainable growth and good profits year in and year out?
Apple makes money on the handset, Google makes money on ad revenue. Apple needs iOS in order to continue growing and remain successful. How much does Google actually make from Android? Probably nothing close to what Apple makes on iOS and related devices. If Google determines that the Android model does not work for them, they have little incentive not to cut and run if the minority of their revenue is coming from that product. Apple has a whole lot more to lose in this game than Google.
While profitability and margins are important, ultimately the game goes to the one with the greatest market share. That has been proven over and over again. Having a huge profit margin means nothing if fewer people buy your product than the competitions'.
So what's better? More people using your product than the other guy's or having sustainable growth and good profits year in and year out?
Apple makes money on the handset, Google makes money on ad revenue. Apple needs iOS in order to continue growing and remain successful. How much does Google actually make from Android? Probably nothing close to what Apple makes on iOS and related devices. If Google determines that the Android model does not work for them, they have little incentive not to cut and run if the minority of their revenue is coming from that product. Apple has a whole lot more to lose in this game than Google.
While profitability and margins are important, ultimately the game goes to the one with the greatest market share. That has been proven over and over again. Having a huge profit margin means nothing if fewer people buy your product than the competitions'.
mrsir2009
Apr 20, 12:31 AM
I'll be buying that phone as my first iDevice :)
chugg
Apr 18, 03:23 PM
Yay go Apple. From the little guy everyone cheered for to the ... big guy that sues everyone and still has everyone cheering for.
OdduWon
Sep 15, 05:22 PM
single 3ghz woodcrest MBP's next tuesday? drool..........
Eldiablojoe
May 4, 05:21 PM
I'm glad we finally started moving :).
We might as well keep moving forward through the door at the end of the hallway.
Concur
We might as well keep moving forward through the door at the end of the hallway.
Concur
CalBoy
May 6, 04:30 PM
So you're saying that science has nothing to do with everyday life? Cake for the elite and bread for everyone else??
I didn't say that at all.
Certain things are good for one thing but not as good for another. Basing your metrics off of water and light make a lot of sense when you have to measure a great deal of new items and compare them objectively.
On the other hand when you need metrics to be a guide through daily life and nothing else, the system that's born from daily necessity makes a lot more sense.
The reasoning gets worse when you'd ask 311 million to make a change because a smaller community of professionals would like their standards to be the standards for all of society. It's not like the two can't coexist; there might be a good argument there if the two were incompatible, but the fact is that they're not.
I see no good sense in that. If the metric system was intrinsically difficult to use in everyday life, then maybe you would have a point. But it's not � it's actually much, much easier to use once you learn it.
A distinction needs to be made here: just because something is easier to multiply by 10 (or 1/10th) doesn't mean that it's easier to use. How many times in your daily life do you need to multiply by 10, or even multiply what you measure? In most of my daily activities the metric system would do nothing new except provide a new set of numbers to get to know.
Even if you did occasionally multiply daily measurements, it would probably be with a smaller integer like 2, 3, or 4. In that case, the imperial system works very well because it provides very low factors and products that most people can do rapidly with nothing more than their 2nd grade 12x12 tables. In fact that's exactly how it came to be the way it is.
The metric system, as many people here keep pointing out, enables some pretty easy mental arithmetic. You'd use it if you had it.
How often does that easy arithmetic come up outside of science? Can you think of a real life example?
In any case, I do already have it. It's on every measuring device I have, from my ruler to my bathroom scale. I use it when it's necessary or more effective, but that's rare. Maybe you should accept that people can have a different preference.
You say it's about the 'ease of transition' but in the next breath you argue that it's all about 'economic return'. Personally I think you're clutching at straws to defend the fact that your country is behind the rest of the world in its ability to institute any kind of consistency with its system of measurements. But, we can agree to disagree.
They are not mutually exclusive values. Both are important factors in determining whether or not to switch. It's just like when a business decides to change it's logo; not only does the cost of marketing the new logo have to be factored in, but the potential lost sales also have to be weighed. In much the same way we have to decide if certain things being switched to metric will ever pay off and how disruptive they'll be. Some things that make sense like food and toiletries have already been metricated. Other things probably cost a lot more and won't be able to overcome their switching cost and they could also cost a lot.
I didn't say that at all.
Certain things are good for one thing but not as good for another. Basing your metrics off of water and light make a lot of sense when you have to measure a great deal of new items and compare them objectively.
On the other hand when you need metrics to be a guide through daily life and nothing else, the system that's born from daily necessity makes a lot more sense.
The reasoning gets worse when you'd ask 311 million to make a change because a smaller community of professionals would like their standards to be the standards for all of society. It's not like the two can't coexist; there might be a good argument there if the two were incompatible, but the fact is that they're not.
I see no good sense in that. If the metric system was intrinsically difficult to use in everyday life, then maybe you would have a point. But it's not � it's actually much, much easier to use once you learn it.
A distinction needs to be made here: just because something is easier to multiply by 10 (or 1/10th) doesn't mean that it's easier to use. How many times in your daily life do you need to multiply by 10, or even multiply what you measure? In most of my daily activities the metric system would do nothing new except provide a new set of numbers to get to know.
Even if you did occasionally multiply daily measurements, it would probably be with a smaller integer like 2, 3, or 4. In that case, the imperial system works very well because it provides very low factors and products that most people can do rapidly with nothing more than their 2nd grade 12x12 tables. In fact that's exactly how it came to be the way it is.
The metric system, as many people here keep pointing out, enables some pretty easy mental arithmetic. You'd use it if you had it.
How often does that easy arithmetic come up outside of science? Can you think of a real life example?
In any case, I do already have it. It's on every measuring device I have, from my ruler to my bathroom scale. I use it when it's necessary or more effective, but that's rare. Maybe you should accept that people can have a different preference.
You say it's about the 'ease of transition' but in the next breath you argue that it's all about 'economic return'. Personally I think you're clutching at straws to defend the fact that your country is behind the rest of the world in its ability to institute any kind of consistency with its system of measurements. But, we can agree to disagree.
They are not mutually exclusive values. Both are important factors in determining whether or not to switch. It's just like when a business decides to change it's logo; not only does the cost of marketing the new logo have to be factored in, but the potential lost sales also have to be weighed. In much the same way we have to decide if certain things being switched to metric will ever pay off and how disruptive they'll be. Some things that make sense like food and toiletries have already been metricated. Other things probably cost a lot more and won't be able to overcome their switching cost and they could also cost a lot.
JAT
Aug 7, 03:32 PM
Its absolute crap that a ~$600 Macmini has these options standard, and yet Apples $4000 top of the line machine doesnt. Unacceptable.
No, it means that the base Mini would be $530 instead of $600 if wireless wasn't standard. And the base Mac Pro would be $2570 instead of $2500 if it did. At least you have the choice on the Pro.
No, it means that the base Mini would be $530 instead of $600 if wireless wasn't standard. And the base Mac Pro would be $2570 instead of $2500 if it did. At least you have the choice on the Pro.
mackiwi
Jul 31, 06:22 AM
As other posters have said...they practically announced it during the last financial anaylyst conference call.
There will be a phone released. No question about that.
The questions are:
- when?
- features?
- will apple do it themselves or seek joint partners?
There will be a phone released. No question about that.
The questions are:
- when?
- features?
- will apple do it themselves or seek joint partners?
Piggie
Apr 23, 06:29 PM
What was the point in bringing retina display to the iPhone? :)
Same thing I guess...
For one I want it, it is very kind on the eyes...
Yes, because the iPhone was low res for a device you hold up to your nose and a typical consumer, which is what Apple design for, could easily see the pixels.
I am wondering how many typical consumers, when viewing at the distance you would view, say a 24" monitor, can make out individual pixels.
I do know Apple's font smoothing is a little, ummmm, shall we say, different to what Microsoft do, so perhaps typefaces do look more jaggy on a Mac than they do on a PC ?
Same thing I guess...
For one I want it, it is very kind on the eyes...
Yes, because the iPhone was low res for a device you hold up to your nose and a typical consumer, which is what Apple design for, could easily see the pixels.
I am wondering how many typical consumers, when viewing at the distance you would view, say a 24" monitor, can make out individual pixels.
I do know Apple's font smoothing is a little, ummmm, shall we say, different to what Microsoft do, so perhaps typefaces do look more jaggy on a Mac than they do on a PC ?
OdduWon
Sep 15, 05:22 PM
single 3ghz woodcrest MBP's next tuesday? drool..........
infidel69
Apr 5, 03:55 PM
Just let it go Apple you're only going to make yourselves look like the bad guy again. If anything you're just bringing more attention to Toyota's marketing campaign. This reminds me of the iphone4 incident when they should of just let it go instead of making themselves look like big brother. Just let it go man
fyre57lp
Nov 3, 09:28 AM
I got mine yesterday and LOVE it. Navigon app + TomTom car kit = win.
reflex
Jul 22, 11:10 AM
As soon as core 2 merom comes out every pc notebook will have it.
This is simply not true. Even though Core Duo has been out for about half a year, a lot of pc laptops are still sold with Pentium-M or Celeron-M cpus.
MacBook can keep the Core Duo for a while longer (until November, for example).
This is simply not true. Even though Core Duo has been out for about half a year, a lot of pc laptops are still sold with Pentium-M or Celeron-M cpus.
MacBook can keep the Core Duo for a while longer (until November, for example).
nastebu
Mar 29, 04:07 PM
Sorry, there is no comparison. US agriculture does not have anywhere near the level of protectionism as Japanese agriculture. Nor does any US industry, with the exception of defense contractors.
And what makes you think a small farmer is somehow superior to DelMonte?
As for who subsidizes agriculture more, I'm unsure, but it's probably close. From the wikipedia article: "A Canadian report claimed that for every dollar U.S. farmers earn, 62 cents comes from some form of government, with total aid in 2009 from all levels of government adding up to $180.8 billion." What's the comparative level in Japan?
The small farmer vs. delMonte is an interesting question. It's a question of values. DelMonte produces cheaper, lower quality food. Small farmers produce more expensive, generally higher quality food. So which you subsidize is a question of social policy.
In Japan, there are lots of small farmers who have kept their farms, and a very strong bias to eat locally. This means that food is of better quality and supports local communities. In the US, massive supermarket chains have tended to dominate food retail, and since they rely on national distribution, food tends to be very processed and have an enormous carbon footprint. It also means lots of mcJobs instead of local businesses.
I prefer the small farmer.
And what makes you think a small farmer is somehow superior to DelMonte?
As for who subsidizes agriculture more, I'm unsure, but it's probably close. From the wikipedia article: "A Canadian report claimed that for every dollar U.S. farmers earn, 62 cents comes from some form of government, with total aid in 2009 from all levels of government adding up to $180.8 billion." What's the comparative level in Japan?
The small farmer vs. delMonte is an interesting question. It's a question of values. DelMonte produces cheaper, lower quality food. Small farmers produce more expensive, generally higher quality food. So which you subsidize is a question of social policy.
In Japan, there are lots of small farmers who have kept their farms, and a very strong bias to eat locally. This means that food is of better quality and supports local communities. In the US, massive supermarket chains have tended to dominate food retail, and since they rely on national distribution, food tends to be very processed and have an enormous carbon footprint. It also means lots of mcJobs instead of local businesses.
I prefer the small farmer.