Mattie Num Nums
Apr 19, 09:18 AM
+1
While I didn't buy my HTC Android because it "looked nice," I did buy it because it was the most iPhone-like phone experience at Sprint at the time. I now pay for that decision everyday (iOS 1.0 puts Android 2.2 to shame) and cannot wait for my contract to be over. Steve Jobs would put someone's head on a pike in front of 1 Infinite Loop if Apple ever released an OS this half-baked. Say what you will about Apple's walled garden, but the Android market is more like a flea market complete with grifters. I've given up buying apps after too many that caused frequent crashes.
Verizon iPhone 5, you cannot arrive soon enough.
iOS 1 puts Android 2.2 to shame?
Now you are just talking out of your @ss. In all honesty the difference between iOS and Android is so subtle.
While I didn't buy my HTC Android because it "looked nice," I did buy it because it was the most iPhone-like phone experience at Sprint at the time. I now pay for that decision everyday (iOS 1.0 puts Android 2.2 to shame) and cannot wait for my contract to be over. Steve Jobs would put someone's head on a pike in front of 1 Infinite Loop if Apple ever released an OS this half-baked. Say what you will about Apple's walled garden, but the Android market is more like a flea market complete with grifters. I've given up buying apps after too many that caused frequent crashes.
Verizon iPhone 5, you cannot arrive soon enough.
iOS 1 puts Android 2.2 to shame?
Now you are just talking out of your @ss. In all honesty the difference between iOS and Android is so subtle.
manosaurus
Oct 12, 12:49 PM
They might as well add a Core 2 Duo Mac Book Pro too.
Nah... Core 2 Duo eMac tomorrow... not the MBP...
Nah... Core 2 Duo eMac tomorrow... not the MBP...
Kelmon
Sep 14, 01:00 PM
Gee, I love that a thread about a photography event has been hijacked by wishes for a new MacBook Pro. As far as I am concerned the release of these laptops can't come soon enough. For the last month the money has been in the bank for the biggest, bad-ass MacBook Pro that Apple will release so I'm just waiting and hoping now. Following the announcements on Tuesday I may throw in an iPod (3-years+ of Mac and I've only held one once...) unless my wife catches me first.
Bring it on.
Bring it on.
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.
wpwj40e
Sep 13, 10:16 PM
Maybe the reason for not having a traditional keypad is that this is actually the iPhone Shuffle.
Apple's market research team has concluded that people get tired of talking to the same people all time. And since the iPod Shuffle is such a hit playing songs randomly,
the new iPhone Shuffle will randomly dial numbers, so every call you make is never boring.
Got more than 240 numbers in your adressbook? No problem. Let iTunes autofill your iPhone shuffle and get a new telephonic experience every time. Mom follows Work. Home follows Pizza Parlor. iPhone shuffle loves to improvise. Take the Shuffle switch, for instance. Even if you�ve synced a particular call-list, you can shuffle numbers with a flick.
ROFL:)
My phone does that now. Little did I know it is a *feature*.
Therese
Apple's market research team has concluded that people get tired of talking to the same people all time. And since the iPod Shuffle is such a hit playing songs randomly,
the new iPhone Shuffle will randomly dial numbers, so every call you make is never boring.
Got more than 240 numbers in your adressbook? No problem. Let iTunes autofill your iPhone shuffle and get a new telephonic experience every time. Mom follows Work. Home follows Pizza Parlor. iPhone shuffle loves to improvise. Take the Shuffle switch, for instance. Even if you�ve synced a particular call-list, you can shuffle numbers with a flick.
ROFL:)
My phone does that now. Little did I know it is a *feature*.
Therese
G4DP
Mar 22, 01:30 PM
Glad all the consumers machines get this first. All the kinks can be worked out before the MacPro gets it at the end of the year.
LaCie have started making drives etc with Cripplepeak connectivity. There are a few others.
LaCie have started making drives etc with Cripplepeak connectivity. There are a few others.
aristobrat
Sep 5, 11:38 AM
Hopefully it's not the Extreme that gets the update because my cable modem is nowhere near my TV. ;)
blizaine
Apr 4, 11:54 AM
I heard the mall cop got the head-shot while moving at full speed on a Segway. Simply amazing.
infidel69
Apr 20, 11:33 AM
Shame that everyone is going to jump to conclusions rather than work out why this is stored.
And really, would you rather have the information stored on the device or logged by Google?
Neither, I was wondering how long it would be before some fanboy would bring up Google.
And really, would you rather have the information stored on the device or logged by Google?
Neither, I was wondering how long it would be before some fanboy would bring up Google.
yellowballoon
Mar 29, 12:11 PM
Apple still doesn't have upload to a cloud or wireless syncing, and Windows Phone does. 25 GB free sky drive, as well as a beautiful hub where you choose what to access at a glance. In iOS, you have to flick and flick, especially if you have many apps. The wireless syncing is slick. Facebook integration flawless. WP7 also now has cut, copy, and paste and HTML5 before the end of the year. I'm sorry, but hooking up with the largest mobile phone manufacture is a no brainer.
Popeye206
Mar 23, 05:22 PM
Don't pull it!!!!!
I'm NOT in favor of drinking and driving, but I am in favor of freedom. I don't like the idea of ANY government control over things like this. Too many darn laws to begin with.
I downloaded this app. It's pretty cool! The DUI thing is like the least useful. There is all sorts of good traffic info on this app. Love it!
I'm NOT in favor of drinking and driving, but I am in favor of freedom. I don't like the idea of ANY government control over things like this. Too many darn laws to begin with.
I downloaded this app. It's pretty cool! The DUI thing is like the least useful. There is all sorts of good traffic info on this app. Love it!
ProwlingTiger
Apr 28, 03:22 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)
$100B past Microsoft in 1 year is tremendous. Go AAPL!
$100B past Microsoft in 1 year is tremendous. Go AAPL!
Ankit1088
Apr 25, 12:52 PM
Liquid-metal!!!
MacRumors
Sep 12, 02:07 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Apple today announced an update to its full-sized iPod line (http://www.apple.com/ipod/ipod.html). Among the enhancements are new games (Bejeweled, Cubis 2, Mahjong, Mini golf, Pac Man, Tetris, Texas Holdem, Vortex, and Zuma), Gapless playback (#1 request according to Jobs), a 60% brighter display, and longer battery life. The new iPod is available immediately in the following models:
30 GB: $249
-Black or White
-14 hr music playback, 4 hr slideshow, 3.5 hr video
80 GB: $349
-Black or White
-20 hr music playback, 6 hr slideshow, 6.5 hr video
Apple today announced an update to its full-sized iPod line (http://www.apple.com/ipod/ipod.html). Among the enhancements are new games (Bejeweled, Cubis 2, Mahjong, Mini golf, Pac Man, Tetris, Texas Holdem, Vortex, and Zuma), Gapless playback (#1 request according to Jobs), a 60% brighter display, and longer battery life. The new iPod is available immediately in the following models:
30 GB: $249
-Black or White
-14 hr music playback, 4 hr slideshow, 3.5 hr video
80 GB: $349
-Black or White
-20 hr music playback, 6 hr slideshow, 6.5 hr video
MattyMac
Sep 9, 10:17 AM
I want to see some unpacking pics of that 24inch model compared with the 20in. Soon enough I suppose.
agmaster
Apr 25, 01:05 PM
Carbon Fiber body... Now that would be amazing!
lmalave
Sep 27, 09:56 AM
Geez, I hope it doesn't look like that. Rotary looks kool, but imagine trying to text or dial without looking.
Yeah, seriously - there's no way!!!
Text Messaging is way too popular now to mess with the key layout.
Really, the only viable options are:
1) standard numeric keypad
2) QWERTY keyboard
3) Hybrid QWERTY keyboard (a la Blackberry 7100 or Blackberry Pearl, though RIM probably has a patent on this...)
Yeah, seriously - there's no way!!!
Text Messaging is way too popular now to mess with the key layout.
Really, the only viable options are:
1) standard numeric keypad
2) QWERTY keyboard
3) Hybrid QWERTY keyboard (a la Blackberry 7100 or Blackberry Pearl, though RIM probably has a patent on this...)
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..
MuDPHuDStudent
Mar 29, 12:26 PM
More people buy smartphones. So Apple could sell more iPhones and have a lower market share.
Looks like they predict a 20% year on year growth for smartphones, which is quite high!
Oh, okay, got it. Thanks! For some reason I thought they were talking about growth rate in market share and not in total sales.
Looks like they predict a 20% year on year growth for smartphones, which is quite high!
Oh, okay, got it. Thanks! For some reason I thought they were talking about growth rate in market share and not in total sales.
MacinDoc
Sep 9, 11:21 AM
You mean Powerbook hinges, iBook logic boards, MacBook Random Shutdown Syndrome (RSS) (http://blogs.zdnet.com/Apple/?p=274), eMac logic boards (http://www.macintouch.com/readerreports/emac/topic4116.html), Powerbook memory slot, White spots and lines on Powerbook screens, chipping paint, cracked cubes, iMac G5 video and power problems,Apple repair extensions (http://www.apple.com/support/),...
I see your point!
Umm, sorry, but according to Consumer Reports' (http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/index.htm)survey of 49,000 laptop users, Apple was tied for the third fewest number of laptop repairs since at 17% (compared to Sony and IBM at 16%, a negligible difference). And, according to their survey of 85,000 desktop users, all other desktop manufacturers had at least 36% more repairs than Apple, and Gateway had a whopping 91% more repairs than Apple.
Just because Apple offers extended service programs for computers beyond their warranty period does not mean that its computers are low quality, it only means that Apple is making an exceptional effort to maintain the loyalty of its customer base by doing more than the minimum required. Have you ever tried to get free service on a computer beyond its warranty period from another manufacturer?
I see your point!
Umm, sorry, but according to Consumer Reports' (http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/index.htm)survey of 49,000 laptop users, Apple was tied for the third fewest number of laptop repairs since at 17% (compared to Sony and IBM at 16%, a negligible difference). And, according to their survey of 85,000 desktop users, all other desktop manufacturers had at least 36% more repairs than Apple, and Gateway had a whopping 91% more repairs than Apple.
Just because Apple offers extended service programs for computers beyond their warranty period does not mean that its computers are low quality, it only means that Apple is making an exceptional effort to maintain the loyalty of its customer base by doing more than the minimum required. Have you ever tried to get free service on a computer beyond its warranty period from another manufacturer?
samiwas
Apr 18, 04:56 PM
Of course that is ridiculous, and I totally agree there should be a line, but where do we draw it? Who gets to draw it?
Ummm...that was pretty much the point....:confused:
The line should be drawn by universal standard workers laws that prevent an employer from needlessly abusing their employees (timewise) without just compensation.
For instance, when I'm working on a union job (yeah, those awful unions protecting workers and stuff), anything over 8 hours a day is time+half. Anything between midnight and 6am is double-time. More than 40 hours in a 7-day period is time+half. Sunday is time+half. The employer has a right to decide when he wants his job done, and he can pay the price for it. The problem is that most employers choose ridiculous timelines and budgets, and the people working for them are stuck having to work the hours to complete something beyond their control. Without some sort of workers protection laws, this will only get worse and worse.
Of course, there are jobs that have to get done in a certain amount of time (as I referenced above), and some people may alter their speed and go slower to push into that overtime (of course this happens...I've seen it firsthand and abhor the practice). But that's no different than an employer dumping a new workload onto someone on Friday afternoon and saying "Yeeeaahh...I'm gonna need you to go ahead and come in tomorrow. Oh, and I almost forgot, I'm also gonna need you to go ahead and come in on Sunday, too, okay? We, uh, lost some people this week, and, uh, we have to sort of play catch up. Thanks!"
So, do you prefer a world where the employer has all the control and can make his employees do whatever he wants for whatever he wants to pay (or they can quit/be fired), or a world where employees have some sort of power to require fair compensation for extraordinary work periods? I know which I prefer, and I'm pretty sure I know which you prefer.
What about a hotshot stock trader making a killing working 80+ hours a week on salary. Should we be allowed to work this much without overtime?
I realize it is an obscure analogy, but it is valid nonetheless.
What does the hotshot trader making a killing have to do with anything? What if the trader is working 80 hours a week and not making a killing? Is the trader WANTING to work 80 hours, or is his firm requiring him to work 80 hours? Are they compensating him or is he just working for the man making the killing for his company but not really seeing the results for himself? I guess if someone WANTS to work 80 hours for free, you can let them...but it should never be a required part of the job.
Ummm...that was pretty much the point....:confused:
The line should be drawn by universal standard workers laws that prevent an employer from needlessly abusing their employees (timewise) without just compensation.
For instance, when I'm working on a union job (yeah, those awful unions protecting workers and stuff), anything over 8 hours a day is time+half. Anything between midnight and 6am is double-time. More than 40 hours in a 7-day period is time+half. Sunday is time+half. The employer has a right to decide when he wants his job done, and he can pay the price for it. The problem is that most employers choose ridiculous timelines and budgets, and the people working for them are stuck having to work the hours to complete something beyond their control. Without some sort of workers protection laws, this will only get worse and worse.
Of course, there are jobs that have to get done in a certain amount of time (as I referenced above), and some people may alter their speed and go slower to push into that overtime (of course this happens...I've seen it firsthand and abhor the practice). But that's no different than an employer dumping a new workload onto someone on Friday afternoon and saying "Yeeeaahh...I'm gonna need you to go ahead and come in tomorrow. Oh, and I almost forgot, I'm also gonna need you to go ahead and come in on Sunday, too, okay? We, uh, lost some people this week, and, uh, we have to sort of play catch up. Thanks!"
So, do you prefer a world where the employer has all the control and can make his employees do whatever he wants for whatever he wants to pay (or they can quit/be fired), or a world where employees have some sort of power to require fair compensation for extraordinary work periods? I know which I prefer, and I'm pretty sure I know which you prefer.
What about a hotshot stock trader making a killing working 80+ hours a week on salary. Should we be allowed to work this much without overtime?
I realize it is an obscure analogy, but it is valid nonetheless.
What does the hotshot trader making a killing have to do with anything? What if the trader is working 80 hours a week and not making a killing? Is the trader WANTING to work 80 hours, or is his firm requiring him to work 80 hours? Are they compensating him or is he just working for the man making the killing for his company but not really seeing the results for himself? I guess if someone WANTS to work 80 hours for free, you can let them...but it should never be a required part of the job.
aristobrat
Sep 26, 08:07 PM
YES! Finally, I reap benefits from being with Cingular!!!! :D
Meh, I know, bitter doesn't go my shoes, but ... heh
It's the second or third carriers' customers that will benefit from all of the weird things that all of you early adopters will help discover. ;)
Or at least that's how it's worked here at Verizon. By the time RIM gets around to releasing a CDMA BlackBerry version of a device, all of the bugs are pretty well worked out.
Meh, I know, bitter doesn't go my shoes, but ... heh
It's the second or third carriers' customers that will benefit from all of the weird things that all of you early adopters will help discover. ;)
Or at least that's how it's worked here at Verizon. By the time RIM gets around to releasing a CDMA BlackBerry version of a device, all of the bugs are pretty well worked out.
hc8170
Oct 27, 10:33 AM
I have nothing against Greenpeace or the message that Greenpeace is trying to send about the environment. If Greenpeace's presence (or more specifically, Greenpeace volunteers' presence) at other public events is any representation, I am not surprised at their behavior.
http://www.macworld.co.uk/mac/news/index.cfm?newsid=16291&pagtype=allchandate
Heck, every trade show I ever go to has girls with their tits half hanging out wondering the halls handing out leaflets nowhere near their particular stand.
Sad to see so many people now happy to have people's free speech stamped all over.
In response to the previous post above, perhaps Greenpeace should think about limiting its volunteers at public events to "really hot" girls dressed "appropriately", I am sure its message would be better received.
http://www.macworld.co.uk/mac/news/index.cfm?newsid=16291&pagtype=allchandate
Heck, every trade show I ever go to has girls with their tits half hanging out wondering the halls handing out leaflets nowhere near their particular stand.
Sad to see so many people now happy to have people's free speech stamped all over.
In response to the previous post above, perhaps Greenpeace should think about limiting its volunteers at public events to "really hot" girls dressed "appropriately", I am sure its message would be better received.
zombierunner
Apr 30, 03:10 PM
i really hope prices go down a little bit .. $150 atleast ..