southernpaws
Apr 23, 11:30 AM
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)
The fact is, we've been through this before. The iPhone 1 was going to be a huge failure because it didn't have 3G. They were concerned about coverage and battery life. It's the same issue now.
People are saying apple should make those sacrifices now to keep up with technology. But nobody is addressing the fact that apple has historical evidence that this is a sound approach.
So many people just love to see every issue from the Apple perspective. There are people who get paid for that. Should not you - as a consumer - care more about the gadget you want than Apple success?
Using two separate chips eats battery life. Not to mention LTE is still "just" coming out, so it won't be widespread enough to take advantage of it until 2012 anyway.
Apple does not have to use two chips. They could just design separate phone for Verizon (just like iPhone 4) which does not support GSM. Not ideal but that's where technology is today. At least Verizon customers could enjoy iPhone 5 with LTE.
Im a shareholder. Similar to many others here that you mindlessly dismiss
The fact is, we've been through this before. The iPhone 1 was going to be a huge failure because it didn't have 3G. They were concerned about coverage and battery life. It's the same issue now.
People are saying apple should make those sacrifices now to keep up with technology. But nobody is addressing the fact that apple has historical evidence that this is a sound approach.
So many people just love to see every issue from the Apple perspective. There are people who get paid for that. Should not you - as a consumer - care more about the gadget you want than Apple success?
Using two separate chips eats battery life. Not to mention LTE is still "just" coming out, so it won't be widespread enough to take advantage of it until 2012 anyway.
Apple does not have to use two chips. They could just design separate phone for Verizon (just like iPhone 4) which does not support GSM. Not ideal but that's where technology is today. At least Verizon customers could enjoy iPhone 5 with LTE.
Im a shareholder. Similar to many others here that you mindlessly dismiss
Plutonius
Apr 26, 04:05 PM
Ah, a last minute vote by Aggie. It looks like he might not have purposely bolded his original vote. Add his name to the list for tomorrow.
tmphoto
Oct 24, 08:04 AM
Apple's headline: "...Seatbelts Sold Separately."
Bad marketing, seatbelts suggests crashing.
Bad marketing, seatbelts suggests crashing.
Apple 26.2
May 4, 06:03 AM
Interesting, but nothing new offered here.
more...
Waybo
Apr 3, 09:47 PM
Tugboat in Miami Port, as we cruised on by.
ISO 200, 120 mm, 0 ev, f/6, 1/400.
C&C welcome & appreciated!
ISO 200, 120 mm, 0 ev, f/6, 1/400.
C&C welcome & appreciated!
Yellowstone2012
Apr 22, 05:48 PM
There is no way it could be that thin.
iPad 2 is thinner than the iPhone 4...
Uhh no. Rounded off edges are a big no-no.
iPad 2 has rounded off edges.
iPad 2 is thinner than the iPhone 4...
Uhh no. Rounded off edges are a big no-no.
iPad 2 has rounded off edges.
more...
Chundles
Aug 15, 05:51 PM
It does vary quite a lot by where you live. Living in Sweden (and coming from the UK) just about everyone I know uses MSN.
Same here, it seems that AIM is only popular within the US. Elsewhere Messenger totally dominates.
I don't know a single person who uses AIM. Not one.
Same here, it seems that AIM is only popular within the US. Elsewhere Messenger totally dominates.
I don't know a single person who uses AIM. Not one.
twcbc
May 4, 07:01 AM
Let's be clear... "Android" is an OS from Google that you can find on dozens of phones from many manufacturers.
Apple knows they can't compete with that. And they're not. Marketshare is not a goal. For instance... Android has more marketshare... now what?
It's Mac vs Windows all over again. Windows is crushing Macs 10 to 1. Dell and HP have sales that dwarf the Mac. But is Apple really in trouble with the Mac?
Market share matters, even for Apple.
more...
%IMG_DESC_9%
%IMG_DESC_10%
more...
%IMG_DESC_11%
%IMG_DESC_12%
more...
%IMG_DESC_13%
%IMG_DESC_14%
more...
%IMG_DESC_15%
%IMG_DESC_16%
more...
%IMG_DESC_17%
%IMG_DESC_18%
%IMG_DESC_19%
Apple knows they can't compete with that. And they're not. Marketshare is not a goal. For instance... Android has more marketshare... now what?
It's Mac vs Windows all over again. Windows is crushing Macs 10 to 1. Dell and HP have sales that dwarf the Mac. But is Apple really in trouble with the Mac?
Market share matters, even for Apple.
more...
Dr.Gargoyle
Jul 28, 08:15 AM
This news will hopefully inspire Apple to make the next generation iPods even more amazing. However, I don't see MS as the biggest threat to the iPod. I am much more concerned about mp3 cellphones with 4Gb flash (see e.g. SonyEricsson).
Apple needs come up with a revolutionary device that integrates an iPod with a cellphone and possibly even a GPS, in order to keep their mp3 marketshare.
Apple needs come up with a revolutionary device that integrates an iPod with a cellphone and possibly even a GPS, in order to keep their mp3 marketshare.
Snowy_River
Dec 1, 07:19 PM
I hope you understand what exactly you are saying. Under 10% is still Millions of systems. Included in that small percentage are hundreds if not thousands of businesses, thousands of schools, and many home businesses. Like anything in life, there are people that like the easy stuff, the work that effects the most people, or the work that provides the most challenge.
Worldwide impact is likely motivation for some hackers, however it doesn't include all of them!
Yes. This is part of why the low market share argument always seemed a bit weak. One can argue that there is a threshold beyond which a platform starts getting more attention from malware writers, but to argue that OS X had a small enough market share such that NO malware writers were trying to write a virus, trojan, worm, adware or spyware has just never made sense.
Worldwide impact is likely motivation for some hackers, however it doesn't include all of them!
Yes. This is part of why the low market share argument always seemed a bit weak. One can argue that there is a threshold beyond which a platform starts getting more attention from malware writers, but to argue that OS X had a small enough market share such that NO malware writers were trying to write a virus, trojan, worm, adware or spyware has just never made sense.
more...
roadbloc
Apr 13, 05:38 PM
Yawn. What is the point? Seriously? A TV with a gyro and shake to undo? :rolleyes:
skunk
Apr 27, 01:07 PM
We can't have an opinion (which is shared by others) it seems. Yeah, what exactly do you know?You were stating point blank that the seizure was obviously fake, and using various random, similarly unqualified posters to back you up. Whether it was a real seizure, a panic attack, blind terror or pure acting, what does it matter? You have no way of knowing, and it is not germane to the subject. If you have seen somebody kicked hard in the head and they end up having what appears to be a seizure shortly afterwards, it is far more appropriate to offer support rather than assuming anything at all.
more...
inkswamp
Jul 28, 03:59 PM
$9,500,000,000 - that's just sitting around in cash with no long term debt. I think Apple's got plenty of "stamina"...
Exactly! I don't understand all this doom-and-gloom everytime MS talks about the music download market. They can't even get their friggin' OS out on time and we're supposed to worry that they can take over a highly competitive market that is still too new for anyone but Apple to really get their head around? I think not. Look at the video game market. After several years and two iterations of their precious XBox, they have still made hardly a dent in that market (despite all the headlines it gets, it's still no threat to Nintendo.)
Plus, you have to factor in the seemingly limitless well of great ideas that Apple has at their disposal that MS does not. MS may have a lot more cash to bully their way into the market, but Apple will continuously outfox them on the sheer basis that they have better ideas and are quick to the draw.
And, as if that's not enough, MS is trying to bully their way into many markets simultaneously while holding ground on the ones they dominate, so it's not like they can throw 100% of their assets at the music market. They have a lot of resources, but they are limited and are spread between gaming, Windows, office software, hardware, MSN, their search portal, .NET, Origami/tablet PC, etc. They are not all-powerful, and I think their effort in music will be halfhearted and ultimately unsuccessful.
And you know what else matters? The fact that when Steve Jobs gets up on stage and talks about music, you can tell that he's really passionate about it. He's not just up there to sell tunes. He's a music lover and other music lovers relate to that and appreciate it. It's infectious. And it matters. I've seen MS and other companies talk about music (most often while wearing a suit which is enough to stop you right there) and the way they talk--there's no passion. You can tell that they view it at arms-length, like some kind of commodity, and surround their efforts with insulting marketing campaigns that play down to the lowest common denominator and that does not help.
I don't think Apple has anything to worry about. As long as they keep going, they're fine. I see no reason to think otherwise.
Exactly! I don't understand all this doom-and-gloom everytime MS talks about the music download market. They can't even get their friggin' OS out on time and we're supposed to worry that they can take over a highly competitive market that is still too new for anyone but Apple to really get their head around? I think not. Look at the video game market. After several years and two iterations of their precious XBox, they have still made hardly a dent in that market (despite all the headlines it gets, it's still no threat to Nintendo.)
Plus, you have to factor in the seemingly limitless well of great ideas that Apple has at their disposal that MS does not. MS may have a lot more cash to bully their way into the market, but Apple will continuously outfox them on the sheer basis that they have better ideas and are quick to the draw.
And, as if that's not enough, MS is trying to bully their way into many markets simultaneously while holding ground on the ones they dominate, so it's not like they can throw 100% of their assets at the music market. They have a lot of resources, but they are limited and are spread between gaming, Windows, office software, hardware, MSN, their search portal, .NET, Origami/tablet PC, etc. They are not all-powerful, and I think their effort in music will be halfhearted and ultimately unsuccessful.
And you know what else matters? The fact that when Steve Jobs gets up on stage and talks about music, you can tell that he's really passionate about it. He's not just up there to sell tunes. He's a music lover and other music lovers relate to that and appreciate it. It's infectious. And it matters. I've seen MS and other companies talk about music (most often while wearing a suit which is enough to stop you right there) and the way they talk--there's no passion. You can tell that they view it at arms-length, like some kind of commodity, and surround their efforts with insulting marketing campaigns that play down to the lowest common denominator and that does not help.
I don't think Apple has anything to worry about. As long as they keep going, they're fine. I see no reason to think otherwise.
argopelter
Jun 7, 06:04 PM
As usual American's (yeah I'm American) love to blame someone for their own responsibility. It's so weird how people on here fight for freedom from the lockdowns that Apple puts on it's developers, freedoms from the limitations and restrictions Apple puts on the iPhone (hence why people jailbreak). Yet when a parent doesn't take accountability for their absence of judgement and legal obligation to be responsible for their child, everyone goes off on Apple for not having the protections in place to prevent this?
What people want is more choice. They're not asking Apple to disable app purchases by default, just put in some simple safeguards that make mistakes like this less likely.
You really believe that failing to log out should be a $1000 mistake? For an app they'll never use? What if the app cost $10,000? $100,000? $1 million? Would they need to go take out a loan and pay spend the rest of their lives paying off the app loan? It's a good thing Apple disagrees with you.
A
What people want is more choice. They're not asking Apple to disable app purchases by default, just put in some simple safeguards that make mistakes like this less likely.
You really believe that failing to log out should be a $1000 mistake? For an app they'll never use? What if the app cost $10,000? $100,000? $1 million? Would they need to go take out a loan and pay spend the rest of their lives paying off the app loan? It's a good thing Apple disagrees with you.
A
more...
twoodcc
Oct 27, 06:58 PM
I'll get right on it! and try to oc it some, once I figure out how :o
I should finish my first bigadv wu sometime around 10 cst tonight.
sounds good! you'll really stack up on points then! what kind of motherboard do you have with the 920?
also, how are your amd machines doing?
I should finish my first bigadv wu sometime around 10 cst tonight.
sounds good! you'll really stack up on points then! what kind of motherboard do you have with the 920?
also, how are your amd machines doing?
SirROM
Jul 24, 10:38 PM
<So, there you have it a completely enclosed ipod, so elegant as not to have a single button or port opening or anything but a beautiful screen.>
I think there is a hole in this argument/dream. Apple has spent considerable time and marketing money in the Made for iPod campaign that centers arounds the dock connector. They have created the Universal dock and inserts for all recent iPods, promising to keep these updated with all new iPods in the foreseeable future. Therefore, I seriously doubt these new no touch iPods wouldn't have at least a dock connector. It allows third parties to keep their investment in accessories without getting pissed at Apple for changing the rules again. How about all these car interfaces that are just now gaining traction in new automobiles for example? They need the dock connector to work. Without the third party economy and proprietary ports, there is also little to keep the MS Menace at bay, despite the coolness of such a product.
Bottom Line: there WILL be a regular dock connector for the foreseeable future on all iPods except the shuffle (which is on it's way out).
I think there is a hole in this argument/dream. Apple has spent considerable time and marketing money in the Made for iPod campaign that centers arounds the dock connector. They have created the Universal dock and inserts for all recent iPods, promising to keep these updated with all new iPods in the foreseeable future. Therefore, I seriously doubt these new no touch iPods wouldn't have at least a dock connector. It allows third parties to keep their investment in accessories without getting pissed at Apple for changing the rules again. How about all these car interfaces that are just now gaining traction in new automobiles for example? They need the dock connector to work. Without the third party economy and proprietary ports, there is also little to keep the MS Menace at bay, despite the coolness of such a product.
Bottom Line: there WILL be a regular dock connector for the foreseeable future on all iPods except the shuffle (which is on it's way out).
more...
MaxMike
Nov 28, 07:27 PM
A new Apple TV to stream from my Mac to my HDTV, a Wireless-N router to speed up sharing between computers from my Wireless-G network, a good webcam for my Mac Mini, and some cash for my future Apple purchases (MBP and iPad 2G)
http://www.gadgetvenue.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/new-apple-tv-300x288.jpg
http://gadgets.softpedia.com/images/gadgets/gallery/large/Linksys-Wireless-N-WRT310N-Gigabit-Router-1.jpg
http://www.connectreviews.com/images/logitech_quickcampro9000_1.jpg
http://www.collegefashion.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/money.jpg
http://www.gadgetvenue.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/new-apple-tv-300x288.jpg
http://gadgets.softpedia.com/images/gadgets/gallery/large/Linksys-Wireless-N-WRT310N-Gigabit-Router-1.jpg
http://www.connectreviews.com/images/logitech_quickcampro9000_1.jpg
http://www.collegefashion.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/money.jpg
firestarter
Apr 24, 02:39 PM
Why are you trying to turn the assault into bullying / an LGBT hate crime? I know MacRumors PRSI is obsessed with the issue, but there's no evidence for it.
According to The Smoking Gun (http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/mcdonalds/mcdonalds-employee-filmed-brutal-beating-640128) the McDonald's employee sacked was Vernon Charm Hackett, who had the following to say on his Facebook page:
http://i.cdn.turner.com/dr/teg/tsg/release/sites/default/files/assets/1fbgrabsizedforinside.jpg
According to The Smoking Gun (http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/mcdonalds/mcdonalds-employee-filmed-brutal-beating-640128) the McDonald's employee sacked was Vernon Charm Hackett, who had the following to say on his Facebook page:
http://i.cdn.turner.com/dr/teg/tsg/release/sites/default/files/assets/1fbgrabsizedforinside.jpg
VanNess
Jul 28, 01:09 PM
Had Apple licensed FP a year ago like a lot of people were begging... they probably would have had to license it to MS.
Reacent Post
basesloaded190
Apr 11, 02:28 PM
I have a feeling TB is going to be the next Firewire: sure, it works, but USB is so much more dominant at basically the same speeds. But I don't really care at the end of the day...just something much much faster than USB 2.0 for my hundreds of gigs of data that I copy/move around a bit.
This couldn't be further from the truth. TB is so much more versatile than USB can really ever be with tons more speed
This couldn't be further from the truth. TB is so much more versatile than USB can really ever be with tons more speed
voyagerd
Apr 14, 02:45 AM
iPad running Mac OS 9! Just what I always wanted!
kingtj
Jun 24, 03:18 PM
I'm honestly not too surprised. On one hand, Apple keeps pushing the iPod Touch as a great little portable gaming system (so kids are getting them left and right), yet on the other, they make it a big pain to prevent a kid from purchasing unwanted software on it.
I know first-hand, because my g/f used to work for Apple, and got refurbished iPod Touches for both of her young kids, after they were constantly borrowing her iPhone. My own daughter got a refurbished Touch last Xmas as well.
I thought I'd be slick and create a whole new iTunes account for my kid that wasn't linked to any credit/debit card at all. That way, she can only purchase FREE apps unless I pre-load her account with some money from a gift-card first. (My g/f didn't do this, and her 3 year old started buying herself quite a few games one day! Until then, she just assumed said 3 year old wouldn't even be capable of navigating the App Store on her own and doing it!)
But then I realized all the little games we bought and put on my iPhone a long time ago were not going to be transferable to her iPod Touch without re-purchasing them. No way I was going to re-buy them, and she was getting all upset she had stuff on my phone that wasn't on her Touch. So I wound up redoing her Touch so it shared MY iTunes account. Not happy about that though, and sure enough, despite my warnings, she bought about $10 in software one time!
Apple really needs to re-think the way this stuff works. I'd be all for something like Android's store apparently does where you can request a refund for anything you download within the first 24 hours.... but frankly, some people will still abuse that too. (They'll start using it as a "free rental" service, grabbing things for a day and then requesting refunds.) So maybe a setup where you can refund apps up to 24 hours later up to the first X number of times, and then the account reverts to only giving refunds within the first hour or 30 minutes?
haha, this makes it onto MR?
My little cousin purchased $2,820.75 from the app store on an iPod Touch. And Apple wasn't going to refund any of it until a transcript from an internal chat was somehow included in a email to my Aunt that consisted of very rude talk behind her back.
I have the emails, but my aunt and uncle aren't finished with the fiasco with Apple's legal team, so I can't show them.
I know first-hand, because my g/f used to work for Apple, and got refurbished iPod Touches for both of her young kids, after they were constantly borrowing her iPhone. My own daughter got a refurbished Touch last Xmas as well.
I thought I'd be slick and create a whole new iTunes account for my kid that wasn't linked to any credit/debit card at all. That way, she can only purchase FREE apps unless I pre-load her account with some money from a gift-card first. (My g/f didn't do this, and her 3 year old started buying herself quite a few games one day! Until then, she just assumed said 3 year old wouldn't even be capable of navigating the App Store on her own and doing it!)
But then I realized all the little games we bought and put on my iPhone a long time ago were not going to be transferable to her iPod Touch without re-purchasing them. No way I was going to re-buy them, and she was getting all upset she had stuff on my phone that wasn't on her Touch. So I wound up redoing her Touch so it shared MY iTunes account. Not happy about that though, and sure enough, despite my warnings, she bought about $10 in software one time!
Apple really needs to re-think the way this stuff works. I'd be all for something like Android's store apparently does where you can request a refund for anything you download within the first 24 hours.... but frankly, some people will still abuse that too. (They'll start using it as a "free rental" service, grabbing things for a day and then requesting refunds.) So maybe a setup where you can refund apps up to 24 hours later up to the first X number of times, and then the account reverts to only giving refunds within the first hour or 30 minutes?
haha, this makes it onto MR?
My little cousin purchased $2,820.75 from the app store on an iPod Touch. And Apple wasn't going to refund any of it until a transcript from an internal chat was somehow included in a email to my Aunt that consisted of very rude talk behind her back.
I have the emails, but my aunt and uncle aren't finished with the fiasco with Apple's legal team, so I can't show them.
KT Walrus
Apr 13, 02:42 PM
Makes more sense to me that Apple would work to standardize AirPlay as a built-in feature of all new HDTV's, blu-ray players, and other set top boxes like Apple TV. In addition to AirPlay input to the HDTV, the HDTV would do AirPlay output from a TV connected webcam/microphone (if any). I don't see Apple trying to sell actual HDTVs, but the iPad would make a great SmartTV content controller that would replace the need for an Apple TV module.
The existing Apple TV could just evolve into an iOS app.
The existing Apple TV could just evolve into an iOS app.
lordonuthin
Oct 28, 01:42 AM
Well, I'll hop on the bandwagon. My measly old MBP should be able to cope with it. I'll get my PS3 onto the game as well, just to see how much I can get out of it.
(far out you guys are well equipped)
Great to have you aboard! Every machine we can get helps. PS3's are great folding machines.
(far out you guys are well equipped)
Great to have you aboard! Every machine we can get helps. PS3's are great folding machines.
0 comments:
Post a Comment