TeppefallGuy
Aug 2, 11:58 AM
1 - Apple will change EULA.
2 - Apple will not allow iTunes music on other players.
3 - Norwegian government person "iTunes music should work on my cellphone".
4 - There is going to be a meeting later this week.
Apple is referred to as "the computer giant Apple". The same label is used when talking about Microsoft/HP/IBM/etc.
-TeppefallGuy Newsroom-
2 - Apple will not allow iTunes music on other players.
3 - Norwegian government person "iTunes music should work on my cellphone".
4 - There is going to be a meeting later this week.
Apple is referred to as "the computer giant Apple". The same label is used when talking about Microsoft/HP/IBM/etc.
-TeppefallGuy Newsroom-
*LTD*
Mar 15, 10:46 PM
You really need to step out of your fanboi bubble, it seems a little silly to be honest.
The entire industry is one big Apple "fanboi", bud. What Apple does, everyone else moves to copy or get it on. My "bubble" is the entire tech industry where it concerns the average user.
What's "silly" is the Apple fansite bubble. Apple fansites on the ass-end of the net with their loveable little geek contingent perpetually out of touch with the actual market.
Step into 2011. It's all about Apple and where they're taking the industry.
The entire industry is one big Apple "fanboi", bud. What Apple does, everyone else moves to copy or get it on. My "bubble" is the entire tech industry where it concerns the average user.
What's "silly" is the Apple fansite bubble. Apple fansites on the ass-end of the net with their loveable little geek contingent perpetually out of touch with the actual market.
Step into 2011. It's all about Apple and where they're taking the industry.
Yvan256
Aug 2, 09:28 AM
The default M4A bit rate used by iTunes is a joke. You have to be 80 years old not to notice the huge difference between a CD and a standard iTunes M4A track.
I'm sorry but most people (I'd say 99.9%) can't hear the difference between a CD and a 128kbps AAC file.
Heck, we got people still using 128kbps MP3 for crying out loud. If they heard any difference (or if it really sounded like crap) we'd see them using 256kbps MP3 instead. Granted, the encoder makes a huge difference, but most files you see on P2P networks are 128kbps.
I'm sorry but most people (I'd say 99.9%) can't hear the difference between a CD and a 128kbps AAC file.
Heck, we got people still using 128kbps MP3 for crying out loud. If they heard any difference (or if it really sounded like crap) we'd see them using 256kbps MP3 instead. Granted, the encoder makes a huge difference, but most files you see on P2P networks are 128kbps.
Vidder
Dec 10, 02:12 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v322/JayMax/Misc/a_winner_is_you_1024-590x442.jpg
stop appreciating the Name of the game instead of the game itself...this game is awful. You're making excuses and justifying the stupid **** that the game has and dealing with it.
When you're playing a game and players start spawning directly behind you and shooting you in the back EVERY SINGLE MATCH, its time to realize that the game sucks.
When you're playing a WAR game and cannot be a successful sniper in it, its time to realize the game sucks.
The maps are too small and the Spawns suck causing multiplayer to blow. If you want to make excuses for all the nonsense and frustration in the game and play on...then have at it. But the game is not nearly as good as Modern Warfare 2.
stop appreciating the Name of the game instead of the game itself...this game is awful. You're making excuses and justifying the stupid **** that the game has and dealing with it.
When you're playing a game and players start spawning directly behind you and shooting you in the back EVERY SINGLE MATCH, its time to realize that the game sucks.
When you're playing a WAR game and cannot be a successful sniper in it, its time to realize the game sucks.
The maps are too small and the Spawns suck causing multiplayer to blow. If you want to make excuses for all the nonsense and frustration in the game and play on...then have at it. But the game is not nearly as good as Modern Warfare 2.
more...
840quadra
Nov 24, 07:03 AM
Well I went to the Mall of America Apple Store (Bloomington Minnesota) that opened at 6am CST, bought a Macbook, and have since returned home.
I was the first person in the store at the register, and the 1st to buy a computer today at that store :)
I got the C2D 1.83 GHZ (Base model ;) ) for $1062.87 out the door :) .
I was the first person in the store at the register, and the 1st to buy a computer today at that store :)
I got the C2D 1.83 GHZ (Base model ;) ) for $1062.87 out the door :) .
ufkdo
May 4, 06:15 AM
A great commercial. Congrats Apple !
more...
AlphaBob
Apr 15, 02:14 PM
This MAY be a real image. One reason to suspect this is there appear to be dust spots on the camera image. The dust spots stay in the same relative position horizontally and vertically (although there was some movement between the two frames).
It seems odd to me that somebody would take the time to fake the sensor dust spots and not have them accidentally rotate as a fake image was rotated. Instead they are aligned with the desk.
Now the writing on the back may be fake, but there was something that appears to have been shifted around and photographed.
It seems odd to me that somebody would take the time to fake the sensor dust spots and not have them accidentally rotate as a fake image was rotated. Instead they are aligned with the desk.
Now the writing on the back may be fake, but there was something that appears to have been shifted around and photographed.
snberk103
Apr 15, 12:29 PM
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
As I said, I understood the point you were trying to make. But.... you can't take two non-TSA incidents and use those to make a case against the TSA specifically. All you can do is say that increased security, similar to what the TSA does, can be shown to not catch everything. I could just as easily argue that because the two incidents (shoe and underwear bombers) did not occur from TSA screenings then that is proof the TSA methods work. I could, but I won't because we don't really know that is true. Too small a sample to judge.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds. Nor, are the support teams command and control. The security forces have shown themselves to be quite good at eventually following the linkages back up the chain.
What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
In other words, in this world... all you've got is incomplete data to try and make a reasonable decisions based on a cost/benefit analysis.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time.
I did. I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
Objections with nothing to support them.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Good. Support your hypothesis. Otherwise it's got the exactly the same weight as my hypothesis that in fact Lisa's rock was making the bears scarce.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were.
US has been waging wars in multiple nations since.... well, lets not go there.... for a long time. What changed on 9/11? Besides enhanced security at the airports, that is.
Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
Over 10 years, not 10 minutes. It is the single act of terrorism on 9/11 that is engraved on people's (not just American) memories and consciousnesses - not the background and now seemingly routine deaths in the military ranks (I'm speaking about the general population, not about the families and fellow soldiers of those who have been killed.)
Terrorism against military targets is 1) not technically terrorism, and b) not very newsworthy to the public. That's why terrorists target civilians. Deadliest single overseas attack on the US military since the 2nd WW - where and when? Hint... it killed 241 American serviceman. Even if you know that incident, do you think it resonates with the general public in anyway? How about the Oklahoma City bombing? Bet you most people would think more people were killed there than in .... (shall I tell you? Beirut.) That's because civilians were targeted in OK, and the military in Beirut.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
You'd not make the news very often, nor change much public opinion in the US, then.
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock.
But can you prove it? :)
Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation.
I'm glad you got that reference. The Salmon works like this. For millennia the bears and eagles have been scooping the salmon out of the streams. Bears, especially, don't actually eat much of the fish. They take a bite or two of the juiciest bits (from a bear's POV) and toss the carcass over their shoulder to scoop another Salmon. All those carcasses put fish fertilizer into the creek and river banks. A lot of fertilizer. So, the you get really big trees there.
That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes.
But I think your reasoning is flawed. Human behaviour is much less complex than tracking how the ecosystem interacts with itself. One species vs numerous species; A species we can communicate with vs multiples that we can't; A long history of trying to understand human behaviour vs Not so much.
Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
It's also why they couldn't pay me enough me to run that operation. Too many "known unknowns".
We can't deduce anything from that footage of the 6 year old without knowing more. What if the explosives sniffing machine was going nuts anytime the girl went near it. If you were on that plane, wouldn't you want to know why that machine thought the girl has explosives on her? We don't know that there was a explosives sniffing device, and we don't know that there wasn't. All we know is from that footage that doesn't give us any context.
If I was a privacy or rights group, I would immediately launch an inquiry though. There is a enough information to be concerned, just not enough to form any conclusions what-so-ever. Except the screener appeared to be very professional.
As I said, I understood the point you were trying to make. But.... you can't take two non-TSA incidents and use those to make a case against the TSA specifically. All you can do is say that increased security, similar to what the TSA does, can be shown to not catch everything. I could just as easily argue that because the two incidents (shoe and underwear bombers) did not occur from TSA screenings then that is proof the TSA methods work. I could, but I won't because we don't really know that is true. Too small a sample to judge.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds. Nor, are the support teams command and control. The security forces have shown themselves to be quite good at eventually following the linkages back up the chain.
What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
In other words, in this world... all you've got is incomplete data to try and make a reasonable decisions based on a cost/benefit analysis.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time.
I did. I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
Objections with nothing to support them.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Good. Support your hypothesis. Otherwise it's got the exactly the same weight as my hypothesis that in fact Lisa's rock was making the bears scarce.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were.
US has been waging wars in multiple nations since.... well, lets not go there.... for a long time. What changed on 9/11? Besides enhanced security at the airports, that is.
Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
Over 10 years, not 10 minutes. It is the single act of terrorism on 9/11 that is engraved on people's (not just American) memories and consciousnesses - not the background and now seemingly routine deaths in the military ranks (I'm speaking about the general population, not about the families and fellow soldiers of those who have been killed.)
Terrorism against military targets is 1) not technically terrorism, and b) not very newsworthy to the public. That's why terrorists target civilians. Deadliest single overseas attack on the US military since the 2nd WW - where and when? Hint... it killed 241 American serviceman. Even if you know that incident, do you think it resonates with the general public in anyway? How about the Oklahoma City bombing? Bet you most people would think more people were killed there than in .... (shall I tell you? Beirut.) That's because civilians were targeted in OK, and the military in Beirut.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
You'd not make the news very often, nor change much public opinion in the US, then.
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock.
But can you prove it? :)
Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation.
I'm glad you got that reference. The Salmon works like this. For millennia the bears and eagles have been scooping the salmon out of the streams. Bears, especially, don't actually eat much of the fish. They take a bite or two of the juiciest bits (from a bear's POV) and toss the carcass over their shoulder to scoop another Salmon. All those carcasses put fish fertilizer into the creek and river banks. A lot of fertilizer. So, the you get really big trees there.
That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes.
But I think your reasoning is flawed. Human behaviour is much less complex than tracking how the ecosystem interacts with itself. One species vs numerous species; A species we can communicate with vs multiples that we can't; A long history of trying to understand human behaviour vs Not so much.
Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
It's also why they couldn't pay me enough me to run that operation. Too many "known unknowns".
We can't deduce anything from that footage of the 6 year old without knowing more. What if the explosives sniffing machine was going nuts anytime the girl went near it. If you were on that plane, wouldn't you want to know why that machine thought the girl has explosives on her? We don't know that there was a explosives sniffing device, and we don't know that there wasn't. All we know is from that footage that doesn't give us any context.
If I was a privacy or rights group, I would immediately launch an inquiry though. There is a enough information to be concerned, just not enough to form any conclusions what-so-ever. Except the screener appeared to be very professional.
more...
quagmire
Jul 27, 03:51 PM
That's after the tax credit. The MSRP is $32,780.
And only has a range of 100 miles. Making it not a good primary vehicle for people. I know for trips to my aunts I would be screwed.
And only has a range of 100 miles. Making it not a good primary vehicle for people. I know for trips to my aunts I would be screwed.
Pontavignon
May 4, 08:07 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)
+1
And the camera should take pix when you peel back the cover, use face recognition to identify the user and instantly open to the right account.
+1
And the camera should take pix when you peel back the cover, use face recognition to identify the user and instantly open to the right account.
more...
macEfan
Nov 24, 08:37 PM
store.apple.com is still near crawl levels. It appears you can shop now (the whole system has been sluggish for the past few hours), but at least the products and the deals pages are working. As FC said, the order review still does not work. My errors range from no errors to connection to database problems. Gotta love Thanksgiving!
No problems for me yet. yay I got a good price on an AP express!
No problems for me yet. yay I got a good price on an AP express!
KingYaba
Mar 3, 09:38 PM
I heard somewhere that federal employees are not able to collectively bargain for their benefits package. If this is true, why are recent states' attempts to restrict unionized bargaining seen as being so draconian, and why isn't there an outcry to give federal employees the same "rights"?
The outcry, in this case, is the jail sentencing for striking.
The outcry, in this case, is the jail sentencing for striking.
more...
BRLawyer
Sep 12, 06:08 AM
Call me na�ve, but aren't they supposed to receive you?
No, as long as they come to my apartment... ;)
No, as long as they come to my apartment... ;)
rnelan7
Apr 10, 03:10 PM
Fair question - mostly for the flexibility of watching multiple channels and/or playing PS3 while watching multiple channels.
Plus - given the size of the room it would be difficult to achieve an ideal viewing distance for anything bigger than 50".
Understanding, I'm coming over to your house to watch sports! I'll bring the chips and dip.
Plus - given the size of the room it would be difficult to achieve an ideal viewing distance for anything bigger than 50".
Understanding, I'm coming over to your house to watch sports! I'll bring the chips and dip.
more...
hob
Jan 9, 01:42 PM
I was gonna say this thread feels like an AA meeting, but it's more like we're all waiting for our next dose of crack or something... :p
SuperCachetes
Apr 17, 10:27 AM
Because I am against classifying people by descriptors. The worth of a man or woman should not be defined by labels like black, gay, or what have you. Treat every man or woman equally, as you would wish to be treated, and I see no need for labels. Do you label your friends? i.e. "Hey, I'm going to see black Jim." Or, "I'm going to see Jew Bob."
So someone like George Washington Carver should be treated as a man of indeterminate race?
So someone like George Washington Carver should be treated as a man of indeterminate race?
more...
absolut_mac
Jan 12, 12:41 AM
Wow, I just watched the keynote and my god this guy is hard to stand....
Don't take CEO's public persona's (or any public figure for that matter) too seriously. It's all about marketing and keeping Wall Street happy.
Don't take CEO's public persona's (or any public figure for that matter) too seriously. It's all about marketing and keeping Wall Street happy.
dieselpower44
Jul 21, 09:49 AM
"Apple - our products suck just as much as everyone else's" :rolleyes:
LOL, couldn't agree more! This change in attitude is going to be the demise of Apple inc.
LOL, couldn't agree more! This change in attitude is going to be the demise of Apple inc.
Macaddicttt
Mar 4, 11:54 AM
Ooops...
GOP Takes Unprecedented 10-Point Lead on Generic Ballot (http://www.gallup.com/poll/142718/GOP-Unprecedented-Lead-Generic-Ballot.aspx)
Republicans also maintain wide gap in enthusiasm about voting
PRINCETON, NJ -- Republicans lead by 51% to 41% among registered voters in Gallup weekly tracking of 2010 congressional voting preferences. The 10-percentage-point lead is the GOP's largest so far this year and is its largest in Gallup's history of tracking the midterm generic ballot for Congress.
http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/4nitz4hkueaj85zreale-w.gif
No one, no one would take a poll that's seven-months out-of-date and try and pass it off as an accurate representation of current public opinion.
GOP Takes Unprecedented 10-Point Lead on Generic Ballot (http://www.gallup.com/poll/142718/GOP-Unprecedented-Lead-Generic-Ballot.aspx)
Republicans also maintain wide gap in enthusiasm about voting
PRINCETON, NJ -- Republicans lead by 51% to 41% among registered voters in Gallup weekly tracking of 2010 congressional voting preferences. The 10-percentage-point lead is the GOP's largest so far this year and is its largest in Gallup's history of tracking the midterm generic ballot for Congress.
http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/4nitz4hkueaj85zreale-w.gif
No one, no one would take a poll that's seven-months out-of-date and try and pass it off as an accurate representation of current public opinion.
Ino
Oct 10, 07:28 PM
The virtual scroll wheel interface would pretty much wreck the games that were just released for the 5/5.5G iPods...
...unless the game itself occupies only half the screen and the other half is just the click wheel on some sort of background, whether in portrait or landscape. I'm a little skeptical on how that kind of user experience might be though...
...unless the game itself occupies only half the screen and the other half is just the click wheel on some sort of background, whether in portrait or landscape. I'm a little skeptical on how that kind of user experience might be though...
eggstone
Nov 24, 09:29 AM
In store you should be able to get both discounts.
I am looking forward to hear the follow up on this story. I really doubted you can get both EDU and Thanksgiving discount together, even in store.
Maybe one can just ask the question to a on-line apple-store-chat staff?
I am looking forward to hear the follow up on this story. I really doubted you can get both EDU and Thanksgiving discount together, even in store.
Maybe one can just ask the question to a on-line apple-store-chat staff?
MattyMac
Oct 10, 06:48 PM
Yeah, Apple isn't going to sit back and let Zune steal its lunch!
Agreed!
So please please please let it be:D
Agreed!
So please please please let it be:D
golferjh3
Aug 2, 05:08 PM
Remember when DELL was a big company, they will simply fade away with a whimper just like DELL did !!! :cool:
I don't remember Dell going anywhere.
I don't remember Dell going anywhere.
Jetson
Oct 12, 10:15 AM
The reason I posted my concern about the scratches on the 5G iPod is because I'm a longtime Apple customer. I was one of the first to buy the iPod when it came to market. I love Apple products.
However, Apple has responded to this scratch issue very poorly. Apple won't even acknowledge that there is a problem, blaming scratches on customer abuse.
Well when you start blaming the customers, then you are definitely on the wrong road. Customers who are not enamored of Apple (don't own a Mac) will switch to the Zune. If you can't understand the basics of how the market operates, then I can see why you are taking potshots.
SavMan hasn't provided any reference or link to support his claim, true or not, physics or not. His claims are anecdotal. Second, whatever the cause of the proliferation of scratches which have generated many, many complaints, denying that scratches exist is foolish, indeed stupid.
If Apple wants to keep its iPod cash cow, I sincerely hope that they address the scratch issue. There is serious competition on the horizon (Zune) and you can't take the customer for granted anymore.
However, Apple has responded to this scratch issue very poorly. Apple won't even acknowledge that there is a problem, blaming scratches on customer abuse.
Well when you start blaming the customers, then you are definitely on the wrong road. Customers who are not enamored of Apple (don't own a Mac) will switch to the Zune. If you can't understand the basics of how the market operates, then I can see why you are taking potshots.
SavMan hasn't provided any reference or link to support his claim, true or not, physics or not. His claims are anecdotal. Second, whatever the cause of the proliferation of scratches which have generated many, many complaints, denying that scratches exist is foolish, indeed stupid.
If Apple wants to keep its iPod cash cow, I sincerely hope that they address the scratch issue. There is serious competition on the horizon (Zune) and you can't take the customer for granted anymore.
0 comments:
Post a Comment