peharri
Sep 14, 09:19 AM
Oh great, not this again.
BTW iPhone is not an Apple trademark. Doesn't make much difference, I'm sure Apple wouldn't call it the iPhone anyway, but iPhone is owned by Teledex, who are an IP telephony manufacturer.
Apple could do us a few favours and publicly announce it will never, ever, sell an Apple phone, just so this speculation ceases. Every time this rumour surfaces, Apple's chances of dominating the cellphone-MP3 player market through neutral licensing agreements becomes a little less likely.
Of course, they could be that stupid. As people run from MP3 players to MP3 phones, Apple releases a phone, doesn't license the technology to the dominant players, and it's share of the market drops from 75% to 3-5%. At which point nobody cares about iTunes any more, and the labels, fed up of the refusals to offer tiered pricing and other gripes, walk away. Buh-bye Apple as a major multimedia force.
BTW iPhone is not an Apple trademark. Doesn't make much difference, I'm sure Apple wouldn't call it the iPhone anyway, but iPhone is owned by Teledex, who are an IP telephony manufacturer.
Apple could do us a few favours and publicly announce it will never, ever, sell an Apple phone, just so this speculation ceases. Every time this rumour surfaces, Apple's chances of dominating the cellphone-MP3 player market through neutral licensing agreements becomes a little less likely.
Of course, they could be that stupid. As people run from MP3 players to MP3 phones, Apple releases a phone, doesn't license the technology to the dominant players, and it's share of the market drops from 75% to 3-5%. At which point nobody cares about iTunes any more, and the labels, fed up of the refusals to offer tiered pricing and other gripes, walk away. Buh-bye Apple as a major multimedia force.
retroneo
Mar 22, 01:34 PM
What about the Mac Pro? It's way past due, would that come first, before the iMac?
Sandy Bridge Xeon's are due in November.
I wouldn't be surprised if the iMac and new Mac mini are the replacement for the Mac Pro.
With Thunderbolt, you will be able to connect the new iMac or Mac mini of them to Fibre Channel arrays, have three displays or use external PCI chassis for existing PCIe cards. iMac CPU performance with the desktop Sandy Bridge CPUs will exceed most Mac Pro configurations. The new iMac's ability to use 32GB of RAM matches the Mac Pro too. You can configure the iMac using SSDs for less than the price of the Mac Pro too.
By the time November comes around, Thunderbolt may cause the death of the Mac Pro.
Sandy Bridge Xeon's are due in November.
I wouldn't be surprised if the iMac and new Mac mini are the replacement for the Mac Pro.
With Thunderbolt, you will be able to connect the new iMac or Mac mini of them to Fibre Channel arrays, have three displays or use external PCI chassis for existing PCIe cards. iMac CPU performance with the desktop Sandy Bridge CPUs will exceed most Mac Pro configurations. The new iMac's ability to use 32GB of RAM matches the Mac Pro too. You can configure the iMac using SSDs for less than the price of the Mac Pro too.
By the time November comes around, Thunderbolt may cause the death of the Mac Pro.
rstansby
Apr 19, 11:21 PM
The logo on the center of the record, not the album artwork. The Beatle's logo looks like an apple to me, Apple's logo looks like an apple to me. We both know if the sides were reversed, Apple would have filed a suit.
Apple Corps (owned by the The Beatles) did sue Apple.
So there you have it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer
Apple Corps (owned by the The Beatles) did sue Apple.
So there you have it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer
neiltc13
Apr 28, 03:28 PM
Microsoft is still doing very well. They're making the best products they ever have done and as a customer I am very pleased with all of my Microsoft purchases.
- Zune desktop software
- Zune hardware and mobile software
- Windows Phone 7
- Windows 7
- Office 2010
- Office 2011 for Mac
- Xbox 360
- Xbox Live
All great products and deserve to be class leaders if they are not already. I can't think of another company (including Apple) that has put out such a fantastic range of very good products.
- Zune desktop software
- Zune hardware and mobile software
- Windows Phone 7
- Windows 7
- Office 2010
- Office 2011 for Mac
- Xbox 360
- Xbox Live
All great products and deserve to be class leaders if they are not already. I can't think of another company (including Apple) that has put out such a fantastic range of very good products.
Coheebuzz
Aug 24, 06:18 AM
The article you are quoting was published two years ago....
Oh you are right, i didn't really check the date. But am sure it's somewhat related to this, since Woo was to invest some serious money to win the market, and now he has the serious money he needs.
100m is still a massive amount of cash, but only roughly 1/100 of Apples total cash. And Apple has gained a couple of things too like the 'made for iPod' logo on their No.1 competitor, which only standardizes the iPod even more.
Also the most important thing they gained is that they are now 'co-owners' of the patent. And when Creative decides to sue somebody else for patent infringement (Zune), Apple will join the fun too and am sure in that case they'll get most of their money back.
Oh you are right, i didn't really check the date. But am sure it's somewhat related to this, since Woo was to invest some serious money to win the market, and now he has the serious money he needs.
100m is still a massive amount of cash, but only roughly 1/100 of Apples total cash. And Apple has gained a couple of things too like the 'made for iPod' logo on their No.1 competitor, which only standardizes the iPod even more.
Also the most important thing they gained is that they are now 'co-owners' of the patent. And when Creative decides to sue somebody else for patent infringement (Zune), Apple will join the fun too and am sure in that case they'll get most of their money back.
iMacZealot
Sep 18, 01:34 AM
You're right it's just like the ages old Mac verses PC debate can't really compare them.
It really comes down to want you need to do and how much you are prepared to spend.
It's not even the technology's price that's the difference, that's decided by another company. it's the technologies that are hard to compare.
It really comes down to want you need to do and how much you are prepared to spend.
It's not even the technology's price that's the difference, that's decided by another company. it's the technologies that are hard to compare.
OdduWon
Sep 27, 12:25 AM
You're joking right? You realise these are pipe-dream mock ups right?
nice mock up. i've seen 4 like this after i had started making mine using the new ..ahem.. mini nano. but why, why have macrocrap apps on it?? the itunes viz is a nice touch tho. italk still my fav though.even though a phone with wings may become annoying at least it will come to you when it rings :D
nice mock up. i've seen 4 like this after i had started making mine using the new ..ahem.. mini nano. but why, why have macrocrap apps on it?? the itunes viz is a nice touch tho. italk still my fav though.even though a phone with wings may become annoying at least it will come to you when it rings :D
cere
Apr 14, 02:02 PM
Yeah, it is. USB 3.0 is not that big of a step up from USB 2.0 so those that really need the extra bandwidth will not bother with it and go straight to Thunderbolt. Simple as that. Leave your rinky dink Toys R Us low bandwidth peripherals to USB and leave the big boy peripherals to Thunderbolt.
Sure you have, you've completely ignored my other post then changed the subject to reading comprehension to smokescreen the topic at hand. Oh and give me a break with your non-insult ********. You have been making jabs about short buses and taking comprehension classes over a Thunderbolt and USB discussion. If anything you are the one that needs to take some classes, maybe not on comprehension but I'm sure you get the idea.
Actually let's do a real recap:
You agree with a claim that Thunderbolt will be Mac only
I respond with an article that simply states it won't be
You respond with the reason it won't take off as manufacturers will have to add it separately
Econgeek tells you it's a completely different scenario because they don't need a license through Apple
I tell you Intel will be supporting both
You then start with your strawman argument and ignore a portion of what I stated
You also follow that up with some insults
I respond with video proof of why Thunderbolt will be popular with many devices
You ignore then respond with more insults
Honestly, can you try to post without arguing against claims I never made? That is at least 3 times now and it shows a lack of honesty or reading ability. I am not sure which.
I never said it was going to Mac only (though you have accused me of that twice). I agreed with the insinuation that it could be. I never said manufacturers would have to add it separately. I did say that the article you posted said only that it would be available to all and that it didn't say all would add it. Mainly, I said that, because you know, the article doesn't actually say that.
I think we are done. No point in debating someone that doesn't understand what he is reading and also makes up things to reply to. Arguing against someone that uses strawman arguments or misses common subtleties in language is bad enough. Arguing against someone that is making up things to argue against is pointless.
Sure you have, you've completely ignored my other post then changed the subject to reading comprehension to smokescreen the topic at hand. Oh and give me a break with your non-insult ********. You have been making jabs about short buses and taking comprehension classes over a Thunderbolt and USB discussion. If anything you are the one that needs to take some classes, maybe not on comprehension but I'm sure you get the idea.
Actually let's do a real recap:
You agree with a claim that Thunderbolt will be Mac only
I respond with an article that simply states it won't be
You respond with the reason it won't take off as manufacturers will have to add it separately
Econgeek tells you it's a completely different scenario because they don't need a license through Apple
I tell you Intel will be supporting both
You then start with your strawman argument and ignore a portion of what I stated
You also follow that up with some insults
I respond with video proof of why Thunderbolt will be popular with many devices
You ignore then respond with more insults
Honestly, can you try to post without arguing against claims I never made? That is at least 3 times now and it shows a lack of honesty or reading ability. I am not sure which.
I never said it was going to Mac only (though you have accused me of that twice). I agreed with the insinuation that it could be. I never said manufacturers would have to add it separately. I did say that the article you posted said only that it would be available to all and that it didn't say all would add it. Mainly, I said that, because you know, the article doesn't actually say that.
I think we are done. No point in debating someone that doesn't understand what he is reading and also makes up things to reply to. Arguing against someone that uses strawman arguments or misses common subtleties in language is bad enough. Arguing against someone that is making up things to argue against is pointless.
aristotle
Apr 20, 01:44 PM
Watch the video. It was happening on the guys phones who discovered it in the UK. Unless AT&T's signal is better than people let on, I doubt they have signal in the UK. ;)
Edit: From tatonka's link below, this is Southern England.
muslim wedding invitations
Wedding Invitation Wording
royal wedding invitation
Wedding Invitation Wording Samples
Invitation templates are available in 3 formats in either formal or informal. wording. Don#39;t Panic There#39;s Still One Prince Left Royal Wedding Souvenir
Basically, the invitation on
invitation wording for wedding
Royal Wedding- Invitation
Formal Wedding Invitation
royal wedding invite wording.
Edit: From tatonka's link below, this is Southern England.
OrangeSVTguy
Mar 23, 06:35 PM
Is this more about removing drunk drivers from the road-which it won't because of the tax revenue from beer sales, or is this about getting more money from people paying fines, from DUIs, speeding etc. Yes it's always about about money.
Seriously if you want to remove drunk drivers, prohibition(which I seriously doubt).
Seriously if you want to remove drunk drivers, prohibition(which I seriously doubt).
D4F
Apr 19, 10:54 AM
You must be a barrel of laughs on a shopping trip:
Salesperson: May I help you?
LagunaSol: Yes, I'd like to buy that big white iPhone 3GS over there.
Salesperson: (confused) Uh, you mean the Galaxy Tab?
LagunaSol: No, no, the 3GS. It's right there.
Salesperson: Sir, they're only vaguely the same shape.
LagunaSol: I don't care, it's a big 3GS, I can tell !
Salesperson: Yeah... okay.
Believe it or not but judging by some replies in this thread there are people THAT stupid and quite a few of them out there.
It's not even funny anymore. The age of retards is where we are.
Salesperson: May I help you?
LagunaSol: Yes, I'd like to buy that big white iPhone 3GS over there.
Salesperson: (confused) Uh, you mean the Galaxy Tab?
LagunaSol: No, no, the 3GS. It's right there.
Salesperson: Sir, they're only vaguely the same shape.
LagunaSol: I don't care, it's a big 3GS, I can tell !
Salesperson: Yeah... okay.
Believe it or not but judging by some replies in this thread there are people THAT stupid and quite a few of them out there.
It's not even funny anymore. The age of retards is where we are.
ezekielrage_99
Oct 27, 10:06 AM
And Greenpeace wonder why people don't take them very seriously.....
milo
Sep 5, 11:58 AM
I've been saying a video Airport is apple's best move for months now.
It doesn't seem Apple's style to make wireless n hardware when there is no standard yet, I would think they would make a Media Center Mac, possibly with a built in iPod dock, maybe adding DivX and XVid (or just sticking VLC on the damn thing).
I think a streaming box makes more sense than a media center computer. A MC box is always going to be overpriced for a single purpose box. Why have hundreds of dollars worth of hardware tethered to a TV when you can have a cheap box on the TV and put your pricey computer anywhere in the house?
Makes even more sense if you have multiple TV's in the house - you can have one server box with the hard drives and as many cheaper TV stations all around the house (including things like bringing a laptop into the backyard).
I love my mini, and it's great for TV viewing...but I HATE leaving it hooked up to the TV all the time. The TV makes a terrible monitor for any other computer use, and I just don't want the computer in my TV room.
The device would not make a lot of sense by itself. There is more to this. Most people are waiting for a Media Center system. Sounds like the device would replace some cables that you can get for 40 bucks. I am refering to the cables that allow you to connect your Mac to the TV.
You're missing the point. Most people don't want their computer in the TV room. The TV makes a terrible monitor, and most people don't want it in that room (or have to have a computer monitor next to the TV). This allows having the computer wherever you want.
I don't want to buy a Mac Mini (and then pay twice for every subsequent release OS X).
I'm sure apple would like you to buy two upgrades, but does anyone really do that?
Hmm...I think Belkin calls this 802.11n. This isn't new. Gimme a break. People are really scrounging around deep now.
Read the article again, you missed the point. This isn't just a 802.11n box, it's a box that has VIDEO outs (plus hopefully a remote, and even Front Row). Do the belkin boxes do that? Don't think so.
It doesn't seem Apple's style to make wireless n hardware when there is no standard yet, I would think they would make a Media Center Mac, possibly with a built in iPod dock, maybe adding DivX and XVid (or just sticking VLC on the damn thing).
I think a streaming box makes more sense than a media center computer. A MC box is always going to be overpriced for a single purpose box. Why have hundreds of dollars worth of hardware tethered to a TV when you can have a cheap box on the TV and put your pricey computer anywhere in the house?
Makes even more sense if you have multiple TV's in the house - you can have one server box with the hard drives and as many cheaper TV stations all around the house (including things like bringing a laptop into the backyard).
I love my mini, and it's great for TV viewing...but I HATE leaving it hooked up to the TV all the time. The TV makes a terrible monitor for any other computer use, and I just don't want the computer in my TV room.
The device would not make a lot of sense by itself. There is more to this. Most people are waiting for a Media Center system. Sounds like the device would replace some cables that you can get for 40 bucks. I am refering to the cables that allow you to connect your Mac to the TV.
You're missing the point. Most people don't want their computer in the TV room. The TV makes a terrible monitor, and most people don't want it in that room (or have to have a computer monitor next to the TV). This allows having the computer wherever you want.
I don't want to buy a Mac Mini (and then pay twice for every subsequent release OS X).
I'm sure apple would like you to buy two upgrades, but does anyone really do that?
Hmm...I think Belkin calls this 802.11n. This isn't new. Gimme a break. People are really scrounging around deep now.
Read the article again, you missed the point. This isn't just a 802.11n box, it's a box that has VIDEO outs (plus hopefully a remote, and even Front Row). Do the belkin boxes do that? Don't think so.
twilson
Apr 29, 03:39 AM
Nintendo is gonna kill them in the Console race. They need to come out with the XBox 720 within 6 months of Nintendo's new machine!
Haha, you're funny. I'm no fan of the Xbox, but you've got to be kidding if you think Nintendo is ever really going to kill Sony/MS. Nintendo may have sold the most consoles, but most main virtually unused, cos the Wii is woefully under-powered, propped up by the same old kiddy franchises and once you get past the new gimmicks gets boring fast.
I hardly know anyone with a Wii, that still uses it. The same will happen to the 3DS.
Haha, you're funny. I'm no fan of the Xbox, but you've got to be kidding if you think Nintendo is ever really going to kill Sony/MS. Nintendo may have sold the most consoles, but most main virtually unused, cos the Wii is woefully under-powered, propped up by the same old kiddy franchises and once you get past the new gimmicks gets boring fast.
I hardly know anyone with a Wii, that still uses it. The same will happen to the 3DS.
vitaboy
Aug 24, 12:01 PM
No, but they lost in every other sense that matters. I am really failing to understand why some people are having such a tough time comprehending this. Apple capitulated on the patent challenge, Apple paid a huge sum of money to Creative so Apple could continue business as usual. Apple lost. That's all, folks.
Sorry, but I think you are taking the settlement at face value and making just a surface interpretation.
There are already several industry analysts who have now gone on record saying this is a win for Apple.
$100 million may be a big load of money for you, me and Creative, but it's chump change when we're talking about the fact that iPod makes $6+ BILLION PER YEAR (and growing) for Apple.
It's like Creative accused Apple of stealing the goose that lays golden eggs. In return, Apple gives Creative one of the eggs and Creative goes, "Wow! Thanks! You can keep the goose!"
The face-value interpretation says that Creative won because it was a pauper who now has a golden egg that's worth a lot of money. The deep interpretation is that Apple still has the goose and Creative just gave up all claims of ownership over it.
What's so hard to understand about that?
BTW, some months ago, Research in Motion coughed up $450 million to settle a patent dispute with NTP over the popular Blackberry devices. RIM made a total of $2 billion in fiscal 2006. NTP basically had RIM by the throat with its patents and extracted a heavy licensing fee as a result.
You're telling me Creative supposedly had Apple by the throat, and extracted 1/4 the licensing for a product that generates 4X the revenue of Blackberry? Riiiiiight....
To put it another way, $450 million was about 25% of RIM's entire annual revenue. $100 million is less than 1% of Apple's, and in fact, is less money than Apple makes on interest each year on its cash horde.
Sorry, but I think you are taking the settlement at face value and making just a surface interpretation.
There are already several industry analysts who have now gone on record saying this is a win for Apple.
$100 million may be a big load of money for you, me and Creative, but it's chump change when we're talking about the fact that iPod makes $6+ BILLION PER YEAR (and growing) for Apple.
It's like Creative accused Apple of stealing the goose that lays golden eggs. In return, Apple gives Creative one of the eggs and Creative goes, "Wow! Thanks! You can keep the goose!"
The face-value interpretation says that Creative won because it was a pauper who now has a golden egg that's worth a lot of money. The deep interpretation is that Apple still has the goose and Creative just gave up all claims of ownership over it.
What's so hard to understand about that?
BTW, some months ago, Research in Motion coughed up $450 million to settle a patent dispute with NTP over the popular Blackberry devices. RIM made a total of $2 billion in fiscal 2006. NTP basically had RIM by the throat with its patents and extracted a heavy licensing fee as a result.
You're telling me Creative supposedly had Apple by the throat, and extracted 1/4 the licensing for a product that generates 4X the revenue of Blackberry? Riiiiiight....
To put it another way, $450 million was about 25% of RIM's entire annual revenue. $100 million is less than 1% of Apple's, and in fact, is less money than Apple makes on interest each year on its cash horde.
Sobering
Sep 4, 03:32 PM
New iMacs? Are you freakin kidding me? I just bought a damn iMac and now there is already new ones! Pffff...
Eraserhead
Nov 13, 05:16 PM
Apple is the copyright holder of those images and they provide the right to use those images in Applications running on macs via the API on a Mac running OS X.
So why can't you use an official Apple API on the iPhone? That's crazy.
So why can't you use an official Apple API on the iPhone? That's crazy.
OdduWon
Sep 12, 01:31 AM
this is great:) were going to be able to control front row with our new touch screen ipods. apple has kept this "close to the chest" because it involves leapord, core animation and the new front row. they even showed it to us when demoing core animation. they had all the data for the floating songs right there while they were just raining down in the background. think about it you could see a what you streamed to the tv on the ipod and touch albums or dvd covers floating in the library. :D hope bluetooth is enough for that seems the movie dongle transef speeds are going to be fast. hope they do release a mac mini tubeport package too.
AppleScruff1
Apr 25, 10:08 PM
And a large portion of that 99% of the market will find integrated graphics fine, until they venture to the Apple App Store, and find that their spanking new MBA have a video card not supported by 99% of the games on sale... In fact, integrated graphics are not only not supported, but are specifically singled out in most game's system requirements.
I don't question the gaming issue, I just wonder what percentage of MBP buyers would not buy because of the Intel graphics. My uneducated guess would be a very small percentage. Remember, Apple caters to the average consumer, not the geeks.
I don't question the gaming issue, I just wonder what percentage of MBP buyers would not buy because of the Intel graphics. My uneducated guess would be a very small percentage. Remember, Apple caters to the average consumer, not the geeks.
gkarris
Mar 29, 02:33 PM
Oh boy, assume that all former Nokia Symbian users will automatically all buy Nokia Windows Mobile Phones - that's scientific... :eek:
;)
;)
suzerain
Sep 26, 02:34 PM
I had no trouble getting an unlock code from Cingular for a SLVR I bought from them. Here's pix I just took showing it in use back home on the Telstra network.
I ended up doing the reverse. I bought a SLVR in China and brought it back to the USA. It's so nice not to have to be on any ****ing "contract". (Sorry, I just really hate the state of the cellphone market in the USA.)
I just want WiFi VoIP phones to come along and wipe out the whole market...I think that will have to wait for WiMax rollouts nationwide, though.
I ended up doing the reverse. I bought a SLVR in China and brought it back to the USA. It's so nice not to have to be on any ****ing "contract". (Sorry, I just really hate the state of the cellphone market in the USA.)
I just want WiFi VoIP phones to come along and wipe out the whole market...I think that will have to wait for WiMax rollouts nationwide, though.
Steve121178
Apr 20, 10:49 AM
What does this even mean? "Apple has never cared about the user?" Perhaps you can teach us, then, how Apple has enjoyed so much success despite "never caring for the user."
Or was it simply fun to write those sentences?
Apple does not care about us, they just enjoy us lining their pockets full of cash. They get us hooked on using their products and we go and buy more and more of them. They just enjoy getting our money, like any business.
Or was it simply fun to write those sentences?
Apple does not care about us, they just enjoy us lining their pockets full of cash. They get us hooked on using their products and we go and buy more and more of them. They just enjoy getting our money, like any business.
IJ Reilly
Aug 24, 06:47 PM
It may be a bookkeeping trick, but it's considered part of Generally Accepted Accounting Procedures (GAAP). The IRS and the SEC certainly doesn't have problem with it and ammorization is actually encouraged. Apple used the same method to record the $250 million cash investment in flash memory plants last year, as well as the $400 million it is setting aside for the new Cupertino campus. Neither of those big cash outlays really affected their profit recording.
I didn't mean to imply that it was somehow illegal or improper. My point was, even an amortized expense is an expense, and booking it as an asset doesn't mean it will produce a return on investment. All those numbers go on the expense side of the ledger, one way or another. Spread out over years or taken as a lump sum, they're still spending the money.
I didn't mean to imply that it was somehow illegal or improper. My point was, even an amortized expense is an expense, and booking it as an asset doesn't mean it will produce a return on investment. All those numbers go on the expense side of the ledger, one way or another. Spread out over years or taken as a lump sum, they're still spending the money.
gkarris
Apr 25, 02:35 PM
AKA
iPad Pro... :eek:
ha, ha....
iPad Pro... :eek:
ha, ha....
0 comments:
Post a Comment