bwillwall
Apr 24, 08:12 AM
That really is such a bad idea :(
Can you imagine the terrible usability in having a screen tilted on it's back and having to lift our arms up to do finger painting.
Who wants to cover their display with their hands?
lol both of you guys, its called the iPad... by the way Apple made it very clear that touchscreen laptops dont work well.
Can you imagine the terrible usability in having a screen tilted on it's back and having to lift our arms up to do finger painting.
Who wants to cover their display with their hands?
lol both of you guys, its called the iPad... by the way Apple made it very clear that touchscreen laptops dont work well.
dgree03
Mar 29, 01:08 PM
That reads quite a bit different from Amazon's "... or as we determine is necessary to provide the Service ..."
Yes amazons is more transparent and to the point. Apples is more vague. Ill take transparent over vague "in my interpretation" any day.
Yes amazons is more transparent and to the point. Apples is more vague. Ill take transparent over vague "in my interpretation" any day.
Peace
Sep 11, 01:37 PM
Why couldn't apple mail a movie to you via USPS? Pop it into your <insert favorite Mac flavor> and have it automaticly import into iTunes library. There is no way I would download a 2g file to watch a movie. 2g is way too big to download. Compare that to music, 5mb on the high end. 2g is 400 times the size. I don't see downloading as a viable option, atleast not at the resolution that makes it competitive with DVD.
PS I think downloadable movies sounds great, but I don't think it is practicle.
Apple wouldn't do that because NetFlix already does.
PS I think downloadable movies sounds great, but I don't think it is practicle.
Apple wouldn't do that because NetFlix already does.
Bengt77
Sep 11, 04:56 AM
One would be in form of Airport that we can stream video to my TV on the entertainment room.
Why would we all want to stream video to your TV? ;) :cool: :p :D
Why would we all want to stream video to your TV? ;) :cool: :p :D
Tomorrow
May 3, 09:02 PM
Semantics. Your argument boils down to the pain of change.
The cost of change. There's a difference.
Again, the real crux of your argument is that people are 'comfortable' with what they already know.
No, once again, it's not about comfort; it's about experience. I learned mostly SI units when I was in college, I'm quite comfortable with using those units - but the industry doesn't use those units. I learned, and became an expert in, the units used by the industry. You would ask millions of engineers, technicians, etc. to throw away years or even decades of experience simply to change a system that isn't broken.
Yes, it's a system that has its roots in the past, but the system still works. There's no compelling reason to change it. There's no efficiency to be gained.
The cost of change. There's a difference.
Again, the real crux of your argument is that people are 'comfortable' with what they already know.
No, once again, it's not about comfort; it's about experience. I learned mostly SI units when I was in college, I'm quite comfortable with using those units - but the industry doesn't use those units. I learned, and became an expert in, the units used by the industry. You would ask millions of engineers, technicians, etc. to throw away years or even decades of experience simply to change a system that isn't broken.
Yes, it's a system that has its roots in the past, but the system still works. There's no compelling reason to change it. There's no efficiency to be gained.
ftaok
Apr 7, 02:32 PM
A lot of the comments on this thread is about competition. How Apple is stiffling the competion by scooping up all of the important parts, thus leaving nothing for the other OEMs.
I call BS.
If we all want Apple to have competition, then the HPs and Samsungs of the world need to step up and compete. They need to develop something that creates enough demand where they can buy up millions upon millions of parts.
Apple developed a product that has enough demand that warrants the purchase of millions of screens. If someone else developed a product that had such demand, then they should/could corner the market for a particular part. The fact of the matter is that none of the iPad competitors have anything novel enough to differentiate it from the iPad.
Here's what the competitors should do. Don't follow Apple into the tablet/slate market. You won't win. Instead, develop the next big thing. Invest millions of dollars into developing the next device and hope that you had the skills to hit it big. That's what they should be doing, not copying the iPad.
I'd be willing to bet that Apple has about 10 different things they're working on right now that will be replacing the iPad as the next big thing. They'll probably work on these items until they get them right. Then they'll polish it to a blinding sheen. And then they'll release it to great fanfare.
This is what Sammy, HP, LG, Moto, et al need to be competing against. They've already lost to the iPad. The war is over. Don't lose the next war against Apple's next big thing.
I call BS.
If we all want Apple to have competition, then the HPs and Samsungs of the world need to step up and compete. They need to develop something that creates enough demand where they can buy up millions upon millions of parts.
Apple developed a product that has enough demand that warrants the purchase of millions of screens. If someone else developed a product that had such demand, then they should/could corner the market for a particular part. The fact of the matter is that none of the iPad competitors have anything novel enough to differentiate it from the iPad.
Here's what the competitors should do. Don't follow Apple into the tablet/slate market. You won't win. Instead, develop the next big thing. Invest millions of dollars into developing the next device and hope that you had the skills to hit it big. That's what they should be doing, not copying the iPad.
I'd be willing to bet that Apple has about 10 different things they're working on right now that will be replacing the iPad as the next big thing. They'll probably work on these items until they get them right. Then they'll polish it to a blinding sheen. And then they'll release it to great fanfare.
This is what Sammy, HP, LG, Moto, et al need to be competing against. They've already lost to the iPad. The war is over. Don't lose the next war against Apple's next big thing.
ucfgrad93
May 4, 01:49 PM
I'd think we'd want to explore this room.
Agreed, lets explore this room.
Agreed, lets explore this room.
addicted44
Apr 23, 06:09 PM
Given this. If these "typical consumers, who don't care or really know about specs" are today, looking at their current 1920x1080 screens, or 1920x1200 screens, and they cannot see the individual pixels from their normal, let's say two feet away viewing distance, then what on earth would be the point in increasing costs, and slowing down an iMac by lumbering it with a higher resolution screen?
What is the point, for these consumers, to increase the screen resolution when they can't make out the individual pixels currently?
Because those screens WILL look better to those normal customers. Text and graphics will look sharper, and clearer.
The iPhone screen, before the retina screen, had a higher resolution than macs. People could not see individual pixels. Despite that, ask any Tom Dick or Harry on the street, and they will be unequivocal that the Retina screen is far better looking than the 3GS screens.
What is the point, for these consumers, to increase the screen resolution when they can't make out the individual pixels currently?
Because those screens WILL look better to those normal customers. Text and graphics will look sharper, and clearer.
The iPhone screen, before the retina screen, had a higher resolution than macs. People could not see individual pixels. Despite that, ask any Tom Dick or Harry on the street, and they will be unequivocal that the Retina screen is far better looking than the 3GS screens.
CosmoPilot
May 6, 12:16 AM
How does this affect T-Bolt? How about the tri-gate technology released by Intel the other day. Sounds like Intel is making huge strides in their processors.
I hope this is just a rumor.
I hope this is just a rumor.
Arcus
Apr 25, 10:31 AM
1. People who are scared by the media and do not think it through enough to see the media have it wrong.
There are quite a few things the media has wrong, but what it does have correct is asking "what is the point of the location database"
2. People who like to stir up trouble for the sake of trouble.
Unfortunately with every one of these issues these people exist, on both side. The people who make too much of an issue and make it seem as though people with legit concerns are just being too anal and those who downplay a legit issue and call EVERYONE else trolls or etc even if they have legitimate concerns and are not caught up in the hype. I see both types posting here.
3. People who hate Apple and use any excuse to blast them, true or not.
Agree.
4. People who are paid to provide misinformation against Apple.
Citation?
There are quite a few things the media has wrong, but what it does have correct is asking "what is the point of the location database"
2. People who like to stir up trouble for the sake of trouble.
Unfortunately with every one of these issues these people exist, on both side. The people who make too much of an issue and make it seem as though people with legit concerns are just being too anal and those who downplay a legit issue and call EVERYONE else trolls or etc even if they have legitimate concerns and are not caught up in the hype. I see both types posting here.
3. People who hate Apple and use any excuse to blast them, true or not.
Agree.
4. People who are paid to provide misinformation against Apple.
Citation?
apolloa
Apr 21, 07:24 PM
Agreed. The Mac Pro case has been perfected over years and doesn't look at all dated. The more Apple has to pour R&D into a small new case with almost certain version 1 cooling issues, the more likely prices will continue to rise.
IMO the Mac Pro looks like an old granny these day's. It's in dire need of a refresh and looks totally out of line when compared to the rest of Apples range. And it's interesting to think that Apple is incapable of properly re-designing the computer because that's what you are saying effectively.
IMO the Mac Pro looks like an old granny these day's. It's in dire need of a refresh and looks totally out of line when compared to the rest of Apples range. And it's interesting to think that Apple is incapable of properly re-designing the computer because that's what you are saying effectively.
Erwin-Br
Apr 21, 04:33 PM
It's not going to happen. If Apple was still interested in offering a rack mountable system they would have redesigned the X-Serve instead of the Mac Pro.
Where is the logic in dropping a perfectly fine rack-mountable system, because apparently it wasn't sold enough, and then convert the Mac Pro workstation to... a rack-mountable system?! They could've dropped the Mac Pro and rebrand X-Serve to Mac Pro instead. Same result.
Where is the logic in dropping a perfectly fine rack-mountable system, because apparently it wasn't sold enough, and then convert the Mac Pro workstation to... a rack-mountable system?! They could've dropped the Mac Pro and rebrand X-Serve to Mac Pro instead. Same result.
LeighAnna Jones
Mar 29, 04:13 PM
Thousands of people are dying in Japan and all you idiots care about is iPod Touch batteries? That's kind of... selfish.
faizanshakyboy
Apr 24, 12:22 AM
if this is true then it is really a very good news :cool::apple:
mashinhead
Aug 11, 10:06 AM
MacBook and MacBook Pro are soldered. So no, you can't change it.
The iMac and MacMini are socketed.
will there be a third party company that offers these upgrades to consumers?
The iMac and MacMini are socketed.
will there be a third party company that offers these upgrades to consumers?
vincenz
Apr 18, 03:14 PM
couldn't Samsung simply get back at Apple by NOT making Apple's stuff? I mean, come on.
They would stand to lose a lot of money if they decided overnight that they are not going to deal with Apple anymore.
They would stand to lose a lot of money if they decided overnight that they are not going to deal with Apple anymore.
Mac'nCheese
May 2, 06:55 PM
I remember in elementary school, learning about the metric system since we were all going to switch to it. That never happened. I wonder why....
Core Trio
Jul 21, 02:04 PM
Noooo....must...resist urges to buy...new MBP's
Just have to keep reminding myself I cant afford these things right now..
Just have to keep reminding myself I cant afford these things right now..
Small White Car
May 4, 03:04 PM
If I have to DL it from the App Store, I've got to download it 4 times!
I can copy iPhone apps from one computer to another just fine. As long as they're logged into the same account they work.
Shouldn't this work the same way?
I mean, obviously we don't know, but I don't see why it shouldn't.
So I guess we'll all just send you our AT&T Internet Bills when we go over their newly implemented data usage caps? :eek:
:rolleyes:
If you're using AT&T mobile internet as the primary connection for your Macs then you probably need to re-examine your life somewhat.
I can copy iPhone apps from one computer to another just fine. As long as they're logged into the same account they work.
Shouldn't this work the same way?
I mean, obviously we don't know, but I don't see why it shouldn't.
So I guess we'll all just send you our AT&T Internet Bills when we go over their newly implemented data usage caps? :eek:
:rolleyes:
If you're using AT&T mobile internet as the primary connection for your Macs then you probably need to re-examine your life somewhat.
globol
May 6, 02:03 AM
Until it happens I'm not even going to care.
zim
Nov 24, 11:04 PM
Apple has about as good a chance of entering the cell phone market as LG does entering the MP3 player market.
Apple doesn't do inexpensive very well.. and 'playing with others' isn't one of their strengths, either. Both are requirements to enter an already highly competitive cell phone marketplace.
Apple needs to get back to what they do best, which is innovate in untapped or barely tapped markets where they really stand out and shine against the competition.. Apple II, Original Macintosh, iPod, etc. Not jump into an already saturated market with little to distinguish themselves between the competition but a pretty case.
LG does make an mp3 player (http://www.lge.com/products/category/list/audio_portable_mp3%20player.jhtml).
I believe that Apple's success has been based on the simplicity of the product not on how rich in features it is. Cell phones are currently overly complex, attempting to do more then what their intent was, which is where I think Apple can make a difference. Removing complexity is what Apple does best.
As for playing with others, Apple has constantly made attempts to bridge the gap between PC and Macs. Look at the early PowerMacs when apple had translation tools, and the ability to read PC formated disks.
"Apple doesn't do inexpensive very well"
- Simplicity comes at a price.
Apple doesn't do inexpensive very well.. and 'playing with others' isn't one of their strengths, either. Both are requirements to enter an already highly competitive cell phone marketplace.
Apple needs to get back to what they do best, which is innovate in untapped or barely tapped markets where they really stand out and shine against the competition.. Apple II, Original Macintosh, iPod, etc. Not jump into an already saturated market with little to distinguish themselves between the competition but a pretty case.
LG does make an mp3 player (http://www.lge.com/products/category/list/audio_portable_mp3%20player.jhtml).
I believe that Apple's success has been based on the simplicity of the product not on how rich in features it is. Cell phones are currently overly complex, attempting to do more then what their intent was, which is where I think Apple can make a difference. Removing complexity is what Apple does best.
As for playing with others, Apple has constantly made attempts to bridge the gap between PC and Macs. Look at the early PowerMacs when apple had translation tools, and the ability to read PC formated disks.
"Apple doesn't do inexpensive very well"
- Simplicity comes at a price.
itcheroni
Apr 15, 06:25 PM
Which "game"? Are you "trading and investing" in companies by purchasing shares in IPOs, or are you "trading and investing" on Wall St.? If it is the latter, then basically you are buying and selling ownership interests in companies, which has almost no affect on underlying companies.
Won't higher capital gains reduce your "take home" earned from trading in the secondary market? If so, don't hedge funds and the like start investing in more risk taking?
What do you think is/was the riskier investment? Investing in GE or investing in a start-up like Google? Innovation? I'm fairly certain buying 100 shares of GE from my broker didn't innovate a new lightbulb, but Google has innovated and expanded with the capital it received in its IPO. If you are trying to increase your rate of return over what you get from your GE shares, would you invest in AT&T or a little start-up called Chef John Smith, Inc. because you think he's an up and coming talent? One has a big upside, but also a lot of risk.
If the goal is to increase rate of return of an investment portfolio, your only choices are to be better at picking good stocks, or to invest in risker investments. Wouldn't that lead to an influx of start-up capital, innovation, hiring, and economic growth?
On the other hand, you can lower capital gains and encourage people to invest conservatively in the secondary market.
Firstly, your perspective would change completely if you ever decide to invest or trade. I don't want hedge funds going for more risk. That is what contributed to the housing bust and mortgage backed securities. I am completely self taught as a trader and investor. In fact, I don't know a single other person who does what I do. And when I do meet someone who works in finance, they are usually just a cog, and I have nothing in common with them.
Secondly, and more importantly, I don't think a person should have to give a good reason to be able to do anything. Unless you can prove that a person's actions causes harm to others, why attack it? Our legal system works that way; the burden of proof is always on the accuser not the accused. So, even if nothing "good" comes out of trading, one shouldn't have to make apologies for it. And if you were only able to invest in IPO's, who would you sell it to? Why invest in an IPO if you can never sell it?
Won't higher capital gains reduce your "take home" earned from trading in the secondary market? If so, don't hedge funds and the like start investing in more risk taking?
What do you think is/was the riskier investment? Investing in GE or investing in a start-up like Google? Innovation? I'm fairly certain buying 100 shares of GE from my broker didn't innovate a new lightbulb, but Google has innovated and expanded with the capital it received in its IPO. If you are trying to increase your rate of return over what you get from your GE shares, would you invest in AT&T or a little start-up called Chef John Smith, Inc. because you think he's an up and coming talent? One has a big upside, but also a lot of risk.
If the goal is to increase rate of return of an investment portfolio, your only choices are to be better at picking good stocks, or to invest in risker investments. Wouldn't that lead to an influx of start-up capital, innovation, hiring, and economic growth?
On the other hand, you can lower capital gains and encourage people to invest conservatively in the secondary market.
Firstly, your perspective would change completely if you ever decide to invest or trade. I don't want hedge funds going for more risk. That is what contributed to the housing bust and mortgage backed securities. I am completely self taught as a trader and investor. In fact, I don't know a single other person who does what I do. And when I do meet someone who works in finance, they are usually just a cog, and I have nothing in common with them.
Secondly, and more importantly, I don't think a person should have to give a good reason to be able to do anything. Unless you can prove that a person's actions causes harm to others, why attack it? Our legal system works that way; the burden of proof is always on the accuser not the accused. So, even if nothing "good" comes out of trading, one shouldn't have to make apologies for it. And if you were only able to invest in IPO's, who would you sell it to? Why invest in an IPO if you can never sell it?
WillEH
May 2, 11:13 PM
Yes please, love things like it :)
McBeats
Apr 5, 04:46 PM
compared to sony, apple is damn near supporting the jailbreak community
totally agreed...
------
Anyway it's ********** ugly!
EXACTLY. Sorry Toyota, but it's pretty rough.
totally agreed...
------
Anyway it's ********** ugly!
EXACTLY. Sorry Toyota, but it's pretty rough.
No comments:
Post a Comment