LagunaSol
Apr 19, 09:23 AM
Salesperson: Sir, they're only vaguely the same shape.
And I don't think "vaguely" means what you think it means.
And I don't think "vaguely" means what you think it means.
Fraghax
Apr 4, 12:16 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
That security guard shoots better than the LA police. Lol
That security guard shoots better than the LA police. Lol
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.
sterno74
Mar 29, 02:25 PM
So the theory they seem to be positing here is that most of the former Symbian users are going to become Windows Mobile users. If you look at the market share figures they show Windows climbing to the 20.9% share that Symbian currently has and Symbian largely ceasing to exist.
The reality is that the OS of phones is becoming the key differentiator. You decide iPhone, Android, or Windows, and then from there you decide the specific hardware you want to run. Nobody is going to be looking for a Nokia phone specifically and then just taking whatever OS it runs.
So if you assume that Android, iOS and Windows are all equal competitors, then figure, at most, Windows is going to take 1/3rd of the market from former Symbian users. Those users will be looking at three OS's that are all completely different from Symbian, so there's no reason to believe they'd have any particular loyalty to the Windows mobile OS because of former Symbian use on a Nokia phone.
They seem to predict that, instead, about 75% of the Symbian users go to Windows mobile. I find that highly unlikely.
The reality is that the OS of phones is becoming the key differentiator. You decide iPhone, Android, or Windows, and then from there you decide the specific hardware you want to run. Nobody is going to be looking for a Nokia phone specifically and then just taking whatever OS it runs.
So if you assume that Android, iOS and Windows are all equal competitors, then figure, at most, Windows is going to take 1/3rd of the market from former Symbian users. Those users will be looking at three OS's that are all completely different from Symbian, so there's no reason to believe they'd have any particular loyalty to the Windows mobile OS because of former Symbian use on a Nokia phone.
They seem to predict that, instead, about 75% of the Symbian users go to Windows mobile. I find that highly unlikely.
ehoui
Apr 28, 04:14 PM
Long on Apple, Microsoft and Google. These are the class leaders. Microsoft is entrenched and executes well in the enterprise space. Their consumer products are good, but not great. While they suffer from too much breadth and not enough deep focus, they have the will to invest for the long term and that is important. Google can be a game changer when they go after a space. Apple executes incredibly well in the consumer space. All good here.
zhenya
Apr 11, 10:14 AM
I agree with the guy who wants any iOS device to be the receiver of AirTunes music.
I hear all the comments about Home Sharing and Airfoil, but both are only partial solutions that work in specific cases. I, personally, nt my old iPod Touch to function as a battery powered airport express - with some battery powered speakers attached, I can stream music anywhere (including the garden, etc) at the same time - perfect for parties. I could do that with AirFoil, but that means when I want to stream from my iPad to my Apple TV or Airport Express speakers in the living room I need a different solution. Plus i'm not sure the Apple Remote app will allow me to switch AirFoil sources on and off, which means I have to go back to my Mac to change them, it's not properly integrated, so not a great solution. Acceptable, sure, but far from ideal.
With home sharing, your old iPod Touch already does this. It's just that you get to 'pull' the music from your library to your Touch, rather than pushing it from the computer to the Touch. Really, what more do you want?
In reality, this is a much better solution than acting as an Airport Express, which only allows you to play one music stream to any or all devices. With home sharing, different devices can listen to different music at the same time.
I hear all the comments about Home Sharing and Airfoil, but both are only partial solutions that work in specific cases. I, personally, nt my old iPod Touch to function as a battery powered airport express - with some battery powered speakers attached, I can stream music anywhere (including the garden, etc) at the same time - perfect for parties. I could do that with AirFoil, but that means when I want to stream from my iPad to my Apple TV or Airport Express speakers in the living room I need a different solution. Plus i'm not sure the Apple Remote app will allow me to switch AirFoil sources on and off, which means I have to go back to my Mac to change them, it's not properly integrated, so not a great solution. Acceptable, sure, but far from ideal.
With home sharing, your old iPod Touch already does this. It's just that you get to 'pull' the music from your library to your Touch, rather than pushing it from the computer to the Touch. Really, what more do you want?
In reality, this is a much better solution than acting as an Airport Express, which only allows you to play one music stream to any or all devices. With home sharing, different devices can listen to different music at the same time.
strwrsfrk
Apr 22, 12:53 PM
If ditching the 320M and switching to an i-processor boosts battery life even 10%, I think it will be worth it.
People who want to play modern games on these systems should already be aware of their limitations; sure, a graphics downgrade is a bummer, but the Intel IGP is good enough for most general productivity needs. And it's already been proven to handle 1080p out.
The general sentiment that the 2012 will be an improvement on 100% of the internals is likely accurate. However, there are four changes that will make this a 100% buy for me:
1) Backlit keyboard (my biggest hope).
2) Larger SSD. 90+ GB base (128 would be most likely, I reckon), 380+ GB BTO.
3) +10% Battery life. An extra 30 minutes to an hour would be spectacular.
4) Core i ULM processor.
People who want to play modern games on these systems should already be aware of their limitations; sure, a graphics downgrade is a bummer, but the Intel IGP is good enough for most general productivity needs. And it's already been proven to handle 1080p out.
The general sentiment that the 2012 will be an improvement on 100% of the internals is likely accurate. However, there are four changes that will make this a 100% buy for me:
1) Backlit keyboard (my biggest hope).
2) Larger SSD. 90+ GB base (128 would be most likely, I reckon), 380+ GB BTO.
3) +10% Battery life. An extra 30 minutes to an hour would be spectacular.
4) Core i ULM processor.
scoobydoo99
Apr 20, 02:09 PM
You have no proof of this.
I'm sure they do... but for the most part they just subpoena the telecom provider for whatever records they require.
lol. they don't even have to subpoena these days. just ask nicely and the companies simply hand over anything they want (all in the name of being good patriots.) Of course, sometimes they charge the government for it:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm
I'm sure they do... but for the most part they just subpoena the telecom provider for whatever records they require.
lol. they don't even have to subpoena these days. just ask nicely and the companies simply hand over anything they want (all in the name of being good patriots.) Of course, sometimes they charge the government for it:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm
pmjoe
Nov 17, 05:16 AM
So, if I associate an image with music or a movie on my Mac, Apple assumes it's OK for them to display it on my Apple TV? What about my copyrighted photos in iPhoto? I didn't give Apple the right to copy them to my iPhone.
Oh wait, it's my Mac and it's my iPhone and it's my Apple TV. Apple needs to stay out of MY business and allow me to make fair use of my content.
Oh wait, it's my Mac and it's my iPhone and it's my Apple TV. Apple needs to stay out of MY business and allow me to make fair use of my content.
ksgant
Mar 22, 02:47 PM
I'm waiting for the refresh of the Mac Mini myself. We're set for around the middle of May to get the tax refund for our state returns around then and that would be a perfect time for them to come out with the refresh.
Frisco
Oct 12, 01:34 PM
Check out DeaPeaJay's mockup at AppleInsider. Me want.
http://www.exit42design.com/stuffDirectory/redNano.jpg
That's Hot! I love the deep red.
http://www.exit42design.com/stuffDirectory/redNano.jpg
That's Hot! I love the deep red.
tCruzin4lyfe
Apr 19, 08:48 AM
I don't see why everybody mad at Apple, Samsung's products do look like iPhone, iPad rip-offs. They look very identical so I can understand why Apple is doing it. Force these other companies to be more creative. I don't know how many times I've seen my friends walk around with other devices such as these and the question they get asked the most is "is that an iPhone?", "can I see it?".
daneoni
Sep 13, 09:56 PM
If that is it then i am so not interested. Crome back and polucarbonate front??. Thats just screaming "scratch me please" if this picture is real then it suggest they took an iPod and slapped phone components onto it. Plus side is, its got a big screen and........??
Stella
Sep 5, 06:01 AM
WO0t! PowerBook G5 tuesday after next!
Large Yawn.
You do realise your not funny at all - rather - very irritating.
Can't you be original?
Large Yawn.
You do realise your not funny at all - rather - very irritating.
Can't you be original?
spaz
Sep 20, 01:24 PM
Well after 8 pages I'm not sure my 2 cents counts for much, but after buying MY "test movie" last night (the brilliant Romy and Michele's High School Reunion), I have a few observations.
Video Quality: Definitely looks a little soft on my widescreen 34" Sony HDTV, but not really bothersome. I'd argue with those who say you can't tell the difference from a DVD, but then again if you just threw the digital file on, I doubt anyone would complain.
Download speed: I must be lucky, because I got the entire movie in 20 minutes flat on my Cable modem. I don't expect that to be the standard, though.
Audio quality: Granted, this was not Revenge of the Sith, but the audio was totally satisfactory. I listened on headphones to get a better sense and the sound was perfectly fine.
My initial reaction was similar to many, in that I couldnt' imagine why people would want a digital file with no physical media, no artwork, and digital rights management, but I've begun to feel this will gain the same appeal as digital audio has. When iTunes started selling music, I was the first to poo-pooh the concept. I am a rabid music collector and couldn't imagine paying for a product without the jewel case, liner notes, etc... now I buy most of my music from iTunes (most, not all) and I don't regret it. I realized i really didn't WANT to cart around cases and discs when I could just have it all digitally, ready to watch, on my device. It's too early to say the same will happen with movies (which, admittedly, are a different animal) but I can definitely see the possibility of lightning striking twice.
Video Quality: Definitely looks a little soft on my widescreen 34" Sony HDTV, but not really bothersome. I'd argue with those who say you can't tell the difference from a DVD, but then again if you just threw the digital file on, I doubt anyone would complain.
Download speed: I must be lucky, because I got the entire movie in 20 minutes flat on my Cable modem. I don't expect that to be the standard, though.
Audio quality: Granted, this was not Revenge of the Sith, but the audio was totally satisfactory. I listened on headphones to get a better sense and the sound was perfectly fine.
My initial reaction was similar to many, in that I couldnt' imagine why people would want a digital file with no physical media, no artwork, and digital rights management, but I've begun to feel this will gain the same appeal as digital audio has. When iTunes started selling music, I was the first to poo-pooh the concept. I am a rabid music collector and couldn't imagine paying for a product without the jewel case, liner notes, etc... now I buy most of my music from iTunes (most, not all) and I don't regret it. I realized i really didn't WANT to cart around cases and discs when I could just have it all digitally, ready to watch, on my device. It's too early to say the same will happen with movies (which, admittedly, are a different animal) but I can definitely see the possibility of lightning striking twice.
mrgreen4242
Sep 5, 02:57 PM
They already sell Showtime Shows on iTunes
Ya, but not movies. They get certain distrobution rights that may cover some kind of download service (they have PPV/VoD broadcast rights, for example). They may be able to get a decent library of downloadable movies for a price that works for Apple... the fact there are Showtime shows on iTunes certainly shows they are willing to work with the iTMS, and the OP may be on to something...
In any event, unless it's HD (720p is fine) I'm not interested. For that matter, when they give me Lost in HD (and a good way to get it to my TV) I'll check out the TV shows.
Ya, but not movies. They get certain distrobution rights that may cover some kind of download service (they have PPV/VoD broadcast rights, for example). They may be able to get a decent library of downloadable movies for a price that works for Apple... the fact there are Showtime shows on iTunes certainly shows they are willing to work with the iTMS, and the OP may be on to something...
In any event, unless it's HD (720p is fine) I'm not interested. For that matter, when they give me Lost in HD (and a good way to get it to my TV) I'll check out the TV shows.
kingtj
Oct 27, 10:41 AM
Shopping malls are private property, rented out in parcels at extremely high prices, so their tenants can run their shops with a perceived better shot at attracting passers-by than if they had a stand-alone store.
If you owned your own shop and some people kept standing out in front of your store without your permission, handing out political flyers, you'd probably run them off, right? In this case, the owners of the shopping mall are providing a similar service to the merchants paying to be there. It's FAR from a "public space".
As I said, fewer and fewer spaces where public debate can take place. Shopping malls are the same - 'public spaces' that aren't. Soon streets that have been public for years will start to be be privatised to provide 'better value for taxpayers' and the takeover will continue.
Then where can free debate take place? Some postage-stamp size bit of turf you call home?
If you owned your own shop and some people kept standing out in front of your store without your permission, handing out political flyers, you'd probably run them off, right? In this case, the owners of the shopping mall are providing a similar service to the merchants paying to be there. It's FAR from a "public space".
As I said, fewer and fewer spaces where public debate can take place. Shopping malls are the same - 'public spaces' that aren't. Soon streets that have been public for years will start to be be privatised to provide 'better value for taxpayers' and the takeover will continue.
Then where can free debate take place? Some postage-stamp size bit of turf you call home?
Stella
Mar 30, 12:25 PM
I thought the poster I was referencing referring to the word "App"... apparently he wasn't. Yes, I know Apple are trading marking "App store".
"App" is NOT BEING TRADEMARKED. "App Store" is. How do people not understand that changing/adding/subtracting letters actually changes words? Like the guy who repeatedly typed "using" instead of "suing" above?
Touche!
(why can't Windows give me easy access to an accent?)
"App" is NOT BEING TRADEMARKED. "App Store" is. How do people not understand that changing/adding/subtracting letters actually changes words? Like the guy who repeatedly typed "using" instead of "suing" above?
Touche!
(why can't Windows give me easy access to an accent?)
AppleScruff1
Apr 20, 10:21 PM
At least try to make rational arguments about the topic at hand. "Apple ripped off the Beatles" and "People here claim Steve Jobs is God" are just annoyingly feeble attempts to add a contrarian view.
But Apple did copy the Beatles and the Beatles sued them multiple times. Why is that statement irrational? What's good for the goose should be good for the gander, no? And as an aside, I think that Apple makes some very nice products.
But Apple did copy the Beatles and the Beatles sued them multiple times. Why is that statement irrational? What's good for the goose should be good for the gander, no? And as an aside, I think that Apple makes some very nice products.
ClimbingTheLog
Sep 26, 04:43 PM
You sound like a pain in the ass to have as a customer.
That's pretty unfair - he said he called to get a bill fixed. What is he supposed to do, give as much of his money to the cell phone company as they see fit?
If your job is dealing with cranky customers and don't much care for it you'll be much happier with a different job, trust me.
That's pretty unfair - he said he called to get a bill fixed. What is he supposed to do, give as much of his money to the cell phone company as they see fit?
If your job is dealing with cranky customers and don't much care for it you'll be much happier with a different job, trust me.
Al Coholic
May 3, 12:28 PM
So why doesn't Apple's main screen lead with the new iMac? :confused: It still shows white iPhone. Kind of telling, eh? It's almost like they're ashamed to let people know that a phone/tablet maker also churns out computers on the side. :eek:
Get 'em while you can folks before they get of the business. :D
Get 'em while you can folks before they get of the business. :D
nishioka
Apr 22, 04:22 AM
Well I can already listen to my music on my MacBook, iPad and iPhone so why would I want it?
Maybe you wouldn't. I could see a use for it myself - I have a library of music so big you couldn't fit it all on any existing iPhone, and it's annoying to be out someplace and wanting to listen to a song, but you can't because you had to exclude it from your last sync. It would be preferable then for me to be able to link my iPhone to my music library and just have Apple deliver everything to me on demand... be it from the hard drive at home or from a central location.
Of course, how this is all implemented will play a big role in whether the service is useful to me or not. If I can't listen to the CDs I bought and imported into iTunes for example... that's a dealbreaker as far as I'm concerned.
Maybe you wouldn't. I could see a use for it myself - I have a library of music so big you couldn't fit it all on any existing iPhone, and it's annoying to be out someplace and wanting to listen to a song, but you can't because you had to exclude it from your last sync. It would be preferable then for me to be able to link my iPhone to my music library and just have Apple deliver everything to me on demand... be it from the hard drive at home or from a central location.
Of course, how this is all implemented will play a big role in whether the service is useful to me or not. If I can't listen to the CDs I bought and imported into iTunes for example... that's a dealbreaker as far as I'm concerned.
Gem�tlichkeit
Apr 30, 01:28 PM
More Thunderbolt the better!
asdf542
Apr 22, 12:12 PM
There are no BDXL notebook drives yet.
Just preempting any claim that there's no place for optical drives because "BD is obsolete".
Even DVDs and CDs are not obsolete. They are mainstream distribution media.
Optical drives at not at all at "floppy time".
Regardless of whether or not there are BDXL notebook drives, do you really think Apple's issue with Blu-Ray is the size the discs can hold? :rolleyes:
I'm not about to sit here and list off reasons why an internal optical drive is useless today. It's pretty clear that if Apple were to keep the optical drive in their machines they would've upgraded to Blu-Ray a long time ago but they haven't so it's quite clear that they have the intentions of removing it in all of their notebooks in the not so distant future.
Just preempting any claim that there's no place for optical drives because "BD is obsolete".
Even DVDs and CDs are not obsolete. They are mainstream distribution media.
Optical drives at not at all at "floppy time".
Regardless of whether or not there are BDXL notebook drives, do you really think Apple's issue with Blu-Ray is the size the discs can hold? :rolleyes:
I'm not about to sit here and list off reasons why an internal optical drive is useless today. It's pretty clear that if Apple were to keep the optical drive in their machines they would've upgraded to Blu-Ray a long time ago but they haven't so it's quite clear that they have the intentions of removing it in all of their notebooks in the not so distant future.
No comments:
Post a Comment