mazola
Sep 14, 10:05 AM
It could be no other thing.
2nyRiggz
Sep 13, 09:17 PM
Its an ipod with a longer screen and a slider.....well at least for me I see nothing too interesting in it...just another ipod you can talk to.
Still neat though.
Bless
Still neat though.
Bless
HecubusPro
Sep 14, 12:15 PM
My prediction:
Definiantly:
MacBook Pro:
2 15" and 1 17" model with 2.16 and 2.33 GHz Merom
1 GB RAM standdard, up to 3 or 4 GB
100 and 120 GB HDD's, up to 160 GB
8x DVD+/-RW DL drives for all
X1600 Pro in low-end 15" and X1800 Pro/XT in hi-end 15" and 17"
FW800 on all models
Magnetic latch (no integrated keyboard)
Expresscard/54 slot on all models
$1899 - $2299 - $2499
I love the way you think. The price seems low, but I wouldn't complain. :)
Definiantly:
MacBook Pro:
2 15" and 1 17" model with 2.16 and 2.33 GHz Merom
1 GB RAM standdard, up to 3 or 4 GB
100 and 120 GB HDD's, up to 160 GB
8x DVD+/-RW DL drives for all
X1600 Pro in low-end 15" and X1800 Pro/XT in hi-end 15" and 17"
FW800 on all models
Magnetic latch (no integrated keyboard)
Expresscard/54 slot on all models
$1899 - $2299 - $2499
I love the way you think. The price seems low, but I wouldn't complain. :)
boncellis
Sep 4, 08:55 PM
This makes sense to me, although it likely has some functionality beyond what has been described. Apple wants to move into a new forum, why reinvent the iPod when it's been done so well? The iTMS has the potential to be bigger than the iPod--big enough to drive sales of computers and a new video device as well as the iPod, it would be anathema for Apple to limit themselves.
The streaming technology is already there through iTunes, is it not? If you have a Mini hooked up to the TV, can't you just stream video to the Mini and play it there? If so, this has to be something new--something that Apple can market alongside the Mini. (Either that or Apple needs to cut the price of the Mini to make it a more realistic set-top box option--maybe Apple sees this as an improved implementation of that idea).
The streaming technology is already there through iTunes, is it not? If you have a Mini hooked up to the TV, can't you just stream video to the Mini and play it there? If so, this has to be something new--something that Apple can market alongside the Mini. (Either that or Apple needs to cut the price of the Mini to make it a more realistic set-top box option--maybe Apple sees this as an improved implementation of that idea).
fabianjj
Apr 22, 11:26 AM
I'm amazed that no-one is seeing the very dangerous path we could be heading down here. Will people only see it when it's too late?
Are we looking into the jaws of the future where you pay, but never OWN anything? Music, Movies, Apps.
You pay to have the right to listen/watch/use the data.
The data is never downloaded to your device to do as you wish, it's always held by the owners. or distributors.
I can see this coming like a flashing red warning sign.
Well it's not like you've ever owned anything you've purchsed earlier, when you buy a CD you buy a physical object as well but what you're paying for is the right to play it in a private setting.
After using Spotify as my primary source of music for a couple of years now I can say that I prefer this renting method. Spotify has virtually any song I'd care to listen to and I can listen to them all instantly, and by using a premium subscription I can store up 3333 songs offline per device (very handy when traveling/commuting).
Are we looking into the jaws of the future where you pay, but never OWN anything? Music, Movies, Apps.
You pay to have the right to listen/watch/use the data.
The data is never downloaded to your device to do as you wish, it's always held by the owners. or distributors.
I can see this coming like a flashing red warning sign.
Well it's not like you've ever owned anything you've purchsed earlier, when you buy a CD you buy a physical object as well but what you're paying for is the right to play it in a private setting.
After using Spotify as my primary source of music for a couple of years now I can say that I prefer this renting method. Spotify has virtually any song I'd care to listen to and I can listen to them all instantly, and by using a premium subscription I can store up 3333 songs offline per device (very handy when traveling/commuting).
oootle
Sep 5, 12:12 PM
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2018
lkrupp
Apr 20, 11:16 AM
Not good. I need an explanation.
What? You think GM's OnStar, and the other car manufacturer's systems, don't keep a record of exactly where your automobile has been? All cars have black boxes these days. You think your bank doesn't know where you've been and what you've bought? You think the government, and most companies, don't already know more about you than you do yourself, like where you go, what you buy, who your friends are, what political persuasion you are?
What? You think GM's OnStar, and the other car manufacturer's systems, don't keep a record of exactly where your automobile has been? All cars have black boxes these days. You think your bank doesn't know where you've been and what you've bought? You think the government, and most companies, don't already know more about you than you do yourself, like where you go, what you buy, who your friends are, what political persuasion you are?
Piggie
Apr 22, 11:24 AM
You don't own anything you download from the iTunes store now. You hold a license and are allowed to play or view it, but you do not own it.
Well no, not in the true sense of the word, but you do have the data and can use the data elsewhere.
In the same way technically you don't own the music on a record, or cassette or CD, but you do have the ability to use/listen to the music elsewhere.
I can just see this ability, which we have taken for granted since the 1st every records were sold to the public in around 1894 will soon, if big companies get there way and the public buy into it without thinking, will be coming to an end.
Well no, not in the true sense of the word, but you do have the data and can use the data elsewhere.
In the same way technically you don't own the music on a record, or cassette or CD, but you do have the ability to use/listen to the music elsewhere.
I can just see this ability, which we have taken for granted since the 1st every records were sold to the public in around 1894 will soon, if big companies get there way and the public buy into it without thinking, will be coming to an end.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 19, 09:30 AM
There are people trying to paint this as though any tablet or mobile phone is similar to the rest so Apple has no case. Not true. Apple is suing one company for a copy so close that it is hard to see the difference.
http://www.palminfocenter.com/images/Treo-680-review-1a.jpg
Looks like Apple copied palm just changed the background to white and the icons to a square!
:rolleyes:
LOL - right. And that pinch and zoom feature on the palm was tremendous.
http://www.palminfocenter.com/images/Treo-680-review-1a.jpg
Looks like Apple copied palm just changed the background to white and the icons to a square!
:rolleyes:
LOL - right. And that pinch and zoom feature on the palm was tremendous.
jouster
Aug 28, 02:18 PM
These are products that are now competing directly with the products or the PC industry.....
Apple has always competed directly with PCs and related products.
.....now that Apple is using Intel Processors, all they really have going for them are their ability to run OS X and their design
When were those not the only distinctions Apple had? I mean, who really bought Macs because they had processors based on a different ISA?
Apple has always competed directly with PCs and related products.
.....now that Apple is using Intel Processors, all they really have going for them are their ability to run OS X and their design
When were those not the only distinctions Apple had? I mean, who really bought Macs because they had processors based on a different ISA?
dizastor
Aug 31, 12:34 PM
I can't take any more of this. I've eaten all of my fingernails and I'm starting to gaze longingly at my toes.
heehee
Apr 25, 09:06 AM
I'm just wondering if anyone can help me reassure my mother that she'll get out of a parking ticket that we got tonight.
We were going out to dinner, and we parked in a handicap spot in downtown ann arbor (we were parallell parking). The sign wasn't clearly visible, so we didn't put up my grandmother's handicap sign in the windshield (she was with us). When we came back from dinner, my Mom found a nice $100 parking ticket on the windshield (her first in 24 years) because there was no handicap sign. So here's my question, she should get out of it if she goes down to the police station with my grandma and my grandma's handicap sign, right? She convinced that that won't work, but I think it will. Any opinions?
Thanks,
Don
Good luck with reporting my plates. I've done that to drunk drivers before, the 911 operator has told me "We're sorry sir, we cannot divert officers based on heresy." Also, see above: My uncle is the traffic court judge in the jurisdiction where I did this, good luck getting a ticket to stand.
EDIT: @mrsirs2009 - No I actually just felt like going fast.
-Don
Listen you're not going to beat me with legal antics. My mother is a senior partner at the largest law firm in Michigan. I've grown up in legal libraries and in courtrooms watching her. You're lie detector statement is total BS. Lie detectors are not admissible in a court of law; also a court can not compel someone to take a polygraph. My previous history would be easily disputed. There were no witnesses present (besides my mother) when I was highbeaming her and laying on my horn. There were however cars present when she brakechecked me. There was one car present when I brakechecked her, but not when I cut her off. The simple fact is that I plan these things out in order to reduce my legal exposure, and increase the other person's legal exposure, in case there were to be an accident/law suit.
Go ahead and call me twisted for giving people what they deserve. It amazes me how such little things tick people off.
-Don
I thought your mom is a senior partner at the largest law firm in Michigan and your uncle is the traffic court judge ? :D
We were going out to dinner, and we parked in a handicap spot in downtown ann arbor (we were parallell parking). The sign wasn't clearly visible, so we didn't put up my grandmother's handicap sign in the windshield (she was with us). When we came back from dinner, my Mom found a nice $100 parking ticket on the windshield (her first in 24 years) because there was no handicap sign. So here's my question, she should get out of it if she goes down to the police station with my grandma and my grandma's handicap sign, right? She convinced that that won't work, but I think it will. Any opinions?
Thanks,
Don
Good luck with reporting my plates. I've done that to drunk drivers before, the 911 operator has told me "We're sorry sir, we cannot divert officers based on heresy." Also, see above: My uncle is the traffic court judge in the jurisdiction where I did this, good luck getting a ticket to stand.
EDIT: @mrsirs2009 - No I actually just felt like going fast.
-Don
Listen you're not going to beat me with legal antics. My mother is a senior partner at the largest law firm in Michigan. I've grown up in legal libraries and in courtrooms watching her. You're lie detector statement is total BS. Lie detectors are not admissible in a court of law; also a court can not compel someone to take a polygraph. My previous history would be easily disputed. There were no witnesses present (besides my mother) when I was highbeaming her and laying on my horn. There were however cars present when she brakechecked me. There was one car present when I brakechecked her, but not when I cut her off. The simple fact is that I plan these things out in order to reduce my legal exposure, and increase the other person's legal exposure, in case there were to be an accident/law suit.
Go ahead and call me twisted for giving people what they deserve. It amazes me how such little things tick people off.
-Don
I thought your mom is a senior partner at the largest law firm in Michigan and your uncle is the traffic court judge ? :D
FriarNurgle
Mar 29, 01:17 PM
Only way MS would get these numbers is if Windows Phone takes over the business cellular market.
getBytesLoaded
Sep 26, 02:08 PM
Hey everybody,
So often I hear people talk about how great the customer service is for Verizon, Cingular, and Sprint. Why are all of you in need of customer service with these companies? I'm with T Mobile and have never needed to call and straighten a bill out, or get credit applied to my account. I'd say the best customer service is the kind you don't need to use. So, I'm hoping that T Mobile will carry the iPhone 6 months after the initial release.
So often I hear people talk about how great the customer service is for Verizon, Cingular, and Sprint. Why are all of you in need of customer service with these companies? I'm with T Mobile and have never needed to call and straighten a bill out, or get credit applied to my account. I'd say the best customer service is the kind you don't need to use. So, I'm hoping that T Mobile will carry the iPhone 6 months after the initial release.
Dmac77
Apr 25, 12:00 AM
Sure, your entire post just screams at what a safe driver you are. :rolleyes:I bet if your parents saw a post like this they would take away your car. You are a menace.
See above. A parent was in the car and actively encouraged me to cut the idiot off. My family's general philosophy (in regards to driving) is be aggressive and intimidate people who try to screw with you; it always results in you winning (it also helps when your uncle presides over the traffic court in town).
-Don
See above. A parent was in the car and actively encouraged me to cut the idiot off. My family's general philosophy (in regards to driving) is be aggressive and intimidate people who try to screw with you; it always results in you winning (it also helps when your uncle presides over the traffic court in town).
-Don
mrgreen4242
Sep 5, 01:54 PM
Well fudge. I've been holding off on getting an Airport Express for literally a year, waiting for an AV version. I finally had to get one when I moved (no cable drop in the office at new house, so needed a wireless router) and then like 2 weeks later they release the AV model. Bastards.
Oh well, probably can't afford one anyways - seeing as the AE w/ AirTunes is still $100. Does Apple price match refurb hardware? I'm assuming the AE price will drop when they release the AV model.
Hmmm, I might be able to talk my wife into letting me get one for the theatre room if I can make it send cable TV up there too... Have to wait and see what the product actually is.
Also, $10-15 for a d/l movies is a ripoff. Unless they are going to do HD quality movies at $15, DVDs will remain a much better value. Now, HD download service, with an affordable playback mechanism, at $15 per movie they will clean up... SD though? Forget about it.
Oh well, probably can't afford one anyways - seeing as the AE w/ AirTunes is still $100. Does Apple price match refurb hardware? I'm assuming the AE price will drop when they release the AV model.
Hmmm, I might be able to talk my wife into letting me get one for the theatre room if I can make it send cable TV up there too... Have to wait and see what the product actually is.
Also, $10-15 for a d/l movies is a ripoff. Unless they are going to do HD quality movies at $15, DVDs will remain a much better value. Now, HD download service, with an affordable playback mechanism, at $15 per movie they will clean up... SD though? Forget about it.
Ricard
Aug 23, 05:43 PM
Apple needs to sell 334,448.160535117 iPods to get the "investment" money back...
EagerDragon
Sep 16, 12:51 PM
Did you see any PDA phone couldnt play video? $599 actually is a very low price. Many high-end PDA phones are selling close to $1000 even without a hard drive.
BTW, $1000 aud is $755 USD
I have to disagree on the price point.
For $1000 you can get a low level 17" iMac. Why would I want to pay that for a frikking phone?
$600 buys you a nice Mini with a dual core. Why pay that much for a phone?
The phone sweet spot is $299, with bluetooth, camera (optional), full pda capabilities, nice screen, voice command, 256 meg internal mem, 2-4 gig flash, new antenna design to pull in weak signals, open so that you can move it from carrier to carrier.
Something like that would sell like hot cakes. Not only that but it would beat a lot of the phones out there in price, usability, and coolness.
BTW, $1000 aud is $755 USD
I have to disagree on the price point.
For $1000 you can get a low level 17" iMac. Why would I want to pay that for a frikking phone?
$600 buys you a nice Mini with a dual core. Why pay that much for a phone?
The phone sweet spot is $299, with bluetooth, camera (optional), full pda capabilities, nice screen, voice command, 256 meg internal mem, 2-4 gig flash, new antenna design to pull in weak signals, open so that you can move it from carrier to carrier.
Something like that would sell like hot cakes. Not only that but it would beat a lot of the phones out there in price, usability, and coolness.
mcdj
Feb 23, 04:25 PM
McAfee is the virus.
Maddix
Apr 22, 06:45 PM
I would also prefer AMD, but I don't think there will be Llanos low-powered enough for the MBA.
Look at the Zacate E-350. It's 18W, and CPU-wise it's at a dual core Atom level.
OK, it's bulk 40nm, and Llano is 32nm SOI, but the quad mobile Llano I've seen is supposed to be 45W. MBAs are at 10W and 17W.
Llano is still a Stars+ core. Maybe next year with Bulldozer Fusion.
AMD would be producing better CPU's via increased profits if Apple chose them over Intel from the start.
Look at the Zacate E-350. It's 18W, and CPU-wise it's at a dual core Atom level.
OK, it's bulk 40nm, and Llano is 32nm SOI, but the quad mobile Llano I've seen is supposed to be 45W. MBAs are at 10W and 17W.
Llano is still a Stars+ core. Maybe next year with Bulldozer Fusion.
AMD would be producing better CPU's via increased profits if Apple chose them over Intel from the start.
shecky
Sep 14, 10:14 AM
Not happening on the 24th fo any reason - photo, computer, or other wise.
you can feel free to go ahead and explain yourself in your next post instead of just mindlessly making statements with nothing to back them up. thanks.
you can feel free to go ahead and explain yourself in your next post instead of just mindlessly making statements with nothing to back them up. thanks.
Multimedia
Sep 12, 04:47 PM
Educated guess would be "big" iPod sales will slump whilst the Nanos & Shuffles will skyrocket.At these new lower price points that reads pretty UN-educated to me. On secopnd thought though since many of US - not the general public - are waiting for the 640x360 widescreen video iPod, this would be a miss.
I htink it's pretty lousy of Apple not to provide the firmware update to allow original 5G Video iPods to load and play Baseline H.264 640x480 self-encoded video. I'm mad about it.
I htink it's pretty lousy of Apple not to provide the firmware update to allow original 5G Video iPods to load and play Baseline H.264 640x480 self-encoded video. I'm mad about it.
milo
Aug 28, 01:59 PM
Um, it's most current whenever you buy it.
As long as you're not buying the past generation, anyway.
If you walked into the Apple Store today and bought a 2GHz MacBook, it'd be the most current.
But if you buy right after an update, instead of right before, your computer will remain current for a longer time. Can't really blame people for wanting to hold out for a rev, especially when it's inevitable that it will be very soon.
As long as you're not buying the past generation, anyway.
If you walked into the Apple Store today and bought a 2GHz MacBook, it'd be the most current.
But if you buy right after an update, instead of right before, your computer will remain current for a longer time. Can't really blame people for wanting to hold out for a rev, especially when it's inevitable that it will be very soon.
wnurse
Aug 23, 10:08 PM
So, in summary...
Apple pays Creative a one time fee of $100M to licence their patents.
Creative joins the 'Made for iPod' program making accessories for their competitor, Apple, who gets money for 'Made for iPod'.
Creative still HAS to defend it's patent against other competitors - that's the nature of patents - or licence it to them. If they do, Apple takes some of that money too. In a round-a-bout way, Apple is getting money back from it's competitors. Nice.
Creative have a much better case because Apple settled.
Creative still owns a valid patent. If Apple had won, there would be no patent so anyone could copy the Creative/Apple style interface.
Apple continues on as if nothing has happened. No long court case delaying sales. No injunctions to halt imports.
Explain to me why people think Apple lost here?
Creative knew it was about to get reamed by Microsoft's Zune which it's players aren't compatible with. They knew to get out of the market. Instead of legitimising Microsoft's offering, they've tied up with Apple. It might bug us that Apple have legitimised a bogus patent but it's otherwise very, very smart.
Interesting, I did not know so many apple fans were lawyers and patent experts. Some call the patent bogus, some claim apple really didn't infringe but felt like being santa claus to creative and some even claim that the lawsuit would have cost apple 100 million (like it would have cost creative 0. Why not slug it out and see how much creative have in the coffers to pay their lawyers?). You guys would all make excellent attorneys!!!.
I'll summarize.
1. Apple infringed on the patent
2. Apple paid license for use of the patent
3. Go watch TV.. show over folks.
Apple could blow a hundred million in legal expenses. It's less of an instance of throwing in the towel, and more of an instance of, "You know, the way idiot judges/juries hand out settlements these days, let's just give them a paltry sum, let them think they've won, and still destroy them in the MP3 market."
Actually, creative won, regardless of whether apple destroys them in the market or not. Man, even Steven (jobs) is not as pissed as you all are. I think he's lying comfortable in his bed right now, probably watching the news. Chill out. Companies infringe on other companies patents all the time. Companies settle all the time. This is not an abnormal event.
Apple pays Creative a one time fee of $100M to licence their patents.
Creative joins the 'Made for iPod' program making accessories for their competitor, Apple, who gets money for 'Made for iPod'.
Creative still HAS to defend it's patent against other competitors - that's the nature of patents - or licence it to them. If they do, Apple takes some of that money too. In a round-a-bout way, Apple is getting money back from it's competitors. Nice.
Creative have a much better case because Apple settled.
Creative still owns a valid patent. If Apple had won, there would be no patent so anyone could copy the Creative/Apple style interface.
Apple continues on as if nothing has happened. No long court case delaying sales. No injunctions to halt imports.
Explain to me why people think Apple lost here?
Creative knew it was about to get reamed by Microsoft's Zune which it's players aren't compatible with. They knew to get out of the market. Instead of legitimising Microsoft's offering, they've tied up with Apple. It might bug us that Apple have legitimised a bogus patent but it's otherwise very, very smart.
Interesting, I did not know so many apple fans were lawyers and patent experts. Some call the patent bogus, some claim apple really didn't infringe but felt like being santa claus to creative and some even claim that the lawsuit would have cost apple 100 million (like it would have cost creative 0. Why not slug it out and see how much creative have in the coffers to pay their lawyers?). You guys would all make excellent attorneys!!!.
I'll summarize.
1. Apple infringed on the patent
2. Apple paid license for use of the patent
3. Go watch TV.. show over folks.
Apple could blow a hundred million in legal expenses. It's less of an instance of throwing in the towel, and more of an instance of, "You know, the way idiot judges/juries hand out settlements these days, let's just give them a paltry sum, let them think they've won, and still destroy them in the MP3 market."
Actually, creative won, regardless of whether apple destroys them in the market or not. Man, even Steven (jobs) is not as pissed as you all are. I think he's lying comfortable in his bed right now, probably watching the news. Chill out. Companies infringe on other companies patents all the time. Companies settle all the time. This is not an abnormal event.