MacRumors
Dec 13, 09:39 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/12/13/4g-verizon-iphone-to-debut-after-christmas/)
MacDailyNews reports (http://www.macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/exclusive_verizons_iphone_rumored_to_be_lte_device_coming_right_after_xmas/) that it has received information from a "source that we believe to be credible" regarding management training for the Verizon iPhone offered by the company last week. According to the report, the Verizon iPhone will launch immediately after Christmas and is in fact an LTE 4G device.- The new iPhone is an LTE device and that fact - the only "LTE iPhone," exclusive to Verizon - will be the main marketing theme; i.e. "For the new '4G' (cough) verizon network" that Verizon has already started promoting
- As rollout of LTE not actually widepsread, Verizon iPhone will have multi-band chip backward compatibility with regular CDMAThe report also claims that the Verizon iPhone is already shipping to Verizon warehouses, and the carrier will maintain control over all stock until launch in order to control information leaks.
Finally, the source indicates that the iPhone 5 was intended to be LTE-only at its debut next summer, but Steve Jobs and Apple are upset that the carriers are not building out their LTE infrastructure quickly enough to make that happen.
Verizon's 4G network launched last week (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/12/01/verizons-4g-network-to-launch-next-week-no-handsets-until-mid-2011/) for mobile broadband customers, but the carrier noted that it does not expect to debut 4G-capable handsets until the middle of next year.
MacDailyNews is not a frequent source of rumors, and has a mixed record on the information it has published in the past. In addition, we are skeptical that Apple had ever seriously planned for the fifth-generation iPhone 5 to be "LTE-only", given that even the most aggressive LTE build-out schedules from the carriers have long planned for it to be several years before their entire networks are upgraded to the standard. In fact, other sources (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/10/11/mid-2011-iphone-to-utilize-dual-mode-gsm-cdma-chip-skip-4g/) have indicated that the fifth-generation iPhone won't support LTE at all, a move which would follow Apple's precedent with not supporting 3G in the original iPhone as it waited for greater availability and more advanced technology for utilizing the standard.
Consequently, we are publishing this rumor on Page 2 for interest and discussion.
Article Link: 4G Verizon iPhone to Debut After Christmas? (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/12/13/4g-verizon-iphone-to-debut-after-christmas/)
MacDailyNews reports (http://www.macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/exclusive_verizons_iphone_rumored_to_be_lte_device_coming_right_after_xmas/) that it has received information from a "source that we believe to be credible" regarding management training for the Verizon iPhone offered by the company last week. According to the report, the Verizon iPhone will launch immediately after Christmas and is in fact an LTE 4G device.- The new iPhone is an LTE device and that fact - the only "LTE iPhone," exclusive to Verizon - will be the main marketing theme; i.e. "For the new '4G' (cough) verizon network" that Verizon has already started promoting
- As rollout of LTE not actually widepsread, Verizon iPhone will have multi-band chip backward compatibility with regular CDMAThe report also claims that the Verizon iPhone is already shipping to Verizon warehouses, and the carrier will maintain control over all stock until launch in order to control information leaks.
Finally, the source indicates that the iPhone 5 was intended to be LTE-only at its debut next summer, but Steve Jobs and Apple are upset that the carriers are not building out their LTE infrastructure quickly enough to make that happen.
Verizon's 4G network launched last week (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/12/01/verizons-4g-network-to-launch-next-week-no-handsets-until-mid-2011/) for mobile broadband customers, but the carrier noted that it does not expect to debut 4G-capable handsets until the middle of next year.
MacDailyNews is not a frequent source of rumors, and has a mixed record on the information it has published in the past. In addition, we are skeptical that Apple had ever seriously planned for the fifth-generation iPhone 5 to be "LTE-only", given that even the most aggressive LTE build-out schedules from the carriers have long planned for it to be several years before their entire networks are upgraded to the standard. In fact, other sources (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/10/11/mid-2011-iphone-to-utilize-dual-mode-gsm-cdma-chip-skip-4g/) have indicated that the fifth-generation iPhone won't support LTE at all, a move which would follow Apple's precedent with not supporting 3G in the original iPhone as it waited for greater availability and more advanced technology for utilizing the standard.
Consequently, we are publishing this rumor on Page 2 for interest and discussion.
Article Link: 4G Verizon iPhone to Debut After Christmas? (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/12/13/4g-verizon-iphone-to-debut-after-christmas/)
raleigh1208
Nov 25, 02:10 AM
Discounts no longer show up, so the sale is over. Hope everyone got a bargain. I didn't really see very many serious bargains. I bought the Airport Express for $88. But the main deals were not that great. They may have tempted some folks walking in the stores to buy a Macbook or ipod, or tempted those already waiting for those items. After paying sales tax, the discount was not that great, and serious bargain hunters could probably have done better at other resellers. But a buck's a buck, so here's to those who bought today and saved a few bucks!
timerollson
Apr 10, 02:09 PM
Needed some spring inspiration and contact lens solution....
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5150/5607236476_4b01b5ba70.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5150/5607236476_4b01b5ba70.jpg
dsnort
Aug 1, 01:57 PM
Problem is Demark, Norway and Sweden are just the first countries to really crack down on DRM like this but they will not be the last. Pulling iTMS away from them might work right now but think long term. The 3 counties will not be the last to do it. Other will follow suit with the DRM. France will at some point get the laws passed since they are pretty close to DRM set up like that with ones that went though so it would not be much of a surpise to see France force DRM to open up there as well. I could see most of the EU at some point forcing the issue.
Should apple pull iTMS away from every country that does that. No it will catch up to them and they will just open up to all. Problem is any country the pulled out of they burned those bridges and will have a very hard time getting back in and will more than likely lose a lot of market share long term by pulling that stunt.
Long term the wises action is for apple to give in and just open it up because those countries are just the first and they most certanily will not be the last.
I have always thought Apple would eventually open up it's DRM of their own free will. At this time, there is no serious competitor to the iPod/iTunes combo. Should serious competition arise, perhaps sometime Zune, the iPods inability to play music from other sources will be a competitive disadvantage.
However, as a philosophical issue, I have a problem with any government interfering like this in a free market! Sometimes such interference is necessary to prevent harm to the public, but I don't see where this is the case with the iPod. It doesn't cause injury to the user, ( if you heed the volume warnings ), and there are alternatives. Those who don't like iPod/iTunes locking them in to one player are fully free to use the alternatives!
Should apple pull iTMS away from every country that does that. No it will catch up to them and they will just open up to all. Problem is any country the pulled out of they burned those bridges and will have a very hard time getting back in and will more than likely lose a lot of market share long term by pulling that stunt.
Long term the wises action is for apple to give in and just open it up because those countries are just the first and they most certanily will not be the last.
I have always thought Apple would eventually open up it's DRM of their own free will. At this time, there is no serious competitor to the iPod/iTunes combo. Should serious competition arise, perhaps sometime Zune, the iPods inability to play music from other sources will be a competitive disadvantage.
However, as a philosophical issue, I have a problem with any government interfering like this in a free market! Sometimes such interference is necessary to prevent harm to the public, but I don't see where this is the case with the iPod. It doesn't cause injury to the user, ( if you heed the volume warnings ), and there are alternatives. Those who don't like iPod/iTunes locking them in to one player are fully free to use the alternatives!
schwell
Oct 21, 11:44 PM
For all of you touting one carrier over another check these maps out.
ATT: http://www.deadcellzones.com/att.html
Verizon: http://www.deadcellzones.com/verizon.html
Sprint: http://www.deadcellzones.com/sprint.html
T-Mobile: http://www.deadcellzones.com/t-mobile.html
ATT: http://www.deadcellzones.com/att.html
Verizon: http://www.deadcellzones.com/verizon.html
Sprint: http://www.deadcellzones.com/sprint.html
T-Mobile: http://www.deadcellzones.com/t-mobile.html
Mac.World
Apr 17, 01:43 PM
Being gay for most of human history has been pretty difficult. To not touch on that is really stupid and shows a bias that when it comes to history, should not be shown.
You do realize that homosexuality is not new and in fact was prevalent throughout ancient Greece, Rome and Egypt. It wasn't until Christianity took root and became prevalent that homosexuality was looked down upon. You can thank religion for that (Leviticus 18:22). So in fact, for most of human history homosexuality was seen as no different from heterosexuality.
You do realize that homosexuality is not new and in fact was prevalent throughout ancient Greece, Rome and Egypt. It wasn't until Christianity took root and became prevalent that homosexuality was looked down upon. You can thank religion for that (Leviticus 18:22). So in fact, for most of human history homosexuality was seen as no different from heterosexuality.
Mac.World
Apr 17, 01:43 PM
Being gay for most of human history has been pretty difficult. To not touch on that is really stupid and shows a bias that when it comes to history, should not be shown.
You do realize that homosexuality is not new and in fact was prevalent throughout ancient Greece, Rome and Egypt. It wasn't until Christianity took root and became prevalent that homosexuality was looked down upon. You can thank religion for that (Leviticus 18:22). So in fact, for most of human history homosexuality was seen as no different from heterosexuality.
You do realize that homosexuality is not new and in fact was prevalent throughout ancient Greece, Rome and Egypt. It wasn't until Christianity took root and became prevalent that homosexuality was looked down upon. You can thank religion for that (Leviticus 18:22). So in fact, for most of human history homosexuality was seen as no different from heterosexuality.
MarximusMG
Apr 21, 11:17 AM
Very nice! I've been waiting for this feature to be implemented on MR.
Popeye206
Mar 29, 08:03 AM
1. You intentionally ignored the point that referred to Apple's Terms of Service. For example, applications like VMWare Fusion, Parallels Desktop or even SuperDuper! could never be distributed through the Mac AppStore because they belong in a category that Apple does not ALLOW in their AppStore. As a matter of fact, even their own Xcode violates their TOS. But they wouldn't be Apple if the same rules also applied to themselves...
2. There won't be a Microsoft AppStore for Windows INTEGRATED INTO WINDOWS. EVER. Why? Because they can't for LEGAL reasons. Anti-trust lawsuits, anyone? Microsoft would only get away with that if they implemented a "choose your AppStore" program that would let the people choose which online store they want to use - just like they had to do it for the web browsers. I think that Apple should also be forced to do the same. After all, there is at least one other "AppStore" for the Mac out there that is even OLDER than Apple's own AppStore, and Apple misuses their power to drive those guys out of business. People stopped using Netscape when Internet Explorer came pre-installed on the operating system. Now people will not even try to look for another online store when the AppStore and iTunes are pre-installed on their computers. The same thing. The same rules should apply to Apple as they obviously apply to Microsoft.
Winni.... you're obviously playing lawyer and have no idea what you're talking about. Microsoft could do what Apple is doing. There is nothing illegal or anti trust about distributing software. They just have to play by the same rules as everyone else. If Apple was to give away the distribution, that would be more in line with anti-trust because then they would be using their power to give something that others pay for. As long as Microsoft would keep their rules within the boundaries of the industry practice, they would be fine to do the same.
Things change and companies with the better idea's thrive while others go away. Music stores are dying. Video stores are dying. Book stores are dying and software distribution stores are dying. But not because of just Apple.... because with the digital age many companies are by-passing channel completely and going direct. What Apple does would be no different than Ford or Mercedes distributing 3rd party accessories through their dealerships to their customers.
Also.... your rights on software depends on what's in the license when you buy it. If it's non-transerable, it's non-transferable. That's why you can get away with buying some of this software for $5. But it's not your legal right to resell. That depends on the license you agree to.
Whoa! The jury is still out as to whether the Mac App Store is a success. While a few apps at the top have trumpeted their success, I dare say there is a far greater mass of apps that are doing less business than before the Mac App Store opened.
In my own market segment the Mac App Store has reduced the cash flow for everyone due largely, among other factors, to the increased and sustained visibility of the freebies. It is crazy for Apple to court developers and then throw up a list of freebies alongside my own paid offering. Thanks so much -- for nothing! Where are the free alternatives to Garage Band, Keynote, or Numbers? You can be sure they are not on the same page in the Mac App Store...
As far as I am concerned as a developer, the Mac App Store is a waste of time unless we can all go write $1.99 apps that get downloaded by a million people (good luck!). Anything that requires significant development time is a loss. Plus, anything that costs real money can't be tried first from the Mac App Store. Developers still have to maintain websites, demos, and bandwidth but then pay Apple 30% for the sale in an environment that depresses prices. Success? By what measure and for whom?
I hear your point, but disagree. Putting your software in the App store will not guarantee success or failure. People buy what's worth it to them. They will pay for what meets their needs. Also, they have to know you exist too. Yes, the App Store can give you exposure, but you still have to market and sell your solution for people to find you or want you. Plus, the AppStore is one outlet and your other outlets should never be abandoned.
However... you're point on price is one to be considered. If you want to get impulse buys, you have to be impulsed priced. And as you point out... that is hard to compete in too.... back to my first point.
Please don't take me wrong... I'm not saying you're wrong... just pointing out that the AppStore does not guarantee anything if you don't have good sales and marketing behind it. Also, you have to have software people want.
2. There won't be a Microsoft AppStore for Windows INTEGRATED INTO WINDOWS. EVER. Why? Because they can't for LEGAL reasons. Anti-trust lawsuits, anyone? Microsoft would only get away with that if they implemented a "choose your AppStore" program that would let the people choose which online store they want to use - just like they had to do it for the web browsers. I think that Apple should also be forced to do the same. After all, there is at least one other "AppStore" for the Mac out there that is even OLDER than Apple's own AppStore, and Apple misuses their power to drive those guys out of business. People stopped using Netscape when Internet Explorer came pre-installed on the operating system. Now people will not even try to look for another online store when the AppStore and iTunes are pre-installed on their computers. The same thing. The same rules should apply to Apple as they obviously apply to Microsoft.
Winni.... you're obviously playing lawyer and have no idea what you're talking about. Microsoft could do what Apple is doing. There is nothing illegal or anti trust about distributing software. They just have to play by the same rules as everyone else. If Apple was to give away the distribution, that would be more in line with anti-trust because then they would be using their power to give something that others pay for. As long as Microsoft would keep their rules within the boundaries of the industry practice, they would be fine to do the same.
Things change and companies with the better idea's thrive while others go away. Music stores are dying. Video stores are dying. Book stores are dying and software distribution stores are dying. But not because of just Apple.... because with the digital age many companies are by-passing channel completely and going direct. What Apple does would be no different than Ford or Mercedes distributing 3rd party accessories through their dealerships to their customers.
Also.... your rights on software depends on what's in the license when you buy it. If it's non-transerable, it's non-transferable. That's why you can get away with buying some of this software for $5. But it's not your legal right to resell. That depends on the license you agree to.
Whoa! The jury is still out as to whether the Mac App Store is a success. While a few apps at the top have trumpeted their success, I dare say there is a far greater mass of apps that are doing less business than before the Mac App Store opened.
In my own market segment the Mac App Store has reduced the cash flow for everyone due largely, among other factors, to the increased and sustained visibility of the freebies. It is crazy for Apple to court developers and then throw up a list of freebies alongside my own paid offering. Thanks so much -- for nothing! Where are the free alternatives to Garage Band, Keynote, or Numbers? You can be sure they are not on the same page in the Mac App Store...
As far as I am concerned as a developer, the Mac App Store is a waste of time unless we can all go write $1.99 apps that get downloaded by a million people (good luck!). Anything that requires significant development time is a loss. Plus, anything that costs real money can't be tried first from the Mac App Store. Developers still have to maintain websites, demos, and bandwidth but then pay Apple 30% for the sale in an environment that depresses prices. Success? By what measure and for whom?
I hear your point, but disagree. Putting your software in the App store will not guarantee success or failure. People buy what's worth it to them. They will pay for what meets their needs. Also, they have to know you exist too. Yes, the App Store can give you exposure, but you still have to market and sell your solution for people to find you or want you. Plus, the AppStore is one outlet and your other outlets should never be abandoned.
However... you're point on price is one to be considered. If you want to get impulse buys, you have to be impulsed priced. And as you point out... that is hard to compete in too.... back to my first point.
Please don't take me wrong... I'm not saying you're wrong... just pointing out that the AppStore does not guarantee anything if you don't have good sales and marketing behind it. Also, you have to have software people want.
imuk
Aug 16, 09:14 AM
I received a 2A62XXX Display last week with a May production date. No idea whether it is an old or a new one. However, I did notice a few dead pixels last night after watching a movies. (The movie credits came with a black background. Great for dead pixel discovery!)
By just looking at it, I noticed at least 4 dead pixels, some appeared stronger than others. They are all on the left half of the screen. Is this considered an acceptable or normal number of dead pixels? I am tempted to return it while I can. Any suggestions?
By just looking at it, I noticed at least 4 dead pixels, some appeared stronger than others. They are all on the left half of the screen. Is this considered an acceptable or normal number of dead pixels? I am tempted to return it while I can. Any suggestions?
Queso
Oct 19, 11:30 AM
Two can play at that game. I still have the 400 shares I bought in 1997.
Do the math. :)
400 pre-splits shares?
My God, man. That's some profit!! :cool:
Do the math. :)
400 pre-splits shares?
My God, man. That's some profit!! :cool:
prady16
Sep 12, 07:31 AM
Its cominggggg........
bloodycape
Jul 26, 11:47 PM
http://www.groupereflect.net/IMG/jpg/image_blog5
I will say that is pretty funny but the odd thing is Apple's formart support isn't the best either, especially for video. If it had or gets divx support that is another story.
I will say that is pretty funny but the odd thing is Apple's formart support isn't the best either, especially for video. If it had or gets divx support that is another story.
mrkramer
Apr 13, 08:14 AM
I don't see anything wrong with it at all. People use children to carry goods all the time and the TSA agent was totally professional about it talking through each step. The rules are there to provide a layer of safety and if you think that it doesn't and don't like the rules, ride the bus!
Better yet, let's remove the TSA agents and let someone fly a plane into another building. :rolleyes:
I don't get how you see nothing wrong with it. In addition to it being completely pointless and ineffective, if you moved this situation from the security line of an airport to anywhere else, the TSA agent would be thrown in jail for touching a little girl like that and the mother probably would as well for allowing it to happen.
Better yet, let's remove the TSA agents and let someone fly a plane into another building. :rolleyes:
I don't get how you see nothing wrong with it. In addition to it being completely pointless and ineffective, if you moved this situation from the security line of an airport to anywhere else, the TSA agent would be thrown in jail for touching a little girl like that and the mother probably would as well for allowing it to happen.
DakotaGuy
Jan 15, 05:59 PM
The Apple TV received a nice update and I am excited to see how movie rental will work out for them. It is also nice to see they are offering HD movies. I am not going to debate 720p versus 1080p because enough people are debating that, but considering bandwidth limitations it is nice to see HD being offered and 720p looks pretty darn good.
I suppose the Time Capsule will be good for some people. It is not something I need, but it is a good idea for those who need it. I think the Airport Express is long overdue for an update, but I guess it still does what it is suppose to do.
The rest was not very exciting. I am going to disagree with a few people on these message boards, but I don't think the MacBook Air is going to be a good seller. I think once people get past the, "wow it's thin" factor they will continue to purchase MacBooks which are a much better value.
I suppose the Time Capsule will be good for some people. It is not something I need, but it is a good idea for those who need it. I think the Airport Express is long overdue for an update, but I guess it still does what it is suppose to do.
The rest was not very exciting. I am going to disagree with a few people on these message boards, but I don't think the MacBook Air is going to be a good seller. I think once people get past the, "wow it's thin" factor they will continue to purchase MacBooks which are a much better value.
MarximusMG
Apr 21, 11:17 AM
Very nice! I've been waiting for this feature to be implemented on MR.
Dagless
Nov 16, 12:43 PM
Why would they go with AMD when there is the Core2Duo? AMD needs something big to compete. AMD? I can't see it.
MattInOz
Sep 28, 08:53 PM
So are there enough Arch's on this board to have a mock up competition?
I see a plan like that and I already have an idea of how I'd elevate it what materials would be used. But also how I'd expect the Architect in question to create the the Form. Then again there is Steve's influence.
Then again there are probably 100's of ways this could look and still be in keeping with the Aesthetic and the plans. We see mock ups of every other product why not the iHouse?
Edit: Does anyone else think that is a wood fired dome (pizza) oven standing in the door way of the butlers kitchen?
I see a plan like that and I already have an idea of how I'd elevate it what materials would be used. But also how I'd expect the Architect in question to create the the Form. Then again there is Steve's influence.
Then again there are probably 100's of ways this could look and still be in keeping with the Aesthetic and the plans. We see mock ups of every other product why not the iHouse?
Edit: Does anyone else think that is a wood fired dome (pizza) oven standing in the door way of the butlers kitchen?
caspersoong
Apr 15, 07:55 PM
Google should have seen this coming long ago.
RubbishBBspeed
Apr 8, 07:23 PM
Best Buy does this all the time. I purchased a Samsung TV off their Web site for in-store sameday pickup last year, and took my receipt to my local store. They wouldn't give me the TV I already purchased because they were holding all of that model until Sunday because of their Sunday ad flyer. They had at least 10 of that model in stock on their store shelves.
They told me I could come back Sunday to pick it up. Naturally, I refused (this was like Tuesday), called Best Buy Online and had them refund my purchase. Then, purchased from Amazon.
I'll never purchase anything major from them again.
I did the same with pc world in england, I haven't bought anything from there stores in the last 15 years and would reckon I've taken between family and friends probably �40,000 out of there takings by buying and advising people to purchase else where. Sometimes it may seem trivial to take a stand against these stores but the amounts do add up as time goes buy.
Which reminds me, I must write to the CEO this weekend and send photos and a list of all the stuff not bought through them. Just as they post there financial results, which aren't looking that good this year.
They told me I could come back Sunday to pick it up. Naturally, I refused (this was like Tuesday), called Best Buy Online and had them refund my purchase. Then, purchased from Amazon.
I'll never purchase anything major from them again.
I did the same with pc world in england, I haven't bought anything from there stores in the last 15 years and would reckon I've taken between family and friends probably �40,000 out of there takings by buying and advising people to purchase else where. Sometimes it may seem trivial to take a stand against these stores but the amounts do add up as time goes buy.
Which reminds me, I must write to the CEO this weekend and send photos and a list of all the stuff not bought through them. Just as they post there financial results, which aren't looking that good this year.
tjhilder
May 2, 04:03 PM
Hopefully it'll fix the bug I get when I want to have a song on repeat, seems to ignore the first song played and then it works on the second :(
0010101
Oct 29, 01:34 AM
The problem with Apple making a 'PC' version of OSX is that they'd have to write it to work with a million different combinations of hardware.. one of the reasons XP is such a crappy OS.
Since Apple builds the hardware, they build the OS to work with that hardware. That's what makes it so stable and reliable.
Now, Apple could, in theory, start a 'OSX Compliant' program, telling third party hardware vendors like Dell or HP that if they use a specific logic board chipset, video chipset, etc that OSX would run as well on such a PC as a Mac, but all that would do is kill Apples hardware sales, because most folks would opt for the ballsed out clone instead of the neutered Apple.
That's why licencing nearly killed Apple.. because the clone companies were building a better, faster box for much less money, and cutting too deep into their hardware sales (which they're making alot more than 20% on).
Another good reason for Apple to keep OSX on their hardware is Microsoft, who would probably quit releasing OSX versions of their popular Word and Excel software if Apple were to try and go head to head with them in the OS market.
Even animals know better than to $#it where they eat.
Despite Apples superior OS, I doubt they'll ever gain much more than 20% of the market, because when it comes down to it, people in general are going to buy what is inexpensive and familure, and has the best range of software available.
Software companies are going to write software for the largest audience possible.. and that's going to continue to be the Winblows platform.
Why hasn't there been a 'universal' version of Photoshop yet? Because the hard core digital imaging people are hanging on to their G5's. The 'casual' and 'consumer' users can use their software just fine under Rosetta on their Intel Macs.
There isn't any incentive for Adobe to port their flagship product yet.. because customers don't have any real incentive to buy it yet.
Since Apple builds the hardware, they build the OS to work with that hardware. That's what makes it so stable and reliable.
Now, Apple could, in theory, start a 'OSX Compliant' program, telling third party hardware vendors like Dell or HP that if they use a specific logic board chipset, video chipset, etc that OSX would run as well on such a PC as a Mac, but all that would do is kill Apples hardware sales, because most folks would opt for the ballsed out clone instead of the neutered Apple.
That's why licencing nearly killed Apple.. because the clone companies were building a better, faster box for much less money, and cutting too deep into their hardware sales (which they're making alot more than 20% on).
Another good reason for Apple to keep OSX on their hardware is Microsoft, who would probably quit releasing OSX versions of their popular Word and Excel software if Apple were to try and go head to head with them in the OS market.
Even animals know better than to $#it where they eat.
Despite Apples superior OS, I doubt they'll ever gain much more than 20% of the market, because when it comes down to it, people in general are going to buy what is inexpensive and familure, and has the best range of software available.
Software companies are going to write software for the largest audience possible.. and that's going to continue to be the Winblows platform.
Why hasn't there been a 'universal' version of Photoshop yet? Because the hard core digital imaging people are hanging on to their G5's. The 'casual' and 'consumer' users can use their software just fine under Rosetta on their Intel Macs.
There isn't any incentive for Adobe to port their flagship product yet.. because customers don't have any real incentive to buy it yet.
quagmire
Jan 12, 09:38 AM
Jobs wasn't smug at all IMHO. He was excited about it. You should of clearly seen that. He made a few jokes( like that prank call to Starbucks), but that was just his normal old humor. The only problem I had was with the order he stated iPod, phone, and internet communicator. The iPod and phone got good responses and then the internet communicator the people went, " ummm.... ok." I would of went internet communicator-> iPod-> phone. Get louder responses step and save the best for last. Other then that the keynote was good, if not one of his best.
For you iPhone haters, you people seem to think hardware makes the product revolutionary. Since you think so, you're right then. The iPhone in terms of hardware is nothing special. Got the standard CPU, standard 2.5G things, etc. But, there is more things that make it revolutionary then hardware. The UI is what makes the iPhone revolutionary. How you navigate the iPhone is revolutionary. How easy it is to use it and navigate through it. Ok, so it uses flash instead of an HD. How do most people treat their cell phones? Most people I see their cell phones are beat up. Scratches galore, etc. I bet the HD would be killed within weeks. Not to mention the extra thickness and power usage. 8 GB is the highest affordable flash you can put in a product right now so Apple didn't skimp out on that. Plus, the iPhone is a phone first and foremost. The iPod part is just a feature on it. I love how someone avoided the question, " What else were you hoping for?" Doesn't answer the question at all. Just continues the BS on how the iPhone isn't revolutionary.
For most part, the iPhone haters simply don't get the point of Apple. Why Apple makes the products the way they do. They have been brainwashed by other companies throwing in technology galore into their products. What is the point of adding even more technology if the current technology in the product isn't easy to use? You're just going to confuse the crap out of your customer base. That is where Apple steps in. Apple takes the technology and makes it easier to use. So Apple doesn't always use the latest and greatest stuff in their products. Look at the original Mac. Nothing really new in there hardware wise. But, it changed how we used a computer. Fast forward to 2001 when the iPod was introduced. It was just another HD based MP3 player. Had nothing the competition. The iPod did what the other MP3 players could do. Yet, what made the iPod revolutionary was the way we navigated through an MP3 player and how we used it overall( the iTunes/iPod integration for example). It was easy to use and put music on it.
PS: If we bought everything Apple made why didn't the Newton and Cube sell well?
For you iPhone haters, you people seem to think hardware makes the product revolutionary. Since you think so, you're right then. The iPhone in terms of hardware is nothing special. Got the standard CPU, standard 2.5G things, etc. But, there is more things that make it revolutionary then hardware. The UI is what makes the iPhone revolutionary. How you navigate the iPhone is revolutionary. How easy it is to use it and navigate through it. Ok, so it uses flash instead of an HD. How do most people treat their cell phones? Most people I see their cell phones are beat up. Scratches galore, etc. I bet the HD would be killed within weeks. Not to mention the extra thickness and power usage. 8 GB is the highest affordable flash you can put in a product right now so Apple didn't skimp out on that. Plus, the iPhone is a phone first and foremost. The iPod part is just a feature on it. I love how someone avoided the question, " What else were you hoping for?" Doesn't answer the question at all. Just continues the BS on how the iPhone isn't revolutionary.
For most part, the iPhone haters simply don't get the point of Apple. Why Apple makes the products the way they do. They have been brainwashed by other companies throwing in technology galore into their products. What is the point of adding even more technology if the current technology in the product isn't easy to use? You're just going to confuse the crap out of your customer base. That is where Apple steps in. Apple takes the technology and makes it easier to use. So Apple doesn't always use the latest and greatest stuff in their products. Look at the original Mac. Nothing really new in there hardware wise. But, it changed how we used a computer. Fast forward to 2001 when the iPod was introduced. It was just another HD based MP3 player. Had nothing the competition. The iPod did what the other MP3 players could do. Yet, what made the iPod revolutionary was the way we navigated through an MP3 player and how we used it overall( the iTunes/iPod integration for example). It was easy to use and put music on it.
PS: If we bought everything Apple made why didn't the Newton and Cube sell well?
Mac-Mariachi
Apr 16, 09:43 AM
The iMac is all aluminum, and it needs the wi-Fi signal, and it seems to work fine.
Yes but the iMac is not 3G, only Wi-Fi. The black antena cover is for 3G reception. :)
Yes but the iMac is not 3G, only Wi-Fi. The black antena cover is for 3G reception. :)
No comments:
Post a Comment