rtharper
Sep 14, 09:59 AM
Why do people seem convinced Apple won't release something like an SLR or video camera?
Because, AFAIK, there's no market for a "Think Differently" camera. A professional photographer doesn't need a camera to match their MacBook Pro, they want one that was made by a pro camera maker.
Because, AFAIK, there's no market for a "Think Differently" camera. A professional photographer doesn't need a camera to match their MacBook Pro, they want one that was made by a pro camera maker.
LaMerVipere
Sep 12, 05:00 PM
Okay, so it appears that owners of 5th generation iPods (before the latest release) who update their iPod software to version 1.2 get a few cool features that come pre-loaded out of the box on the latest 5th generation iPods, but not all.
We get:
• Gapless playback
• Ability to adjust backlight brightness (I'm particularly excited about this, I've been wanting it for ages, I bet it increases battery battery life immensely with the brightness turned way down)
• When rapidly scrolling through ARTISTS we get overlayed alphabet letters which correspond to where we are on our list
• Ability to play games bought from iTunes
We don't get:
• New search function
** Video playback details yet to be determined
We get:
• Gapless playback
• Ability to adjust backlight brightness (I'm particularly excited about this, I've been wanting it for ages, I bet it increases battery battery life immensely with the brightness turned way down)
• When rapidly scrolling through ARTISTS we get overlayed alphabet letters which correspond to where we are on our list
• Ability to play games bought from iTunes
We don't get:
• New search function
** Video playback details yet to be determined
Paulhammer
Sep 14, 08:44 AM
The invitation suggests Aperture, but could it also be an extreme closeup of an isight camera on a black anodized MBP? ;) :cool: :D :eek: :confused:
Hodapp
Sep 26, 09:59 AM
I can't wait to get my hands on an iPhone- I'm getting tired of my SLVR. As soon as the iPhone launches I'm throwing my SLVR in to a river. This is starting to become tradition, there must be a half dozen old cell phones of mine which have been cast in to the briny deep. What a liberating experience.
vitaboy
Aug 24, 04:20 AM
Is this a one-time payment to include all future uses?
It seems to be the case, as the agreement resolves "all disputes." I'm sure there is a stipulation that Creative agrees not to pursue patent claims against Apple in the future.
Which is why the whole "Creative won" argument doesn't wash. Considering that iPod will end up generating tens of billions of dollars in future revenue for Apple (on top of the billions it's already made), settling for $100 million is not exactly a sign of Creative dealing from a position of strength.
I mean think about it. Creative is basically claiming Apple stole its goose that lays golden eggs. Apple says "No, we didn't, in fact, you stole our spinning wheel that can spin threads of gold from straw!" They both argue and threaten each other, but in the end Apple offers Creative a little piece of golden eggshell, and Creative is so happy about winning, it tells Apple, "Aww, shucks, thanks for the piece of shell, you can keep the goose!"
I don't think so. :P
Which is why the deal has all the signs of Creative gulping down its pride and accepting a settlement on Apple's terms. Creative accepted because if it didn't, the chances were quite high that it would not be in business a year from now, mainly because Zune will wipe out its ability to sell in a crowded market. At least now, it has a big stick it can use against Microsoft.
In the end, it's a big win for Apple.
It seems to be the case, as the agreement resolves "all disputes." I'm sure there is a stipulation that Creative agrees not to pursue patent claims against Apple in the future.
Which is why the whole "Creative won" argument doesn't wash. Considering that iPod will end up generating tens of billions of dollars in future revenue for Apple (on top of the billions it's already made), settling for $100 million is not exactly a sign of Creative dealing from a position of strength.
I mean think about it. Creative is basically claiming Apple stole its goose that lays golden eggs. Apple says "No, we didn't, in fact, you stole our spinning wheel that can spin threads of gold from straw!" They both argue and threaten each other, but in the end Apple offers Creative a little piece of golden eggshell, and Creative is so happy about winning, it tells Apple, "Aww, shucks, thanks for the piece of shell, you can keep the goose!"
I don't think so. :P
Which is why the deal has all the signs of Creative gulping down its pride and accepting a settlement on Apple's terms. Creative accepted because if it didn't, the chances were quite high that it would not be in business a year from now, mainly because Zune will wipe out its ability to sell in a crowded market. At least now, it has a big stick it can use against Microsoft.
In the end, it's a big win for Apple.
TallManNY
Apr 22, 08:22 AM
If single use ownership is the wave of the future and that results in people buying more stuff, stuff like CDs, DVDs, and Digital Books which are basically infinite unconstrained resources (i.e., no supply issue for any of these), then prices for them will go down. So this is unlikely to be a negative for the consumer.
I have my iPhone with me at all times and it has enough songs on it that I don't feel constrained. So streaming doesn't seem too exciting. Also, I doubt AT&T's New York cell coverage will be able to handle it to make this a nice experience.
I have my iPhone with me at all times and it has enough songs on it that I don't feel constrained. So streaming doesn't seem too exciting. Also, I doubt AT&T's New York cell coverage will be able to handle it to make this a nice experience.
aurichie
Apr 19, 07:44 AM
Google actually doesn't, being an industry newcomer and all (they only appeared at the end of the 90s in the industry). That is one of their Achilles' heels.
They have plenty of patents. It wasn't until the 90s that the patent madness really started with software. Google is also leading the bidding for a large portfolio of mobile patents to protect them against Apple and Microsoft.
They have plenty of patents. It wasn't until the 90s that the patent madness really started with software. Google is also leading the bidding for a large portfolio of mobile patents to protect them against Apple and Microsoft.
Piggie
Apr 22, 05:34 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.
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.
Eidorian
Jul 14, 01:19 PM
To all you G5/PPC fanboys:
http://www.crazyass13.com/wp-content/theburgerking.jpgI've seen worse with that tag line. Much, much worse. :eek:
http://www.crazyass13.com/wp-content/theburgerking.jpgI've seen worse with that tag line. Much, much worse. :eek:
whatever
Sep 11, 10:51 PM
The margins on a mid-mac should be better than the iMac since it's using standard (and therefore cheap) desktop components. So any mid-mac sales in preference to the iMac would probably make Apple more money anyway.
I want Apple to release a stupid "mid-mac" just to shut you and everyone else up.
Professionals buy Mac Pros or laptops. Consumers buy iMacs or laptops. That's a sound and successful strategy for Apple. And if you need a cheap Mac, you can buy a mini.
Just because Intel releases a chip, does not mean Apple is going to use it. If that was the case then Intel should re-release the 486, so that Apple can put them in the "mid-mac"!
I want Apple to release a stupid "mid-mac" just to shut you and everyone else up.
Professionals buy Mac Pros or laptops. Consumers buy iMacs or laptops. That's a sound and successful strategy for Apple. And if you need a cheap Mac, you can buy a mini.
Just because Intel releases a chip, does not mean Apple is going to use it. If that was the case then Intel should re-release the 486, so that Apple can put them in the "mid-mac"!
rajid
Mar 23, 06:00 PM
First of all, you can't stop people from sharing information of any type. If not here, then somewhere else; twitter with geotagging, perhaps. Second, as far as I know it's always been illegal to notify other drivers of a cop checking speeds. I would assume it's illegal to notify drivers of a DUI check point as well. If so, arrest the person posting the information, not the program.
MisterMe
Dec 30, 04:16 PM
It makes sense. iProducts are increasingly becoming ubiquitous, therefore they will become more profitable for malware developers to attack. It's not a McAfee sales pitch so much as it's stating the obvious. Same with Android.No, it is the same nonsense that Microsoft and its apologists have been saying for the past decade. It isn't any truer today than it was a decade ago.
craigsharp@spym
Sep 14, 08:54 AM
iPhone.org is a hoax, i think. I'm not sure, but it is kinda funny that Apple owns mammals.org? why in the heck does apple own that domain name? Kinda lookin forward to seeing the the all new Apple Mammal, It's a robot that looks and feels human, can think and even reproduces the same way a human does. LOL Oh and it can play the new movies too.
PatrickCocoa
Mar 22, 02:12 PM
Newbie question - please don't flame me.
How big of a transition is this, as compared - for example - to the Intel chip back around 2006? What I mean is, after the transition to Intel, certain software and eventually the newest operating system itself could no longer be run on the old chip. So, is this transition as significant as that, or is this more of a speed boost kind of thing?
Thanks.
Compared to the switch to Intel, or the switch to a new form factor, this is minor, much less significant. It's basically a speed boost with possibly a few new gee-gaws.
Also, the refresh cycle is not set in stone, so a new iMac could come out tomorrow or it may be six months away. If you need a new iMac, buy one. When the new version comes out, the iMac you bought won't be any slower.
Also, Apple has a 14 day return policy, so if you buy an iMac and a new version comes out a week later, just take it back and upgrade.
How big of a transition is this, as compared - for example - to the Intel chip back around 2006? What I mean is, after the transition to Intel, certain software and eventually the newest operating system itself could no longer be run on the old chip. So, is this transition as significant as that, or is this more of a speed boost kind of thing?
Thanks.
Compared to the switch to Intel, or the switch to a new form factor, this is minor, much less significant. It's basically a speed boost with possibly a few new gee-gaws.
Also, the refresh cycle is not set in stone, so a new iMac could come out tomorrow or it may be six months away. If you need a new iMac, buy one. When the new version comes out, the iMac you bought won't be any slower.
Also, Apple has a 14 day return policy, so if you buy an iMac and a new version comes out a week later, just take it back and upgrade.
stewacide
Sep 27, 12:35 AM
If I had to guess as to why Apple would go with an exclusive provider to start, I would say so as to play hardball with the network providers.
Apple doesn't want to gum their pretty phones up with provider ick-ware like other manufacturers have to (just like it didn't want to e.g. 'Intel Inside' its pretty boxes), so they make a deal whereas in exchange for initial exclusivity Cingular agrees to relent control over the phones software and services (so that it say interfaces with the iTunes store for music and tones not Cingular's store: although I'm sure the service provider will charge the full market rate for data transfer). Then when the iPhone becomes a huge hit the other providers won't have any choice if they want to get on board as well.
I don't see why Apple would start a virtual operator, because they have no interest in getting into the service provider game. They can get what they really want - an opt-out of the cruddy operator system in the US especially - through market weight alone.
Apple doesn't want to gum their pretty phones up with provider ick-ware like other manufacturers have to (just like it didn't want to e.g. 'Intel Inside' its pretty boxes), so they make a deal whereas in exchange for initial exclusivity Cingular agrees to relent control over the phones software and services (so that it say interfaces with the iTunes store for music and tones not Cingular's store: although I'm sure the service provider will charge the full market rate for data transfer). Then when the iPhone becomes a huge hit the other providers won't have any choice if they want to get on board as well.
I don't see why Apple would start a virtual operator, because they have no interest in getting into the service provider game. They can get what they really want - an opt-out of the cruddy operator system in the US especially - through market weight alone.
koen
Sep 13, 09:25 PM
Type the following in the Terminal:
cd /Applications/iTunes.app/Contents/MacOS
strings * | grep -i phone
cd /Applications/iTunes.app/Contents/MacOS
strings * | grep -i phone
Sensamic
Mar 24, 03:29 PM
I have a imac late 2009 and Im very very happy with it. I dont need a bigger screen, I dont need more resolution, I dont need more disk space, I dont need thunderbolt or USB 3, I dont need Lion, I dont need more RAM, I dont need better graphics...
I dont plan on buying a new imac until they come with USB 3 and thunderbolt and SSD inside and, who knows, bluray...
Right now theres just absolutely no need to change. Only option I want is the next macbook air with core i3, since I dont have a laptop and I need one. Ill have to wait until November or so. It wouldnt be smart to buy it now since the next update sure with have core i3 and thunderbolt and 4GB RAM.
I dont plan on buying a new imac until they come with USB 3 and thunderbolt and SSD inside and, who knows, bluray...
Right now theres just absolutely no need to change. Only option I want is the next macbook air with core i3, since I dont have a laptop and I need one. Ill have to wait until November or so. It wouldnt be smart to buy it now since the next update sure with have core i3 and thunderbolt and 4GB RAM.
sisyphus
Sep 10, 09:33 PM
Flame me if you must, but what is the sense in having multiple cores if the software running on it doesn't take advantage of it? Same thing with advertising the new chips as being 64 bit. That's great, but I don't have anything (not in beta) that can use it.
Apple themselves have never been great at making use of multiple processors (in tandem), so I'm not getting how 4, 8, 32 cores makes much difference?
According to the Page 2 Rumors there are some significant speed ups to OpenGL in the next update to 10.4 due to multithreading. Apple has had 4 processor systems for over a year now. I would think they have some ideas about how to make use of it.
Things like the next version of iChat... 1 core to run some application, another for the computer to compress that image into a nice stream to be broadcast over the net, and another to do the actual operation of iChat and the OS and whatever else you have in the background at the time.
There are all sorts of stupid (and not so stupid) ways to eat up processor cycles if you have them. :rolleyes:
Apple themselves have never been great at making use of multiple processors (in tandem), so I'm not getting how 4, 8, 32 cores makes much difference?
According to the Page 2 Rumors there are some significant speed ups to OpenGL in the next update to 10.4 due to multithreading. Apple has had 4 processor systems for over a year now. I would think they have some ideas about how to make use of it.
Things like the next version of iChat... 1 core to run some application, another for the computer to compress that image into a nice stream to be broadcast over the net, and another to do the actual operation of iChat and the OS and whatever else you have in the background at the time.
There are all sorts of stupid (and not so stupid) ways to eat up processor cycles if you have them. :rolleyes:
Multimedia
Sep 11, 06:16 PM
The benchmarks on Tom's Hardware are up.
Intel's Core 2 Quadro Kentsfield: Four Cores on a Rampage (http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/09/10/four_cores_on_the_rampage/)
An up to 100% performance increase over the Core 2 Duo. Goodness me.
I was surprised to see that it's the same form factor chunkywise (same pin setup as Core 2 Duo and compatible with those MBs) - I thought it would be thicker.Great catch Law Guy. Congratulations and thanks!
This is huge news. Where is everybody?!? :confused:
It appears that Conroe motherboards or logic boards, as some like to call them, are Core 2 Quadro ready. Oops! No wonder Apple hasn't released an early Conroe Mac. They's obviously waiting for these Core 2 Quadros to ship - dropping a bomb on everyone who bought a Mac Pro. :eek:
Am I the only one here who thinks this is gigantic news? I can hear a pin drop. The stunned silence is deafening. :eek: ;)
Maybe an early Christmas Present Is In The Works For November Shipping from Apple. :)
So Kentsfield is dubbed Core 2 Quadro or C2Q for short. And it looks like this - last pic is pin view with Core 2 Duo on left Core 2 Quadro on right:
Intel's Core 2 Quadro Kentsfield: Four Cores on a Rampage (http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/09/10/four_cores_on_the_rampage/)
An up to 100% performance increase over the Core 2 Duo. Goodness me.
I was surprised to see that it's the same form factor chunkywise (same pin setup as Core 2 Duo and compatible with those MBs) - I thought it would be thicker.Great catch Law Guy. Congratulations and thanks!
This is huge news. Where is everybody?!? :confused:
It appears that Conroe motherboards or logic boards, as some like to call them, are Core 2 Quadro ready. Oops! No wonder Apple hasn't released an early Conroe Mac. They's obviously waiting for these Core 2 Quadros to ship - dropping a bomb on everyone who bought a Mac Pro. :eek:
Am I the only one here who thinks this is gigantic news? I can hear a pin drop. The stunned silence is deafening. :eek: ;)
Maybe an early Christmas Present Is In The Works For November Shipping from Apple. :)
So Kentsfield is dubbed Core 2 Quadro or C2Q for short. And it looks like this - last pic is pin view with Core 2 Duo on left Core 2 Quadro on right:
amols
Jul 14, 02:11 PM
Whoa!! I feel a lot better that MBP is not getting CPU upgrade anytime soon. I don't want my month-old MBP getting obsolete in another month.
jafd
Apr 25, 04:41 PM
Haha. Silver. Collector's edition?
Athlete's edition, I reckon, given a piece of silver weighs around 4 times more than a piece of aluminum of the same volume.
Athlete's edition, I reckon, given a piece of silver weighs around 4 times more than a piece of aluminum of the same volume.
Dr.Gargoyle
Sep 14, 09:37 AM
yes, and photo software runs on computers. "This is the new Aperture. and it will run beautifully on the new C2D Macbook Pro I just announced. Boom. does this... Boom, does that...etc..."
EDIT: iMeowbot beat me to it, but what he/she said
and you have your computer in a desk (iDesk) and you sit down then you work (iChair) and the chair is placed on a floor (iFloor)....
Apple will eventually update both MB and MBP, but I doubt they send out an invitation for an update, in particular if the venue for the presentation is a photo convention.
EDIT: iMeowbot beat me to it, but what he/she said
and you have your computer in a desk (iDesk) and you sit down then you work (iChair) and the chair is placed on a floor (iFloor)....
Apple will eventually update both MB and MBP, but I doubt they send out an invitation for an update, in particular if the venue for the presentation is a photo convention.
kreach
Apr 20, 09:58 AM
nice! Actually.
sisyphus
Sep 10, 10:40 PM
Close, Manic Mouse. I dont understand people's belief that every Intel chip made has to go into an Apple machine. I doubt the Conroe will be used in any Mac nor the Kentsfield. The range is covered, and I'm sick of these silly rumors of Mac mid towers.
There wont be a mid tower, not now, not "Next Tuesday".
The thing is that it is very easy to layout a reasoning as to why Apple should/will use a Conroe chip in its line up. It is very difficult with the current product lineup to show why they wont.
As noted in a previous post, there is a $1000US price gap in their lineup that has been left in the lineup. There is currently a chip that would fill in that gap. This machine would steal slightly from both the lower and higher priced machines, yet open another market segment.
Apple has seen massive growth in the laptop market with the iBook. The MacBook perfectly filled a need with a certain market segment. The desktop Macs cover all of the segments except 1. This big gaping hole in their lineup has the perfect processor to meet its needs. Apple has designed a new case style for the Mac Pro. A smaller version would be simple to build re-using many of the components allowing for some economies of scale. This makes both the Mac Pro and the smaller sibling more cost effective in terms of components and assembly line manufacture.
The argument against goes. Well apple hasn't had a mid range headless machine since the G3 era. Which is of course true. However there was no way to differentiate products because there wasn't enough variability to the chips.
We now have:
Duo<Duo 2 (Merom) <Duo 2 (Conroe) <Xeon (Woodcrest)
(Mini < iMac < Mac < Mac Pro)
So just because Apple has had a big hole in its product matrix for the last few years means that it will continue to have a big hole in its product matrix until the end of time? Apple left that hole because it wasn't possible to create enough distiction between the product lines if they closed it. Now with the processors available from Intel, it is possible.
Apple is out to make $$$. It is a big corporation, and one that we all (usually) like because of the innovative easy to use products it delivers. It is making a MASSIVE consumer push right now. If a midrange machine will make them the most dough that is what they will deliver.
SJ likes clean product lines and that is what is going on.
Shuffle < Nano < iPod (< vPod)
MacBook < MacBook Pro
Mini < iMac (<Mac) < Mac Pro
X-Serve
They are all very clean product lines. The reason they destroyed all the product lines was that they had:
PM 5XXX
PM 6XXX
PM 7XXX
PM 8XXX
PM 9XXX
And there were overlapping prices and specs and God knows what. Unless you were a regular koolaid drinker it was extremely tough to keep track of what did what in the product matrix.
This will be a very clean and easy to understand matrix.
There wont be a mid tower, not now, not "Next Tuesday".
The thing is that it is very easy to layout a reasoning as to why Apple should/will use a Conroe chip in its line up. It is very difficult with the current product lineup to show why they wont.
As noted in a previous post, there is a $1000US price gap in their lineup that has been left in the lineup. There is currently a chip that would fill in that gap. This machine would steal slightly from both the lower and higher priced machines, yet open another market segment.
Apple has seen massive growth in the laptop market with the iBook. The MacBook perfectly filled a need with a certain market segment. The desktop Macs cover all of the segments except 1. This big gaping hole in their lineup has the perfect processor to meet its needs. Apple has designed a new case style for the Mac Pro. A smaller version would be simple to build re-using many of the components allowing for some economies of scale. This makes both the Mac Pro and the smaller sibling more cost effective in terms of components and assembly line manufacture.
The argument against goes. Well apple hasn't had a mid range headless machine since the G3 era. Which is of course true. However there was no way to differentiate products because there wasn't enough variability to the chips.
We now have:
Duo<Duo 2 (Merom) <Duo 2 (Conroe) <Xeon (Woodcrest)
(Mini < iMac < Mac < Mac Pro)
So just because Apple has had a big hole in its product matrix for the last few years means that it will continue to have a big hole in its product matrix until the end of time? Apple left that hole because it wasn't possible to create enough distiction between the product lines if they closed it. Now with the processors available from Intel, it is possible.
Apple is out to make $$$. It is a big corporation, and one that we all (usually) like because of the innovative easy to use products it delivers. It is making a MASSIVE consumer push right now. If a midrange machine will make them the most dough that is what they will deliver.
SJ likes clean product lines and that is what is going on.
Shuffle < Nano < iPod (< vPod)
MacBook < MacBook Pro
Mini < iMac (<Mac) < Mac Pro
X-Serve
They are all very clean product lines. The reason they destroyed all the product lines was that they had:
PM 5XXX
PM 6XXX
PM 7XXX
PM 8XXX
PM 9XXX
And there were overlapping prices and specs and God knows what. Unless you were a regular koolaid drinker it was extremely tough to keep track of what did what in the product matrix.
This will be a very clean and easy to understand matrix.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario