FlyNolJ
Sep 12, 05:16 PM
Christ, a $50 dollar price cut is a year of innovation? WOW.
roland.g
Mar 22, 03:09 PM
I am going to be in the market to replace my 24" 2.8 rev. A aluminum iMac (Aug 2007) when these come out with a new 27". I will be consolidating to an iMac and iPad 2 since I no longer feel the need for a 13" MacBook Pro as well.
Sell the MacBook Pro and iMac to fund the new iMac or close to it. However, I will wait until later in the summer and get a 10.7 Lion pre-loaded machine. No sense in buying that close to a major OS update.
Sell the MacBook Pro and iMac to fund the new iMac or close to it. However, I will wait until later in the summer and get a 10.7 Lion pre-loaded machine. No sense in buying that close to a major OS update.
dondark
Sep 9, 11:12 PM
I've been calling around, there are 3 stores near me but none have a 24" iMac for me to look at yet. :( I'm looking to see what the annoucement is on Tuesday is...Cube redux? :eek:
It is Metal iPod Nano, Macbook Nano, Full HD MBP.
It is Metal iPod Nano, Macbook Nano, Full HD MBP.
Small White Car
Nov 13, 02:06 PM
CAREFULLY read APPLEs developers rules
You should try it!
They didn't break the rules.
You should try it!
They didn't break the rules.
Amazing Iceman
Mar 30, 11:48 AM
Microsoft is suing homebuilders for offering "Windows" in their homes. Instead, they need to refer to them as "transparent viewing portals".
"Portals"??? Did you say "Portals"? you can't say that! It could be trademarked too!
How about "Shoe Store"? is that a trademark too? If not, I should patent it and sue all of them.
Regarding the term "Windows", I have no idea how M$ got away with suing "Lindows". their claim was that phonetically there was a similarity that could confuse the public.
Repeat after me: "Lindows, Windows". Did you get confused? I don't think so.
Repeat after me: "AppStore, App Store". Did you get confused? What? Where? Sounds the same?
Based on their "Lindows" precedent, M$ has no ground to refute the lawsuit.
"Portals"??? Did you say "Portals"? you can't say that! It could be trademarked too!
How about "Shoe Store"? is that a trademark too? If not, I should patent it and sue all of them.
Regarding the term "Windows", I have no idea how M$ got away with suing "Lindows". their claim was that phonetically there was a similarity that could confuse the public.
Repeat after me: "Lindows, Windows". Did you get confused? I don't think so.
Repeat after me: "AppStore, App Store". Did you get confused? What? Where? Sounds the same?
Based on their "Lindows" precedent, M$ has no ground to refute the lawsuit.
Dmac77
Apr 25, 12:48 AM
You deserve a bad rap:rolleyes: There is nothing illegal going 5 under. It is illegal to be going 20 over. If you get caught, that is like an auto revocation of your license to give you an idea how serious it is
And you call us laughable? How about you start practicing safe driving habits before you kill someone bud:cool:
What is with your sense of you doing nothing wrong? seriously...the issue lies pretty much all with you as far as I am concerned...
I'm not saying that my speed was legal, but after she brakechecked me, she dropped her speed to under 55mph which is illegal at least in portions of Michigan; there's a thing called a minimum speed limit.
-Don
And you call us laughable? How about you start practicing safe driving habits before you kill someone bud:cool:
What is with your sense of you doing nothing wrong? seriously...the issue lies pretty much all with you as far as I am concerned...
I'm not saying that my speed was legal, but after she brakechecked me, she dropped her speed to under 55mph which is illegal at least in portions of Michigan; there's a thing called a minimum speed limit.
-Don
JayLenochiniMac
Apr 4, 12:42 PM
From article (http://www.10news.com/news/27421748/detail.html):
The male suspects and their alleged female accomplice then got into a silver Acura that crashed while still inside the shopping center's parking lot, Facicci said, noting that one of the men was driving and he died in the crash. He appears to have been killed by a bullet that went through the passenger window, Chula Vista Police said.
This explains the headshot as the driver was sitting in the car and they were likely still firing at the guard while attempting to get away.
The male suspects and their alleged female accomplice then got into a silver Acura that crashed while still inside the shopping center's parking lot, Facicci said, noting that one of the men was driving and he died in the crash. He appears to have been killed by a bullet that went through the passenger window, Chula Vista Police said.
This explains the headshot as the driver was sitting in the car and they were likely still firing at the guard while attempting to get away.
Sydde
Apr 10, 05:43 PM
Remember, we have high taxes (~20% VAT etc) but better public services in general.
If you calculate where personal income goes, the US has effectively similar tax rates to most of Europe, just more of it goes to private business instead of the government. The structure of the legal system supports funneling our money upward in a manner that is functionally indistinguishable from privatized taxation. Lamentably, the ROI on privatization, AFAICT, is far lower in the private sector (compare the benefit/overhead ratio of Medicare to most private insurance companies). Personally, I would take government services over more costly, lower quality private services every freaking time.
The dynamic that the US faces right now is similar to north Africa and the Arabian peninsula: as those in power work out more ways to benefit from the misery of the essentially powerless, more and more people are acquiring less and less to lose. The tipping point will be when the sheer volume of despair overtops the levee of hope. The Prince describes these cycles of society. What follows may well be a slight revision of its antecedent, unless we can somehow refer to history to discover some way to break the cycle.
Swings and roundabouts!
Swindon?
http://lorenzbeyeler.com/images/magic_circle_2.jpg
If you calculate where personal income goes, the US has effectively similar tax rates to most of Europe, just more of it goes to private business instead of the government. The structure of the legal system supports funneling our money upward in a manner that is functionally indistinguishable from privatized taxation. Lamentably, the ROI on privatization, AFAICT, is far lower in the private sector (compare the benefit/overhead ratio of Medicare to most private insurance companies). Personally, I would take government services over more costly, lower quality private services every freaking time.
The dynamic that the US faces right now is similar to north Africa and the Arabian peninsula: as those in power work out more ways to benefit from the misery of the essentially powerless, more and more people are acquiring less and less to lose. The tipping point will be when the sheer volume of despair overtops the levee of hope. The Prince describes these cycles of society. What follows may well be a slight revision of its antecedent, unless we can somehow refer to history to discover some way to break the cycle.
Swings and roundabouts!
Swindon?
http://lorenzbeyeler.com/images/magic_circle_2.jpg
milo
Sep 19, 03:28 PM
Considering that the iTS is like the 5th biggest music vendor, they sure suck at selling movies. 125k is nothing compared to real movie vendors.
Maybe when they get more than 75 movies. Amazon unbox started with like 2000 movies!
Are you serious? This is their first WEEK of doing it, what do you expect? And how many movies did Amazon sell in their first week? I'd bet it was less than Apple. Good selection won't overcome crappy implemenation.
I guess people value convenience over quality. That's great for Apple. That confirms it will be a success.
For me I rather buy DVDs or wait for hi definition downloads, but I guess many people out there are satisfy with lower quality.
From what I've heard, the quality is pretty close to DVD. Have you compared the two? What is your complaint about quality?
On my DSL connection, it took about 7 hours. I let it go overnight.
Not quite the 30 minutes that Steve promised.
He quoted that number on a 5M connection...is that what you have?
Maybe they could make iTunes let you start playing your TV show download before it's finished, like they let you do with movies?
I'd bet they already do, since the download engine in iTunes is redone. Can anyone confirm?
Maybe when they get more than 75 movies. Amazon unbox started with like 2000 movies!
Are you serious? This is their first WEEK of doing it, what do you expect? And how many movies did Amazon sell in their first week? I'd bet it was less than Apple. Good selection won't overcome crappy implemenation.
I guess people value convenience over quality. That's great for Apple. That confirms it will be a success.
For me I rather buy DVDs or wait for hi definition downloads, but I guess many people out there are satisfy with lower quality.
From what I've heard, the quality is pretty close to DVD. Have you compared the two? What is your complaint about quality?
On my DSL connection, it took about 7 hours. I let it go overnight.
Not quite the 30 minutes that Steve promised.
He quoted that number on a 5M connection...is that what you have?
Maybe they could make iTunes let you start playing your TV show download before it's finished, like they let you do with movies?
I'd bet they already do, since the download engine in iTunes is redone. Can anyone confirm?
deputy_doofy
Sep 14, 09:50 AM
My prediction:
Definiantly:
Aperture 2.0 ($299)
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
Maybe:
iPhone with 3.2 mpx camera by Canon
New displays
PowerBook G5
Unikely:
802.11 n (in MacPro and MacBook Pro)
New iSight with IR reciever
MacBook
I'm thinking 2 of those listed under "maybe" are definites. :p
Definiantly:
Aperture 2.0 ($299)
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
Maybe:
iPhone with 3.2 mpx camera by Canon
New displays
PowerBook G5
Unikely:
802.11 n (in MacPro and MacBook Pro)
New iSight with IR reciever
MacBook
I'm thinking 2 of those listed under "maybe" are definites. :p
Machead III
Aug 29, 03:39 AM
Shipping date on the 1.83Ghz White MB is 5-7 days. On the rest of the MBs it's 3-5.
All other comps are 24hr, apart from the iMacs which are 1-2.
Has it been like this for a while already? Is this because of shortages, or is it a sign?
All other comps are 24hr, apart from the iMacs which are 1-2.
Has it been like this for a while already? Is this because of shortages, or is it a sign?
flinstone
Sep 12, 02:40 PM
Anubis "We waited 334 days for this? "
I agree totally lame and bad for Apple.
How longer i think of the "news" today the more foolish i think it is of Steve to even announce this crap!
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
I agree totally lame and bad for Apple.
How longer i think of the "news" today the more foolish i think it is of Steve to even announce this crap!
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
steve_hill4
Aug 23, 05:36 PM
A little-known company, and that was to create it's product. If apple buys one of their largest competitors, that will raise a few eyebrows.
Think Microsoft strategy here. They settle with Creative for $100 million and Creative join the Made for iPod scheme. If they suceed and get back on their feet, it helps Apple argue they aren't anti-competition, if they fail, Creative fall by the wayside and Apple could perhpas snap them up for a bargain.
Buy Creative now and thy will not only be accused of anti-competitive behaviour, but probably lose any cases over Fairplay.
Think Microsoft strategy here. They settle with Creative for $100 million and Creative join the Made for iPod scheme. If they suceed and get back on their feet, it helps Apple argue they aren't anti-competition, if they fail, Creative fall by the wayside and Apple could perhpas snap them up for a bargain.
Buy Creative now and thy will not only be accused of anti-competitive behaviour, but probably lose any cases over Fairplay.
Alvi
Apr 4, 11:51 AM
Was It really necessary to kill him?
No
No
Multimedia
Sep 12, 06:36 PM
picture attached
Edit: Tested on Three iPods now. One bought days after the first 5G was realsed right up to one bought in july... all work with itunes purchase and home encoded content.How are you home encoding? From What source type of video?
Both Mainline and Baseline 2-pass encodes from Handbrake at 640x480 won't load onto my iPod.
OK as far as I can tell exports from EyeTV2 and Handbrake will not work. But exports off an existing mp4 file from QuickTime Pro will. Looks like Elgato and Handbrake have some work to do. Sorry for the confusion.
Edit: Tested on Three iPods now. One bought days after the first 5G was realsed right up to one bought in july... all work with itunes purchase and home encoded content.How are you home encoding? From What source type of video?
Both Mainline and Baseline 2-pass encodes from Handbrake at 640x480 won't load onto my iPod.
OK as far as I can tell exports from EyeTV2 and Handbrake will not work. But exports off an existing mp4 file from QuickTime Pro will. Looks like Elgato and Handbrake have some work to do. Sorry for the confusion.
justperry
Apr 4, 11:41 AM
Is this news:confused:
Geckotek
Apr 4, 12:21 PM
If guns didn't exist, things like this wouldn't be happening.
Yeah, because crime and wars didn't exist before guns.
Someone is extremely naive.
Yeah, because crime and wars didn't exist before guns.
Someone is extremely naive.
8Phoenix
Sep 14, 12:41 AM
With due respect. The design looks good but I think it is lacking a few things.
I am not even sure if iPhone will be out for a while. Because assume the patient drawings on appleinsider is true, then it is likely that Apple might install iSight in the iPhone. (camera feature of the phone)
I am most expecting the iPhone to be a pda, rather than a mobile phone. Most likely a 3G phone. iChat, iCal, Address Book, and lite version of Mail and safari is what i would expect to see. Even iTunes and Quicktime. Lite version of course. (most essential would be ical, addressbook, mail)
I think more revolutionary of the design is that if you open iCal, Mail, safari etc you would have to turn the mobile horizitional for wide screen reading, and the wheel is most likely to be a touch screen.
Can I also add, I think it is extremely unlikely apple would do the slide down for the numpad. Because teh slider would impair your touch on the pad and make it uncomfortable, especially for long txt.
Because of all this, we will have to wait a bit, until Apple are able to pack all this into a small phone which I don't think they want to be maximum 1.5 size larger than Ipod Nano (and probably will be thicker but too thick)
I am not even sure if iPhone will be out for a while. Because assume the patient drawings on appleinsider is true, then it is likely that Apple might install iSight in the iPhone. (camera feature of the phone)
I am most expecting the iPhone to be a pda, rather than a mobile phone. Most likely a 3G phone. iChat, iCal, Address Book, and lite version of Mail and safari is what i would expect to see. Even iTunes and Quicktime. Lite version of course. (most essential would be ical, addressbook, mail)
I think more revolutionary of the design is that if you open iCal, Mail, safari etc you would have to turn the mobile horizitional for wide screen reading, and the wheel is most likely to be a touch screen.
Can I also add, I think it is extremely unlikely apple would do the slide down for the numpad. Because teh slider would impair your touch on the pad and make it uncomfortable, especially for long txt.
Because of all this, we will have to wait a bit, until Apple are able to pack all this into a small phone which I don't think they want to be maximum 1.5 size larger than Ipod Nano (and probably will be thicker but too thick)
samiwas
Apr 20, 02:47 PM
The free market would suck if it were run in the way your brain imagines it. But imagine if you ran a company, and your chief goal is to make a profit. Having happy employees who are payed fairly and receive vacation days, benefits, etc, is definitely a better business model than working your employees like slaves.
OK, so why don't more businesses do that, instead of doing everything they can to "cut costs" to "generate higher profits"? Obviously, a business needs to make a profit. But instead of just making a profit, it seems that nowadays a business is not considered successful unless that business generates massive profits, or highly increased profits over the previous year. And if a business doesn't make as much as they thought they might (even though they've pulled in billions in profit), they are considered failed and their stock tumbles.
Honestly, I don't believe the "free market" that you or any Republican/Tea Partier/Libertarian believes in would work either, except for funneling even more dough to the top (which I actually think might be the way you want to see it, and thus believe would be successful). If you really believe that without some sort of regulation, all businesses would be spending MORE on their employees, you are hopeless.
Benefits shouldn't be government regulated. However, the slave labor that you describe should most certainly not be allowed, duh. Try cutting back on the straw man argument some.
My example may have been a little over the top, but let's not pretend for one second that plenty of employers out there would think nothing of asking their employees to come in on weekends or stay late nights with no extra compensation.
Benefits should have some sort of MINIMAL regulation. The US has pretty much the fewest benefits of any developed nation, and this is considered a good thing....because it benefits the business and not the worker.
It's humorous that when people imagine a free market, they ignore that in a free market, employers would be fighting for good employees as much as employees are fighting for the employers.
Wait...what?? Employers are currently not trying to get good employees? What does this even mean?
It's sad that the government is the largest charity, because it's just so darn inefficient. I have an idea. Private charity.
Somehow, I can't imagine a private charity large enough to take care of all of America's bottom class or replace existing "entitlement programs". The largest charity in the US is the United Way with $3.8billion in income. As for current government program expenses, even Tenant-based Rental Assistance is at $18.2billion, and that's just a single line item in a portion of one part of programs. I just cannot see how private charity could have the kind of reach that the government does. And I'm guessing that the people who do run the government programs make a little less than the $715,000 salary of the head of the United Way.
For all the bleeding heart liberals I've spoken with over the years, who want crazy amounts taxed in order to support social uplift programs, I never see any of them giving away 50+% of their income to charity. It's a lot easier to ask the government to give other peoples money to charity.
I can tell you right now that my family gives >50% of its total income.
However, if you think that taxes = charity, what incentive do you have to give? (to the organizations that are 90+% efficient rather than whatever the crap the government is)
So, AFTER paying 30% in federal and state income taxes, whatever percentage in sales and property tax, you are still able give away an additional 50% or more to charity? So you are able to live on like 3% of your earnings? I would LOVE to be in that position! It's very admirable, but hardly reachable for the average person. I try to give whenever I can, but I can admit that's it's usually around $2k a year.
Anyway, the topic is about the influx of low-wage, no-benefit jobs with no worker protections during times of high profitability and skyrocketing leadership pay. Some people actually see this as good. Some see it as bad. If you see this as a good thing, then we're at an impasse.
OK, so why don't more businesses do that, instead of doing everything they can to "cut costs" to "generate higher profits"? Obviously, a business needs to make a profit. But instead of just making a profit, it seems that nowadays a business is not considered successful unless that business generates massive profits, or highly increased profits over the previous year. And if a business doesn't make as much as they thought they might (even though they've pulled in billions in profit), they are considered failed and their stock tumbles.
Honestly, I don't believe the "free market" that you or any Republican/Tea Partier/Libertarian believes in would work either, except for funneling even more dough to the top (which I actually think might be the way you want to see it, and thus believe would be successful). If you really believe that without some sort of regulation, all businesses would be spending MORE on their employees, you are hopeless.
Benefits shouldn't be government regulated. However, the slave labor that you describe should most certainly not be allowed, duh. Try cutting back on the straw man argument some.
My example may have been a little over the top, but let's not pretend for one second that plenty of employers out there would think nothing of asking their employees to come in on weekends or stay late nights with no extra compensation.
Benefits should have some sort of MINIMAL regulation. The US has pretty much the fewest benefits of any developed nation, and this is considered a good thing....because it benefits the business and not the worker.
It's humorous that when people imagine a free market, they ignore that in a free market, employers would be fighting for good employees as much as employees are fighting for the employers.
Wait...what?? Employers are currently not trying to get good employees? What does this even mean?
It's sad that the government is the largest charity, because it's just so darn inefficient. I have an idea. Private charity.
Somehow, I can't imagine a private charity large enough to take care of all of America's bottom class or replace existing "entitlement programs". The largest charity in the US is the United Way with $3.8billion in income. As for current government program expenses, even Tenant-based Rental Assistance is at $18.2billion, and that's just a single line item in a portion of one part of programs. I just cannot see how private charity could have the kind of reach that the government does. And I'm guessing that the people who do run the government programs make a little less than the $715,000 salary of the head of the United Way.
For all the bleeding heart liberals I've spoken with over the years, who want crazy amounts taxed in order to support social uplift programs, I never see any of them giving away 50+% of their income to charity. It's a lot easier to ask the government to give other peoples money to charity.
I can tell you right now that my family gives >50% of its total income.
However, if you think that taxes = charity, what incentive do you have to give? (to the organizations that are 90+% efficient rather than whatever the crap the government is)
So, AFTER paying 30% in federal and state income taxes, whatever percentage in sales and property tax, you are still able give away an additional 50% or more to charity? So you are able to live on like 3% of your earnings? I would LOVE to be in that position! It's very admirable, but hardly reachable for the average person. I try to give whenever I can, but I can admit that's it's usually around $2k a year.
Anyway, the topic is about the influx of low-wage, no-benefit jobs with no worker protections during times of high profitability and skyrocketing leadership pay. Some people actually see this as good. Some see it as bad. If you see this as a good thing, then we're at an impasse.
Bern
Aug 23, 05:14 PM
Well for a company that's almost bankrupt I guess this was a worthwhile event for them. Now Creative can continue to make "adapted copies" of the iPod and lose money all over again.
Judging by their past business practices it's only a matter of time before they teeter on the edge of insolvency then I guess they'll have to come up with another reason to sue Apple all over again.
Judging by their past business practices it's only a matter of time before they teeter on the edge of insolvency then I guess they'll have to come up with another reason to sue Apple all over again.
Popeye206
Apr 19, 08:51 AM
Too bad Apple couldn't just ask Samsung to behave themselves... Maybe they did?
I don't know about you, but it's pretty obvious to me that the Samsung devices pictured here are a clear and blatant rip-off of Apple's designs and interface. At least other Android devices had some differentiating elements. Not so here. Even a monkey could see Samsung stealing Apple's bananas in this case.
So you know, before you sue, you issue a "Cease" letter explaining your claim and asking the offending company to stop. So in essence, they did ask. It's part of the process.
Really guys.... this is all just normal business. It amazes me when people get up in arms either way. Valid patents and technology innovations need to protected by their owners... otherwise they are fools to let others copy them... especially when you do have the hottest single product out there. Apple worked hard to get where they are and to just let others copy freely would be stupid on Apple's part.
With that said, I'm saying the above as a "fanboy" but as someone in the software industry and value the things I've done in the past and patents we've had.
I don't know about you, but it's pretty obvious to me that the Samsung devices pictured here are a clear and blatant rip-off of Apple's designs and interface. At least other Android devices had some differentiating elements. Not so here. Even a monkey could see Samsung stealing Apple's bananas in this case.
So you know, before you sue, you issue a "Cease" letter explaining your claim and asking the offending company to stop. So in essence, they did ask. It's part of the process.
Really guys.... this is all just normal business. It amazes me when people get up in arms either way. Valid patents and technology innovations need to protected by their owners... otherwise they are fools to let others copy them... especially when you do have the hottest single product out there. Apple worked hard to get where they are and to just let others copy freely would be stupid on Apple's part.
With that said, I'm saying the above as a "fanboy" but as someone in the software industry and value the things I've done in the past and patents we've had.
spicyapple
Sep 4, 03:12 PM
One more thing... iPod video projector!!! :)
clarksonknight
Dec 30, 10:22 AM
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.
chrono1081
Mar 23, 04:57 PM
No one likes drunk drivers. No one. Period. That being said, Apple should not pull the App. Speed trap apps will be next (Trapster)... Keep the app store open to everything thats legal. This is no different than a friend calling you telling you to avoid a check point. Neither is illegal.
+1 I highly doubt anyone who is drunk is going to dig out their phone to look where the traps are.
+1 I highly doubt anyone who is drunk is going to dig out their phone to look where the traps are.
No comments:
Post a Comment