mBox
Apr 24, 04:44 PM
Well forget BD and go for 4K with REDRAY ;)
peharri
Nov 25, 09:06 PM
Consider this. Let's say Apple does something along the lines we're predicting, and sells their phones. Before we plunk down our money, we go around to the various cell carriers and inquire if they'll let us bring our phone to their network. They say either "NO!" or "Not at this time."
The only mobile carriers in a position to do this are the cdmaOne/CDMA2000 ones (Verizon, Sprint PCS, etc.) If Apple makes a GSM or UMTS phone, the carrier has little or no say in whether you use it. T-Mobile and Cingular will, by next year, be running both types of network in the US, and both already run GSM.
The real influence the cellphone companies (at least, the ones not stuck in the 1980s as far as their network infrastructure goes) have on phone purchasing is the ability to subsidize phones that fit their model. This, in practice, usually means rebranding. Cingular is pretty good on that score and rarely insists on more than some ugly logos printed on the phone (unfortunately their network is not the greatest GSM implementation in the world.) T-Mobile, in my experience, is somewhat worse, though not always for bad reasons. For example, they'd probably insist on "My Faves", a proprietary five person phonebook, being grafted on to whatever UI an "iPhone" has, in return for any substantial subsidy.
The fact Apple can't expect carriers to subsidize their phones is one issue they have to deal with. I'm more concerned though with Apple becoming a minority player, with its phone tied to a music store whose success was, in major part, to do with the giant marketshare it had, and thus Jobs's ability to force the labels to compromise on prices.
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
Apple would need not merely infrastructure but spectrum to actually start a carrier. They have neither.
Purchasing a carrier is an interesting pipe dream and would terrify the crap out of most shareholders. Mobile telephony is a long term thing, with very little return on investment yet for most people who've invested in it. It's not even a good time to get involved, most companies are rolling out 3G networks and 4G, in the shape of WiMAX, is already being released in some areas.
Were they to do the carrier thing, the best they could hope for would be to be an MVNO. This would be a major change of business model. It has so many ramifications I don't know where to begin.
The only mobile carriers in a position to do this are the cdmaOne/CDMA2000 ones (Verizon, Sprint PCS, etc.) If Apple makes a GSM or UMTS phone, the carrier has little or no say in whether you use it. T-Mobile and Cingular will, by next year, be running both types of network in the US, and both already run GSM.
The real influence the cellphone companies (at least, the ones not stuck in the 1980s as far as their network infrastructure goes) have on phone purchasing is the ability to subsidize phones that fit their model. This, in practice, usually means rebranding. Cingular is pretty good on that score and rarely insists on more than some ugly logos printed on the phone (unfortunately their network is not the greatest GSM implementation in the world.) T-Mobile, in my experience, is somewhat worse, though not always for bad reasons. For example, they'd probably insist on "My Faves", a proprietary five person phonebook, being grafted on to whatever UI an "iPhone" has, in return for any substantial subsidy.
The fact Apple can't expect carriers to subsidize their phones is one issue they have to deal with. I'm more concerned though with Apple becoming a minority player, with its phone tied to a music store whose success was, in major part, to do with the giant marketshare it had, and thus Jobs's ability to force the labels to compromise on prices.
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
Apple would need not merely infrastructure but spectrum to actually start a carrier. They have neither.
Purchasing a carrier is an interesting pipe dream and would terrify the crap out of most shareholders. Mobile telephony is a long term thing, with very little return on investment yet for most people who've invested in it. It's not even a good time to get involved, most companies are rolling out 3G networks and 4G, in the shape of WiMAX, is already being released in some areas.
Were they to do the carrier thing, the best they could hope for would be to be an MVNO. This would be a major change of business model. It has so many ramifications I don't know where to begin.
Peace
Jul 29, 08:43 PM
I can already see Phil sitting in the audience and then Job's cell phone rings..
Jobs: um..excuse me a sec..Seems I have a phone call..
Pulls out this cool looking cell phone,flips it open and says hello?
Phil: Say Steve,can we have a chat real fast ? then starts up iChat on his iPhone..
Jobs: starts up iChat on his cell phone..
The rest is history :D
Jobs: um..excuse me a sec..Seems I have a phone call..
Pulls out this cool looking cell phone,flips it open and says hello?
Phil: Say Steve,can we have a chat real fast ? then starts up iChat on his iPhone..
Jobs: starts up iChat on his cell phone..
The rest is history :D
outlawarth
Apr 20, 01:10 PM
All of these September iPhone rumors leave three possibilities:
1) Apple failed to plug all of its leaks and there are genuine sources providing this information, and as a result, the iPhone 5 will really be out in September.
2) Apple is intentionally testing the waters to not only see where remaining leaks are, but also to encourage iPhone 4 sales to not drop off during the late spring/early summer.
3) The original September rumor began from an untested source and spent enough time on the merry-go-round to be viewed as "legitimate" by larger media outlets.
I agree. While obviously all 3 are equally possible #2 and #3 seem most likely to me.
1) Apple failed to plug all of its leaks and there are genuine sources providing this information, and as a result, the iPhone 5 will really be out in September.
2) Apple is intentionally testing the waters to not only see where remaining leaks are, but also to encourage iPhone 4 sales to not drop off during the late spring/early summer.
3) The original September rumor began from an untested source and spent enough time on the merry-go-round to be viewed as "legitimate" by larger media outlets.
I agree. While obviously all 3 are equally possible #2 and #3 seem most likely to me.
Micjose
Apr 18, 05:07 PM
might aswell sue everyone else in the tech industry :p
bruinsrme
Apr 9, 08:36 PM
Spotlight is giving me 288.
You are using an * in you formula, the original doesn't have an *
You are using an * in you formula, the original doesn't have an *
iGary
Aug 7, 05:47 PM
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2006/08/dsc_0631.jpg
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2006/08/dsc_0641.jpg
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2006/08/dsc_0636.jpg
Kinda ugly.
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2006/08/dsc_0641.jpg
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2006/08/dsc_0636.jpg
Kinda ugly.
Anawrahta
Aug 12, 12:08 AM
I'm sure at the very least the MBP will get the new chips soon (within a month or so). The question is, whether it will get a case redesign/new features. So let's make a list of things you'd like to see happen. Personally I'd like to see:
FW800
DL Superdrive
Swappable HD
Expresscard 54
Case dedesign or material change
I wouldn't be surprised if the engineers were too busy just getting it ready for MacWorld when it debuted to give it a full redesign. Also from what I've read they didn't want to change the appearance too much to make the transition to Intel seamless.
FW800
DL Superdrive
Swappable HD
Expresscard 54
Case dedesign or material change
I wouldn't be surprised if the engineers were too busy just getting it ready for MacWorld when it debuted to give it a full redesign. Also from what I've read they didn't want to change the appearance too much to make the transition to Intel seamless.
j_maddison
Jul 30, 08:11 AM
If they somehow include a full qwerty thumb keyboard, this sleek and sexy phone is mine.
Hmm you just made me think. Cell phones are very subjective, and what one person thinks is a sleek sexy phone another person will hate. Personally I hate the concept of qwerty keyboards, I have one on my blackberry and I just wish it had a stylus instead.
Someone else mentioned a flippy phone, I prefer the slide phones. My current phone is a Nokia 8800, and my three phones before that were two 8910i's and an 8910. I don't really care for features on a phone, its all about the way it looks. And if its too cheap, I probaby won't buy it. That was the reason I never bothered with the Razr phone when it first came out in the UK.
I hope Apple's new phone is as revolutionary as the nano was wen it was introduced, and I hope its pricey too!
Jay
Hmm you just made me think. Cell phones are very subjective, and what one person thinks is a sleek sexy phone another person will hate. Personally I hate the concept of qwerty keyboards, I have one on my blackberry and I just wish it had a stylus instead.
Someone else mentioned a flippy phone, I prefer the slide phones. My current phone is a Nokia 8800, and my three phones before that were two 8910i's and an 8910. I don't really care for features on a phone, its all about the way it looks. And if its too cheap, I probaby won't buy it. That was the reason I never bothered with the Razr phone when it first came out in the UK.
I hope Apple's new phone is as revolutionary as the nano was wen it was introduced, and I hope its pricey too!
Jay
sejanus
Aug 7, 06:18 PM
Does anyone know if this systems absolutely *REQUIRES* ECC RAM?
ECC is very expensive!
ECC is very expensive!
aafuss1
Aug 7, 09:01 PM
macpro.pdf is the service manual for those who have GSX and Service Source access (eg. AASP's do). Can't find public info on how to add/remove user installable part yets.
KnightWRX
May 4, 07:21 PM
No, they are doing it to make installations easier. You can already install Lion on Hackintoshes.
What was hard about previous installations ? Pop CD in, run upgrade. Same process.
You didn't have to boot off the SL CD to install it, you could start the upgrade process from Leopard just fine.
What was hard about previous installations ? Pop CD in, run upgrade. Same process.
You didn't have to boot off the SL CD to install it, you could start the upgrade process from Leopard just fine.
fixyourthinking
Nov 26, 02:47 PM
Wasn't there a video of a concept called "The Knowldge Navigator" that voice recognition, scheduling email, etc etc that was like a futuristic Newton?
See http://www.billzarchy.com/clips/clips_apple_nav.htm
See http://www.billzarchy.com/clips/clips_apple_nav.htm
Burger King
Apr 25, 09:13 AM
I'm guessing silence, since burgers don't talk. ;)
D.
I do and No I didn't steal anything!
D.
I do and No I didn't steal anything!
ChickenSwartz
Aug 2, 04:07 PM
http://www.macrumorslive.com/web/
www.macrumors.com will auto redirect there, I believe.
www.macrumors.com will auto redirect there, I believe.
teme
Aug 7, 02:30 PM
Excellent. Now it's time to wait for the sub-$2000 "Pro" desktop announcement. There's a suspicious gap in their lineup. Mac Pro Cube (http://macprocube.com), perhaps?
I'll wait for that until Paris, and if it isn't available then, I'll buy a PC.
I'll wait for that until Paris, and if it isn't available then, I'll buy a PC.
bassfingers
Mar 30, 01:50 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
I agree. Given the last Ford we purchased leaked and after 6 months of trying to fix it, the Ford dealer said "well, everything leaks" and said they'd give a good deal on it to trade it in if we wanted. And the last GM we had stalled every morning when you were pulling out on to the road and the dealer said that it was "just the way the car was made," and could never fix it I wouldn't buy an American made car unless they started getting good reports both for quality upfront (they just sound cheap compared to a Honda, Mercedes, Lexus, Porsche, or Toyota) and for quality over 5-6+ years of ownership. And the previous American made cars we had were of similar low quality.
So for the last 11 years, I've been buying non-American. It is too bad, but the quality is not there. I even looked at one with a friend in November and it was the same deal.
An iPhone made in the US would be double the price due to high taxes and regulation. Quality, who knows, but the cost would be prohibitive compared to everyone else. It would be the fastest way for Apple to kill itself. If Apple *could* do it, they would, but it is impossible.
It is competition - if you can't compete on quality or price, you are out of luck. Unless you can get a handout.
Quality would probably go down.
People keep quoting "taxes and regulation". Sure those would expensive, but how about the unions! That's why it'd be expensive. We'd have to pay someone $30 an hour to assemble iPods. I'm sorry, but if literally anyone in the world can do the exact same job as you with little to no training, you get minimum wage
I agree. Given the last Ford we purchased leaked and after 6 months of trying to fix it, the Ford dealer said "well, everything leaks" and said they'd give a good deal on it to trade it in if we wanted. And the last GM we had stalled every morning when you were pulling out on to the road and the dealer said that it was "just the way the car was made," and could never fix it I wouldn't buy an American made car unless they started getting good reports both for quality upfront (they just sound cheap compared to a Honda, Mercedes, Lexus, Porsche, or Toyota) and for quality over 5-6+ years of ownership. And the previous American made cars we had were of similar low quality.
So for the last 11 years, I've been buying non-American. It is too bad, but the quality is not there. I even looked at one with a friend in November and it was the same deal.
An iPhone made in the US would be double the price due to high taxes and regulation. Quality, who knows, but the cost would be prohibitive compared to everyone else. It would be the fastest way for Apple to kill itself. If Apple *could* do it, they would, but it is impossible.
It is competition - if you can't compete on quality or price, you are out of luck. Unless you can get a handout.
Quality would probably go down.
People keep quoting "taxes and regulation". Sure those would expensive, but how about the unions! That's why it'd be expensive. We'd have to pay someone $30 an hour to assemble iPods. I'm sorry, but if literally anyone in the world can do the exact same job as you with little to no training, you get minimum wage
Bye Bye Baby
May 7, 01:01 PM
I must say that mobileme is essential for me. Laptop, desktop, media centre mini, iphone and one day an ipad- i need a way of syncing contacts/ email/ calendars/ documents and settings that no one else offers so easily.
I do not like google as a company. I simply don't trust them and don't like their business model.
Both back to my mac and the iphone locator have beed precious tools for me.
there is a lot there but I think they could upgrade the service for us.
I do not like google as a company. I simply don't trust them and don't like their business model.
Both back to my mac and the iphone locator have beed precious tools for me.
there is a lot there but I think they could upgrade the service for us.
Don't panic
May 4, 12:13 PM
so now we have to wait until mscriv tells you his foul intentions?
this could take a while. he's probably busy torturing counseling flies or sommthing ;)
this could take a while. he's probably busy torturing counseling flies or sommthing ;)
griz
May 4, 02:55 PM
How so?
The current method is "the OS DVD you buy can be used anywhere, as often as you like, forever."
How could it be worse than that?
Not as often as you like. You buy one copy of Snow Leopard and it is good for one Mac. Family pack gets you 5.
The current method is "the OS DVD you buy can be used anywhere, as often as you like, forever."
How could it be worse than that?
Not as often as you like. You buy one copy of Snow Leopard and it is good for one Mac. Family pack gets you 5.
iJohnHenry
Apr 18, 07:03 PM
It's kind of a prerequisite for a collapse that 99% of the population is unprepared.
Shuuuush, don't make a wave, unless you want to be swallowing pee.
Shuuuush, don't make a wave, unless you want to be swallowing pee.
netdog
Jul 30, 04:42 PM
do you think they'd make it work with cingular and the rest, or do think they'd make their own service like helio?
I would bet it will come out as GSM initially, though perhaps they will release a CDMA as well.
I would bet it will come out as GSM initially, though perhaps they will release a CDMA as well.
iRobby
Apr 21, 04:51 PM
Is this an IOS device?:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:
rhsgolfer33
Apr 14, 04:12 PM
I'll bet he moved on to forums where his ideas were more warmly accepted.
On the issues of taxes ... tax me more!
Sure, tax the rich more too.
But every American should be chipping in to solve the issues that we're facing.
We're in the lifeboat, and the water's rising. Everybody pick up a pail and start bailing.
I never thought I'd see the day, but I agree with you. Everyone has to see a tax increase in order to solve the budget problems.
The non-tax accountant part of me (the tax accountant part of me wants the tax code as complicated as humanly possible) would love it if the corporate tax code was simplified and the tax rates reduced so that corporations actually paid taxes in line with other nations - we'd still probably see more revenue even with the decreased rates because the base would be broadened and corporations would actually pay. We should probably broaden the tax base for individuals by eliminating deductions and then eliminate the Bush tax cuts for everyone (which will increase tax rates across the board, more so at the upper two brackets). I'm not opposed to adding a VAT with a low rate either.
I'd like to see plenty of spending cuts too - stop the three wasteful and pointless wars we are fighting would be a great start, then cut defense spending. Like it or not, I think we need to acknowledge that social security needs changes - a decrease in benefits and removing the limit on payroll taxes for social security would be a good start.
But then again, I'm a moderate (though I am generally fiscally libertarian) and I understand the urgency with which we need to eliminate our deficit and decrease our national debt. I don't have much hope for any of this happening, since neither side can seem to acknowledge that we need a combo of what they both propose.
One thing I don't hear in the raising taxes discussion is what we should do with capital gains. That's the reason billionaires pay a paltry 15%. Almost all of their income comes from the selling of assets rather than a salary. Their money works for them, rather than the rest of us who have to work for our money. And for that, we reward them with a super low tax rate. :rolleyes:
It's time to raise the capital gains rate and make it progressively tied to income taxes.
I tend to agree - I have no problem giving someone who actually makes their money via salary or wages a capital gains break (it encourages investing and most of the time those gains will be from investments for retirement), but it is kind of silly that someone who derives most of their income from capital gains gets to pay at the same low rate. Possibly it could be linked to amount of income and percentage of gross income that comes from capital gains - for instance, if you are in the top income bracket and more than 50% of your gross income is from capital gains, you must include all income at the standard ordinary income rates. Of course it would have to be refined (too easy to get around right now), but it would insure that higher income individuals that make most of their money via capital gains pay appropriate taxes, while keeping most retirees and lower/middle/upper middle income people from being hit with ordinary income rates on capital gains when the a lower rate is more appropriate.
On the issues of taxes ... tax me more!
Sure, tax the rich more too.
But every American should be chipping in to solve the issues that we're facing.
We're in the lifeboat, and the water's rising. Everybody pick up a pail and start bailing.
I never thought I'd see the day, but I agree with you. Everyone has to see a tax increase in order to solve the budget problems.
The non-tax accountant part of me (the tax accountant part of me wants the tax code as complicated as humanly possible) would love it if the corporate tax code was simplified and the tax rates reduced so that corporations actually paid taxes in line with other nations - we'd still probably see more revenue even with the decreased rates because the base would be broadened and corporations would actually pay. We should probably broaden the tax base for individuals by eliminating deductions and then eliminate the Bush tax cuts for everyone (which will increase tax rates across the board, more so at the upper two brackets). I'm not opposed to adding a VAT with a low rate either.
I'd like to see plenty of spending cuts too - stop the three wasteful and pointless wars we are fighting would be a great start, then cut defense spending. Like it or not, I think we need to acknowledge that social security needs changes - a decrease in benefits and removing the limit on payroll taxes for social security would be a good start.
But then again, I'm a moderate (though I am generally fiscally libertarian) and I understand the urgency with which we need to eliminate our deficit and decrease our national debt. I don't have much hope for any of this happening, since neither side can seem to acknowledge that we need a combo of what they both propose.
One thing I don't hear in the raising taxes discussion is what we should do with capital gains. That's the reason billionaires pay a paltry 15%. Almost all of their income comes from the selling of assets rather than a salary. Their money works for them, rather than the rest of us who have to work for our money. And for that, we reward them with a super low tax rate. :rolleyes:
It's time to raise the capital gains rate and make it progressively tied to income taxes.
I tend to agree - I have no problem giving someone who actually makes their money via salary or wages a capital gains break (it encourages investing and most of the time those gains will be from investments for retirement), but it is kind of silly that someone who derives most of their income from capital gains gets to pay at the same low rate. Possibly it could be linked to amount of income and percentage of gross income that comes from capital gains - for instance, if you are in the top income bracket and more than 50% of your gross income is from capital gains, you must include all income at the standard ordinary income rates. Of course it would have to be refined (too easy to get around right now), but it would insure that higher income individuals that make most of their money via capital gains pay appropriate taxes, while keeping most retirees and lower/middle/upper middle income people from being hit with ordinary income rates on capital gains when the a lower rate is more appropriate.
No comments:
Post a Comment