KnightWRX
Apr 26, 02:09 PM
Does apple use the term "applications" for their software as opposed to "programs" like windows.
Microsoft has used both programs and application for decades.
ding ding ding. I agree.
The store is called the App Store. You can't copy someones store name.
The point that has been brought forth to the USPTO is that Apple has no right to an exclusive mark on App Store because of its descriptive and generic nature. This is not like the examples you cite, the problem is not that Apple has a shoe store they want to call Yellow, it's that they have a shoe store they want to call shoe store.
Microsoft has used both programs and application for decades.
ding ding ding. I agree.
The store is called the App Store. You can't copy someones store name.
The point that has been brought forth to the USPTO is that Apple has no right to an exclusive mark on App Store because of its descriptive and generic nature. This is not like the examples you cite, the problem is not that Apple has a shoe store they want to call Yellow, it's that they have a shoe store they want to call shoe store.
Morod
Apr 21, 11:34 AM
It doesn't take long for crap politics to enter a thread....
steadysignal
Apr 25, 10:28 AM
Time to hide my iPhone file from the wife:rolleyes:
Seriously......privacy issues seem all over the place in this digital age....here is another example.
I guess we need a law disclosing if such and such device tracks you and needs to disclose that to you clearly via a warning label/other....
will a law stop the data from being used against you?
Seriously......privacy issues seem all over the place in this digital age....here is another example.
I guess we need a law disclosing if such and such device tracks you and needs to disclose that to you clearly via a warning label/other....
will a law stop the data from being used against you?
dscuber9000
Mar 20, 11:15 PM
Wow, that is a shocker.
The U.S. Congress passed a law to prohibit any attempt to assassinate any foreign leader.
Why, I don't know, but there it is. :confused:
I saw on CNN that our intention was to cripple the opposition, and if it so happens that Qaddafi is in that building then that is purely coincidental. :rolleyes: :D
Isn't it funny that the world acts like a bunch of 10-year-olds when it comes to war? Did I say funny? I meant sad, dangerous, and catastrophic.
The U.S. Congress passed a law to prohibit any attempt to assassinate any foreign leader.
Why, I don't know, but there it is. :confused:
I saw on CNN that our intention was to cripple the opposition, and if it so happens that Qaddafi is in that building then that is purely coincidental. :rolleyes: :D
Isn't it funny that the world acts like a bunch of 10-year-olds when it comes to war? Did I say funny? I meant sad, dangerous, and catastrophic.
alexpaul
Mar 23, 05:11 AM
Of course! No need to do this. Apple can try something innovative on the existing iPod classic like adding bluetooth etc. That would be pretty handy :)
yoda13
Mar 18, 11:02 PM
I think that what iMac_Japan doesn't get is that more people are coming to Apple rather than moving away from the platform, and yes marketshare could be higher, but even though it is what it is, it is still growing, not in total marketshare, but in total number of users, or so I have read in these forums and in various Mac magazines. Apple is one of very few tech companies that are making money and the established base is growing rather than shrinking, despite marketshare. Apple is going to be allright, I think. But that is just my 2 cents.
Built
Apr 2, 07:37 PM
I'll "believe" when they fix the currently unresolved and widespread quality control issues...light bleed on virtually every unit and blemishes, dents and scratches on units straight out of the box.
Fix those issues, Apple, and then I will "believe" enough to get an iPad 2.
Fix those issues, Apple, and then I will "believe" enough to get an iPad 2.
mrgreen4242
Aug 29, 11:08 AM
IF they go to a 1.66ghz Core Duo, 512mb RAM, GMA950, 80gb 5400rpm HD, SD, AE, and BT model for $599 I'll get one immediately. That's a great price and would make an affordable upgrade from my current mini (assuming I could get at least, say, $350 for it which is fairly reasonable I think).
I'd probably be OK if they went with a 60gb HDD, but the SD is non-negotiable. I think the current high end mini is a perfectly acceptable machine for 90% of the people in the world, even those who want to play SOME games (the GMA950 outpaces the 9200 in the PPC minis in most things, especially in Windows).
Ideally, though, I agree that the mini needs to get back to a $499 and $599 (or $699 if the specs warrent it) price point. If they update the speed and keep the price the same this update, they need to have a mid cycle price drop to $499 and $699, followed by a move to Memrom and the x3000/Santa Rosa platform (at the same prices).
EDIT: Now that I think about it, even if they don't make those specs at that price, the refurbs are already $699, so there's a good chance they will drop to $599 after a refresh, which works just as well for me... guess I'm getting a new computer next month! (WooWoo for 3 pay period months ;))
I'd probably be OK if they went with a 60gb HDD, but the SD is non-negotiable. I think the current high end mini is a perfectly acceptable machine for 90% of the people in the world, even those who want to play SOME games (the GMA950 outpaces the 9200 in the PPC minis in most things, especially in Windows).
Ideally, though, I agree that the mini needs to get back to a $499 and $599 (or $699 if the specs warrent it) price point. If they update the speed and keep the price the same this update, they need to have a mid cycle price drop to $499 and $699, followed by a move to Memrom and the x3000/Santa Rosa platform (at the same prices).
EDIT: Now that I think about it, even if they don't make those specs at that price, the refurbs are already $699, so there's a good chance they will drop to $599 after a refresh, which works just as well for me... guess I'm getting a new computer next month! (WooWoo for 3 pay period months ;))
Dagless
Jun 22, 04:24 PM
Has anyone else here used touchscreen computers? They're a pain! Verging on useless. When I had one I thought it was fun for a few minutes, then I went back to keyboard and mouse.
I hope this isn't the start of OSX being replaced by iOS. I like my compatibility and "free" OS (not being limited to a store, being able to do things without voiding the warranty, etc).
I hope this isn't the start of OSX being replaced by iOS. I like my compatibility and "free" OS (not being limited to a store, being able to do things without voiding the warranty, etc).
whatever
Nov 27, 02:11 PM
I don't know anyone who has something bigger and are just consumers and not prosumers.
Hi, my name is Joe and I'm sitting in front of a 30" ACD and I have a 22" ACD beside me. And I'm typing this from home.
I would rather see Apple lower the price of the 20" and keep all of their displays at 20" and higher.
Hi, my name is Joe and I'm sitting in front of a 30" ACD and I have a 22" ACD beside me. And I'm typing this from home.
I would rather see Apple lower the price of the 20" and keep all of their displays at 20" and higher.
ZrSiO4-Zircon
Jan 11, 05:55 PM
I really don't think Apple will come out with external optical drives... That is just too... complicated. Personally, and I think alot of people will agree, if you're going to have a small computer device, you don't want to carry another piece of equipment with you everywhere you go.
What's more believable (to me anyway) is the sub-notebook that syncs kind of like the iPod through iTunes.
Maybe iSync will handle that kind of syncing with what I have in mind?
I'm no fortune teller :p
What's more believable (to me anyway) is the sub-notebook that syncs kind of like the iPod through iTunes.
Maybe iSync will handle that kind of syncing with what I have in mind?
I'm no fortune teller :p
Xavier
Nov 27, 02:40 PM
I wouldn't mind this happening! I have been stuck with a 15 inch (not even wide screen) for a long time, but being low budget, haven't been able to afford the models I wanted. I hope that Apple produces this
nylonsteel
Apr 2, 09:48 PM
nice - short and sweet commericial - wish my corporate company would use ipad2 and iphone4 - their stupid excuse for years is blackberry is more enterprise secure - yeah so so f---in boring - aapl rules over rimm
islanders
Dec 27, 11:20 PM
For $299 I will guess you would get a dvd, and a download streaming device for iTV. But if you need a mac mini then you would have two dvd players. I hope there is an upgrade for some computer functions such as websurfing and word processing.
Comcast has video on demand and there is no additional hardware. This services is supposed to expand.
I don�t see a surround sound audio amp for $299. Perhaps a dock for your iPod, or the iPod is the harddrive.
I�m really curious where this iTV might be going?
Comcast has video on demand and there is no additional hardware. This services is supposed to expand.
I don�t see a surround sound audio amp for $299. Perhaps a dock for your iPod, or the iPod is the harddrive.
I�m really curious where this iTV might be going?
faroZ06
Apr 3, 01:25 AM
Has piano music like the oooold Mac ads. I guess they're addressing the complaints about how the Xoom (which is a piece of junk) has more RAM. Who cares? :cool:
iBug2
May 2, 06:03 PM
So you're saying we should go back to Mac OS Classic cooperative multi-tasking ?
Hello ?
The 80s called, they want their computing paradigms back. Cooperative multi-tasking makes sense on ressource limited architectures. Even the iPhone/iPad like devices are far from "ressource limited". We had pre-emptive multi-tasking on much less capable devices (think 386s with 8 MB of RAM).
Obviously the guy you replied to did not know anything he was talking about. Apple's resume function on Lion does not break the multitasking we have on SL anyway and it's just a nice addition.
Hello ?
The 80s called, they want their computing paradigms back. Cooperative multi-tasking makes sense on ressource limited architectures. Even the iPhone/iPad like devices are far from "ressource limited". We had pre-emptive multi-tasking on much less capable devices (think 386s with 8 MB of RAM).
Obviously the guy you replied to did not know anything he was talking about. Apple's resume function on Lion does not break the multitasking we have on SL anyway and it's just a nice addition.
Object-X
Nov 28, 03:25 AM
Wow. For someone who seems to have all the answers, you're not reading the rest of this thread very well.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327
In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.
I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?
There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.
Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.
Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.
Well, you just made my point better than me. Of the millions of Macs sold, how many are to customers needing correct color and really care about the finer details of the monitor's specs? If you're buying a $2400 + Mac Pro the choice is obvious and you could justify the higher price, but what about the low end?
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20". The Apple monitor is extremely dim, so much so I'm not buying the superior color argument with that model, it's very noticable; the iMac however is very bright and the colors look much richer. If you want to argue that the Apple monitor is sooo much better with color reproduction and the numbers don't lie, than OK, I'll give you that. But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one. Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper. Apple won't make as much money off of a mini/cinema combo as they will off of a 20" iMac; especially if the profit margin on the monitor is razor thin.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it. I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right? But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327
In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.
I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?
There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.
Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.
Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.
Well, you just made my point better than me. Of the millions of Macs sold, how many are to customers needing correct color and really care about the finer details of the monitor's specs? If you're buying a $2400 + Mac Pro the choice is obvious and you could justify the higher price, but what about the low end?
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20". The Apple monitor is extremely dim, so much so I'm not buying the superior color argument with that model, it's very noticable; the iMac however is very bright and the colors look much richer. If you want to argue that the Apple monitor is sooo much better with color reproduction and the numbers don't lie, than OK, I'll give you that. But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one. Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper. Apple won't make as much money off of a mini/cinema combo as they will off of a 20" iMac; especially if the profit margin on the monitor is razor thin.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it. I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right? But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
MacNewsFix
Apr 12, 11:18 PM
Because Apple says "Tape is Dead" doesn't make it true...just like Blu-Ray isn't gone. So that begs the question--is there tape output support (machine interfacing, et al) for FCX?
If you are talking HDCAM SR, the one factory where it was produced is located in Sendai and was destroyed in the recent tsunami. Nobody knows how soon the factory will be back up, but likely no time soon. 10 tapes were recently sold on Ebay for $5000. The general consensus is the recent tragedy will accelerate the death of tape.
If you are talking HDCAM SR, the one factory where it was produced is located in Sendai and was destroyed in the recent tsunami. Nobody knows how soon the factory will be back up, but likely no time soon. 10 tapes were recently sold on Ebay for $5000. The general consensus is the recent tragedy will accelerate the death of tape.
Chundles
Aug 16, 07:22 AM
Digitimes?
iBook G5 and PowerBook G5 Digitimes?
Yah right.
Sorry but I've had it with new iPod rumours. They'll come when they come and they won't be as revolutionary as we'd thought.
Massively fed up now.
iBook G5 and PowerBook G5 Digitimes?
Yah right.
Sorry but I've had it with new iPod rumours. They'll come when they come and they won't be as revolutionary as we'd thought.
Massively fed up now.
cloudnine
Nov 27, 01:42 PM
This may pave the way to larger wide-screens.
I would love to see a 40" widescreen.
Because a 30" cinema display is too small? Because you want to consolidate your TV and computer displays? :confused:
I would love to see a 40" widescreen.
Because a 30" cinema display is too small? Because you want to consolidate your TV and computer displays? :confused:
DavidLeblond
Sep 1, 12:55 PM
if this turns out to be true, here's my prediction on the pricing:
17" is stripped down and relegated to "emac" status and sells at a $999 price point
20" sells for $1299 or $1399
23" sells for $1699 or MAYBE $1799 at the most
Wishful thinking (both yours and mine).
Not gonna happen.
17" is stripped down and relegated to "emac" status and sells at a $999 price point
20" sells for $1299 or $1399
23" sells for $1699 or MAYBE $1799 at the most
Wishful thinking (both yours and mine).
Not gonna happen.
rasmasyean
Mar 18, 06:17 AM
Here's a video on the latest developments in Lybia. The "No Fly Zone" really means, "No Fly for Quadaffi plus Yes Bombing for US and UK".
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/42143060#42143060
Is it me, or does war seem kind of rediculous now. :cool:
I mean, I understand the need for "non occupational forces", but this is getting kind of rediculous. It almost seems like it's almost a capitalist motive to demonstrate weapons for sale at every opportunity. :D
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/42143060#42143060
Is it me, or does war seem kind of rediculous now. :cool:
I mean, I understand the need for "non occupational forces", but this is getting kind of rediculous. It almost seems like it's almost a capitalist motive to demonstrate weapons for sale at every opportunity. :D
KingYaba
Oct 23, 08:52 PM
One of these days the MBP Merom rumor will be correct. :)
mazola
Sep 7, 09:53 AM
And 'The Boatniks' too!
No comments:
Post a Comment