ZrSiO4-Zircon
Jan 11, 06:12 PM
First time I've seen USB called complicated :).
I see what you mean from a design standpoint though, inelegant might be a better word. But it just makes too much sense not to do it. I hardly EVER use my optical drive. Why am I carrying it everywhere I go?
Point taken.
But still, I just don't think an external optical drive is a good idea. Reminds me of the days when I used those external CD drives where I had to put the CD in a cartridge before putting it in the drive...
I think the point I'm trying to make is that it makes it too complicated to the end user, having an accessory that's optional but a necessity at the same time.
I see what you mean from a design standpoint though, inelegant might be a better word. But it just makes too much sense not to do it. I hardly EVER use my optical drive. Why am I carrying it everywhere I go?
Point taken.
But still, I just don't think an external optical drive is a good idea. Reminds me of the days when I used those external CD drives where I had to put the CD in a cartridge before putting it in the drive...
I think the point I'm trying to make is that it makes it too complicated to the end user, having an accessory that's optional but a necessity at the same time.
nebo1ss
Mar 20, 12:56 PM
I am very uncomfortable with the intervention in Libya. When you look at what is happening in Bahrain, Syria, Yemen, Saudi Arabia etc. You have to ask the question why Libya. Perhaps its payback time for the PANAM 101.
Not sure I understand the logic of intervention in one conflict but not another. I fear this is going to hurt us in the long term.
Not sure I understand the logic of intervention in one conflict but not another. I fear this is going to hurt us in the long term.
Gem�tlichkeit
Apr 12, 09:29 PM
I hope this means we will eventually see a 64bit version of iMovie ;)
Evangelion
Aug 29, 12:25 PM
I know this is off topic...
yes it is, and you already entioned it another discussion. and there is aready a dedicated discussion about it. so why spam this thread?
yes it is, and you already entioned it another discussion. and there is aready a dedicated discussion about it. so why spam this thread?
durvivor
Oct 23, 01:19 PM
In my opinion, there is a VERY good possibility of the Macbook Pros being updated tomorrow. Here's Why:
If you look at the Macbook Pro's "last updated" section, you'll notice that it was April 24, 2006. Tomorrow will be October 24, exactly 6 month's difference. Coincidence? perhaps, but in my opinion if it's not tomorrow, it's not until late November.
Awesome, this means there will be further Macbook and Macbook Pro updates on April 24th (a Tuesday). I'm guessing that will be too early for Santa Rosa w/ Robsin caching technology. But, I bet there will be speed increases, graphics and hd increases.
If you look at the Macbook Pro's "last updated" section, you'll notice that it was April 24, 2006. Tomorrow will be October 24, exactly 6 month's difference. Coincidence? perhaps, but in my opinion if it's not tomorrow, it's not until late November.
Awesome, this means there will be further Macbook and Macbook Pro updates on April 24th (a Tuesday). I'm guessing that will be too early for Santa Rosa w/ Robsin caching technology. But, I bet there will be speed increases, graphics and hd increases.
maclaptop
Apr 9, 11:46 PM
I've never owned an automatic. I'm addicted to driving a sports car with a manual gearbox.
After owning several I simply cannot imagine anything else. I enjoy driving too much to drive an automatic sedan.
After owning several I simply cannot imagine anything else. I enjoy driving too much to drive an automatic sedan.
rockthecasbah
Jul 13, 10:46 PM
I'm sure that the drive with be built-to-order only. They are far too expensive and appeal to such a small audience (right now) that having it standard would just iritate people buying pro line equipment who don't need these drives yet because of the unnecessary costs.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 26, 02:11 PM
Try again what ? It's not a word mark, it's a typed drawing, meaning you could trademark Pet Store too if it is a different drawing all together (different font, different shape, different color).
It's basically a logo trademark, like let's say : :apple:
Your point is that you cannot find such a trademark as "app store" in the standard character format because "app store" is too general right? The other person posted that "pet store" would be a ridiculous example of this.
"Registration of a mark in the standard character format will provide broad rights, namely use in any manner of presentation."
Source: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/index.jsp
Ok fair enough. Pet store was registered in the stylized or design format.
But your basic argument against Apple is that they cannot use app store as a trademark in the broader text format because it is too general. But this is not the only example of such a thing.
If this is the case then Apple Store will be thrown out too. It is the same type of trademark. Two words, not one and not preceded by "the".
App Store
Apple Store
The other argument is that "app" is too generic and that the term was around prior to the trademark. I do not believe this is valid either as "app" may have existed but was not widely used. The argument would have been used agains the prior trademark of "appstore" in that case.
One thing is for sure. Our opinions will have no bearing on the final outcome.
1. Look, the form in which it was trademarked matters. Otherwise, there would only be 1 type of mark. You can overrule it all you want, in the end you were wrong.
2. App is as much a part of the lexicon as pet. I know I've been using it for more than a decade.
You define the lexicon of the overall society?
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.
That is the problem defined by people who object to Apple's trademark. It has not been decided whether Apple's trademark should be invalidated based on this opinion yet.
It's basically a logo trademark, like let's say : :apple:
Your point is that you cannot find such a trademark as "app store" in the standard character format because "app store" is too general right? The other person posted that "pet store" would be a ridiculous example of this.
"Registration of a mark in the standard character format will provide broad rights, namely use in any manner of presentation."
Source: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/index.jsp
Ok fair enough. Pet store was registered in the stylized or design format.
But your basic argument against Apple is that they cannot use app store as a trademark in the broader text format because it is too general. But this is not the only example of such a thing.
If this is the case then Apple Store will be thrown out too. It is the same type of trademark. Two words, not one and not preceded by "the".
App Store
Apple Store
The other argument is that "app" is too generic and that the term was around prior to the trademark. I do not believe this is valid either as "app" may have existed but was not widely used. The argument would have been used agains the prior trademark of "appstore" in that case.
One thing is for sure. Our opinions will have no bearing on the final outcome.
1. Look, the form in which it was trademarked matters. Otherwise, there would only be 1 type of mark. You can overrule it all you want, in the end you were wrong.
2. App is as much a part of the lexicon as pet. I know I've been using it for more than a decade.
You define the lexicon of the overall society?
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.
That is the problem defined by people who object to Apple's trademark. It has not been decided whether Apple's trademark should be invalidated based on this opinion yet.
JFreak
Jul 20, 05:05 AM
Reading this thread I realized that technical issues are not deal-breaker for many people -- it's still price that matters the most. If download-to-own costs $10, then everyone keeps demanding better specs for the material and it never ends. But if rental costs a buck a piece, then it's fun to watch and quality feels acceptable.
It's all about money, guys. Like it or not.
It's all about money, guys. Like it or not.
corywoolf
Sep 6, 01:36 PM
Terrified to see that my MBP's 1.83 Ghz Core Duo is now in Apple's lowest line of computers... It does what I need it to, but it must be worth half the value it was 6 months ago ($1,999.99). Even more terrified that my ex got a black MB that has a better processor then mine. And she only uses it for papers and chatting! :eek:
danielwsmithee
Nov 29, 03:32 PM
Yes, support for more formats and codecs than iTunes currently plays friendly with would be welcome.You know I originally thought that, but I kind of like the way it works now. I would much rather have a few codecs that work very well. Then play everything under the sun just not very well.
blilly
Nov 28, 10:40 AM
It's far too early to make comparisons . . . . the competition is good and I think even Apple enjoys the challenge. I don't like this "us vs. them" attitude that seems to be so pervasive with the Zune . . even more, it seems, than with the OS wars . . . .
razzmatazz
Aug 6, 09:41 PM
I became a hard core Mac user after Panther was released. I was wondering if Apple took stabs at Microsoft when they were introducing Panther. :confused:
Mr. McMac
Apr 9, 10:39 PM
Most of the cars I've owned over the past 40 years have been stick
dr Dunkel
Apr 20, 06:03 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; sv-se) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Yeah, following industry standard is boring :D
Yeah, following industry standard is boring :D
alent1234
Apr 22, 09:43 AM
Why would Apple release an iMac refresh a couple of months before a new OS debuts? Also, this would be the FASTEST REFRESH IN APPLE HISTORY at 9 months.
You all fell for the hype and made Bri@n T0ng (eat that SEO) and Sea-NET advertising revenue. :rolleyes:
because a lot of people will buy the iMac and then 10.7 for another $29 or so. more money in their pockets
You all fell for the hype and made Bri@n T0ng (eat that SEO) and Sea-NET advertising revenue. :rolleyes:
because a lot of people will buy the iMac and then 10.7 for another $29 or so. more money in their pockets
ArchaicRevival
Apr 12, 08:40 PM
Here comes Super Final Cut Express (SFCE)...
Or Final Cut Express Pro :rolleyes:
Or Final Cut Express Pro :rolleyes:
applefanDrew
May 2, 09:02 PM
I like it, but right now there's 3 ways to install apps: App Store, download from internet and drag to applications folder, installer wizard (like MS Office). Also, the difference between the applications folder and LaunchPad will be confusing for most users. This whole thing needs to be unified. Either get rid of the Applications folder or get rid of LaunchPad.
Afaik, there is no apps folder on the dock by default in lion. Launchpad has taken it's place.
Afaik, there is no apps folder on the dock by default in lion. Launchpad has taken it's place.
imnotatfault
Aug 19, 09:09 AM
I disagree with pretty much everything you said here Manic Mouse :D.
I really hope the iPod doesn't go down the line of convergence/frankenstein/jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none. It's a solid music player and it's main priority should be as such. In my experience with work colleagues and parents/in-laws the iPod is almost bordering on being too difficult as it is just with just music and video. Many never bother with video or podcasts or even firmware updates because they perceive it to be too complex. Adding slide-out keyboards, larger/deeper navigation menus, wifi connections, and email configuration would probably push it over the edge as far as being too technologically intimidating for most. Not to mention the size sacrifice.
Apple may bring something else to the market to compete if there really is a decent market for devices like the Mylo (which I'm personally not too sure there is).
Only if the device was separate from the iPod, which stayed truer to its roots, and more importantly, there was some sort of higher integration. Like the proposed built-in dock the mac mini would have. I still miss that.
I really hope the iPod doesn't go down the line of convergence/frankenstein/jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none. It's a solid music player and it's main priority should be as such. In my experience with work colleagues and parents/in-laws the iPod is almost bordering on being too difficult as it is just with just music and video. Many never bother with video or podcasts or even firmware updates because they perceive it to be too complex. Adding slide-out keyboards, larger/deeper navigation menus, wifi connections, and email configuration would probably push it over the edge as far as being too technologically intimidating for most. Not to mention the size sacrifice.
Apple may bring something else to the market to compete if there really is a decent market for devices like the Mylo (which I'm personally not too sure there is).
Only if the device was separate from the iPod, which stayed truer to its roots, and more importantly, there was some sort of higher integration. Like the proposed built-in dock the mac mini would have. I still miss that.
tychay
Nov 28, 08:09 PM
I have no idea where you got that one from. The original Xbox never made a profit. Microsoft is deliberately selling the Xbox 360 at a loss to capture marketshare. However, the PS3 and Ninetindo Wii are selling like hotcakes, are latest big things, and have the buzz. The best laid plans ...
I think the first statement is correct or close to it. They may have had a single profitable quarter when Halo 2 was released. I'm not sure because they bury games in a Microsoft Entertainment and Devices Division. Which includes their smartphone stuff (now that it has stopped bleeding money) and their profitable and acclaimed mice, keyboards, and other stuff (all manufactured by other companies, sort of like Dell, but with a nicer design).
The second part I believe is now wrong. I think the XBox 360 is no longer a loss lead, though that might change as there is some speculation that they will be dropping the price to undercut Sony soon. I believe the fact that it is no longer a loss lead is causing a confounding with the "360 is profitable" commentaries here.
Another commenter mentioned how smart it was was the XBox had a hard drive on it. I’d say if it is so smart why did Microsoft remove it in the base model 360? I’ll point out that this happened because the price of hard drives do not get any cheaper! In fact the price of commodity hardware design doesn’t get any cheaper! Huh? Hard drives get bigger, not cheaper. Processors and chips get more powerful, not cheaper.
What went on is that successive iterations of the Playstation and Playstation 2 would allow Sony to combine chips to reduce the price (and make smaller PSOne and slim-cased Playstation 2). This outlet wasn't available to Microsoft because of their design which is why the XBox was a losing money for it's entire run and Sony played games by dropping their price before it ever turned a profit.
Those two things are "of a piece". While commodity hardware was an interesting idea, it was a failure. Which is why the XBox 360 is not built from commodity PC hardware. The hard drives are a necessary evil of the "Live" strategy so they're left in as an option and bundled with the Playstation 3. That's why these 6G consoles are expensive and not dropping in price fast.
Right now all this is moot since the thing to watch is the Sony gamble on a blue laser. Obviously it will get cheaper fast, but the question is how fast and how cheap? The horrible yields on the Cell processor isn't helping things.
Currently, the XBox 360 has sold very consistently at around 1.5 million units a quarter. The XMas quarter last year had supply issues and only sold .9 million units. That's hardly dominating. In fact, I think the Playstation 2 outsold the 360 in each of those quarters even though the device is six years old. Let's put some numbers here. Last year over 100 million Playstation 2’s had been sold, six months ago, they were selling 380k/month. The XBox 360 sold 6 million units since it's introduction over a year ago, six months ago they were selling 300k/month, they had fixed the channel problems that plagued the release.
Consider this: Nintendo sold 600,000 Wiis in the last eight days. Given the scarcity of the Playstation 3 and the popularity and addictiveness of WiiSports and Zelda, they should easily crush that .9 million opening quarter of the 360. And consider this: each unit at a profit with a number of titles putting money directly in Nintendo's pocket.
I'm not claiming that the Wii will beat the 360. I'm just pointing out that according to sales numbers, the 360 is no iPod, is not trending to an iPod, will never be an iPod. The iPod sits on 75% market share. The closest thing to an iPod in the entertainment market is the Playstation 2.
Which is a big distraction from the point. And what is the point? That the XBox is a bad analogy. It is best to consider their Windows CE->Smartphone Microsoft play to see that the Zune is a bad idea. How many years and failed ideas have there been (Windows CE, Windows Mobile, PocketPC, etc. etc.)? How many billions sunk (some years more than the entire capitalization of the PDA market)? How much marketshare? 6% of smartphones, 60% of the dead-end PDA market, and most of the dead ATM teller market (because IBM did a phased pull out, not because Microsoft "won"). And even those markets are being eaten by Linux faster than Windows.
The only thing we can learn from the XBox and Microsoft is that Microsoft pees on their partners (NVidia) at the earliest opportunity. But we already knew that as soon as the Zune didn't support Plays For Sure.
I think the first statement is correct or close to it. They may have had a single profitable quarter when Halo 2 was released. I'm not sure because they bury games in a Microsoft Entertainment and Devices Division. Which includes their smartphone stuff (now that it has stopped bleeding money) and their profitable and acclaimed mice, keyboards, and other stuff (all manufactured by other companies, sort of like Dell, but with a nicer design).
The second part I believe is now wrong. I think the XBox 360 is no longer a loss lead, though that might change as there is some speculation that they will be dropping the price to undercut Sony soon. I believe the fact that it is no longer a loss lead is causing a confounding with the "360 is profitable" commentaries here.
Another commenter mentioned how smart it was was the XBox had a hard drive on it. I’d say if it is so smart why did Microsoft remove it in the base model 360? I’ll point out that this happened because the price of hard drives do not get any cheaper! In fact the price of commodity hardware design doesn’t get any cheaper! Huh? Hard drives get bigger, not cheaper. Processors and chips get more powerful, not cheaper.
What went on is that successive iterations of the Playstation and Playstation 2 would allow Sony to combine chips to reduce the price (and make smaller PSOne and slim-cased Playstation 2). This outlet wasn't available to Microsoft because of their design which is why the XBox was a losing money for it's entire run and Sony played games by dropping their price before it ever turned a profit.
Those two things are "of a piece". While commodity hardware was an interesting idea, it was a failure. Which is why the XBox 360 is not built from commodity PC hardware. The hard drives are a necessary evil of the "Live" strategy so they're left in as an option and bundled with the Playstation 3. That's why these 6G consoles are expensive and not dropping in price fast.
Right now all this is moot since the thing to watch is the Sony gamble on a blue laser. Obviously it will get cheaper fast, but the question is how fast and how cheap? The horrible yields on the Cell processor isn't helping things.
Currently, the XBox 360 has sold very consistently at around 1.5 million units a quarter. The XMas quarter last year had supply issues and only sold .9 million units. That's hardly dominating. In fact, I think the Playstation 2 outsold the 360 in each of those quarters even though the device is six years old. Let's put some numbers here. Last year over 100 million Playstation 2’s had been sold, six months ago, they were selling 380k/month. The XBox 360 sold 6 million units since it's introduction over a year ago, six months ago they were selling 300k/month, they had fixed the channel problems that plagued the release.
Consider this: Nintendo sold 600,000 Wiis in the last eight days. Given the scarcity of the Playstation 3 and the popularity and addictiveness of WiiSports and Zelda, they should easily crush that .9 million opening quarter of the 360. And consider this: each unit at a profit with a number of titles putting money directly in Nintendo's pocket.
I'm not claiming that the Wii will beat the 360. I'm just pointing out that according to sales numbers, the 360 is no iPod, is not trending to an iPod, will never be an iPod. The iPod sits on 75% market share. The closest thing to an iPod in the entertainment market is the Playstation 2.
Which is a big distraction from the point. And what is the point? That the XBox is a bad analogy. It is best to consider their Windows CE->Smartphone Microsoft play to see that the Zune is a bad idea. How many years and failed ideas have there been (Windows CE, Windows Mobile, PocketPC, etc. etc.)? How many billions sunk (some years more than the entire capitalization of the PDA market)? How much marketshare? 6% of smartphones, 60% of the dead-end PDA market, and most of the dead ATM teller market (because IBM did a phased pull out, not because Microsoft "won"). And even those markets are being eaten by Linux faster than Windows.
The only thing we can learn from the XBox and Microsoft is that Microsoft pees on their partners (NVidia) at the earliest opportunity. But we already knew that as soon as the Zune didn't support Plays For Sure.
Cowinacape
Aug 7, 03:51 AM
Just wanted to say thanks to MR for setting up a convenient keynote feed for us! Thanks!:cool:
SactoGuy18
Jan 2, 04:41 PM
I personally think we'll see this:
1) 2G iPod nano available in 16 GB edition. Apple drops the 2 GB edition and lowers the price of the 4 GB to $175 and 8 GB to $225.
2) 30 GB 5.5G iPod dropped, replaced by new 40 GB model. 80 GB model has no changes.
3) "True" video iPod (about the size of the Samsung Q1 handheld computer) arrives with 16:9 aspect ratio screen with full touchscreen functions. Will offer either 80 GB or 120 GB hard disk drive capacities.
1) 2G iPod nano available in 16 GB edition. Apple drops the 2 GB edition and lowers the price of the 4 GB to $175 and 8 GB to $225.
2) 30 GB 5.5G iPod dropped, replaced by new 40 GB model. 80 GB model has no changes.
3) "True" video iPod (about the size of the Samsung Q1 handheld computer) arrives with 16:9 aspect ratio screen with full touchscreen functions. Will offer either 80 GB or 120 GB hard disk drive capacities.
dongmin
Jan 12, 12:42 AM
Here is some info on the wireless power adaptor technlogy I mentioned previously that I believe will be incorporated into a new low power mac that does not ever need to be plugged in. There are two trains of thought. One is that it will be set atop a wireless power pad that will conduct the electricity a mere inch or two to 'charge' or power the mac without any cable or outside connectors and the other which has been demonstrated by a few other companies including involves electricity being sent through the air similar to a wireless signal, except the laptop actually charges without any wires at all - cordless electricity as it were.
Here's some links to some past posts discussing the technlogy.
http://www.tuaw.com/2007/02/16/rumors-docking-and-charging-by-induction/
http://www.louisgray.com/live/2007/02/its-time-to-make-power-wireless-and.html
Finally, a company called Powercast at www.powercastco.com demonstrated this wireless power transfer not too long ago by lighting a bulb up with absolutely no wires. Pretty cool and inevitable if you ask me.
This is what I'm guessing will be the hot new product - the MacAir - no cords. Power without wires.
BFMApple has some patents that deal with induction-based charging for your i-gadgets:
http://www.macrumors.com/2007/02/15/patent-wireless-iphone-charging-station/
There's also wireless firewire that stirred a lot of discussion three years ago:
http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB20040511S0001
Here's some links to some past posts discussing the technlogy.
http://www.tuaw.com/2007/02/16/rumors-docking-and-charging-by-induction/
http://www.louisgray.com/live/2007/02/its-time-to-make-power-wireless-and.html
Finally, a company called Powercast at www.powercastco.com demonstrated this wireless power transfer not too long ago by lighting a bulb up with absolutely no wires. Pretty cool and inevitable if you ask me.
This is what I'm guessing will be the hot new product - the MacAir - no cords. Power without wires.
BFMApple has some patents that deal with induction-based charging for your i-gadgets:
http://www.macrumors.com/2007/02/15/patent-wireless-iphone-charging-station/
There's also wireless firewire that stirred a lot of discussion three years ago:
http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB20040511S0001
dr Dunkel
Apr 20, 06:53 AM
Agreed. With the big up in GPU they gave the MBPs I am hopeful that they just might. The 27" saw the first desktop CPU in an iMac, right? I wonder if they can't now manage the same with the GPU. If it is decent, I think I'll be pretty tempted; and I've been running on only laptops for ages, so that's saying something!
I'm with you on this one. If the new iMacs have decent GPU:s, I'm on the boat for an ultimate. If not, no iMac this time.
Decent GPU would mean something like the 6950 or, even better, an Apple special version :D Well, it will have to pack enough power to feed that high resolution screen.
6950 in the 21.5 (who makes screens this small these days?) would be super, if they make the "21.5" into 23.5 instead.
I'm with you on this one. If the new iMacs have decent GPU:s, I'm on the boat for an ultimate. If not, no iMac this time.
Decent GPU would mean something like the 6950 or, even better, an Apple special version :D Well, it will have to pack enough power to feed that high resolution screen.
6950 in the 21.5 (who makes screens this small these days?) would be super, if they make the "21.5" into 23.5 instead.