Gugulino
Apr 1, 04:19 AM
I think, there is a way to get this app in the MAS, too. Needs a bit of tweaking by the developers.
adouglas2001
Jan 15, 03:03 PM
Just sold my Apple shares.
Genius move, that.
Have you never heard of "sell on the news?" Everyone's already done it.
Apple is down $13.50 as I write this.
It will come back up, provided the economy as a whole doesn't implode.
I got an Apple gift card for the holidays, and was waiting to see what Apple was going to announce. My decision? I'm ordering a refurb MBP to replace my G4 Powerbook this week.
"Old old old?" Not compared to my early-2003 computer. It's dramatically faster, dramatically more efficient, and dramatically more capacious than the machine I've got. Based on the Penryn tests I've seen so far, an MBP update will result in only a marginal improvement. I don't NEED a few extra percent of battery life or performance here and there.
It is always wiser in the long run IMHO to be a late adopter and buy near the end of a product lifecycle than near the beginning. Early adopters are, and have always been, late beta testers.
I dunno...seems that everyone could use just a little less caffeine and stop obsessing over instant gratification and wish fulfillment. Take a deep breath. Leopard WILL be updated. Blu-Ray WILL happen. The MBP WILL get a refresh. And so on. But not today. Big deal. Wait a few months.
Could be that age and decades of experience have given me an appreciation for the long view. I just don't get all torqued up over every tiny move that Apple makes (or fails to make). They still make great products.
Genius move, that.
Have you never heard of "sell on the news?" Everyone's already done it.
Apple is down $13.50 as I write this.
It will come back up, provided the economy as a whole doesn't implode.
I got an Apple gift card for the holidays, and was waiting to see what Apple was going to announce. My decision? I'm ordering a refurb MBP to replace my G4 Powerbook this week.
"Old old old?" Not compared to my early-2003 computer. It's dramatically faster, dramatically more efficient, and dramatically more capacious than the machine I've got. Based on the Penryn tests I've seen so far, an MBP update will result in only a marginal improvement. I don't NEED a few extra percent of battery life or performance here and there.
It is always wiser in the long run IMHO to be a late adopter and buy near the end of a product lifecycle than near the beginning. Early adopters are, and have always been, late beta testers.
I dunno...seems that everyone could use just a little less caffeine and stop obsessing over instant gratification and wish fulfillment. Take a deep breath. Leopard WILL be updated. Blu-Ray WILL happen. The MBP WILL get a refresh. And so on. But not today. Big deal. Wait a few months.
Could be that age and decades of experience have given me an appreciation for the long view. I just don't get all torqued up over every tiny move that Apple makes (or fails to make). They still make great products.
TheMacBookPro
Mar 19, 11:46 AM
I've never, ever had a conversation about my phone with a random person in the street - let alone conduct comparison tests.
I'm guessing from your thread that you porbably love the iphone a bit too much... Get out and enjoy the world. Perhaps leave the phone at home!
This.
Oh please! I think that statement would be better targeted at the people who engage in this childish behaviour. I was just the recipient, also they weren't total strangers, but they weren't people that I know either.
Also, quite a few people in this thread say that these phones are the same price, well one of the main points of one of these guys was that he paid �100 for his brand new Desire and is on a �18 a month contract. In all honesty, that is a lot cheaper than any iPhone deal out there.
You're the one who took the time out of your day to start this thread and respond, lol.
This, actually, is my biggest concern: That Apple will just be smug enough to think they don't need to do anything with the design.
They did that with the iPhone and the touch and they're going to do it again. When is the question.
I'm guessing from your thread that you porbably love the iphone a bit too much... Get out and enjoy the world. Perhaps leave the phone at home!
This.
Oh please! I think that statement would be better targeted at the people who engage in this childish behaviour. I was just the recipient, also they weren't total strangers, but they weren't people that I know either.
Also, quite a few people in this thread say that these phones are the same price, well one of the main points of one of these guys was that he paid �100 for his brand new Desire and is on a �18 a month contract. In all honesty, that is a lot cheaper than any iPhone deal out there.
You're the one who took the time out of your day to start this thread and respond, lol.
This, actually, is my biggest concern: That Apple will just be smug enough to think they don't need to do anything with the design.
They did that with the iPhone and the touch and they're going to do it again. When is the question.
dernhelm
Oct 1, 05:58 AM
Slide to Unlock....
If they make the "star trek" whoosh sound when you open and close them, it might be cool...
If they make the "star trek" whoosh sound when you open and close them, it might be cool...
Reach9
Apr 25, 12:33 PM
Really hoping that this is the next iPhone. It looks odd and legit at the same time, so i'm not sure. Still, i hope the next iPhone will have a larger screen.
Uh, no... the iPhone 4 was called the iPhone 4 because it was the 4th version of the iPhone (not because it came after 3 in 3G). If the next iPhone is called the 4S, that'd be the 5th iPhone model. So the next one after that would be called the iPhone 6.
It would go:
iPhone
iPhone 3G
iPhone 3GS
iPhone 4
iPhone 4S (or iPhone 5)
iPhone 6
Yes, and due to basics of Marketing, chances are Apple will call it an iPhone 5, it makes no sense to skip "5" and go to 6. Also, iPhone 6 would be the 7th iPhone then. Apple isn't the one to confuse their customers like that, look at the iPad 2.
The 3GS was named as a substitute to get back into numerical ordering, that's what i think. It wouldn't make sense to go from iPhone 3G to iPhone 3, marketing wise.
Regardless, this update will be major and i can't wait for the next iPhone.
Uh, no... the iPhone 4 was called the iPhone 4 because it was the 4th version of the iPhone (not because it came after 3 in 3G). If the next iPhone is called the 4S, that'd be the 5th iPhone model. So the next one after that would be called the iPhone 6.
It would go:
iPhone
iPhone 3G
iPhone 3GS
iPhone 4
iPhone 4S (or iPhone 5)
iPhone 6
Yes, and due to basics of Marketing, chances are Apple will call it an iPhone 5, it makes no sense to skip "5" and go to 6. Also, iPhone 6 would be the 7th iPhone then. Apple isn't the one to confuse their customers like that, look at the iPad 2.
The 3GS was named as a substitute to get back into numerical ordering, that's what i think. It wouldn't make sense to go from iPhone 3G to iPhone 3, marketing wise.
Regardless, this update will be major and i can't wait for the next iPhone.
Bonte
Oct 29, 02:24 PM
They will take "because it'll kill Apple's hardware business, which is where Apple makes most of their money" as an answer, however.
Apple's interests lie in selling high-margin solutions, not bottom-of-the-market extremely low margin PCs.
Think of Dell as Ford, and Apple as BMW.
The computer - car analogy has to stop, it makes no sense at all. The most reliable car is the Toyota Corolla because it is the longest in production and has the errors worked out a long time ago, worst reliable cars are short production but expensive models like the Ferrari. Ford has less luxury options but may well be more reliable than BMW, price and luxury isn't the key factor here.
As for the "high-margin solutions" Apple has a good position at the moment, price is competitive and high standard. It looks like Apple wants to keep a firm grip on the top end models but losing it on the low end, there is no sub $500 Mac! (except maybe the "iTV") Licensing an OS has a typical $80 price point and that is more than they make on a Mac Mini (hard- and software together) so it makes sense to me.
A few years back Steve said that Apple would focus more on software than on hardware (and brought the iPod on the market :) ), the release of 10.5 may well be the turning point for the OS. If Mac sales go the way of the iPod then i agree there is no need to license but if not i see no other option. Its not if but when.
Apple's interests lie in selling high-margin solutions, not bottom-of-the-market extremely low margin PCs.
Think of Dell as Ford, and Apple as BMW.
The computer - car analogy has to stop, it makes no sense at all. The most reliable car is the Toyota Corolla because it is the longest in production and has the errors worked out a long time ago, worst reliable cars are short production but expensive models like the Ferrari. Ford has less luxury options but may well be more reliable than BMW, price and luxury isn't the key factor here.
As for the "high-margin solutions" Apple has a good position at the moment, price is competitive and high standard. It looks like Apple wants to keep a firm grip on the top end models but losing it on the low end, there is no sub $500 Mac! (except maybe the "iTV") Licensing an OS has a typical $80 price point and that is more than they make on a Mac Mini (hard- and software together) so it makes sense to me.
A few years back Steve said that Apple would focus more on software than on hardware (and brought the iPod on the market :) ), the release of 10.5 may well be the turning point for the OS. If Mac sales go the way of the iPod then i agree there is no need to license but if not i see no other option. Its not if but when.
mensrea
Sep 12, 01:26 AM
Bloomberg weighs in:
Sept. 12 (Bloomberg) -- Apple Computer Inc. today may begin selling full-length Walt Disney Co. films online and introduce a new iPod on which to play them.
Chief Executive Officer Steve Jobs will say at a meeting in San Francisco that Apple's iTunes store is adding downloadable Disney movies to its music and television shows, said three officials familiar with the plan. Jobs also may introduce an iPod with a larger screen and more memory to accommodate movies, said analysts including Eugene Munster of Piper Jaffray & Cos.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=a7MNkU.36h8k&refer=news
Sept. 12 (Bloomberg) -- Apple Computer Inc. today may begin selling full-length Walt Disney Co. films online and introduce a new iPod on which to play them.
Chief Executive Officer Steve Jobs will say at a meeting in San Francisco that Apple's iTunes store is adding downloadable Disney movies to its music and television shows, said three officials familiar with the plan. Jobs also may introduce an iPod with a larger screen and more memory to accommodate movies, said analysts including Eugene Munster of Piper Jaffray & Cos.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=a7MNkU.36h8k&refer=news
geoffism
Dec 13, 03:26 PM
We've all be wrong before.
its interesting that Fortune picked up the story as well. The internet is the new home of the written truth.
It would be cool if it happens, but I'm not holding my breath.
its interesting that Fortune picked up the story as well. The internet is the new home of the written truth.
It would be cool if it happens, but I'm not holding my breath.
Scarlet Fever
Jan 13, 05:12 PM
so now if i need the widescreen ipod, but dont like the phone .. i dont have the choice .. either stand outside apple outlet and drool all day or go in and pay extra for the phone that comes with the ipod that i want.
but the point is that Apple's lineup isn't going to stay the way it is forever. Within a couple of weeks or months, Apple will announce the widescreen iPod. Now that they have shown what you can do with a touchscreen, I reckon we should expect OS X and a dully-touchable display on the iPod.
Just wait a little while; the 6th Gen iPod will be released :)
but the point is that Apple's lineup isn't going to stay the way it is forever. Within a couple of weeks or months, Apple will announce the widescreen iPod. Now that they have shown what you can do with a touchscreen, I reckon we should expect OS X and a dully-touchable display on the iPod.
Just wait a little while; the 6th Gen iPod will be released :)
SeaFox
Oct 28, 11:10 PM
APPLE, DO NOT MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE AGAIN!!!
Apple made a big mistake not licensing Mac OS 22 years ago allowing clones. Otherwise Mac OS X would be now the mainstream operating system.
Now history repeats. Apple has now the oppotunity to take over and beat Windows. But for that it is absolutely essential to allow Mac OS X to run on ANY PC out there.
Why does Apple make the same mistake?
I was going to write a replay to this. But John Gruber has done one already (http://daringfireball.net/2004/08/parlay).
But I will say. HELLO? WHERE WERE YOU IN 1997? Apple did license the MacOS. And it almost put them out of business.
Repeat after me:
Apple is a hardware company.
Apple is a hardware company.
If they didn't sell Macintoshes and iPods they would be out of business.
If they didn't sell Macintoshes and iPods they would be out of business.
The software is what makes the hardware valuable.
The software is what makes the hardware valuable.
The software is easy to use and works well.
The software is easy to use and works well.
If the software worked on any hardware, it would not be so easy to use.
If the software worked on any hardware, it would not be so easy to use.
It would also not work so well.
It would also not work so well.
Apple made a big mistake not licensing Mac OS 22 years ago allowing clones. Otherwise Mac OS X would be now the mainstream operating system.
Now history repeats. Apple has now the oppotunity to take over and beat Windows. But for that it is absolutely essential to allow Mac OS X to run on ANY PC out there.
Why does Apple make the same mistake?
I was going to write a replay to this. But John Gruber has done one already (http://daringfireball.net/2004/08/parlay).
But I will say. HELLO? WHERE WERE YOU IN 1997? Apple did license the MacOS. And it almost put them out of business.
Repeat after me:
Apple is a hardware company.
Apple is a hardware company.
If they didn't sell Macintoshes and iPods they would be out of business.
If they didn't sell Macintoshes and iPods they would be out of business.
The software is what makes the hardware valuable.
The software is what makes the hardware valuable.
The software is easy to use and works well.
The software is easy to use and works well.
If the software worked on any hardware, it would not be so easy to use.
If the software worked on any hardware, it would not be so easy to use.
It would also not work so well.
It would also not work so well.
UTclassof89
Jul 21, 01:39 PM
1) What isn't factored into your calculations is that because of its more-sensitive antenna, the iP4 was able to make calls, in marginal signal areas, where the 3GS showed no signal and was not able to attempt or receive a call... dropping any of these "never-before-possible" calls would reflect poorly on the iP4, and be included in the "< 1 call per hundred" more dropped calls by the iP4.
True, but a dropped call is a dropped call.
2) <1 per 100 more dropped calls by the iP4 than the 3GS. "< 1" can mean anything from, say, .0000000001 to .9999999999. Without knowing the real delta fraction it is difficult to base calculations on it.
We both know that's a crock. If "<1" was anything less than 0.8, Apple would have said "barely over one half of one percent". But they didn't. That means it's more like .97 or .98 (bet me an iPhone!)
3) The 3GS came into being with a plethora of available cases-- the iP4 with 1 case, that was in so short supply as to be non-available. Apple stated that 80% of the 3GSs left their store with a case. So, many 3Gs had 2 layers of antenna shielding, the 3GS plastic housing and an external case. The bulk of iP4s had neither-- 0 levels of antenna shielding.
Wow. Mr. Jobs, I didn't realize it was you.
The point isn't whether a case mitigates the issue--I have no doubt that it does. But Apple is spinning facts and pretending the issue is the typical attenuation issue other phones has. It isn't (otherwise the iphone 4's that left the store without a case would be dropping fewer calls, not more)
True, but a dropped call is a dropped call.
2) <1 per 100 more dropped calls by the iP4 than the 3GS. "< 1" can mean anything from, say, .0000000001 to .9999999999. Without knowing the real delta fraction it is difficult to base calculations on it.
We both know that's a crock. If "<1" was anything less than 0.8, Apple would have said "barely over one half of one percent". But they didn't. That means it's more like .97 or .98 (bet me an iPhone!)
3) The 3GS came into being with a plethora of available cases-- the iP4 with 1 case, that was in so short supply as to be non-available. Apple stated that 80% of the 3GSs left their store with a case. So, many 3Gs had 2 layers of antenna shielding, the 3GS plastic housing and an external case. The bulk of iP4s had neither-- 0 levels of antenna shielding.
Wow. Mr. Jobs, I didn't realize it was you.
The point isn't whether a case mitigates the issue--I have no doubt that it does. But Apple is spinning facts and pretending the issue is the typical attenuation issue other phones has. It isn't (otherwise the iphone 4's that left the store without a case would be dropping fewer calls, not more)
true777
Sep 29, 12:42 AM
Man, that is a crummy little house by Silicon Valley standards if I ever saw one. I live in the neighboring town (Portola Valley), which is essentially the same as Woodside, and hence know many homes in the area (including the one I live in). And by current standards around here, not having a private bathroom for EACH bedroom, and a LARGE closet, is pretty substandard. Also, to only have *1* walk-in in the master rather than 2 is not good. No home theater? Large gym with panoramic views? Sauna/steam room/? Sun room? Library? Detached guest suite or guest house (in-law/nanny quarters, etc.)? Swimming pool? Hot tub? This honestly doesn't look like a place where a man of his caliber would be living full-time. Of course his house in Palo Alto isn't huge, either, but at least it is charming, historic, enchanted.
He has a number of kids, so I'm not sure how they would all fit into this small space with their friends when, e.g., everyone comes home for summers, holidays, etc. Typical houses for higher level people in the Woodside area would have at least 6-7 bedrooms, a bathroom for each bedroom, plus several additional half bathrooms, and probably about 10,000 squ. ft.
Only thing that makes sense to me is that he would view this as his retirement house since it'll only be done ~5 years, anyway. And I suppose for retirement people like to keep it small and simple. That would make sense to me and might hint at when he might be planning on retiring.
He has a number of kids, so I'm not sure how they would all fit into this small space with their friends when, e.g., everyone comes home for summers, holidays, etc. Typical houses for higher level people in the Woodside area would have at least 6-7 bedrooms, a bathroom for each bedroom, plus several additional half bathrooms, and probably about 10,000 squ. ft.
Only thing that makes sense to me is that he would view this as his retirement house since it'll only be done ~5 years, anyway. And I suppose for retirement people like to keep it small and simple. That would make sense to me and might hint at when he might be planning on retiring.
-aggie-
Apr 21, 11:12 PM
Is this going to be used ultimately to rate posters (kind of like the Apple site for one example)?
How is abuse of this going to be addressed?
If all it�s used for is the post itself, I don�t see any value for this.
What are MR�s (Arn�s and the other Gods) thoughts on what they want to do with this?
How is abuse of this going to be addressed?
If all it�s used for is the post itself, I don�t see any value for this.
What are MR�s (Arn�s and the other Gods) thoughts on what they want to do with this?
davepoint
Aug 8, 01:33 PM
By the way - the apple uk store lists the 23" as �779 - yet earlier in this thread people were saying that the prices had not yet dropped..I was under the impression that 779 was the reduced price..is it going down further or are the wrong?
Huntn
Mar 4, 01:52 PM
So when I talk to my 28 year old son in law school, it becomes a different issue. He's a 3L in the thick of things seeing "both" sides of everything, without any moral consideration, and his conservative leanings tend to buy the myth that unions and "liberals" are anti-business. He can talk the liberal argument, because he may have to one day, but his conservative bias is hard to break. I wish him all the best, always, but God help us should he ever make the bench anywhere. ;)
All anyone has to remember in a liberal vs conservative discussion is one simple fact: There has been no law ever initiated by conservatives to help working class citizens. All of these ideas- min wage, child labor laws, max hours per week, workplace safety, etc, all spring from liberal thinking, because liberals give a damn. Conservatives as a rule are too worried about who might take their hard earned money. You know the "sorry we just can't afford it" argument.
All anyone has to remember in a liberal vs conservative discussion is one simple fact: There has been no law ever initiated by conservatives to help working class citizens. All of these ideas- min wage, child labor laws, max hours per week, workplace safety, etc, all spring from liberal thinking, because liberals give a damn. Conservatives as a rule are too worried about who might take their hard earned money. You know the "sorry we just can't afford it" argument.
srl7741
Apr 13, 12:22 PM
As much as I disagree with everything TSA they are not the problem "we" are for allowing them to do what they do everyday. We continue to lower the bar and I don't see it going back up. It's difficult to reverse such a large thing after we have accepted it. Next up Saturday/Sunday sporting events or other places with very large numbers of people.
dr_lha
Nov 16, 01:02 PM
No basically. Not saying it won't ever happen, but Apple is way to happy with Intel right now to go to a competitor. Its not going to happen until Intel and Apple fall out of love.
mmcc
Mar 29, 08:46 AM
Yes, the App Store can give you exposure, but you still have to market and sell your solution for people to find you or want you. Plus, the AppStore is one outlet and your other outlets should never be abandoned.
Yes, but you can't have it both ways. A successful Mac App Store from your perspective means more Apple customers use it to find apps. In my experience to date, this means those other "outlets" become less and less profitable. Marketing is a numbers game and a major disruption like the Mac App Store can quickly shift those numbers to the negative. In my case it is no longer profitable to maintain some of those "other outlets".
Here's a specific example: Google AdWords. Before the Mac App Store opened, many customers gravitated first to Google search to find an app. I would pay for AdWords placement and if I got a click-through I could be assured that my website exclusively captured the attention. Yes, my app still had to be good enough to capture a sale but at least there were no other competitors there -- and no freebie alternatives (except for demos/trials).
The same strategy no longer works with the Mac App Store. First, the traffic in Google search is reduced as more Apple customers gravitate to the Mac App Store first. My conversions costs showed a clear trend upward as soon as the Mac App Store opened (other competitors in my app space have also dropped away from AdWords indicating similar escalating conversion costs). Furthermore, if I try to drive customers to the Mac App Store to buy, to increase my exposure therein, I incur the AdWord conversion costs, plus the 30% to Apple and a reduced price in the Mac App Store to compete in the race to the bottom. Clearly AdWords is a losing strategy in this case.
However... you're point on price is one to be considered. If you want to get impulse buys, you have to be impulsed priced.
That's fine if the volume was worthwhile. What I am saying is that impulse buy volume is NOT there at any price to even approach what I was making in my market space before. I've been in the #1 spot for my category and it was not a windfall.
I say again, the Mac App Store has depressed the sales volume and gross in my category for everyone. This is not a success in the sense of encouraging a vibrant and growing Mac software market. I felt that before the Mac App Store opened that the Mac software market was reaching a critical mass and that developers found it increasingly attractive. The Mac App Store has crushed that IMO and I am not sure it will return unless Apple makes huge percentage gains in the traditional PC market (and recent trends show it is leveling off).
Please don't take me wrong... I'm not saying you're wrong... just pointing out that the AppStore does not guarantee anything if you don't have good sales and marketing behind it. Also, you have to have software people want.
How exactly would you suggest to market in the Mac App Store? I can't buy ad placement. Lowering my price to 99 cents hasn't given me exposure. I need some (ethical) ideas. :p
Yes, but you can't have it both ways. A successful Mac App Store from your perspective means more Apple customers use it to find apps. In my experience to date, this means those other "outlets" become less and less profitable. Marketing is a numbers game and a major disruption like the Mac App Store can quickly shift those numbers to the negative. In my case it is no longer profitable to maintain some of those "other outlets".
Here's a specific example: Google AdWords. Before the Mac App Store opened, many customers gravitated first to Google search to find an app. I would pay for AdWords placement and if I got a click-through I could be assured that my website exclusively captured the attention. Yes, my app still had to be good enough to capture a sale but at least there were no other competitors there -- and no freebie alternatives (except for demos/trials).
The same strategy no longer works with the Mac App Store. First, the traffic in Google search is reduced as more Apple customers gravitate to the Mac App Store first. My conversions costs showed a clear trend upward as soon as the Mac App Store opened (other competitors in my app space have also dropped away from AdWords indicating similar escalating conversion costs). Furthermore, if I try to drive customers to the Mac App Store to buy, to increase my exposure therein, I incur the AdWord conversion costs, plus the 30% to Apple and a reduced price in the Mac App Store to compete in the race to the bottom. Clearly AdWords is a losing strategy in this case.
However... you're point on price is one to be considered. If you want to get impulse buys, you have to be impulsed priced.
That's fine if the volume was worthwhile. What I am saying is that impulse buy volume is NOT there at any price to even approach what I was making in my market space before. I've been in the #1 spot for my category and it was not a windfall.
I say again, the Mac App Store has depressed the sales volume and gross in my category for everyone. This is not a success in the sense of encouraging a vibrant and growing Mac software market. I felt that before the Mac App Store opened that the Mac software market was reaching a critical mass and that developers found it increasingly attractive. The Mac App Store has crushed that IMO and I am not sure it will return unless Apple makes huge percentage gains in the traditional PC market (and recent trends show it is leveling off).
Please don't take me wrong... I'm not saying you're wrong... just pointing out that the AppStore does not guarantee anything if you don't have good sales and marketing behind it. Also, you have to have software people want.
How exactly would you suggest to market in the Mac App Store? I can't buy ad placement. Lowering my price to 99 cents hasn't given me exposure. I need some (ethical) ideas. :p
lordonuthin
Jul 11, 12:15 PM
well after moving, i finally have my computers setup again. i just got internet access today, but it is looking terribly slow. i just started folding with 4 GPUs for right now. i'll see how this goes before i start with the big units
Good to have you back folding again. We need the points...
Good to have you back folding again. We need the points...
miggyb
Jan 6, 01:22 PM
Google Video + YouTube + Myspace + Apple's Servers = enough bandwidth?
If not, could someone put up a torrent? From what it sounds like, the torrent would download quicker than the quicktime stream. Especially once you start getting 100+ seeders.
The question is, how many hardcore mac users know how to forward their ports? I'm making a guess that the average point-and-click user isn't also the one to know the exact date of the yearly keynote. Isn't it more of a developer/advanced user thing?
If not, could someone put up a torrent? From what it sounds like, the torrent would download quicker than the quicktime stream. Especially once you start getting 100+ seeders.
The question is, how many hardcore mac users know how to forward their ports? I'm making a guess that the average point-and-click user isn't also the one to know the exact date of the yearly keynote. Isn't it more of a developer/advanced user thing?
amols
Sep 25, 02:36 PM
Really a great update for a great product. And now even Mac Mini Solo has a supported configuration. I can't believe Apple has improved so many things for no update price. I also can't believe so many negative ratings. Those waiting for new MBPs, check out next MS event or E3 or Oscars...you never know :D .
I love my MBP more than ever now :D :D
I love my MBP more than ever now :D :D
Stella
Aug 1, 10:17 AM
This is just one more reason why socialism doesn't work. It takes away the incentive of a company to put a product in the country, and the consumers ultimately suffer.
LOL.
Nice troll.
LOL.
Nice troll.
MattyMac
Oct 10, 06:48 PM
Yeah, Apple isn't going to sit back and let Zune steal its lunch!
Agreed!
So please please please let it be:D
Agreed!
So please please please let it be:D
Mitthrawnuruodo
Aug 2, 07:12 AM
Apple Gets French Support in Music Compatibility Case
By THOMAS CRAMPTON
Published: July 29, 2006
PARIS, July 28 � The French constitutional council, the country�s highest judicial body, has declared major aspects of the so-called iPod law unconstitutional, undermining some controversial aspects of the legislation.
� Apple�s lawyers might want to drink a glass of French Champagne today, but not a whole bottle,� said Dominique Menard, partner at the Lovells law firm and a specialist in intellectual property. �The constitutional council has highlighted fundamental protections for intellectual property in such a way as to put iTunes a little further from risk of the French law.�
Released late Thursday, the council�s 12-page legal finding made frequent reference to the 1789 Declaration on Human Rights and concluded that the law violated the constitutional protections of property.
The decision affects Apple�s market-dominant iTunes Music Store by undermining the government�s original intention, which was to force Apple and others to sell music online that would be playable on any device. Apple�s iPod is the only portable music device that can play music purchased on iTunes, which lead rivals to complain about anti-competitive practices.
Although the ruling could still require companies like Apple to make music sold online to be compatible with other hand-held devices, it said that the companies could not be forced to do so without receiving compensation. The council also eliminated reduced fines for file sharing.
�The constitutional council effectively highlighted the importance of intellectual property rights,� Mr. Menard said, emphasizing that Apple and other companies must be paid for sharing their copy-protection technology.
The law, which had been approved by the French Senate and National Assembly last month, was brought for review at the demand of more than 100 members of the National Assembly. The council�s review of whether the law fits within the French Constitution�s framework is one of the final steps before a law is promulgated. It now could take effect as altered by the council or the government could bring it once more before the Parliament.
The French minister of culture, Renaud Donnedieu de Vabres, advocated enforced interoperability as a way to ensure diverse cultural offerings on the Internet by limiting technical constraints on digital works.
While the constitutional council highlighted the need for compensation, it was not such good news for Apple and other companies that the principle of forced interoperability remained in place, said Jean-Baptiste Soufron, legal director of the Association of Audionautes, a group opposed to copy restrictions.
�It is good news for Apple because they receive monetary compensation, but much bigger bad news if it forces them to license iTunes,� he said. Link (requires login) (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/29/technology/29music.html?_r=4&ref=business&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=login&oref=slogin)
By THOMAS CRAMPTON
Published: July 29, 2006
PARIS, July 28 � The French constitutional council, the country�s highest judicial body, has declared major aspects of the so-called iPod law unconstitutional, undermining some controversial aspects of the legislation.
� Apple�s lawyers might want to drink a glass of French Champagne today, but not a whole bottle,� said Dominique Menard, partner at the Lovells law firm and a specialist in intellectual property. �The constitutional council has highlighted fundamental protections for intellectual property in such a way as to put iTunes a little further from risk of the French law.�
Released late Thursday, the council�s 12-page legal finding made frequent reference to the 1789 Declaration on Human Rights and concluded that the law violated the constitutional protections of property.
The decision affects Apple�s market-dominant iTunes Music Store by undermining the government�s original intention, which was to force Apple and others to sell music online that would be playable on any device. Apple�s iPod is the only portable music device that can play music purchased on iTunes, which lead rivals to complain about anti-competitive practices.
Although the ruling could still require companies like Apple to make music sold online to be compatible with other hand-held devices, it said that the companies could not be forced to do so without receiving compensation. The council also eliminated reduced fines for file sharing.
�The constitutional council effectively highlighted the importance of intellectual property rights,� Mr. Menard said, emphasizing that Apple and other companies must be paid for sharing their copy-protection technology.
The law, which had been approved by the French Senate and National Assembly last month, was brought for review at the demand of more than 100 members of the National Assembly. The council�s review of whether the law fits within the French Constitution�s framework is one of the final steps before a law is promulgated. It now could take effect as altered by the council or the government could bring it once more before the Parliament.
The French minister of culture, Renaud Donnedieu de Vabres, advocated enforced interoperability as a way to ensure diverse cultural offerings on the Internet by limiting technical constraints on digital works.
While the constitutional council highlighted the need for compensation, it was not such good news for Apple and other companies that the principle of forced interoperability remained in place, said Jean-Baptiste Soufron, legal director of the Association of Audionautes, a group opposed to copy restrictions.
�It is good news for Apple because they receive monetary compensation, but much bigger bad news if it forces them to license iTunes,� he said. Link (requires login) (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/29/technology/29music.html?_r=4&ref=business&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=login&oref=slogin)
0 comments:
Post a Comment