profets
Apr 25, 10:28 AM
really? can you show me your At&t speedtest?
I'm not on AT&T (been on Rogers and Wind in Canada). On Rogers/Fido or Bell/Telus/Virgin its not uncommon to consistently hit 5-6mbps on an iPhone or other phone (with hspa up to 7.2mbps). They've had hspa+ in many areas for over a year as well.
So hearing 4mbps out of hspa+ which is being marketed as 4G is just sad.
I'm not on AT&T (been on Rogers and Wind in Canada). On Rogers/Fido or Bell/Telus/Virgin its not uncommon to consistently hit 5-6mbps on an iPhone or other phone (with hspa up to 7.2mbps). They've had hspa+ in many areas for over a year as well.
So hearing 4mbps out of hspa+ which is being marketed as 4G is just sad.
kiljoy616
Apr 13, 03:22 PM
The iPad has already blown away the "Apple makes overpriced stuff myth" out of the water. If you are still clinging on to this, let it go and find another useful argument.
Most of the products in Apple's line up are competitively priced or more affordable than its competitors...and don't compare iMac's to desktop boxes it's an all-in-one a different form factor.
Apple makes insane profits because their products sell...in extraordinary numbers not because they are overpriced. Fact is if Apple only makes income because of the premium, people will not continue to buy them if they don't work well.
If you want to dispute what I said, try making your own product, design a pretty logo for it and sell it at a premium. See how that works out for you.
Well said, but even if this iVisual was to come out, Apple is not going to bring out just a TV its going to be much more and I can't imagine what that could be. Most people even today just don't have the internet needed to really push something Apple would want to get into when it comes to the TV that is why the Apple TV is still a hobby for Apple.
That said maybe they are looking to see what Google does with their Gigabyte fiber deployment. If we started to see real speeds something like a 4k apple tv could become a reality. Give me that and retianal display and drop all the 3d gimmick, I just don't really care for it.
Most of the products in Apple's line up are competitively priced or more affordable than its competitors...and don't compare iMac's to desktop boxes it's an all-in-one a different form factor.
Apple makes insane profits because their products sell...in extraordinary numbers not because they are overpriced. Fact is if Apple only makes income because of the premium, people will not continue to buy them if they don't work well.
If you want to dispute what I said, try making your own product, design a pretty logo for it and sell it at a premium. See how that works out for you.
Well said, but even if this iVisual was to come out, Apple is not going to bring out just a TV its going to be much more and I can't imagine what that could be. Most people even today just don't have the internet needed to really push something Apple would want to get into when it comes to the TV that is why the Apple TV is still a hobby for Apple.
That said maybe they are looking to see what Google does with their Gigabyte fiber deployment. If we started to see real speeds something like a 4k apple tv could become a reality. Give me that and retianal display and drop all the 3d gimmick, I just don't really care for it.
Joshuarocks
Apr 25, 08:35 AM
I'm not sure where you get the idea that Iran is "one of the most backward countries in the world", because in many ways it is not. The pronouncement that sex-changes were OK came from none other than Ayatollah Khomeini himself, several decades ago.
Homosexuality, of course, is another matter, but that's all right because they apparently "don't have homosexuals in Iran". Probably because they get executed.
You mean Ayatollah assahola? :)
Homosexuality, of course, is another matter, but that's all right because they apparently "don't have homosexuals in Iran". Probably because they get executed.
You mean Ayatollah assahola? :)
gkarris
Mar 1, 10:12 AM
If this guy can generate that much viewership and money, it show you the state of television progamming... :eek:
more...
Prom1
Apr 11, 10:15 PM
Not sure if I would consider "AJA, BlackMagic, and Promise" to be "industry demand." :) I'll give ya Promise.
I would think having names like Western Digital, Sony, HP, Maxtor, Iomega, and Seagate a lot more proof that TB is being adopted. USB 3.0 has been gaining momentum by leaps and bounds over the past year.
I have a feeling TB is going to be the next Firewire: sure, it works, but USB is so much more dominant at basically the same speeds. But I don't really care at the end of the day...just something much much faster than USB 2.0 for my hundreds of gigs of data that I copy/move around a bit.
And yes, for the true true true speed fans that need the best of the best of the best in their profession...sure, buy what you need.
Matrox has already been highlighted at NAB ~ you missed that. LaCie is an original with "The Little Big Disk" being a small RAID SSD drive with TB expect that mid-summer (salivating over this with aluminum body and very small package).
USB3.0 will have its place for the commoner � but with TB that'll be its last generation; I presume.
Question (I'm surprised nobody asked this yet): Does TB bring back MBP Disk Mode? The option to hold "T" on boot up to turn your Mac into a HDD and carbon copy data to external or migrate/image from external to internal?
I also vote for a port replicator type box for MBP/iMac lineup unit.
I'm still on the hunt for a Corei5 Quad-Core iMac (I'm still confused why Apple downgraded from that to dual-core i3's)?!!????
I would think having names like Western Digital, Sony, HP, Maxtor, Iomega, and Seagate a lot more proof that TB is being adopted. USB 3.0 has been gaining momentum by leaps and bounds over the past year.
I have a feeling TB is going to be the next Firewire: sure, it works, but USB is so much more dominant at basically the same speeds. But I don't really care at the end of the day...just something much much faster than USB 2.0 for my hundreds of gigs of data that I copy/move around a bit.
And yes, for the true true true speed fans that need the best of the best of the best in their profession...sure, buy what you need.
Matrox has already been highlighted at NAB ~ you missed that. LaCie is an original with "The Little Big Disk" being a small RAID SSD drive with TB expect that mid-summer (salivating over this with aluminum body and very small package).
USB3.0 will have its place for the commoner � but with TB that'll be its last generation; I presume.
Question (I'm surprised nobody asked this yet): Does TB bring back MBP Disk Mode? The option to hold "T" on boot up to turn your Mac into a HDD and carbon copy data to external or migrate/image from external to internal?
I also vote for a port replicator type box for MBP/iMac lineup unit.
I'm still on the hunt for a Corei5 Quad-Core iMac (I'm still confused why Apple downgraded from that to dual-core i3's)?!!????
clientsiman
May 3, 08:20 AM
Nice upgrade this time.
more...
cutsman
Apr 10, 08:51 AM
Downtown Toronto, taken with Nikon D90 + 24-70 f2.8.
http://cman.zenfolio.com/img/s3/v26/p66040576-4.jpg
http://cman.zenfolio.com/img/s3/v26/p66040576-4.jpg
pernst
Apr 23, 08:40 PM
Why?
I thought AT&T's buyout means T-Mobile is going bye-bye?
408 area code, that means cali. is that steve jobs' personal number? :P
No such place as "cali". Please try again.
I thought AT&T's buyout means T-Mobile is going bye-bye?
408 area code, that means cali. is that steve jobs' personal number? :P
No such place as "cali". Please try again.
more...
AlphaBob
Jan 30, 04:57 PM
...some people look at their paper money (cash, stock & bonds) and start to worry that all of it could go bankrupt...so they look for a little insurance in Gold, just incase the worse happens then they still have something of real value.
I understand the theory of what you say, that gold has intrinsic value. However, the theory has never been tested in a true crisis. Trust me, if everything went bankrupt (stocks, bonds, t-bills, banks, etc.), then gold will be of little value as well. The ONLY thing of true value under those circumstances will be food and those things that can be used to barter for food (gold would have some value in that case, but so would a box of ammunition) The fact that someone paid $1000 or $2000 an ounce for gold before a crisis will mean nothing. It will be worth only as much as someone is capable of paying, and that will be very little.
The last run-up in the price of gold in the 80s was met with a rapid drop less than two years later to the $350 range, which is where gold sat for almost twenty years. While I have no idea how much more it will increase in value over the short term, the problem is that when the fall comes it will be quite rapid.
The biggest difference I see between gold and stocks is that one is based on negative gloom/doom thinking, and the other is based on positive/growth thinking. I have little to no interest in investing in gloom/doom, and history is the reason why. Periods of negative thinking tend to be short-lived.
I understand the theory of what you say, that gold has intrinsic value. However, the theory has never been tested in a true crisis. Trust me, if everything went bankrupt (stocks, bonds, t-bills, banks, etc.), then gold will be of little value as well. The ONLY thing of true value under those circumstances will be food and those things that can be used to barter for food (gold would have some value in that case, but so would a box of ammunition) The fact that someone paid $1000 or $2000 an ounce for gold before a crisis will mean nothing. It will be worth only as much as someone is capable of paying, and that will be very little.
The last run-up in the price of gold in the 80s was met with a rapid drop less than two years later to the $350 range, which is where gold sat for almost twenty years. While I have no idea how much more it will increase in value over the short term, the problem is that when the fall comes it will be quite rapid.
The biggest difference I see between gold and stocks is that one is based on negative gloom/doom thinking, and the other is based on positive/growth thinking. I have little to no interest in investing in gloom/doom, and history is the reason why. Periods of negative thinking tend to be short-lived.
NewSc2
Jul 28, 05:43 PM
I think this is great news~ I mean, really a few things would happen:
Zune sucks, doesn't do well (good for Apple)
Zune is well designed, but Apple makes an even better iPod (good for us)
Zune is really really well-designed, better than the iPod. (good for me, I'll get a Zune over an iPod)
Zune sucks, doesn't do well (good for Apple)
Zune is well designed, but Apple makes an even better iPod (good for us)
Zune is really really well-designed, better than the iPod. (good for me, I'll get a Zune over an iPod)
more...
-aggie-
Apr 19, 12:14 PM
It's better to wait longer before starting if you get more players (should at least have 15).
"Don't Panic" said he will play but I didn't see his name on the list.
I'll play and bring some popcorn in anticipation of another "Don't Panic" / Aggie argument :).
Note: I have a bunch of work coming up so I may not be as active (posting) as usual :(.
My point wasn�t we need to start; it was that we aren�t getting players. I figured I�d bump it to maybe get the thread some notice.
When do DP and I argue?:confused:
"Don't Panic" said he will play but I didn't see his name on the list.
I'll play and bring some popcorn in anticipation of another "Don't Panic" / Aggie argument :).
Note: I have a bunch of work coming up so I may not be as active (posting) as usual :(.
My point wasn�t we need to start; it was that we aren�t getting players. I figured I�d bump it to maybe get the thread some notice.
When do DP and I argue?:confused:
Cigsm
Apr 30, 07:35 PM
Where? I just checked the Top 200 Best Selling iTunes Songs & there's only ONE .69c song all the way at #196.
In fact, there's only 3 .99c songs, two of which are in the bottom 25.
I realize that this was the labels doing & not Apple, but that's crazy.
I've seen numerous $0.69 songs. If you're always looking at brand new stuff you may not see them.
In fact, there's only 3 .99c songs, two of which are in the bottom 25.
I realize that this was the labels doing & not Apple, but that's crazy.
I've seen numerous $0.69 songs. If you're always looking at brand new stuff you may not see them.
more...
playaj82
Jul 27, 01:18 PM
Trademarks must be able to be shown to be in use to be defensible. You cannot simply trademark any name or phrase you want. You have to demonstrate the current or intended future use of the name or phrase.
With regards to "doPod", Apple doesn't need to trademark that, as they could argue that the name of a device that was called a doPod was too similar to their, already trademarked, device called "iPod".
You can file an anticipatory mark. The key is intent to use. For instance, I've developed a product and want to start marketing it, i.e. Zune. I file my mark with the PTO before the product has ever actually entered the stream of commerce. Now getting "real" protection from infringers would require you have used it in commerce rather than intended to use it in commerce. But the PTO doesn't handle infringement, they primarily handle validity.
If I don't use it, oh well, the next person who comes along and uses the mark with their product gets to argue that I never used it in commerce. My point is that the little guy who comes along and uses the mark is better off coming up with something else rather than getting into any legal dispute with a company the size of Apple.
With regards to "doPod", Apple doesn't need to trademark that, as they could argue that the name of a device that was called a doPod was too similar to their, already trademarked, device called "iPod".
You can file an anticipatory mark. The key is intent to use. For instance, I've developed a product and want to start marketing it, i.e. Zune. I file my mark with the PTO before the product has ever actually entered the stream of commerce. Now getting "real" protection from infringers would require you have used it in commerce rather than intended to use it in commerce. But the PTO doesn't handle infringement, they primarily handle validity.
If I don't use it, oh well, the next person who comes along and uses the mark with their product gets to argue that I never used it in commerce. My point is that the little guy who comes along and uses the mark is better off coming up with something else rather than getting into any legal dispute with a company the size of Apple.
bdkennedy1
Mar 31, 01:19 PM
That calendar is just ugly. I don't like where Apple is going with this UI realism. If I want a calendar that looks like that then I will go out and buy a real one.
more...
kppolich
Jan 28, 01:23 PM
perhaps this weekend :)
http://sitespecific.dealerskins.com/CarouselMotors/InventoryImages/31990296_md.jpg
http://sitespecific.dealerskins.com/CarouselMotors/InventoryImages/31990296_md.jpg
Gold89
May 3, 07:47 AM
Looks like a solid update, shouldn't be long before a Mac Mini and Mac Pro update to complete the lineup.
more...
lincolntran
Apr 28, 11:28 AM
Yes, the iPhone does compete against Android. The last time I went into a AT&T or Verizon store, this was obvious. To say that the iPhone does not compete against Android is silly.
Silly how? iPhone is a hardware and Android is an OS. This is apple v.s. meat. It's not even fruit v.s. fruit :rolleyes:
.... Again, the article was about the iPhone vs. Andriod handset sales, not the tablet sales. Another Straw Man approach to a comment about iPhone handset sales.
...
When your sales numbers for phones are ~50% of that of your competitor; whereas a few years ago they were barely a blip, then yes that means they are getting kicked in the teeth in handset OS sales.
Since you are talking about "sale". Can you list any Androids device that outsell the iPhone?
---->>>>>>> Buy one get one free --> only 1 device make money, the second is free. So, for 100 Androids devices got on the customers' hand, only 50 of them are "sold".
Silly how? iPhone is a hardware and Android is an OS. This is apple v.s. meat. It's not even fruit v.s. fruit :rolleyes:
.... Again, the article was about the iPhone vs. Andriod handset sales, not the tablet sales. Another Straw Man approach to a comment about iPhone handset sales.
...
When your sales numbers for phones are ~50% of that of your competitor; whereas a few years ago they were barely a blip, then yes that means they are getting kicked in the teeth in handset OS sales.
Since you are talking about "sale". Can you list any Androids device that outsell the iPhone?
---->>>>>>> Buy one get one free --> only 1 device make money, the second is free. So, for 100 Androids devices got on the customers' hand, only 50 of them are "sold".
stroked
Apr 24, 07:06 PM
Define "dude".
anyone born with a penis
except a child of course
anyone born with a penis
except a child of course
robeddie
Apr 21, 10:04 AM
Lol ok buddy. Hope your not waiting for there to be a backlit keyboard in the air because I doubt there will be. Apple took it out of the MBA for a reason not for the heck of it
If you're alluding to the theory that Apple took it out to 'differentiate' it from the macbook pro's, I still don't get that concept.
I mean, if you want to differentiate your higher end products from the lower end ones, you ADD features to the higher end one. You DON'T remove features that were once standard for years on the lower end machine.
***It's like if Ford all the sudden removed air conditioning on all but their high end cars - saying that's a 'luxary' feature for their high end vehicles. We'd ALL cry BULL.....!!! Same thing has happened with the MBA.
If you're alluding to the theory that Apple took it out to 'differentiate' it from the macbook pro's, I still don't get that concept.
I mean, if you want to differentiate your higher end products from the lower end ones, you ADD features to the higher end one. You DON'T remove features that were once standard for years on the lower end machine.
***It's like if Ford all the sudden removed air conditioning on all but their high end cars - saying that's a 'luxary' feature for their high end vehicles. We'd ALL cry BULL.....!!! Same thing has happened with the MBA.
johndallas999
May 4, 09:35 AM
pfft, this should not be front page news, hell not even second page... just a bunch of hearsay from a CR that knows nothing about it and speculates BS.
No kidding! You'd think this whole site was just based on "rumors". Jeeze!
No kidding! You'd think this whole site was just based on "rumors". Jeeze!
MacNut
Feb 25, 11:27 AM
As it is looking, looks like the show might be done period. Which just sucks. One of my favorite shows too! :mad:They show will be on as long as the ratings are up. Maybe Sheen gets killed off when he crashes his car next season and then their long lost brother enters.
Evangelion
Jul 12, 09:23 AM
I'm not. What would I like to see from Apple? What would my ideal iPod be like? Let's explore the possibilities.
Bluetooth-headphones. This would kick ass. No more wires that get tangled up. And it CAN be done!
Large touch-screen. No separate controls, the controls would be right in the display (like in the image that was linked before in this thread).
And before you say "but there would be fingerprints on the screen! And it wouldn't provide any tactile feedback!". Ah, but how about that "no-touch" controls that have been rumored? I have no idea that is it really possible, but what if? You could simply hover you finger 1cm from the screen and use the controls. No fingerprints. As to the tactile feedback.... Tactile feedback is used that you know where the controls are without actually looking at the screen. "No-touch" UI does not have this, because you aren't actually touching anything. So how do we make this work? Well, what if you could just put your finger close to the screen ANYWHERE on the screen. If you do circlular motion (like in current iPod) the device would scroll, adjust volume, and do the other things you can do on the current iPod. If you move your finger straigh up, it would be equivaltnof clicking "menu". Straight down would be play/pause and so forth.
As to WLAN and the like.... What if the new iPod could be tied to iChat? You could VOIP to/from the iPod. just turn on the wireless, and browse to the "buddy list" menu on your iPod, and you are all set. Hell, the iPod could have a camera as well! if they can put video-cameras on phones, is there any reason why iPod couldn't have one?
if we assume that the "no-touch" UI is possible, then nothing I have listed is impossible. iPod with those specs would be YEARS ahead of any other device on the market! It would absolutely embarrass all the other devices.
I decided to quote myself here. I would like Apple to REALLY do something revolutionary for a change. iPod was nice. A big improvement over what was available at the time, sure, but not revolutionary. And while iPod has been improved over the years, the steps have been quite small. Larger storage, smaller size, less weight, color-screen, refinements... How about REALLY rocking our world for a change? Enough with these evolutionary steps, take a revolutionary step instead! You have the audience, you have the market, you have the brand. You CAN do it! If there's anyone who can do it, it's you.
Remember the "Think Different"? I would like Apple to do so. Instead of living the status quo, and making small improvements, make something different. Make iPod revolutionary. The groundwork has already been done. You just need to take that one step.
Bluetooth-headphones. This would kick ass. No more wires that get tangled up. And it CAN be done!
Large touch-screen. No separate controls, the controls would be right in the display (like in the image that was linked before in this thread).
And before you say "but there would be fingerprints on the screen! And it wouldn't provide any tactile feedback!". Ah, but how about that "no-touch" controls that have been rumored? I have no idea that is it really possible, but what if? You could simply hover you finger 1cm from the screen and use the controls. No fingerprints. As to the tactile feedback.... Tactile feedback is used that you know where the controls are without actually looking at the screen. "No-touch" UI does not have this, because you aren't actually touching anything. So how do we make this work? Well, what if you could just put your finger close to the screen ANYWHERE on the screen. If you do circlular motion (like in current iPod) the device would scroll, adjust volume, and do the other things you can do on the current iPod. If you move your finger straigh up, it would be equivaltnof clicking "menu". Straight down would be play/pause and so forth.
As to WLAN and the like.... What if the new iPod could be tied to iChat? You could VOIP to/from the iPod. just turn on the wireless, and browse to the "buddy list" menu on your iPod, and you are all set. Hell, the iPod could have a camera as well! if they can put video-cameras on phones, is there any reason why iPod couldn't have one?
if we assume that the "no-touch" UI is possible, then nothing I have listed is impossible. iPod with those specs would be YEARS ahead of any other device on the market! It would absolutely embarrass all the other devices.
I decided to quote myself here. I would like Apple to REALLY do something revolutionary for a change. iPod was nice. A big improvement over what was available at the time, sure, but not revolutionary. And while iPod has been improved over the years, the steps have been quite small. Larger storage, smaller size, less weight, color-screen, refinements... How about REALLY rocking our world for a change? Enough with these evolutionary steps, take a revolutionary step instead! You have the audience, you have the market, you have the brand. You CAN do it! If there's anyone who can do it, it's you.
Remember the "Think Different"? I would like Apple to do so. Instead of living the status quo, and making small improvements, make something different. Make iPod revolutionary. The groundwork has already been done. You just need to take that one step.
MacNut
May 1, 10:18 PM
Obama was trying to make this a big surprise and Congress let the cat out early.
Eldiablojoe
Apr 30, 07:31 PM
Eldiablojoe can be our token blonde in the afterlife?
See, and you thought the goofy "newb" questions were just an act. They aren't, lol.
See, and you thought the goofy "newb" questions were just an act. They aren't, lol.
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق