toddybody
Mar 25, 09:28 AM
Awesome awesome price...jeeze, theres very little reason for anyone not to have an iPad now (if they wanted one in the first place).
peharri
Aug 14, 02:48 PM
You are wrong.
Proven by Apples rising market share.;)
Nonsense. Apple is selling a lot of computers right now because Jobs Osbourned the entire PowerPC range just over a year ago by announcing the switch to Intel. For each model of Mac, sales were artificially low before the Intel version was launched, and artificially higher after.
Additionally, people are happer buying Macs if they know they can switch back to Windows if it doesn't work out. One of the major barriers to owning a Mac has been removed by the Intel switch (whatever my misgivings on the subject.)
It's simply ridiculous to argue that the ads have helped sales. Sales would be much higher now than they would have been six months ago even if Apple had stopped advertising completely. The question is whether they would be even higher if they weren't insulting their target audience. The answer, of course, is yes.
Proven by Apples rising market share.;)
Nonsense. Apple is selling a lot of computers right now because Jobs Osbourned the entire PowerPC range just over a year ago by announcing the switch to Intel. For each model of Mac, sales were artificially low before the Intel version was launched, and artificially higher after.
Additionally, people are happer buying Macs if they know they can switch back to Windows if it doesn't work out. One of the major barriers to owning a Mac has been removed by the Intel switch (whatever my misgivings on the subject.)
It's simply ridiculous to argue that the ads have helped sales. Sales would be much higher now than they would have been six months ago even if Apple had stopped advertising completely. The question is whether they would be even higher if they weren't insulting their target audience. The answer, of course, is yes.
netdog
Oct 27, 03:04 AM
It's still a ripoff.
SL
So don't get it. Obviously many agree with you, and many don't, myself included.
SL
So don't get it. Obviously many agree with you, and many don't, myself included.
rdowns
Apr 5, 09:05 AM
Oh my, what a conundrum for the fan boys. On one hand, CR loves the iPad and Apple's customer service but on the other hand, we have the iPhone 4. :D
maflynn
May 5, 05:28 PM
I like how Microsoft thinks the 11" MacBook Air is a netbook ;)
They're not the only ones ;)
They're not the only ones ;)
SlamJam12
Oct 13, 10:42 PM
I like the iPhone 4 form factor. I am tempted to get one. But with early controversy about the antenna problems and the prone problems of delicate glass, I would not mind a new form factor that could help improve future iPhones.
NoSmokingBandit
Jul 14, 07:28 AM
4gb onboard sounds cool, but with usb support (finally!) it seems a little superfluous. It would really only be used for saves i assume, and most saves are under 1mb, so you could have ~250 saves on the old model 360 without worrying about space.
logandzwon
Mar 23, 02:00 PM
5 years ago Apple was pushing open standards with no licensing require (ie, zeroconf) and no one would buy in. Now they offer a standard with a fraction of the capability and charge for it and everyone wants it.
People are stupid.
People are stupid.
e�Studios
Mar 29, 03:19 PM
Better graphics than the existing DS
I am tempted to buy one for this reason. I was able to look at one in a store earlier today and wow, its ugly.. I really prefer the look of the DSi a lot more, the 3DS just looks horrible compared to the DSi.
The 3D aspect really means nothing to me as I cannot see anything in 3D (glasses based or this I assume) because of my vision issues. The idea of having better graphics compels me, however I'm not sure if I will get one just yet.
I am tempted to buy one for this reason. I was able to look at one in a store earlier today and wow, its ugly.. I really prefer the look of the DSi a lot more, the 3DS just looks horrible compared to the DSi.
The 3D aspect really means nothing to me as I cannot see anything in 3D (glasses based or this I assume) because of my vision issues. The idea of having better graphics compels me, however I'm not sure if I will get one just yet.
BillyBobBongo
Mar 18, 07:44 AM
The picture that is shown tells you how much cheaper (in %) the other countries are (compared to The Netherlands)
Tell me about it, it's gone insane here...I've taken to filling up in unmaned stations so I can save a few extra few cents each time.
Tell me about it, it's gone insane here...I've taken to filling up in unmaned stations so I can save a few extra few cents each time.
coder12
Apr 19, 09:55 AM
My post is "coming soon"......IN PURPLE TEXT!!!!;)
After reading this I feel sexually confused :confused:
After reading this I feel sexually confused :confused:
barrett14
Mar 14, 09:52 AM
any report of a place that has them in stock?
Gasu E.
Mar 25, 09:20 AM
i bet they had people there with MBA's from good schools running financial what if's and telling management to avoid digital because they will make less money due to not selling the film or anything other than the camera
They did not avoid digital at all, in fact they were an early entrant to digital. The problem was that they were used to having a lucrative near-monopoly in film, a fat side business in film processing and a nice low-end camera business built around proprietary "connvenience" film packaging. They were now facing aggressive consumer electronics companies who were used to relently feature upgrades and short model lifecycles. Moreover, they could not rely on their film dominance to keep competitors at a disadvantage. In other words, they had to change their business model completely-- from near monopoly to completely competitive-- in order to success in the new business. Only a fraction of companies manage to do this successfully.
Keep in mind, also, due to the increased competition and lack of a film component, that the opportunity for Kodak in digital was much smaller than their film and related businesses. It's very hard to manage a shrinking company, and even harder if you are also trying to reinvent yourself.
They did not avoid digital at all, in fact they were an early entrant to digital. The problem was that they were used to having a lucrative near-monopoly in film, a fat side business in film processing and a nice low-end camera business built around proprietary "connvenience" film packaging. They were now facing aggressive consumer electronics companies who were used to relently feature upgrades and short model lifecycles. Moreover, they could not rely on their film dominance to keep competitors at a disadvantage. In other words, they had to change their business model completely-- from near monopoly to completely competitive-- in order to success in the new business. Only a fraction of companies manage to do this successfully.
Keep in mind, also, due to the increased competition and lack of a film component, that the opportunity for Kodak in digital was much smaller than their film and related businesses. It's very hard to manage a shrinking company, and even harder if you are also trying to reinvent yourself.
kaneda
Sep 14, 11:21 AM
Everybody needs to UPGRADE from 10-10.1 to 10.2 JAGUAR!! IT IS FAST!
Thunderhawks
Apr 15, 06:35 AM
Windows 7 was his idea.
The shirt and T look was his wife's.
The shirt and T look was his wife's.
maokh
Jun 11, 02:20 PM
The AWS 1700/2100 is a weird beast. And yes, the FCC, as well as TMobile, would have rather harmonized the band allocation with the rest of the world.
The problem is, the reverse allocation (phone to "tower") in the european 2100 band overlaps our existing american 1900 band.
So the FCC had to come up with some weird split band with the free allocations it had, creating a really weird beast that requires custom radios on both the handset and "tower" side.
Also, in case anyone is wondering, the 1800 band has been allocated to the US federal government. Among many other things, a benefit of which is to operate ad-hoc/covert communication networks using commodity european band GSM gear. Go figure.
With the AWS allocation, we will never have a 1800 band either even if the feds ditch it.
In terms of this "analyst" report, what a bunch of idiots. I also highly doubt that apple would create a special iPhone or modify its globally distributed product for what may only be 1-3 million subscribers a year from now. Especially since AWS band handsets will need additional RF circuitry at additional cost due to its obscurity and lack of support on multiband chipsets.
I think that AWS will come only by chance when it just happens to be cheaper than the existing chipset they are using.
The problem is, the reverse allocation (phone to "tower") in the european 2100 band overlaps our existing american 1900 band.
So the FCC had to come up with some weird split band with the free allocations it had, creating a really weird beast that requires custom radios on both the handset and "tower" side.
Also, in case anyone is wondering, the 1800 band has been allocated to the US federal government. Among many other things, a benefit of which is to operate ad-hoc/covert communication networks using commodity european band GSM gear. Go figure.
With the AWS allocation, we will never have a 1800 band either even if the feds ditch it.
In terms of this "analyst" report, what a bunch of idiots. I also highly doubt that apple would create a special iPhone or modify its globally distributed product for what may only be 1-3 million subscribers a year from now. Especially since AWS band handsets will need additional RF circuitry at additional cost due to its obscurity and lack of support on multiband chipsets.
I think that AWS will come only by chance when it just happens to be cheaper than the existing chipset they are using.
Watabou
Apr 30, 05:09 PM
*sigh* Okay I give up.
flurffmeister
Apr 6, 11:07 AM
Though it's not very clear, it looks like the capacity is listed as 12(X) GB. From what I've seen in any mass storage device, 8-10% of the storage space is missing for whatever reason (my 32GB iPhone has 29.1GB.) Even if it says 120GB, that's only 6.25% gone.
This.
The settings also show a 128GB capacity.
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/04/231008-S4022974_500.jpg
If this were a genuine 128GB unit, the settings would show something like 118GB capacity.
128 GB (storage size speak = 128 billion bytes) = 119.2GB (binary speak)
Subtract about 900 megs to a gig for the OS (judging by the stated capacity on an iPod touch 4 at iOS 4.3.1), and you have somewhere around 118-118.3GB.
This.
The settings also show a 128GB capacity.
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/04/231008-S4022974_500.jpg
If this were a genuine 128GB unit, the settings would show something like 118GB capacity.
128 GB (storage size speak = 128 billion bytes) = 119.2GB (binary speak)
Subtract about 900 megs to a gig for the OS (judging by the stated capacity on an iPod touch 4 at iOS 4.3.1), and you have somewhere around 118-118.3GB.
spuality
Mar 27, 01:57 PM
Right now I have a 24" white iMac with a 2.33 Ghz C2D and a 15" MacBook Pro with a 2.53 Ghz C2D. Both computers are great and work perfectly for what I do. The only problem is having two computers is overkill for me. Transferring files and apps is just too much of a hassle. What I'd like to do is get one of the new 13" MacBook Pros and get an external display to hook up when I'm using it at my desk. I just have a few questions. But first, let me tell you what I use my computer for: I do some web design and development, using CSSEdit, Espresso, Dreamweaver, Flash, Fireworks, Illustrator, Photoshop. I do some RAW photo editing using Aperture and Photoshop. I do a lot of casual web surfing, emailing, etc. I watch videos on Hulu. I'll be going to school in the fall for computer science, so I'll be doing some (or a lot) of...whatever it is they have me doing. I do absolutely no gaming. So, here are my questions:
Transporteur
Apr 29, 04:14 PM
This is mostly due taxes. If you Americans wondered how Europeans actually pay health care and other nice things, here you go. Officially the taxes on the gas are called "Eco taxes" though.
Sorry but health care is paid by your health care taxes, that come off your gross income. You don't pay those at the gas station! :rolleyes:
What makes gas prices in the EU that high are VAT (which is considerably higher in the EU) and energy taxes.
The eco taxes you mentioned are actually only a small part of the energy taxes (they were introduced to reduce CO2 emissions and to decrease the taxes for annuity insurance). Who knows where the rest of the energy tax goes...
Sorry but health care is paid by your health care taxes, that come off your gross income. You don't pay those at the gas station! :rolleyes:
What makes gas prices in the EU that high are VAT (which is considerably higher in the EU) and energy taxes.
The eco taxes you mentioned are actually only a small part of the energy taxes (they were introduced to reduce CO2 emissions and to decrease the taxes for annuity insurance). Who knows where the rest of the energy tax goes...
MacCoaster
Sep 20, 02:59 PM
Originally posted by bond2
As the saying goes at Apple: "If you can't beat'em, dual'em"
I say whatever it takes to keep up. Doesn't bother me that there are two CPU's under the hood. Anyways I am sure that OS X is way more optimized for dual Processors than Windows 2000 or XP. Having OS X far outways the slight difference in hardware performance. OS X is specifically designed for Macs, and optimized to take full advantage of the hardware. No one that has a Dell, Compaq, Gateway...etc... can say the same thing about Windows. The only way that would happen is if Microsoft came out with a special Intel version of Windows or AMD version. Never gonna happen. I know most of you already know this but I just thought I'd throw it out there again.
Windows XP is optimized for both Intel Pentiums and AMD Athlons. You can include optimizations for both and they will be used as needed. Windows XP-64 is also compiled for IA-64 workstations. Apple might have beat Microsoft with the first consumer 32 bit OS, but Microsoft beat Apple with the first consumer 64 bit OS. You're speaking facts and not justifying them; please, next time at least justify yourself.
As the saying goes at Apple: "If you can't beat'em, dual'em"
I say whatever it takes to keep up. Doesn't bother me that there are two CPU's under the hood. Anyways I am sure that OS X is way more optimized for dual Processors than Windows 2000 or XP. Having OS X far outways the slight difference in hardware performance. OS X is specifically designed for Macs, and optimized to take full advantage of the hardware. No one that has a Dell, Compaq, Gateway...etc... can say the same thing about Windows. The only way that would happen is if Microsoft came out with a special Intel version of Windows or AMD version. Never gonna happen. I know most of you already know this but I just thought I'd throw it out there again.
Windows XP is optimized for both Intel Pentiums and AMD Athlons. You can include optimizations for both and they will be used as needed. Windows XP-64 is also compiled for IA-64 workstations. Apple might have beat Microsoft with the first consumer 32 bit OS, but Microsoft beat Apple with the first consumer 64 bit OS. You're speaking facts and not justifying them; please, next time at least justify yourself.
marksman
Apr 1, 01:06 PM
Ala Carte Channels would cause some channels to go away, on the other hand it would allow other channels to thrive and flourish, because the channels people really wanted to watch would get the most revenue.
I don't want to overpay for the 10 channels I want so 20 other channels I don't care about can continue to exist. Let the marketplace sort it out. It certainly would not actually make channels appeal to a wider demographic, it would probably be the opposite really, as small strong niches carry the day and carry their channels and the programming.
I don't want to overpay for the 10 channels I want so 20 other channels I don't care about can continue to exist. Let the marketplace sort it out. It certainly would not actually make channels appeal to a wider demographic, it would probably be the opposite really, as small strong niches carry the day and carry their channels and the programming.
Applespider
Oct 20, 05:05 AM
I really don't recall there being much of a line for Tiger. I think I got into town about quarter to 6 and still got in and picked up my copy of Tiger and a scratchcard within minutes of 6pm.
Gasu E.
Sep 26, 09:49 AM
According to US law, a trademark holder MUST defend their trademarks, or they risk losing them. Google is struggling with this, as they're trying to encourage people not to use it as a generic verb.
Wikipedia Linky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain#Trademark)
Absolutely. Having received a couple of cease-and-desist letters myself (from Microsoft, actually), I think Apple's letter to Podcast Ready is extremely polite and accomodating for letters of this type. Also, note it was carefully crafted just for Podcast Ready, undoubtedly at significant expense. If Apple had a larger agenda of controlling the term "podcast" in all its uses, I suspected this note would have been a bit more boiler-plate and re-usable.
My take on this is not that Apple is trying to own all uses of the term pod or podcast, but to establish the legal boundaries between the reach of their trademarks and common usage. In order to do this, Apple has to take a somewhat aggressive stance. The actual boundary will be adjudicated by negotiation, and at some point, probably the courts.
Wikipedia Linky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain#Trademark)
Absolutely. Having received a couple of cease-and-desist letters myself (from Microsoft, actually), I think Apple's letter to Podcast Ready is extremely polite and accomodating for letters of this type. Also, note it was carefully crafted just for Podcast Ready, undoubtedly at significant expense. If Apple had a larger agenda of controlling the term "podcast" in all its uses, I suspected this note would have been a bit more boiler-plate and re-usable.
My take on this is not that Apple is trying to own all uses of the term pod or podcast, but to establish the legal boundaries between the reach of their trademarks and common usage. In order to do this, Apple has to take a somewhat aggressive stance. The actual boundary will be adjudicated by negotiation, and at some point, probably the courts.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario