plinden
Jul 20, 04:55 PM
That's funny that is not what they told us when I worked for Aldus, although there was one time that we could not trade.
I think the blackout period is only for execs and VPs, most of the time.
Last company I worked for, there was a blackout period for everyone, but it was longer for executive and sales staff, or in fact for anyone who might have had detailed inside knowledge. For instance one colleague, a software engineer, shared an office for a few months with a sales manager, and during that time he had a longer blackout period than the rest of us because he might have overheard some insider information.
Also, we weren't allowed to short the company stock ... since that's kind of like athletes betting that their team will lose, and you might be tempted to release information that would tank the stock.
I think the blackout period is only for execs and VPs, most of the time.
Last company I worked for, there was a blackout period for everyone, but it was longer for executive and sales staff, or in fact for anyone who might have had detailed inside knowledge. For instance one colleague, a software engineer, shared an office for a few months with a sales manager, and during that time he had a longer blackout period than the rest of us because he might have overheard some insider information.
Also, we weren't allowed to short the company stock ... since that's kind of like athletes betting that their team will lose, and you might be tempted to release information that would tank the stock.
fwoppers
Sep 24, 05:51 PM
Going to Best Buy in a few minutes. Going to look at their Grip Vues, and then Griffin 'Reveal's ( http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Griffin+Technology+-+Reveal+Case+for+4th-Generation+Apple%26%23174%3B+iPod%26%23174%3B+touch+-+Black/1207809.p?id=1218234053966&skuId=1207809 ) which show off the nice shinyness, and comes with a stand. Whichever I grab, probably will note here the quality. :P
Ping Guo
Jun 23, 11:09 AM
Lay the iMac on it's back, and it all becomes clear. There's nothing more frustrating than not being able to touch your computer screen.
Why would I lay an iMac on its back? There's nothing more frustrating than not being able to touch your computer screen, are you sure? I can think of many things that are a lot more frustrating. Perhaps you're obsessive-compulsive?:p
Why would I lay an iMac on its back? There's nothing more frustrating than not being able to touch your computer screen, are you sure? I can think of many things that are a lot more frustrating. Perhaps you're obsessive-compulsive?:p
CalBoy
Apr 26, 03:17 PM
I doubt any legal battle between titans is a simple case, even if it appears so to us laypersons.
Certainly there are going to be minutiae that most of us won't ever learn about (and even fewer will understand), but in this case the trademark dispute is going to invariably depend on whether or not "app" is specific enough to trademark or whether it is generic to the point that trademarking it would deprive consumers and companies of a simple ands valuable labeling device.
"Amazon" is a generic term and should not be used for a store name.
Generic in a legal sense means that the term describes the product or service. For example, "computer" broadly describes any device with a chip, some storage, and an ability to perform calculations or other functions for the user. A person could not trademark "Computer Store" because it would leave other competitors with no way of describing the service they offer.
Amazon is an online retailer; hence "online retailer" cannot be trademarked but "Amazon" can be.
In much the same way "app store" describes what is being sold and how, and any competitor would want to make use of the same basic naming structure in order to clearly inform consumers about what they could expect to find.
The general population never heard the term "App" until Apple released the iPhone.
Nor did the general population ever shop for Apps online until Apple built the App Store.
The abbreviation "App" used in conjunction with "store" to denote an online marketplace in which to buy applications is a unique combination that is not known in generic parlance.
Apple will win this.
This is just not true. App has long been in use since before the 1990s.
Apple is also not the only company to sell software online; many companies had been doing direct downloads for years before iOS came out.
You make it sound as though this is such an obvious distinction that Apple could never get a trademark for "app store". But apparently this argument is not so strong in trademark law as Apple actually has the trademark already. If that were not the case how could they sue another entity for trademark infringement?
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
It was.
Apple does not actually hold the trademark yet. That is still being decided. They filed their case against Amazon prematurely, hoping to either make Amazon change names or get a leg-up in the trademark hearings (or both).
Certainly there are going to be minutiae that most of us won't ever learn about (and even fewer will understand), but in this case the trademark dispute is going to invariably depend on whether or not "app" is specific enough to trademark or whether it is generic to the point that trademarking it would deprive consumers and companies of a simple ands valuable labeling device.
"Amazon" is a generic term and should not be used for a store name.
Generic in a legal sense means that the term describes the product or service. For example, "computer" broadly describes any device with a chip, some storage, and an ability to perform calculations or other functions for the user. A person could not trademark "Computer Store" because it would leave other competitors with no way of describing the service they offer.
Amazon is an online retailer; hence "online retailer" cannot be trademarked but "Amazon" can be.
In much the same way "app store" describes what is being sold and how, and any competitor would want to make use of the same basic naming structure in order to clearly inform consumers about what they could expect to find.
The general population never heard the term "App" until Apple released the iPhone.
Nor did the general population ever shop for Apps online until Apple built the App Store.
The abbreviation "App" used in conjunction with "store" to denote an online marketplace in which to buy applications is a unique combination that is not known in generic parlance.
Apple will win this.
This is just not true. App has long been in use since before the 1990s.
Apple is also not the only company to sell software online; many companies had been doing direct downloads for years before iOS came out.
You make it sound as though this is such an obvious distinction that Apple could never get a trademark for "app store". But apparently this argument is not so strong in trademark law as Apple actually has the trademark already. If that were not the case how could they sue another entity for trademark infringement?
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
It was.
Apple does not actually hold the trademark yet. That is still being decided. They filed their case against Amazon prematurely, hoping to either make Amazon change names or get a leg-up in the trademark hearings (or both).
JackSYi
Jul 13, 11:03 PM
I bet it will be BTO when it is introduced at WWDC.
cleanup
Nov 27, 05:09 PM
Gift for my mom. She rides her bike 10 miles to and from work a few times a week:
http://img227.imageshack.us/img227/8065/appleipodnano6thgenerat.jpg
I cycle to work and school daily (except in the coming winter months) and I gotta tell you, cyclists who listen to music while they ride are clearly not very concerned for their own or anyone else's safety! No offense, but for your mother's sake, I hope she keeps the volume REALLY low, or doesn't use the iPod at all. It's rather dangerous, IMHO.
Haven't started Christmas shopping yet (unlike Surely) so I haven't got any good karma, but nevertheless picked up a new pair of jeans for myself. D'oh. :(
http://images.asos.com/inv/s/15/95/525822/dripdry/image1xl.jpg
http://img227.imageshack.us/img227/8065/appleipodnano6thgenerat.jpg
I cycle to work and school daily (except in the coming winter months) and I gotta tell you, cyclists who listen to music while they ride are clearly not very concerned for their own or anyone else's safety! No offense, but for your mother's sake, I hope she keeps the volume REALLY low, or doesn't use the iPod at all. It's rather dangerous, IMHO.
Haven't started Christmas shopping yet (unlike Surely) so I haven't got any good karma, but nevertheless picked up a new pair of jeans for myself. D'oh. :(
http://images.asos.com/inv/s/15/95/525822/dripdry/image1xl.jpg
Dalton63841
Apr 9, 04:45 PM
In many parts of the U.S. manuals are becoming less and less common. For the record I very much prefer a stick shift. More control, more power, and better fuel economy. That is, if you know how to drive them properly.
I learned how to drive one on an old gravel road. They are surprisingly easy to learn.
I learned how to drive one on an old gravel road. They are surprisingly easy to learn.
Earendil
Nov 28, 10:32 AM
Well, you just made my point better than me. Of the millions of Macs sold, how many are to customers needing correct color and really care about the finer details of the monitor's specs?
*snip*
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20".
*snip*
But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
And that percentage shoots up when you take into account only the Pro style Towers. And it's a shame your Cinema display is showing age sooner than I would think it should. Still, in my own experience with color reproduction and accuracy in Photography, the cinema displays I have used have exceeded my Dell 2005. In regular computer use I wouldn't be able to tell them apart (aside from the back light bleed on the Dell).
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Do you see any fan boys making posts here? I see some people here that are ignorant of the way monitors work and yet are trying to pass opinions on Apple/Dell/LCD market as gold though.
That's the issue though, currently Apple doesn't sell a consumer computer that either doesn't already come with a monitor, or where you aren't supposed to already have a monitor.
the MacBook and iMac both have screens built in, the MacMini, if you saw any of it's advertisements or presentation, is meant as a direct replacement for a PC box. i.e. bring your own mouse, keyboard and monitor. I as well as another guy have already said this though.
It's a problem, still, I want too want Apple to sell a consumer level monitor. But Apple certainly doesn't have to enter that market if they don't want to. Besides, the market for a cheap 17" monitor is TINY. You're talking Mini owners (who don't already have a monitor) maybe a few laptop owners, and...? G5 owners? If you're plugin a $150 LCD up to a G5 you should be shot :P Unless you are running three at once or something.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
Many professionals run Duel 20" screens. In fact I see this setup far more often that a 30" screen.
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one.
wow wow wow. You just me on that logic jump. Apple sells some high end systems to Professions in industry that demand at least a certain standard. Apple also sells other computers. Apple Sells monitors that are aiming at (hitting is another matter) those professionals that demand a certain standard. Apple doesn't currently sell any other monitors. How is that proof that Apple is trying to personally screw you out of your cash?
Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
Yeah, there is a gap, and I do see it as a problem. No one in the entire thread is disagreeing with that. You ideas on why there is a gap is viewed a little bit more negative than I would, but whatever.
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper.
Another huge jump in logic based on no facts and stretched assumptions. Do you know what Apple takes home at the end of the day from each monitor sale, each iMac sale, and each Mini sale? Can you provide that data to back up any of your conclusions? It sure would go a long way in getting anyone to side with you on that point. However, until you do, I'm going to say this one more time:
Cinema Display = Pro quality Display (I don't give a hoot if your eyes can't see it, the components alone show it, and that is what cost money to make not your eye sight)
Pro Quality = not cheap, don't go looking for a $200 monitor for pro work.
And for the last time, I'm still waiting for someone to show me a display that matches the Cinemas tech specs and qualifications and also cost downwards in the $400 range that people keep speaking about. Because until someone does, I'm inclined to believe, based on my own looking, that Apple is right with the industry on this one (or close) and all our whining on cost means jack.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it.
In light of that little sarcastc jab, the irony is that you are one of, if not the only user, to have admitted to owning a 20" Cinema display in this thread so far :rolleyes:
[quote]I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right?
I'll just quote myself on this one...
[QUOTE=Earendil]You seem to be coming at me as if I stand on some high ground, when in fact I own (as stated in my signature) a 20" wide Dell monitor
So just trust me when I say that the difference in my Photographs, and Photo editing on my Dell vs an Apple monitor is different, and a noticeable difference not just in color, but in back lighting and change in color based on viewing angle. When I'm surfing the web I don't notice/care, or playing games, or just about anything else. And since I don't make money on my photos, or do too much printing, I went with the Dell because the price/benefits ratio did not justify the Apple monitor. I wish Apple had provided a consumer level monitor for me to buy, it would go far better with my Powerbook, but they didn't. I'm not going to discount their current line up just because I can't afford it, and I don't think you should discount it just because you don't understand it technically.
But if you had been following the thread you'd know that about me already...
But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
No, you are asking for two very different things here.
1. You are asking Apple to produce a consumer level monitor that you can afford and falls in line with the market. I think everyone agrees with this idea, whether there is a large enough market for Apple to justify it (only Aple costumers would consider them) is up for debate.
and...
2. You are asking Apple to drop the price on their Pro displays without giving a reason (all your reasons apply to a consumer LCD), nor have you provided a similarly speced display to show that Apple is out of line with it's pricing.
There are large difference between a Mini and a G5. Just because most people wouldn't notice it doesn't mean it isn't there. Just relax and trust me that in two properly functioning displays, Apple's monitors are very good, and imho should never be compared to Apple's displays unless you are trying to convince a consumer (who can't tell the difference) not to buy it and buy an alternative display. I have done this before. Just like you'd never compare a Mini and a G5 unless grandma was thinking about buying a G5 to surf the web with...
~Tyler
*snip*
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20".
*snip*
But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
And that percentage shoots up when you take into account only the Pro style Towers. And it's a shame your Cinema display is showing age sooner than I would think it should. Still, in my own experience with color reproduction and accuracy in Photography, the cinema displays I have used have exceeded my Dell 2005. In regular computer use I wouldn't be able to tell them apart (aside from the back light bleed on the Dell).
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Do you see any fan boys making posts here? I see some people here that are ignorant of the way monitors work and yet are trying to pass opinions on Apple/Dell/LCD market as gold though.
That's the issue though, currently Apple doesn't sell a consumer computer that either doesn't already come with a monitor, or where you aren't supposed to already have a monitor.
the MacBook and iMac both have screens built in, the MacMini, if you saw any of it's advertisements or presentation, is meant as a direct replacement for a PC box. i.e. bring your own mouse, keyboard and monitor. I as well as another guy have already said this though.
It's a problem, still, I want too want Apple to sell a consumer level monitor. But Apple certainly doesn't have to enter that market if they don't want to. Besides, the market for a cheap 17" monitor is TINY. You're talking Mini owners (who don't already have a monitor) maybe a few laptop owners, and...? G5 owners? If you're plugin a $150 LCD up to a G5 you should be shot :P Unless you are running three at once or something.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
Many professionals run Duel 20" screens. In fact I see this setup far more often that a 30" screen.
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one.
wow wow wow. You just me on that logic jump. Apple sells some high end systems to Professions in industry that demand at least a certain standard. Apple also sells other computers. Apple Sells monitors that are aiming at (hitting is another matter) those professionals that demand a certain standard. Apple doesn't currently sell any other monitors. How is that proof that Apple is trying to personally screw you out of your cash?
Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
Yeah, there is a gap, and I do see it as a problem. No one in the entire thread is disagreeing with that. You ideas on why there is a gap is viewed a little bit more negative than I would, but whatever.
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper.
Another huge jump in logic based on no facts and stretched assumptions. Do you know what Apple takes home at the end of the day from each monitor sale, each iMac sale, and each Mini sale? Can you provide that data to back up any of your conclusions? It sure would go a long way in getting anyone to side with you on that point. However, until you do, I'm going to say this one more time:
Cinema Display = Pro quality Display (I don't give a hoot if your eyes can't see it, the components alone show it, and that is what cost money to make not your eye sight)
Pro Quality = not cheap, don't go looking for a $200 monitor for pro work.
And for the last time, I'm still waiting for someone to show me a display that matches the Cinemas tech specs and qualifications and also cost downwards in the $400 range that people keep speaking about. Because until someone does, I'm inclined to believe, based on my own looking, that Apple is right with the industry on this one (or close) and all our whining on cost means jack.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it.
In light of that little sarcastc jab, the irony is that you are one of, if not the only user, to have admitted to owning a 20" Cinema display in this thread so far :rolleyes:
[quote]I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right?
I'll just quote myself on this one...
[QUOTE=Earendil]You seem to be coming at me as if I stand on some high ground, when in fact I own (as stated in my signature) a 20" wide Dell monitor
So just trust me when I say that the difference in my Photographs, and Photo editing on my Dell vs an Apple monitor is different, and a noticeable difference not just in color, but in back lighting and change in color based on viewing angle. When I'm surfing the web I don't notice/care, or playing games, or just about anything else. And since I don't make money on my photos, or do too much printing, I went with the Dell because the price/benefits ratio did not justify the Apple monitor. I wish Apple had provided a consumer level monitor for me to buy, it would go far better with my Powerbook, but they didn't. I'm not going to discount their current line up just because I can't afford it, and I don't think you should discount it just because you don't understand it technically.
But if you had been following the thread you'd know that about me already...
But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
No, you are asking for two very different things here.
1. You are asking Apple to produce a consumer level monitor that you can afford and falls in line with the market. I think everyone agrees with this idea, whether there is a large enough market for Apple to justify it (only Aple costumers would consider them) is up for debate.
and...
2. You are asking Apple to drop the price on their Pro displays without giving a reason (all your reasons apply to a consumer LCD), nor have you provided a similarly speced display to show that Apple is out of line with it's pricing.
There are large difference between a Mini and a G5. Just because most people wouldn't notice it doesn't mean it isn't there. Just relax and trust me that in two properly functioning displays, Apple's monitors are very good, and imho should never be compared to Apple's displays unless you are trying to convince a consumer (who can't tell the difference) not to buy it and buy an alternative display. I have done this before. Just like you'd never compare a Mini and a G5 unless grandma was thinking about buying a G5 to surf the web with...
~Tyler
BillyShears
Jan 13, 02:33 AM
GreenPeace will go Ape Shite if the MacBookAir is charged through induction. It will not be near as efficient in power transfer as a direct connection would be. (nothing transfers with 100% efficiency)
I can see GreenPeace attacking Apple now because the new notebooks will cause a 15% spike in electricity consumption, dumping 15% more carbon into the air. Death to Apple!
"There's CO2 in the air."
I can see GreenPeace attacking Apple now because the new notebooks will cause a 15% spike in electricity consumption, dumping 15% more carbon into the air. Death to Apple!
"There's CO2 in the air."
AvSRoCkCO1067
Aug 24, 05:58 PM
I thought Yonah and Merom are basically the same cost-wise. That's why everyone thinks including merom in new systems won't raise the price of those systems. I could be wrong.
They will be - at least initially - but Intel will undoubtedly lower prices on the Yonah chips shortly, making a cheaper Yonah-based Mini feasible.
They will be - at least initially - but Intel will undoubtedly lower prices on the Yonah chips shortly, making a cheaper Yonah-based Mini feasible.
Bregalad
Apr 20, 01:10 PM
what's the first letter in imac?
An all-in-one computer is just another consumer device. Bring on the Mac Pros
Intel won't have new Mac Pro CPUs available until fall. It's a strange way to run a company actually. Release the consumer stuff first and wait most of the year to give the pros something that beats the consumer stuff. Then a couple months later release new consumer stuff that matches the vastly more expensive pro stuff. Seems backward to everyone except Intel.
I think that's one of the reasons why Apple has held off with the iMac upgrade. They wanted the MacBook Pro to be ahead for a few months because it's a "pro" model line.
To the person who claimed iMac was held back because of the chipset defect, they obviously haven't counted the high speed SATA channels correctly. The 27" iMac only uses two (SSD and HD). A slot loading optical drive is pretty much the slowest device you can put in a computer these days and can be run off any crap bus.
An all-in-one computer is just another consumer device. Bring on the Mac Pros
Intel won't have new Mac Pro CPUs available until fall. It's a strange way to run a company actually. Release the consumer stuff first and wait most of the year to give the pros something that beats the consumer stuff. Then a couple months later release new consumer stuff that matches the vastly more expensive pro stuff. Seems backward to everyone except Intel.
I think that's one of the reasons why Apple has held off with the iMac upgrade. They wanted the MacBook Pro to be ahead for a few months because it's a "pro" model line.
To the person who claimed iMac was held back because of the chipset defect, they obviously haven't counted the high speed SATA channels correctly. The 27" iMac only uses two (SSD and HD). A slot loading optical drive is pretty much the slowest device you can put in a computer these days and can be run off any crap bus.
sineplex
Sep 19, 01:57 AM
Nope, it's those 99 cents silicone case from HK!
ok sounds great. post a link I'll buy that for 99c until I find something I really like.
BTW What camera did you use to take the shot ? Makes it look much more than 99c
ok sounds great. post a link I'll buy that for 99c until I find something I really like.
BTW What camera did you use to take the shot ? Makes it look much more than 99c
lowbatteries
May 2, 06:37 PM
But my iPhone is far more limited than my first Windows PC in that regard. Even with Windows 95 I could go from one app to another while letting the other on load in the background. iOS freezes everything. If I want a video to upload on Facebook, I have no choice but to keep the app open until it's done. On my PC, I can start the upload and then move on to other things while the process is completing.
I find moving to non-true multitasking as a step backward, not a step forward. As you said, out systems capabilites are able to do so much more. I can be playing a computer game, hit the Windows key, and open a media player and never see a drop in performance. Why limit your computer to one task at a time? Kind of defeats the point of multi-core processors.
I upload large videos all the time on my iPhone, in the background. This has been built in since multitasking was introduced (if an app you are using doesn't do this, that's the developers fault).
Weird. When I ask someone a yes/no question, I expect a yes/no response.
Do you understand what I mean?
selena gomez short hair 2011.
selena gomez hair up styles.
Selena gomez hairstyles
selena gomez short hair 2011.
selena gomez short hair 2011.
selena gomez short hair 2011.
I find moving to non-true multitasking as a step backward, not a step forward. As you said, out systems capabilites are able to do so much more. I can be playing a computer game, hit the Windows key, and open a media player and never see a drop in performance. Why limit your computer to one task at a time? Kind of defeats the point of multi-core processors.
I upload large videos all the time on my iPhone, in the background. This has been built in since multitasking was introduced (if an app you are using doesn't do this, that's the developers fault).
Weird. When I ask someone a yes/no question, I expect a yes/no response.
Do you understand what I mean?
lizard79
Dec 3, 04:15 AM
well - that's my point. I'd like my mac for work at my "working" place and the iTV connected to the hifi-system, external hdd with the iTunes library, movies etc. close to the "entertainment" area. And the ipod should be closer to the entertainment than work area..
hope you're wrong - althought I think you might be right ;)
cheers. hans
I mean I get what you are saying, but it doesn't seem like it would be very useful for two reasons. 1. By the very nature of how iTV works, you have a Mac somewhere else in the house and therefore have a tiny, hidden out of the way docking station right there. 2. iTV should either slip seemlesly into your aray of tv components and look elegant. Slapping an ipod on it makes it look like just another charging dock station and not nearly as sleek as the houaing it is in now.
hope you're wrong - althought I think you might be right ;)
cheers. hans
I mean I get what you are saying, but it doesn't seem like it would be very useful for two reasons. 1. By the very nature of how iTV works, you have a Mac somewhere else in the house and therefore have a tiny, hidden out of the way docking station right there. 2. iTV should either slip seemlesly into your aray of tv components and look elegant. Slapping an ipod on it makes it look like just another charging dock station and not nearly as sleek as the houaing it is in now.
barkmonster
Apr 27, 06:26 AM
Yes Amazon jump on the "it's generic" bandwagon. :rolleyes:
Please lets just keep this thread about the response and not "But how is it generic. . ." "Apple didn't create App. . ." "Well Amazon is right it's generic. . ."
I don't think it's generic that's my opinion and I'm sticking to it. I'm moving on.
In general, "Applications" are what Apple run on their Mac OS platform "Apps" are what they run on their iOS platform, a cut down version of Mac OS X with a cut down but related and familiar name.
Other operating systems (mobile based included) refer to software as "Programs". This has gone back as far as the days of DOS and Atari/Amiga.
Apple have so much prior use of both the term Application to refer to software and App as the shortened term for iOS that Amazon are just picking a fight because Apple offer their own alternative to the Kindle and they don't like the competition.
Please lets just keep this thread about the response and not "But how is it generic. . ." "Apple didn't create App. . ." "Well Amazon is right it's generic. . ."
I don't think it's generic that's my opinion and I'm sticking to it. I'm moving on.
In general, "Applications" are what Apple run on their Mac OS platform "Apps" are what they run on their iOS platform, a cut down version of Mac OS X with a cut down but related and familiar name.
Other operating systems (mobile based included) refer to software as "Programs". This has gone back as far as the days of DOS and Atari/Amiga.
Apple have so much prior use of both the term Application to refer to software and App as the shortened term for iOS that Amazon are just picking a fight because Apple offer their own alternative to the Kindle and they don't like the competition.
matznentosh
Oct 23, 08:48 AM
You do know that you'll be getting a US-formatted keyboard and AC adapter, yes?
Don't forget the AC adapter works on UK voltage, you just need the plug adapter.
Don't forget the AC adapter works on UK voltage, you just need the plug adapter.
levitynyc
Mar 25, 03:50 PM
Time to grab a 10 foot HDMI cord.
DMann
Aug 6, 08:43 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
MacRumorsLive.com (http://www.macrumorslive.com/) will provide live coverage of the event starting at 1PM EST (10AM Pacific). No need to reload the page, updates will appear as they are posted. In January, our system successfully delivered updates to over 100,000 (http://www.macrumors.com/events/mwsf2006-stats.php) simultaneous visitors.
More photos of banners posted at WWDC have been circulating. Apple appears to be taking on Microsoft's upcoming Vista operating system directly with banners that state:
"Mac OS X Leopard, Introducing Vista 2.0" (photo (http://static.flickr.com/74/207241438_7c0f89412d_b.jpg))
"Mac OS X Leopard, Hasta la Vista, Vista"
In the meanwhile, you can read the WWDC 2006 Rumor Roundup (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060805162310.shtml), see our WWDC related Guide Pages (http://guides.macrumors.com/Category:WWDC_2006), chat in our IRC channel (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/06/20030608214842.shtml) or participate in the forums (http://forums.macrumors.com).
We will continue to provide any last minute updates leading to the event.
Perhaps MS will change the name a third time before it is released.
MacRumorsLive.com (http://www.macrumorslive.com/) will provide live coverage of the event starting at 1PM EST (10AM Pacific). No need to reload the page, updates will appear as they are posted. In January, our system successfully delivered updates to over 100,000 (http://www.macrumors.com/events/mwsf2006-stats.php) simultaneous visitors.
More photos of banners posted at WWDC have been circulating. Apple appears to be taking on Microsoft's upcoming Vista operating system directly with banners that state:
"Mac OS X Leopard, Introducing Vista 2.0" (photo (http://static.flickr.com/74/207241438_7c0f89412d_b.jpg))
"Mac OS X Leopard, Hasta la Vista, Vista"
In the meanwhile, you can read the WWDC 2006 Rumor Roundup (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060805162310.shtml), see our WWDC related Guide Pages (http://guides.macrumors.com/Category:WWDC_2006), chat in our IRC channel (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/06/20030608214842.shtml) or participate in the forums (http://forums.macrumors.com).
We will continue to provide any last minute updates leading to the event.
Perhaps MS will change the name a third time before it is released.
Tonsko
Jan 7, 01:51 PM
That a Remus I spy there? I remember choosing between that and SuperSprint for my old Edition 1 G60. I went for SS in the end as the steel was different and gave a different note.
motulist
Aug 7, 01:07 AM
10am PST is 1am here.
Where the heck are you? Australia?
Where the heck are you? Australia?
Daveway
Jan 1, 07:01 PM
This year better be good!
I just saw this! OMG1!!1
Apple is putting the heat on for MWSF. I think they're releasing what everyone is expecting (applephone) plus many unexpected additions.
mmmm i love Apple
What does it mean!?! :)
I just saw this! OMG1!!1
Apple is putting the heat on for MWSF. I think they're releasing what everyone is expecting (applephone) plus many unexpected additions.
mmmm i love Apple
What does it mean!?! :)
wizard
Jun 22, 03:53 PM
Exactly. When did the keyboard and mouse become public enemy number 1? These technologies have been perfected over years and years of real use.
If Apple introduces a touch iMac it's clearly a money grab, to sucker the public into thinking touch is somehow superior when in fact it is vastly inferior on a desktop monitor.
Not in every case but certainly in most cases a Touch screen on the desktop, supporting most productivity apps, is a TERRIBLE idea. I work in a plant full of touch screens supporting various systems and frankly they all suck for general run of the mill interaction or data entry. There is nothing about Apples GUI that can improve this as it is more of a physical ergonomic issue.
However that doesn't mean that touch screen are never useful on the desktop. On the contrary there are apps that can effectively leverage a touch screen. The problem is these are not the apps that most people will be making use of.
In the end I believe you are right about people getting suckered into something they might not ever use. Further I'm more surprised that this rumor is desktop related as a touch screen might actually get used more on a laptop. In the end I just hope this is a bogus rumor.
If Apple introduces a touch iMac it's clearly a money grab, to sucker the public into thinking touch is somehow superior when in fact it is vastly inferior on a desktop monitor.
Not in every case but certainly in most cases a Touch screen on the desktop, supporting most productivity apps, is a TERRIBLE idea. I work in a plant full of touch screens supporting various systems and frankly they all suck for general run of the mill interaction or data entry. There is nothing about Apples GUI that can improve this as it is more of a physical ergonomic issue.
However that doesn't mean that touch screen are never useful on the desktop. On the contrary there are apps that can effectively leverage a touch screen. The problem is these are not the apps that most people will be making use of.
In the end I believe you are right about people getting suckered into something they might not ever use. Further I'm more surprised that this rumor is desktop related as a touch screen might actually get used more on a laptop. In the end I just hope this is a bogus rumor.
danvdr
Oct 23, 11:12 PM
FWI Dell Just Lowered The List Of All Their Monitors � 30" $1279 24" $679 Right Now (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productlisting.aspx?c=us&category_id=6198&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs). We paid $1349 last week in a sale and now it's been trumped. New 30" list is only $1599 and 24" list is $799.
2007FP 20" 1600x1200 is now only $359.20 (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=320-4687). This is amazing.
And the E207WFP 20" monitor (which seems to be comparable to the 2007FP minus a few bells and whistles (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productcompare.aspx?c=us&category_id=6198&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs&p=320-4688~320-5123~)) is only $289.
2007FP 20" 1600x1200 is now only $359.20 (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=320-4687). This is amazing.
And the E207WFP 20" monitor (which seems to be comparable to the 2007FP minus a few bells and whistles (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productcompare.aspx?c=us&category_id=6198&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs&p=320-4688~320-5123~)) is only $289.
mainstreetmark
Jul 19, 03:47 PM
Count me in, too.
Of course, they got an extra $200 out of me, because I wanted a black Macbook. *grumble*
Of course, they got an extra $200 out of me, because I wanted a black Macbook. *grumble*
No comments:
Post a Comment