Jay42
Oct 14, 09:36 AM
Just noticed something at work (large retailer). The iPod case is unusually empty of iPod videos. We may have 15 total when the case usual has 50-100. The iPod Nanos on the other hand are completely stocked full. Usually this only happens when Apple is going to release a new version and stops sending the store product. I know it sounds weird because they just upgraded the 5G but it was a very insignificant update. Just thought I'd add that to the rumor mill.
Mmmm, they're not replacing the current iPod-With-Video models. If anything, they will add another model "on top" of the ipod family. Not sure if your shortage of iPods really means anything.
If Apple really is going to release something, it is already in full production as we speak. They will need to announce it and get it into stores by November to make the holiday season and that would still be last minute. After October, I'm not holding my breath.
Mmmm, they're not replacing the current iPod-With-Video models. If anything, they will add another model "on top" of the ipod family. Not sure if your shortage of iPods really means anything.
If Apple really is going to release something, it is already in full production as we speak. They will need to announce it and get it into stores by November to make the holiday season and that would still be last minute. After October, I'm not holding my breath.
aiqw9182
Mar 28, 03:37 PM
If I understand some of you on this thread correctly then it is my opinion that you've missed the point, slightly.
I don't think that the merits or demerits of the mac app store are the core point here. The store may be good, excellent, bad, poor, draconian, onerous or whatever but Apple is going to award programming and application awards to only those apps that are distributed through their application store.
Even if you think the store is great, hell even if the store IS GREAT, don't you also feel that it isn't the ONLY way to get quality, well made applications.
Apple is only promoting application which it profits from AND which conform to its Terms of Service.
The offensive part for me is just how unapologetic they seem to be showing bias for what makes them money, not with what may be driving the platform or solving user needs/wants.
I anticipate that some may remind me about Apple's responsibility to shareholders and about being a profitable business and therefore say that it is obvious that they support the apps from which they make a profit. I just think that is an oversimplification of situation and I think this does more to hurt the image of the platform, rather than improve it. It does more to hurt developer interest than it does improve developer interest in the mac platform. Long term, I'd rather see them building an enthusiasm for their products (including the mac app store) for their own merits.
Not even going to bother reading this because I was NEVER discussing or defending Apple for only picking apps in the App Store. Get your facts straight before you decide to write a book on an internet forum over a discussion that went on for two replies.
I don't think that the merits or demerits of the mac app store are the core point here. The store may be good, excellent, bad, poor, draconian, onerous or whatever but Apple is going to award programming and application awards to only those apps that are distributed through their application store.
Even if you think the store is great, hell even if the store IS GREAT, don't you also feel that it isn't the ONLY way to get quality, well made applications.
Apple is only promoting application which it profits from AND which conform to its Terms of Service.
The offensive part for me is just how unapologetic they seem to be showing bias for what makes them money, not with what may be driving the platform or solving user needs/wants.
I anticipate that some may remind me about Apple's responsibility to shareholders and about being a profitable business and therefore say that it is obvious that they support the apps from which they make a profit. I just think that is an oversimplification of situation and I think this does more to hurt the image of the platform, rather than improve it. It does more to hurt developer interest than it does improve developer interest in the mac platform. Long term, I'd rather see them building an enthusiasm for their products (including the mac app store) for their own merits.
Not even going to bother reading this because I was NEVER discussing or defending Apple for only picking apps in the App Store. Get your facts straight before you decide to write a book on an internet forum over a discussion that went on for two replies.
tny
Nov 16, 04:26 PM
Do they have to remake a new "Universal Binary?" Because aren't the current UB's for Intel and PPC? Please tell me they wont. I don't wnat to have to wait again for new UB's
No. The AMD processors we're talking about have the same instruction set as the Intel processors Apple is currently using; in fact, the 64 bit extensions were written by AMD, not Intel (Intel's original 64-bit solution is Itanium, which on the seamier side of the computer trade - for instance, in the Register - is called the Itanic, because it is still sinking; eventually, Intel was forced to adopt AMD's extensions because the architecture is more compatible with the Pentium/x86 architecture).
Such a switch would be comparable in terms of technological impact to the switch from IBM for the G3 to Motorola for the G4, and then to IBM for the G5.
Now, if Apple switched to Intel Itanium or (if it were ever released again) the Digital Alpha, yes, a new form of Universal Binary would be needed. I suspect that the Cell processor is not completely compatible with the G5, so it's possible that a switch to Cell would require a new form of UB, too.
No. The AMD processors we're talking about have the same instruction set as the Intel processors Apple is currently using; in fact, the 64 bit extensions were written by AMD, not Intel (Intel's original 64-bit solution is Itanium, which on the seamier side of the computer trade - for instance, in the Register - is called the Itanic, because it is still sinking; eventually, Intel was forced to adopt AMD's extensions because the architecture is more compatible with the Pentium/x86 architecture).
Such a switch would be comparable in terms of technological impact to the switch from IBM for the G3 to Motorola for the G4, and then to IBM for the G5.
Now, if Apple switched to Intel Itanium or (if it were ever released again) the Digital Alpha, yes, a new form of Universal Binary would be needed. I suspect that the Cell processor is not completely compatible with the G5, so it's possible that a switch to Cell would require a new form of UB, too.
KingYaba
Mar 3, 09:02 PM
Fines and jail time? What a crock of ****. Negotiate, by all means, if the union pay needs to be cut back to balance a state budget, but this bill goes too far.
Congress shall make no law prohibiting the right of the people to peacefully assemble....
Congress shall make no law prohibiting the right of the people to peacefully assemble....
JTR7
Oct 23, 03:43 PM
I think you both...
That was directed more at True... But, thanks for the enlightenment.
Obviously, you can understand the confusion.
That was directed more at True... But, thanks for the enlightenment.
Obviously, you can understand the confusion.
caspersoong
Apr 29, 09:02 PM
I like the tweak. Hope it does not fade away in the next build.
D1G1T4L
Mar 17, 05:14 PM
You mean like posting just to say "I'm laughing at you all?" Welcome to the "holier than thou club, buddy.
Please read my post again. Never did I say I was laughing at "you all" but rather the post "buddy". Hope I didn't touch a nerve.
Also who are you quoting?
Please read my post again. Never did I say I was laughing at "you all" but rather the post "buddy". Hope I didn't touch a nerve.
Also who are you quoting?
jaigo
Oct 16, 08:33 AM
Bottomline, don't expect a true video ipod or macbookpro merom update until late 2007 :confused:
rtdgoldfish
Apr 3, 09:05 PM
A friend of mine works with the Xbox support team. I'll ask him if there's anything (legal) that they can do. You have my admiration for your good detective work!
That would be great. I'm sure there must be SOMETHING they can do.
That would be great. I'm sure there must be SOMETHING they can do.
*LTD*
Mar 16, 08:36 AM
This is nonsence. If the average user was interested in just Apple, then why are Apple on a lesser market share for pretty much... everything but MP3 players? How come Android is proving more popular?
You mean all the junk Google flooded the market with in order to inflate their share because they *still* can't make anything even remotely on the level of the iPhone?
Licensing out your OS to anyone that can slam together a box and unloading product via the likes of ZTE and cheap Asian outfits (i.e., the "other" category) is hardly impressive. It's the Wintel way of dong business. Great for pumping up market share, but the profits go to the cream of the crop: Apple. For the rest it's a race to the bottom.
I've said this before, and I'll say it again. THIS IS NOT AN APPLE FANSITE! Please go elsewhere if you wish to praise the mighty Apple endlessly. This site is for news and discussion based around Apple products. Not for fans to blow their load.
It's an Apple fansite. It's unavoidable. It *is* however, an unhappy experience for trolls and contrarians. You seem unhappy and exasperated in your posts. Is that maybe an indicator of something?
I'm in 2011. And I'm seeing Android beat iOS in the mobile world, and slowly creeping up in the tablet world. I'm seeing OS X being turned from a pretty advanced OS to an App riddled toy. I'm seeing Apple discontinue server services. I'm seeing Apple making silly mistakes such as clock bugs and adding social networks to media players. I'm seeing Apple still not improve MobileMe.
You're seeing Apple hit new milestones and the competition keeping up the only way they know how: price and universal licensing. ZTE releases more Android junk and HTE releases their 20th variation of the same phone and it's crickets. Meanwhile there's so much as a hint of a new iPhone and the industry and market is just buzzing with excitement. The reason is simple: when it comes to Apple, consumer anticipation is in line with expectation.
As for the rest, Apple is following the same formula they always have. It's the ideal of engineering and design: simplify, simplify, simplify. Cut, cut, cut. Then perfect what's left over.
This is what results in record sales. With profits to match.
Cheers.
You mean all the junk Google flooded the market with in order to inflate their share because they *still* can't make anything even remotely on the level of the iPhone?
Licensing out your OS to anyone that can slam together a box and unloading product via the likes of ZTE and cheap Asian outfits (i.e., the "other" category) is hardly impressive. It's the Wintel way of dong business. Great for pumping up market share, but the profits go to the cream of the crop: Apple. For the rest it's a race to the bottom.
I've said this before, and I'll say it again. THIS IS NOT AN APPLE FANSITE! Please go elsewhere if you wish to praise the mighty Apple endlessly. This site is for news and discussion based around Apple products. Not for fans to blow their load.
It's an Apple fansite. It's unavoidable. It *is* however, an unhappy experience for trolls and contrarians. You seem unhappy and exasperated in your posts. Is that maybe an indicator of something?
I'm in 2011. And I'm seeing Android beat iOS in the mobile world, and slowly creeping up in the tablet world. I'm seeing OS X being turned from a pretty advanced OS to an App riddled toy. I'm seeing Apple discontinue server services. I'm seeing Apple making silly mistakes such as clock bugs and adding social networks to media players. I'm seeing Apple still not improve MobileMe.
You're seeing Apple hit new milestones and the competition keeping up the only way they know how: price and universal licensing. ZTE releases more Android junk and HTE releases their 20th variation of the same phone and it's crickets. Meanwhile there's so much as a hint of a new iPhone and the industry and market is just buzzing with excitement. The reason is simple: when it comes to Apple, consumer anticipation is in line with expectation.
As for the rest, Apple is following the same formula they always have. It's the ideal of engineering and design: simplify, simplify, simplify. Cut, cut, cut. Then perfect what's left over.
This is what results in record sales. With profits to match.
Cheers.
yg17
Apr 21, 12:26 PM
Sorry, this idea is horrible. People are going to downrate posts because they disagree with someone's opinion, not because it's a bad post.
I can easily see the fanboys downrating anyone who mentions Microsoft, Android or any of Apple's competitors in a positive light.
I can easily see the fanboys downrating anyone who mentions Microsoft, Android or any of Apple's competitors in a positive light.
jaigo
Oct 11, 09:16 AM
I really hope the Zune becomes a real competitor and threat to Ipod. I am sick of apple sitting on their ass and giving us minimal improvements to the ipod. I want a wide screen, good battery life, THIN and sleek and sturdy. I will not buy a zune but I hope this pushes apple to bring us the goddamn widescreen ipod. :mad:
aafuss1
Nov 16, 07:35 PM
Yes Dad. :D
Ladies and Gentlemen of Macrumours, this is from Digitimes, they still owe me a G5 iBook from 2005.
Digitimes = wrong, always wrong.
I agree DigiTimes is very inaccurate with Apple rumors, but probably not the same for other companies-eg. Sony or Samsung.
Ladies and Gentlemen of Macrumours, this is from Digitimes, they still owe me a G5 iBook from 2005.
Digitimes = wrong, always wrong.
I agree DigiTimes is very inaccurate with Apple rumors, but probably not the same for other companies-eg. Sony or Samsung.
toddybody
Apr 8, 01:57 PM
Promotion: Best Buy would like you to pay for an iPad 2 in full...to get on a list, that may get one by Aug. Oh, and uh...a free keychain too.
quagmire
Jan 12, 09:38 AM
Jobs wasn't smug at all IMHO. He was excited about it. You should of clearly seen that. He made a few jokes( like that prank call to Starbucks), but that was just his normal old humor. The only problem I had was with the order he stated iPod, phone, and internet communicator. The iPod and phone got good responses and then the internet communicator the people went, " ummm.... ok." I would of went internet communicator-> iPod-> phone. Get louder responses step and save the best for last. Other then that the keynote was good, if not one of his best.
For you iPhone haters, you people seem to think hardware makes the product revolutionary. Since you think so, you're right then. The iPhone in terms of hardware is nothing special. Got the standard CPU, standard 2.5G things, etc. But, there is more things that make it revolutionary then hardware. The UI is what makes the iPhone revolutionary. How you navigate the iPhone is revolutionary. How easy it is to use it and navigate through it. Ok, so it uses flash instead of an HD. How do most people treat their cell phones? Most people I see their cell phones are beat up. Scratches galore, etc. I bet the HD would be killed within weeks. Not to mention the extra thickness and power usage. 8 GB is the highest affordable flash you can put in a product right now so Apple didn't skimp out on that. Plus, the iPhone is a phone first and foremost. The iPod part is just a feature on it. I love how someone avoided the question, " What else were you hoping for?" Doesn't answer the question at all. Just continues the BS on how the iPhone isn't revolutionary.
For most part, the iPhone haters simply don't get the point of Apple. Why Apple makes the products the way they do. They have been brainwashed by other companies throwing in technology galore into their products. What is the point of adding even more technology if the current technology in the product isn't easy to use? You're just going to confuse the crap out of your customer base. That is where Apple steps in. Apple takes the technology and makes it easier to use. So Apple doesn't always use the latest and greatest stuff in their products. Look at the original Mac. Nothing really new in there hardware wise. But, it changed how we used a computer. Fast forward to 2001 when the iPod was introduced. It was just another HD based MP3 player. Had nothing the competition. The iPod did what the other MP3 players could do. Yet, what made the iPod revolutionary was the way we navigated through an MP3 player and how we used it overall( the iTunes/iPod integration for example). It was easy to use and put music on it.
PS: If we bought everything Apple made why didn't the Newton and Cube sell well?
For you iPhone haters, you people seem to think hardware makes the product revolutionary. Since you think so, you're right then. The iPhone in terms of hardware is nothing special. Got the standard CPU, standard 2.5G things, etc. But, there is more things that make it revolutionary then hardware. The UI is what makes the iPhone revolutionary. How you navigate the iPhone is revolutionary. How easy it is to use it and navigate through it. Ok, so it uses flash instead of an HD. How do most people treat their cell phones? Most people I see their cell phones are beat up. Scratches galore, etc. I bet the HD would be killed within weeks. Not to mention the extra thickness and power usage. 8 GB is the highest affordable flash you can put in a product right now so Apple didn't skimp out on that. Plus, the iPhone is a phone first and foremost. The iPod part is just a feature on it. I love how someone avoided the question, " What else were you hoping for?" Doesn't answer the question at all. Just continues the BS on how the iPhone isn't revolutionary.
For most part, the iPhone haters simply don't get the point of Apple. Why Apple makes the products the way they do. They have been brainwashed by other companies throwing in technology galore into their products. What is the point of adding even more technology if the current technology in the product isn't easy to use? You're just going to confuse the crap out of your customer base. That is where Apple steps in. Apple takes the technology and makes it easier to use. So Apple doesn't always use the latest and greatest stuff in their products. Look at the original Mac. Nothing really new in there hardware wise. But, it changed how we used a computer. Fast forward to 2001 when the iPod was introduced. It was just another HD based MP3 player. Had nothing the competition. The iPod did what the other MP3 players could do. Yet, what made the iPod revolutionary was the way we navigated through an MP3 player and how we used it overall( the iTunes/iPod integration for example). It was easy to use and put music on it.
PS: If we bought everything Apple made why didn't the Newton and Cube sell well?
bpaluzzi
May 4, 10:22 AM
The first link seems to be saying 4% of doctors read their email on an ipad. Do you think that really matches up with what the advertisement says, is that ground breaking?
Are you talking about this link?
http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/physician-mobile-use-grows-45-percent
If so, I'm not sure how you came up with your statement. It's not even a misreading / misunderstanding. Your statement is just plain wrong.
Are you talking about this link?
http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/physician-mobile-use-grows-45-percent
If so, I'm not sure how you came up with your statement. It's not even a misreading / misunderstanding. Your statement is just plain wrong.
bearbo
Jan 12, 02:36 AM
I would love to see you come up with something revolutionary.
just because i can't come up with something revolutionary doesn't mean i can't say other things aren't.
The hardware, what do you want them to do? Come out with a floating phone? They do have to make something that is relatively affordable. They can't possibly make a platinum apple phone with surround sound speakers floating around it and tag it at $20,000. You would complain anyway.
hm. i think the point of revolutionary is so its function is not so obvious?
and just for the record, i don't want platium apple phone with surround sound speaker floating around it. ew.
again, i'm not saying iphone is crap, it's not the best thing in the world. gah
What else were you hoping for?
if he want to call it revolutionary, i was hoping for something revolutionary.
just because i can't come up with something revolutionary doesn't mean i can't say other things aren't.
The hardware, what do you want them to do? Come out with a floating phone? They do have to make something that is relatively affordable. They can't possibly make a platinum apple phone with surround sound speakers floating around it and tag it at $20,000. You would complain anyway.
hm. i think the point of revolutionary is so its function is not so obvious?
and just for the record, i don't want platium apple phone with surround sound speaker floating around it. ew.
again, i'm not saying iphone is crap, it's not the best thing in the world. gah
What else were you hoping for?
if he want to call it revolutionary, i was hoping for something revolutionary.
Kingsly
Oct 10, 06:22 PM
Gawd. Will this rumor just die already?
I want a vPod as much as the next guy... but please make the madness stop! :(
I want a vPod as much as the next guy... but please make the madness stop! :(
Dagless
Mar 26, 06:16 PM
Well, they did steal over $1000 worth of stuff. Thats a big deal in my book when I only make $10,000 a year and that I'm in college. I know what you are saying but its still crappy for someone to even steal $100 worth of stuff from you.
It's crappy that someone would steal anything from you. The feeling of having something taken from you is an unmeasurable price in itself.
Back in our old house we had a bike stolen, my grandfather (who was about 70 at the time) fought off some Spanish muggers whilst on holiday too. That really shook him up and nothing was taken from him!
It's crappy that someone would steal anything from you. The feeling of having something taken from you is an unmeasurable price in itself.
Back in our old house we had a bike stolen, my grandfather (who was about 70 at the time) fought off some Spanish muggers whilst on holiday too. That really shook him up and nothing was taken from him!
yellow
Apr 6, 10:39 AM
Sorry folks, unlocked/locked correct threads this time. :D
goober1223
Apr 6, 09:38 AM
And what was the motivation of the third party app makers? To make a fast buck out of serving ads to people more interested in the ad than the product. That is bad for advertisers and probably the real reason the app was rejected.
Who know whether clicks inside this app count as regular impressions? Unlike any third party, Apple is in a position to refund any advertisers for clicks on these ads. If they are doing that then I don't see anything wrong with them releasing this niche product.
I see your point, but I think that it's quite uncharitable to question the motives of individuals but let apple have a pass. They are in the position to do whatever they want, and there's no way that they WOULD reimburse those whose apps were rejected for the same function, but my point is that they shouldn't have rejected those apps at all. It's hypocritical of them to reject an app for a reason, and then when they get desperate for their iAd program to catch on more with advertisers (which apparently aren't as excited for the platform as Apple had hoped) they change their mind and create their own app.
And besides, an ad impression is an ad impression. The only iAds that I click on are accidental. If people want to download an app to see what an iAd looks like, they are also getting the best of what the advertisers had hoped for: the chance to make somebody want to use their product. They pay for the option of changing somebody's mind, not to actually do it. They pay to put the advertisement in partial view. Not to actually sell products directly.
It doesn't matter who makes the app, if they are putting the ads in front of people, they deserve the money. That goes for Apple or any of the several individuals that have already created such apps.
Who know whether clicks inside this app count as regular impressions? Unlike any third party, Apple is in a position to refund any advertisers for clicks on these ads. If they are doing that then I don't see anything wrong with them releasing this niche product.
I see your point, but I think that it's quite uncharitable to question the motives of individuals but let apple have a pass. They are in the position to do whatever they want, and there's no way that they WOULD reimburse those whose apps were rejected for the same function, but my point is that they shouldn't have rejected those apps at all. It's hypocritical of them to reject an app for a reason, and then when they get desperate for their iAd program to catch on more with advertisers (which apparently aren't as excited for the platform as Apple had hoped) they change their mind and create their own app.
And besides, an ad impression is an ad impression. The only iAds that I click on are accidental. If people want to download an app to see what an iAd looks like, they are also getting the best of what the advertisers had hoped for: the chance to make somebody want to use their product. They pay for the option of changing somebody's mind, not to actually do it. They pay to put the advertisement in partial view. Not to actually sell products directly.
It doesn't matter who makes the app, if they are putting the ads in front of people, they deserve the money. That goes for Apple or any of the several individuals that have already created such apps.
VictoriaStudent
Mar 17, 02:32 AM
:rolleyes: Good luck getting anywhere with that.
not trying to go anywhere with it. I don't particularly care what happens to our "friend." I just find his arrogance horrendous.
not trying to go anywhere with it. I don't particularly care what happens to our "friend." I just find his arrogance horrendous.
rovex
Apr 26, 05:35 AM
Is that an aluminium curved back I see? Please say it ain't so!
The demise of glass is premature until liquid metal becomes readily available.
The demise of glass is premature until liquid metal becomes readily available.
DMann
Jan 14, 01:45 AM
ha, that was pretty good. and true really...
they didn't release iwork and ilife probably b/c of Amazon putting it up on their website early
and now poor ol' Amazon has egg on its face:o
they didn't release iwork and ilife probably b/c of Amazon putting it up on their website early
and now poor ol' Amazon has egg on its face:o
0 comments:
Post a Comment