Alistair.nz
Apr 21, 08:51 PM
Hi, i'm probably pushing my luck by asking this but, i was wondering if anyone knew how long after the U.S. release the rest of the world gets the imac released?
I realise there is no set U.S release date at the moment, but judging from past releases will it be staggered like the iPad 2 or will it be released simultaneously across the world?
Cheers
I realise there is no set U.S release date at the moment, but judging from past releases will it be staggered like the iPad 2 or will it be released simultaneously across the world?
Cheers
Axemantitan
Apr 2, 08:17 PM
Is this the same Narrator that does the Ken Burns films?
Yes. Peter Coyote was the narrator for Ken Burns' documentaries. He is the second person to speak in this clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gJ43sReByo
Yes. Peter Coyote was the narrator for Ken Burns' documentaries. He is the second person to speak in this clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gJ43sReByo
steviem
Apr 10, 07:40 AM
Conventional torque converter auto's still sap more power and fuel than sticks. But, with DCT's entering the market, the advantage of the manual transmission went out the window.
That has killed interest for me at least for a stick. Unless you like rowing your own gears, DCT's are the way to go. They can get the same or better in performance and fuel economy.
Well, the weight advantage of a manual transmission is still there. Although in sports cars, sequential gearboxes are best.
Cars seem to have grown to be huge since the 80s. Look at a BMW 3 series from the late 80s compared with a modern 3 series now. That new 3 series is the size of a 5 series and the 1 series is just about the same size as an old 3 series.
I love manual transmission, my first two cars didn't even have PAS, power steering or ABS, the first car was a pile of crap, but the 205 GTi was so nice and quick that it didn't need any electronics in it.
When I move to the US though, I will probably be driving an Automatic, it will be simply something to get me from A to B. Rather than over here when I drive around lovely B (country) roads to get to places and a manual gearboxes are just more fun on twisty roads.
Once I can afford it though, I'd like to find a classic car to restore, maybe an MG or something, just to keep some quintessential Englishness in my life!
That has killed interest for me at least for a stick. Unless you like rowing your own gears, DCT's are the way to go. They can get the same or better in performance and fuel economy.
Well, the weight advantage of a manual transmission is still there. Although in sports cars, sequential gearboxes are best.
Cars seem to have grown to be huge since the 80s. Look at a BMW 3 series from the late 80s compared with a modern 3 series now. That new 3 series is the size of a 5 series and the 1 series is just about the same size as an old 3 series.
I love manual transmission, my first two cars didn't even have PAS, power steering or ABS, the first car was a pile of crap, but the 205 GTi was so nice and quick that it didn't need any electronics in it.
When I move to the US though, I will probably be driving an Automatic, it will be simply something to get me from A to B. Rather than over here when I drive around lovely B (country) roads to get to places and a manual gearboxes are just more fun on twisty roads.
Once I can afford it though, I'd like to find a classic car to restore, maybe an MG or something, just to keep some quintessential Englishness in my life!
Primejimbo
Mar 22, 04:49 PM
I will just continue to use my iphone as my ipod like everyone else.......
Sent from my Iphone
I have a classic and an iPhone....
I use both and always will
Sent from my Iphone
I have a classic and an iPhone....
I use both and always will
Evangelion
Jul 14, 05:34 AM
This is all Sony's fault.:mad: If they learned anything from the Betamax, they should know that when ever they try to standardize a technology, they fail.
You mean like when they standardised on CD's?
You mean like when they standardised on CD's?
zeppiecr
Nov 30, 08:20 AM
why not put a bluray in the itv?
nospeed411
Apr 21, 06:57 PM
Ok all I want to know is why the hell is Al Freaktard still allowed to breathe my air???
Antares
Sep 1, 01:43 PM
I truly hope that this rumor turns out ot be false. My 20" Core Duo iMac is only 6 months old. I would be extremely distraught if a 23 incher comes out. Please Apple, wait until January 2007 to update the iMacs (or only update the processors, please).
AidenShaw
Nov 15, 11:59 AM
well, OSX whooped xp for multicore usage then
On pyMol, yes.
If you look at the full article, XP bested OSX on several other programs.
Pretty much even, overall.
They don't report software versions or other useful details (like how many FB-DIMMs in the systems), so any of the "wins" and "losses" could easily be differences in software versions (is pyMol OSX exactly the same version, compiled with the same optimizations on the same compiler?) or other details.
For example, what if pyMol on OSx86 is optimized for Core and later chips, and the XP version is optimized for Pentium III systems (and doesn't take advantage of Pentium 4 and Core 2 improvements)? If that's that case, is not fair to say OSX is faster than XP - although it's clearly reasonable to state that OSX is a faster choice for pyMol.
On pyMol, yes.
If you look at the full article, XP bested OSX on several other programs.
Pretty much even, overall.
They don't report software versions or other useful details (like how many FB-DIMMs in the systems), so any of the "wins" and "losses" could easily be differences in software versions (is pyMol OSX exactly the same version, compiled with the same optimizations on the same compiler?) or other details.
For example, what if pyMol on OSx86 is optimized for Core and later chips, and the XP version is optimized for Pentium III systems (and doesn't take advantage of Pentium 4 and Core 2 improvements)? If that's that case, is not fair to say OSX is faster than XP - although it's clearly reasonable to state that OSX is a faster choice for pyMol.
gnomeisland
Apr 21, 07:13 AM
You're forgetting that if the iMac user was shunting video to a big-screen TV via HDMI, the user might want to keep that port for that. Would leave the Thunderbolt port for other devices that they might want to keep plugged in without having to swap.
Not all of us want to plug and unplug...plug and unplug
Thunderbolt is daisy chain-able. Now I give HDMI *in* a 1% chance on the 27" model since Apple sold a few on the virtue of the Mini-DP in on that model. However, HDMI costs Apple money and it is more likely you'll see Thunderbolt capable of turning the internal display into an external display for another device, or perhaps, TWO thunderbolt ports with said functionality.
I give the two thunderbolt ports a 2-3% chance but for me that's worth dreaming about.
Not all of us want to plug and unplug...plug and unplug
Thunderbolt is daisy chain-able. Now I give HDMI *in* a 1% chance on the 27" model since Apple sold a few on the virtue of the Mini-DP in on that model. However, HDMI costs Apple money and it is more likely you'll see Thunderbolt capable of turning the internal display into an external display for another device, or perhaps, TWO thunderbolt ports with said functionality.
I give the two thunderbolt ports a 2-3% chance but for me that's worth dreaming about.
Leet Apple
Feb 17, 10:42 PM
Used my iPhone 3G for the Pic
Sorry for the Quality
Before:
http://i287.photobucket.com/albums/ll155/PASSWORDIS12/photo1.jpg
After:
http://i287.photobucket.com/albums/ll155/PASSWORDIS12/PhotoFeb17114104PM.jpg
Put my MacBook Pro on a separate table
Sorry for the Quality
Before:
http://i287.photobucket.com/albums/ll155/PASSWORDIS12/photo1.jpg
After:
http://i287.photobucket.com/albums/ll155/PASSWORDIS12/PhotoFeb17114104PM.jpg
Put my MacBook Pro on a separate table
Millah
Apr 27, 01:00 AM
You got me there. Here's a bit of interesting tech trademark trivia (Microsoft vs Lindows):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_v._Lindows
Exactly. I find it quite funny people don't understand that the "Windows" brand is referring to the windowed metaphor on desktop GUIs. So, Windows technically is just as generic as App store, considering all desktop UIs use the Window metaphor for displaying content.
But I think we'd all agree that when you hear the term windows, you think of Microsofts OS. Thats the exact same thing going on here with App store. Companies trademark "generic" terms all the time. Most trademarks ARE generic. But once it becomes used to associate a brand or product, its no longer generic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_v._Lindows
Exactly. I find it quite funny people don't understand that the "Windows" brand is referring to the windowed metaphor on desktop GUIs. So, Windows technically is just as generic as App store, considering all desktop UIs use the Window metaphor for displaying content.
But I think we'd all agree that when you hear the term windows, you think of Microsofts OS. Thats the exact same thing going on here with App store. Companies trademark "generic" terms all the time. Most trademarks ARE generic. But once it becomes used to associate a brand or product, its no longer generic.
Small White Car
Apr 12, 10:14 PM
You realize that you'll be on Aperture 5 before you spend more money than just buying 3 outright. The upgrade from 2 to 3 cost more than just buying 3 on the app store.
Why do you want to spend more money?
If I buy Aperture 3, 4, and 5 on the app store I'll have spent $240.
Didn't it used to be $300 for 1 version? What did the upgrades cost? I feel like I'll be way past 5 before I break even.
Available on the App Store?!?
Seriously, this better come in a box.
I can't get this approved for use without probably buying it myself first, let alone using my own iTunes account, which brings up a whole lot of licensing issues at work. And before you say "create a iTunes account for work."... Tying the corporate credit card to a shared iTunes account? I'd have a better chance of having our CEO give me one of his Jaguars than that. Not to mention, IT would slaughter me for the amount of bandwidth I'd use in downloading it.
Yeah, our editing machines aren't even allowed to be on the internet.
Hopefully there's a way around this.
Why do you want to spend more money?
If I buy Aperture 3, 4, and 5 on the app store I'll have spent $240.
Didn't it used to be $300 for 1 version? What did the upgrades cost? I feel like I'll be way past 5 before I break even.
Available on the App Store?!?
Seriously, this better come in a box.
I can't get this approved for use without probably buying it myself first, let alone using my own iTunes account, which brings up a whole lot of licensing issues at work. And before you say "create a iTunes account for work."... Tying the corporate credit card to a shared iTunes account? I'd have a better chance of having our CEO give me one of his Jaguars than that. Not to mention, IT would slaughter me for the amount of bandwidth I'd use in downloading it.
Yeah, our editing machines aren't even allowed to be on the internet.
Hopefully there's a way around this.
Anonymous Freak
Nov 28, 12:01 AM
Apple previously had sold a 17" 4:3 ratio LCD until June 2004
Correction: the 17" Apple Cinema Display was the oddball 5:4 ratio. 1280x1024 is *NOT* 4:3. 1280x960 is. CRTs are usually 4:3, and Apple's CRTs that support 1280 or higher use 1280x960 (such as the eMac.) LCDs that use 1280 use the the non-standard ratio of 1280x1024. Why? No clue. Some oddball decision a little over half a decade ago. But 1280x1024 became the standard for LCDs.
Correction: the 17" Apple Cinema Display was the oddball 5:4 ratio. 1280x1024 is *NOT* 4:3. 1280x960 is. CRTs are usually 4:3, and Apple's CRTs that support 1280 or higher use 1280x960 (such as the eMac.) LCDs that use 1280 use the the non-standard ratio of 1280x1024. Why? No clue. Some oddball decision a little over half a decade ago. But 1280x1024 became the standard for LCDs.
Blasphemic
Jan 6, 07:32 AM
Still the same car but got some new pictures: Opel Corsa 1.4 Swing from 1997, worth about nothing but it means alot to me :)
First 2 are outside the building where i live, and yes i know she could really need a wash but that wont be done untill they have time to do it at work (i work at a Car rental company)
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/wXLXKwnhy9eY0TMZdMXHEw?feat=directlink
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/wXLXKwnhy9eY0TMZdMXHEw?feat=directlink
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/rkrAdjzNNR1-snLEoQ-syA?feat=directlink
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/rkrAdjzNNR1-snLEoQ-syA?feat=directlink
The inside could really use a good cleaning aswell
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/c5sYp9nOeu1wbtYNlQRTxA?feat=directlink
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/c5sYp9nOeu1wbtYNlQRTxA?feat=directlink
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/89Ncn1aLHvyvNOlJt6D51g?feat=directlink
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/89Ncn1aLHvyvNOlJt6D51g?feat=directlink
And she has quite a few Km on the clock.
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/6T-PpSGfPzAtBL3BAv1uoQ?feat=directlink
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/6T-PpSGfPzAtBL3BAv1uoQ?feat=directlink
And here is what i drive when im at work (i dont clean the cars, im the guy standing behind the counter saying sir to people)
First one is a Porsche Cayenne
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ebentzen/5330241084/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ebentzen/5330241084/
Jaguar XF (i didnt take this picture)
http://www.speedlux.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Jaguar-XF-3.jpg
http://www.speedlux.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Jaguar-XF-3.jpg
And theres all the Audis and Mercs =)
i posted the links aswell since i cant get it to post the actual pictures :(
why dont picasa/flick let me link to the the picture >_<
First 2 are outside the building where i live, and yes i know she could really need a wash but that wont be done untill they have time to do it at work (i work at a Car rental company)
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/wXLXKwnhy9eY0TMZdMXHEw?feat=directlink
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/wXLXKwnhy9eY0TMZdMXHEw?feat=directlink
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/rkrAdjzNNR1-snLEoQ-syA?feat=directlink
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/rkrAdjzNNR1-snLEoQ-syA?feat=directlink
The inside could really use a good cleaning aswell
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/c5sYp9nOeu1wbtYNlQRTxA?feat=directlink
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/c5sYp9nOeu1wbtYNlQRTxA?feat=directlink
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/89Ncn1aLHvyvNOlJt6D51g?feat=directlink
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/89Ncn1aLHvyvNOlJt6D51g?feat=directlink
And she has quite a few Km on the clock.
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/6T-PpSGfPzAtBL3BAv1uoQ?feat=directlink
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/6T-PpSGfPzAtBL3BAv1uoQ?feat=directlink
And here is what i drive when im at work (i dont clean the cars, im the guy standing behind the counter saying sir to people)
First one is a Porsche Cayenne
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ebentzen/5330241084/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ebentzen/5330241084/
Jaguar XF (i didnt take this picture)
http://www.speedlux.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Jaguar-XF-3.jpg
http://www.speedlux.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Jaguar-XF-3.jpg
And theres all the Audis and Mercs =)
i posted the links aswell since i cant get it to post the actual pictures :(
why dont picasa/flick let me link to the the picture >_<
chutch15
Sep 13, 07:04 AM
It does not. With this new glass, I don't feel I need one. A screen protector is far softer and would take more damage in dents and scratches, not to mention expensive (and a pain) to replace.
MarcelV
Jan 1, 07:28 PM
....as a continuation of Jobs last iTV performance. Apple will show how the connected world is going to look. You will have the Mac, the new iTV (probably a launch date will be provided), the new MacPhone, a new .Mac service that will be the key for phone content and syncing, and a new widescreen iPod (not sure about the touchscreen, but will be available immediately). And of course, a full Leopard preview that is the engine behind the full integration. It will become more about the concept this time. Much less about the devices as the Leopard launch will be the key of the platform. The iPod can be launched as it is not directly tied in, but the phone, Leopard and .Mac 5.0 are directly related. The 'top-secret' features? Push technolgy utilizing .Mac to the phone. And because the phone will sync two way with .Mac, your Mac will be kept updated on iCal, Address Book. And even iTunes will know what songs you wanted to purchase utilizing Gracenote's Music ID (the audio fingerprinting technology developed by Philips.)
Just my thoughts, but this is an area the will be able to become a major player in the market.
Just my thoughts, but this is an area the will be able to become a major player in the market.
iJawn108
Jul 19, 05:31 PM
:) I contributed to these stats I bought a shuffle... now apple hurry up and release leopard so i can give you more sales numbers in Q4.:cool:
notjustjay
Mar 25, 03:55 PM
I recall some of the naysayers around here not even a year ago stating that such a device would never be suitable for gaming. And here we are. With HD output to your TV.
Vision, people. Vision.
There's still the practical limitations of using a touchscreen as a control device, though. It's never going to be as tactile as a controller with buttons and joysticks. Not to mention having the HDMI adaptor sticking out of the side of the iPad while you're holding it to play games...
Apart from that, I'm glad to see the iPad is able to hold its own as a gaming machine.
Vision, people. Vision.
There's still the practical limitations of using a touchscreen as a control device, though. It's never going to be as tactile as a controller with buttons and joysticks. Not to mention having the HDMI adaptor sticking out of the side of the iPad while you're holding it to play games...
Apart from that, I'm glad to see the iPad is able to hold its own as a gaming machine.
Lollypop
Jul 20, 07:47 AM
What makes you think that you have to do that?
have you ever used Linux? Application-installation in any modern Linux-distro is VERY smooth. If I want to install an app in Ubuntu (the previous distro I used), how do I do that? Well, I load a package-manager, which gives me a list of apps. I select the app I want to install, and click "Install". And that's it. How much simpler could it be? Why does everyone think that loading a web-browser, searching the app with Google, browsing to the website, downloading the installer (assuming that the apps is free. Usually with Mac, it's not) and running the installer is somehow "easier" that launching an app, selecting the app to be installed from a list and clicking "install"? Seriously?
What do you mean by "unified front"? The GUI? Most distros use either KDE or GNOME (usually alloweing the user to choose which one he prefers), so they are in fact quite unified.
I have used Linux before, admit that I gave up with linux with Suse 9. The point I was trying to make with the package manager is that its not easy to go out and find something, every time you either have to find a package for your specific distribution or have it "built" for your distro. If you look at the way the mac works now I can drag the aduim icon to a remote drive, and from almost any machine that meets the basic specs I can then double click that app, even if its on a network drive, it will run, can you say the same for Linux?
By unification I meant giving a constant user experience with singal points of administration, management ect. Some of my previous sessions with linux the applications did not always fully adhere to guidelines that were set out by KDE, whatever theme i choose, it didnt adapt to it for example. I fully admit im not a linux guru, and that things very likely have changed, but my perception is that every distro comes with a boat load of software on the DVD or via download, if you want to get something thats not listed it becomes a bit more difficult. There is the issue of building your own kernel and then software for it but other than bulding the kernel i have no knowlede of any related issues.
The mac advantage is that its a bit easier to get, install and run applications than windows, and IMO linux as well. Thats a advantage apple should leverage and try and sell more if they are going to sell more machines and increase the market share of the entire platform.
I agree with kalisphoenix to an extent when he says that the linux people dont want a single unified distro, the linux crowd doesnt want a true singular unfied platform, why is there a few big distros out there after years of linux development, why are there so many niche ones, and why do linux users argue with others over their favorite distro? Diversity and flexability is one of the strenghts of Linux, its users know that, and having a single distro that does everything will counter that strength, they also know that.
Im not taking on linux, to the contrary I believe linux has a critical place, I personally believe that its diversity/flexibility is one of the reasons it hasnt concored the desktop market, (peolpe want the plain and simple windows thing, to much options makes it overly complex), diversity/flexibility is the same reason linux has concored the server market.
have you ever used Linux? Application-installation in any modern Linux-distro is VERY smooth. If I want to install an app in Ubuntu (the previous distro I used), how do I do that? Well, I load a package-manager, which gives me a list of apps. I select the app I want to install, and click "Install". And that's it. How much simpler could it be? Why does everyone think that loading a web-browser, searching the app with Google, browsing to the website, downloading the installer (assuming that the apps is free. Usually with Mac, it's not) and running the installer is somehow "easier" that launching an app, selecting the app to be installed from a list and clicking "install"? Seriously?
What do you mean by "unified front"? The GUI? Most distros use either KDE or GNOME (usually alloweing the user to choose which one he prefers), so they are in fact quite unified.
I have used Linux before, admit that I gave up with linux with Suse 9. The point I was trying to make with the package manager is that its not easy to go out and find something, every time you either have to find a package for your specific distribution or have it "built" for your distro. If you look at the way the mac works now I can drag the aduim icon to a remote drive, and from almost any machine that meets the basic specs I can then double click that app, even if its on a network drive, it will run, can you say the same for Linux?
By unification I meant giving a constant user experience with singal points of administration, management ect. Some of my previous sessions with linux the applications did not always fully adhere to guidelines that were set out by KDE, whatever theme i choose, it didnt adapt to it for example. I fully admit im not a linux guru, and that things very likely have changed, but my perception is that every distro comes with a boat load of software on the DVD or via download, if you want to get something thats not listed it becomes a bit more difficult. There is the issue of building your own kernel and then software for it but other than bulding the kernel i have no knowlede of any related issues.
The mac advantage is that its a bit easier to get, install and run applications than windows, and IMO linux as well. Thats a advantage apple should leverage and try and sell more if they are going to sell more machines and increase the market share of the entire platform.
I agree with kalisphoenix to an extent when he says that the linux people dont want a single unified distro, the linux crowd doesnt want a true singular unfied platform, why is there a few big distros out there after years of linux development, why are there so many niche ones, and why do linux users argue with others over their favorite distro? Diversity and flexability is one of the strenghts of Linux, its users know that, and having a single distro that does everything will counter that strength, they also know that.
Im not taking on linux, to the contrary I believe linux has a critical place, I personally believe that its diversity/flexibility is one of the reasons it hasnt concored the desktop market, (peolpe want the plain and simple windows thing, to much options makes it overly complex), diversity/flexibility is the same reason linux has concored the server market.
PBF
Apr 10, 02:13 AM
WOW!!! iCal looks *********g UGLY... I hope they add an option to use a standard gray toolbar area... That seems so unlike apple to do something like that.
Heh.. What if they give everything that look :). I think I would switch to windows if they did that..
I don't understand why everyone seems to dislike the "new" iCal so much. Clearly, it was adopted by iPad iOS at first and now by Mac OS X Lion. Nothing new here. Nothing unexpected.
I don't remember people disliking/complaining about the iCal look on iPad at all. I tell ya, people complain just for the sake of complaining. What a crowd. :rolleyes:
Heh.. What if they give everything that look :). I think I would switch to windows if they did that..
I don't understand why everyone seems to dislike the "new" iCal so much. Clearly, it was adopted by iPad iOS at first and now by Mac OS X Lion. Nothing new here. Nothing unexpected.
I don't remember people disliking/complaining about the iCal look on iPad at all. I tell ya, people complain just for the sake of complaining. What a crowd. :rolleyes:
ten-oak-druid
Apr 26, 02:11 PM
Try again what ? It's not a word mark, it's a typed drawing, meaning you could trademark Pet Store too if it is a different drawing all together (different font, different shape, different color).
It's basically a logo trademark, like let's say : :apple:
Your point is that you cannot find such a trademark as "app store" in the standard character format because "app store" is too general right? The other person posted that "pet store" would be a ridiculous example of this.
"Registration of a mark in the standard character format will provide broad rights, namely use in any manner of presentation."
Source: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/index.jsp
Ok fair enough. Pet store was registered in the stylized or design format.
But your basic argument against Apple is that they cannot use app store as a trademark in the broader text format because it is too general. But this is not the only example of such a thing.
If this is the case then Apple Store will be thrown out too. It is the same type of trademark. Two words, not one and not preceded by "the".
App Store
Apple Store
The other argument is that "app" is too generic and that the term was around prior to the trademark. I do not believe this is valid either as "app" may have existed but was not widely used. The argument would have been used agains the prior trademark of "appstore" in that case.
One thing is for sure. Our opinions will have no bearing on the final outcome.
1. Look, the form in which it was trademarked matters. Otherwise, there would only be 1 type of mark. You can overrule it all you want, in the end you were wrong.
2. App is as much a part of the lexicon as pet. I know I've been using it for more than a decade.
You define the lexicon of the overall society?
The point that has been brought forth to the USPTO is that Apple has no right to an exclusive mark on App Store because of its descriptive and generic nature. This is not like the examples you cite, the problem is not that Apple has a shoe store they want to call Yellow, it's that they have a shoe store they want to call shoe store.
That is the problem defined by people who object to Apple's trademark. It has not been decided whether Apple's trademark should be invalidated based on this opinion yet.
It's basically a logo trademark, like let's say : :apple:
Your point is that you cannot find such a trademark as "app store" in the standard character format because "app store" is too general right? The other person posted that "pet store" would be a ridiculous example of this.
"Registration of a mark in the standard character format will provide broad rights, namely use in any manner of presentation."
Source: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/index.jsp
Ok fair enough. Pet store was registered in the stylized or design format.
But your basic argument against Apple is that they cannot use app store as a trademark in the broader text format because it is too general. But this is not the only example of such a thing.
If this is the case then Apple Store will be thrown out too. It is the same type of trademark. Two words, not one and not preceded by "the".
App Store
Apple Store
The other argument is that "app" is too generic and that the term was around prior to the trademark. I do not believe this is valid either as "app" may have existed but was not widely used. The argument would have been used agains the prior trademark of "appstore" in that case.
One thing is for sure. Our opinions will have no bearing on the final outcome.
1. Look, the form in which it was trademarked matters. Otherwise, there would only be 1 type of mark. You can overrule it all you want, in the end you were wrong.
2. App is as much a part of the lexicon as pet. I know I've been using it for more than a decade.
You define the lexicon of the overall society?
The point that has been brought forth to the USPTO is that Apple has no right to an exclusive mark on App Store because of its descriptive and generic nature. This is not like the examples you cite, the problem is not that Apple has a shoe store they want to call Yellow, it's that they have a shoe store they want to call shoe store.
That is the problem defined by people who object to Apple's trademark. It has not been decided whether Apple's trademark should be invalidated based on this opinion yet.
broncopde
Jun 24, 02:01 AM
I just don't see people wanting to have their arms up like that to use a desktop computer. It works so well on the iPad cause you can use it where your hands are already sitting (in your lap). But this...doesn't strike as being very practical at all.
jsm4182
Feb 26, 01:03 PM
I don't think that's a first-gen, mate. The first gens were acrylic:
The acrylic ones are the Apple Studio Displays. They've been the Cinema display since they moved to aluminum.
The acrylic ones are the Apple Studio Displays. They've been the Cinema display since they moved to aluminum.
No comments:
Post a Comment