Scooterman1
Sep 14, 11:39 AM
I guess you don't read my posts carefully. I said what you said, that Toyota issues a recall, but the onus is on the owner to bring in the vehicle for servicing. Exactly as Apple has now done: if you experience a problem, let them know and you can get a free bumper.
To Consumer Reports this is an unacceptable way to deal with a design flaw. If it's Apple. For Toyota, it's fine and considered the normal way to handle a design flaw.
I just have a hard time picturing Toyota mailing me a new accelerator pedal and linkage and expecting me to install it. Wake up!
But why should Apple provide a permanent fix when the problem hasn't affected sales too much, and they can come out with a fixed phone next year and get you to stand in line to buy it.
Consumer Reports are doing exactly what their subscribers are paying them to do. I'm sorry if everyone isn't Apple Fanboys, but they get paid NOT to be anyone's Fanboy.
To Consumer Reports this is an unacceptable way to deal with a design flaw. If it's Apple. For Toyota, it's fine and considered the normal way to handle a design flaw.
I just have a hard time picturing Toyota mailing me a new accelerator pedal and linkage and expecting me to install it. Wake up!
But why should Apple provide a permanent fix when the problem hasn't affected sales too much, and they can come out with a fixed phone next year and get you to stand in line to buy it.
Consumer Reports are doing exactly what their subscribers are paying them to do. I'm sorry if everyone isn't Apple Fanboys, but they get paid NOT to be anyone's Fanboy.
LethalWolfe
Apr 5, 01:57 PM
What are you talking about? iTMS not generating profit? Geez, check your facts!
You are the one in need of fact checking. Jobs has said in a number of interviews that iTMS will generate enough money to basically break even. iTMS is there to sell iPods, not to make a profit.
Lethal
You are the one in need of fact checking. Jobs has said in a number of interviews that iTMS will generate enough money to basically break even. iTMS is there to sell iPods, not to make a profit.
Lethal
kalisphoenix
Jul 20, 01:42 AM
You are probably nursing those MS shares you bought at $90, hoping for a better day. It is not coming anytime soon sorry to say. Buying is about momentum. Apple has it and MS does not. Vista already has a great deal of bad press and it has not even hit the street. eWeek and other journals are already writing about Vista security vulnerabilities. That is not a good sign. Vista features and functionality has been scaled back numerous times. That too is not a good sign.
Vista will sell more copies in its first two weeks than Leopard in its first year. As several hundred thousand years of humanity have demonstrated, rhyme and reason matters little.
Who would have imagined that the common view. amongst the informed computer community, was MS was trying desperately to draw close to even-up with Apple? About the time MS established Windows 2000, they were at the top of the computer world in just about every SW market there was.
....and they still are. The anti-Apple and anti-Linux advertising games are defense, not offense.
They finally had a very stable desktop, server platform, mail server, yellow pages, browser, office suite, SQL engine, and so on. But once they reached this pinnacle, two things happened (or at least two I want to talk about). One, they became way too greedy with their predatory licensing. It just went through the roof. If you have never purchased SW at the enterprise level, you do not understand how expensive this has become. SW can cost (at least) as much HW at the enterprise level.
No doubt, but I don't see businesses exactly fleeing in droves.
The second thing that happened at MS is best described in a quote "When Alexander looked at his empire, he wept for there was nothing more to conquer." Instead of continuing on the path of R&D, they tried to find "new worlds to conquer", secure in the knowledge they had indeed subdued all competitors who could challenge them. Sun had tried to mount a charge in the early-mid 90's. Fortunately for MS, Sun's CEO lacked the wherewithal to do more than file lawsuits. Linux suffers from the exact problems that have plagued the Unix community; they cannot unify because they have no leadership.
Sun's ailments are a lot more complicated than that, as are SGI's. Most of their problem is that their workstation prices make Apple's seem like bargain-bin deals.
Gah. The Linux community doesn't want to unify. In fact, not unifying is the core of their philosophy. The vast majority of Linux users (ie, non-n00bs) don't really give a crap about mass adoption of Linux. Many even view such a possibility with horror and disgust. The only priority is choice. It's why there are 415 distributions (none of which are compatible with each other), 9,843 window managers (none of which have remotely similar configuration options), and 3.43x10^15 terminal emulators (none of which actually emulate terminals any better or worse than any other one).
Waving the "king of the OS hill" prize in front of a bunch of Linux users/developers will only result in them staring at you like a dog that's been shown a card trick. With very few exceptions, only n00bs (and uncomprehending businessmen who think they can somehow profit) want mass adoption of Linux.
Vista will sell more copies in its first two weeks than Leopard in its first year. As several hundred thousand years of humanity have demonstrated, rhyme and reason matters little.
Who would have imagined that the common view. amongst the informed computer community, was MS was trying desperately to draw close to even-up with Apple? About the time MS established Windows 2000, they were at the top of the computer world in just about every SW market there was.
....and they still are. The anti-Apple and anti-Linux advertising games are defense, not offense.
They finally had a very stable desktop, server platform, mail server, yellow pages, browser, office suite, SQL engine, and so on. But once they reached this pinnacle, two things happened (or at least two I want to talk about). One, they became way too greedy with their predatory licensing. It just went through the roof. If you have never purchased SW at the enterprise level, you do not understand how expensive this has become. SW can cost (at least) as much HW at the enterprise level.
No doubt, but I don't see businesses exactly fleeing in droves.
The second thing that happened at MS is best described in a quote "When Alexander looked at his empire, he wept for there was nothing more to conquer." Instead of continuing on the path of R&D, they tried to find "new worlds to conquer", secure in the knowledge they had indeed subdued all competitors who could challenge them. Sun had tried to mount a charge in the early-mid 90's. Fortunately for MS, Sun's CEO lacked the wherewithal to do more than file lawsuits. Linux suffers from the exact problems that have plagued the Unix community; they cannot unify because they have no leadership.
Sun's ailments are a lot more complicated than that, as are SGI's. Most of their problem is that their workstation prices make Apple's seem like bargain-bin deals.
Gah. The Linux community doesn't want to unify. In fact, not unifying is the core of their philosophy. The vast majority of Linux users (ie, non-n00bs) don't really give a crap about mass adoption of Linux. Many even view such a possibility with horror and disgust. The only priority is choice. It's why there are 415 distributions (none of which are compatible with each other), 9,843 window managers (none of which have remotely similar configuration options), and 3.43x10^15 terminal emulators (none of which actually emulate terminals any better or worse than any other one).
Waving the "king of the OS hill" prize in front of a bunch of Linux users/developers will only result in them staring at you like a dog that's been shown a card trick. With very few exceptions, only n00bs (and uncomprehending businessmen who think they can somehow profit) want mass adoption of Linux.
Mr-Stabby
Apr 12, 10:39 PM
Some people seem to think that difficult to use = pro. Those are the people use windows because they enjoy fixing problems. Anything to save time is good for anyone, pro or not, and this interface feels like one that wont take much time to get used to. It looks well designed.
You've hit the nail on the head there. It goes back to the old problem that some pros enjoy having something thats hard to use, because they feel clever/superior using it, knowing that others can't. Releases like this one that make a Pro program accessible to not so skilled people p*sses off these Pro users, because they want to be seen to be the clever ones, the mystical being who can work this very complicated program that no one else can. It's these type of people who come out with the 'Oh well it's not a pro program anymore, hello iMovie Pro" type comments.
I for one am a professional video editor, and i am extremely excited by this. It's going to be so fun learning this new program! Something new to investigate is always fun. From what i've seen, it doesn't look dumbed down at all.
You've hit the nail on the head there. It goes back to the old problem that some pros enjoy having something thats hard to use, because they feel clever/superior using it, knowing that others can't. Releases like this one that make a Pro program accessible to not so skilled people p*sses off these Pro users, because they want to be seen to be the clever ones, the mystical being who can work this very complicated program that no one else can. It's these type of people who come out with the 'Oh well it's not a pro program anymore, hello iMovie Pro" type comments.
I for one am a professional video editor, and i am extremely excited by this. It's going to be so fun learning this new program! Something new to investigate is always fun. From what i've seen, it doesn't look dumbed down at all.
GLS
Mar 23, 02:46 PM
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
Yes, Apple looks bad to have perhaps their most iconic device ever on their website. At the very least, without the iPod, the Apple of today would look quite different...or might not even be around....
Having said that...I do hope there will always be a click wheel iPod of some type offered. I much prefer it to using the touch interface, as far as iPod's are concerned.
I should have bought a spare Nano before they bastardized it last fall....
Yes, Apple looks bad to have perhaps their most iconic device ever on their website. At the very least, without the iPod, the Apple of today would look quite different...or might not even be around....
Having said that...I do hope there will always be a click wheel iPod of some type offered. I much prefer it to using the touch interface, as far as iPod's are concerned.
I should have bought a spare Nano before they bastardized it last fall....
osxhero
Apr 12, 09:31 PM
People detection or NSA spoofer code. People should have the right to turn this stuff off. Hope FCP doesn't impose it without an option to disable.
gr8whtd0pe
Jan 6, 07:53 AM
...but it was seen on Top Gear a few years back (http://i53.tinypic.com/33mv0yb.png) when the boys made their electric car and took it to Oxford.
http://i54.tinypic.com/99hvma.jpg
That. Is. Awesome.
http://i54.tinypic.com/99hvma.jpg
That. Is. Awesome.
Bengt77
Aug 29, 03:58 PM
I thought the Yonah/Merom pricing 'issue' has been discussed some time ago, already. The 'conclusion' was that Intel would price the Merom the same as the Yonah, to be able to fight off AMD, which has closen in on Intel a bit too much, to Intel's liking. Intel wants everybody to switch to the Core 2 technology as soon as possible. That's the only way the Intel chips will be faster on all levels than their AMD counterparts. Because, yes, Yonah was a stopgap chip. Merom is the real New Chip�.
nerdo
Apr 13, 05:46 AM
Eeeh?!? I say every tool helps. If I get a tool that can color shot and counter shot differently because it recognizes a face, I say groovy!
Indexing old stuff looking for faces: go for it, the need of the "pro" is whatever it is. All this pretending there is some uniform pro way of working is the most amateurish idea around. There is only the end result, how you get there doesn't matter to the viewer.
... oh damn sucked into another pointless statement hah... yeah FCP renders slow...
No professional would let the software identify their subjects. Features like this do nothing to lighten the workflow of their productions. Only amateurs would allow an algorithms to determine what gets logged as what. Regardless of how the rest of the program turn out, the facial recognition is something only amateurs will use. Professionals have a higher standard of quality, and more complex needs than that.
Indexing old stuff looking for faces: go for it, the need of the "pro" is whatever it is. All this pretending there is some uniform pro way of working is the most amateurish idea around. There is only the end result, how you get there doesn't matter to the viewer.
... oh damn sucked into another pointless statement hah... yeah FCP renders slow...
No professional would let the software identify their subjects. Features like this do nothing to lighten the workflow of their productions. Only amateurs would allow an algorithms to determine what gets logged as what. Regardless of how the rest of the program turn out, the facial recognition is something only amateurs will use. Professionals have a higher standard of quality, and more complex needs than that.
jxyama
Apr 2, 09:09 AM
You have some good points here....but the basic arguement is how to survive in the future - How to grow the business....Itms doesn't make any money for Apple, the ipod is going to have too many similar players. So why not go for the lower end of the market - eg: like they did with the old "LC"s machines. People buy software but they don't want to shell out alot of money for hardware.
no worry, people's been saying that apple's been dying since like 10 years ago. and increasing the marketshare doesn't mean it's growing and not increasing the marketshare doesn't mean its future is doomed.
look at gateway. it just acquired eMachines and "doubled" its marketshare to 7%. apple is half that. and guess which company has been more profitable recently? which company is debt free? (hint: it's not gateway) and which company had to expand beyond just selling cheap PCs to continue its operation? (another hint: it's not apple.)
i see absolutely no economic reason why apple should bother selling cheap macs.
people who know what they want will pay for Macs. if they don't know what they want, they won't care if they got a Mac.
no worry, people's been saying that apple's been dying since like 10 years ago. and increasing the marketshare doesn't mean it's growing and not increasing the marketshare doesn't mean its future is doomed.
look at gateway. it just acquired eMachines and "doubled" its marketshare to 7%. apple is half that. and guess which company has been more profitable recently? which company is debt free? (hint: it's not gateway) and which company had to expand beyond just selling cheap PCs to continue its operation? (another hint: it's not apple.)
i see absolutely no economic reason why apple should bother selling cheap macs.
people who know what they want will pay for Macs. if they don't know what they want, they won't care if they got a Mac.
feare
Apr 2, 08:43 AM
It's definitely a lot smoother than the first preview was, especially in the animation department. Mission Control is no longer choppy for me, and while opening folders in launchpad is still choppy, it is much less so than in the first preview (I'm also on my Cinema Display right now, which seems to push my 2009 13" mbp).
In fact, animations on the whole seem to be smoother than in SL. When using my cinema display, opening large stacks tended to be a little choppy, but now they open smoothly.
And the default wallpaper is much improved.
In fact, animations on the whole seem to be smoother than in SL. When using my cinema display, opening large stacks tended to be a little choppy, but now they open smoothly.
And the default wallpaper is much improved.
SciFrog
Feb 17, 12:55 PM
No remote login?
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!
Balaamsdonkey
Apr 22, 01:43 AM
I could be wrong but I think the GPS recording has more to do with GPS locating for photography than anything else. Isn't that how GPS enabled cameras work? They check the GPS signal every few seconds and record it? I could be wrong.
It would make more sense to just record the GPS info when a photo is taken though.
It would make more sense to just record the GPS info when a photo is taken though.
vincenz
Feb 25, 02:07 PM
picture
How is that iMac floating in the air like that? Unless mine eyes deceive me.
How is that iMac floating in the air like that? Unless mine eyes deceive me.
davester
Oct 24, 01:03 AM
Since when have Apple used the Optima font family for their copy? :rolleyes:
Edit: lol ok, thought you were serious about this for a moment.
Edit: lol ok, thought you were serious about this for a moment.
jdawgnoonan
Mar 25, 05:05 PM
That is awesome and amazing, but it would be much more so without the cable. My experience is that the cable connection to all iDevices get pretty touchy (due to the cable I believe, not the actual iDevice). Make that work with the iPhone or iPod touch acting as a controller and it would be sweeter, or better yet release a controller for games on the iPad that is comfortable and costs less than 50 bucks.
vvebster
Nov 23, 10:58 PM
ROFL, tell me about it :D
Psht. I can get that up here for free.
Psht. I can get that up here for free.
Chundles
Jul 18, 03:16 AM
List of things I don't want to hear one word about at the WWDC:
iPod
iPod nano
iTMS
iMac
Mac mini
MacBook.
The WWDC is now and always should be a professionally focussed conference. All technical, nerdy and Pro stuff - Mac Pro, MacBook Pro, Pro Apps, OS X development.
All the other stuff can be updated in their own little events or quietly on the online store on or around the WWDC if needs be but the actual event should be totally professional stuff. That's why the developers pay the big bucks.
iPod
iPod nano
iTMS
iMac
Mac mini
MacBook.
The WWDC is now and always should be a professionally focussed conference. All technical, nerdy and Pro stuff - Mac Pro, MacBook Pro, Pro Apps, OS X development.
All the other stuff can be updated in their own little events or quietly on the online store on or around the WWDC if needs be but the actual event should be totally professional stuff. That's why the developers pay the big bucks.
prodigee
Feb 27, 10:00 PM
lol, I just realized how stupid my previous comment sounded :o
Haha its all good. We all say silly things sometimes. ;)
Haha its all good. We all say silly things sometimes. ;)
AidenShaw
Aug 31, 09:29 PM
Just got my registration, hotel and everything for the Fall IDF... (http://www.intel.com/idf/us/fall2006/)
I'll find out about all the top-secret Intel roadmap stuff nano-seconds before the rest of the universe.
And I'll be able to say "what, you're not waiting for the 6-core Snoqualamie chipset and the Sammamish CPU" with a straight face. :eek:
I'll find out about all the top-secret Intel roadmap stuff nano-seconds before the rest of the universe.
And I'll be able to say "what, you're not waiting for the 6-core Snoqualamie chipset and the Sammamish CPU" with a straight face. :eek:
base08
Jan 12, 08:24 AM
Take a look at this:
http://flickr.com/photos/peteryan/2187596838/
Personaly i think it's fake, because of the non-capital letter on the begining of the second sentence... but who knows it could be true the disposition of the this so called macbook air is quite original and not in the tradicional way laptop upside down opened a little...
http://flickr.com/photos/peteryan/2187596838/
Personaly i think it's fake, because of the non-capital letter on the begining of the second sentence... but who knows it could be true the disposition of the this so called macbook air is quite original and not in the tradicional way laptop upside down opened a little...
andrew.gw
Apr 3, 10:02 AM
What does the iOS scrollbar look like on pages with a black background?
http://cl.ly/3W1u1A3X0K0K1w0q3N2J/ScrollBar.png
http://cl.ly/3W1u1A3X0K0K1w0q3N2J/ScrollBar.png
islanders
Dec 29, 08:04 PM
I entirely DISagree :)
It's the cost and convenience that will determine how successful iTS downloads are. I would hope for DVD quality (including surround sound).
One day I'll have a HD screen and I'll be wanting to use a HD service.. so it'd be good for Apple to have a plan there for that :)
Good point.
But it seems like most people are dying for HD over here. We have quite a few cable and satellite providers that have HD and who ever offers the most channel, people are going to choose that one. Comcast is supposed to roll out 20 more HD channels in 07. The same goes for the others.
Direct TV which is one of the major satellite providers didn�t anticipate the demand for HD DVD and they were on back order for months, about a month ago, when I was choosing a cable provider. You buy that HD DVD for $200, a two year contract for HD, and rent the box then return it. (yeah right?) And you had to get on a waiting list.
I don�t think anyone anticipated the demand for HD. People watch programs they normally wouldn�t if it�s HD.
There are still a lot of analog cable subscribers on Comcast, you don�t need a digital box, but they are going to be forced to use digital so Comcast can make room on the bandwidth for more HD channels.
Digital 480p isn�t bad, but it�s 4:3 aspect.
I would say PQ is the highest concern. And I agree price is also right up there, and it�s a different market.
It's the cost and convenience that will determine how successful iTS downloads are. I would hope for DVD quality (including surround sound).
One day I'll have a HD screen and I'll be wanting to use a HD service.. so it'd be good for Apple to have a plan there for that :)
Good point.
But it seems like most people are dying for HD over here. We have quite a few cable and satellite providers that have HD and who ever offers the most channel, people are going to choose that one. Comcast is supposed to roll out 20 more HD channels in 07. The same goes for the others.
Direct TV which is one of the major satellite providers didn�t anticipate the demand for HD DVD and they were on back order for months, about a month ago, when I was choosing a cable provider. You buy that HD DVD for $200, a two year contract for HD, and rent the box then return it. (yeah right?) And you had to get on a waiting list.
I don�t think anyone anticipated the demand for HD. People watch programs they normally wouldn�t if it�s HD.
There are still a lot of analog cable subscribers on Comcast, you don�t need a digital box, but they are going to be forced to use digital so Comcast can make room on the bandwidth for more HD channels.
Digital 480p isn�t bad, but it�s 4:3 aspect.
I would say PQ is the highest concern. And I agree price is also right up there, and it�s a different market.
No comments:
Post a Comment