vastoholic
Feb 18, 12:49 AM
Nice, I find my MBP is the perfect size for traveling too. I am curious though, what limitations did you have with the iPad?
Oh, it was mostly my media. I have a large collection of music/movies/tv shows and I can only fit a certain amount on my iPhone and iPad. I turned off my mac mini at home since I was going to be gone for 2 months here so I can't stream from that. Even if I could, my wifi here is terrible, Netflix is always poor quality and has a hard time keeping up with that. So I bought the macbook and a 1TB hard drive to install when I get back home and then I'm headed off again for my mobilization and then deployment in the summer. Just wanted to be able to take my whole library with me. The MBP will also be used for college when I get back from Afghanistan.
Oh, it was mostly my media. I have a large collection of music/movies/tv shows and I can only fit a certain amount on my iPhone and iPad. I turned off my mac mini at home since I was going to be gone for 2 months here so I can't stream from that. Even if I could, my wifi here is terrible, Netflix is always poor quality and has a hard time keeping up with that. So I bought the macbook and a 1TB hard drive to install when I get back home and then I'm headed off again for my mobilization and then deployment in the summer. Just wanted to be able to take my whole library with me. The MBP will also be used for college when I get back from Afghanistan.
granex
Nov 28, 10:24 AM
The Xbox comparison is not totally valid because in that case Microsoft could provide software support to the games makers and provide other incentives for content (as well as supplying their own games content). With the Zune (and other mp3 players) things are pretty much content neutral for the most part, except for online store purchases, where Apple has a huge advantage.
The only way that Microsoft can use their $$ to greatly influence this market is by selling the Zune for a loss (as they did for the Xbox). They really can't influence the content market in the same way, unless they start paying bands to pull their stuff from iTunes, and even then that is a small piece of the music content market.
They will have to win on features and integration -- so they are pretty much doomed. They have essentially bet the whole farm on the wireless exchange. We'll see how that works, but it is a density dependent advantage (if there are not enough Zunes around then there is no advantage to being able to exchange with people). Some animal species go extinct even when they are at reasonably large numbers when their relative density falls so low that they can't effectively find mates. This is called the Allee effect. If the density of Zunes does not increase above a certain critical level, even assuming that people want to squirt songs (or whatever it's called), then they are really out of luck.
A cheap, powerful Xbox with lots of cool games has value right from the start. Microsoft could buy your love in this case.
The only way that Microsoft can use their $$ to greatly influence this market is by selling the Zune for a loss (as they did for the Xbox). They really can't influence the content market in the same way, unless they start paying bands to pull their stuff from iTunes, and even then that is a small piece of the music content market.
They will have to win on features and integration -- so they are pretty much doomed. They have essentially bet the whole farm on the wireless exchange. We'll see how that works, but it is a density dependent advantage (if there are not enough Zunes around then there is no advantage to being able to exchange with people). Some animal species go extinct even when they are at reasonably large numbers when their relative density falls so low that they can't effectively find mates. This is called the Allee effect. If the density of Zunes does not increase above a certain critical level, even assuming that people want to squirt songs (or whatever it's called), then they are really out of luck.
A cheap, powerful Xbox with lots of cool games has value right from the start. Microsoft could buy your love in this case.
OhEsTen
Nov 15, 10:50 AM
How can this get negative votes? In fact, how do a lot of perfectly benign threads get negative votes? Are there just members out there who vote negative on everything?
Actually, it's a little known fact that Steve Ballmer frequents this site.... So I attribute all the negative votes to him clicking the "negative" button until he gets tired.... as you can see he doesn't have very much endurance....
Actually, it's a little known fact that Steve Ballmer frequents this site.... So I attribute all the negative votes to him clicking the "negative" button until he gets tired.... as you can see he doesn't have very much endurance....
Chundles
Aug 16, 07:22 AM
Digitimes?
iBook G5 and PowerBook G5 Digitimes?
Yah right.
Sorry but I've had it with new iPod rumours. They'll come when they come and they won't be as revolutionary as we'd thought.
Massively fed up now.
iBook G5 and PowerBook G5 Digitimes?
Yah right.
Sorry but I've had it with new iPod rumours. They'll come when they come and they won't be as revolutionary as we'd thought.
Massively fed up now.
DewGuy1999
Feb 28, 02:39 PM
here is my mess sorry i didnt clean up first
Nice setup. What's the story behind the "double" windows, I've never seen anything like that before.
Nice setup. What's the story behind the "double" windows, I've never seen anything like that before.
BlizzardBomb
Sep 1, 11:52 AM
i find 17'' way to small for a desktop computer.
You what? Well I guess its a matter of opinion but a 17" with a decent resolution is plenty! Heck, I even know people who use a 15" MBP as a desktop replacement. :)
You what? Well I guess its a matter of opinion but a 17" with a decent resolution is plenty! Heck, I even know people who use a 15" MBP as a desktop replacement. :)
whoooaaahhhh
Jul 14, 09:54 AM
Good post, sums up the current situation very nicely.
Given that dual layer 50GB blu-ray discs cant even be produced yet, i think the 200GB claim is complete vaporware.
I hope HD-DVD wins this war soon, as it is out of the gates first, and thus far a far superior format. If Blu-Ray were to give up now, i dont think many people would be sad. One format is better for everyone.
NO.
First of all, Blu-Ray discs are a completely new material and fabrication process, so highlighting the fact that they've only made 25GB discs (which were stable-ly created long before almost ANY HD-DVD's) and can't produce a disk which is far above the specs of the competition, is like saying screw the russians cuz they're space program hasn't sent a man to mars (nobody's done it yet, anyway). You can't blame Blu-Ray for not being able to deliver 50 GB yet, the meat of the war is just beginning anyway.
Secondly, what was said about the VC-1 codec is very wrong. Microsoft's VC-1 codec is far worse and more difficult to work with than MPEG 2 or MPEG 4 that sony will probably offer in later versions of Blu-Ray. All this malarky about artifacts doesn't really make sense when you consider that we've been USING MPEG2 IN DVD'S FOR YEARS NOW! There's no way that the algorithim could be to blame for the artifacts! Sure it's fatter, but it's a lighter compression, and as Sony has shown with their PCM Audio on Blu-Ray, sometimes light compression on a bigger disk is better than heavy compression on smaller disks. It will be a lot easier to change to a more efficient codec down the line (which is what we've done with computers time and time again, as well as professional video) so we can get Ultra HD on Blu Ray when it comes out as well.
I'm sorry, I understand people really want HD-DVD to win because it's easier and cheaper right now, but since when has the easiest option been the best? If Blu-Ray doesn't win this war we'll have another short life-span format, this version of HD will not be enough for the professional industry much longer, take it from a video guy. I've written a frickin' paper on this very subject.
IMHO I'd like to see a Blu-Ray with the Mac Pro's to help solidify the consumer base into purchasing a better product, because that's how you standardize something in the market...sales...But I don't know that it will happen. Although remember DVD-RAM? Apple seemed to like that for awhile...that died...
I also don't want microsoft handling my video codec, anybody remember the wonderous creation of WMV/WMA? The one that like none of us can use on macs? HD-DVD's codec is a derivation of the WMV-HD codec. Welcome to the Microsoft reality. They really like controlling proprietary codecs. Also...MPEG was created by a group of companies and people working together, Microsoft created WMV, so they've got almost complete say in how that plays out.
Given that dual layer 50GB blu-ray discs cant even be produced yet, i think the 200GB claim is complete vaporware.
I hope HD-DVD wins this war soon, as it is out of the gates first, and thus far a far superior format. If Blu-Ray were to give up now, i dont think many people would be sad. One format is better for everyone.
NO.
First of all, Blu-Ray discs are a completely new material and fabrication process, so highlighting the fact that they've only made 25GB discs (which were stable-ly created long before almost ANY HD-DVD's) and can't produce a disk which is far above the specs of the competition, is like saying screw the russians cuz they're space program hasn't sent a man to mars (nobody's done it yet, anyway). You can't blame Blu-Ray for not being able to deliver 50 GB yet, the meat of the war is just beginning anyway.
Secondly, what was said about the VC-1 codec is very wrong. Microsoft's VC-1 codec is far worse and more difficult to work with than MPEG 2 or MPEG 4 that sony will probably offer in later versions of Blu-Ray. All this malarky about artifacts doesn't really make sense when you consider that we've been USING MPEG2 IN DVD'S FOR YEARS NOW! There's no way that the algorithim could be to blame for the artifacts! Sure it's fatter, but it's a lighter compression, and as Sony has shown with their PCM Audio on Blu-Ray, sometimes light compression on a bigger disk is better than heavy compression on smaller disks. It will be a lot easier to change to a more efficient codec down the line (which is what we've done with computers time and time again, as well as professional video) so we can get Ultra HD on Blu Ray when it comes out as well.
I'm sorry, I understand people really want HD-DVD to win because it's easier and cheaper right now, but since when has the easiest option been the best? If Blu-Ray doesn't win this war we'll have another short life-span format, this version of HD will not be enough for the professional industry much longer, take it from a video guy. I've written a frickin' paper on this very subject.
IMHO I'd like to see a Blu-Ray with the Mac Pro's to help solidify the consumer base into purchasing a better product, because that's how you standardize something in the market...sales...But I don't know that it will happen. Although remember DVD-RAM? Apple seemed to like that for awhile...that died...
I also don't want microsoft handling my video codec, anybody remember the wonderous creation of WMV/WMA? The one that like none of us can use on macs? HD-DVD's codec is a derivation of the WMV-HD codec. Welcome to the Microsoft reality. They really like controlling proprietary codecs. Also...MPEG was created by a group of companies and people working together, Microsoft created WMV, so they've got almost complete say in how that plays out.
theBigD23
May 2, 07:01 PM
I feel the same way. I just want to delete an app that delete all of the junk that comes with it. Just moving it to e trash does not do that. Some programs have an uninstall and some don't. That's more confusing for people.
This concept might seem alien to a lot of MacRumours users, but being a 'switcher', the method of deleting any app on OS X currently seems very ad hoc. I've been a mac user now for about 4 years and yet the idea of having to delete an app by dragging it to the trash seems very... strange. You never know if you've deleted ALL of that program.
Microsoft have managed to get one thing right in Windows. A specific tool (Add/Remove Programs) to delete a program. That's something that I genuinely feel is lacking in OS X and this idea of clicking and holding in LaunchPad makes sense. It's imple enough: most users who own an iPhone will have no trouble in adopting this method. And what's more, it makes it instantly accessible to anyone who uses a mac. In addition, it goes a step further than Microsoft. It avoids making more novice users from having to delve in to a complex window of settings. A step in the right direction? I think so!
So personally, I think this is a very simple yet very effective change to make to OS X and should be a welcome sign of the things to come in Lion!
This concept might seem alien to a lot of MacRumours users, but being a 'switcher', the method of deleting any app on OS X currently seems very ad hoc. I've been a mac user now for about 4 years and yet the idea of having to delete an app by dragging it to the trash seems very... strange. You never know if you've deleted ALL of that program.
Microsoft have managed to get one thing right in Windows. A specific tool (Add/Remove Programs) to delete a program. That's something that I genuinely feel is lacking in OS X and this idea of clicking and holding in LaunchPad makes sense. It's imple enough: most users who own an iPhone will have no trouble in adopting this method. And what's more, it makes it instantly accessible to anyone who uses a mac. In addition, it goes a step further than Microsoft. It avoids making more novice users from having to delve in to a complex window of settings. A step in the right direction? I think so!
So personally, I think this is a very simple yet very effective change to make to OS X and should be a welcome sign of the things to come in Lion!
imac_japan
Mar 20, 08:23 AM
Thanks for all the comments....
I just want to add that Apple would sell more computers if one was cheaper.....
Say if one (without a monitor) - You can plug into a TV, Was like I said $500 to $600, I would buy 2. One for me and one for my (future) kids..
People (even in Japan) say Macs are too expensive ! Ive been to Akihabara in Tokyo and Den den Town in Osaka ! Ive lived in Japan for 5 years. Yes, the Ipod has been popular in Japan BUT a hell of alot more people buy IBMs here eg: Toshiba, Hitachi and Sony.
An example is....My GF (Japanese) is a university student (she studies Computer science). Her University uses The LCD Imacs and IBMs. Her fellow classmates like them but say that they are too expensive - PLUS this is important !! Everyone else has an IBM so why buy a Mac...
I just want to add that Apple would sell more computers if one was cheaper.....
Say if one (without a monitor) - You can plug into a TV, Was like I said $500 to $600, I would buy 2. One for me and one for my (future) kids..
People (even in Japan) say Macs are too expensive ! Ive been to Akihabara in Tokyo and Den den Town in Osaka ! Ive lived in Japan for 5 years. Yes, the Ipod has been popular in Japan BUT a hell of alot more people buy IBMs here eg: Toshiba, Hitachi and Sony.
An example is....My GF (Japanese) is a university student (she studies Computer science). Her University uses The LCD Imacs and IBMs. Her fellow classmates like them but say that they are too expensive - PLUS this is important !! Everyone else has an IBM so why buy a Mac...
skeep5
Sep 14, 03:05 PM
This story gets buried in the blog and a story of ninja stars makes page one? No Apple bias here. :rolleyes:
maybe they were rubber ninja stars.
maybe they were rubber ninja stars.
thejadedmonkey
Aug 7, 07:07 AM
-Soltaire game as a dashboard widget
Yes! Take Solitare, the number 1 Windows game, and make it even easier to keep hidden when your boss walks by!:D
Yes! Take Solitare, the number 1 Windows game, and make it even easier to keep hidden when your boss walks by!:D
gugy
Nov 29, 05:36 PM
Very interesting
Channels and content providers have been struggling for years in how to make an interface and technology that works well.
Apple has a huge momentum on their side. As well as Microsoft if Vista is good and they can come up
with a competitor to iTV.
I am not sure if iTV works on PCs but if Apple can pull that of, it will be even more enticing for those content
providers to jump on iTVs bandwagon.
it's a very exciting time for Apple. if they can make all this work, watch out people, the stock price will sky rocket!
Channels and content providers have been struggling for years in how to make an interface and technology that works well.
Apple has a huge momentum on their side. As well as Microsoft if Vista is good and they can come up
with a competitor to iTV.
I am not sure if iTV works on PCs but if Apple can pull that of, it will be even more enticing for those content
providers to jump on iTVs bandwagon.
it's a very exciting time for Apple. if they can make all this work, watch out people, the stock price will sky rocket!
SamEllens
Apr 12, 09:05 PM
I know this thread is probably full of pro video geeks so don't eat me alive here. What's the primary difference between FCP and Express aside from the fact that Final Cut Pro is packaged in a suite of applications?
If you're a novice and start with FCE you won't really find it lacking. When I did a project on FCE after using FCP for 4 years I was constantly irritated by things I use frequently just not being there. I can't remember the specifics - must've blocked it out as a bad dream haha.
If you're a novice and start with FCE you won't really find it lacking. When I did a project on FCE after using FCP for 4 years I was constantly irritated by things I use frequently just not being there. I can't remember the specifics - must've blocked it out as a bad dream haha.
FoxyKaye
Jun 23, 12:00 PM
iOS on a real Mac seems about as pointless as Microsoft Bob on Windows.
Granted, there are some highly innovative aspects to iOS, and integrating some of these into a desktop computer OS would be beneficial.
But gods help us all of iOS and OS X merge at some point - as was pointed out on Slashdot just today, it would create a fully media DRM-locked, Apple-controlled application distribution center. Which would be very beneficial to Apple, but not so much to the consumer.
Although speculation that this will happen is rampant, as exemplified by the ARS Technica article today: http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/06/developers-expect-ios-and-mac-os-to-merge-over-time.ars
In the meantime, it has been well over a year since either the XServe or Mac Pro have seen an update (despite charging through the roof for last year's technology), and Apple hasn't said anything about 10.7. That should be enough of an indicator right there.
Granted, there are some highly innovative aspects to iOS, and integrating some of these into a desktop computer OS would be beneficial.
But gods help us all of iOS and OS X merge at some point - as was pointed out on Slashdot just today, it would create a fully media DRM-locked, Apple-controlled application distribution center. Which would be very beneficial to Apple, but not so much to the consumer.
Although speculation that this will happen is rampant, as exemplified by the ARS Technica article today: http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/06/developers-expect-ios-and-mac-os-to-merge-over-time.ars
In the meantime, it has been well over a year since either the XServe or Mac Pro have seen an update (despite charging through the roof for last year's technology), and Apple hasn't said anything about 10.7. That should be enough of an indicator right there.
dubAdub
Apr 19, 01:25 PM
the 27 imac is a beast!!!!!
God I wish I had the money to get it.
I called my 2007 C2D Extreme iMac "the hombre" when I first got it.
When the Ivy Bridge iMac is released I'll feel that it's time to get a new computer worthy of naming.
God I wish I had the money to get it.
I called my 2007 C2D Extreme iMac "the hombre" when I first got it.
When the Ivy Bridge iMac is released I'll feel that it's time to get a new computer worthy of naming.
Earendil
Nov 27, 09:49 PM
IMAGINED?
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
And what, exactly, is your point? Really, did you read the thread? Okay, mb not, did you read anything that I wrote? No? Did you follow the linked thread that has been used as a counter point to the FUD that is spread? No?
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
Bad apple for not offering a $400 laptop, that pressures me into getting a Dell! Bad apple for not offering me a fast car, that pressures me into buying a BMW!!
I'm sorry, but your conclusions are horrible. You aren't looking at all the "facts", and then with the few you are using (out of context) you are drawing very stretched conclusions.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck,
No, but we have little reason to believe that they aren't selling well enough, and good reason to believe they are. Why? Because if they weren't selling well, and they were highly marked up, than it wouldn't hurt apple to lower the price, and sell more units. But they haven't yet done that. So either Apple's marketing guys are complete idiots and missed business 101, or they are selling enough units to justify the price.
but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
A very interesting theory, that seems plausible. However what is more likely is that Apple is selling enough units, and that they aren't overly priced for their intended purpose and intended competition (which is NOT Dell).
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program.
News flash, any monitor on the market today will work with your Mac. I know, it's amazing. Buy a cheap monitor and slap an Apple sticker on it if you like. Or go complain that NEC is limiting your choice by not offering a monitor in your price range, or that BMW is screwing you out of a car by not offering a car at 10 grand.
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
They might do it, but it won't be a prosumer level monitor like the rest. It will use a cheaper panel so that it's in line with it's target audience (consumer budget mini buyers). There aren't many companies, if any, that sell pro specced monitors at 17" any more. And as those better panels become cheaper, there is even less reason to offer the pro guys such small screen space.
Now, would you please, for the love of knowledge, go read the first post in this thread before making another reply. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
Thank you,
~Tyler
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
And what, exactly, is your point? Really, did you read the thread? Okay, mb not, did you read anything that I wrote? No? Did you follow the linked thread that has been used as a counter point to the FUD that is spread? No?
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
Bad apple for not offering a $400 laptop, that pressures me into getting a Dell! Bad apple for not offering me a fast car, that pressures me into buying a BMW!!
I'm sorry, but your conclusions are horrible. You aren't looking at all the "facts", and then with the few you are using (out of context) you are drawing very stretched conclusions.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck,
No, but we have little reason to believe that they aren't selling well enough, and good reason to believe they are. Why? Because if they weren't selling well, and they were highly marked up, than it wouldn't hurt apple to lower the price, and sell more units. But they haven't yet done that. So either Apple's marketing guys are complete idiots and missed business 101, or they are selling enough units to justify the price.
but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
A very interesting theory, that seems plausible. However what is more likely is that Apple is selling enough units, and that they aren't overly priced for their intended purpose and intended competition (which is NOT Dell).
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program.
News flash, any monitor on the market today will work with your Mac. I know, it's amazing. Buy a cheap monitor and slap an Apple sticker on it if you like. Or go complain that NEC is limiting your choice by not offering a monitor in your price range, or that BMW is screwing you out of a car by not offering a car at 10 grand.
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
They might do it, but it won't be a prosumer level monitor like the rest. It will use a cheaper panel so that it's in line with it's target audience (consumer budget mini buyers). There aren't many companies, if any, that sell pro specced monitors at 17" any more. And as those better panels become cheaper, there is even less reason to offer the pro guys such small screen space.
Now, would you please, for the love of knowledge, go read the first post in this thread before making another reply. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
Thank you,
~Tyler
piecewise
Nov 29, 01:48 PM
This is completely useless. An analyst thinks the iTV will have an additional feature? Fantastic. Like what, specifically?
You know, I suspect the next version of the iPod will also feature something different or new. Just a hunch, though. Nothing solid to back that up yet.
Safe bet.
You know, I suspect the next version of the iPod will also feature something different or new. Just a hunch, though. Nothing solid to back that up yet.
Safe bet.
apb3
Aug 19, 10:38 AM
If Apple do that then iPod sales will die whenever their competitors are offer all the other services along with an MP3 player. Apple isn't about conservatisim and playing it safe, the reason the iPod was a success was precisely the opposite: innovation.
"Pure" machines are a dying breed, there are very few around these days. Consoles, computers and mobile phones have all shown that the more you offer the better you sell and that "pure" machines are soon to be extinct.
And apb3, what you're describing in the chocolate and PSP is NOT a QWERTY keyboard. Look at the youtube video of the MYLO.
Never actually held the chocolate, just saw the TV ad. But you know what I mean and you cannot possible say that they are easy inpurt methods for even moderately extended use. Or are you? But, in any case, thanks for putting me straight on that.
The iPod would continue to sell "pure" (and I know I'm being contradictory as my original 1Gen iPod is a much different machine than my vid iPod but we're talking of the iPod as a basic walkman-type device) as there will always be demand for a music/media player at a fairly reasonably price. Either through attrition, improvements to current features (bigger screens, easier input methods, color screens, longer battery life, new battery types, etc) there will ALWAYS be demand for the iPod.
Using your reasoning, why not add all these features and more to every TV on the market cuz, "Hey, pure machines are going to be extinct soon. Everybody has a TV so we're not going to be selling any more pretty soon... Let's add keyboards and webcams to the remotes. make 'em with wireless net access, hell, throw in Vista and a dock for the refrigerator to show you how much beer is left so you don't have to get up!!!" That's not what happens. Improvements come and are incorporated and even stick around if people like them or are weeded out in the next model. But those improvements are all related to the TV viewing experience. Remember webTV? and that was only offered as a separate add-on if memory serves.
You can innovate wothout mucking about with a winner by adding a battery draining, mostly useless "feature(s)" to the best selling media device in the world. No one is going to jump ship because they can't control their dishwasher from their iPod interface. If apple feels there is a market for what some members of this forum are calling for and said market is large enough the smart move seems to me to be a new device along with that device's new profit stream, limit it's ability to cannibalize your other products in any large way. You get the idea. You don't need to make the iPod the be-all end-all device. In fact, I think if you did, you'd lose market share to other devices without the bloat.
And the argument that no one wants a "utility belt" with a million devices each dedicated to one function just doesn't hold water with me. I carry a lot of gear. A laptop, a comm device of some sort and my iPod would do anything I need to do as a civilian back in the world. Obviously I carry much more here as I have the desire to make it back to the real world but that's not what the real market is.
But maybe I'm the oddd man out in this argument. I hope not but I have ben wrong once or twice. My wife says so.
"Pure" machines are a dying breed, there are very few around these days. Consoles, computers and mobile phones have all shown that the more you offer the better you sell and that "pure" machines are soon to be extinct.
And apb3, what you're describing in the chocolate and PSP is NOT a QWERTY keyboard. Look at the youtube video of the MYLO.
Never actually held the chocolate, just saw the TV ad. But you know what I mean and you cannot possible say that they are easy inpurt methods for even moderately extended use. Or are you? But, in any case, thanks for putting me straight on that.
The iPod would continue to sell "pure" (and I know I'm being contradictory as my original 1Gen iPod is a much different machine than my vid iPod but we're talking of the iPod as a basic walkman-type device) as there will always be demand for a music/media player at a fairly reasonably price. Either through attrition, improvements to current features (bigger screens, easier input methods, color screens, longer battery life, new battery types, etc) there will ALWAYS be demand for the iPod.
Using your reasoning, why not add all these features and more to every TV on the market cuz, "Hey, pure machines are going to be extinct soon. Everybody has a TV so we're not going to be selling any more pretty soon... Let's add keyboards and webcams to the remotes. make 'em with wireless net access, hell, throw in Vista and a dock for the refrigerator to show you how much beer is left so you don't have to get up!!!" That's not what happens. Improvements come and are incorporated and even stick around if people like them or are weeded out in the next model. But those improvements are all related to the TV viewing experience. Remember webTV? and that was only offered as a separate add-on if memory serves.
You can innovate wothout mucking about with a winner by adding a battery draining, mostly useless "feature(s)" to the best selling media device in the world. No one is going to jump ship because they can't control their dishwasher from their iPod interface. If apple feels there is a market for what some members of this forum are calling for and said market is large enough the smart move seems to me to be a new device along with that device's new profit stream, limit it's ability to cannibalize your other products in any large way. You get the idea. You don't need to make the iPod the be-all end-all device. In fact, I think if you did, you'd lose market share to other devices without the bloat.
And the argument that no one wants a "utility belt" with a million devices each dedicated to one function just doesn't hold water with me. I carry a lot of gear. A laptop, a comm device of some sort and my iPod would do anything I need to do as a civilian back in the world. Obviously I carry much more here as I have the desire to make it back to the real world but that's not what the real market is.
But maybe I'm the oddd man out in this argument. I hope not but I have ben wrong once or twice. My wife says so.
carmenodie
Apr 3, 12:04 AM
Marketing geniuses :)
You got that right.
People also forget that Apple is, at its core, an engineering company.
I can't wait to get my ipad 2 64 gig only . I'll get the wifi because I ain't paying no body for tethering and I'm too chicken to jailbreak my iphone 4.
You got that right.
People also forget that Apple is, at its core, an engineering company.
I can't wait to get my ipad 2 64 gig only . I'll get the wifi because I ain't paying no body for tethering and I'm too chicken to jailbreak my iphone 4.
devinci99
Mar 22, 04:15 PM
I do think it's possible that Apple might re-invent the classic.
A price drop and some minor update (such as wifi, bluetooth capabilities, ios capable) might happen. I think updating the classic's internal's and functionality might be feasible. But I doubt they will touch the physical appearance of it.
But re-inventing the classic would defeat the purpose of calling it 'classic'.
The Ipod Touch is their outlet for innovations now. Though, I wonder when the touch, would simple be called the iPod (drop the touch from the name).
A price drop and some minor update (such as wifi, bluetooth capabilities, ios capable) might happen. I think updating the classic's internal's and functionality might be feasible. But I doubt they will touch the physical appearance of it.
But re-inventing the classic would defeat the purpose of calling it 'classic'.
The Ipod Touch is their outlet for innovations now. Though, I wonder when the touch, would simple be called the iPod (drop the touch from the name).
cal6n
Mar 25, 04:46 AM
As I understand it, once the relevant files are installed, these cards don't display anything until the OS boots, but then they (or at least some of them, like the 5770, 5870 and 6870) work just fine.
But what about rEFIt? Will that put a video signal out through DVI or DP? If that'll do the job, then I'm all over a 6870 black!
But what about rEFIt? Will that put a video signal out through DVI or DP? If that'll do the job, then I'm all over a 6870 black!
rdowns
Mar 19, 11:39 AM
This is being led by the UK and France... Obama has been dragging his feet.
http://www.france24.com/en/20110318-cameron-sarkozy-lead-no-fly-zone-effort-libya-benghazi
Doesn't seem to stop Obama from going on TV to claim credit though.
I suspect his foot dragging was done to get other nations to step up and take the lead here. About time IMO.
http://www.france24.com/en/20110318-cameron-sarkozy-lead-no-fly-zone-effort-libya-benghazi
Doesn't seem to stop Obama from going on TV to claim credit though.
I suspect his foot dragging was done to get other nations to step up and take the lead here. About time IMO.
NAG
Jan 12, 06:24 PM
Thing is it would have to be cheap enough for a hospital to give out to all the doctors and such (I think we're using Epic now or something).
ecoons
Jan 11, 10:43 PM
Electromagnetic fields decrease with the cube of the distance (I think- might be square, but someone smarter than I can correct me). You would need to keep the charger within a few inches while charging. Frankly, if I'm going to carry a charger with me when I travel, I really don't care if it's plugged in directly or just has to be really close.
What if there was a universal (yikes, what IS truly universal nowadays) way of transmitting electrical power, where your physical desk-top, kitchen counter, tray tables in airplanes, glove boxes (or cup holders for phones), nightstand in a hotel room, etc could charge your electronic gadgets just when you set them on the surface. That would mean they would be "just a few inches away" or less. There's no need to be charging devices 100% of the time, but as long as you can set them down on a "recharging surface" when they get low, then you have a cordless charging system.
What if there was a universal (yikes, what IS truly universal nowadays) way of transmitting electrical power, where your physical desk-top, kitchen counter, tray tables in airplanes, glove boxes (or cup holders for phones), nightstand in a hotel room, etc could charge your electronic gadgets just when you set them on the surface. That would mean they would be "just a few inches away" or less. There's no need to be charging devices 100% of the time, but as long as you can set them down on a "recharging surface" when they get low, then you have a cordless charging system.
No comments:
Post a Comment