pack
Apr 7, 12:32 PM
Wow. I think you missed the point. At 1199, the MacbookPRO should have a discrete option...hell, POS HP's at 600.00 do.
Oh, and please spare me the snarky "well then enjoy your HP! Har har har" comment.
No you have no point. 1199 vs 1799.00 one costs significantly more money. You can't have everything, all the build quality and all the features some things have to be omitted. There are trade offs. That is one. Those potential customers that don't want it buy a crappy 600 dollar hp laptop. Macbook pros aren't considered the best laptop in the industry because they are missing features and cost too much despite what you'd like to believe.
PS enjoy your ****** 600 dollar HP laptop
Oh, and please spare me the snarky "well then enjoy your HP! Har har har" comment.
No you have no point. 1199 vs 1799.00 one costs significantly more money. You can't have everything, all the build quality and all the features some things have to be omitted. There are trade offs. That is one. Those potential customers that don't want it buy a crappy 600 dollar hp laptop. Macbook pros aren't considered the best laptop in the industry because they are missing features and cost too much despite what you'd like to believe.
PS enjoy your ****** 600 dollar HP laptop
wangagat
Jul 21, 03:24 PM
something to remember about product update cycles:
iSight iMac G5 came out in October '05, Intel iMac came out just 3 months later... in January '06.
just thought I should remind everyone.
iSight iMac G5 came out in October '05, Intel iMac came out just 3 months later... in January '06.
just thought I should remind everyone.
OllyW
Mar 29, 09:00 AM
And Amazon thinks crippling ioS compatibility will be good business? FAIL.
At least it works on the market leading platform. ;)
At least it works on the market leading platform. ;)
macnews
Apr 25, 09:31 AM
Android is funded by target advertising? I didnt know that, can you provide a link that backs this up?
Android costs money to develop. Android from what has been put out there is free for companies to use with no licensing fee. So how is Google able to generate money to pay people to code and maintain the software?
1. Google is generating money through it's normal search business which is well documented to know where you are at (physically and on the web) and where you have been (on the web).
2. Google is generating money through advertising generated via the Android platform. If this is the case, it would seem very like they would employ the same tactics used in standard desktop web advertising in the mobile spectrum. So logic and past actions would dictate but if that isn't enough then how about the patent Google was awarded for advertising on the mobile platform based on location? http://www.gomonews.com/google-and-the-art-of-self-defense-location-based-mobile-advertising-patent-is-probably-anti-apple-weaponry/
Android costs money to develop. Android from what has been put out there is free for companies to use with no licensing fee. So how is Google able to generate money to pay people to code and maintain the software?
1. Google is generating money through it's normal search business which is well documented to know where you are at (physically and on the web) and where you have been (on the web).
2. Google is generating money through advertising generated via the Android platform. If this is the case, it would seem very like they would employ the same tactics used in standard desktop web advertising in the mobile spectrum. So logic and past actions would dictate but if that isn't enough then how about the patent Google was awarded for advertising on the mobile platform based on location? http://www.gomonews.com/google-and-the-art-of-self-defense-location-based-mobile-advertising-patent-is-probably-anti-apple-weaponry/
goMac
Apr 18, 03:39 PM
Have you seen Windows GUI? It's also almost identical - rows of icons and task bar at the bottom. Did Microsoft sue Apple? No.
That's because Microsoft copied Apple (or NeXT really.) The NeXT dock predates the taskbar in Windows, and at the time a lot of people felt that's where Microsoft got the taskbar from.
If you go back to Windows 3.1, no taskbar. And then suddenly Windows 95 which shipped after NeXTStep, there is a taskbar.
That's because Microsoft copied Apple (or NeXT really.) The NeXT dock predates the taskbar in Windows, and at the time a lot of people felt that's where Microsoft got the taskbar from.
If you go back to Windows 3.1, no taskbar. And then suddenly Windows 95 which shipped after NeXTStep, there is a taskbar.
Benjy91
Apr 20, 09:46 AM
I wouldn't mind a heavier phone, if it meant better battery life or a bigger screen.
I think Apple are too obsessed with this "Thinner, Lighter" everything. It's a phone, it is no where near 'Heavy'
I think Apple are too obsessed with this "Thinner, Lighter" everything. It's a phone, it is no where near 'Heavy'
justinLONG
Mar 29, 11:17 PM
and yes I would buy Quality american made products if a union was not involved, been in one. nothing but shysters. may be a reason why companies go overseas
Satori
Apr 7, 09:39 AM
I don't understand, Apple can't let RIM have 12 panels? When they sell off those 12 units, Apple can let them have 12 more.
Lol... if they let RIM have 12, then they'll have to let everyone have 12!
Lol... if they let RIM have 12, then they'll have to let everyone have 12!
wacky4alanis
Nov 3, 12:25 PM
Suction mounts are magnets for thieves. They leave a circular mark on the windshield that says "break into my car - I have a GPS unit for you to steal!". The thief will be very annoyed when they just find the Tom-Tom mount - until they figure out that they sell for > $100 LOL They will undoubtedly steal other stuff and break your window in the process.
I prefer the friction mounts that just sit on your dashboard and fit easily into the glove box. They are much more stealthy, and work great. Mine never slips or slides around. This is the one I use for my Garmin Nuvi:
http://www.buy.com/prod/garmin-010-10908-00-portable-friction-mount-garmin-portable-friction/q/loc/111/204297424.html
Is there something like that for the iPhone? If so, I would like to buy one.
*edit* I did a web search and found that Arkon sells a general purpose friction mount that could most likely be used with the Tom-Tom mount:
http://www.arkon.com/weighted_friction_dash_mount.php
They also sell a mount designed for the iPhone.
I prefer the friction mounts that just sit on your dashboard and fit easily into the glove box. They are much more stealthy, and work great. Mine never slips or slides around. This is the one I use for my Garmin Nuvi:
http://www.buy.com/prod/garmin-010-10908-00-portable-friction-mount-garmin-portable-friction/q/loc/111/204297424.html
Is there something like that for the iPhone? If so, I would like to buy one.
*edit* I did a web search and found that Arkon sells a general purpose friction mount that could most likely be used with the Tom-Tom mount:
http://www.arkon.com/weighted_friction_dash_mount.php
They also sell a mount designed for the iPhone.
WestonHarvey1
Mar 31, 09:33 AM
Sabertooth.
That sounds more like a retconned name for Macintosh System Software 1.0.
That sounds more like a retconned name for Macintosh System Software 1.0.
kalsta
May 3, 08:08 PM
Adopting the metric system doesn't mean other more informal units of measurement will disappear from popular usage. In Australia you order a schooner or middy of beer. In some pubs it's a pint. Teaspoons won't suddenly disappear from your kitchen or your recipes. Fear not.
don.keishlong
Apr 5, 09:45 PM
Hmmm... I think I'll go jailbreak my iPod touch now.
Maybe then I can get a toggle switch for wifi on my home screen. :rolleyes:
You're an idiot
Maybe then I can get a toggle switch for wifi on my home screen. :rolleyes:
You're an idiot
shigzeo
Aug 7, 06:03 PM
Suppose it'd be a bit heretic to buy one of these solely for Windows, right?
I'd not get a quad Xeon Woodcrest anywhere else for less, and my Athlon 64 just doesn't cut it...
I like your style. i sold my beloved ibook in order to get a new bicycle which is not good for cs2.
I'd not get a quad Xeon Woodcrest anywhere else for less, and my Athlon 64 just doesn't cut it...
I like your style. i sold my beloved ibook in order to get a new bicycle which is not good for cs2.
asdf542
Mar 28, 10:16 AM
Sure, but the "delay" could be that iOS 5 isn't ready yet and Apple isn't going to launch iPhone 5 w/o a full iOS update. Quite possible iOS5 engineers were temp. xfered to OS X 10.7 at this final stage to ensure it makes out the door on time and w/ fewest glitches possible. Once 10.7 goes GM iOS5 development will go back to normal speed.
Snow Leopard did not effect iOS release dates. If the iPad 2 was delayed like the rumors were suggesting then I would believe this, but it wasn't. So far all of Apple's releases for 2011 have been typical with their past schedules. No reason to think any different for this one.
Snow Leopard did not effect iOS release dates. If the iPad 2 was delayed like the rumors were suggesting then I would believe this, but it wasn't. So far all of Apple's releases for 2011 have been typical with their past schedules. No reason to think any different for this one.
Popeye206
Apr 25, 10:33 AM
There's a black Escalade parked outside with a guy in a suit and sunglasses. I think there's an Apple sticker on the rear window? :eek:
Someone, please call Jesse Ventura! Help!
:rolleyes:
Someone, please call Jesse Ventura! Help!
:rolleyes:
kavika411
Mar 29, 08:59 AM
Also, why would I only want my music accessible when I have internet? Any road trips from where I live (Utah) generally put me in EDGE territory which won't be consistently fast enough to stream the audio at enough quality, let alone the fact that there are several dead spots along the way. I'll stick to having my music on my iPhone. No buffer, no stutter, no data usage. Oh, yeah. That. Data usage. With carriers bottlenecking you now, you think they'll favor Amazon cloud delivery for people who want to stream their music all day long? They (Amazon) will probably also do some more compression on the files so it'll sound like listening to your music in a tin can.
I have similar concerns. I'm betting (and I may not be saying anything new here) that Apple will roll out (1) free storage for all iTunes-purchased content, (2) an additional free 10 gigs, (3) tier pricing for additional storage as opposed to Amazon's dollar-per-gig, and (4) it only works - at least initially - when you are on wifi, similar to Facetime. I know that last part will be a deal breaker for a lot of people, but I believe they will be giving this storage/streaming away free for purchased items plus 10 gigs of other stuff at least and, therefore, it will have at least some value since it is free. And I do believe it will be a free method for wireless synching somehow.
Anyway, jus' speculatin'.
I have similar concerns. I'm betting (and I may not be saying anything new here) that Apple will roll out (1) free storage for all iTunes-purchased content, (2) an additional free 10 gigs, (3) tier pricing for additional storage as opposed to Amazon's dollar-per-gig, and (4) it only works - at least initially - when you are on wifi, similar to Facetime. I know that last part will be a deal breaker for a lot of people, but I believe they will be giving this storage/streaming away free for purchased items plus 10 gigs of other stuff at least and, therefore, it will have at least some value since it is free. And I do believe it will be a free method for wireless synching somehow.
Anyway, jus' speculatin'.
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 10:46 PM
All this talk about Palm needing to modernize their OS, or it is outdated, or needing to re-write is absolutely hilarious.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
rdlink
Apr 20, 06:02 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-gb) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
I think Apple needs to concentrate more on improving iOS rather than adding a faster processor. Tbh I'm pretty fed up of my iPhone 4 as the is just looks boringly simple. Not everybody wants the same old os on every device. I think it's the omnia 7 next for me so I can have a change.
I agree. iOS is #1 reason why I haven't bought iPad yet - Android 3.0 looks so good on tablets that I haven't decided yet wheter to buy iPad or Android tablet. I'm not that interested in new iPhone models either, because iOS has basically looked the same since the first iPhone, and it's beginning to look very old and dated. I know it's simple to use, and for many people that's the biggest reason to choose iOS, but personally I like to try new things.
Agreed. I moved from my good ol' 3Gs to a ZTE-Blade a few months ago and have to say that despite the general black/grey colors that android apps seem to be forced to use with the UI, the 'desktop' of the phone is much more elegant and usable than the iPhone's. I'd really like to see Apple open up the API's a little more and maybe even allow us to completely swap out their homescreen for custom app based ones. It works well on the droids.
We all have our opinions, likes and dislikes. Personally, the things that you three cite are reasons why I have tried four different Android devices, and returned/sold every one of them. I, for one hope that Apple continues to march to the beat of their own drummer, and continues to go after the simpler aesthetic. Every Android device I have owned has seemed like a cheap, kludgy "Window-ized" version of the iPhone. More married to specs than to user experience. Don't get me wrong. I can geek it up with the best of 'em. But my first Mac several years ago was nothing short of a watershed moment in my computing life. It made me realize how tired I was getting of having to spend hours and hours customizing my interface just to make it usable, and tweaking my hardware to keep it running optimally (or some semblance thereof).
When I see links such as the one earlier in this forum, showing the hacks one must put in place just to make the battery on a Thunderbolt last more than half a day I shudder to think of all of the years I spent with (virtual) grease under my fingernails, and how nice it is now to just have devices that help me get through the day without having to constantly tinker under the hood.
Not to mention that the "openness" of Android allowing hardware manufacturers and carriers to conspire against subscribers has let the proverbial fox back in the henhouse.
Sure, I'd like to see IOS continue to evolve and wow us with a few revolutionary changes. But, IMO following the Android model is not the way to go. To each his own, I suppose.
I think Apple needs to concentrate more on improving iOS rather than adding a faster processor. Tbh I'm pretty fed up of my iPhone 4 as the is just looks boringly simple. Not everybody wants the same old os on every device. I think it's the omnia 7 next for me so I can have a change.
I agree. iOS is #1 reason why I haven't bought iPad yet - Android 3.0 looks so good on tablets that I haven't decided yet wheter to buy iPad or Android tablet. I'm not that interested in new iPhone models either, because iOS has basically looked the same since the first iPhone, and it's beginning to look very old and dated. I know it's simple to use, and for many people that's the biggest reason to choose iOS, but personally I like to try new things.
Agreed. I moved from my good ol' 3Gs to a ZTE-Blade a few months ago and have to say that despite the general black/grey colors that android apps seem to be forced to use with the UI, the 'desktop' of the phone is much more elegant and usable than the iPhone's. I'd really like to see Apple open up the API's a little more and maybe even allow us to completely swap out their homescreen for custom app based ones. It works well on the droids.
We all have our opinions, likes and dislikes. Personally, the things that you three cite are reasons why I have tried four different Android devices, and returned/sold every one of them. I, for one hope that Apple continues to march to the beat of their own drummer, and continues to go after the simpler aesthetic. Every Android device I have owned has seemed like a cheap, kludgy "Window-ized" version of the iPhone. More married to specs than to user experience. Don't get me wrong. I can geek it up with the best of 'em. But my first Mac several years ago was nothing short of a watershed moment in my computing life. It made me realize how tired I was getting of having to spend hours and hours customizing my interface just to make it usable, and tweaking my hardware to keep it running optimally (or some semblance thereof).
When I see links such as the one earlier in this forum, showing the hacks one must put in place just to make the battery on a Thunderbolt last more than half a day I shudder to think of all of the years I spent with (virtual) grease under my fingernails, and how nice it is now to just have devices that help me get through the day without having to constantly tinker under the hood.
Not to mention that the "openness" of Android allowing hardware manufacturers and carriers to conspire against subscribers has let the proverbial fox back in the henhouse.
Sure, I'd like to see IOS continue to evolve and wow us with a few revolutionary changes. But, IMO following the Android model is not the way to go. To each his own, I suppose.
Clive At Five
Nov 22, 12:53 PM
I'll agree as well. One feature that Apple might be able to captalize on, if they do sell direct to consumers rather than through carriers, would be resolution of the bells/whistles problem.
For some people, a phone isn't a phone unless is has a 3MP camera, takes 640x480 video, etc. For others, all they want is basic PDA functionality. Would it be possible for Apple to offer a BTO option? I mean, Camera/Video is generally listed under a single menu option, and it wouldn't be that difficult to design the firmware to only display the category if the Camera is installed. To make things easier, Apple could stock one or two basic models in their stores, and leave people to go to apple.com for customizations...Any reason why this couldn't work?
Other than confusing everyone with too many options, no.
If you're a teenage girl, your phone has to have a camera on it, meaning you'll have to go to Apple.com to custom-order it. That's complicated.
If you're a hiker, maybe you're going to want a phone with GPS, meaning you'll have to go to Apple.com to custom-order it. That's complicated.
If you're a huge multitasker, you're going to want PDA-functionality, meaning you'll have to go to Apple.com to custom-order it. That's complicated.
Very few people, I feel, will want a bare-bones phone... meaning most will have to go to Apple.com to custom-order it. That's too complicated for most people to do.
So in short, no, I don't think that'll work. Good idea, though. That way you'd get a phone with the features you want without the crap that you don't want. Unfortunately, as far as a particular model of phone goes, it's either all or nothing... and I don't think Apple will want to release 18 different models of phone, each with different capabilities... that's worse than BTO.
-Clive
For some people, a phone isn't a phone unless is has a 3MP camera, takes 640x480 video, etc. For others, all they want is basic PDA functionality. Would it be possible for Apple to offer a BTO option? I mean, Camera/Video is generally listed under a single menu option, and it wouldn't be that difficult to design the firmware to only display the category if the Camera is installed. To make things easier, Apple could stock one or two basic models in their stores, and leave people to go to apple.com for customizations...Any reason why this couldn't work?
Other than confusing everyone with too many options, no.
If you're a teenage girl, your phone has to have a camera on it, meaning you'll have to go to Apple.com to custom-order it. That's complicated.
If you're a hiker, maybe you're going to want a phone with GPS, meaning you'll have to go to Apple.com to custom-order it. That's complicated.
If you're a huge multitasker, you're going to want PDA-functionality, meaning you'll have to go to Apple.com to custom-order it. That's complicated.
Very few people, I feel, will want a bare-bones phone... meaning most will have to go to Apple.com to custom-order it. That's too complicated for most people to do.
So in short, no, I don't think that'll work. Good idea, though. That way you'd get a phone with the features you want without the crap that you don't want. Unfortunately, as far as a particular model of phone goes, it's either all or nothing... and I don't think Apple will want to release 18 different models of phone, each with different capabilities... that's worse than BTO.
-Clive
Eraserhead
Apr 15, 01:20 AM
Lets look at the world's highest growth economy and see what their tax rates are:
China
The applicable tax rate for capital gains in China depends upon the nature of the taxpayer (i.e. whether the taxpayer is a person or company) and whether the taxpayer is resident or non-resident for tax purposes.
Tax-resident enterprises will be taxed at 25% in accordance with the Enterprise Income Tax Law. Non-resident enterprises will be taxed at 10% on capital gains in accordance with the Implementing Regulations to the Enterprise Income Tax Law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_gains_tax#China
So they have a higher rate of capital gains tax than the US.
China
The applicable tax rate for capital gains in China depends upon the nature of the taxpayer (i.e. whether the taxpayer is a person or company) and whether the taxpayer is resident or non-resident for tax purposes.
Tax-resident enterprises will be taxed at 25% in accordance with the Enterprise Income Tax Law. Non-resident enterprises will be taxed at 10% on capital gains in accordance with the Implementing Regulations to the Enterprise Income Tax Law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_gains_tax#China
So they have a higher rate of capital gains tax than the US.
Mac Fly (film)
Nov 22, 09:28 AM
HEY! who's he calling a "PC guy"??! :mad:
Exactly, Mac guys are though. Actually nobody is walking anywhere, very bad analogy. Apple isn't going to walk in, they're are going to use their thought processes, thier leadership, thier skills, thier talents, thier expirence, and their knowhow, to proove there's a reason why Apple makes things better then the other, and they will once again be proven right, I hope.
Exactly, Mac guys are though. Actually nobody is walking anywhere, very bad analogy. Apple isn't going to walk in, they're are going to use their thought processes, thier leadership, thier skills, thier talents, thier expirence, and their knowhow, to proove there's a reason why Apple makes things better then the other, and they will once again be proven right, I hope.
siderealxxx
May 6, 05:11 AM
Any chance of a PPC to ARM bridge for OS9?!
:D
:D
Popeye206
Apr 7, 11:41 AM
They only need like ~100,000.
Hummm... maybe Motorola has some spare Xoom screens they could share with RIM? Oh... the size thing.... Hummm...
The Tab! There should be about 1 million+ channel returns coming back on the TAB 1.0... Samsung may have some stock that RIM could work with? A little glue and tape and there you go! :p
Hummm... maybe Motorola has some spare Xoom screens they could share with RIM? Oh... the size thing.... Hummm...
The Tab! There should be about 1 million+ channel returns coming back on the TAB 1.0... Samsung may have some stock that RIM could work with? A little glue and tape and there you go! :p
louden
Jul 21, 08:07 PM
I'd like to see the merom with a new enclosure for the mbp. I like the magnetic latch, and I'd like to see something with a nicer screen and dedicated graphics.
That would look good for vista or macos.
That would look good for vista or macos.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar