Dan==
Jul 27, 04:06 PM
But its like ATI simply naming one of their chips ATI Radeon with no additional naming (being something like X1800 etc.). Why not something like Mac Plus, Mac Extra, Mac Express... I could go on.
Those are all fine.
Well, the Mac Plus is pretty slow these days. What was that - 8Mhz?
Too bad the Mac Mini wasn't named the Mac Nano. Then we could have named this one the Mac Mini.
Those are all fine.
Well, the Mac Plus is pretty slow these days. What was that - 8Mhz?
Too bad the Mac Mini wasn't named the Mac Nano. Then we could have named this one the Mac Mini.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 12:13 PM
Funny also that we heard a DAMN THING from the media regarding the fact that ONLY CONGRESS can declare war.
What was your beloved Reagan up to in Grenada then? :rolleyes:
What was your beloved Reagan up to in Grenada then? :rolleyes:
QCassidy352
Jul 20, 03:53 PM
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Kentsfield will not be appearing in any of the Pro machines for some time.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
What? Apple*differentiates the XServes by having them 1U thick and rackmountable. One buys a rackmount server not because it's faster but because it's smaller and fits in a rack.
yeah, what he said. Apple does not have to distinguish powermacs from servers with processor speeds. People (businesses) who need servers are not going to buy powermacs to do the job even if they are a little bit faster or cheaper; they are going to buy real rack-mounted servers.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
What? Apple*differentiates the XServes by having them 1U thick and rackmountable. One buys a rackmount server not because it's faster but because it's smaller and fits in a rack.
yeah, what he said. Apple does not have to distinguish powermacs from servers with processor speeds. People (businesses) who need servers are not going to buy powermacs to do the job even if they are a little bit faster or cheaper; they are going to buy real rack-mounted servers.
eawmp1
Apr 27, 08:09 AM
I thought looking at my location histories was interesting. I, too, have no delusions that I cannot be tracked (cell phone, credit card purchases, etc.) I wonder if all the paranoids realize that any GPS camera encodes that information in the image. Share that photo online and anyone can get the metadata with location of photograph.
You wanna be connected, you can't be truly anonymous.
You wanna be anonymous, sell you computer, smart phone, cut up credit cards, and move to an undocumented shack in the middle of nowhere with no utilities.
You wanna be connected, you can't be truly anonymous.
You wanna be anonymous, sell you computer, smart phone, cut up credit cards, and move to an undocumented shack in the middle of nowhere with no utilities.
dante@sisna.com
Aug 18, 04:40 AM
My goal is to buy a Quad G5 before the end of the year. I already have what is arguably the fastest 68k Mac (look at screen name for a clue) so I would like to also own the fastest PowerPC Mac Apple sold too.
Yes, I love my Quad G5 -- ROCK Solid. I agree with you.
And my MAC PRO 3.0 is on the way. But this Quad G5, still a great box -- highly recommend.
DJO
Yes, I love my Quad G5 -- ROCK Solid. I agree with you.
And my MAC PRO 3.0 is on the way. But this Quad G5, still a great box -- highly recommend.
DJO
gnasher729
Aug 26, 06:09 PM
I believe the 2.33 GHz Merom chip debuted at the same price as the 2.16 GHz Yonah when it was released. The prices of MBPs certainly haven't fallen. Apple has just been enjoying the extra profits from Intel's price drops of the past few months.
At that time, Apple upgraded all MacBook Pros to the next faster chip without changing prices.
At that time, Apple upgraded all MacBook Pros to the next faster chip without changing prices.
kallisti
Mar 22, 05:52 PM
I'm not american, perhaps you should be utilising the 'proper' English that was invented here.
And you're last sentence makes you look rather condescending and quite frankly a bit of a pretentious moron.
And I'm sorry to say, I've never been to the states, but of course you make an unfounded and ignorant assertion that I have never travelled. Really, you're not doing yourself much good with that mentality you have.
Glad that you're just showcasing your pitiful character to the rest of us.
Just stop already. You made a couple of stupid and incorrect statements. You got called on them. Suck it up and admit you were wrong. It happens to the best of us :)
And you're last sentence makes you look rather condescending and quite frankly a bit of a pretentious moron.
And I'm sorry to say, I've never been to the states, but of course you make an unfounded and ignorant assertion that I have never travelled. Really, you're not doing yourself much good with that mentality you have.
Glad that you're just showcasing your pitiful character to the rest of us.
Just stop already. You made a couple of stupid and incorrect statements. You got called on them. Suck it up and admit you were wrong. It happens to the best of us :)
Ace25
Aug 26, 04:10 PM
I am now pretty sure that new MacBooks are being released in the next few days.
I ordered one on the 17th of august and it was scheduled to ship on the 24th of august. Then for some reason it was bumped to a new ship date of august 31st, just enough time to drop a new merom processor in it!
I ordered one on the 17th of august and it was scheduled to ship on the 24th of august. Then for some reason it was bumped to a new ship date of august 31st, just enough time to drop a new merom processor in it!
IBradMac
Jun 14, 12:36 AM
Correct to the even though your an authorized user. Authorized users can do anything but add or upgrade, atleaset at RS.
Cut it out with your scalpel,
Quilling Patterns - Quilling
I also added a larger flower
Cut out templates.
Myspace Rangoli Designs Flower
size paper flower patterns
In order to cut out some
cut out a daffodil pattern
our cut-out paper flower
Now cut out two leaf shapes.
~Shard~
Jul 15, 12:49 AM
Still, it's ridiculous that Apple's Top-Of-The-Line machines don't come STANDARD with 1 gig of ram. I can guarantee they will when they come out next month.
Oh, I agree - I should hope this is the case. In this day and age, 1 GB should be table stakes, especially when you're dealing with Pro machines - I would bet that most PowerMac owners upgrade to at least 2 GB of RAM standard as it is. Throw on top of that the fact that Leopard is coming out in (presumably) 6 months, give or take, and I'm sure that 1 GB will be required to run that with any degree of smoothness as well.
Here's hoping you're right. I think including 512 MB of RAM standard would be a bit of a slap in the face if Apple is releasing these supposedly "advanced" machines. What kind of advanced PowerMac has only 512 MB of RAM standard? ;) :cool:
Oh, I agree - I should hope this is the case. In this day and age, 1 GB should be table stakes, especially when you're dealing with Pro machines - I would bet that most PowerMac owners upgrade to at least 2 GB of RAM standard as it is. Throw on top of that the fact that Leopard is coming out in (presumably) 6 months, give or take, and I'm sure that 1 GB will be required to run that with any degree of smoothness as well.
Here's hoping you're right. I think including 512 MB of RAM standard would be a bit of a slap in the face if Apple is releasing these supposedly "advanced" machines. What kind of advanced PowerMac has only 512 MB of RAM standard? ;) :cool:
pkson
Apr 10, 08:36 PM
Wow. You'd think a FCP Users group would be able to track down a halfway decent graphic artist to make their banner graphic...
Aww, give them a break, they're probably just trying to keep with the 90's design of the UI. :D
Honestly, the website totally sucks. Looks like a get-rich-quick advertisement site. They might be FCP pros, but they know amateur HTML.
Aww, give them a break, they're probably just trying to keep with the 90's design of the UI. :D
Honestly, the website totally sucks. Looks like a get-rich-quick advertisement site. They might be FCP pros, but they know amateur HTML.
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 06:49 PM
Confused.
Can somebody explain me the differences between the cellphone market between the US and Europe.
Will a 'iPhone' just be marketed to the US or worldwide (as the iPod does)?
C.:confused:
The biggest difference would be that in europe we use GSM-system (900 Mhz and 1800Mhz) whereas US use both CDMA and GSM (850MHz and 1900Mhz)
A typical triband GSM phone enables you to call more or less all over the world whereas a CDMA is more or less restricted to use it in US and some countries in Asia. CDMA and GSM are two incompatible system like windows and OSX, i.e they dont "speak" with each other. One difference you notice as a user is that GSM phones has a SIM card which more or less is your identity. That is, if you have an unlocked cellphone you can change operators whenever you feel like it. This is not possible with CDMA cellphones.
Celphones are also much more common in europe and the "typical" cellphone user is not that tied up to an operator as a "typical" US user. Carriers in europe don't cripple the phones like some do in US.
I am sure there are man more differences, but these were the only that came to my mind right now.
Can somebody explain me the differences between the cellphone market between the US and Europe.
Will a 'iPhone' just be marketed to the US or worldwide (as the iPod does)?
C.:confused:
The biggest difference would be that in europe we use GSM-system (900 Mhz and 1800Mhz) whereas US use both CDMA and GSM (850MHz and 1900Mhz)
A typical triband GSM phone enables you to call more or less all over the world whereas a CDMA is more or less restricted to use it in US and some countries in Asia. CDMA and GSM are two incompatible system like windows and OSX, i.e they dont "speak" with each other. One difference you notice as a user is that GSM phones has a SIM card which more or less is your identity. That is, if you have an unlocked cellphone you can change operators whenever you feel like it. This is not possible with CDMA cellphones.
Celphones are also much more common in europe and the "typical" cellphone user is not that tied up to an operator as a "typical" US user. Carriers in europe don't cripple the phones like some do in US.
I am sure there are man more differences, but these were the only that came to my mind right now.
leekohler
Apr 28, 09:58 AM
You accuse every 'liberal' in this forum of being blinded by their bias. I suppose all of the 'conservatives' see clearly and are willing to consider all reasonable alternatives. Lol. And then the debate becomes what is reasonable? :p
If he can't stand the heat, he knows where the kitchen door is.
If he can't stand the heat, he knows where the kitchen door is.
Blaze3555
Apr 10, 02:16 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)
Did any One catch the quote about the puck. For a split second I got exited because I thought it was Kevin Smith. I love his podcasts. Execp he talk about only using Avid because Fcp docent have a big enough time line. But Let's all go inside! Lol
Did any One catch the quote about the puck. For a split second I got exited because I thought it was Kevin Smith. I love his podcasts. Execp he talk about only using Avid because Fcp docent have a big enough time line. But Let's all go inside! Lol
sparkleytone
Mar 26, 12:45 AM
What is it with all the complaining? Lion is a fresh direction for OS X, of course it will be paid. It will probably cost $129, so go ahead and get yourself all cried out now about it. If you think it’s just a minor revision that should be given away for free or $29:
1) Don’t buy it
2) You’re wrong
Full-screen apps along is just…why haven’t we been doing this all along?
1) Don’t buy it
2) You’re wrong
Full-screen apps along is just…why haven’t we been doing this all along?
happyduck42
Apr 19, 02:12 PM
According to Wikipedia It was released in Feb before the iPhone was released..
Wikipedia is wrong then; it was announced in Feb after the iPhone in January 2007.
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_f700-1849.php
Wikipedia is wrong then; it was announced in Feb after the iPhone in January 2007.
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_f700-1849.php
law guy
Aug 5, 09:49 PM
I'd like to predict an unanticipated show stopper - a new Mac ultraportable that weighs something like 2.2 lbs and is around the thickness of a magazine. The new notebook would not be breaking new ground - there are intel PC notebooks that fit this / similar descriptions, for example the Q2010 offering by Fijitsu (illustrated in Q2010 pics that follow). http://common.ziffdavisinternet.com/util_get_image/13/0,1425,sz=1&i=134331,00.jpg http://www.fujitsu-siemens.com/Resources/35/2097637765.jpg But, new gound or not, it would be an exciting addition to the MacBook Pro line up. It would also be fun to have a product like that to catch everyone off guard.
I do have a bit of keynote fever. How do they do it? I'm not going to buy anything for a few years, and yet I can't wait to see what is unveiled. This time around, the fever pitch seems more acute than it's been since perhaps MWSF 2003 (when the Alu 12 and 17" PBs came out) - even more anticipation than then because of all of the new products expected. This is also the time when MR really shines - this is the core of the site: rumors about Macs - I love it.
I do have a bit of keynote fever. How do they do it? I'm not going to buy anything for a few years, and yet I can't wait to see what is unveiled. This time around, the fever pitch seems more acute than it's been since perhaps MWSF 2003 (when the Alu 12 and 17" PBs came out) - even more anticipation than then because of all of the new products expected. This is also the time when MR really shines - this is the core of the site: rumors about Macs - I love it.
manu chao
Aug 27, 05:31 AM
You're screwing up, intel. We don't want 300 trillion transistors on a 1 nm die. We want longer battery life. Idiots.
Don't blame Intel, blame Apple for not using the ULV versions of the Core Duo chips. There are other manufacturers which use them (otherwise it would not make much sense for Intel to offer them).
However, the battery life of these machines is maybe in the order of six hours only, for once because the screen, HD etc. still need the same amount of power. Making the screen smaller, using Intel graphics, maybe even a 1.8" HD, you can reduce power consumption further, most often manufacturers also reduce battery size at the same time to make the laptops lightweight, preventing you to see battery life numbers of ten hours.
Moreover, reports about machines using the ULV versions (and sometimes 1.8" HDs) do complain about the performance.
Don't blame Intel, blame Apple for not using the ULV versions of the Core Duo chips. There are other manufacturers which use them (otherwise it would not make much sense for Intel to offer them).
However, the battery life of these machines is maybe in the order of six hours only, for once because the screen, HD etc. still need the same amount of power. Making the screen smaller, using Intel graphics, maybe even a 1.8" HD, you can reduce power consumption further, most often manufacturers also reduce battery size at the same time to make the laptops lightweight, preventing you to see battery life numbers of ten hours.
Moreover, reports about machines using the ULV versions (and sometimes 1.8" HDs) do complain about the performance.
obeygiant
Apr 28, 11:14 AM
I heard if you take Obama's long form birth certificate and fold just the right way, you can see the twin towers collapsing..OMG!
BReaking News! White House releases longer whiteish birth certificate:
http://i55.tinypic.com/jgi4xv.jpg
BReaking News! White House releases longer whiteish birth certificate:
http://i55.tinypic.com/jgi4xv.jpg
jmbear
Nov 29, 12:39 PM
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
01civicman
Apr 8, 08:12 AM
I am also a work at BB. I can tell you how it works for me. If we are getting shipments, its being kept from the associates (at least in my store). My store is small and if they were some where in plain sight, we'd see them. Plus I'm pretty close to a lot of inventory guys. The Daily Quota thing doesn't make much sense, because in the end, its a month end budget that we have to meet. If we miss by 2K one day, but are over by 5K the next, it doesn't really matter. Sure the managers want to hit every day, but it doesn't really make that much sense.
As for the $100 pre-sale, my store stopped it at about 10 people, so its not like we did that to a ton of people, and about a week ago, 6 of them got their iPad, so our "list" is almost empty.
Also, having the iPad, definitely brings foot traffic in to potentially make money elsewhere, but in the end, if we sell 20,000 iPads (and nothing else), the store just lost money.
As for the $100 pre-sale, my store stopped it at about 10 people, so its not like we did that to a ton of people, and about a week ago, 6 of them got their iPad, so our "list" is almost empty.
Also, having the iPad, definitely brings foot traffic in to potentially make money elsewhere, but in the end, if we sell 20,000 iPads (and nothing else), the store just lost money.
Bilbo63
Apr 19, 06:03 PM
According to Wikipedia It was released in Feb before the iPhone was released..
The iPhone was revealed on January 9th 2007. It didn't ship until June due to regulatory approval.
The iPhone was revealed on January 9th 2007. It didn't ship until June due to regulatory approval.
krcbkidz
Mar 22, 05:07 PM
You obviously don't know much about samsung. Samsung makes RAM and CPU that apple uses in iphone/ipad. Possibly LCD too. A4 was definitely made by samsung. It's pretty certain A5 is also made by samsung, despite rumors TSMC will make them for apple.
Samsung being samsung, they can match Apple in price in tablet forever (well maybe not forever but for a long time) even without making much profit (not that they would do it). Samsung is HUGE. They have plenty of other stuff they can sell with profit.
I know about Samsung & the company's size. Yes, Samsung does manufacture parts for Apple; the parts they manufacture are according to Apple's R&D specifications & are designed by/for Apple only. Apple holds the license for specific parts (ie. the A5/A4 chip designs). Therefore even though Samsung manufactures the parts, they cannot put these parts in other hardware unless deemed so by Apple. Apple pays Samsung a fee to utilize their production facilities, which is a profit for Samsung. This profit is small compared to the margin of parts/production to MSRP that Apple reaps on each iPad. Apple controls hardware development, OS development, & UI development by keeping everything in house. Samsung utilizes a third party OS, & third party processor technology. I don't feel their user experience is as good as it could be. Samsung ultimately controls the manufacturing of the Tab but they leave money on the table as opposed to Apple's business model.
Samsung being samsung, they can match Apple in price in tablet forever (well maybe not forever but for a long time) even without making much profit (not that they would do it). Samsung is HUGE. They have plenty of other stuff they can sell with profit.
I know about Samsung & the company's size. Yes, Samsung does manufacture parts for Apple; the parts they manufacture are according to Apple's R&D specifications & are designed by/for Apple only. Apple holds the license for specific parts (ie. the A5/A4 chip designs). Therefore even though Samsung manufactures the parts, they cannot put these parts in other hardware unless deemed so by Apple. Apple pays Samsung a fee to utilize their production facilities, which is a profit for Samsung. This profit is small compared to the margin of parts/production to MSRP that Apple reaps on each iPad. Apple controls hardware development, OS development, & UI development by keeping everything in house. Samsung utilizes a third party OS, & third party processor technology. I don't feel their user experience is as good as it could be. Samsung ultimately controls the manufacturing of the Tab but they leave money on the table as opposed to Apple's business model.
BornAgainMac
Aug 17, 09:39 AM
I don't like Adobe anymore. :mad:
No comments:
Post a Comment