lordonuthin
Dec 17, 10:26 PM
Our team is at 2.147 million points for the last 7 days, the highest I've ever seen it!! Way to go Team!
Macrumors.com - Team Folding - 7 days 2,146,864 Total points 146,241M
We're catching up to those Greeks and will soon pass them.
Macrumors.com - Team Folding - 7 days 2,146,864 Total points 146,241M
We're catching up to those Greeks and will soon pass them.
Built
Nov 16, 06:25 AM
I was an early adopter on iPhone 1st gen. I upgraded to iPhone 3G 18 months later. Skipped 3GS, and ordered the iPhone 4 on June 15th during the big frenzy.
My iPhone 4 was delivered to my home the day before launch day.
Granted I have always had a cheap thin rubberized case around my iPhone 4 (but I have also had one on all my other iPhones as well)...but the iPhone 4 has given me BETTER service...fewer dropped calls...increased versatility...amazing battery life...better screen...faster response...than any of my other iPhones...
While long ago, I generally enjoyed Consumer Reports, I believe their stance is nothing more than a blatant attempt at sensationalism based on initial reports of iPhone issues.
Personally, over the years, I have seen Consumer Reports almost imperceptibly slide into what it is today...a largely commercialized rag which long ago lost its "pro-consumer, anti-establishment" focus.
My iPhone 4 was delivered to my home the day before launch day.
Granted I have always had a cheap thin rubberized case around my iPhone 4 (but I have also had one on all my other iPhones as well)...but the iPhone 4 has given me BETTER service...fewer dropped calls...increased versatility...amazing battery life...better screen...faster response...than any of my other iPhones...
While long ago, I generally enjoyed Consumer Reports, I believe their stance is nothing more than a blatant attempt at sensationalism based on initial reports of iPhone issues.
Personally, over the years, I have seen Consumer Reports almost imperceptibly slide into what it is today...a largely commercialized rag which long ago lost its "pro-consumer, anti-establishment" focus.
rasmasyean
Mar 19, 12:53 PM
Umm kind of hard to do this with out the US and its military power. My understanding is the US it mostly going to provide support for it but not as much of the combat forces. The support being things like aerial refueling as we have the most of those flying gas tanks. They will circle over the Mediterranean Sea refueling planes going to and from missions. Kind of key to extend the range of the fighters and Fighter bombers.
Other thing the US I believe will provide is cruise missals as that they can launch from the Mediterranean Sea. This mostly to take out the Air Defenses. They might provide a few bombers to help take out artillery
US is not taking the lead. But is providing support. US is going to have the other countries really provide most of the planes needed for this.
Actually, the US is supplying EWar and Communications as well. The AWACS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airborne_Early_Warning_and_Control) planes themselves can be considered like "mother ships" of today and fill command and control functions.
Command craft often make the decisions and lead attack and defense tactics. It's not necessarily the ppl who have the "front line" forces are in the ones who are the major player. "Fighter planes" are just like drones with people in them. They follow orders and do not lead anything. It would be like saying the marines are the leading authority in war. They are not. They are just machine operators who pull the trigger.
It's really too early to tell what we are going to see, because they never tell you anything. Maybe with this rag tag army, you don't need $billion stealth planes to beat them up so you might not see these kind of things. Maybe later on you will see some predators or some crap only, who knows. But for now they just give the press a story and if the reporter steps out of line, they get him fired, like Geraldo Rivera during the Iraqi Freedom.
Other thing the US I believe will provide is cruise missals as that they can launch from the Mediterranean Sea. This mostly to take out the Air Defenses. They might provide a few bombers to help take out artillery
US is not taking the lead. But is providing support. US is going to have the other countries really provide most of the planes needed for this.
Actually, the US is supplying EWar and Communications as well. The AWACS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airborne_Early_Warning_and_Control) planes themselves can be considered like "mother ships" of today and fill command and control functions.
Command craft often make the decisions and lead attack and defense tactics. It's not necessarily the ppl who have the "front line" forces are in the ones who are the major player. "Fighter planes" are just like drones with people in them. They follow orders and do not lead anything. It would be like saying the marines are the leading authority in war. They are not. They are just machine operators who pull the trigger.
It's really too early to tell what we are going to see, because they never tell you anything. Maybe with this rag tag army, you don't need $billion stealth planes to beat them up so you might not see these kind of things. Maybe later on you will see some predators or some crap only, who knows. But for now they just give the press a story and if the reporter steps out of line, they get him fired, like Geraldo Rivera during the Iraqi Freedom.
Doctor Q
Jul 18, 12:53 PM
Rentals are definitely the way to go.I think rentals are sometimes the way to go. If I want to watch a movie once, a rental is perfect. If I want to watch it 2 or 3 times over many years, I might as well rent it more than once. But I want to watch it many times, month after month or year after year, I ought to own a copy, to save the expense and trouble of renting it. I already have both choices in "hardcopy" format. I'd like to have both choices online too, as conveniently as possible.
scottlinux
Oct 23, 02:06 PM
I don't know if this update is imminent. apple.com store still shows macbooks and mbp as shipping within 24 hours....
Lord Blackadder
Mar 4, 02:58 PM
If you buy a truck or SUV because you want to tow or haul, drive offroad or use it for work, fine. If you bought it because you're being "protective", then, yes, that is a selfish motivation.
Larger SUV's and trucks often do suffer fewer driver fatalities, so in some ways they are safer (in the US), but that is because they force smaller vehicles to absorb most of the impact during a crash. Also, the rollover risk remains high, so that the "protection" you are buying is pretty conditional and may come at the expense of other people's lives.
In addition, I should point out that minivans are safer than SUVs, so if you want your family safe, buy a minivan. Finally, it's a proven fact that pickups are less safe than cars, period.
If you want to debate it further I suggest we start another thread though, so we can keep this one on-topic.
Larger SUV's and trucks often do suffer fewer driver fatalities, so in some ways they are safer (in the US), but that is because they force smaller vehicles to absorb most of the impact during a crash. Also, the rollover risk remains high, so that the "protection" you are buying is pretty conditional and may come at the expense of other people's lives.
In addition, I should point out that minivans are safer than SUVs, so if you want your family safe, buy a minivan. Finally, it's a proven fact that pickups are less safe than cars, period.
If you want to debate it further I suggest we start another thread though, so we can keep this one on-topic.
Multimedia
Jul 14, 08:51 AM
Currently, prices of Xeons seem to hover between $500 and $1000. And note: these are RETAIL PRICES for consumers! Apple's prices for those CPU's would be considerably less. So I don't see Apple having any problems offering quad-Woodcrest for under $4000. I wouldn't be one bit surprised if we saw quad-Woodcrest for under $3000!Gee I hope you're right. Quad MacIntels For Under $3k Would Be A Miracle. Thanks for the heads up. :rolleyes:
danvdr
Oct 23, 06:42 PM
Along with the macbook and MB pro getting updates, for $14.95 you can download an ipod nano or ipod patch/software that lets you listen to FM radio without having to purchase the radio remote. Interface is the same as with the remote.
Cool beans. Where can you get this download?
Cool beans. Where can you get this download?
Cygnus311
Sep 1, 12:38 PM
I couldn't disagree with you more.
This size represents the iMac that can display Full resolution 1080p HD content. If they introduce this and then eventually throw a Blu-ray in there they've got the killer combination. Front Row is already setup to be a home-theatre replacement. I mean come on, it's basically an HDTV...it's 1080p, it's got a remote, and it's got front row... This will sell like crack... Digital crack...
A 23" home theater screen? Umm.......
This size represents the iMac that can display Full resolution 1080p HD content. If they introduce this and then eventually throw a Blu-ray in there they've got the killer combination. Front Row is already setup to be a home-theatre replacement. I mean come on, it's basically an HDTV...it's 1080p, it's got a remote, and it's got front row... This will sell like crack... Digital crack...
A 23" home theater screen? Umm.......
longsilver
Sep 5, 09:10 AM
It is back up but I can't spot any update. And from what I can tell, none of the other countries' stores went down at all.
wordoflife
Feb 19, 09:44 PM
crapy iphone pics
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y52/ObeyHK/photo.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y52/ObeyHK/photo-1.jpg
Beautiful view!
Holy crap! That is a nice view!
I'm jealous!
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y52/ObeyHK/photo.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y52/ObeyHK/photo-1.jpg
Beautiful view!
Holy crap! That is a nice view!
I'm jealous!
jxyama
Mar 31, 07:01 AM
How about three options....
1) I was thinking of a cut down emac style for the 1st time, Dad and Mums, Student, Low income buyers. (eg: basic cut down version)
2) An expandable machine based on the above design (eg: middle of the road - same chip as 3 but much lower specs)
3) Macs for the professionals...and 2nd or 3rd time computer buyers (eg: high spec/price - Higher spec chip than 2)
problem is, what do you cut down in #1 and still make profit? it's clear that dirt cheap computer market is something apple's not interested in. they believe it makes no economic sense. apple is not a charity organization, it is NOT on some mission to spread the goodness of Mac OS... if they don't see an economic merit in offering dirt cheap Macs, they won't, just like any other businesses.
eMac is not meant to be cheap. iMac is not meant to be cheap. they are meant to be all-in-one. if you know enough to foresee that you may need to upgrade in the future, you get a PowerMac because all-in-one is not for you. if you want a cheap, upgradable machine, then, unfortunately, you are not within apple's target market. thus far, apple has been doing well with this philosophy and who's to tell them to change? (do note that "customers" wanting dirt cheap machines have far less economic leverage because, well, they are cheap. if $800 is too much for a complete computer/OS/bundled software, then nevermind what dell's offering, apple believes they are ok without catering to you. if $400 is your budget, then apple believes it won't matter to you whether you get a dell or a Mac. if you want a Mac for sure, apple is betting that you will put down $400 more and get an eMac.)
even if apple offered custom upgrade parts (and only apple parts will work with Macs - otherwise, people will just go out and buy stock parts), i doubt they will be well received - they will be "overpriced" afterall, just like their computers are "overpriced" especially according to these "cheap" customers.
1) I was thinking of a cut down emac style for the 1st time, Dad and Mums, Student, Low income buyers. (eg: basic cut down version)
2) An expandable machine based on the above design (eg: middle of the road - same chip as 3 but much lower specs)
3) Macs for the professionals...and 2nd or 3rd time computer buyers (eg: high spec/price - Higher spec chip than 2)
problem is, what do you cut down in #1 and still make profit? it's clear that dirt cheap computer market is something apple's not interested in. they believe it makes no economic sense. apple is not a charity organization, it is NOT on some mission to spread the goodness of Mac OS... if they don't see an economic merit in offering dirt cheap Macs, they won't, just like any other businesses.
eMac is not meant to be cheap. iMac is not meant to be cheap. they are meant to be all-in-one. if you know enough to foresee that you may need to upgrade in the future, you get a PowerMac because all-in-one is not for you. if you want a cheap, upgradable machine, then, unfortunately, you are not within apple's target market. thus far, apple has been doing well with this philosophy and who's to tell them to change? (do note that "customers" wanting dirt cheap machines have far less economic leverage because, well, they are cheap. if $800 is too much for a complete computer/OS/bundled software, then nevermind what dell's offering, apple believes they are ok without catering to you. if $400 is your budget, then apple believes it won't matter to you whether you get a dell or a Mac. if you want a Mac for sure, apple is betting that you will put down $400 more and get an eMac.)
even if apple offered custom upgrade parts (and only apple parts will work with Macs - otherwise, people will just go out and buy stock parts), i doubt they will be well received - they will be "overpriced" afterall, just like their computers are "overpriced" especially according to these "cheap" customers.
millerb7
May 3, 06:58 AM
Okay, stupid question, sort of related.
I'm running optibay on my MBP (SSD & HDD with SSD split running my apps and OS, and then Win7, and my HDD acting as my storage drive for my media).... when I install Lion how crazy is that going to get?
I HIGHLY doubt (but do hopelessly hope [yes, I know]) that it'll be as easy as swapping my snow leopard with Lion... meaning that my Win7 will remain.... although for some reason I feel that I'll need to format the entire SSD, thus erasing my win7 install?
The only reason I ask is that it's a pita to install Win7 with this setup due to Win7 not loading from disk via USB... so I have to remove the damn optibay and put my optical drive back in.
So basically, I assume I have to re-link my OSX (as it's split now between ssd and hdd)... but do I have to erase my Win7 install as well on the SSD?
I'm running optibay on my MBP (SSD & HDD with SSD split running my apps and OS, and then Win7, and my HDD acting as my storage drive for my media).... when I install Lion how crazy is that going to get?
I HIGHLY doubt (but do hopelessly hope [yes, I know]) that it'll be as easy as swapping my snow leopard with Lion... meaning that my Win7 will remain.... although for some reason I feel that I'll need to format the entire SSD, thus erasing my win7 install?
The only reason I ask is that it's a pita to install Win7 with this setup due to Win7 not loading from disk via USB... so I have to remove the damn optibay and put my optical drive back in.
So basically, I assume I have to re-link my OSX (as it's split now between ssd and hdd)... but do I have to erase my Win7 install as well on the SSD?
NameUndecided
Apr 2, 07:49 PM
Leopard requires 9GB, Snow Leopard requires 5GB, and now Lion is under 4GB?
Oh my, no. That's just the size of the installer, which is compressed. Right now on the partition that I'm pretty sure that I only have the OS installed on and little to nothing else, I have 6.55gb taken up. The final version might take up even less than that.
Oh my, no. That's just the size of the installer, which is compressed. Right now on the partition that I'm pretty sure that I only have the OS installed on and little to nothing else, I have 6.55gb taken up. The final version might take up even less than that.
09iMac=Fail
Mar 27, 08:44 PM
I assume that's what you meant. Because we've seen touchscreen devices advance by leaps and bounds since June 2007. In two years' time it will very likely be an entirely new ballgame with such devices being a dominant force in tech, including gaming.
This little demo is just barely scratching the surface.
Saying that touch screen devices will be the dominant force in gaming in 2 years is a bold statement. I'd love to see them advance that much in 2 years, but I have a hard time seeing them being superior to traditional systems.
LTD, do you own a PS3 or other similar system? We all know you don't own a 360. :) Just curious if you are much of a gamer or not. And no, gaming on cell phones or similar devices is not what I'm talking about.
This little demo is just barely scratching the surface.
Saying that touch screen devices will be the dominant force in gaming in 2 years is a bold statement. I'd love to see them advance that much in 2 years, but I have a hard time seeing them being superior to traditional systems.
LTD, do you own a PS3 or other similar system? We all know you don't own a 360. :) Just curious if you are much of a gamer or not. And no, gaming on cell phones or similar devices is not what I'm talking about.
HiRez
Apr 12, 10:05 PM
Wow, looks pretty awesome. Nothing about improved typography though? Booooo.
wovel
Apr 3, 12:18 AM
Which part, the stock information, typing an email, or working on a spreadsheet? ;)
It was the brain scans..
Great ad. When they can't compete on specs Apple should try to use fuzzy math (sorry, logic) to convince people that there is more to their products. That's the only way for Apple to keep the profit margin.
Like when your competitors can't compete on usability and applications, they talk about meaningless "features" no one actually cares about.
It was the brain scans..
Great ad. When they can't compete on specs Apple should try to use fuzzy math (sorry, logic) to convince people that there is more to their products. That's the only way for Apple to keep the profit margin.
Like when your competitors can't compete on usability and applications, they talk about meaningless "features" no one actually cares about.
Chundles
Sep 6, 10:39 AM
I love my mini. I would have bought the former top end mini (1.66ghz Duo, 80gb HDD, SD) to replace my mini if it came down to $599 refurb/$699 new. I like my monitor just fine. I prefer the form factor of the mini over the iMac is what it comes down to, I suppose.
I'm not a fan of the iMac design... mostly because of my bad experience with a Rev A iMac G5 being so freaking loud. If Apple had kept the Core Solo and dropped it's price $100 or more (Apple needs a $399 mini more than it needs a $799 model) lots of people would have bought it.
As it stands, though, the mini kinda sucks.
The Intel iMacs are almost silent - truly, you can barely hear them if at all.
I'm not a fan of the iMac design... mostly because of my bad experience with a Rev A iMac G5 being so freaking loud. If Apple had kept the Core Solo and dropped it's price $100 or more (Apple needs a $399 mini more than it needs a $799 model) lots of people would have bought it.
As it stands, though, the mini kinda sucks.
The Intel iMacs are almost silent - truly, you can barely hear them if at all.
Mainyehc
Nov 28, 03:50 PM
I agree with almost everything you wrote (you're a pretty smart guy!) but offer two comments:
1 - We don't know there isn't a Jobs waiting in the wings. We also don't know there isn't a Jobs in the #2 spot at some Fortune 50 company who could be in a MS executive suite in 3 years.
2 - MS being "too proud" is exactly the kind of thing I mean when I write about not being able to predict the post-Bill future. He is certainly too proud but who knows about Bill 2.0?
You make the point about the rank-and-file being mostly very talented and I agree. If MS gets executives who stay out of the way who knows what Zune 3.0 will be like?
Why, thanks! English isn't even my native language... And I'm not a long-time Apple user either. But I suppose three years worth of using Macs and hangin' around MacRumors:Forums also helped, as did reading a lot (well, way too much, really) about the computer industry's history! :p
Your points are, of course, fairly good. But this is just a clear example of me playing the role of the "ominous wishful thinker", and you that of the "devil's advocate". So I surely hope I'm right in my predictions; even though I know competition is a good thing, arguing that competition from Microsoft could possibly be a "good" thing is nothing short of an oxymoron (I'm not saying that's your opinion. The problem is, if it's you who turns out to be right, that's what the Zune will become: competition! :p ). Let's hope that some worthy competitors, both on the cosumer electronics and the PC hardware/software/operating systems, OTHER than Microsoft emerge to give Apple some eventually needed "kicks in the butt", so they don't become lazy. ;)
'Course, if Microsoft could, hypothetically, stop being such an evil company, I'd certainly overlook their shady past and could even, Jobs forbid!, use some of their products (provided they'd be up to my typical Mac User's standards :rolleyes: ). :D
1 - We don't know there isn't a Jobs waiting in the wings. We also don't know there isn't a Jobs in the #2 spot at some Fortune 50 company who could be in a MS executive suite in 3 years.
2 - MS being "too proud" is exactly the kind of thing I mean when I write about not being able to predict the post-Bill future. He is certainly too proud but who knows about Bill 2.0?
You make the point about the rank-and-file being mostly very talented and I agree. If MS gets executives who stay out of the way who knows what Zune 3.0 will be like?
Why, thanks! English isn't even my native language... And I'm not a long-time Apple user either. But I suppose three years worth of using Macs and hangin' around MacRumors:Forums also helped, as did reading a lot (well, way too much, really) about the computer industry's history! :p
Your points are, of course, fairly good. But this is just a clear example of me playing the role of the "ominous wishful thinker", and you that of the "devil's advocate". So I surely hope I'm right in my predictions; even though I know competition is a good thing, arguing that competition from Microsoft could possibly be a "good" thing is nothing short of an oxymoron (I'm not saying that's your opinion. The problem is, if it's you who turns out to be right, that's what the Zune will become: competition! :p ). Let's hope that some worthy competitors, both on the cosumer electronics and the PC hardware/software/operating systems, OTHER than Microsoft emerge to give Apple some eventually needed "kicks in the butt", so they don't become lazy. ;)
'Course, if Microsoft could, hypothetically, stop being such an evil company, I'd certainly overlook their shady past and could even, Jobs forbid!, use some of their products (provided they'd be up to my typical Mac User's standards :rolleyes: ). :D
Jason Beck
Mar 25, 04:49 PM
Wireless controllers for iPad and TV dock or something please.
MikeNemat
Aug 6, 10:41 PM
Am I supposed to leave out cookies? :p :D
Yep. And Milk. Steve Jobs will climb down your chimney, eat the cookies, and pour the milk into any PCs he finds in your house :)
Yep. And Milk. Steve Jobs will climb down your chimney, eat the cookies, and pour the milk into any PCs he finds in your house :)
SeaFox
Dec 28, 02:23 AM
Here is your quote SeaFox.
You are an condescending individual and take my post out of context.
You can't please all of the people all of the time.
"I wouldn't hold my breath on the word processing and web surfing. WebTV showed surfing the internet on a TV sucked because trying to read normal-sized text from six feet away was hard, and bumping the text size up would goof up the page layout generally. Same reason word processing would be silly."
I stand by the statement. WebTV failed because at the time everyone had CRT TVs, which are much blurrier than a computer monitor. Even if you are using a new plasma screen set you have to account for how you use your device. One sits in front of their monitor by a couple feet. This makes 12 point text readable. Now, step back from this thread about six feet or so, however far you usually sit from your TV, and you'll see why. Even if you're viewing the screen at the real resolution of the HD set (1920x1080 for the real nice sets) you're still not going to be wanting to read long passages to text from your TV. Kinda like people don't like reading books in their entirety one screen at a time in Acrobat.
When you ask a home entertainment device to perform the functions of a regular computer you're adding all sorts of complexity and starting down a slippery slope. Let's say Apple added the ability to view Word files to the iTV. Someone would complain that they couldn't edit them. Same with iMovie files. Now you have to add that functionality. Then someone would say "well, what about image files? I can already watch my iPhoto library, why can't I do color and brightness/contrast correction?"
This is exactly the same thing that comes up about the iPod and the Apple Phone. Yeah, the iPod has no built-in FM tuner, no voice memo ability, no built in recording ability, built in FM transmitter for the car, ect. And adding these features would make the interface more complicated, when one of the things that makes the iPod such a hit is it's simplicity. Why do current music playing phones suck? Because the player functionality is hidden under a bunch of unintuitive menus, just like most of the other bells and whistles that may have influenced you to buy the phone to begin with. It's the current state of overly complicated interface design that gets people excited about Apple entering the cell phone market.
Edit: Also, one last point. If you put too much functionality into the iTV that is normally relegated to a regular Mac, then charge less for the iTV, you're going to eat into sales of the Mac Mini. Apple wouldn't do this, and this is the main reason I don't think you'll see the ability to open Word files or surf the Net with the iTV, that and it just sounds like a weird feature to have in a set top box.
If you've got your Mini hooked up to your TV and its working good for you I applaud you. The iTV is clearly not aiming for your type of consumer. I've read articles about setting up Minis as PVR's with HD sets, and invariably the indivdulal has some difficulty finding a monitor resolution and refresh rate the HD set will play along with at first, and actual use of the device is hobbled by needing a wireless keyboard or similar. Apple is aiming for the average TV watching consumer with the iTV, who I can tell you from personal experience are not nearly as smart.
You are an condescending individual and take my post out of context.
You can't please all of the people all of the time.
"I wouldn't hold my breath on the word processing and web surfing. WebTV showed surfing the internet on a TV sucked because trying to read normal-sized text from six feet away was hard, and bumping the text size up would goof up the page layout generally. Same reason word processing would be silly."
I stand by the statement. WebTV failed because at the time everyone had CRT TVs, which are much blurrier than a computer monitor. Even if you are using a new plasma screen set you have to account for how you use your device. One sits in front of their monitor by a couple feet. This makes 12 point text readable. Now, step back from this thread about six feet or so, however far you usually sit from your TV, and you'll see why. Even if you're viewing the screen at the real resolution of the HD set (1920x1080 for the real nice sets) you're still not going to be wanting to read long passages to text from your TV. Kinda like people don't like reading books in their entirety one screen at a time in Acrobat.
When you ask a home entertainment device to perform the functions of a regular computer you're adding all sorts of complexity and starting down a slippery slope. Let's say Apple added the ability to view Word files to the iTV. Someone would complain that they couldn't edit them. Same with iMovie files. Now you have to add that functionality. Then someone would say "well, what about image files? I can already watch my iPhoto library, why can't I do color and brightness/contrast correction?"
This is exactly the same thing that comes up about the iPod and the Apple Phone. Yeah, the iPod has no built-in FM tuner, no voice memo ability, no built in recording ability, built in FM transmitter for the car, ect. And adding these features would make the interface more complicated, when one of the things that makes the iPod such a hit is it's simplicity. Why do current music playing phones suck? Because the player functionality is hidden under a bunch of unintuitive menus, just like most of the other bells and whistles that may have influenced you to buy the phone to begin with. It's the current state of overly complicated interface design that gets people excited about Apple entering the cell phone market.
Edit: Also, one last point. If you put too much functionality into the iTV that is normally relegated to a regular Mac, then charge less for the iTV, you're going to eat into sales of the Mac Mini. Apple wouldn't do this, and this is the main reason I don't think you'll see the ability to open Word files or surf the Net with the iTV, that and it just sounds like a weird feature to have in a set top box.
If you've got your Mini hooked up to your TV and its working good for you I applaud you. The iTV is clearly not aiming for your type of consumer. I've read articles about setting up Minis as PVR's with HD sets, and invariably the indivdulal has some difficulty finding a monitor resolution and refresh rate the HD set will play along with at first, and actual use of the device is hobbled by needing a wireless keyboard or similar. Apple is aiming for the average TV watching consumer with the iTV, who I can tell you from personal experience are not nearly as smart.
imnotatfault
Aug 19, 09:09 AM
I disagree with pretty much everything you said here Manic Mouse :D.
I really hope the iPod doesn't go down the line of convergence/frankenstein/jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none. It's a solid music player and it's main priority should be as such. In my experience with work colleagues and parents/in-laws the iPod is almost bordering on being too difficult as it is just with just music and video. Many never bother with video or podcasts or even firmware updates because they perceive it to be too complex. Adding slide-out keyboards, larger/deeper navigation menus, wifi connections, and email configuration would probably push it over the edge as far as being too technologically intimidating for most. Not to mention the size sacrifice.
Apple may bring something else to the market to compete if there really is a decent market for devices like the Mylo (which I'm personally not too sure there is).
Only if the device was separate from the iPod, which stayed truer to its roots, and more importantly, there was some sort of higher integration. Like the proposed built-in dock the mac mini would have. I still miss that.
I really hope the iPod doesn't go down the line of convergence/frankenstein/jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none. It's a solid music player and it's main priority should be as such. In my experience with work colleagues and parents/in-laws the iPod is almost bordering on being too difficult as it is just with just music and video. Many never bother with video or podcasts or even firmware updates because they perceive it to be too complex. Adding slide-out keyboards, larger/deeper navigation menus, wifi connections, and email configuration would probably push it over the edge as far as being too technologically intimidating for most. Not to mention the size sacrifice.
Apple may bring something else to the market to compete if there really is a decent market for devices like the Mylo (which I'm personally not too sure there is).
Only if the device was separate from the iPod, which stayed truer to its roots, and more importantly, there was some sort of higher integration. Like the proposed built-in dock the mac mini would have. I still miss that.
Macky-Mac
Mar 31, 01:35 PM
Japan? Yes. The Nazis? Certainly not. The Soviets defeated the Nazis......
To say any one country defeated the nazis really isn't true. It's as unreasonable a claim as rasmasyean's wargasmic fantasy :p
As it was, the nazi invasion of russia came very close to success. Would the soviets have defeated the nazis if germany hadn't also been engaged in northern africa and then italy and western europe at the same time they were fighting the soviets? Would they have have beaten Hitler if he hadn't gone against the advice of his generals and made some disastrous decisions? Didn't the Persian supply corridor factor into the soviets being able to hold off the germans? etc etc etc
The reality is that the allied forces beat the nazis and not any one country.
To say any one country defeated the nazis really isn't true. It's as unreasonable a claim as rasmasyean's wargasmic fantasy :p
As it was, the nazi invasion of russia came very close to success. Would the soviets have defeated the nazis if germany hadn't also been engaged in northern africa and then italy and western europe at the same time they were fighting the soviets? Would they have have beaten Hitler if he hadn't gone against the advice of his generals and made some disastrous decisions? Didn't the Persian supply corridor factor into the soviets being able to hold off the germans? etc etc etc
The reality is that the allied forces beat the nazis and not any one country.
No comments:
Post a Comment