Gatesbasher
Mar 31, 09:06 PM
Yeah! That's what'll happen!
Or they'll do further research and realize that the implications in this SINGLE ARTICLE might not be 100% true.
To the everyday user this means NOTHING as they have no knowledge of what open truly means, and therefore can't take advantage of it.
To the users who actually have the knowhow to utilize open source operating systems, this might mean a minor hinderance, but not a complete game changer.
And for clarification, the former is the vast majority.
Did no one notice the obvious bias in this article? It's slanted, and the author clearly thinks that Google has been wrong this entire time.
The everyday user has been buying Android phones in large numbers because they're cheap and are available on more carriers. This is not about everyday users, it's about the Fandroids who have been screaming "'Open' good, 'closed' bad!!" at the top of their lungs for the last three years.
I stand by my three groups: 1�indiscriminate Apple-haters (like you), 2�people who just want a team to root for: "Go Android!!" Right or wrong, and 3�the true believers in the open-source religion.
Now as I said before, the only truly "open" phones would be FreeRunners that Stallman assembles in his Mom's basement from components gleaned from dumpsters and hands out for free, so I have no idea what new savior they'll turn to to save them from the tyrant Jobs. Be funny if it was Microsoft!
And no, I see no "bias" in the article�I think you're using the Rupert Murdoch definition: "Facts I don't want anybody to hear."
Or they'll do further research and realize that the implications in this SINGLE ARTICLE might not be 100% true.
To the everyday user this means NOTHING as they have no knowledge of what open truly means, and therefore can't take advantage of it.
To the users who actually have the knowhow to utilize open source operating systems, this might mean a minor hinderance, but not a complete game changer.
And for clarification, the former is the vast majority.
Did no one notice the obvious bias in this article? It's slanted, and the author clearly thinks that Google has been wrong this entire time.
The everyday user has been buying Android phones in large numbers because they're cheap and are available on more carriers. This is not about everyday users, it's about the Fandroids who have been screaming "'Open' good, 'closed' bad!!" at the top of their lungs for the last three years.
I stand by my three groups: 1�indiscriminate Apple-haters (like you), 2�people who just want a team to root for: "Go Android!!" Right or wrong, and 3�the true believers in the open-source religion.
Now as I said before, the only truly "open" phones would be FreeRunners that Stallman assembles in his Mom's basement from components gleaned from dumpsters and hands out for free, so I have no idea what new savior they'll turn to to save them from the tyrant Jobs. Be funny if it was Microsoft!
And no, I see no "bias" in the article�I think you're using the Rupert Murdoch definition: "Facts I don't want anybody to hear."
gnasher729
Mar 22, 01:38 PM
You are the funniest poster on here. Thanks for the entertainment. (Not sure if it's your intent, but thanks anyway.)
Here's what he doesn't realise: Every product has both a price, and a value. In case of the iPhone, Apple has left a lot of space for others to undercut it in price. And many people will go for something that is cheaper, even when it doesn't have quite the value. But as we can see now, Apple hasn't left any margin with the iPad for competitors to undercut it in price. If the iPad was starting at around $1000 as had been suggested originally, then Samsung would be able to sell lots and lots of tablets for $499. But the iPad starts at $499. Samsung could sell lots and lots of tablets for $249 or $299, but they can't build them for the price. The reason why none of these tablets are cheaper than the iPad is because they just can't build them cheaper.
For the same price, people are going to buy the original and not a cheap copy. So they will buy and continue buying the iPad. And the iPad is the one that you know will be around next year, unlike others.
Here's what he doesn't realise: Every product has both a price, and a value. In case of the iPhone, Apple has left a lot of space for others to undercut it in price. And many people will go for something that is cheaper, even when it doesn't have quite the value. But as we can see now, Apple hasn't left any margin with the iPad for competitors to undercut it in price. If the iPad was starting at around $1000 as had been suggested originally, then Samsung would be able to sell lots and lots of tablets for $499. But the iPad starts at $499. Samsung could sell lots and lots of tablets for $249 or $299, but they can't build them for the price. The reason why none of these tablets are cheaper than the iPad is because they just can't build them cheaper.
For the same price, people are going to buy the original and not a cheap copy. So they will buy and continue buying the iPad. And the iPad is the one that you know will be around next year, unlike others.
Dark K
Jun 19, 03:29 PM
If anyone can answer me this question, it would be most appreciated :D
Does anyone know how many iPhone 4s Radioshack will be getting apart from those that they "reserved"?
Does anyone know how many iPhone 4s Radioshack will be getting apart from those that they "reserved"?
shawnce
Aug 26, 03:25 PM
Apple is now getting their parts from the same bin that PC makers use. Intel = cheap parts. Cheap parts = low quality.
Same thing with the batteries....
OS X can run on PPC and X86. Apple should target X86 to consumers and PPC for pro's Yet iBooks and PowerBooks (PPC based systems) are part of this most recent battery recall (and a prior one)... it has nothing to do with switching to Intel. Apple has been using standard commodity parts in their systems for a VERY long time now.
...and while you are at the site why not look at some non-Intel based systems...
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=Titanium_PowerBook_G4
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=PowerBook_12%22
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=Ibook
Same thing with the batteries....
OS X can run on PPC and X86. Apple should target X86 to consumers and PPC for pro's Yet iBooks and PowerBooks (PPC based systems) are part of this most recent battery recall (and a prior one)... it has nothing to do with switching to Intel. Apple has been using standard commodity parts in their systems for a VERY long time now.
...and while you are at the site why not look at some non-Intel based systems...
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=Titanium_PowerBook_G4
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=PowerBook_12%22
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=Ibook
jacg
Jul 27, 10:22 AM
Ah and where has the wireless mouse/kbd option gone in the store? Maybe they will be free with the upgraded iMacs.
According to the bluetooth mighty mouse info at apple.com, you still need a wired keyboard and mouse to install the thing. When you went for the wireless option before, did you get a wired keyboard too?
Also, are there any how-to guides for upgrading Yonah iMacs to Merom?
According to the bluetooth mighty mouse info at apple.com, you still need a wired keyboard and mouse to install the thing. When you went for the wireless option before, did you get a wired keyboard too?
Also, are there any how-to guides for upgrading Yonah iMacs to Merom?
maelstromr
Apr 19, 05:33 PM
Is that we here in ka world know our Apple products....
But out in the Minnesota farmlands.... They may not have seen the ads....
Met up with another farming buddy... A couple of beers.
Gone to a tech shop to buy a smartphone n thought through the beer bottle they bought themselves a samsung iPhone.
:rolleyes:
/sarcasm
So what's your point? The presence of competition does not harm a competitor? Seems contrary to that whole "competition" word.
And your next point is what? A successful company should allow a competitor to use it's technology/patents to compete with it? All at the same time as just taking it from all the competitors that sue Apple on the other companies' patents, right?
How many anti-Apple suing trolls here are also pro-other company suing Apple trolls in other threads?
So you don't like the way IP law works? Vote for someone who will change the legal structure. Until then, corporations are going to work in the environment your legislators and courts created. Hate the game, not the player.
But out in the Minnesota farmlands.... They may not have seen the ads....
Met up with another farming buddy... A couple of beers.
Gone to a tech shop to buy a smartphone n thought through the beer bottle they bought themselves a samsung iPhone.
:rolleyes:
/sarcasm
So what's your point? The presence of competition does not harm a competitor? Seems contrary to that whole "competition" word.
And your next point is what? A successful company should allow a competitor to use it's technology/patents to compete with it? All at the same time as just taking it from all the competitors that sue Apple on the other companies' patents, right?
How many anti-Apple suing trolls here are also pro-other company suing Apple trolls in other threads?
So you don't like the way IP law works? Vote for someone who will change the legal structure. Until then, corporations are going to work in the environment your legislators and courts created. Hate the game, not the player.
Zadillo
Aug 7, 09:34 PM
Safari appears to be brushed metal. Go here (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/dashboard.html) and go to about 1/6 of the way through.
Perhaps sometime between now and Spring 2007 they might find the time to change that.
Perhaps sometime between now and Spring 2007 they might find the time to change that.
wnurse
Nov 29, 12:41 AM
I can't wait until Steve laughs in their faces. Who the hell do these guys think they are?
Hmm, the people that can tell apple to go screw themselves and take their music of itunes, that's who. One studio threatening to ask for a piece of ipods is not as threatening if they all do... what you gonna do, not buy music at all?.. of course you will buy music. You'll curse the studios but you'll buy music (and if not you, mom and pop will still buy music even if not available on itunes).
Wil universal get what they want?.. Apple is not totally powerless in this potential negotiation but i doubt steve has the power to laugh in their faces. Apple does not make music, it sells it. A seller can hardly laugh in the face of the producer of goods (or the gatekeeper of those goods). Want proof?.. walmart vs apple. Apple makes ipods.. Walmart refused to deal with apple the way apple wanted.. guess who lost in that battle.. walmart of course.. they are merely a seller, apple is the gatekeeper of ipods. The same is with the music studios.. apple is a seller, music companies are the gatekeepers. They can dictate who can and can't sell their music and while every corporation is motivated by profits.. they can always take their music and go home. Sure they lose but so does apple or they can make their music exclusively available only on microsoft service. You might not buy the music but you aren't 300 miliion americans. I gurantee apple does not want to be sitting by idly watching microsoft steal a market they grew. Naw, steve is not laughing in anyone's face.
Hmm, the people that can tell apple to go screw themselves and take their music of itunes, that's who. One studio threatening to ask for a piece of ipods is not as threatening if they all do... what you gonna do, not buy music at all?.. of course you will buy music. You'll curse the studios but you'll buy music (and if not you, mom and pop will still buy music even if not available on itunes).
Wil universal get what they want?.. Apple is not totally powerless in this potential negotiation but i doubt steve has the power to laugh in their faces. Apple does not make music, it sells it. A seller can hardly laugh in the face of the producer of goods (or the gatekeeper of those goods). Want proof?.. walmart vs apple. Apple makes ipods.. Walmart refused to deal with apple the way apple wanted.. guess who lost in that battle.. walmart of course.. they are merely a seller, apple is the gatekeeper of ipods. The same is with the music studios.. apple is a seller, music companies are the gatekeepers. They can dictate who can and can't sell their music and while every corporation is motivated by profits.. they can always take their music and go home. Sure they lose but so does apple or they can make their music exclusively available only on microsoft service. You might not buy the music but you aren't 300 miliion americans. I gurantee apple does not want to be sitting by idly watching microsoft steal a market they grew. Naw, steve is not laughing in anyone's face.
yoak
Apr 12, 04:18 AM
The insufficient content shouldn't pop up at random, or there is a bug. It pops up when there is insufficient content for a transition. Some transitions like crossfade are centered at the end/starting point of a clip. So it expands past/before this point, hence the need of additional content in the file.
I didn't know about that multicore issue with Compressor when launched directly from the timeline. I suspect an issue with your setup. Compressor does make good use of my 4 cores on mpeg2 and I never set up Qmaster.
What Mac are you using?
When I installed FSC3 I had to set up Qmaster to make Compressor use all my cores. It was not easy to make it work, but that was due to the bug that don�t allow you to send directly from FC. This is what took me a while to find out.
We still had some problems making a new Mac Pro making use of all it�s core just this winter.
Have you checked your BAtch Monitor to make sure Compressor really splits up the file and spread it out over all your cores?
For the content bug, I�m not sure it�s a bug. I do know that it comes up when a file is too short for dissolve etc, but sometimes I can�t figure out why it comes up. Could still be my own fault, maybe I presumed it was a bug too easily
I didn't know about that multicore issue with Compressor when launched directly from the timeline. I suspect an issue with your setup. Compressor does make good use of my 4 cores on mpeg2 and I never set up Qmaster.
What Mac are you using?
When I installed FSC3 I had to set up Qmaster to make Compressor use all my cores. It was not easy to make it work, but that was due to the bug that don�t allow you to send directly from FC. This is what took me a while to find out.
We still had some problems making a new Mac Pro making use of all it�s core just this winter.
Have you checked your BAtch Monitor to make sure Compressor really splits up the file and spread it out over all your cores?
For the content bug, I�m not sure it�s a bug. I do know that it comes up when a file is too short for dissolve etc, but sometimes I can�t figure out why it comes up. Could still be my own fault, maybe I presumed it was a bug too easily
Xeem
Aug 15, 12:05 PM
Still waiting for game benchmarks...
Ditto. Sometimes a system's true colors don't show until you've benchmarked modern games on it.
Ditto. Sometimes a system's true colors don't show until you've benchmarked modern games on it.
Popeye206
Mar 31, 04:16 PM
And the Apple haters do yet another 180...
1. Macs
1995 to 2007: Don't use a Mac. Noone uses Macs.
2007 to Present: Don't use a Mac. Everyone uses a Mac.
2. Apps
1995 to 2/22/2011: Don't use Apple. There is no software and they can't do anything.
2/22 to Present: Apps? Who needs Apps as long as you have a robust UI?
3. Open
2007 to Today: Apple is a walled garden that only stupid lemmings use.
Today going forward: Controlling the OS is necessary and good for the consumer.
+1! Love this analogy!
You could also add to it:
1984-1991: GUI? Who needs a GUI? Real computers use command lines!
1999 - Vista: Thank goodness that Microsoft invented the GUI interface.
:D
1. Macs
1995 to 2007: Don't use a Mac. Noone uses Macs.
2007 to Present: Don't use a Mac. Everyone uses a Mac.
2. Apps
1995 to 2/22/2011: Don't use Apple. There is no software and they can't do anything.
2/22 to Present: Apps? Who needs Apps as long as you have a robust UI?
3. Open
2007 to Today: Apple is a walled garden that only stupid lemmings use.
Today going forward: Controlling the OS is necessary and good for the consumer.
+1! Love this analogy!
You could also add to it:
1984-1991: GUI? Who needs a GUI? Real computers use command lines!
1999 - Vista: Thank goodness that Microsoft invented the GUI interface.
:D
batitombo
Apr 25, 02:20 PM
I'm so over this ****
Tomaz
Aug 7, 04:30 PM
If you were picking on Mail.app's Stationery I'd probably agree with you.
None of the things that Time Machine have been compared to seem even close to what they are planning to do. Including my own VMS file versioning analogies. System Restore is not capable of restoring a single file, and particularly not within a running application. It seems kind of more like a system wide undo function when it comes to files...
B
I'm not comparing it to system restore but to Volume Shadow Copy from Windows Server 2003. File-by-file snapshot by MS 3 years ago!
I think Time Machine looks and probably is good, but after having seen all the pictures of the banners at WWDC mocking Vista, I expected someting REALLY NEW, not just warmed up. If they can't show the super super secret new stuff yet, then they shouldn't have used those banners. I find that arrogant...
None of the things that Time Machine have been compared to seem even close to what they are planning to do. Including my own VMS file versioning analogies. System Restore is not capable of restoring a single file, and particularly not within a running application. It seems kind of more like a system wide undo function when it comes to files...
B
I'm not comparing it to system restore but to Volume Shadow Copy from Windows Server 2003. File-by-file snapshot by MS 3 years ago!
I think Time Machine looks and probably is good, but after having seen all the pictures of the banners at WWDC mocking Vista, I expected someting REALLY NEW, not just warmed up. If they can't show the super super secret new stuff yet, then they shouldn't have used those banners. I find that arrogant...
mactoday
Apr 6, 11:16 AM
They do:D Speced out 17'' MBP.
Youre totally right though, their notebook displays have been taking backseat to the iOS train. Hell, the iPad3 is gonna have a 2048x1536 display for heavens sake...and they couldnt even give the refreshed 13'' MBP the same res as the months old 13'' MBA. FAIL.
I bet you that you'll never see a iPad with screen resolution like 2048x1536, it's a ****ing nightmare to iOS developers. You don't understand that it's ****ing crazy, iOS interface like MacOS X interface is not scalable. Apple have to change the whole GUI before making this step forward. You know why there is much smaller apps for Android OS that for iOS? Because Adnroid devices have tons of screen resolutions and every ****ing vendor think that this is better but they kill platform with tons of resolutions, it's hard for developers to make apps compatible with all resolutions, again GUI problem.
Youre totally right though, their notebook displays have been taking backseat to the iOS train. Hell, the iPad3 is gonna have a 2048x1536 display for heavens sake...and they couldnt even give the refreshed 13'' MBP the same res as the months old 13'' MBA. FAIL.
I bet you that you'll never see a iPad with screen resolution like 2048x1536, it's a ****ing nightmare to iOS developers. You don't understand that it's ****ing crazy, iOS interface like MacOS X interface is not scalable. Apple have to change the whole GUI before making this step forward. You know why there is much smaller apps for Android OS that for iOS? Because Adnroid devices have tons of screen resolutions and every ****ing vendor think that this is better but they kill platform with tons of resolutions, it's hard for developers to make apps compatible with all resolutions, again GUI problem.
applebb
Apr 7, 11:27 PM
You people don't know the facts and are jumping to conclusions. You need to realize that this is a RUMOR site....
epitaphic
Aug 18, 06:09 AM
A whole 9 months? Those systems are supposed to last four years.
long haired chihuahua puppies
Long Hair Chihuahua Puppies
apple head chihuahua puppies -
katyoshi
Apr 7, 01:18 AM
This is why I waited for them to update the C2D first before purchasing. I will be buying the top 13". :rolleyes:
nsayer
Apr 6, 10:37 AM
For most people the ipad is more useful than the air anyway imo. Yes i owned an air, the ipad 1, and now the ipad 2 and the air was just a watered down macbook pro more than the ipad is a scaled up ipod touch
Alas, there are some things that the curated app store will never be able to supply. Case in point: a pokerstars or fulltilt client. And if the ipad's Safari can't do java or flash or allow me to run the applications of my choosing, then it's not sufficiently open for my needs.
Alas, there are some things that the curated app store will never be able to supply. Case in point: a pokerstars or fulltilt client. And if the ipad's Safari can't do java or flash or allow me to run the applications of my choosing, then it's not sufficiently open for my needs.
ctdonath
Mar 22, 02:57 PM
but these tablets ( and my ipad) will NEVER be a true enterprise product with out some sort of native printing and a FIRST CLASS STYLUS/WRITING APPS. PERIOD.
They're not what they're not.
Their purpose is anywhere/anytime/always-on, not "best tool for job X".
I drag my tablet everywhere because it's easy to carry and easy to use (ease on the scale of "quick email check in elevator", "get restaurant.com coupon while walking between car and cafe" easy).
Your complaint is akin to whining a Swiss Army knife is unsuitable for culinary or carpentry use. You have a serious application for which a serious tool is warranted, you get the serious tool - not whine that a lightweight general-purpose device doesn't fulfill the role. ...and sometimes the right tool for a particular enterprise application IS a Swiss Army knife, because for a particular job the "every tool is available in a tiny lightweight package" may be best.
They're not what they're not.
Their purpose is anywhere/anytime/always-on, not "best tool for job X".
I drag my tablet everywhere because it's easy to carry and easy to use (ease on the scale of "quick email check in elevator", "get restaurant.com coupon while walking between car and cafe" easy).
Your complaint is akin to whining a Swiss Army knife is unsuitable for culinary or carpentry use. You have a serious application for which a serious tool is warranted, you get the serious tool - not whine that a lightweight general-purpose device doesn't fulfill the role. ...and sometimes the right tool for a particular enterprise application IS a Swiss Army knife, because for a particular job the "every tool is available in a tiny lightweight package" may be best.
Eidorian
Mar 26, 10:25 AM
I will wait to see what Spotlight is like.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 20, 08:32 AM
Samsung has no honor.
It seems their problem is that they had access to Apple's design and so were able to copy more closely than is usually the case with Apple competitors.
It seems their problem is that they had access to Apple's design and so were able to copy more closely than is usually the case with Apple competitors.
dgree03
Apr 6, 02:43 PM
That's what I've gone for, Wifi only. With the wireless hotspot feature of the Nexus S, a 3G version seemed pointless for me.
I thought the same thing, until i bought my 3g Xoom. Then i felt finally freedom! I have a rooted EVO and with my ipad 1 I would tether all the time. Take my phone out, start wireless tether, put my phone back, kill my phone battery.. rinse and repeat.
Now I dont have to kill my phone battery tethering, nor do I have to deal with the hassle of enabling tether on my phone all the time.
I thought the same thing, until i bought my 3g Xoom. Then i felt finally freedom! I have a rooted EVO and with my ipad 1 I would tether all the time. Take my phone out, start wireless tether, put my phone back, kill my phone battery.. rinse and repeat.
Now I dont have to kill my phone battery tethering, nor do I have to deal with the hassle of enabling tether on my phone all the time.
Mattie Num Nums
Mar 31, 02:38 PM
I've been wanting to say this for a very long time. Google's OS has no advantage over iOS. You could even say it has a disadvantage. Having to create a vanilla code base that needs to function on multiple pieces of hardware is complex, more complexity creates weaker system.
But here's my point. The ONLY ONLY reason why Android market share is anywhere near what it is today is because of the Buy One Get One options at most phone retailers. iOS has NEVER done that and hopefully never will. If you didn't care about the phone or service but needed two "Newer Smart Phones" one for you and one for your wife, why not go with the "Blah Blah" model from Verizon where if I buy one today I get the second for free (two year agreement and activation fees required).
Market share means nothing. This platform is doomed unless Google reins it in and get control over it. If they do, providers will be less willing to work with them, if they don't, by by Android.
My Two Cents.
-LanPhantom
You could say the same thing about Apple though. The Apple fad will go away and the extremely closed ecosystem which seems to not be really developing much in terms of UI or having an actual roadmap could end iOS.
I don't understand why people can't just see the pros and cons of both and accept both are great platforms. Its always a WAR with Apple fans. Apple against EVERYONE!
But here's my point. The ONLY ONLY reason why Android market share is anywhere near what it is today is because of the Buy One Get One options at most phone retailers. iOS has NEVER done that and hopefully never will. If you didn't care about the phone or service but needed two "Newer Smart Phones" one for you and one for your wife, why not go with the "Blah Blah" model from Verizon where if I buy one today I get the second for free (two year agreement and activation fees required).
Market share means nothing. This platform is doomed unless Google reins it in and get control over it. If they do, providers will be less willing to work with them, if they don't, by by Android.
My Two Cents.
-LanPhantom
You could say the same thing about Apple though. The Apple fad will go away and the extremely closed ecosystem which seems to not be really developing much in terms of UI or having an actual roadmap could end iOS.
I don't understand why people can't just see the pros and cons of both and accept both are great platforms. Its always a WAR with Apple fans. Apple against EVERYONE!
blahblah100
Apr 6, 02:52 PM
:apple:
That's all I have to say.
Really? Are sales numbers what dictates one product is better than the other?
I'm not saying the Xoom is better (I haven't used one) but a reading of the posts on this thread would suggest that sales number indicate that one product is better than the other.
That's all I have to say.
Really? Are sales numbers what dictates one product is better than the other?
I'm not saying the Xoom is better (I haven't used one) but a reading of the posts on this thread would suggest that sales number indicate that one product is better than the other.
No comments:
Post a Comment