Doraemon
Mar 28, 09:56 AM
Its killing them
Geez. How many more people do you need to see that you're wrong. :rolleyes:
Geez. How many more people do you need to see that you're wrong. :rolleyes:
twoodcc
Jul 13, 10:42 PM
dang, that would be awesome. i just hope i can buy one and put it in an external enclosure and have my mac be able to use it
skunk
Mar 27, 04:57 AM
Well, the US controls the AWACSThe AWACS involved are owned and operated by NATO. There may not even be US personnel on board.
apb3
Aug 17, 11:49 AM
I don't really see the demand behind adding wireless functionality into the iPod. I think wireless is the buzz word right now and investment managers and industry analysts don't even know what it means.
Bluetooth headphones, if they sound good, and bluetooth syncing is the only function people might use out of this. However, most people charge as they sync, so they would need to connect the iPod to the computer anyway. Bluetooth headphones would need to be charged too, and that is a nuisance.
The only thing semi-useful out of 802.11 is sending audio to airport express. But I use my laptop for that already, so does this really add any functionality? No one I know will be typing in a 256-bit WPA key into their iPod so they can play their iPod music over their friend's airport express, either. At work, I can view and sample my coworker's library on my computer - even when they leave for lunch. And if I like it, I can buy it on iTunes right there. Again, where is the usefulness of a wireless iPod?
I can see how XM radio might be useful to many, even though it doesn't appeal to me. However, I would think Apple would want an exclusive deal if they were to offer this feature.
A man (almost - I think XM blows as compared to Sirius, seriously) after my own heart.... ;)
and so much more succinct.:D
Bluetooth headphones, if they sound good, and bluetooth syncing is the only function people might use out of this. However, most people charge as they sync, so they would need to connect the iPod to the computer anyway. Bluetooth headphones would need to be charged too, and that is a nuisance.
The only thing semi-useful out of 802.11 is sending audio to airport express. But I use my laptop for that already, so does this really add any functionality? No one I know will be typing in a 256-bit WPA key into their iPod so they can play their iPod music over their friend's airport express, either. At work, I can view and sample my coworker's library on my computer - even when they leave for lunch. And if I like it, I can buy it on iTunes right there. Again, where is the usefulness of a wireless iPod?
I can see how XM radio might be useful to many, even though it doesn't appeal to me. However, I would think Apple would want an exclusive deal if they were to offer this feature.
A man (almost - I think XM blows as compared to Sirius, seriously) after my own heart.... ;)
and so much more succinct.:D
KnightWRX
Apr 21, 11:17 AM
A number of observers have pointed out that Apple did respond to location-tracking concerns (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/07/20/apple-responds-to-questions-about-location-tracking-and-privacy/) last July, noting that such information could be collected, batched, and sent to Apple to assist with generating and refining its database of cellular and Wi-Fi access points for providing location services. Location tracking is also used to aid in targeting iAds to customers based on their geographic region, although this information is not passed on to advertisers.
Once sent to Apple, it should be removed from the phone though, which is not happening right now according to reports. This is wrong. The problem isn't the feature per say, it's the persistence of this database and it's very accurate, low-resolution.
Once sent to Apple, it should be removed from the phone though, which is not happening right now according to reports. This is wrong. The problem isn't the feature per say, it's the persistence of this database and it's very accurate, low-resolution.
timerollson
Feb 20, 03:03 PM
snip
What speakers and how's the bass on them?
What speakers and how's the bass on them?
Doctor Q
Sep 6, 07:50 PM
Why exactly is fixed pricing so important? isn't that.. well.. a bit anti supply/demand? Anyone have any stats on the percentages that bestbuy, a local music/video store, and apple are making on a normal purchase?You are correct that "market pricing", where the price of a movie is based on what that particular movie might be worth to people, and possibly on the relative cost of bringing it to you, would better follow the principles of supply and demand.
The other side of the story is that Apple wants to keep things as simple as possible, and fixed pricing is very easy for consumers to understand. It changes a tricky buying decision (is this movie worth this price?) to a simpler buying decision (which movies are worth the standard price?). It may not seem that complicated either way, but it makes a difference with skittish first timer buyers. It's like not having to haggle when the price of something isn't negotiable. Less flexibility, but less decisionmaking.
Among the general public, there has been a much larger resistance to these download services than you'd know from reading posts from tech-minded people in forums like these. I think fixed pricing for iTunes music was one of the keys to the success of the iTunes Music Store. Remember that only a small percentage of music buyers buy online, and movies are going to start out the same way.
The other side of the story is that Apple wants to keep things as simple as possible, and fixed pricing is very easy for consumers to understand. It changes a tricky buying decision (is this movie worth this price?) to a simpler buying decision (which movies are worth the standard price?). It may not seem that complicated either way, but it makes a difference with skittish first timer buyers. It's like not having to haggle when the price of something isn't negotiable. Less flexibility, but less decisionmaking.
Among the general public, there has been a much larger resistance to these download services than you'd know from reading posts from tech-minded people in forums like these. I think fixed pricing for iTunes music was one of the keys to the success of the iTunes Music Store. Remember that only a small percentage of music buyers buy online, and movies are going to start out the same way.
vincenz
Feb 26, 05:34 PM
Ha man you really did your research, how'd you find the lamp though?
Thanks, just a bit of sleuthing (googling) on the internet :p
Just looked up "robot lamp" and luckily it came up.
Thanks, just a bit of sleuthing (googling) on the internet :p
Just looked up "robot lamp" and luckily it came up.
Bernard SG
Oct 21, 05:52 AM
14 million devices sold in Q3 2010.
'Nuff said.
'Nuff said.
Fukui
Mar 21, 07:11 PM
What people don't understand is that Apple is dying....
Everyone is buying IBMs and if Apple doesn't do something then they are dead.
Not exactly. Everyone's buying DELLs.
And, For What its worth, apples market share may be lower over time, but thier installed/customer base IS increasing. Just not at the same growth level as the Big Players. The only thing that prevents apples larger growth is largely microsoft.
When customers cant access the website they want, take classes to learn MS office only on PC's because the mac version is different, cant use all the same peripherals as windows users (not as bad as it used to be for sure) etc, apple will grow slower than the bigger PC companies.
How come Acer isnt dying with its meager 3 percent market share?
Lower prices don't seem to help them that much...
Its much more than price that determines market share, things like advertising...which is what apple is actually doing for the iPod.
Everyone is buying IBMs and if Apple doesn't do something then they are dead.
Not exactly. Everyone's buying DELLs.
And, For What its worth, apples market share may be lower over time, but thier installed/customer base IS increasing. Just not at the same growth level as the Big Players. The only thing that prevents apples larger growth is largely microsoft.
When customers cant access the website they want, take classes to learn MS office only on PC's because the mac version is different, cant use all the same peripherals as windows users (not as bad as it used to be for sure) etc, apple will grow slower than the bigger PC companies.
How come Acer isnt dying with its meager 3 percent market share?
Lower prices don't seem to help them that much...
Its much more than price that determines market share, things like advertising...which is what apple is actually doing for the iPod.
econgeek
Apr 12, 09:58 PM
The auto-tracking timeline seems so obvious (in retrospect) that I think a year the UIs with 99 tracks stacked on top of each other, a new track for each tiny clip, etc, are going to look horribly complicated. They may look "professional" to people who think all information should be onscreen at once -- even if there's no video in the track, at he time range you're looking at, the track is still there.
But it seems like this new UI will give much better control and edibility for the range of the work that you're currently working on.
It is looking like some of the features that I think were a PITA before are better integrated here too.... if the comments about adjusting time scale mean what I think.
A great leap forward in usability, it looks like.
But it seems like this new UI will give much better control and edibility for the range of the work that you're currently working on.
It is looking like some of the features that I think were a PITA before are better integrated here too.... if the comments about adjusting time scale mean what I think.
A great leap forward in usability, it looks like.
thejadedmonkey
Nov 28, 07:46 AM
Congratulations, you just lost any arguments you wish to make. If Apple monitors are vastly overpriced for what you get, if you don't have any need for something that is superior to a regular consumer model, then why in the hell did you buy one?
Maybe he got an apple one first and didn't like it (but who's going to trash it), or one was a gift, or perhaps he wanted to go with the whole apple-theme.. Maybe he has TWO computers.
Why are you looking for a fight? I happen to have two different lava lamps. why? Because I can. thank you, don't bite my head off because I have two.
Maybe he got an apple one first and didn't like it (but who's going to trash it), or one was a gift, or perhaps he wanted to go with the whole apple-theme.. Maybe he has TWO computers.
Why are you looking for a fight? I happen to have two different lava lamps. why? Because I can. thank you, don't bite my head off because I have two.
MCIowaRulz
Apr 19, 01:14 PM
FINALLY! I've been holding off for over a year upgrading my 2007 iMac because of the ancient ports. Give me my Thunderbolt!
I HAD YOU ALL BEAT:D
I'm GOING to upgrade from a slow single processor 867Mhz G4 from 2001 running Tiger with a 120GB+60GB HD and the ancient ATI 9000 Pro.:)
1 21.5 (or 24 please)
3.x Ghz Quad SB i7
8 GB (or 16GB)
2 TB HD
Ati 6000x series
etc etc:):)
I HAD YOU ALL BEAT:D
I'm GOING to upgrade from a slow single processor 867Mhz G4 from 2001 running Tiger with a 120GB+60GB HD and the ancient ATI 9000 Pro.:)
1 21.5 (or 24 please)
3.x Ghz Quad SB i7
8 GB (or 16GB)
2 TB HD
Ati 6000x series
etc etc:):)
tomsk
Jan 12, 12:57 AM
Try this...
Jobs described the Apple TV as his 'hobby' - Not a clever choice of words at the time the analysts thought...
Now take the outgoing Mac Mini, repackage and upgrade, dice it up with the Airport Extreme (with built in bb modem this time - please), add a little Apple TV '2', leave on gas mark 7 for 2 hours...
Total over the 'air' internal network with media storage and streaming capability and it's time to enter the full-on home multimedia market. Plus as a little bonus, movie and tv show rentals - watchable on your mac, itouch, iphone etc...
Actually, what the hell... They make Back to my Mac actually work and let you watch them on the road too ;-)
:p
Jobs described the Apple TV as his 'hobby' - Not a clever choice of words at the time the analysts thought...
Now take the outgoing Mac Mini, repackage and upgrade, dice it up with the Airport Extreme (with built in bb modem this time - please), add a little Apple TV '2', leave on gas mark 7 for 2 hours...
Total over the 'air' internal network with media storage and streaming capability and it's time to enter the full-on home multimedia market. Plus as a little bonus, movie and tv show rentals - watchable on your mac, itouch, iphone etc...
Actually, what the hell... They make Back to my Mac actually work and let you watch them on the road too ;-)
:p
Rodimus Prime
Apr 17, 10:39 AM
While I know how to drive a car with a manual shifter, here's a BIG problem nowadays: the quality of the shifter has really gone downhill in recent years. http://www.en.kolobok.us/smiles/big_standart/negative.gif
Unless you're driving a BMW, Honda or Porsche, gear shifters on modern cars either are too "notchy" or overly-vague in terms of finding a gear, and the result is not very pleasant, especially in city driving.
Besides, automatics and dual-clutch gearboxes--thanks to modern computer controls--have gotten really good in recent years. This is especially true with automatics that sport six to eight forward gears, which allows for a lot smoother automatic shifts between gears during acceleration. I've test-driven a 2011 US-market Hyundai Elantra saloon with Hyundai's own six-speed automatic and note how smooth the shifts are even during hard acceleration.
What Hondas have good shifters???? Umm sorry but no. I have driving manual Honda's and several different years including the range that you called good (02-06) and still compared to others they sucked. My 2004 Nissan manual feel better and the Nissan is a little notchy but it has well defined gates. Honda manual just feel funny plus I hate how their clutch feels.
As for something us mortals can afford that I find has the best shifting feel is Mazda. Every one of those I have driving they have that silky smooth feel to it. I love it and has to be the best feeling shifter I have ever used.
Unless you're driving a BMW, Honda or Porsche, gear shifters on modern cars either are too "notchy" or overly-vague in terms of finding a gear, and the result is not very pleasant, especially in city driving.
Besides, automatics and dual-clutch gearboxes--thanks to modern computer controls--have gotten really good in recent years. This is especially true with automatics that sport six to eight forward gears, which allows for a lot smoother automatic shifts between gears during acceleration. I've test-driven a 2011 US-market Hyundai Elantra saloon with Hyundai's own six-speed automatic and note how smooth the shifts are even during hard acceleration.
What Hondas have good shifters???? Umm sorry but no. I have driving manual Honda's and several different years including the range that you called good (02-06) and still compared to others they sucked. My 2004 Nissan manual feel better and the Nissan is a little notchy but it has well defined gates. Honda manual just feel funny plus I hate how their clutch feels.
As for something us mortals can afford that I find has the best shifting feel is Mazda. Every one of those I have driving they have that silky smooth feel to it. I love it and has to be the best feeling shifter I have ever used.
tychay
Nov 28, 08:09 PM
I have no idea where you got that one from. The original Xbox never made a profit. Microsoft is deliberately selling the Xbox 360 at a loss to capture marketshare. However, the PS3 and Ninetindo Wii are selling like hotcakes, are latest big things, and have the buzz. The best laid plans ...
I think the first statement is correct or close to it. They may have had a single profitable quarter when Halo 2 was released. I'm not sure because they bury games in a Microsoft Entertainment and Devices Division. Which includes their smartphone stuff (now that it has stopped bleeding money) and their profitable and acclaimed mice, keyboards, and other stuff (all manufactured by other companies, sort of like Dell, but with a nicer design).
The second part I believe is now wrong. I think the XBox 360 is no longer a loss lead, though that might change as there is some speculation that they will be dropping the price to undercut Sony soon. I believe the fact that it is no longer a loss lead is causing a confounding with the "360 is profitable" commentaries here.
Another commenter mentioned how smart it was was the XBox had a hard drive on it. I’d say if it is so smart why did Microsoft remove it in the base model 360? I’ll point out that this happened because the price of hard drives do not get any cheaper! In fact the price of commodity hardware design doesn’t get any cheaper! Huh? Hard drives get bigger, not cheaper. Processors and chips get more powerful, not cheaper.
What went on is that successive iterations of the Playstation and Playstation 2 would allow Sony to combine chips to reduce the price (and make smaller PSOne and slim-cased Playstation 2). This outlet wasn't available to Microsoft because of their design which is why the XBox was a losing money for it's entire run and Sony played games by dropping their price before it ever turned a profit.
Those two things are "of a piece". While commodity hardware was an interesting idea, it was a failure. Which is why the XBox 360 is not built from commodity PC hardware. The hard drives are a necessary evil of the "Live" strategy so they're left in as an option and bundled with the Playstation 3. That's why these 6G consoles are expensive and not dropping in price fast.
Right now all this is moot since the thing to watch is the Sony gamble on a blue laser. Obviously it will get cheaper fast, but the question is how fast and how cheap? The horrible yields on the Cell processor isn't helping things.
Currently, the XBox 360 has sold very consistently at around 1.5 million units a quarter. The XMas quarter last year had supply issues and only sold .9 million units. That's hardly dominating. In fact, I think the Playstation 2 outsold the 360 in each of those quarters even though the device is six years old. Let's put some numbers here. Last year over 100 million Playstation 2’s had been sold, six months ago, they were selling 380k/month. The XBox 360 sold 6 million units since it's introduction over a year ago, six months ago they were selling 300k/month, they had fixed the channel problems that plagued the release.
Consider this: Nintendo sold 600,000 Wiis in the last eight days. Given the scarcity of the Playstation 3 and the popularity and addictiveness of WiiSports and Zelda, they should easily crush that .9 million opening quarter of the 360. And consider this: each unit at a profit with a number of titles putting money directly in Nintendo's pocket.
I'm not claiming that the Wii will beat the 360. I'm just pointing out that according to sales numbers, the 360 is no iPod, is not trending to an iPod, will never be an iPod. The iPod sits on 75% market share. The closest thing to an iPod in the entertainment market is the Playstation 2.
Which is a big distraction from the point. And what is the point? That the XBox is a bad analogy. It is best to consider their Windows CE->Smartphone Microsoft play to see that the Zune is a bad idea. How many years and failed ideas have there been (Windows CE, Windows Mobile, PocketPC, etc. etc.)? How many billions sunk (some years more than the entire capitalization of the PDA market)? How much marketshare? 6% of smartphones, 60% of the dead-end PDA market, and most of the dead ATM teller market (because IBM did a phased pull out, not because Microsoft "won"). And even those markets are being eaten by Linux faster than Windows.
The only thing we can learn from the XBox and Microsoft is that Microsoft pees on their partners (NVidia) at the earliest opportunity. But we already knew that as soon as the Zune didn't support Plays For Sure.
I think the first statement is correct or close to it. They may have had a single profitable quarter when Halo 2 was released. I'm not sure because they bury games in a Microsoft Entertainment and Devices Division. Which includes their smartphone stuff (now that it has stopped bleeding money) and their profitable and acclaimed mice, keyboards, and other stuff (all manufactured by other companies, sort of like Dell, but with a nicer design).
The second part I believe is now wrong. I think the XBox 360 is no longer a loss lead, though that might change as there is some speculation that they will be dropping the price to undercut Sony soon. I believe the fact that it is no longer a loss lead is causing a confounding with the "360 is profitable" commentaries here.
Another commenter mentioned how smart it was was the XBox had a hard drive on it. I’d say if it is so smart why did Microsoft remove it in the base model 360? I’ll point out that this happened because the price of hard drives do not get any cheaper! In fact the price of commodity hardware design doesn’t get any cheaper! Huh? Hard drives get bigger, not cheaper. Processors and chips get more powerful, not cheaper.
What went on is that successive iterations of the Playstation and Playstation 2 would allow Sony to combine chips to reduce the price (and make smaller PSOne and slim-cased Playstation 2). This outlet wasn't available to Microsoft because of their design which is why the XBox was a losing money for it's entire run and Sony played games by dropping their price before it ever turned a profit.
Those two things are "of a piece". While commodity hardware was an interesting idea, it was a failure. Which is why the XBox 360 is not built from commodity PC hardware. The hard drives are a necessary evil of the "Live" strategy so they're left in as an option and bundled with the Playstation 3. That's why these 6G consoles are expensive and not dropping in price fast.
Right now all this is moot since the thing to watch is the Sony gamble on a blue laser. Obviously it will get cheaper fast, but the question is how fast and how cheap? The horrible yields on the Cell processor isn't helping things.
Currently, the XBox 360 has sold very consistently at around 1.5 million units a quarter. The XMas quarter last year had supply issues and only sold .9 million units. That's hardly dominating. In fact, I think the Playstation 2 outsold the 360 in each of those quarters even though the device is six years old. Let's put some numbers here. Last year over 100 million Playstation 2’s had been sold, six months ago, they were selling 380k/month. The XBox 360 sold 6 million units since it's introduction over a year ago, six months ago they were selling 300k/month, they had fixed the channel problems that plagued the release.
Consider this: Nintendo sold 600,000 Wiis in the last eight days. Given the scarcity of the Playstation 3 and the popularity and addictiveness of WiiSports and Zelda, they should easily crush that .9 million opening quarter of the 360. And consider this: each unit at a profit with a number of titles putting money directly in Nintendo's pocket.
I'm not claiming that the Wii will beat the 360. I'm just pointing out that according to sales numbers, the 360 is no iPod, is not trending to an iPod, will never be an iPod. The iPod sits on 75% market share. The closest thing to an iPod in the entertainment market is the Playstation 2.
Which is a big distraction from the point. And what is the point? That the XBox is a bad analogy. It is best to consider their Windows CE->Smartphone Microsoft play to see that the Zune is a bad idea. How many years and failed ideas have there been (Windows CE, Windows Mobile, PocketPC, etc. etc.)? How many billions sunk (some years more than the entire capitalization of the PDA market)? How much marketshare? 6% of smartphones, 60% of the dead-end PDA market, and most of the dead ATM teller market (because IBM did a phased pull out, not because Microsoft "won"). And even those markets are being eaten by Linux faster than Windows.
The only thing we can learn from the XBox and Microsoft is that Microsoft pees on their partners (NVidia) at the earliest opportunity. But we already knew that as soon as the Zune didn't support Plays For Sure.
extrafuzzyllama
Sep 30, 01:00 AM
anyone bought those clear gel tpu cases or the non clear tpu cases from ebay i am thinking of buying a few since they r $2 each
Yakuza
Nov 24, 08:53 AM
Crystal Head Vodka for turkey day.
Mando
Dude!! that's freakin' awsome! :D
Mando
Dude!! that's freakin' awsome! :D
PodHead
Dec 1, 10:22 PM
You know what I would like with iTV?
Live content.
Think about it for a moment. I think everyone hates how expensive cable TV is. I am paying $45 per month just for 50 channels or so, with maybe 10 of those I actually watch (the networks, MSNBC, NESN, FSNE, ESPN, and a few other random ones).
Apple has the TV Shows issue fixed, thanks to $1.99 per show on iTunes and season passes.
However, live content is the big issue. I would love to ditch my cable tv subscription and go soley iTV. But I like to watch sports, especially baseball and football. Also you need TV for news events, especially breaking news. iTV and iTunes does not (yet) allow you to watch live streaming content.
If Apple could somehow strike a deal to cover sports and other live content such as news...that just really opens the door. Major League Baseball already does it with MLB.TV, except it is browser based. Imagine the same thing, but on iTV!?!?
Do that, and I would seriously cancel my cable tv subscription and go a la carte with iTunes. I spend roughly $540 a year on my 50 channels of cable TV, of which I at most watch 10 channels. I would much rather spend say $270 (half of the $540) on the 5 or so shows I watch, plus season passes for my local baseball and football teams, and the news channel of my choice.
That is where iTV could become a real winner.
I'm in the same boat!! Except I live in Japan. I rely solely on iTunes to watch my favorite shows in the U.S. But...I usually have to wait an extra day (not including the day it takes to appear on iTunes) to watch them. By the time the Packers have won (being optimistic) I'm two, sometimes three days behind (or ahead depending how you look at it) the news. I would totally stay up til 3:00 am to watch them live from the states.:p
Live content.
Think about it for a moment. I think everyone hates how expensive cable TV is. I am paying $45 per month just for 50 channels or so, with maybe 10 of those I actually watch (the networks, MSNBC, NESN, FSNE, ESPN, and a few other random ones).
Apple has the TV Shows issue fixed, thanks to $1.99 per show on iTunes and season passes.
However, live content is the big issue. I would love to ditch my cable tv subscription and go soley iTV. But I like to watch sports, especially baseball and football. Also you need TV for news events, especially breaking news. iTV and iTunes does not (yet) allow you to watch live streaming content.
If Apple could somehow strike a deal to cover sports and other live content such as news...that just really opens the door. Major League Baseball already does it with MLB.TV, except it is browser based. Imagine the same thing, but on iTV!?!?
Do that, and I would seriously cancel my cable tv subscription and go a la carte with iTunes. I spend roughly $540 a year on my 50 channels of cable TV, of which I at most watch 10 channels. I would much rather spend say $270 (half of the $540) on the 5 or so shows I watch, plus season passes for my local baseball and football teams, and the news channel of my choice.
That is where iTV could become a real winner.
I'm in the same boat!! Except I live in Japan. I rely solely on iTunes to watch my favorite shows in the U.S. But...I usually have to wait an extra day (not including the day it takes to appear on iTunes) to watch them. By the time the Packers have won (being optimistic) I'm two, sometimes three days behind (or ahead depending how you look at it) the news. I would totally stay up til 3:00 am to watch them live from the states.:p
cube
Mar 24, 02:10 PM
It outperforms the 320M under OS X. It certainly doesn't "suck" as much as you make it out to be.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdPi4GPEI74
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdPi4GPEI74
FreeState
Mar 23, 03:00 PM
The App has been pulled because it is not in compliance with developer guidelines.
http://www.cultofmac.com/apple-pulls-gay-cure-app-over-dev-guidelines/87815
Apple spokesman Tom Neumayr said Wednesday:
�We removed the Exodus International app from the App Store because it violates our developer guidelines by being offensive to large groups of people.�
http://www.cultofmac.com/apple-pulls-gay-cure-app-over-dev-guidelines/87815
Apple spokesman Tom Neumayr said Wednesday:
�We removed the Exodus International app from the App Store because it violates our developer guidelines by being offensive to large groups of people.�
FubsyGamr
Sep 20, 07:40 PM
Does anti-static have anything to do with it not being a lint magnet?
I have no idea haha.
I was also looking at some 3g Leather Cases (those are my favorite style) is there any reason they wouldn't work with my 4g? For example, this one looks good:
http://www.amazon.com/DLO-HipCase-Leather-Folio-touch/dp/B000WOIFO2
but would my 4g fit in there?
I have no idea haha.
I was also looking at some 3g Leather Cases (those are my favorite style) is there any reason they wouldn't work with my 4g? For example, this one looks good:
http://www.amazon.com/DLO-HipCase-Leather-Folio-touch/dp/B000WOIFO2
but would my 4g fit in there?
arn
Jan 1, 05:55 PM
I don't think there's been any compelling evidence to support that, sadly. At least, several very seemingly viable component technologies, such as ULV C2D's, are not available yet.
.
not only that, but none of the rumors really pointed to MWSF for a compact Macbook.
arn
.
not only that, but none of the rumors really pointed to MWSF for a compact Macbook.
arn
WildPalms
Sep 7, 11:28 AM
There has been a lot said here and elsewhere on what Apple is going to release. But let�s step back and look at the big picture for a moment and think through this process.
What we know:
1. Apple maintains the largest online movie trailer site on the internet. They have the technology to stream data in HD and they just bought a level 4 data center in March this year to storage an enormous amount of data. (I�ll get to this later)
2. HD downloads are enormous and storing them on your hard disk would fill up the disk in no time. So keeping the file for long periods of time is not an option.
3. Apple sells more laptops then desktops and laptops have a smaller hard drive with limited capacity, no one wants an external hd to carry along with their laptop, it would defeat the purpose of being portable.
4. Apple doesn�t make money on downloads, but selling the product that it runs on.
5. iPods screens are too small to watch full length movies on, and their disk space is too limited for movies (iPod nano outsells the video iPod)
6. FrontRow is made for displaying on the TV, not a computer monitor.
7. People WILL NOT PAY $9.99 or $14.99 for a download of a movie, even with a burn option. DVDs can be bought at Wal-Mart or BestBuy for the same price and you get the cover and quality you want and deserve. ( I know a few mac fans will go out and buy whatever Apple puts out, but thinking of an average person )
8. Steve Jobs said in an interview that most people only watch live action movies 1 or 2 times with the exception of animation, but music they listen to over and over again. And he hates variable pricing for content.
So what does all this mean? I think we will see on Sept 12th a streaming rental service that runs off a new media device made to hook up to your TV and runs FrontRow with Showtime as a feature on it that looks a lot like the Movie Trailer section on FrontRow today, where you see the cover designs of the movie instead of a text. (Think about when you go to Blockbuster and all you see is cover designs, and a description on the back) With this service you will be able to see the cover design, the rating, run time, the description and preview a trailer of the movie. Then if you want you can �rent� it for $2.99. After watching the movie, the content is deleted; this would work a lot like pay-per-view. For music and photos, this device will wirelessly connect to your computer to stream music from iTunes and photos from iPhoto. The device will probably sell for around $149 - $299, depending on what it can do.
But who knows� I�m probably completing wrong and Apple will release a download movie site, charge $9.99 for a movie download that around 600 MB per download and take 2 hours to download and release an airport express with video output and charge $129 for it.
Interesting take.
What we know:
1. Apple maintains the largest online movie trailer site on the internet. They have the technology to stream data in HD and they just bought a level 4 data center in March this year to storage an enormous amount of data. (I�ll get to this later)
2. HD downloads are enormous and storing them on your hard disk would fill up the disk in no time. So keeping the file for long periods of time is not an option.
3. Apple sells more laptops then desktops and laptops have a smaller hard drive with limited capacity, no one wants an external hd to carry along with their laptop, it would defeat the purpose of being portable.
4. Apple doesn�t make money on downloads, but selling the product that it runs on.
5. iPods screens are too small to watch full length movies on, and their disk space is too limited for movies (iPod nano outsells the video iPod)
6. FrontRow is made for displaying on the TV, not a computer monitor.
7. People WILL NOT PAY $9.99 or $14.99 for a download of a movie, even with a burn option. DVDs can be bought at Wal-Mart or BestBuy for the same price and you get the cover and quality you want and deserve. ( I know a few mac fans will go out and buy whatever Apple puts out, but thinking of an average person )
8. Steve Jobs said in an interview that most people only watch live action movies 1 or 2 times with the exception of animation, but music they listen to over and over again. And he hates variable pricing for content.
So what does all this mean? I think we will see on Sept 12th a streaming rental service that runs off a new media device made to hook up to your TV and runs FrontRow with Showtime as a feature on it that looks a lot like the Movie Trailer section on FrontRow today, where you see the cover designs of the movie instead of a text. (Think about when you go to Blockbuster and all you see is cover designs, and a description on the back) With this service you will be able to see the cover design, the rating, run time, the description and preview a trailer of the movie. Then if you want you can �rent� it for $2.99. After watching the movie, the content is deleted; this would work a lot like pay-per-view. For music and photos, this device will wirelessly connect to your computer to stream music from iTunes and photos from iPhoto. The device will probably sell for around $149 - $299, depending on what it can do.
But who knows� I�m probably completing wrong and Apple will release a download movie site, charge $9.99 for a movie download that around 600 MB per download and take 2 hours to download and release an airport express with video output and charge $129 for it.
Interesting take.
No comments:
Post a Comment