Subiklim
Aug 23, 04:40 PM
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2006/aug/23settlement.html
LegendKillerUK
Mar 23, 04:52 PM
Surely these apps fall foul of the rule about no lasting entertainment?
They seem pointless if you're already drunk to be able to use it.
They seem pointless if you're already drunk to be able to use it.
EagerDragon
Sep 10, 08:47 AM
Is the 24" as quiet as the MacPro? Have you been able to compare to the 20"?
The store is noisy, so it is hard to say. To me neither was making a sound.
The store is noisy, so it is hard to say. To me neither was making a sound.
Warbrain
Apr 20, 10:31 AM
I can't, but maybe these guys can/will.
That's what I'm hoping. I'm leaning towards the SLA being the answer for this.
That's what I'm hoping. I'm leaning towards the SLA being the answer for this.
pika2000
Apr 11, 02:32 AM
There are apps for AirPlay.
Perhaps you have not heard of this thing call the App Store. :rolleyes:
Care to actually show me what app that will actually do what I was talking about? :rolleyes:
I want to play music from iTunes on my Mac as the source, and multiple airplay devices as the target. Currently I can only play to Airport Expresses and Apple TVs (and upcoming Airplay certified speakers). I want Apple to include all iOS devices to that list of target devices.
Perhaps you have not heard of this thing call the App Store. :rolleyes:
Care to actually show me what app that will actually do what I was talking about? :rolleyes:
I want to play music from iTunes on my Mac as the source, and multiple airplay devices as the target. Currently I can only play to Airport Expresses and Apple TVs (and upcoming Airplay certified speakers). I want Apple to include all iOS devices to that list of target devices.
Yankee617
Apr 20, 12:28 PM
everyone here is on facebook, exposing their real names, friends, user uploaded photos that are under the control of facebook under the new TOS agreement, where they live, phone numbers, what they like, what they dislike, their status updates, etc.
i'm not on facebook.
i'm not on facebook.
cube
Apr 22, 01:57 PM
An Audi R8 doesn't have any heated seats but a Honda Civic does so that means that an Audi R8 must look bad correct? So why would someone buy an Audi R8 instead of a Honda Civic? :rolleyes:
Nice job ignoring the HP Envy.
Why am I even bothering?
I heard the name HP Envy, but I never bothered looking what it is. So yes, I ignore it.
So, if there's no option to have heated seats in the Audi, that looks bad.
Nice job ignoring the HP Envy.
Why am I even bothering?
I heard the name HP Envy, but I never bothered looking what it is. So yes, I ignore it.
So, if there's no option to have heated seats in the Audi, that looks bad.
Yebot
Aug 31, 12:14 PM
9/12
One day before Yebot's birthday. Good timing. I smell a MBP in my future.
One day before Yebot's birthday. Good timing. I smell a MBP in my future.
shartypants
Mar 22, 03:37 PM
Why not, its best to move production to the newer processor if it costs the same.
Auax
Apr 20, 01:28 AM
Sumsang claimed that they created this phone. Actually i see no significant difference between Galaxy and iPhone.
Cameront9
Aug 24, 12:35 AM
Not Hierarchial File System! Hierarchial MENU System!
Now, we can freely discuss the "merits" of this patent, but fact is that Apple lost, fair 'n square. If Apple thought that Creatives patent was bogus, they would have NOT paid. 100 million dollars is a lot of cash, no matter how you slice it. If the patent was bogus, and they still paid, Apple would be sending other companies a message that said "Want some cash? Sue us with bogus patents, we'll gladly pay!". No, Apple paid because they felt that they were really infringing and that if they had proceedd with the lawsuit, they would have lost a lot more than 100 million.
If it's a BS patent, why did Apple pay? Clearly, it was NOT a BS patent. True, the patent-system might be screwed up, but that is not the point of this discussion.
Alright, Menu system. But it's the same thing. You select songs (files) through groups of albums/artists/etc (folders/directories).
Of COURSE Apple was infringing on the patent if you assume it was a valid patent. I'm saying the patent never should have been granted because it's not something you can patent. I have a feeling that Apple possibly could have won this lawsuit, but it would have taken years of red tape, legal fees, etc, and they would be taking a gamble. Apple's taken gambles in the legal process before and lost (see: Microsoft GUI case). Steve doesn't want to go through that again, so he pays off Creative. Then, being Steve, he somehow uses his RDF to get Creative to join the licensing program, which has the potential to MAKE APPLE MONEY off of this deal.
Did Apple "win" this? Of course not. They're still out 100 million. But they also came out with some interesting deals that make this not a total loss.
And finally, to answer your statement in the first paragraph: This is EXACTLY why the patent system IS messed up. Because it DOES send a message of "hey we filed this patent for something blatantly obvious, give us some money" In most cases, it will be cheaper to settle. Thus companies end up using Patents, rather than products, as a money-maker.
Now, we can freely discuss the "merits" of this patent, but fact is that Apple lost, fair 'n square. If Apple thought that Creatives patent was bogus, they would have NOT paid. 100 million dollars is a lot of cash, no matter how you slice it. If the patent was bogus, and they still paid, Apple would be sending other companies a message that said "Want some cash? Sue us with bogus patents, we'll gladly pay!". No, Apple paid because they felt that they were really infringing and that if they had proceedd with the lawsuit, they would have lost a lot more than 100 million.
If it's a BS patent, why did Apple pay? Clearly, it was NOT a BS patent. True, the patent-system might be screwed up, but that is not the point of this discussion.
Alright, Menu system. But it's the same thing. You select songs (files) through groups of albums/artists/etc (folders/directories).
Of COURSE Apple was infringing on the patent if you assume it was a valid patent. I'm saying the patent never should have been granted because it's not something you can patent. I have a feeling that Apple possibly could have won this lawsuit, but it would have taken years of red tape, legal fees, etc, and they would be taking a gamble. Apple's taken gambles in the legal process before and lost (see: Microsoft GUI case). Steve doesn't want to go through that again, so he pays off Creative. Then, being Steve, he somehow uses his RDF to get Creative to join the licensing program, which has the potential to MAKE APPLE MONEY off of this deal.
Did Apple "win" this? Of course not. They're still out 100 million. But they also came out with some interesting deals that make this not a total loss.
And finally, to answer your statement in the first paragraph: This is EXACTLY why the patent system IS messed up. Because it DOES send a message of "hey we filed this patent for something blatantly obvious, give us some money" In most cases, it will be cheaper to settle. Thus companies end up using Patents, rather than products, as a money-maker.
AtHomeBoy_2000
Aug 31, 01:06 PM
Apple Insider was saying the movie price would be $14.99 -I would not pay that much to watch a movie on a small screen... no way, unless I had a hour long commute to work on a train... can't believe there are that many people like that out there!
Everyone ASSUMES they will make these DVDs available via MP4. Who's to say they dont offer up an ISO file that is the FULL DVD (extra's and all)? Maybe even the full DVD encoded in MP4.
Everyone ASSUMES they will make these DVDs available via MP4. Who's to say they dont offer up an ISO file that is the FULL DVD (extra's and all)? Maybe even the full DVD encoded in MP4.
iMikeT
Sep 19, 04:27 PM
I think that this is a good thing. Hopefully, it will convince other studios to join the iTS for distribution. And on top of that, Apple can sell high(er) definition movies.
Daghis
May 3, 12:34 PM
I just called three local Apple Stores in the Seattle area and not a single one has the new iMacs in stock. Is this happening to everyone else? I really wanted to pick mine up today!
I stopped by my local Apple store and had a similar experience. Actually, it was a bit worse... they still had the old iMacs out and when I asked about the new ones, I was told "What new iMacs?"
I stopped by my local Apple store and had a similar experience. Actually, it was a bit worse... they still had the old iMacs out and when I asked about the new ones, I was told "What new iMacs?"
DagazaGZ
Apr 30, 02:02 PM
Curious that everyone is clamoring for a thunderbolt-enabled machine, but there isn't a single thunderbolt drive available on the market.
I guess some people just need to feel like they have new stuff even if it's totally pointless.
You bring a good point... I thought there were thunderbolt drives...
I guess some people just need to feel like they have new stuff even if it's totally pointless.
You bring a good point... I thought there were thunderbolt drives...
Joshuarocks
Apr 19, 10:10 AM
Minimum wage needs to be increased, national healthcare needs to be implemented and tax holes closed. This country would be in a lot better shape as far as it's lower classes go, imo.
Min wage should be 10/ hour.. possibly 11 with the way this country is heading...
Min wage should be 10/ hour.. possibly 11 with the way this country is heading...
KnightWRX
Apr 30, 05:00 PM
I agree 100% with the sentiment of what you're saying -- I think the matte vs. gloss thing is WAAAAY overblown, but just for argument's sake, remember that CRT have a curved front screen, not a flat sheet of glass. That's going to diffuse a lot of external light just by the nature of the design.
Sure, maybe, but I remember not being able to even see what was on glass tube CRT monitor when the shades were open. Heck, TVs in summer ? :eek: While there may be virtues to the matte screens, I doubt it's as big an issue as some people make it out to be.
Sure, maybe, but I remember not being able to even see what was on glass tube CRT monitor when the shades were open. Heck, TVs in summer ? :eek: While there may be virtues to the matte screens, I doubt it's as big an issue as some people make it out to be.
ClimbingTheLog
Sep 26, 04:40 PM
Yeah I don't think that is going to happen. I can't see Apple making a CDMA phone just for Verizon/Sprint. Making a GSM phone, especially if it is quad-band, would allow them to only make 1 phone for the world market.
Right, so problem #1 is the huge number of Verizon/Sprint customers in the US Apple would be giving up just for the sake of saving the engineering time to replace a radio chip. There's no way they can give up 60 million or so potential customers and say to their investors, "yeah, but we'll save a million dollars over the next three years by doing it."
Problem #2 is that there are countries/regions where CDMA is more prevalent than GSM or where GSM doesn't exist at all. Some of it has to due with terrain, some of it is political. There are lists on the web you can google for which countries use which technology.
I was hoping Apple would be the first company to use software-defined radios and make this a non-issue. I was bummed when I read they switch to COTS parts for the quick buck on iTunes. Maybe the other two rumored phones which are supposed to come later will be the one we were hoping for. June 2007?
Cingular has their priorities wrong. They go for the rural markets, where people don't want to have anything to do with cell phones, and they ignore the big cities.
Huh? I've never seen Cingular coverage in any rural areas. Maybe in the mid-south but the rest of the country isn't so uniform.
When will we see global releases of iTunes stuff?
When your local media cartel decides to play ball. You think Apple doesn't want to be selling into your market for nearly $0 their cost?
Right, so problem #1 is the huge number of Verizon/Sprint customers in the US Apple would be giving up just for the sake of saving the engineering time to replace a radio chip. There's no way they can give up 60 million or so potential customers and say to their investors, "yeah, but we'll save a million dollars over the next three years by doing it."
Problem #2 is that there are countries/regions where CDMA is more prevalent than GSM or where GSM doesn't exist at all. Some of it has to due with terrain, some of it is political. There are lists on the web you can google for which countries use which technology.
I was hoping Apple would be the first company to use software-defined radios and make this a non-issue. I was bummed when I read they switch to COTS parts for the quick buck on iTunes. Maybe the other two rumored phones which are supposed to come later will be the one we were hoping for. June 2007?
Cingular has their priorities wrong. They go for the rural markets, where people don't want to have anything to do with cell phones, and they ignore the big cities.
Huh? I've never seen Cingular coverage in any rural areas. Maybe in the mid-south but the rest of the country isn't so uniform.
When will we see global releases of iTunes stuff?
When your local media cartel decides to play ball. You think Apple doesn't want to be selling into your market for nearly $0 their cost?
Rocketman
Mar 22, 01:21 PM
I want to know where to get a list of products that hook onto Thunderbolt.
Rocketman
Rocketman
Bibulous
Sep 13, 09:04 PM
I believe it after how they treated Moto, and it makes sense they would announce it after the new ipods. Hope it has 4GB storage at least.
mambodancer
Oct 28, 09:15 AM
They do build in obsolescence into the ipod as you can't replace the battery (easily). It does become a disposable item, although a pricey one at that. I do love the ipod (even though I don't own one) but this puts me off to the point where I just can't go through with actually buying one. My experience with rechargeable batteries in mobile phones and lap top isn't good.
My first gen 5GB iPod is still going strong after 5 years.
Also, even if the battery went totally dead, why would you throw a perfectly good iPod away? I use mine as a portable hard drive and in the car with an FM transmitter (connected to the lighter outlet to power the iPod) to listen to podcasts and music. Neither requires the battery for either of these functions. If you jog or bike or listen to your iPod while travelling and don't have access to power then replacing the battery is problematic but not impossible. In fact the local Microcenter here in Denver sells iPod battery replacements for less than $100 and will install them if you don't want to.
I don't think this is the problem some people seem to think it is and if anyone reading these posts wants to throw out their iPod that has a bad battery please contact me and I will gladly take it off your hands.
My first gen 5GB iPod is still going strong after 5 years.
Also, even if the battery went totally dead, why would you throw a perfectly good iPod away? I use mine as a portable hard drive and in the car with an FM transmitter (connected to the lighter outlet to power the iPod) to listen to podcasts and music. Neither requires the battery for either of these functions. If you jog or bike or listen to your iPod while travelling and don't have access to power then replacing the battery is problematic but not impossible. In fact the local Microcenter here in Denver sells iPod battery replacements for less than $100 and will install them if you don't want to.
I don't think this is the problem some people seem to think it is and if anyone reading these posts wants to throw out their iPod that has a bad battery please contact me and I will gladly take it off your hands.
mattsh
Aug 29, 06:13 AM
After looking around the apple website this morning.. I don't believe that we are getting the new chips until AFTER the iPod rebate offer.. and here is why.
The only legal way Apple could offer the new processor would be to offer it ONLY to out-of-education persons. If you read the fine print of the Apple iPod offer, it ONLY lists the current models (and G4) as acceptable units to use when filing a rebate.... if they were to place the new chip models on the store, it would invalidate the rebate, should someone have the old rebate forms, and a new machine. Just a thought.
POSSIBLY INACCURATE - SEE BELOW POSTS
The only legal way Apple could offer the new processor would be to offer it ONLY to out-of-education persons. If you read the fine print of the Apple iPod offer, it ONLY lists the current models (and G4) as acceptable units to use when filing a rebate.... if they were to place the new chip models on the store, it would invalidate the rebate, should someone have the old rebate forms, and a new machine. Just a thought.
POSSIBLY INACCURATE - SEE BELOW POSTS
kainjow
Sep 26, 03:54 PM
Anyway, I'm not excited about an iPhone. It would need to give me at least one neat feature for this to be worth drooling over.
FSUSem1noles
Sep 26, 03:55 PM
YES! Finally, I reap benefits from being with Cingular!!!! :D
No comments:
Post a Comment