Squire
Aug 5, 11:30 PM
Does anyone think the recent "problems" at Apple are going to have any effect on what happens Monday.
Story: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/08/05/BUGAHKBK3H1.DTL
If there are products that are they "maybe" list, this might put them on the "go" list. Big news pushes stock prices up and pushes the "problem" stories on page 2.
I agree. In fact, I was going to post the same thing. I was all set to be disappointed by the keynote until I read a new Forbes article on the topic. They are expecting some pretty amazing things; things that will divert media attention away from Apple's embarrassing financial scandal.
-Squire
P.S. How about seamless MSN/Yahoo! Messenger support in iChat?\
<edit> All of which has upped the stakes for Apple and Jobs, the company's public face. He must show the world something new when he delivers the keynote at Monday's conference. Really new. Something revolutionary, not evolutionary, that will excite the fans, grow the business--and change the subject.
http://www.forbes.com/home/technology/2006/08/04/ipod-jobs-zune_cx_ck_rr_0804apple.html
Story: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/08/05/BUGAHKBK3H1.DTL
If there are products that are they "maybe" list, this might put them on the "go" list. Big news pushes stock prices up and pushes the "problem" stories on page 2.
I agree. In fact, I was going to post the same thing. I was all set to be disappointed by the keynote until I read a new Forbes article on the topic. They are expecting some pretty amazing things; things that will divert media attention away from Apple's embarrassing financial scandal.
-Squire
P.S. How about seamless MSN/Yahoo! Messenger support in iChat?\
<edit> All of which has upped the stakes for Apple and Jobs, the company's public face. He must show the world something new when he delivers the keynote at Monday's conference. Really new. Something revolutionary, not evolutionary, that will excite the fans, grow the business--and change the subject.
http://www.forbes.com/home/technology/2006/08/04/ipod-jobs-zune_cx_ck_rr_0804apple.html
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.
leekohler
Mar 3, 10:30 AM
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy
No, but standing on your porch and walking to a restaurant are usually morally indifferent actions.
Lee, first, do me a favor when we correspond with each other, would you? Please don't say "feel" when you mean "believe" or "think." This conversation isn't about emotion. It's about truths and falsehoods.
Second, by the definition of sodomy at the dictionary at Dictionary.Reference.com), same-sex couples do engage in sodomy (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy).
Oh please. Can the condescension. If you know what I meant, there no reason for you to give me a dictionary link. And gee- could you be a little more insulting assuming that I don't know what sodomy is? Wow. Hey Bill, newsflash- I'm an adult- 43 years old. I went to college. I know what words mean, but I guess I should have been more clear and said "anal sex". Next time I will. I also know that people express themselves with words in different ways and that words can have several meanings due to their context. Apparently you do too. And by the way, I did mean "feel", not "believe". Your zeal on this subject is indicative of that.
Third, if the Catholic Church is right, I didn't make the rules. God did.
That's an awfully big "if" Bill- and certainly not one I'm willing to bet my life on. BTW- man made God and the Bible. You guys made your own rules.
Fourth, again, I say what I believe. Others need to chose what they'll do. I'm not their dictator. I'm not their lawgiver. But if they're doing something they shouldn't do, they may get negative consequences here or hereafter. But I won't give them them those consequences. I won't punish anyone for what he does in his bedroom. I don't have the authority to do that. And I don't want Big Brother to spy on same-sex attracted people when they're in bed together. I'm not going to ask my policeman friend Kurt to batter down your bedroom door if I think you're having sex. Moral rightness or wrongness is one thing. Whether it's prudent to outlaw some potentially immoral action is something else.
But you want to make sure Big Brother keeps us from being able to marry. You absolutely do. It's about control for you, Bill. Admit it.
Fifth, sure some opposite-sex sex is dangerous, too. Whether a man or a woman is the recipient, anal sex an cause colon leakage. Anal sex kills epithelial cells and semen suppresses the recipient's immune system. It needs to do that during vaginal sex, too, because if it didn't do it, white blood cells would attack the sperm. Vaginas are well-suited for sex partly because they contain a natural lubricant that rectums don't contain. Does anyone notice a hint of natural teleology there, hmm?
They're called condoms, Bill. Sensible people use them to protect against the very things you describe. Because ya know, we DO know about such things. Oh wait- that's against your Catholic teaching. So much so, that your religion tells people in Africa not to use them, making the AIDS epidemic even worse. Thanks for that.
Sixth, for people who think I'm trying to control them or punish them, I'll put the shoe one the other foot. How many liberals attack Beck personally when they don't even listen to him? How many try to shout down conservatives or to silence them when they say something that the shouters and the would-be silencers hate to hear? How many generalize hastily about people "like me" when they assume that anyone who thinks "gay" sex is immoral is obviously a hateful homophobe? How many would try to limit my free speech by outlawing my so-called hate speech? How many don't distinguish between condemning a person and condemning an action?
Bill- if you were sincere about this, you would support the gay rights movement and support equal marriage rights for gay people. Your examples are silly. Everyone has the right to speak out against opinions they oppose. In none of the examples you used is anyone trying to legally deny anyone anything. People are entitled to their opinions. people are NOT entitled to deny others legal rights simply because they disagree with them. No one is trying to pass a law against Glenn Beck or you. You guys ARE trying to pass laws against us.
No, but standing on your porch and walking to a restaurant are usually morally indifferent actions.
Lee, first, do me a favor when we correspond with each other, would you? Please don't say "feel" when you mean "believe" or "think." This conversation isn't about emotion. It's about truths and falsehoods.
Second, by the definition of sodomy at the dictionary at Dictionary.Reference.com), same-sex couples do engage in sodomy (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy).
Oh please. Can the condescension. If you know what I meant, there no reason for you to give me a dictionary link. And gee- could you be a little more insulting assuming that I don't know what sodomy is? Wow. Hey Bill, newsflash- I'm an adult- 43 years old. I went to college. I know what words mean, but I guess I should have been more clear and said "anal sex". Next time I will. I also know that people express themselves with words in different ways and that words can have several meanings due to their context. Apparently you do too. And by the way, I did mean "feel", not "believe". Your zeal on this subject is indicative of that.
Third, if the Catholic Church is right, I didn't make the rules. God did.
That's an awfully big "if" Bill- and certainly not one I'm willing to bet my life on. BTW- man made God and the Bible. You guys made your own rules.
Fourth, again, I say what I believe. Others need to chose what they'll do. I'm not their dictator. I'm not their lawgiver. But if they're doing something they shouldn't do, they may get negative consequences here or hereafter. But I won't give them them those consequences. I won't punish anyone for what he does in his bedroom. I don't have the authority to do that. And I don't want Big Brother to spy on same-sex attracted people when they're in bed together. I'm not going to ask my policeman friend Kurt to batter down your bedroom door if I think you're having sex. Moral rightness or wrongness is one thing. Whether it's prudent to outlaw some potentially immoral action is something else.
But you want to make sure Big Brother keeps us from being able to marry. You absolutely do. It's about control for you, Bill. Admit it.
Fifth, sure some opposite-sex sex is dangerous, too. Whether a man or a woman is the recipient, anal sex an cause colon leakage. Anal sex kills epithelial cells and semen suppresses the recipient's immune system. It needs to do that during vaginal sex, too, because if it didn't do it, white blood cells would attack the sperm. Vaginas are well-suited for sex partly because they contain a natural lubricant that rectums don't contain. Does anyone notice a hint of natural teleology there, hmm?
They're called condoms, Bill. Sensible people use them to protect against the very things you describe. Because ya know, we DO know about such things. Oh wait- that's against your Catholic teaching. So much so, that your religion tells people in Africa not to use them, making the AIDS epidemic even worse. Thanks for that.
Sixth, for people who think I'm trying to control them or punish them, I'll put the shoe one the other foot. How many liberals attack Beck personally when they don't even listen to him? How many try to shout down conservatives or to silence them when they say something that the shouters and the would-be silencers hate to hear? How many generalize hastily about people "like me" when they assume that anyone who thinks "gay" sex is immoral is obviously a hateful homophobe? How many would try to limit my free speech by outlawing my so-called hate speech? How many don't distinguish between condemning a person and condemning an action?
Bill- if you were sincere about this, you would support the gay rights movement and support equal marriage rights for gay people. Your examples are silly. Everyone has the right to speak out against opinions they oppose. In none of the examples you used is anyone trying to legally deny anyone anything. People are entitled to their opinions. people are NOT entitled to deny others legal rights simply because they disagree with them. No one is trying to pass a law against Glenn Beck or you. You guys ARE trying to pass laws against us.
twoodcc
Aug 11, 05:30 PM
No, there has been 8 Gran Turismo games totaling 56M. If you only count the 4 full release titles, you get 46M.
http://www.polyphony.co.jp/english/list.html
i know there have been more 'titles'. but they are not full releases, but i did leave out Gran Turismo for PSP, so they are up to 5 full releases now.
So, I guess you aren't going to count the Need For Speed series either, are you? As a series, it is already over 100M sales.
yes i know, but there are more games in that series, and again, it's a different type of racing game.
take a look here: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gran_Turismo_(series))
The Gran Turismo video game series has been one of the most popular over its lifetime, appealing to an audience ranging from casual gamers to fans of realistic PC racing sims. Because of the success of the Gran Turismo series, Guinness World Records awarded the series 7 world records in the Guinness World Records: Gamer's Edition 2008. These records include "Largest Number of cars in a Racing game", "Highest Selling PlayStation Game","Oldest Car in a Racing Game", and "Largest Instruction Guide for a Racing Game".
With a collective sales total of over 57 million units sold[1], it is the highest-selling PlayStation exclusive franchise of all time.
Name for me one real car that was created just for GT. Not a concept car, a REAL car.
GT by Citro�n (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GT_by_Citro�n).
granted, only 6 were made, but still, it's a real car. its not a fake one
http://www.polyphony.co.jp/english/list.html
i know there have been more 'titles'. but they are not full releases, but i did leave out Gran Turismo for PSP, so they are up to 5 full releases now.
So, I guess you aren't going to count the Need For Speed series either, are you? As a series, it is already over 100M sales.
yes i know, but there are more games in that series, and again, it's a different type of racing game.
take a look here: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gran_Turismo_(series))
The Gran Turismo video game series has been one of the most popular over its lifetime, appealing to an audience ranging from casual gamers to fans of realistic PC racing sims. Because of the success of the Gran Turismo series, Guinness World Records awarded the series 7 world records in the Guinness World Records: Gamer's Edition 2008. These records include "Largest Number of cars in a Racing game", "Highest Selling PlayStation Game","Oldest Car in a Racing Game", and "Largest Instruction Guide for a Racing Game".
With a collective sales total of over 57 million units sold[1], it is the highest-selling PlayStation exclusive franchise of all time.
Name for me one real car that was created just for GT. Not a concept car, a REAL car.
GT by Citro�n (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GT_by_Citro�n).
granted, only 6 were made, but still, it's a real car. its not a fake one
cbronfman
Apr 11, 06:35 PM
I'm with the other 3GS posters who hoped to be able to upgrade in June when our phones will be 2 years old (and showing their age for a tech product). I can wait until September (well, I'll have to as I don't want an iP4 which will be a year old by then). If something goes awry with my 3GS I'll have a problem as I don't want to be locked into a contract with AT&T buying a iP4 a year after it was released, and my iPhone 2G (original) has no GPS so some of the functionality I rely on will be gone). Maybe I'll schedule a genius bar check-up for my 3GS before my Apple Care expires. I don't expect LTE although it woudl be nice. I do hope for 3G+, dual core processor, improved antenna (although the signal strength on the IP4 is much stronger than on the 3GS) and thinner would be nice. I'd also really like it to be like the iPad2 with the GSM version able to work on other GSM networks by a quick change in SIM card and not locked to AT&T for those that travel a lot abroad or to Canada.
falconeight
Apr 6, 03:11 PM
I bought a xoom...the salesmen started it up for me and after seeing it I changed my mind. It was my first return before I swipped my card.
MacRumors
Mar 22, 12:43 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/22/blackberry-playbook-coming-april-19th-at-499-samsung-intros-8-9-and-10-1-galaxy-tabs/)
With Apple's iPad 2 having been on sale in the U.S. for a week and half already and set to launch in 25 new countries (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/22/apple-officially-confirms-ipad-2-launches-in-25-countries-on-friday/) on Friday, other companies are continuing to ramp up their efforts as they seek to bring competitive tablets to the market.
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/22/133658-blackberry_playbook_apps_500.jpg
%IMG_DESC_8%
%IMG_DESC_9%
%IMG_DESC_10%
%IMG_DESC_11%
%IMG_DESC_12%
%IMG_DESC_13%
%IMG_DESC_14%
%IMG_DESC_15%
%IMG_DESC_16%
%IMG_DESC_17%
%IMG_DESC_18%
%IMG_DESC_19%
With Apple's iPad 2 having been on sale in the U.S. for a week and half already and set to launch in 25 new countries (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/22/apple-officially-confirms-ipad-2-launches-in-25-countries-on-friday/) on Friday, other companies are continuing to ramp up their efforts as they seek to bring competitive tablets to the market.
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/22/133658-blackberry_playbook_apps_500.jpg
kdarling
Mar 31, 04:16 PM
Yet what he said is 100% accurate..Weird how that can happen sometimes.
Gruber is rarely accurate in his conclusions, and this time is no exception.
None of what is happening smacks of being a "bait-and-switch" as he claims. That would've required extremely clever pre-planning years ago on the part of Google.
Instead, it's got all the hallmarks of too little pre-planning.
Anyone with experience dealing with large projects can see that Rubin has belatedly come to realize that things were getting out of control. Now he is goofing up trying to take full control himself instead of doing the smart thing and first getting a consensus from the OHA members.
Gruber is rarely accurate in his conclusions, and this time is no exception.
None of what is happening smacks of being a "bait-and-switch" as he claims. That would've required extremely clever pre-planning years ago on the part of Google.
Instead, it's got all the hallmarks of too little pre-planning.
Anyone with experience dealing with large projects can see that Rubin has belatedly come to realize that things were getting out of control. Now he is goofing up trying to take full control himself instead of doing the smart thing and first getting a consensus from the OHA members.
onemorething
Aug 5, 08:50 PM
I did a little digging and the most amount of time between any given ipod release is 10 months. I did more research and apple has released a new ipod on average every 9-10 months; the last major ipod was released in oct. 2005. I say any given tuesday between now and october or expo paris:rolleyes:
Charlie Sheen
Mar 26, 04:48 AM
Can't wait. Hope it's awesome
Hawaga
Apr 5, 05:31 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; fr-fr) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148a Safari/6533.18.5)
Well, if it's a dramatic improvement, I may start looking into it...
...A proud Avid user ;)
Well, if it's a dramatic improvement, I may start looking into it...
...A proud Avid user ;)
NoSmokingBandit
Aug 11, 07:14 AM
The only official date given to the game is Nov 2, but there were vague dates before then. They showed it at E3 '06, but it wasnt supposed to be a launch title.
Timepass
Jul 15, 10:57 AM
I disagree. Using ATX power supplies is a stupid idea. I am sure Apple uses higher quality power supplies than you would pick up at your local CompUSA.
If they allow this there will be a lot of dead Macs, from power supplies whose rails aren't strong enough.
Not to mention those who buy the 400W model because it is only 20 bucks and drastically underpower there Mac.
This would cause too many problems. Keep it proprietary IMO.
Well I wouldnt worry about that in the case of a mac. Only people who are really going to replace there PSU are going to be people who know something about computers. A lot of people replace there ram. PSU are not upgraded very offen if ever at all.
Also the people who do replace PSU most of them know dont cheap out on them. Among home builder comminty a thing most agree on is NEVER cheap out on a PSU. Go name brand. Reason being is why would you build a 1k system and then risk it all with a cheap PSU (rule can be cut if pretty much using dirt cheap parts to begin with and trying to go as cheaply as possible (less than 500 and in old spare parts). My own PC rig using an Antec True Power PSU in it (that i pick up from compUSA oddly enough).
I think going ATX is a good thing because it means Apple is going to be using more standardized parts so it will be cheaper for apple to get them.
If they allow this there will be a lot of dead Macs, from power supplies whose rails aren't strong enough.
Not to mention those who buy the 400W model because it is only 20 bucks and drastically underpower there Mac.
This would cause too many problems. Keep it proprietary IMO.
Well I wouldnt worry about that in the case of a mac. Only people who are really going to replace there PSU are going to be people who know something about computers. A lot of people replace there ram. PSU are not upgraded very offen if ever at all.
Also the people who do replace PSU most of them know dont cheap out on them. Among home builder comminty a thing most agree on is NEVER cheap out on a PSU. Go name brand. Reason being is why would you build a 1k system and then risk it all with a cheap PSU (rule can be cut if pretty much using dirt cheap parts to begin with and trying to go as cheaply as possible (less than 500 and in old spare parts). My own PC rig using an Antec True Power PSU in it (that i pick up from compUSA oddly enough).
I think going ATX is a good thing because it means Apple is going to be using more standardized parts so it will be cheaper for apple to get them.
layte
Mar 31, 03:52 PM
You're moving the goal posts. That always has been the wonderful thing about the words "open" and "free" with respect to software. They never really meant much but had such loaded connotations. You can change the definition mid-argument as easily as you change what hat you're wearing.
I look ace in a Trilby.
You know, projecting isn't healthy at all.
You'd best stop then old fella (yea, I can play forum clich�d response 101 as well, /tips-hat)
I look ace in a Trilby.
You know, projecting isn't healthy at all.
You'd best stop then old fella (yea, I can play forum clich�d response 101 as well, /tips-hat)
Zwhaler
Aug 26, 04:40 PM
So, if Merom is out the 28th and possiblity of Merom MBPs comeing out the 29th? or sometime BEFORE September.
I could see that happening. Well, it will be on a tuesday! :)
I could see that happening. Well, it will be on a tuesday! :)
vincenz
Apr 11, 11:33 AM
Looks like we'll be waiting in line in the cold instead of the heat. Can't really complain...
robbyx
Apr 25, 04:05 PM
This suit has merit. If I turn off location services there should be no record of where I go.
Why would you assume that turning off location services would prevent tracking? The phone is still connected to the cell network. I'd assume Airplane Mode would turn off tracking, but not location services.
With that and other simple info I can find out where you work, where you bank, where you live, what time you usually get home. All it takes is one website or email attachment to compromise your device. This info is not encrypted.
I do think if Any device does this they should be sued
First, someone would have to obtain your phone. No one seems to mention this. Big bad Apple is tracking us all!!! Apple isn't tracking anyone. The phone is logging location information for some reason, perhaps legit, perhaps a bug, perhaps test code that got left behind, who knows. The point is, your location isn't compromised unless someone steals your phone.
And if they steal your phone, they'll have your address book, your web bookmarks, your email, your notes, etc.
Suing over this is idiotic and really shows how absurd this whole "privacy" debate has become. Scott McNealy said it best years ago: "Privacy is dead. Get over it."
Why would you assume that turning off location services would prevent tracking? The phone is still connected to the cell network. I'd assume Airplane Mode would turn off tracking, but not location services.
With that and other simple info I can find out where you work, where you bank, where you live, what time you usually get home. All it takes is one website or email attachment to compromise your device. This info is not encrypted.
I do think if Any device does this they should be sued
First, someone would have to obtain your phone. No one seems to mention this. Big bad Apple is tracking us all!!! Apple isn't tracking anyone. The phone is logging location information for some reason, perhaps legit, perhaps a bug, perhaps test code that got left behind, who knows. The point is, your location isn't compromised unless someone steals your phone.
And if they steal your phone, they'll have your address book, your web bookmarks, your email, your notes, etc.
Suing over this is idiotic and really shows how absurd this whole "privacy" debate has become. Scott McNealy said it best years ago: "Privacy is dead. Get over it."
REDolution
Apr 10, 07:34 AM
Well I bet they handle Formats differently.
Gone is Pulldown. Gone is Film Support...replaced with the best web movie rendering support in the industry. Also Apple will change the antiquated delivery method for productions. Once your done you publish to the itunes store and you have now distributed your movie. The interface will be a multitrack version of iMovie. From watching this clip and all the industry big wigs saying "its wonderful" Ya its great but in a different way ... because whats going to be released is not FCP studio 4. I'm sure its a whole new thing. So all the iMovie 7 users who had to keep using it because iMovie 8 was a total re-write because of no legacy no pluggin support will happen to FC Editors. This will force Editors who use Studio 3 to continue to use S3 until they build up the features of this "new" editor. Its going to be a very interesting NAB. Avid and Premiere are going to gain a lot of new friends if this is true. But the larger batch of new editors who really could care less about 99% of what this small market needs will be very happy. I also bet the price is quite a bit lower as well.
This will be the everything is gone and changed upgrade.
Are you speculating or have you just disobeyed your NDA? ;-)
Gone is Pulldown. Gone is Film Support...replaced with the best web movie rendering support in the industry. Also Apple will change the antiquated delivery method for productions. Once your done you publish to the itunes store and you have now distributed your movie. The interface will be a multitrack version of iMovie. From watching this clip and all the industry big wigs saying "its wonderful" Ya its great but in a different way ... because whats going to be released is not FCP studio 4. I'm sure its a whole new thing. So all the iMovie 7 users who had to keep using it because iMovie 8 was a total re-write because of no legacy no pluggin support will happen to FC Editors. This will force Editors who use Studio 3 to continue to use S3 until they build up the features of this "new" editor. Its going to be a very interesting NAB. Avid and Premiere are going to gain a lot of new friends if this is true. But the larger batch of new editors who really could care less about 99% of what this small market needs will be very happy. I also bet the price is quite a bit lower as well.
This will be the everything is gone and changed upgrade.
Are you speculating or have you just disobeyed your NDA? ;-)
Yvan256
Apr 10, 12:02 PM
Wow. You'd think a FCP Users group would be able to track down a halfway decent graphic artist to make their banner graphic...
At least the one on their website looks fine (yet still ugly), the one on MacRumors looks resized and the pixels got messed up... :confused:
At least the one on their website looks fine (yet still ugly), the one on MacRumors looks resized and the pixels got messed up... :confused:
kavika411
Feb 28, 08:20 PM
According to the school's website (http://www.chc.edu/News/2011/February/statement_regarding_jim_st_george/), he was not fired as the OP's article suggests. Rather, his contract was not renewed. AFAIK, adjunct instructors do not enjoy the same privileges as tenured professors. If his contract ran out and was simply not renewed, then that's that, unless it can be argued that the college has some legal obligation to offer a new contract.
But threads like this are above further research. Not sure why you'd want to mess up a perfectly good party.
But threads like this are above further research. Not sure why you'd want to mess up a perfectly good party.
wovel
Mar 31, 03:20 PM
This is a smart move. It had to happen sooner or later.
John Gruber would eat Steve Job's ***** if he could. His opinion is extremely biased.
Yet what he said is 100% accurate..Weird how that can happen sometimes.
Except... he's right. This was a bait-and-switch from Google. I don't think it was a bad move for the future of the platform, but it does render a lot of their PR commentary through history as bogus. As for Gruber, you clearly don't like him, but while he is certainly a fan of Apple he is usually correct.
Despite what the fandroids think, the Android Ecosystem is in a world of hurt. Fragmentation is a much bigger problem then even Jobs said and they have almost no market at all for paid applications today. They will continue to dominate the worthless bottom of the market and nothing else if they do not do something to reign in these manufacturers.
John Gruber would eat Steve Job's ***** if he could. His opinion is extremely biased.
Yet what he said is 100% accurate..Weird how that can happen sometimes.
Except... he's right. This was a bait-and-switch from Google. I don't think it was a bad move for the future of the platform, but it does render a lot of their PR commentary through history as bogus. As for Gruber, you clearly don't like him, but while he is certainly a fan of Apple he is usually correct.
Despite what the fandroids think, the Android Ecosystem is in a world of hurt. Fragmentation is a much bigger problem then even Jobs said and they have almost no market at all for paid applications today. They will continue to dominate the worthless bottom of the market and nothing else if they do not do something to reign in these manufacturers.
runninmac
Aug 17, 01:01 AM
This is a very dumb question but is Photoshop running under rosetta in this test?
If Photoshop is that is nuts.
Oh, please believe it is.
:eek:
If Photoshop is that is nuts.
Oh, please believe it is.
:eek:
SeaFox
Nov 28, 08:37 PM
The rationale is that iPods are used only for stolen music (which they aren't) and this will help offset the losses (which it won't).
What's also interesting is that if this fee is added they have now unwittingly legimized the stolen music. They wouldn't be able to sue people for having stolen music on their iPods if this fee is supposed to cover losses from piracy.
What's also interesting is that if this fee is added they have now unwittingly legimized the stolen music. They wouldn't be able to sue people for having stolen music on their iPods if this fee is supposed to cover losses from piracy.
Porco
Nov 28, 10:41 PM
The full article is very funny.
"It would be a nice idea. We have a negotiation coming up not too far. I don't see why we wouldn't do that... but maybe not in the same way," he told the Reuters Media Summit, when asked if Universal would negotiate a royalty fee for the iPod that would be similar to Microsoft's Zune.
"The Zune (deal) was an amazingly interesting exercise, to end up with a piece of technology," he added.
"It would be a nice idea" if I got money for nothing too! And why am I tempted to read "an amazingly interesting exercise" as an amazingly interesting exercise ... he added, dollar signs flashing in his eyes like some real-life Scrooge McDuck' ?
And to end up with "a piece of technology"! Yes! wow! hahahahah, I bet Microsoft were astounded about that too.
As the various parodies of such behaviour online indicates, the whole thing would be hilarious if it wasn't so ... true.
Pirates will pirate unless you give them a compelling reason not to. Legitimate customers will stay that way unless they feel piracy is an action they are ethically comfortable with. This kind of garbage makes that happen.
So for every iPod that would possibly hold a good couple of hundred Universal tracks amongst the thousands on there, I'd guess this kind of thing completely turns us nerds towards piracy rather than CD purchases/legitimate downloads. Is that $1 per iPod really going to make them as much money as the $xx they have lost on CDs and downloads? I'd guess not. Even if only 1% of people buying iPods pirate Universal tracks instead of buying them because of this deal (if it happens), it would be a loser for Universal. And of course the only people not financially at a loss because of it will be people who buy tracks, not the pirates who are back in the black as soon as they soak up the $1 surcharge by illegally downloading a Universal album as soon as they get their iPod.
If Apple did have the misfortune to be made to accept this kind of thing (unlikely right now I'd think, but you never know after a couple of ad-laden Zune-ar years), they should add the $1 to the price of the iPod so people ask "why does it cost $201?" and they should tell people on their web-site exactly why as well, providing details of how to get in touch with Universal to express their thanks.
Sorry if I've repeated any points already made... it's a Universally idiotic idea.
"It would be a nice idea. We have a negotiation coming up not too far. I don't see why we wouldn't do that... but maybe not in the same way," he told the Reuters Media Summit, when asked if Universal would negotiate a royalty fee for the iPod that would be similar to Microsoft's Zune.
"The Zune (deal) was an amazingly interesting exercise, to end up with a piece of technology," he added.
"It would be a nice idea" if I got money for nothing too! And why am I tempted to read "an amazingly interesting exercise" as an amazingly interesting exercise ... he added, dollar signs flashing in his eyes like some real-life Scrooge McDuck' ?
And to end up with "a piece of technology"! Yes! wow! hahahahah, I bet Microsoft were astounded about that too.
As the various parodies of such behaviour online indicates, the whole thing would be hilarious if it wasn't so ... true.
Pirates will pirate unless you give them a compelling reason not to. Legitimate customers will stay that way unless they feel piracy is an action they are ethically comfortable with. This kind of garbage makes that happen.
So for every iPod that would possibly hold a good couple of hundred Universal tracks amongst the thousands on there, I'd guess this kind of thing completely turns us nerds towards piracy rather than CD purchases/legitimate downloads. Is that $1 per iPod really going to make them as much money as the $xx they have lost on CDs and downloads? I'd guess not. Even if only 1% of people buying iPods pirate Universal tracks instead of buying them because of this deal (if it happens), it would be a loser for Universal. And of course the only people not financially at a loss because of it will be people who buy tracks, not the pirates who are back in the black as soon as they soak up the $1 surcharge by illegally downloading a Universal album as soon as they get their iPod.
If Apple did have the misfortune to be made to accept this kind of thing (unlikely right now I'd think, but you never know after a couple of ad-laden Zune-ar years), they should add the $1 to the price of the iPod so people ask "why does it cost $201?" and they should tell people on their web-site exactly why as well, providing details of how to get in touch with Universal to express their thanks.
Sorry if I've repeated any points already made... it's a Universally idiotic idea.