iAlan
Nov 28, 08:16 PM
I haven't read all the post as yet, got to around post #50 but my sentiments pretty much reflect those of most posters.
However, if there is evidence that a bulk of the royalty (and I mean more than 50%) will go to artists then I can see justification in the process (but it should not be a flat $1 per device as the cost/profit of devices varies). But at the same time, Apple should get a higher share of the 99c per track as I believe the money they get per song pretty much only covers there management of the stored data and hosting on iTunes with very little profit per song - and this is understandable as Apple can leverage the iTunes store to drive iPod sales.
If the record companies want a profitable piece of Apple�s pie (no pun intended) then Apple should be entitled to a profitable piece of the 99c download.
Same logic me thinks�
However, if there is evidence that a bulk of the royalty (and I mean more than 50%) will go to artists then I can see justification in the process (but it should not be a flat $1 per device as the cost/profit of devices varies). But at the same time, Apple should get a higher share of the 99c per track as I believe the money they get per song pretty much only covers there management of the stored data and hosting on iTunes with very little profit per song - and this is understandable as Apple can leverage the iTunes store to drive iPod sales.
If the record companies want a profitable piece of Apple�s pie (no pun intended) then Apple should be entitled to a profitable piece of the 99c download.
Same logic me thinks�
Blackforge
Apr 6, 04:45 PM
Unfortunately the Xoom (or any Android device) doesn't support Windows Authentication in the default browser. Quite a few Enterprises use on internal websites, etc. Firefox for Android supports it, but last I heard, it wasn't compatible with the newer processors in the tablets.
Puts a damper in a lot of enterprise positioning they could have done.
iPad/iPhone supports it though..
Puts a damper in a lot of enterprise positioning they could have done.
iPad/iPhone supports it though..
solvs
Aug 27, 12:37 AM
That $100 million that Apple just wasted on Creative could have meant new supercooled mobile G5's if it would have been pumped into IBM (Power.org).
Ha! $100 million wouldn't come close to even paying for 1 factory to be built, let alone continued costs. I would have loved more PPC machines, but it is what it is, and the new Intel chips are pretty good. At least better than the crappy P4s they're replacing. The G4/5s could have been great, but IBM and Moto/Freescale dropped the ball, and would have continued to do so unless Apple spent somewhere more in the billions, not millions. Maybe not even then. It sucks that quality has gone down as costs have, but such is the nature of the beast. Hopefully something comes of all the complaints, and Apple can get it's act together as well as further find a way to drive down costs without becoming like Dell. I just had to deal with Dell support, and let me tell you, it was not fun.
And for the record, they've been using the same somewhat standard PC parts for awhile now, minus their proprietary chipsets, which BTW are still proprietary.
Ha! $100 million wouldn't come close to even paying for 1 factory to be built, let alone continued costs. I would have loved more PPC machines, but it is what it is, and the new Intel chips are pretty good. At least better than the crappy P4s they're replacing. The G4/5s could have been great, but IBM and Moto/Freescale dropped the ball, and would have continued to do so unless Apple spent somewhere more in the billions, not millions. Maybe not even then. It sucks that quality has gone down as costs have, but such is the nature of the beast. Hopefully something comes of all the complaints, and Apple can get it's act together as well as further find a way to drive down costs without becoming like Dell. I just had to deal with Dell support, and let me tell you, it was not fun.
And for the record, they've been using the same somewhat standard PC parts for awhile now, minus their proprietary chipsets, which BTW are still proprietary.
Lollypop
Jul 28, 04:07 AM
I would really like to se a mid range mac, not really fond of the illustrations above but the extra expansion of the pro line would be apreciated but at a more affordable price. I use a few older powermacs for servers but I really would like something with a bit more processing power... :D and something with a bit more longevity, something like a nice new Core 2 Duo Extreme! LOL
Macaroony
Mar 3, 06:41 AM
I don't see any point in being sexually attracted to anyone of the same sex, since I think homosexuality is a psychological problem caused by nurture, not by nature.
And I don't see the point in being sexually attracted to anyone of the opposite sex, but since society tells me it's "normal" I live with it nonetheless. It's all a matter of perception and experience. You have yours, I have mine and they're both normal to us.
If everyone with genitals were always morally free to do that, homosexually abusive pedophile priests would have been morally free to molest their victims.
Pedophilia is immoral - no matter man or woman. Please do not put both homosexuality and pedophilia into the same boat. There are plenty of grown men who abuse underage girls, it's when they happen to be gay that elevates the problem and lazily ties it to homosexuality.
And I don't see the point in being sexually attracted to anyone of the opposite sex, but since society tells me it's "normal" I live with it nonetheless. It's all a matter of perception and experience. You have yours, I have mine and they're both normal to us.
If everyone with genitals were always morally free to do that, homosexually abusive pedophile priests would have been morally free to molest their victims.
Pedophilia is immoral - no matter man or woman. Please do not put both homosexuality and pedophilia into the same boat. There are plenty of grown men who abuse underage girls, it's when they happen to be gay that elevates the problem and lazily ties it to homosexuality.
BGil
Aug 8, 04:32 AM
Have to agree with you on just about everything. If MS tried to release something like this, as anything other than a service pack, their user base would (quite rightly) crucify them.
The TimeMachine mirrors the same functionality that was announced for Vista about a week ago,
It's kinda unfair to say Microsoft just announced PreviousDocs/Shadow Copy "about a week ago" because it's been in every build for the last year.
Winsupersite on build 5219:
Windows Vista build 5219 also includes an integrated Shadow Copy client, which you manage from the Shadow Copies tab of the Properties dialog for your hard drive (Figure). This feature, which first originated in Windows Server lets you cache older versions of data files so that you can recover information in the event of an error. So if you overwrite a critical file, or inadvertently change part of a document, you can "go back in time" and access older versions.
Let's see how this works. First, you need to enable Shadow Copies from the aforementioned dialog. Then, after you've mucked up a file, you can access its Properties dialog in Explorer and navigate to the Previous Versions pane (Figure). Here, you can select between various different versions of the document (and your time travel experience is complete). This is a great feature, and I'm glad to see it being added to the Windows client.
http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista-5219-review-26.jpg
http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista-5219-review-25.jpg
That build was released in September of 2005.
http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/winvista_5219.asp
Even before that Bob Muglia, who head the Longhorn Server project, said it would be integrated into NTFS.
MS also ships a shadow copy client for XP.
If anything, Apple has known about Previous Docs for over a year now.
The TimeMachine mirrors the same functionality that was announced for Vista about a week ago,
It's kinda unfair to say Microsoft just announced PreviousDocs/Shadow Copy "about a week ago" because it's been in every build for the last year.
Winsupersite on build 5219:
Windows Vista build 5219 also includes an integrated Shadow Copy client, which you manage from the Shadow Copies tab of the Properties dialog for your hard drive (Figure). This feature, which first originated in Windows Server lets you cache older versions of data files so that you can recover information in the event of an error. So if you overwrite a critical file, or inadvertently change part of a document, you can "go back in time" and access older versions.
Let's see how this works. First, you need to enable Shadow Copies from the aforementioned dialog. Then, after you've mucked up a file, you can access its Properties dialog in Explorer and navigate to the Previous Versions pane (Figure). Here, you can select between various different versions of the document (and your time travel experience is complete). This is a great feature, and I'm glad to see it being added to the Windows client.
http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista-5219-review-26.jpg
http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista-5219-review-25.jpg
That build was released in September of 2005.
http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/winvista_5219.asp
Even before that Bob Muglia, who head the Longhorn Server project, said it would be integrated into NTFS.
MS also ships a shadow copy client for XP.
If anything, Apple has known about Previous Docs for over a year now.
hyperpasta
Jul 14, 03:11 PM
I have to say that the enclosure news was expected. However, I would really hope that Apple can pull off better specs than that...
AppleKrate
Sep 19, 08:47 AM
Well, the store's not down. My theory that an update would happen today looks to be bunk. Couple with this story, and I have no idea what to think now. I'm completely perplexed. Oh well, I guess we'll just see what happens at Photokina.
The one good side to today's non-event is that I have a little longer to graduate from 'macrumors newbie' :o before I'm outta here to play sorry work with my new MBP :) (my plan is to change my moniker to ExLax when I make 'macrumors regular')
The one good side to today's non-event is that I have a little longer to graduate from 'macrumors newbie' :o before I'm outta here to play sorry work with my new MBP :) (my plan is to change my moniker to ExLax when I make 'macrumors regular')
*LTD*
Mar 26, 03:46 PM
I tested Lion, and removed it after a month. Not buying it. I'll use Snow Leopard, it's the best OS so far. I'll see the one after Lion, maybe there will be something interesting.
LOL, you for real?
I'm pretty sure Apple has a handle on things. They seem to know what they're doing.
I'll bet you'll be using Lion after its release and saying the same thing about it as Snow Leopard. Most of us will.
LOL, you for real?
I'm pretty sure Apple has a handle on things. They seem to know what they're doing.
I'll bet you'll be using Lion after its release and saying the same thing about it as Snow Leopard. Most of us will.
kalun
Sep 18, 11:27 PM
As I is naught en Amerikan canned sumone plz tell mi wen tanksgifting is? :p
lol, 1337 sp3ak FTW!!
lol, 1337 sp3ak FTW!!
jeanlain
Apr 10, 09:22 AM
Anyone else call BS on that whole article?
Second: Didn't ANYONE realize this is all rumor and speculation? Not fact?
No.
What rumor, that the next FCP was demoed at Cupertino to a panel of editors, and that Apple will be at Supermeet? This is basically fact at this stage. The rest is just vague statements and logical conclusions.
Second: Didn't ANYONE realize this is all rumor and speculation? Not fact?
No.
What rumor, that the next FCP was demoed at Cupertino to a panel of editors, and that Apple will be at Supermeet? This is basically fact at this stage. The rest is just vague statements and logical conclusions.
gnasher729
Jul 28, 06:27 AM
Ensoniq, thanks so much for the useful corrections. How significant do you think that 64-bit capability will be in the future compared to not having it(say, 2-3 years time)?
64 bit is required for applications that need more than four GB of memory. For other things, it is nice to have, but not required. If you buy a MacBook today, you wouldn't be able to put more than 4 GB of memory in it for the next few years anyway, so in that respect it doesn't matter much whether you have a Yonah or Merom chip. For everything else, 64 bit software might run a bit faster than 32 bit software on a 64 bit chip, but it is not essential. So I think applications will ship as 32 bit or as combined 32/64 bit applications for quite some time.
The question for the developers would be: If I switch to 64 bit exclusively, so my code runs ten percent faster on Core 2 Duo, but 1-2 million Macintosh users cannot use it at all, how many sales will I gain because it is faster, and how many sales will I lose because 2 million people cannot use it? Three years from now, the answer will still be that you lose more sales running 64 bit only.
64 bit is required for applications that need more than four GB of memory. For other things, it is nice to have, but not required. If you buy a MacBook today, you wouldn't be able to put more than 4 GB of memory in it for the next few years anyway, so in that respect it doesn't matter much whether you have a Yonah or Merom chip. For everything else, 64 bit software might run a bit faster than 32 bit software on a 64 bit chip, but it is not essential. So I think applications will ship as 32 bit or as combined 32/64 bit applications for quite some time.
The question for the developers would be: If I switch to 64 bit exclusively, so my code runs ten percent faster on Core 2 Duo, but 1-2 million Macintosh users cannot use it at all, how many sales will I gain because it is faster, and how many sales will I lose because 2 million people cannot use it? Three years from now, the answer will still be that you lose more sales running 64 bit only.
marksman
Apr 25, 04:38 PM
Prove it.
The burden of proof is not on him or Apple and you can't prove a negative.
The burden of proof would be on those bringing the lawsuit or people like yourself to prove apple is doing something with this data.
The burden of proof is not on him or Apple and you can't prove a negative.
The burden of proof would be on those bringing the lawsuit or people like yourself to prove apple is doing something with this data.
ikir
Mar 31, 02:37 PM
I have 2 friends with android, one with an HTC and one with Samsung Galaxy S.
They have different OS versions since they aren't able to update it, they get crap bugs and error in almost every software they use. I say to one of them to update to lastest version, he told me he can't because he need to do it from "root"... i don't know, but at least i was able to install WhatsApp on their phones, the only thing i care :-P Naturally they are using their device at minimum, few software and one of them neither have 3G connection. When we are at pub, they all use my iPhone for browsing and gaming (sigh) as always has been.
They have different OS versions since they aren't able to update it, they get crap bugs and error in almost every software they use. I say to one of them to update to lastest version, he told me he can't because he need to do it from "root"... i don't know, but at least i was able to install WhatsApp on their phones, the only thing i care :-P Naturally they are using their device at minimum, few software and one of them neither have 3G connection. When we are at pub, they all use my iPhone for browsing and gaming (sigh) as always has been.
SevenInchScrew
Aug 19, 12:05 AM
I hate how some people think the ~800 standard cars are going to look like GT4 cars.
They won't just look like it, they ARE GT4 cars. Take note that NONE of the cars that are playable at these events or seen in almost all screen shots are Standard� cars. I'm not "hating" on the game. I just question their decisions. As I said in my previous posts, I'm a very LONG time fan of the GT series. But, I'm getting tired of the repeated cycle I continuously go through with them lately. Super hype for the games before they come out, and then, regardless of exponentially greater feature list, I'm let down by the actual driving.
Again, I'm glad this game looks spectacular, because it really does. Even though the screen shots that we're seeing are from Photo Mode, the ones that have come out at GC10 are amazing. It is also practically bewildering how the game now has a feature list that is so huge and loaded with features, if you didn't hear it from Polyphony themselves, you might not believe it. But, like I said, the more stuff that keeps getting added to the game, and more minutiae they detail in the Premium� cars, the more my expectations of the actual driving in the game rises.
They won't just look like it, they ARE GT4 cars. Take note that NONE of the cars that are playable at these events or seen in almost all screen shots are Standard� cars. I'm not "hating" on the game. I just question their decisions. As I said in my previous posts, I'm a very LONG time fan of the GT series. But, I'm getting tired of the repeated cycle I continuously go through with them lately. Super hype for the games before they come out, and then, regardless of exponentially greater feature list, I'm let down by the actual driving.
Again, I'm glad this game looks spectacular, because it really does. Even though the screen shots that we're seeing are from Photo Mode, the ones that have come out at GC10 are amazing. It is also practically bewildering how the game now has a feature list that is so huge and loaded with features, if you didn't hear it from Polyphony themselves, you might not believe it. But, like I said, the more stuff that keeps getting added to the game, and more minutiae they detail in the Premium� cars, the more my expectations of the actual driving in the game rises.
milo
Jul 27, 11:42 AM
honestly, right now i do not believe the power differential to be worth it. it would be better to wait for chips with a larger speed differential.
Based on current pricing, the only upgrade that is really appealing right now is Core Solo mini to merom.
Based on current pricing, the only upgrade that is really appealing right now is Core Solo mini to merom.
twoodcc
Aug 27, 10:43 PM
i am looking forward to this game, no matter if it's got standard and premium cars.
Bill McEnaney
Apr 29, 12:47 PM
So what? Who said liberals never partake in name calling? You claimed that liberals do more name calling. You want me to go dig out examples of name-calling done by conservative voices such as Limbaugh, Beck, etc.?
Please do dig them out. It's only fair that you should be free to point out point out evil that some conservatives do publicly. Meanwhile, let's see whether this (http://www.mrc.org/Profiles/odonnell/welcome.asp) link works now.
RT, did you notice that I said that whomever does it, name-calling is libel or slander?
Please do dig them out. It's only fair that you should be free to point out point out evil that some conservatives do publicly. Meanwhile, let's see whether this (http://www.mrc.org/Profiles/odonnell/welcome.asp) link works now.
RT, did you notice that I said that whomever does it, name-calling is libel or slander?
PCMacUser
Aug 27, 07:39 AM
Yes, and as someone has already pointed out, if the Core2 can do 20% better with the same power, can't you just throttle your new Core2 MBP down 20% and get a laptop with the same performance of your old one with 20% better battery life?
Talk about not seeing the forest through the trees. :rolleyes:
It's quite common in the PC laptop world to do exactly that - using the BIOS to drop the default clock speed and/or voltage of the CPU to extend battery life. But that requires a BIOS which Apples don't have. Perhaps it can be done another way...
Talk about not seeing the forest through the trees. :rolleyes:
It's quite common in the PC laptop world to do exactly that - using the BIOS to drop the default clock speed and/or voltage of the CPU to extend battery life. But that requires a BIOS which Apples don't have. Perhaps it can be done another way...
bousozoku
Nov 28, 10:16 PM
I would assume that Microsoft agreed to pay Universal just because it could cause Apple problems, not because they felt any need to pay.
Universal tried to sue Sony back in the 1970s over videocassette recorders. They were somewhat successful in scaring people from buying Sony VCRs, even though they weren't really successful in court.
I can't see as how they'll be pushing Apple too far. It seems every day, Universal and its subsidiaries lose ground to competitors.
Universal tried to sue Sony back in the 1970s over videocassette recorders. They were somewhat successful in scaring people from buying Sony VCRs, even though they weren't really successful in court.
I can't see as how they'll be pushing Apple too far. It seems every day, Universal and its subsidiaries lose ground to competitors.
iAlan
Jul 27, 10:23 AM
out-of-focus photos of boxes in elevators and poorly photo-shopped renditions of casings...
The only problem is that Apple will have to be on the ball with upgrades so as not to loose the speed war against other intel machines (running Windows unfortunately) but we will all want the latest and fastest processors in the line-up even if we are not in the market for a new computer...
The only problem is that Apple will have to be on the ball with upgrades so as not to loose the speed war against other intel machines (running Windows unfortunately) but we will all want the latest and fastest processors in the line-up even if we are not in the market for a new computer...
princealfie
Nov 29, 01:22 AM
You my friend, sound like a socialist...
I'm a Poststructuralistmarxist so perhaps that will help you guys out :cool:
I'm a Poststructuralistmarxist so perhaps that will help you guys out :cool:
hayesk
Nov 29, 10:45 AM
If Universal gets a royalty from every iPod, then I will help myself to Universal's music library. After all, isn't that what the fee is for?
kdarling
Mar 22, 07:38 PM
It runs Android. Pretty sure that's what he meant. So, Google, Android developers, Android marketplace.
Ah, I thought perhaps he knew something I didn't.
True, they don't have to spend a lot of time or money on core OS improvements.
Nor do they have to worry about maintaining an app market (or getting bad publicity because they approved baby-killer or gay-fixer apps). OTOH, they don't directly profit from app sales.
Samsung, HTC and others do have staff for third party developer relations, and all maintain R&D labs for their Android porting and customization.
That doesn't change the accounting. Cost is still the same, and they are pricing theirs very low. The first Tab came out at what, $800, and then dropped immediately on entrance to Costco and other retailers. Last I saw it was $400, I haven't been paying close attention, though.
It came out at $600, which many thought made some sense (http://www.engadget.com/2010/10/20/editorial-why-the-galaxy-tabs-price-makes-sense/) considering it had 3G and GPS. I bought one myself.
I think you're right, now it's as low as $400 on contract. (Heck, it's only $250 right now on T-Mobile (http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/galaxy-tab/SGH-T849ZKATMB).)
Ah, I thought perhaps he knew something I didn't.
True, they don't have to spend a lot of time or money on core OS improvements.
Nor do they have to worry about maintaining an app market (or getting bad publicity because they approved baby-killer or gay-fixer apps). OTOH, they don't directly profit from app sales.
Samsung, HTC and others do have staff for third party developer relations, and all maintain R&D labs for their Android porting and customization.
That doesn't change the accounting. Cost is still the same, and they are pricing theirs very low. The first Tab came out at what, $800, and then dropped immediately on entrance to Costco and other retailers. Last I saw it was $400, I haven't been paying close attention, though.
It came out at $600, which many thought made some sense (http://www.engadget.com/2010/10/20/editorial-why-the-galaxy-tabs-price-makes-sense/) considering it had 3G and GPS. I bought one myself.
I think you're right, now it's as low as $400 on contract. (Heck, it's only $250 right now on T-Mobile (http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/galaxy-tab/SGH-T849ZKATMB).)
No comments:
Post a Comment