DeathChill
Apr 19, 09:18 PM
I agree, Samsung has copied Apple.
In fact I'm truly impressed with Samsung's expertise. Their Galaxy S is every bit as nice as my iPhone 4.
In fact after doing the research, I decided to add a line to my family plan so I could try the Android powered phone.
Now I have two great phones. However I must say I'm shocked that I like the Galaxy better than the more diminutive iPhone.
Really? Based on all your previous posts which I glanced through I'd only be surprised if the opposite was true.
There's a lot to be said for a spacious and gorgeous 4.0" Super AMOLED display. I had no idea of the advantages it offers.
Then there's a huge advantage with SWYPE. Instead of hammering on a hard glass keyboard when messaging, Swype allows you to glide one finger across the keys to form words. It's the single greatest advancement in touchscreen input technology to date.
Swype submitted their app to Apple nearly a year ago, but it was rejected.
One can only guess, its excellent, trouble free and easy operation triggered Steve's jealousy.
Yet it's important that we give credit to Apple for insisting on a old school slow yet familiar keyboard. I must admit it took me ten minutes of watching the tutorial, and fifteen minutes more to adapt.
That said it quickly has become my favorite.
I really wish Apple would overcome their fear of including it on the iPhone. My Galaxy S gives me the choice of two other keyboards on case I didn't like Swype. Apple could do the same.
I really like Apple, I have many of their products.
Just think of how much greater they could be, if not for their closed minded ways towards anything outside of their comfort zone.
Why is the iPhone's implementation slow?
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/08/24/fastest-texting-in-the-world-actually-on-an-iphone/
EDIT: Not that I think that Apple shouldn't open up more and allow things like Swype; they should.
In fact I'm truly impressed with Samsung's expertise. Their Galaxy S is every bit as nice as my iPhone 4.
In fact after doing the research, I decided to add a line to my family plan so I could try the Android powered phone.
Now I have two great phones. However I must say I'm shocked that I like the Galaxy better than the more diminutive iPhone.
Really? Based on all your previous posts which I glanced through I'd only be surprised if the opposite was true.
There's a lot to be said for a spacious and gorgeous 4.0" Super AMOLED display. I had no idea of the advantages it offers.
Then there's a huge advantage with SWYPE. Instead of hammering on a hard glass keyboard when messaging, Swype allows you to glide one finger across the keys to form words. It's the single greatest advancement in touchscreen input technology to date.
Swype submitted their app to Apple nearly a year ago, but it was rejected.
One can only guess, its excellent, trouble free and easy operation triggered Steve's jealousy.
Yet it's important that we give credit to Apple for insisting on a old school slow yet familiar keyboard. I must admit it took me ten minutes of watching the tutorial, and fifteen minutes more to adapt.
That said it quickly has become my favorite.
I really wish Apple would overcome their fear of including it on the iPhone. My Galaxy S gives me the choice of two other keyboards on case I didn't like Swype. Apple could do the same.
I really like Apple, I have many of their products.
Just think of how much greater they could be, if not for their closed minded ways towards anything outside of their comfort zone.
Why is the iPhone's implementation slow?
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/08/24/fastest-texting-in-the-world-actually-on-an-iphone/
EDIT: Not that I think that Apple shouldn't open up more and allow things like Swype; they should.
miketcool
Aug 11, 06:38 PM
You all must realize now that the touch screen scroll wheel is for the iPhone, not, the iPod. You wont watch video's on your phone, but youll listen to audio, dial numbers and store info. The Video player will be a spin off and be video oriented, this will be mobile oriented. $399, I'd still buy a mobile hub with music and phone capabilities.
It Cometh.
It Cometh.
citizenzen
Mar 17, 10:44 AM
Yet another war, yet another military action which will inevitably cause 'blow-back', started by a man who sold himself to you as a military dove.
While I might agree with some of things you said, I do have to take exception to this point. How did Obama sell himself as a "military dove"?
He campaigned on getting out of Iraq, while escalating our campaign in Afghanistan. And promises to close Gitmo had more to do with due process than it did pacifism.
So please 5P, provide some evidence on how Obama sold himself as a "dove".
And please, let's dispense with your ridiculous "both parties are the same line". Is that a pickle in your pocket, or are you just happy to see Newt Gingrich?
While I might agree with some of things you said, I do have to take exception to this point. How did Obama sell himself as a "military dove"?
He campaigned on getting out of Iraq, while escalating our campaign in Afghanistan. And promises to close Gitmo had more to do with due process than it did pacifism.
So please 5P, provide some evidence on how Obama sold himself as a "dove".
And please, let's dispense with your ridiculous "both parties are the same line". Is that a pickle in your pocket, or are you just happy to see Newt Gingrich?
DisMyMac
Apr 5, 07:11 PM
Is there any hope for good subtitle support? OCR, etc.?
carlos700
Aug 7, 11:24 AM
I'd like to see your "Mac" model bumped up past the iMac. I think a lot of people, myself included, would pay a premium for the ability to upgrade. In fact, I wouldn't care if they didn't offer a completely new model as long as they offer some "affordable" manifestations of the Mac Pro. So how's this (and go easy on me here because I rarely delve into the technical aspect of things):
Eventually (i.e. by November), Core 2 Duo/Woodcrest across he board:
1) Mac mini: 2 models both with the 1.86 GHz Core 2 Duo
2) iMac: 2 models with 1.86 GHz and 2.13 GHz Core 2 Duo
3) Mac Pro: 4 models; 2 Core 2 Duo-based systems (2.40 GHz and 2.66 GHz) and 2 Xeon-based systems (2.80 GHz and 3.0 GHz). The higher-end Xeon systems would sport the same enclosure as the Core 2 Duo systems (similar to the PM G5) but would come in an anodized charcoal black enclosure.
Any takers?
-Squire
Well, most of that looks good except that there is no 2.8GHz Woodcrest.
Eventually (i.e. by November), Core 2 Duo/Woodcrest across he board:
1) Mac mini: 2 models both with the 1.86 GHz Core 2 Duo
2) iMac: 2 models with 1.86 GHz and 2.13 GHz Core 2 Duo
3) Mac Pro: 4 models; 2 Core 2 Duo-based systems (2.40 GHz and 2.66 GHz) and 2 Xeon-based systems (2.80 GHz and 3.0 GHz). The higher-end Xeon systems would sport the same enclosure as the Core 2 Duo systems (similar to the PM G5) but would come in an anodized charcoal black enclosure.
Any takers?
-Squire
Well, most of that looks good except that there is no 2.8GHz Woodcrest.
whatever
Sep 13, 12:41 PM
All the people that just coughed up $3k for a quad core MacPro.
I'm one of those people who dropped $4K for a quad core MacPro and basically I'm happy that I did. It blows away everything else that is out there today and will be the top performing Mac until 2007. Apple will not be releasing an upgrade to the Mac Pro this year. No matter what anyone says.
Why you might ask, well they don't need to!
But what if the competition releases these super fast machines, won't Apple be left behind. No! What OS will these machines be running, Windows XP. One of the things that seperates Apple from everyone else is their OS. They have an OS which takes full advantage (important word is full) of the hardware. It's the big advantage that they have over Dell and HP, they create the software that runs on the computer.
So if I want to run Final Cut Pro as fast as possible on an optiomized machine, then I'll have to run it on a Mac. Alright, that's a bad example, but in a way it's not, because a lot of the people buying Mac Pros also live in Apple's Pro apps.
The next new computer we'll see from Apple anytime soon will be the MacBook Pro which will be redesigned (featuring the MacBook's keyboard), upgrades to the MacBook won't happen until January (however Apple may try to get them out in December).
Apple's goal is to have everything 64-Bit before Leopard is uncaged.
I'm one of those people who dropped $4K for a quad core MacPro and basically I'm happy that I did. It blows away everything else that is out there today and will be the top performing Mac until 2007. Apple will not be releasing an upgrade to the Mac Pro this year. No matter what anyone says.
Why you might ask, well they don't need to!
But what if the competition releases these super fast machines, won't Apple be left behind. No! What OS will these machines be running, Windows XP. One of the things that seperates Apple from everyone else is their OS. They have an OS which takes full advantage (important word is full) of the hardware. It's the big advantage that they have over Dell and HP, they create the software that runs on the computer.
So if I want to run Final Cut Pro as fast as possible on an optiomized machine, then I'll have to run it on a Mac. Alright, that's a bad example, but in a way it's not, because a lot of the people buying Mac Pros also live in Apple's Pro apps.
The next new computer we'll see from Apple anytime soon will be the MacBook Pro which will be redesigned (featuring the MacBook's keyboard), upgrades to the MacBook won't happen until January (however Apple may try to get them out in December).
Apple's goal is to have everything 64-Bit before Leopard is uncaged.
gnasher729
Aug 17, 09:17 AM
Edit: Please ignore this post, I can't count!!!
If you buy a Xeon 5160 (3.0GHz) at the moment they are �570. Apple are charging �530 to upgrade from Xeon 5150 (2.66GHz) to the Xeon 5160. Bearing in mind that you can probably sell the original 2.66Gz chip for around �300, it would be cheaper to buy the lower spec Mac Pro and upgrade yourself.
It's not something I would do myself, but some enterprising dealer could easily do that. In US prices, difference between two 3.00 GHz and two 2.66 GHz chips is roughly $300, and you could sell the 2.66 GHz ones at a premium because they had "extra burn-in testing" :-)
Seriously, the problem is getting money for the 2.66 chips.
If you buy a Xeon 5160 (3.0GHz) at the moment they are �570. Apple are charging �530 to upgrade from Xeon 5150 (2.66GHz) to the Xeon 5160. Bearing in mind that you can probably sell the original 2.66Gz chip for around �300, it would be cheaper to buy the lower spec Mac Pro and upgrade yourself.
It's not something I would do myself, but some enterprising dealer could easily do that. In US prices, difference between two 3.00 GHz and two 2.66 GHz chips is roughly $300, and you could sell the 2.66 GHz ones at a premium because they had "extra burn-in testing" :-)
Seriously, the problem is getting money for the 2.66 chips.
Benjy91
Mar 31, 02:52 PM
Please, enlighten us, how does fragmentation bite Android's ass when it is the #1 smartphone OS. Regardless what you think, Android and iOS are by far the most successful OS in the last 5 years.
How is it biting them in the ass? Android is the fastest growing OS with a larger share than IOS. I think it's been a very succesfull strategy.
I never said it's already got them, I said it would get them eventually, and now Google has seen this, and is now tightening control.
And how it will 'bite them in the ass' is with the user experience, users seeing apps on the Android Marketplace, but the app doesnt support their phone, or requires features their phone doesnt support, or their phone doesnt quite have the power to run it. Could crash their phone etc.
Their strategy ensured short-term gain, but problems later on.
Apple wont run into problems with iOS Fragmentation for a long time yet. And they can easily avoid these issues by officially not supporting older devices and preventing them accessing apps they cant run.
How is it biting them in the ass? Android is the fastest growing OS with a larger share than IOS. I think it's been a very succesfull strategy.
I never said it's already got them, I said it would get them eventually, and now Google has seen this, and is now tightening control.
And how it will 'bite them in the ass' is with the user experience, users seeing apps on the Android Marketplace, but the app doesnt support their phone, or requires features their phone doesnt support, or their phone doesnt quite have the power to run it. Could crash their phone etc.
Their strategy ensured short-term gain, but problems later on.
Apple wont run into problems with iOS Fragmentation for a long time yet. And they can easily avoid these issues by officially not supporting older devices and preventing them accessing apps they cant run.
regandarcy
Apr 5, 05:48 PM
New iMacs would be great. Let's not forget new MacBook airs. They need sandy bridge and thunderbolt too! :-)
Doubt it will be MacBook airs. But updating the iMacs along with the new final cut pro does make sense.
Doubt it will be MacBook airs. But updating the iMacs along with the new final cut pro does make sense.
Super Dave
Aug 8, 12:50 AM
Also a very good point, so I need a bigger main HD for my MacBookPro (the new Seagate 160GB becomes interesting) for Time Machine, but i still need to back the hole thing up to an external HD in case of a HD crash (I had 2 in the last 8 months!). So Tine Machine doesn't make Backups obsolete, I didn't even think of that up to now. Hmmm..
Time Machine is backup, it's not for on the same drive (or nothing implied it was).
David :cool:
Time Machine is backup, it's not for on the same drive (or nothing implied it was).
David :cool:
john123
Sep 19, 09:35 AM
You can get a real speed boost just by compiling to 64-bit (naturally this depends on the source). The 64-bit benefit will increase over time on the Mac platform. On 64-bit Gentoo I had the chance to compare 32-bit & 64-bit binaries on exactly the same PC, & disagree entirely with your statement. Programs that can take advantage of 64-bit architecture, & are subsequently compiled for it, are definitely something to be desired.
Add grudging 32-bit hanger-ons to the spoiled 13 year olds on here.
Sometimes you can; sometimes not. That depends on a lot of factors. It's not universal. On the cluster we designed at my office with Opterons, we are actually using 32 bit (albeit with some software enhancements) because it came out considerably faster than the 64 bit implementations. So it's not a universal thing.
Add grudging 32-bit hanger-ons to the spoiled 13 year olds on here.
Sometimes you can; sometimes not. That depends on a lot of factors. It's not universal. On the cluster we designed at my office with Opterons, we are actually using 32 bit (albeit with some software enhancements) because it came out considerably faster than the 64 bit implementations. So it's not a universal thing.
bigandy
Sep 19, 06:12 AM
It's going to happen, it'll happen when it happens, and the only thing we can be sure of is that people will still be complaining about them when they've arrived. :rolleyes:
jonharris200
Aug 7, 03:42 PM
I can exclusively reveal that the top top secret feature of Leopard will be... inbuilt photocopying! :D
peeInMyPantz
Jul 27, 10:40 PM
if merom produces less heat.. i would think that apple will quickly update both MB and MBP so it won't be releasing anymore problematic notebooks
donlphi
Nov 28, 11:04 PM
Universal has already stated that half of the money will be going to the artists.
YEAH RIGHT... here you go EMINEM... here is your .00000000000000017 of a cent you get for this ZUNE. Just trying to share the wealth with ALL THE ARTISTS. Those artists will never see that money. PLEASE. HOW naive could you be?
Microsoft's lack of backbone is going to make us all pay... wait and see.
YEAH RIGHT... here you go EMINEM... here is your .00000000000000017 of a cent you get for this ZUNE. Just trying to share the wealth with ALL THE ARTISTS. Those artists will never see that money. PLEASE. HOW naive could you be?
Microsoft's lack of backbone is going to make us all pay... wait and see.
Chip NoVaMac
Apr 7, 11:38 PM
After reading more of the responses working retail I might be able to shed on some light as to why BB might hold back on selling what they have on hand.
As one poster mentioned BB store managers have a quota or sales goal to make each day it seems. The sad fact is that when hot products enter the market they can skew your sales data for that day, week, or month. So taking and throttling sales to make ones sales goal can help out the following year.
Sadly sometimes you get corporate HQ that is just focused in on gains over LY, never mind that hot product that was blowing off the shelves was the reason for it. In particular for a publicly traded company that has shareholders to answer to.
As an example; lets say the local BB store got a 100 iPad 2 64GB 3G's in this morning. That is about $83K in sales. And lets say they average sales without the iPad 2 for the same day LY was $500K. Next year that manager would be looking at needing a $583K to make his goal.
Bean counters at the corporate level don't care one red cent about any hot item that caused the spike. Nor do shareholders of public companies. I personally have seen in the past when the store I worked for made it goal for the day, hold back on processing an order till the next day to give us a jump on the next days sales. But NEVER to the point that customers with money in hand were denied buying the product right then and there.
And that is where I think BB is getting in trouble with Apple right now....
As one poster mentioned BB store managers have a quota or sales goal to make each day it seems. The sad fact is that when hot products enter the market they can skew your sales data for that day, week, or month. So taking and throttling sales to make ones sales goal can help out the following year.
Sadly sometimes you get corporate HQ that is just focused in on gains over LY, never mind that hot product that was blowing off the shelves was the reason for it. In particular for a publicly traded company that has shareholders to answer to.
As an example; lets say the local BB store got a 100 iPad 2 64GB 3G's in this morning. That is about $83K in sales. And lets say they average sales without the iPad 2 for the same day LY was $500K. Next year that manager would be looking at needing a $583K to make his goal.
Bean counters at the corporate level don't care one red cent about any hot item that caused the spike. Nor do shareholders of public companies. I personally have seen in the past when the store I worked for made it goal for the day, hold back on processing an order till the next day to give us a jump on the next days sales. But NEVER to the point that customers with money in hand were denied buying the product right then and there.
And that is where I think BB is getting in trouble with Apple right now....
mkruck
Apr 6, 03:06 PM
Yeesh dude, at least your wife cares enough to do nice things for you. :(
Yes, and my response that you quoted was said tongue in cheek. People really need to lighten up and stop taking themselves so seriously.
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk
Yes, and my response that you quoted was said tongue in cheek. People really need to lighten up and stop taking themselves so seriously.
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk
manu chao
Aug 27, 05:58 AM
A lot of (very vocal) people keep complaining about the crappy video cards Apple is using. I have heard these complaints for years now, I have heard them for all models.
I, personally, have seen often enough performance limitations in my daily work related to the processor, I have also fairly often seen performance limitations due to my harddrive. I have rarely seen performance limitations due to my graphics card, maybe sometimes with Expose (big deal :rolleyes: ) and possibly with Aperture.
So, getting a faster processor, or moving to a multiprocessor system, getting more RAM (reducing access to the HD) and getting e.g. a RAID system will do much, much more for your performance than getting a better video card, except for those using certain high-end apps and gamers.
But, I do not have a computer to play games, I have a computer to get work done, I am sitting 13 hours a day in front of my computer, zero hours of these doing gaming.
I, personally, have seen often enough performance limitations in my daily work related to the processor, I have also fairly often seen performance limitations due to my harddrive. I have rarely seen performance limitations due to my graphics card, maybe sometimes with Expose (big deal :rolleyes: ) and possibly with Aperture.
So, getting a faster processor, or moving to a multiprocessor system, getting more RAM (reducing access to the HD) and getting e.g. a RAID system will do much, much more for your performance than getting a better video card, except for those using certain high-end apps and gamers.
But, I do not have a computer to play games, I have a computer to get work done, I am sitting 13 hours a day in front of my computer, zero hours of these doing gaming.
ergle2
Sep 15, 12:50 PM
More pedantic details for those who are interested... :)
NT actually started as OS/2 3.0. Its lead architect was OS guru Dave Cutler, who is famous for architecting VMS for DEC, and naturally its design influenced NT. And the N-10 (Where "NT" comes from, "N" "T"en) Intel RISC processor was never intended to be a mainstream product; Dave Cutler insisted on the development team NOT using an X86 processor to make sure they would have no excuse to fall back on legacy code or thought. In fact, the N-10 build that was the default work environment for the team was never intended to leave the Microsoft campus. NT over its life has run on X86, DEC Alpha, MIPS, PowerPC, Itanium, and x64.
IBM and Microsoft worked together on OS/2 1.0 from 1985-1989. Much maligned, it did suck because it was targeted for the 286 not the 386, but it did break new ground -- preemptive multitasking and an advanced GUI (Presentation Manager). By 1989 they wanted to move on to something that would take advantage of the 386's 32-bit architecture, flat memory model, and virtual machine support. Simultaneously they started OS/2 2.0 (extend the current 16-bit code to a 16-32-bit hybrid) and OS/2 3.0 (a ground up, platform independent version). When Windows 3.0 took off in 1990, Microsoft had second thoughts and eventually broke with IBM. OS/2 3.0 became Windows NT -- in the first days of the split, NT still had OS/2 Presentation Manager APIs for it's GUI. They ripped it out and created Win32 APIs. That's also why to this day NT/2K/XP supported OS/2 command line applications, and there was also a little known GUI pack that would support OS/2 1.x GUI applications.
All very true, but beyond that -- if you've ever looked closely VMS and at NT, you'll notice, it's a lot more than just "influenced". The core design was pretty much identical -- the way I/O worked, its interrupt handling, the scheduler, and so on -- they're all practically carbon copies. Some of the names changed, but how things work under the hood hadn't. Since then it's evolved, of course, but you'd expect that.
Quite amusing, really... how a heavyweight enterprise-class OS of the 80's became the desktop of the 00's :)
Those that were around in the dim and distant will recall that VMS and Unix were two of the main competitors in many marketplaces in the 80's and early 90's... and today we have OS X, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, etc. vs XP, W2K3 Server and (soon) Vista -- kind of ironic, dontcha think? :)
Of course, there's a lot still running VMS to this very day. I don't think HP wants them to tho' -- they just sent all the support to India, apparently, to a team with relatively little experience...
NT actually started as OS/2 3.0. Its lead architect was OS guru Dave Cutler, who is famous for architecting VMS for DEC, and naturally its design influenced NT. And the N-10 (Where "NT" comes from, "N" "T"en) Intel RISC processor was never intended to be a mainstream product; Dave Cutler insisted on the development team NOT using an X86 processor to make sure they would have no excuse to fall back on legacy code or thought. In fact, the N-10 build that was the default work environment for the team was never intended to leave the Microsoft campus. NT over its life has run on X86, DEC Alpha, MIPS, PowerPC, Itanium, and x64.
IBM and Microsoft worked together on OS/2 1.0 from 1985-1989. Much maligned, it did suck because it was targeted for the 286 not the 386, but it did break new ground -- preemptive multitasking and an advanced GUI (Presentation Manager). By 1989 they wanted to move on to something that would take advantage of the 386's 32-bit architecture, flat memory model, and virtual machine support. Simultaneously they started OS/2 2.0 (extend the current 16-bit code to a 16-32-bit hybrid) and OS/2 3.0 (a ground up, platform independent version). When Windows 3.0 took off in 1990, Microsoft had second thoughts and eventually broke with IBM. OS/2 3.0 became Windows NT -- in the first days of the split, NT still had OS/2 Presentation Manager APIs for it's GUI. They ripped it out and created Win32 APIs. That's also why to this day NT/2K/XP supported OS/2 command line applications, and there was also a little known GUI pack that would support OS/2 1.x GUI applications.
All very true, but beyond that -- if you've ever looked closely VMS and at NT, you'll notice, it's a lot more than just "influenced". The core design was pretty much identical -- the way I/O worked, its interrupt handling, the scheduler, and so on -- they're all practically carbon copies. Some of the names changed, but how things work under the hood hadn't. Since then it's evolved, of course, but you'd expect that.
Quite amusing, really... how a heavyweight enterprise-class OS of the 80's became the desktop of the 00's :)
Those that were around in the dim and distant will recall that VMS and Unix were two of the main competitors in many marketplaces in the 80's and early 90's... and today we have OS X, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, etc. vs XP, W2K3 Server and (soon) Vista -- kind of ironic, dontcha think? :)
Of course, there's a lot still running VMS to this very day. I don't think HP wants them to tho' -- they just sent all the support to India, apparently, to a team with relatively little experience...
enda1
Jul 27, 01:37 PM
How long do you people think it will be before merom is put in the macbook?
Really want one befor i go back to college but it looks lokie i might have to splurge for an MBP instead.
Poor me....
Really want one befor i go back to college but it looks lokie i might have to splurge for an MBP instead.
Poor me....
swingerofbirch
Aug 26, 07:40 PM
I'm sure the GPU will also be bumped, at the very least. The MBP will probably also see some things that the MB has like a user-removable hard drive and magnetic latch. The CPU and GPU alone make it worth getting the new one, IMO.
Also, I'll say it one last time (yea right) - the imac should not and will not get a mobile processor. It only got Yonah because there was no alternative. It had a real desktop processor when one was available on the PPC side (G5), and it will have a real desktop processor now that one is available on the intel side (Conroe). Leave merom for what it was meant for - laptops.
I agree with you wholeheartedly.
But, I guess they COULD have put a pentium d in them...didnt they have dual cores?
Also, I'll say it one last time (yea right) - the imac should not and will not get a mobile processor. It only got Yonah because there was no alternative. It had a real desktop processor when one was available on the PPC side (G5), and it will have a real desktop processor now that one is available on the intel side (Conroe). Leave merom for what it was meant for - laptops.
I agree with you wholeheartedly.
But, I guess they COULD have put a pentium d in them...didnt they have dual cores?
SuperMatt
Mar 31, 02:26 PM
The biggest advantage always given for Android over iOS is that it's "open source." Well, clearly that's not the case anymore. So, I can't think of any other reason to use Android over iOS, or even Windows 7. It looks like junk, and it's just a cheap ripoff of iOS.
andrewag
Aug 7, 03:25 PM
Autumn is ages away!! Damn it!!!
Have to admit i'm not very impressed at the moment *cough* but i'm staying optimisitic that when i read more into it and as more information comes out there will be something that grabs my attention.
I'm kinda bummed that even with Vista sneaking up that Aqua hasn't changed much.
*stays optimistic*
Have to admit i'm not very impressed at the moment *cough* but i'm staying optimisitic that when i read more into it and as more information comes out there will be something that grabs my attention.
I'm kinda bummed that even with Vista sneaking up that Aqua hasn't changed much.
*stays optimistic*
scaredpoet
Apr 7, 11:05 PM
The difference to the customer is zero. Unavailable for purchase either way.
Wrong. Every iPad 2 that was being held back by best Buy could've been sold to someone who ordered at Apple's site online, or at an Apple Store... or perhaps some other retailer who knows better than to artificially restrict supply when there's already a supply issue in evidence.
If this report has any truth to it, Apple should be ashamed to nick-pick over semantics.
If this report has any truth to it, Apple should be applauded for taking action against a retailer that was hoarding stock.
I was considering buying an iPad2 from Best Buy. Glad I didn't. And know i'm reminded not to consider them again in the future.
Every day Apple stores get shipments of iPads....but they don't sell them when the arrive. They hold them for the line that forms the next morning.
Seems odd to me. Like they are purposely making a spectacle in front of the store every morning.
Actually, the point (which was made clear when they started doing this, but you apparently missed) was to avoid a day-long spectacle of people standing in line in front of the store all day in the hopes that a shipment would come in mid day... meanwhile preventing other people from buying other things at the store, and causing disruptions throughout the day in shopping malls for other vendors. If you had seen the 2+ months of lines in front of Apple Stores when the iPhone 4 came out, you'd probably understand better.
Selling the stock (and selling out of it) in the morning and making that clear to people is different from saying "we don't have any" when in fact you do and just would rather not sell them.
Wrong. Every iPad 2 that was being held back by best Buy could've been sold to someone who ordered at Apple's site online, or at an Apple Store... or perhaps some other retailer who knows better than to artificially restrict supply when there's already a supply issue in evidence.
If this report has any truth to it, Apple should be ashamed to nick-pick over semantics.
If this report has any truth to it, Apple should be applauded for taking action against a retailer that was hoarding stock.
I was considering buying an iPad2 from Best Buy. Glad I didn't. And know i'm reminded not to consider them again in the future.
Every day Apple stores get shipments of iPads....but they don't sell them when the arrive. They hold them for the line that forms the next morning.
Seems odd to me. Like they are purposely making a spectacle in front of the store every morning.
Actually, the point (which was made clear when they started doing this, but you apparently missed) was to avoid a day-long spectacle of people standing in line in front of the store all day in the hopes that a shipment would come in mid day... meanwhile preventing other people from buying other things at the store, and causing disruptions throughout the day in shopping malls for other vendors. If you had seen the 2+ months of lines in front of Apple Stores when the iPhone 4 came out, you'd probably understand better.
Selling the stock (and selling out of it) in the morning and making that clear to people is different from saying "we don't have any" when in fact you do and just would rather not sell them.
No comments:
Post a Comment