macnulty
Aug 24, 07:51 PM
Huge win for Apple, hands down.
$100m is not chump change but for a company with Apple's size it comes close.
On top of that Apple gets to recoup at least some of that if Creative decides to license the technology in question.
On top of that Creative is entering the "made for iPod" market, which only adds to the iPod allure.
On top of that iPod interface doesn't change.
$100m is not chump change but for a company with Apple's size it comes close.
On top of that Apple gets to recoup at least some of that if Creative decides to license the technology in question.
On top of that Creative is entering the "made for iPod" market, which only adds to the iPod allure.
On top of that iPod interface doesn't change.
Vegasman
Mar 30, 01:23 PM
Again why cant MS just call is their MobileApp store?
They don't want to call their store "MobileApp" because they already have a store. It's called "Marketplace".
They would however like to describe their store that called "Marketplace" by saying that it is a store that sells apps. You know, an app store.
They don't want to call their store "MobileApp" because they already have a store. It's called "Marketplace".
They would however like to describe their store that called "Marketplace" by saying that it is a store that sells apps. You know, an app store.
Mac-Addict
Aug 31, 06:46 PM
well I need cash and i need cash fast if they put the prices up on a macbook pro after it gets the merom chip *Preys to god that prices dont go up* plus if the "iPhone" comes out im going to need to get one of those too :D perhapes i will sell my psp..
8CoreWhore
Apr 30, 01:37 PM
THANK CHRIST....sorry :o
Steve has been called all kinds of names, but...
Steve has been called all kinds of names, but...
thworple
Oct 27, 10:25 AM
I'm sorry, what part of 'private property' don't you people understand?
They weren't trespassing or anything like that!!! Its not like they wandered onto someone's back yard and started selling lemonade from a small stand without permission.
They had purchased a small stall there and went about their business handing out leaflets highlighting their concerns at Apple's environmental policy, as well as giving people some tasty Organic Apples (which many, myself included, lapped up ;) ).
Sure, they wandered away from their stall to the entrance to hand out leaflets, but so did half or dozen or so other stallholders. The fact remains that I haven't heard of anyone else being ejected because of this. And it makes you concerned that they were singled out because of the message they were trying to convey.
I was personally more bothered by the people trying to sell you something you didn't want as soon as you entered the Expo (that and the fact that every time I went to the Google stand they'd run out of sweets! :rolleyes: )
They weren't trespassing or anything like that!!! Its not like they wandered onto someone's back yard and started selling lemonade from a small stand without permission.
They had purchased a small stall there and went about their business handing out leaflets highlighting their concerns at Apple's environmental policy, as well as giving people some tasty Organic Apples (which many, myself included, lapped up ;) ).
Sure, they wandered away from their stall to the entrance to hand out leaflets, but so did half or dozen or so other stallholders. The fact remains that I haven't heard of anyone else being ejected because of this. And it makes you concerned that they were singled out because of the message they were trying to convey.
I was personally more bothered by the people trying to sell you something you didn't want as soon as you entered the Expo (that and the fact that every time I went to the Google stand they'd run out of sweets! :rolleyes: )
guet
Nov 13, 05:08 PM
Obviously the images are copyrighted by Apple, and those images they don't want people using. Ok, well, that is their rights, they designed them and copyrighted them.
For the benefit of others who don't bother to read the article, the images in question are provided by a system API on OS X. The API is *provided* to give developers images they can use to represent the current computer, and is supposed to be used that way. All RA have done is used those same images to transmit from the desktop to the iPhone, to show the user which computer they're connecting to.
Some idiot reviewer at Apple has seen the images and decided that since they're displayed on an iPhone they're infringing one of the many incredibly vague rules in the SDK. Given the completely borked review process, it's unlikely to be rectified, and has wasted a lot of everyone's time - there's no way to know in advance which rules the reviewer may decide to impose - almost every app could be seen to infringe one of them. Like the iPhone book app rejection and many others for different obscure reasons, this is a case of a sensible rule interpreted in an insane way.
Can't blame the developers at all for walking away from the frustrating, capricious waste of time which is iTunes store approvals, and good on them for publicising this; taking three months to even give a firm reason for rejection is a real failure on Apple's part, and the entire process is a train wreck.
If Apple doesn't defend their copyright, then they can lose it, so they HAVE to fight for it.
I think you're confusing copyright and Trademarks. This is not the case with copyright at all.
For the benefit of others who don't bother to read the article, the images in question are provided by a system API on OS X. The API is *provided* to give developers images they can use to represent the current computer, and is supposed to be used that way. All RA have done is used those same images to transmit from the desktop to the iPhone, to show the user which computer they're connecting to.
Some idiot reviewer at Apple has seen the images and decided that since they're displayed on an iPhone they're infringing one of the many incredibly vague rules in the SDK. Given the completely borked review process, it's unlikely to be rectified, and has wasted a lot of everyone's time - there's no way to know in advance which rules the reviewer may decide to impose - almost every app could be seen to infringe one of them. Like the iPhone book app rejection and many others for different obscure reasons, this is a case of a sensible rule interpreted in an insane way.
Can't blame the developers at all for walking away from the frustrating, capricious waste of time which is iTunes store approvals, and good on them for publicising this; taking three months to even give a firm reason for rejection is a real failure on Apple's part, and the entire process is a train wreck.
If Apple doesn't defend their copyright, then they can lose it, so they HAVE to fight for it.
I think you're confusing copyright and Trademarks. This is not the case with copyright at all.
Huntn
Apr 11, 10:47 PM
If you try to imagine the future of society and governance, you either are going to regress to unregulated capitalism and barrons or move forward to regulated capitalism or some form of socialism. The idea is to raise up the majority of people, not every person for themselves, not screw over your fellow human being for your personal advantage.
I'd say since the high point of post WWII, we as a society in the U.S. have done our best to eradicate The New Deal and move back to reaching for magnificant wealth while screwing each other over.
So what would you call moving forward?
I'd say since the high point of post WWII, we as a society in the U.S. have done our best to eradicate The New Deal and move back to reaching for magnificant wealth while screwing each other over.
So what would you call moving forward?
andiwm2003
Sep 9, 08:31 AM
Yes of course it can, you obviously don't understand what x86_64 is.
Manic Mouse obviously understands what 64 bit means. that is obvious if one is able to read the post.;)
i also wonder if the new systems are really future proof or if hybrid systems like this will in a few years be not compatible. also how will windows run on a system like this? what about games that usually expect a certain hardware setup?
Manic Mouse obviously understands what 64 bit means. that is obvious if one is able to read the post.;)
i also wonder if the new systems are really future proof or if hybrid systems like this will in a few years be not compatible. also how will windows run on a system like this? what about games that usually expect a certain hardware setup?
JZ Wire
Sep 10, 02:13 AM
I was credit card in hand when these were released, but I stopped myself. I'd like to wait a bit and see the 64 bit boost (if there is any), and Leopard in general.
I feel like these are speed demons, but I can't take advantage of a lot of it due to my heavy use of CS2 and the in-between feeling of Apple's apps/OS right now.
The second Leopard is out, I'm on the 24" iMac train.
Yea, I know what you mean. Apple needs to get on the ball with that already. They have been shipping dual core machines for a while yet OS X cant truly take advantage of it. Since intel will be using more cores as time goes by it only makes sense for OS X and it's apps to be able to harness the full power of all the cores/processors. I really really hope thats what they have planned for Leopard. Maybe its one of the " Super Secret Features" ??? :rolleyes:
I feel like these are speed demons, but I can't take advantage of a lot of it due to my heavy use of CS2 and the in-between feeling of Apple's apps/OS right now.
The second Leopard is out, I'm on the 24" iMac train.
Yea, I know what you mean. Apple needs to get on the ball with that already. They have been shipping dual core machines for a while yet OS X cant truly take advantage of it. Since intel will be using more cores as time goes by it only makes sense for OS X and it's apps to be able to harness the full power of all the cores/processors. I really really hope thats what they have planned for Leopard. Maybe its one of the " Super Secret Features" ??? :rolleyes:
Donz0r
Sep 13, 09:46 PM
do you dial numbers every time you use your phone? I have a samsung t809, and i don't slide it down most of the time, unless i want to answer it that way. It's kinda fun, but it's not required to answer the phone.
http://common.ziffdavisinternet.com/util_get_image/11/0,,i=118734&,00.jpg
oh yeah, this plays aac's and any song as a ringtone. so that makes ringtone purchases 0.00 if you own the song already... what a concept!
My friend has that phone, it's amazing.
THESE SLIDER PHONES ARE A HUGE HIT RIGHT NOW!
Some of you may not like the slider style, but most consumers love it. And love the idea of a True music playing cell phone that can replace your iPod (nano at least)
http://common.ziffdavisinternet.com/util_get_image/11/0,,i=118734&,00.jpg
oh yeah, this plays aac's and any song as a ringtone. so that makes ringtone purchases 0.00 if you own the song already... what a concept!
My friend has that phone, it's amazing.
THESE SLIDER PHONES ARE A HUGE HIT RIGHT NOW!
Some of you may not like the slider style, but most consumers love it. And love the idea of a True music playing cell phone that can replace your iPod (nano at least)
flopticalcube
Apr 16, 01:55 PM
Whats the speed of thunderbolt? and will it be faster then sata 3.0
Capped at 10gb/s on the copper version. SATA 3 is 6gbps.
Capped at 10gb/s on the copper version. SATA 3 is 6gbps.
winmacguy
Aug 23, 11:56 PM
A little-known company, and that was to create it's product. If apple buys one of their largest competitors, that will raise a few eyebrows.
Philips Electronics of Holland was one of the companies that turned down the offer to develop the predecessor of the iPod from its creator.
Philips Electronics of Holland was one of the companies that turned down the offer to develop the predecessor of the iPod from its creator.
KingCrimson
Apr 28, 05:26 PM
Wow, Apple is pretty much unstoppable now. And if anyone tries to get in their way, they've got a $60b war chest.
Cite? The latest Yahoo! financial page has them at $29 billion.
Cite? The latest Yahoo! financial page has them at $29 billion.
guet
Nov 13, 04:44 PM
the tide is turning against Apple here, they need to clean up their act and get this whole thing working better.
i understand the walled-garden approach and respect that, but they also need to get the store cleaned up/organized and they need to work better with developers - which might just mean hiring more people to work with them on a daily basis.
No, they need to ditch the walled garden approach. It has never worked, and will never work, from AOL to eWorld, it'll lead to indifference and hostility from developers, and eventually, users. Throwing more people at it would not solve what is a systemic problem.
i understand the walled-garden approach and respect that, but they also need to get the store cleaned up/organized and they need to work better with developers - which might just mean hiring more people to work with them on a daily basis.
No, they need to ditch the walled garden approach. It has never worked, and will never work, from AOL to eWorld, it'll lead to indifference and hostility from developers, and eventually, users. Throwing more people at it would not solve what is a systemic problem.
samcolak
Apr 22, 11:26 AM
As my first post to macrumors, I just purchased a 13" refurb 30 min ago. Oh well, still good technology. I can finally sell my 2007 macbook.
Im running a 2007 MBP17'' with a nice SSD - Its a 2.33C2D and im happy its lasted soo long.. I had to replace the disk as it wasnt enough...
Im running a 2007 MBP17'' with a nice SSD - Its a 2.33C2D and im happy its lasted soo long.. I had to replace the disk as it wasnt enough...
freiheit
Sep 9, 02:22 AM
But because not all applications and tasks take full advantage of the Mac multiprocessing capabilities,
And I'm thinking... why?! 10 years ago BeOS had this down pat. The whole system was multi-threaded and multi-processor aware from the kernel all the way up through the user interface including the system services used by all native applications. It was amazingly responsive and was reported (in major publications) to gain as much as 60-70% performance by having a second CPU. I realize MacOS X is based on some old NeXTStep code which was not made for multiple processors, but come on! This is the 21st century and Apple's been selling dual processor machines for about 5 years now.
Anyway, this is great news. I'd been drooling over the new iMacs since they were announced and wondering how much I might gain by upgrading from my 2GHz G5 PowerMac. It's very enticing.
And I'm thinking... why?! 10 years ago BeOS had this down pat. The whole system was multi-threaded and multi-processor aware from the kernel all the way up through the user interface including the system services used by all native applications. It was amazingly responsive and was reported (in major publications) to gain as much as 60-70% performance by having a second CPU. I realize MacOS X is based on some old NeXTStep code which was not made for multiple processors, but come on! This is the 21st century and Apple's been selling dual processor machines for about 5 years now.
Anyway, this is great news. I'd been drooling over the new iMacs since they were announced and wondering how much I might gain by upgrading from my 2GHz G5 PowerMac. It's very enticing.
DJTJ
Apr 22, 11:23 AM
Does this mean we will see a resolution downgrade to that of the 13 macbook pro's?
ten-oak-druid
Apr 19, 09:14 AM
I think that because Samsung is a manufacturer of Apple components, their "design" team had more access to the Apple design and user experience than is usually the case. This certainly made it easier for them to copy a good thing but it also made it easier to make the copy too similar to the original.
Did these companies copy each other's netbook designs back when netbooks were supposed to be the next best thing?
Did these companies copy each other's netbook designs back when netbooks were supposed to be the next best thing?
Dagless
Apr 11, 05:14 AM
Lucky its not Sony. Those that exposed it would be in a never ending court case, and everyone's IP that visited macrumors would be subpoenaed by a federal judge.
Not the same thing.
Not the same thing.
Machead III
Aug 31, 01:38 PM
Alright well, it's the Movie Store, and AppleInsider are porbably right about what they have said about it.
Meaning: Disney is the only one on board from the start.
However, don't **** your pants yet, that does not means we're stuck with Bambi and Mickey Mouse for 6 months.
The Walt Disney Company is about as expansive as they come, and they're particularly devious when it comes to branding. For various PR reasons they like to set up studios with different names and "tones" so that their cuddley flagship brand isn't trodden on by gritty adult movies.
If Disney are on board, that means as well as the "Walt Disney Pictures" movies like Toy Story and Aladin etc., Touchstone Pictures and Miramax are in (and also Hollywood Studios, but that's about to merge, it's not nothing notable since The 6th Sense, and nothing notable before that).
So you've got films like The Insider, Cinderella Man, The Royal Tenenbaums, Sin City, Gangs of New York, The Hours etc. etc. right off the bat.
Probably 1/5 of an average "movie fans" diet will consist of flicks produced by a branch of The Walt Disney Company, with another 5th being from WB, another from Universal and the rest from others like Sony and independants like Lions Gate and the Sundance groups.
You really wan't Universal in there eventually, as they're the ones with the big library. And Warner are the dudes holding all the old time classics, so you wan't them too.
Lions Gate make great films but the medium sized studios like them you can probably survive without, for the beginning, though it looks like Lions are in anyway.
Sony would be nice, they often hold the key to the films responsible for the recent surge in popularity of foreign films. Particuarly in Europe, Chinese and Spanish-speaking films have become really quite popular, with Zhang Yimou's Hero and House of Flying Daggers huge hits.
Of course, I'm hoping FilmFour get in their quickly, as they are responsible for really some of the most exciting cinema in recent years; Trainspotting, The Motorcycle Diaries, the list goes on...
Meaning: Disney is the only one on board from the start.
However, don't **** your pants yet, that does not means we're stuck with Bambi and Mickey Mouse for 6 months.
The Walt Disney Company is about as expansive as they come, and they're particularly devious when it comes to branding. For various PR reasons they like to set up studios with different names and "tones" so that their cuddley flagship brand isn't trodden on by gritty adult movies.
If Disney are on board, that means as well as the "Walt Disney Pictures" movies like Toy Story and Aladin etc., Touchstone Pictures and Miramax are in (and also Hollywood Studios, but that's about to merge, it's not nothing notable since The 6th Sense, and nothing notable before that).
So you've got films like The Insider, Cinderella Man, The Royal Tenenbaums, Sin City, Gangs of New York, The Hours etc. etc. right off the bat.
Probably 1/5 of an average "movie fans" diet will consist of flicks produced by a branch of The Walt Disney Company, with another 5th being from WB, another from Universal and the rest from others like Sony and independants like Lions Gate and the Sundance groups.
You really wan't Universal in there eventually, as they're the ones with the big library. And Warner are the dudes holding all the old time classics, so you wan't them too.
Lions Gate make great films but the medium sized studios like them you can probably survive without, for the beginning, though it looks like Lions are in anyway.
Sony would be nice, they often hold the key to the films responsible for the recent surge in popularity of foreign films. Particuarly in Europe, Chinese and Spanish-speaking films have become really quite popular, with Zhang Yimou's Hero and House of Flying Daggers huge hits.
Of course, I'm hoping FilmFour get in their quickly, as they are responsible for really some of the most exciting cinema in recent years; Trainspotting, The Motorcycle Diaries, the list goes on...
jamesryanbell
Apr 22, 11:22 AM
Not trying to force this mentality on anyone, but for ME: No Ivy Bridge, no care.
I'm sure it'll be a great machine though just like the current one. It's just not enough difference to make me upgrade. (Just like iPad 1 to iPad 2)
I'm sure it'll be a great machine though just like the current one. It's just not enough difference to make me upgrade. (Just like iPad 1 to iPad 2)
Huntn
Apr 17, 04:51 AM
Maximizing profits and self enrichment while diminishing the contribution of rank and file workers will be the downfall of this country. You know, the expendable workers who can be replaced in the 3rd world is going to turn us into the 3rd world.
Old Smuggler
Sep 16, 12:02 PM
if they are using off the shelf parts it sounds like its going to be like every other phone which blows
ctachme
Jul 14, 09:20 AM
The Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Extreme are widely expected to make their Mac debut in Apple's PowerMac computers which are rumored to be released on August 7th 2006 at the World Wide Developers Conference.
I want my MacBook Pro Core 2!!!.
I want my MacBook Pro Core 2!!!.