danielwsmithee
Apr 25, 04:09 PM
Contrastingly, if you need to not have one, you can always buy a MacBook Air. I don't use my FireWire 800 port often, but when I do, I'm thankful it's there. The same goes for the optical drive. Again, if you don't want it, Apple makes the MacBook Air which comes without it for the truly space-concious.
No I can't just get an Air. Not if I want a quad-core i7 dedicated graphics, an SSD boot drive and a 1TB HD for data. That sounds awfully "Pro" to me.
No I can't just get an Air. Not if I want a quad-core i7 dedicated graphics, an SSD boot drive and a 1TB HD for data. That sounds awfully "Pro" to me.
milo
Sep 5, 01:53 PM
Do you know a Tivo is a computer? It has a microprocessor and runs Linux. However, they don't try to make it a computer. That is why their idea has caught on.
That, and they keep the cost low by subsidizing it with subscriptions. A box for sale has to be cheap, and a device that just streams video, no hard drive at all, could be even cheaper than a tivo.
Is a streaming box really what you want? I mean, it's one thing to connect my airport express to my bose stereo system and let it play a playlist from my computer in my office, but if we have a streaming video, we still have to go to our office and start the video from the other room. If that's the case, I might as well move my computer to my living room.
They will have to have something that allows you to access your audio and video files with a remote. Maybe an aiport express with a remote control and user interface similar, but better than frontrow.
Right now a mac mini can do all of the things you need it to. You can stream video from another computer on the network, you can connect it to your T.V. and stereo. What would be the point of a new airport extreme if for $200 more you can get an entire compuer.
just some random thoughts...
A streaming box is DEFINITELY what I want. I assume they will have a remote available for this, not having one would be a deal breaker and I doubt they'd release this half baked.
A mini can do this, but starting at $599, it's going to be more than $200 more than an airport video. And I'd much rather have my mini somewhere else in the house so I don't have to try and read the menus on my NTSC TV, or have a monitor next to my TV.
That, and they keep the cost low by subsidizing it with subscriptions. A box for sale has to be cheap, and a device that just streams video, no hard drive at all, could be even cheaper than a tivo.
Is a streaming box really what you want? I mean, it's one thing to connect my airport express to my bose stereo system and let it play a playlist from my computer in my office, but if we have a streaming video, we still have to go to our office and start the video from the other room. If that's the case, I might as well move my computer to my living room.
They will have to have something that allows you to access your audio and video files with a remote. Maybe an aiport express with a remote control and user interface similar, but better than frontrow.
Right now a mac mini can do all of the things you need it to. You can stream video from another computer on the network, you can connect it to your T.V. and stereo. What would be the point of a new airport extreme if for $200 more you can get an entire compuer.
just some random thoughts...
A streaming box is DEFINITELY what I want. I assume they will have a remote available for this, not having one would be a deal breaker and I doubt they'd release this half baked.
A mini can do this, but starting at $599, it's going to be more than $200 more than an airport video. And I'd much rather have my mini somewhere else in the house so I don't have to try and read the menus on my NTSC TV, or have a monitor next to my TV.
MagnusVonMagnum
Apr 12, 03:52 PM
I'm confused... What will this give us in XBMC that we don't already have? Since I'm assuming you're running XBMC on Apple TV2, Airplay already works just fine...
Airplay and Airtunes are two different things AFAIK. I was under the impression that AUDIO was routed ONLY through AirTUNES and that AirPLAY was purely the VIDEO portion of the stream. Thus, you could stream a video to XBMC from an iPad, but you would get no audio and/or music could not be streamed with it. At least this was the jist I got from a thread on the matter when Airplay functionality was first added. Cracking the Airtunes key would enable XBMC to be seen from within iTunes as a full fledged audio device and thus you could output audio to it and other speakers at the same time, etc. and control it all from "REMOTE" on an iOS device.
Come to think of it, I see the thread title is "AirPLAY Private Key Exposed". So either that is a misprint or this thread is terribly out of date. AirPLAY has been known for quite a long time and it has NOTHING to do with an Airport Express, which is only AirTUNES so I'm assuming they mean the Airtunes key has been exposed (Airplay was not encrypted to my knowledge, only Airtunes). AppleTV Gen1 only has AirTunes, not AirPlay, for example as does Airport Express.
Hi
Not simultaneous control like AirTunes. You can stream to multiple computers, but it will need to be controlled separately -- as far as I know.
I can't think of a good reason to stream strictly audio to multiple computers, even if each is connected to speakers. Seems very clumsy to me, and you'd be better off getting an Airport Express ($69 refurbished (http://store.apple.com/us/product/FB321LL/A?mco=MTY3ODQ5OTY)) for each speaker system or getting AirPlay-supported speakers.
Why would you want to buy another device and/or set of speakers for a given room if it already has a good set of speakers connected to a computer, especially if that computer is already turned on? You'd need switching of some kind (e.g. receiver) to even use the same speakers with another device and it would just be a waste of money (unless you never plan to have that computer turned on and/or that is not the main speakers in that room). For example, my whole house audio/video server is on 24/7 and has Klipsch THX speakers connected to it. Why on earth would I want an Airport Express in that room, especially when it's normally the computer that is spooling out the iTunes information to begin with?
It makes me grin a little when I see posts like in this thread posted by people who obviously have no shortage of money (with their multiple mac systems) and yet dont want to hand over a little money for something thats been out for 5 years and makes the audio elements of airplay completely redundant.
Sonos. Easier, way better quality, more options, fully upgradeable, completely unrestrictive. And it just works.
For videophiles get a popcorn hour, 1080p streaming goodness which plays formats Apple TV can only dream of.
To host the content (if you dont want to buy an internal hard drive for Popcorn Hour) a simple NAS.
- Sonos is not "way better quality" (AppleTV2 output is DIGITAL and so the "quality" depends entirely on the stereo you connect it to. So sorry but you have no point there.
- It may not be better quality, but it IS "way more expensive". AppleTV2 costs $99 (same price as an Airport Express which is "audio only" like Sonos). Sonos OTOH costs $349 for a basic receiver which then still requires to either be connected directly to a router (wired) OR you have to pay ANOTHER $99 for a "bridge" to send a separate wireless signal off your router just for Sonos devices (waste of bandwidth and clutters the band with more wireless signals instead of just using your existing wireless router, which most people already have (how many used a wired only router and if you did you cannot use the Sonos wireless for anything else). So already you are at LEAST $450 in the hole for a single room with Sonos and you have ONLY AUDIO capability.
-But then I would be forgetting you need a SOURCE of music. You tout the use of an NAS, but most NAS devices aren't exactly cheap or anything. For all intensive purposes they are a just a headless computer and most run Linux. AppleTV2 is out of the box a PITA if you don't want to leave a computer on, but you can put XBMC on it which will use any NAS or networked source. You then have the same functionality as Sonos BUT you also have full video capability. You could instead get a cheap Netbook for $250 (cheaper than most NAS devices) and connect a hard drive to that and run iTunes and the full Apple interface if you'd like and still have XBMC available as well. Personally, I just use an old PPC G4 PowerMac as a server and 24/7 Internet terminal. Intel machines can also be set to Wake On Lan, so you can have your machine sleep while AppleTV is not in use. In short, NAS isn't as great as you make it sound (most are also dog slow compared to a real computer) and there are alternative options even with Apple software like a cheap Netbook as a server.
-Now I come to the heart of the matter...VIDEO. You suggest a Popcorn Hour in ADDITION to the already out of this world priced Sonos system. They start at $179 and go up to $299. That brings your total minimum price for a wireless system for a single room to $629 AND you have to switch between two separate devices to listen to audio and/or watch videos. With AppleTV you have all your movies, tv shows, photos, music, music videos, YouTube and Internet Radio (plus the options of XBMC with a quick hack including non-Apple formats) and your TOTAL COST for **one** room wireless using an existing wireless router is $99. $629 versus $99...Hmmmmmm. And then there's the matter of Popcorn Hour's crappy interface versus Apple's polished one. XBMC makes Popcorn Hour look bad as well. Bugs or popcorn? :confused:
So for the price of your ONE room audio and video, I could have SIX rooms using AppleTV2 with both video and audio and still have $29 to spare. With XBMC installed, it can play any format (just like Popcorn Hour). With the Apple interface running, it can sync audio to all rooms or play independently (just like Sonos). And it all can be controlled by an iOS device as well or programmed to accept the signals from any IR remote out there with extra buttons available.
Using ONE device (AppleTV), I have menu access to ALL my media collection without even having to switch the input on the receiver. I can play slide shows to my music collection and watch my entire video library (including VHS/Laserdisc/DVD/Blu-Ray conversions) and rent HD movies at the push of a button (Netflix is available on ATV2 as well).
I see ZERO advantage to Sonos and it costs a LOT more (what restrictions are you referring to with ATV? iTunes handles WAV, AAC, MP3 and Apple Lossless and seamlessly plays DTS music CDs that have been dumped). 3rd party formats like Flac are easily converted or they can be played in XBMC. Popcorn Hour's only advantage (once you figure XBMC into the fold) is that it can output in 1080p (ATV2 downconverts the final output to 720p at the moment, although my Gen1 ATV can play 1080p with XBMC using the Linux OS install and a cheap Crystal card in the one room where it matters here with a 93" screen).
In other words, I need lack nothing here at a fraction of the price and way better integration than your solution.
Airplay and Airtunes are two different things AFAIK. I was under the impression that AUDIO was routed ONLY through AirTUNES and that AirPLAY was purely the VIDEO portion of the stream. Thus, you could stream a video to XBMC from an iPad, but you would get no audio and/or music could not be streamed with it. At least this was the jist I got from a thread on the matter when Airplay functionality was first added. Cracking the Airtunes key would enable XBMC to be seen from within iTunes as a full fledged audio device and thus you could output audio to it and other speakers at the same time, etc. and control it all from "REMOTE" on an iOS device.
Come to think of it, I see the thread title is "AirPLAY Private Key Exposed". So either that is a misprint or this thread is terribly out of date. AirPLAY has been known for quite a long time and it has NOTHING to do with an Airport Express, which is only AirTUNES so I'm assuming they mean the Airtunes key has been exposed (Airplay was not encrypted to my knowledge, only Airtunes). AppleTV Gen1 only has AirTunes, not AirPlay, for example as does Airport Express.
Hi
Not simultaneous control like AirTunes. You can stream to multiple computers, but it will need to be controlled separately -- as far as I know.
I can't think of a good reason to stream strictly audio to multiple computers, even if each is connected to speakers. Seems very clumsy to me, and you'd be better off getting an Airport Express ($69 refurbished (http://store.apple.com/us/product/FB321LL/A?mco=MTY3ODQ5OTY)) for each speaker system or getting AirPlay-supported speakers.
Why would you want to buy another device and/or set of speakers for a given room if it already has a good set of speakers connected to a computer, especially if that computer is already turned on? You'd need switching of some kind (e.g. receiver) to even use the same speakers with another device and it would just be a waste of money (unless you never plan to have that computer turned on and/or that is not the main speakers in that room). For example, my whole house audio/video server is on 24/7 and has Klipsch THX speakers connected to it. Why on earth would I want an Airport Express in that room, especially when it's normally the computer that is spooling out the iTunes information to begin with?
It makes me grin a little when I see posts like in this thread posted by people who obviously have no shortage of money (with their multiple mac systems) and yet dont want to hand over a little money for something thats been out for 5 years and makes the audio elements of airplay completely redundant.
Sonos. Easier, way better quality, more options, fully upgradeable, completely unrestrictive. And it just works.
For videophiles get a popcorn hour, 1080p streaming goodness which plays formats Apple TV can only dream of.
To host the content (if you dont want to buy an internal hard drive for Popcorn Hour) a simple NAS.
- Sonos is not "way better quality" (AppleTV2 output is DIGITAL and so the "quality" depends entirely on the stereo you connect it to. So sorry but you have no point there.
- It may not be better quality, but it IS "way more expensive". AppleTV2 costs $99 (same price as an Airport Express which is "audio only" like Sonos). Sonos OTOH costs $349 for a basic receiver which then still requires to either be connected directly to a router (wired) OR you have to pay ANOTHER $99 for a "bridge" to send a separate wireless signal off your router just for Sonos devices (waste of bandwidth and clutters the band with more wireless signals instead of just using your existing wireless router, which most people already have (how many used a wired only router and if you did you cannot use the Sonos wireless for anything else). So already you are at LEAST $450 in the hole for a single room with Sonos and you have ONLY AUDIO capability.
-But then I would be forgetting you need a SOURCE of music. You tout the use of an NAS, but most NAS devices aren't exactly cheap or anything. For all intensive purposes they are a just a headless computer and most run Linux. AppleTV2 is out of the box a PITA if you don't want to leave a computer on, but you can put XBMC on it which will use any NAS or networked source. You then have the same functionality as Sonos BUT you also have full video capability. You could instead get a cheap Netbook for $250 (cheaper than most NAS devices) and connect a hard drive to that and run iTunes and the full Apple interface if you'd like and still have XBMC available as well. Personally, I just use an old PPC G4 PowerMac as a server and 24/7 Internet terminal. Intel machines can also be set to Wake On Lan, so you can have your machine sleep while AppleTV is not in use. In short, NAS isn't as great as you make it sound (most are also dog slow compared to a real computer) and there are alternative options even with Apple software like a cheap Netbook as a server.
-Now I come to the heart of the matter...VIDEO. You suggest a Popcorn Hour in ADDITION to the already out of this world priced Sonos system. They start at $179 and go up to $299. That brings your total minimum price for a wireless system for a single room to $629 AND you have to switch between two separate devices to listen to audio and/or watch videos. With AppleTV you have all your movies, tv shows, photos, music, music videos, YouTube and Internet Radio (plus the options of XBMC with a quick hack including non-Apple formats) and your TOTAL COST for **one** room wireless using an existing wireless router is $99. $629 versus $99...Hmmmmmm. And then there's the matter of Popcorn Hour's crappy interface versus Apple's polished one. XBMC makes Popcorn Hour look bad as well. Bugs or popcorn? :confused:
So for the price of your ONE room audio and video, I could have SIX rooms using AppleTV2 with both video and audio and still have $29 to spare. With XBMC installed, it can play any format (just like Popcorn Hour). With the Apple interface running, it can sync audio to all rooms or play independently (just like Sonos). And it all can be controlled by an iOS device as well or programmed to accept the signals from any IR remote out there with extra buttons available.
Using ONE device (AppleTV), I have menu access to ALL my media collection without even having to switch the input on the receiver. I can play slide shows to my music collection and watch my entire video library (including VHS/Laserdisc/DVD/Blu-Ray conversions) and rent HD movies at the push of a button (Netflix is available on ATV2 as well).
I see ZERO advantage to Sonos and it costs a LOT more (what restrictions are you referring to with ATV? iTunes handles WAV, AAC, MP3 and Apple Lossless and seamlessly plays DTS music CDs that have been dumped). 3rd party formats like Flac are easily converted or they can be played in XBMC. Popcorn Hour's only advantage (once you figure XBMC into the fold) is that it can output in 1080p (ATV2 downconverts the final output to 720p at the moment, although my Gen1 ATV can play 1080p with XBMC using the Linux OS install and a cheap Crystal card in the one room where it matters here with a 93" screen).
In other words, I need lack nothing here at a fraction of the price and way better integration than your solution.
Yebubbleman
Apr 25, 04:51 PM
Herp derp. Im pretty sure there will be a minor spec bump as well, and exterior design in a laptop is a pretty important feature or a "function and should be taken in consideration just as well (or not even more) than a new "ixy procesor" and a "8650 gt mx" graphics card, which in most cases just serve as a hard on for spec geeks.
why am i even responding you are clearly bitter and are writing purely from that bitterness.
Oh yeah, I'm bitter that we're not still using Titanium for the exterior of the Pro Mac laptop line. Clearly, I must, y'know, feel resentment for some silly reason for all of you people who, for some sillier reason are sick of the Unibody design. Yeah, 'cause I totally have emotions on reserve for inconsequential things like that. Man, get real.
Specs are what truly matter. If the chassis is designed to be sturdier, more rigid, and more durable, and easier to service than these models, that's a great upgrade. If it's only a stark cosmetic change, then that's not at all worth going nuts over, unless you, like many (but certainly not all) Apple customers, are superficial like that. Newer processors and better graphics DO matter as we use our computers for apps, and beyond using a freakin' web browser and running Word a lot of these apps demand the hardware to run them. And if they don't now, they will eventually. That's how computers work? Or are you still repping the Titanium PowerBook G4 yourself?
No I can't just get an Air. Not if I want a quad-core i7 dedicated graphics, an SSD boot drive and a 1TB HD for data. That sounds awfully "Pro" to me.
Aww man, poor you, having to put up with the optical drive at the cost of a 1TB hard drive (that you could easily get eight times the amount of via the Thunderbolt port). Life must suck. The optical drive must really be keeping you from getting lots of work (Macrumors forum trolling) done. Yeah, for you, they should kill it. You're absolutely right. Come on, if you want thinness and no optical, the Air is your machine; if you want Pro features (and granted, not all of them will serve YOU), get a MacBook Pro; but whining that the MacBook Pro has a feature that YOU don't find a use for, but someone else does, is about as selfish and as silly of an activity as they come.
why am i even responding you are clearly bitter and are writing purely from that bitterness.
Oh yeah, I'm bitter that we're not still using Titanium for the exterior of the Pro Mac laptop line. Clearly, I must, y'know, feel resentment for some silly reason for all of you people who, for some sillier reason are sick of the Unibody design. Yeah, 'cause I totally have emotions on reserve for inconsequential things like that. Man, get real.
Specs are what truly matter. If the chassis is designed to be sturdier, more rigid, and more durable, and easier to service than these models, that's a great upgrade. If it's only a stark cosmetic change, then that's not at all worth going nuts over, unless you, like many (but certainly not all) Apple customers, are superficial like that. Newer processors and better graphics DO matter as we use our computers for apps, and beyond using a freakin' web browser and running Word a lot of these apps demand the hardware to run them. And if they don't now, they will eventually. That's how computers work? Or are you still repping the Titanium PowerBook G4 yourself?
No I can't just get an Air. Not if I want a quad-core i7 dedicated graphics, an SSD boot drive and a 1TB HD for data. That sounds awfully "Pro" to me.
Aww man, poor you, having to put up with the optical drive at the cost of a 1TB hard drive (that you could easily get eight times the amount of via the Thunderbolt port). Life must suck. The optical drive must really be keeping you from getting lots of work (Macrumors forum trolling) done. Yeah, for you, they should kill it. You're absolutely right. Come on, if you want thinness and no optical, the Air is your machine; if you want Pro features (and granted, not all of them will serve YOU), get a MacBook Pro; but whining that the MacBook Pro has a feature that YOU don't find a use for, but someone else does, is about as selfish and as silly of an activity as they come.
balamw
Sep 19, 05:24 PM
That's revenue not profit, their profit was $5 billion in 2005 so $50M is about 1% of that, remember that the money from iTunes is practically all profit as their are no real costs for Disney (other than giving Apple a few video files which probably costs $100 000 a year maximum.)
Yes, but from the original Article.
In addition, Iger said the company expects over $50 million in revenue over the first year of the program.
You're right that they probably make better margins on this revenue, but it ain't pure profit.
B
Yes, but from the original Article.
In addition, Iger said the company expects over $50 million in revenue over the first year of the program.
You're right that they probably make better margins on this revenue, but it ain't pure profit.
B
aloshka
Mar 29, 01:09 PM
Looking at the figures right now anyone can easily see that iOS is not the dominating platform. Not even the second most popular (which is Symbian), but does anyone really care ?. Same case with the Macs and Mac OS X.
I would really like to see Microsoft step up the game because in the end, we customers are the ones receiving most benefit.
I had been a loyal Windows user (up to Windows 7) when I switched to Mac last year. My take is that Windows and its creators are not technically inferior to Mac OS and Apple, but their corporate philosophy has never sported the acumen and, guess what, common sense with which Steve Jobs makes the his products so pleasant to use and look at.
I'm with you 100%, I just wish Apple would focus better on development languages, frameworks & environments. XCode4 is wonderful, but objective-c and the apple SDK libraries suck. Microsoft really wins with .NET where things are just logically placed and powerful. Apple SDK, however, you have some libraries that are in C, you have some that are in Objective-C, you have some that use a mixture of both. It feels like they glued crap together last minute, but never cleaned it up. This is actually why a lot of powerful software for the MAC is unavailable outside of already C-compiled programs like photoshop, etc. Take for instance Quicken, no good Mac alternative period. When I decided to develop it myself and make millions (joke), I realized that it would take me twice as long to develop a decent mac application because I had to design around memory management, etc that you simply don't worry about in .NET. Databases, etc, PIA. Yes, I understand it requires developers to think ahead, but it also means decent software for the mac requires teams on top of teams to develop thus software still sucks on the MAC outside of what Apple had their 10-man teams build in over a year (ie iWork, etc)
I would really like to see Microsoft step up the game because in the end, we customers are the ones receiving most benefit.
I had been a loyal Windows user (up to Windows 7) when I switched to Mac last year. My take is that Windows and its creators are not technically inferior to Mac OS and Apple, but their corporate philosophy has never sported the acumen and, guess what, common sense with which Steve Jobs makes the his products so pleasant to use and look at.
I'm with you 100%, I just wish Apple would focus better on development languages, frameworks & environments. XCode4 is wonderful, but objective-c and the apple SDK libraries suck. Microsoft really wins with .NET where things are just logically placed and powerful. Apple SDK, however, you have some libraries that are in C, you have some that are in Objective-C, you have some that use a mixture of both. It feels like they glued crap together last minute, but never cleaned it up. This is actually why a lot of powerful software for the MAC is unavailable outside of already C-compiled programs like photoshop, etc. Take for instance Quicken, no good Mac alternative period. When I decided to develop it myself and make millions (joke), I realized that it would take me twice as long to develop a decent mac application because I had to design around memory management, etc that you simply don't worry about in .NET. Databases, etc, PIA. Yes, I understand it requires developers to think ahead, but it also means decent software for the mac requires teams on top of teams to develop thus software still sucks on the MAC outside of what Apple had their 10-man teams build in over a year (ie iWork, etc)
MacFan782040
Sep 5, 02:58 PM
iTunes Movie Store should be rental only.
If you really love a movie, go out and buy it. This way, you have the physical copy to carry around with you where ever you want to watch it (living room, friend's house, car, ect)
I think the notion that Apple is trying to get is like this senerio:
Somebody who is bored on a Friday night with nothing better to do, who does not feel like driving out to the local video rental store. Howabout being able to download it on your computer for $4.99 for a 5 day rental.
I would probably pay that. Apple figures if you want decent quality, hook your Mac Mini up to your HDTV and play it off there. If not, just watch it on your Mac.
If you copy it to an iPod, the movie will expire in 5 days as well. Or, it will expire next time you connect your iPod to iTunes. (people HAVE to do that!)
We'll probably see Front Row 2.0 as well.
Just some thoughts....
If you really love a movie, go out and buy it. This way, you have the physical copy to carry around with you where ever you want to watch it (living room, friend's house, car, ect)
I think the notion that Apple is trying to get is like this senerio:
Somebody who is bored on a Friday night with nothing better to do, who does not feel like driving out to the local video rental store. Howabout being able to download it on your computer for $4.99 for a 5 day rental.
I would probably pay that. Apple figures if you want decent quality, hook your Mac Mini up to your HDTV and play it off there. If not, just watch it on your Mac.
If you copy it to an iPod, the movie will expire in 5 days as well. Or, it will expire next time you connect your iPod to iTunes. (people HAVE to do that!)
We'll probably see Front Row 2.0 as well.
Just some thoughts....
kdarling
Apr 20, 09:25 AM
My favorite was a few years ago when Apple tried to stop New York (aka the Big Apple) from using this logo for their "Green New York" environmental project.
Apple claimed it would "seriously injure the reputation which it has established for its goods and services."
.
Apple claimed it would "seriously injure the reputation which it has established for its goods and services."
.
kurosov
Mar 30, 12:02 PM
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/app
278891
I think this is enough to show that Microsoft is unequivocally correct. The term has been in use for much longer than Apple's launching of the store and it has been ubiquitous in the computer industry for a long time.
The way to distinguish (if it needs to be done) between app stores is by saying the name of the app store before hand, ie the Apple App Store, the Amazon App Store, or the Microsoft App Store.
This argument has nothing to do with the term "app" but with the legally given trademark "app store".
The term app store was never used before the release and subsequent trademark approval of apples app store so anybody arguing that the term is generic are just being silly. The whole concept of a trademark is to protect a companies name, slogan etc from becoming a generic term and to prevent that they have to defend against it.
278891
I think this is enough to show that Microsoft is unequivocally correct. The term has been in use for much longer than Apple's launching of the store and it has been ubiquitous in the computer industry for a long time.
The way to distinguish (if it needs to be done) between app stores is by saying the name of the app store before hand, ie the Apple App Store, the Amazon App Store, or the Microsoft App Store.
This argument has nothing to do with the term "app" but with the legally given trademark "app store".
The term app store was never used before the release and subsequent trademark approval of apples app store so anybody arguing that the term is generic are just being silly. The whole concept of a trademark is to protect a companies name, slogan etc from becoming a generic term and to prevent that they have to defend against it.
milo
Sep 12, 02:32 PM
Yeah, I wanted to see the phone that was rumored (phone, iPod, remote control, etc.).
A phone was NEVER rumored for today from any reliable source. It was just delusional apple fanboys hoping for it.
I hate when a smarta$$ lays in with this post. We'll whine if we want to. YEAH!
That was exactly his point. Thanks for proving it.
A phone was NEVER rumored for today from any reliable source. It was just delusional apple fanboys hoping for it.
I hate when a smarta$$ lays in with this post. We'll whine if we want to. YEAH!
That was exactly his point. Thanks for proving it.
Sensamic
Mar 24, 03:29 PM
I have a imac late 2009 and Im very very happy with it. I dont need a bigger screen, I dont need more resolution, I dont need more disk space, I dont need thunderbolt or USB 3, I dont need Lion, I dont need more RAM, I dont need better graphics...
I dont plan on buying a new imac until they come with USB 3 and thunderbolt and SSD inside and, who knows, bluray...
Right now theres just absolutely no need to change. Only option I want is the next macbook air with core i3, since I dont have a laptop and I need one. Ill have to wait until November or so. It wouldnt be smart to buy it now since the next update sure with have core i3 and thunderbolt and 4GB RAM.
I dont plan on buying a new imac until they come with USB 3 and thunderbolt and SSD inside and, who knows, bluray...
Right now theres just absolutely no need to change. Only option I want is the next macbook air with core i3, since I dont have a laptop and I need one. Ill have to wait until November or so. It wouldnt be smart to buy it now since the next update sure with have core i3 and thunderbolt and 4GB RAM.
quagmire
Apr 25, 10:12 AM
I am still in the process of reading through this thread.
Anyway, here is my two cents.
Going a certain speed above the limit is not unsafe in itself. What makes 90 MPH+ unsafe is no one else is going 90 MPH most likely. The difference in speed between you and the rest of traffic is the unsafe situation. If everyone was going 90 MPH as you were, then going 25 MPH over the limit is irrelevant as there isn't an unsafe situation given that everyone is going 90 MPH, paying attention to the road, etc.
Now don't get me wrong, I hate people who cruise in the left lane as well. I don't care what the speed limit is, if traffic is moving 80 MPH in a 70 MPH zone in the left lane, then you go 80 MPH or stay out of the left lane. If you go to pass someone and change into the left lane, then speed up to the speed of traffic or change lanes when there isn't going to be someone behind you so you don't cut the person off that was in the left lane already going faster than you are. I also don't care if you want to be a cop-wannabe and slow faster traffic down to the speed limit which in that case your cop-wannabe butt is causing an unsafe situation, not everyone going 10 above the limit. Just change lanes and let them pass. It is safer for everyone if you do that. And please do pay attention to your surroundings and don't create a rolling roadblock. Is it that hard to keep situational awareness?
Dmac, you were unsafe. I don't care if you had a parent in the car telling you to do what you did. Your parent is an unsafe driver as well. You don't tailgate people, don't honk, etc. Flash to pass is a concept that no American knows about because our drivers ed courses are pathetic. But, it still doesn't excuse what you did and I hate drivers like you. Please slow down.
I am a big proponent of making drivers ed as tough as it is to get your private pilots license.
Anyway, here is my two cents.
Going a certain speed above the limit is not unsafe in itself. What makes 90 MPH+ unsafe is no one else is going 90 MPH most likely. The difference in speed between you and the rest of traffic is the unsafe situation. If everyone was going 90 MPH as you were, then going 25 MPH over the limit is irrelevant as there isn't an unsafe situation given that everyone is going 90 MPH, paying attention to the road, etc.
Now don't get me wrong, I hate people who cruise in the left lane as well. I don't care what the speed limit is, if traffic is moving 80 MPH in a 70 MPH zone in the left lane, then you go 80 MPH or stay out of the left lane. If you go to pass someone and change into the left lane, then speed up to the speed of traffic or change lanes when there isn't going to be someone behind you so you don't cut the person off that was in the left lane already going faster than you are. I also don't care if you want to be a cop-wannabe and slow faster traffic down to the speed limit which in that case your cop-wannabe butt is causing an unsafe situation, not everyone going 10 above the limit. Just change lanes and let them pass. It is safer for everyone if you do that. And please do pay attention to your surroundings and don't create a rolling roadblock. Is it that hard to keep situational awareness?
Dmac, you were unsafe. I don't care if you had a parent in the car telling you to do what you did. Your parent is an unsafe driver as well. You don't tailgate people, don't honk, etc. Flash to pass is a concept that no American knows about because our drivers ed courses are pathetic. But, it still doesn't excuse what you did and I hate drivers like you. Please slow down.
I am a big proponent of making drivers ed as tough as it is to get your private pilots license.
Coleman2010
Apr 4, 12:42 PM
Very sad. Someone lost their life over something so trivial. And sad that the guard has to live with knowing he took a life. :(
EspressoLove
Apr 22, 07:14 PM
Thunderbolt is not a supplement to DisplayPort. It is a downgrade to DisplayPort.
have you been cubed recently, sir ?
have you been cubed recently, sir ?
tekmoe
Aug 29, 06:27 AM
what time were the macbooks released earlier this year?
iJohnHenry
Apr 25, 10:33 AM
So it seems that the OP may be a liar or have memory recall issues, considering the inconsistences found in his prior posts. Is there a MR rule for that?
Perhaps we need a Fiction forum, in order that the children may play there?
Perhaps we need a Fiction forum, in order that the children may play there?
vvebsta
Mar 23, 05:20 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
Drunk people aren't gonna be coherent enough to check their phones for check points. Let's the other sane people avoid the added traffic.
Drunk people aren't gonna be coherent enough to check their phones for check points. Let's the other sane people avoid the added traffic.
Eidorian
Jul 14, 09:59 AM
I really think the iMac should use Conroe now. I think the reason they used the Yonah chip is that they had no desktop "Core" architecture chips available. While using Merom is the easy thing to do, I hope they don't do it. The iMac is supposedly a desktop, it should use a desktop chip.Did anyone pay attention to the power and thermal requirements of Conroe?
milo
Aug 28, 01:42 PM
Apple isn't trying to remain competitive with anyone. :rolleyes:
Never have, never will.
They march to the beat of their own drum.
They're competitive with the Mac Pro. Very competitive.
I'd like to see apple release merom and conroe machines ASAP, but I'm not going to rake them over the coals for lagging the announcements from PC makers by a few days (probably in the next two or three tuesdays).
Are all the pc merom laptops shipping immediately?
I think that Apple shouldn't enter that race.. their products are distinguished by other features than mere processing power (as soon as this changes: goodbye Apple), and coming out with new models every few months will probably just piss off Apple customers (so far, it's pretty easy to know ALL current laptop models that Apple offers - can you say that for Dell, too?).
Updating wouldn't mean new models, just bumps to what they're shipping now. And that's a GOOD thing, apple customers should be happy about having the latest and greatest available, not pissed off. Apple needs to consistently keep up with the latest cpus.
Never have, never will.
They march to the beat of their own drum.
They're competitive with the Mac Pro. Very competitive.
I'd like to see apple release merom and conroe machines ASAP, but I'm not going to rake them over the coals for lagging the announcements from PC makers by a few days (probably in the next two or three tuesdays).
Are all the pc merom laptops shipping immediately?
I think that Apple shouldn't enter that race.. their products are distinguished by other features than mere processing power (as soon as this changes: goodbye Apple), and coming out with new models every few months will probably just piss off Apple customers (so far, it's pretty easy to know ALL current laptop models that Apple offers - can you say that for Dell, too?).
Updating wouldn't mean new models, just bumps to what they're shipping now. And that's a GOOD thing, apple customers should be happy about having the latest and greatest available, not pissed off. Apple needs to consistently keep up with the latest cpus.
iMeowbot
Sep 14, 09:47 PM
I see your points, but it would seem more natural to write on the screen (hand eye coordination) or to edit a photo, enlarge it, get rid of red eye, etc. If there was no adversed interaction with the stylus. Moving my hand while watching the cursor move far from the hand gets some getting used to. Using a stylus right on the screen would (in my mind) seem more natural. But you are the Pro, so I will defer to you.
There's no need to defer, I'm sure this will all boil down to personal preferences :) All I know is that I was seriously annoyed by the Palm and Pocket PC interfaces, and a Cintiq I borrowed for a while was the same way. For now, a regular tablet seems to do the trick.
I may feel differently about the interface some day when software is a little better about addressing lag (through better use of threading and so on). Faster hardware helps, but programs still like to wander off and do other things that leave the pointer ahead of the display. It's a little less unnerving if you can't quite see it happening :)
There's no need to defer, I'm sure this will all boil down to personal preferences :) All I know is that I was seriously annoyed by the Palm and Pocket PC interfaces, and a Cintiq I borrowed for a while was the same way. For now, a regular tablet seems to do the trick.
I may feel differently about the interface some day when software is a little better about addressing lag (through better use of threading and so on). Faster hardware helps, but programs still like to wander off and do other things that leave the pointer ahead of the display. It's a little less unnerving if you can't quite see it happening :)
Macnoviz
Oct 12, 01:18 PM
Orpah... I like it :D Kinda like Oompah (ya know, Oompahloompah, as in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, golden ticket? No? Ah, never mind......)
Golden ticket, which brings us to the (fake) keynote invitations, which automatically leads to C2D MBP's tomorrow! :eek: My god! They ARE everywhere
Golden ticket, which brings us to the (fake) keynote invitations, which automatically leads to C2D MBP's tomorrow! :eek: My god! They ARE everywhere
twoodcc
Sep 5, 01:45 PM
wow. well this confirms it then. man this is gonna be a long week of waiting
cozmot
Mar 17, 07:31 AM
It this utter ignorance and false sense of security in the Mac user base that I would use to my advantage if I were a cyber-criminal. While I completely appreciate the lack of malware OSX has enjoyed thus far, I've seen more than enough evidence over the past few years to tell me that it's far from safe. The latest Safari/Webkit hacking contest result alone should be enough to cause any reasonable person to take notice. I think a few people will be changing their tunes the day the crap finally hits the fan.
For some reason, a certain famous quote from The Hitchhiker's Guide to The Galaxy about the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation comes to mind regarding certain people who will be the first against the wall when the revolution comes.... ;)
So you're not a cyber-criminal, but there are many out there, yet they haven't used this "sense of security in the Mac user base" to their advantage, have they? The latest hacking contest (I assume you're referring to Pwn2Own 2011) resulted in Safari and IE 8 being hacked. A browser is not an OS. Note that Goggle Chrome came out with flying colors, yet one of its platforms - Windows - has been hacked many times.
Simply put, there are underlying vulnerabilities to Windows that do not exist with OS X. That said, the real dangers to your computer are how you use it. Don't have a password on your wireless router? Use easy-to-guess passwords on your online accounts? Never change your passwords? Use the same password on all your accounts? Visit porn sites a lot and download that stuff? Download movies illegally? Click on links in emails from people you don't know? Or, from those you do, don't look at the source to see if it's a valid link? Respond to emails telling you that your [fill in the blank] account has been temporarily disabled, and that you need to "verify" your information to reactivate it? If so to any of the above, you're asking for trouble, even if you do have AV software "protecting" you.
There are many security experts who do not use AV software. Steve Gibson http://www.grc.com is one of them. Why? They practice safe computing and use common sense. No amount of AV or Internet security software is going to protect people who practice unsafe computing.
We've been hearing about the crap hitting the fan for years, and will for years to come. Yawn.
For some reason, a certain famous quote from The Hitchhiker's Guide to The Galaxy about the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation comes to mind regarding certain people who will be the first against the wall when the revolution comes.... ;)
So you're not a cyber-criminal, but there are many out there, yet they haven't used this "sense of security in the Mac user base" to their advantage, have they? The latest hacking contest (I assume you're referring to Pwn2Own 2011) resulted in Safari and IE 8 being hacked. A browser is not an OS. Note that Goggle Chrome came out with flying colors, yet one of its platforms - Windows - has been hacked many times.
Simply put, there are underlying vulnerabilities to Windows that do not exist with OS X. That said, the real dangers to your computer are how you use it. Don't have a password on your wireless router? Use easy-to-guess passwords on your online accounts? Never change your passwords? Use the same password on all your accounts? Visit porn sites a lot and download that stuff? Download movies illegally? Click on links in emails from people you don't know? Or, from those you do, don't look at the source to see if it's a valid link? Respond to emails telling you that your [fill in the blank] account has been temporarily disabled, and that you need to "verify" your information to reactivate it? If so to any of the above, you're asking for trouble, even if you do have AV software "protecting" you.
There are many security experts who do not use AV software. Steve Gibson http://www.grc.com is one of them. Why? They practice safe computing and use common sense. No amount of AV or Internet security software is going to protect people who practice unsafe computing.
We've been hearing about the crap hitting the fan for years, and will for years to come. Yawn.
HecubusPro
Aug 28, 06:11 PM
To be fair to direzz, he said that every mac LAPTOP he bought has sucked, not every computer.
To be fair to me, that's what I meant, actually. :)
To be fair to me, that's what I meant, actually. :)
No comments:
Post a Comment