mox358
Sep 13, 09:47 PM
I am with you on this. I don't see the real compelling reason to have a plain old iPod that makes phone calls and sucks all my battery so I can't play music, or vice versa. It needs to be a compelling smart phone, that will be the inovative part, not the hardware design. We all know it will look like a nano.
But why should it? This isn't Motorola... this is Apple. They are supposed to be the masters of industrial design and software integration. No doubt the phone will have an awesome user interface, but I expect more from Apple than sticking an antenna and GSM chip inside a nano, putting a keypad underneath it, and calling it a day. This couldn't have taken very long to dream up... it seems like the most obvious and un-Apple idea of them all.
If this is the fabled iPhone then Apple is losing its touch... the design was already done when they introduced the nano.
I hope Apple wants this to be a phone with iPod functionality opposed to a nano with phone functionallity. The difference is huge. What is the primary function of this device? To play music or use as a phone? Thus far it looks like a nano with a software update and a GSM chip sadly.
But why should it? This isn't Motorola... this is Apple. They are supposed to be the masters of industrial design and software integration. No doubt the phone will have an awesome user interface, but I expect more from Apple than sticking an antenna and GSM chip inside a nano, putting a keypad underneath it, and calling it a day. This couldn't have taken very long to dream up... it seems like the most obvious and un-Apple idea of them all.
If this is the fabled iPhone then Apple is losing its touch... the design was already done when they introduced the nano.
I hope Apple wants this to be a phone with iPod functionality opposed to a nano with phone functionallity. The difference is huge. What is the primary function of this device? To play music or use as a phone? Thus far it looks like a nano with a software update and a GSM chip sadly.
Evangelion
Sep 5, 09:03 AM
If we see new macs when the store is up. then it will be clear that the upcoming event will be only iPod related. here's to mac updates this morning!:D
If there are Mac updates coming, why is only US store down?
If there are Mac updates coming, why is only US store down?
dondark
Sep 13, 11:26 PM
I hope the iPhone can be use iChat and we can video chat with and Mac at any time.
wywern209
Apr 25, 06:44 PM
ehh, i don't think much will change from the unibody we have this yr. there might be some infusion of liquid metal for sturdiness but besides that, i don't think much will change. on the other hand, USB3 will be standard next yr and maybe some stuff will be out to take advantage of lightpeak. and i seriously doubt that we will have super highres stuff next year for the laptops. I anticipate higher res ACDs but nothing more.
dmelgar
Mar 22, 01:56 PM
What about the Mini?
berkleeboy210
Sep 4, 07:31 PM
With all these rumors around, I feel like this event is Tomorrow, and not next week, but still we don't even have a confirmed date yet.
Now don't get me wrong, I'd love to see everything happen in one event that AppleInsider recently predicted.
But I just there are too many rumors floating around at this point.
Anyone agree w/ me on this one?
Now don't get me wrong, I'd love to see everything happen in one event that AppleInsider recently predicted.
But I just there are too many rumors floating around at this point.
Anyone agree w/ me on this one?
W1MRK
Apr 16, 06:01 PM
Glad to see they are supporting both
holycat
Sep 14, 08:17 AM
i am a mac-apple newbie~~~
aperture 2!!!waiting for me...i m a photography lover...
i have go through (youtube) a few previous keynote that brought by Steve...
i have addicted with aPPLe
cant wait my new 24' iMac n my new iPod..shuffle
aperture 2!!!waiting for me...i m a photography lover...
i have go through (youtube) a few previous keynote that brought by Steve...
i have addicted with aPPLe
cant wait my new 24' iMac n my new iPod..shuffle
OdduWon
Sep 7, 08:59 PM
:D it seems like the reason this apple is broadcasting to the event is so that they can show how their new ichat streaming dot mac movie/video chat ipod pack works;) .
jonhaxor
Mar 30, 12:15 PM
Does the general public think of a particular store when someone says Burger Store? I'm pretty sure people do not say "hey lets go to the Burger Store." The term Burger Store has no mindshare from what I know with the general public. No one uses it as a brand name.
you mean macdonalds?
you mean macdonalds?
zap2
Apr 10, 09:11 PM
you guys do realize gas is like 9 dollars a gallon in europe right?
Well with a minimum wage of 19 bucks I imagine it is not as much of any issue as it is in America. Plus European countries aren't nearly the size of the United States, so driving is done less.(also likely one of the reasons for less drinking and driving accidents and deaths...along with being introduced to drinking at a younger age in most countries there)
Well with a minimum wage of 19 bucks I imagine it is not as much of any issue as it is in America. Plus European countries aren't nearly the size of the United States, so driving is done less.(also likely one of the reasons for less drinking and driving accidents and deaths...along with being introduced to drinking at a younger age in most countries there)
Lesser Evets
Apr 22, 05:07 AM
How does streaming music to my iPhone help me, when O2 cap my Internet usage, and then charge when you use more.
This is one of the many scenarios that make me wonder why "cloud based" services are so pursued. Lack of signal, in any way, means your device is useless.
Coupled with the probability that within a decade there will be cheap memory to hold everything the vast majority of users wants/possesses, this cloud-based stuff seems more like a control issue than a service provided.
This is one of the many scenarios that make me wonder why "cloud based" services are so pursued. Lack of signal, in any way, means your device is useless.
Coupled with the probability that within a decade there will be cheap memory to hold everything the vast majority of users wants/possesses, this cloud-based stuff seems more like a control issue than a service provided.
ripfrankwhite
Sep 5, 12:54 PM
If the stock goes up $10 he'll have himself a free ipod. not all that bad.
$10 !!??? :eek: It's already at $70. It won't go up much more. But good luck, and I hope it does.
$10 !!??? :eek: It's already at $70. It won't go up much more. But good luck, and I hope it does.
cube
Apr 14, 01:05 PM
The mini-display port connector is part of the DisplayPort 1.2 standard and is seemingly seeing wide adoption from PC laptop and display makers.
The DisplayPort 1.2 specification requires support for DisplayPort 1.1a on mini-display ports, but I don't see anything that precludes it supporting 1.2 signalling.
Can you point to an article that details how Thunderbolt is a problem for this? The Thunderbolt controller, when connected to a DisplayPort 1.2 (only) display, could fall back to DisplayPort mode like it does now, could it not?
Thunderbolt is currently limited to 10Gbps per channel, which is much less of what DisplayPort 1.2 requires.
The DisplayPort 1.2 specification requires support for DisplayPort 1.1a on mini-display ports, but I don't see anything that precludes it supporting 1.2 signalling.
Can you point to an article that details how Thunderbolt is a problem for this? The Thunderbolt controller, when connected to a DisplayPort 1.2 (only) display, could fall back to DisplayPort mode like it does now, could it not?
Thunderbolt is currently limited to 10Gbps per channel, which is much less of what DisplayPort 1.2 requires.
smack416
Oct 27, 06:55 PM
I was thinking of buying an iPod Shuffle for my niece for Xmas but she'll be getting something else instead.
I'm sure your niece will be proud of you too, once she can understand why you did what you did.
What, exactly, is there to be proud of? Taking an uninformed or misguided stand is not something to trumpet.
As an environmentalist I am extremely pissed at Greenpeace and all the other fear mongerers out there that spread lies and hyperbole in order to "force" people to believe in their righteous campaigns.
As someone working in the marketing industry it pains me to see such useless posturing which, in the end, may win over a few fanatics but, most importantly, alienates the general public.
Actually making an impact on the environment would not be terribly difficult if groups like Greenpeace weren't putting off the average person from having a proper discussion on the issues that could actually make a difference. I'm talking about energy conservation over, say, inconsequential amounts of BFRs.
I'm sure your niece will be proud of you too, once she can understand why you did what you did.
What, exactly, is there to be proud of? Taking an uninformed or misguided stand is not something to trumpet.
As an environmentalist I am extremely pissed at Greenpeace and all the other fear mongerers out there that spread lies and hyperbole in order to "force" people to believe in their righteous campaigns.
As someone working in the marketing industry it pains me to see such useless posturing which, in the end, may win over a few fanatics but, most importantly, alienates the general public.
Actually making an impact on the environment would not be terribly difficult if groups like Greenpeace weren't putting off the average person from having a proper discussion on the issues that could actually make a difference. I'm talking about energy conservation over, say, inconsequential amounts of BFRs.
peharri
Sep 18, 09:00 AM
You are right. I make a call. i expect to pay for it. i dont expect the person im calling to get billed for the damn call.
The other way of looking at it is that the mobile user has made a technology choice. They shouldn't expect other people to pay for their technology choice. A system where each person pays to connect to the network and decides how they want to pay for that is inherently fairer, even if it makes it harder for people to choose to subsidize the systems of others.
(Remember too that in the majority of cases, most US users have a fixed bill because of the high number of bundled minutes coupled with the huge unmetered portions of their bills. It's not the case that we get billed for the incoming call in the majority of cases. If it's made at peak time, from a different network, then yeah, we'll use bundled minutes, but most of us end up with large amounts of bundled minutes free at the end of the month despite this. And you never have to accept an incoming call.)
and. as for pricing. yes, vodafone have a 1c/sec flat rate on calls. but. i pay $79/month and at the end of the my account has a automatic refund (of sorts) applied, so anything up to $500 in calls/txt/etc is included in the $79.
That doesn't sound like a bad plan, that's unusually good outside of the US from what I've researched, though most of my research has been limited to the UK.
i DO use my mobile for most calls. i use my landline maybe once a week, because it has a better speakerphone if im using it for a long time.
If I were back in Britain, I couldn't substitute a cellphone for a landline because of the incoming calls issue. It's simply not fair to my family or friends to make them pay through the nose to contact me. I might use one for the bulk of my outgoing calls, but for incoming calls, it wouldn't be right.
An ideal compromise, in my view, would be for the operators to provide two numbers on every phone, a caller pays and a mobile party pays (with the latter being treated as ordinary airtime, or unmetered according to a fixed monthly charge), but alas I don't think the operators would ever do something that could potentially undermine their interconnect revenues like that.
Neither solution is perfect. The US seems better at the moment because of the emphasis on unmetered usage. At least unmetered incoming calls are an option here. But the downside is the lack of a practical PAYG system.
The other way of looking at it is that the mobile user has made a technology choice. They shouldn't expect other people to pay for their technology choice. A system where each person pays to connect to the network and decides how they want to pay for that is inherently fairer, even if it makes it harder for people to choose to subsidize the systems of others.
(Remember too that in the majority of cases, most US users have a fixed bill because of the high number of bundled minutes coupled with the huge unmetered portions of their bills. It's not the case that we get billed for the incoming call in the majority of cases. If it's made at peak time, from a different network, then yeah, we'll use bundled minutes, but most of us end up with large amounts of bundled minutes free at the end of the month despite this. And you never have to accept an incoming call.)
and. as for pricing. yes, vodafone have a 1c/sec flat rate on calls. but. i pay $79/month and at the end of the my account has a automatic refund (of sorts) applied, so anything up to $500 in calls/txt/etc is included in the $79.
That doesn't sound like a bad plan, that's unusually good outside of the US from what I've researched, though most of my research has been limited to the UK.
i DO use my mobile for most calls. i use my landline maybe once a week, because it has a better speakerphone if im using it for a long time.
If I were back in Britain, I couldn't substitute a cellphone for a landline because of the incoming calls issue. It's simply not fair to my family or friends to make them pay through the nose to contact me. I might use one for the bulk of my outgoing calls, but for incoming calls, it wouldn't be right.
An ideal compromise, in my view, would be for the operators to provide two numbers on every phone, a caller pays and a mobile party pays (with the latter being treated as ordinary airtime, or unmetered according to a fixed monthly charge), but alas I don't think the operators would ever do something that could potentially undermine their interconnect revenues like that.
Neither solution is perfect. The US seems better at the moment because of the emphasis on unmetered usage. At least unmetered incoming calls are an option here. But the downside is the lack of a practical PAYG system.
MagnusVonMagnum
Mar 23, 04:05 PM
It's quite predictable that when someone fails to prove their baseless arguments in this forum, they resort to the elementary school tactic of name-calling, such as "fanboys". Your "logic" and "scientific evidence" was flawed. Just because others didn't agree with you doesn't make them "fanboys". It just means they found your arguments unfounded.
It's quite predictable that when someone says something you cannot successively argue with that you will post pages and pages of nonsense instead. You haven't said anything that makes sense in this entire thread (e.g. comparing a monogamous relationship with your wife to exposing your computer to hundreds of millions of computers on the Internet. It makes NO sense and yet there is NO POINT to arguing with that kind of illogical crap because you will defend it with yet more NONSENSE until the end of time itself).
Furthermore, I wasn't talking to you. You clearly don't even KNOW the definition of a fanboy (it's not an insult, but a description of an emotional archetype type of poster) and then make false accusations of flaming while simultaneously supporting actual flamers like cwt1nospam (whose arguments you conveniently ignored TWICE just like I said). If you cannot "argue" based on all the evidence but just conveniently ignore anything that does not support your argument while attacking with anything that does and then pretending everyone else doesn't exist you've then proven you are not worth conversing with and thus my lack of replies to you. You will now predictably reply with yet more BS nonsense about how great your arguments are and how stupid everything I say is. Sorry, but I'm done playing your games.
It's quite predictable that when someone says something you cannot successively argue with that you will post pages and pages of nonsense instead. You haven't said anything that makes sense in this entire thread (e.g. comparing a monogamous relationship with your wife to exposing your computer to hundreds of millions of computers on the Internet. It makes NO sense and yet there is NO POINT to arguing with that kind of illogical crap because you will defend it with yet more NONSENSE until the end of time itself).
Furthermore, I wasn't talking to you. You clearly don't even KNOW the definition of a fanboy (it's not an insult, but a description of an emotional archetype type of poster) and then make false accusations of flaming while simultaneously supporting actual flamers like cwt1nospam (whose arguments you conveniently ignored TWICE just like I said). If you cannot "argue" based on all the evidence but just conveniently ignore anything that does not support your argument while attacking with anything that does and then pretending everyone else doesn't exist you've then proven you are not worth conversing with and thus my lack of replies to you. You will now predictably reply with yet more BS nonsense about how great your arguments are and how stupid everything I say is. Sorry, but I'm done playing your games.
Cinch
Sep 5, 12:56 PM
attempts to unify the TV and the computer have been done for the last 15 years or so without success. I give Apple a less then 10% success. Even if they succeed, the definition of success here is greatly compromise to a point of failure.
Cinch
Cinch
Subiklim
Aug 23, 04:53 PM
Well Apple isn't afraid of buying companies. The whole idea for the iPod came not from Apple but from a company they took over.
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.
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.
Anaemik
Apr 19, 06:58 AM
According to the Yahoo news article, Apple was Samsung's second-largest client in 2010 after Sony Corp and was responsible for $142 billion (4%) of Samsung's revenues last year.
So Yahoo would have us believe that Samsung's revenues last year were in the region of $3.5 TRILLION???? LOL
Tell me they were responsible for 4% of a $142B total ($5.7B) and I'd have a much easier time believing it.
edit: Ahh, seems like I was just beaten to it.
So Yahoo would have us believe that Samsung's revenues last year were in the region of $3.5 TRILLION???? LOL
Tell me they were responsible for 4% of a $142B total ($5.7B) and I'd have a much easier time believing it.
edit: Ahh, seems like I was just beaten to it.
charlituna
Apr 11, 09:27 AM
What I don't get is why can't Apple enable any iOS device (iPod Touch, iPhone, iPad) as an Airplay target device? Obviously iOS supports it as Apple TV can be a target for Airplay from iTunes.
They could do it but AirPlay targets are supposed to have good sound and the speakers on those items do not. So it makes sense that they haven't cause the idiot masses would hear that lousy sound and think their whatever was busted.
They could do it but AirPlay targets are supposed to have good sound and the speakers on those items do not. So it makes sense that they haven't cause the idiot masses would hear that lousy sound and think their whatever was busted.
ctdonath
Apr 30, 03:50 PM
I could care less at the moment about external storage.
um, ok. Some of us do care, when there is no way an iMac will hold enough internal storage.
And it's "couldn't". Pet peeve.
um, ok. Some of us do care, when there is no way an iMac will hold enough internal storage.
And it's "couldn't". Pet peeve.
AppleScruff1
Apr 29, 02:23 AM
- Windows Mobile was among the first platforms for smartphones and failed miserably.
- Global personal computer sales are slumping (-3% in Q1 2011) while Macs achieve a growth of 26%. There's clearly a loss of traction for Windows going on, despite all the praises for Windows 7.
Is the global sales growth drop due to Windows? How many percent gain of the overall OS market has Apple gained with the 26% increase in Mac sales?
- Global personal computer sales are slumping (-3% in Q1 2011) while Macs achieve a growth of 26%. There's clearly a loss of traction for Windows going on, despite all the praises for Windows 7.
Is the global sales growth drop due to Windows? How many percent gain of the overall OS market has Apple gained with the 26% increase in Mac sales?
rmhop81
Apr 22, 12:30 PM
Its also not great for many many many other people. You still base your ideas and arguments on the flawed notion that people have unlimited data and could still get it. I will also state again, I personally believe this will be some kind of add-on locker and not replacing local storage. I believe replacing local storage at this point would be a major mistake on Apple's part because it would negatively affect so many people...granted, not all.
i'm not ignoring any facts. u are being too technical. i have unlimited data but i use less than 2gb. my point is if u are places and it has free wifi, CONNECT to it...which is what i do at work and at home. streaming does not use a lot of data like you think.
look at the MBA. obviously it's not a computer for you. Doesn't mean it's not a great option for someone else. Storage is minimal and doesn't have a cd drive at all. This is all my wife and i use for a computer. It works great for us.
do you see now where the future is going with minimal hard drive space and no cd drive???
i'm not ignoring any facts. u are being too technical. i have unlimited data but i use less than 2gb. my point is if u are places and it has free wifi, CONNECT to it...which is what i do at work and at home. streaming does not use a lot of data like you think.
look at the MBA. obviously it's not a computer for you. Doesn't mean it's not a great option for someone else. Storage is minimal and doesn't have a cd drive at all. This is all my wife and i use for a computer. It works great for us.
do you see now where the future is going with minimal hard drive space and no cd drive???
No comments:
Post a Comment