Daveoc64
May 4, 02:57 PM
Obviously Lion will not follow App Store conventions seeing as it isn't an app.
Why put it in the App Store if it isn't an App?
Why put it in the App Store if it isn't an App?
inlovewithi
Apr 26, 02:08 PM
It was only a matter of time.
3N16MA
Mar 28, 12:20 PM
I don't get how people can view the iPhone design as dated (assuming externals here). I've been playing around with several Android phones lately, and they are all horrible cheap, plastic toys in comparison. I was surprised to find that even Android, the OS, is still slow, jerky and unpolished versus the good old iOS.
The only devices that can even compete on sheer quality and solid design are the Nokia n8s and e7s. In particular the n8. Just a pity about the software there.
By all means update the iPhone �*development is good. But I don't see any need to forcefully change the design of it. It's actually pretty damn good.
I also think the iPhone 4 design is still fresh after two years of the same look with the 3G/3Gs. Increasing the screen to 4" would not hurt.
The only devices that can even compete on sheer quality and solid design are the Nokia n8s and e7s. In particular the n8. Just a pity about the software there.
By all means update the iPhone �*development is good. But I don't see any need to forcefully change the design of it. It's actually pretty damn good.
I also think the iPhone 4 design is still fresh after two years of the same look with the 3G/3Gs. Increasing the screen to 4" would not hurt.
MattyMac
Jul 29, 09:45 PM
Pleasssssssssse...I've been waiting for this!
alphaod
Apr 26, 02:41 PM
I zillion Android devices and only threee current iOS devices. Not surprising.
And does this chart account for folks that have a phone on each platform? :p
And does this chart account for folks that have a phone on each platform? :p
iVeBeenDrinkin'
Apr 10, 02:51 AM
It must be on par with your math skills then. Horrible.
I detect some sarcasm here, but I'm not sure, you didn't tell us if you were trying to be or not.
I detect some sarcasm here, but I'm not sure, you didn't tell us if you were trying to be or not.
gkarris
May 4, 03:03 PM
But will be greeted with outrage here anyway, just you watch.
So I guess we'll all just send you our AT&T Internet Bills when we go over their newly implemented data usage caps? :eek:
:rolleyes:
So I guess we'll all just send you our AT&T Internet Bills when we go over their newly implemented data usage caps? :eek:
:rolleyes:
-hh
Sep 11, 09:16 AM
Apple has over 150 stores in US(or is it 250?). So is it possible if someone wants to Buy or rent a movie he just goes to any of these stores(which will have Optic fibre connectivity with the online store) and download the desired movie on his iPod/Laptop/mini taking no more than 10 minutes. Now this might not sound that great but it should definitely up the sales of iFlicks by atleast 10-15% IMO. All these stores are located in prime locations in big cities. There is a huge number of footfalls in and around these stores...It`s just a thought and it might not really be possible...
One of the more interesting comments I've seen here.
If you think about the success of iTunes, much of it has been in the "long tail" of obscure music that gets a new chance to be sold, rather than just the Top 10 (or 20) mainstream hits that you would normally find in your local record store (Tower Records, etc).
The same also holds true with NetFlix: because the customer effectively "mail orders" his movie from a centralized distributor, he has more choices than what he finds in the local Blockbuster, since their distribution model suffers from shelf space being finite inside a brick-n-mortar store.
So where is this going?
Cross the concept of using the brick-&-mortar's storefront (Apple's) the the essentially "BTO" feature for buying DVD's of Netflix.
You order your movie online, then go pick it up at your local Apple store where they've freshly downloaded (across their GB connection), burned it to DVD (with copy protections) and stuck in a jewelbox for you.
Managing your consumers to prevent friday afternoon rushes can be built into the price structure: all movies are, say, $14.99, but there's a $5 discount for 12 hour notice and an extra 'rush' $5 handling fee if you order it in-store as a 'while you wait'.
What's in it for Apple? Besides the sale of movies themselves, its one way to increase foot traffic in your stores, for anytime a consumer is in the store, there might be an add-on sale or two.
In theory, Apple could make this a rental service model as well if they wanted to, but I consider that to be fairly unlikely. Similarly, a simliar idea could be done with the localized publishing (at the Apple Store) of iPhoto books ... what all of these ideas have in common is to reduce the delay in delayed gratification.
-hh
One of the more interesting comments I've seen here.
If you think about the success of iTunes, much of it has been in the "long tail" of obscure music that gets a new chance to be sold, rather than just the Top 10 (or 20) mainstream hits that you would normally find in your local record store (Tower Records, etc).
The same also holds true with NetFlix: because the customer effectively "mail orders" his movie from a centralized distributor, he has more choices than what he finds in the local Blockbuster, since their distribution model suffers from shelf space being finite inside a brick-n-mortar store.
So where is this going?
Cross the concept of using the brick-&-mortar's storefront (Apple's) the the essentially "BTO" feature for buying DVD's of Netflix.
You order your movie online, then go pick it up at your local Apple store where they've freshly downloaded (across their GB connection), burned it to DVD (with copy protections) and stuck in a jewelbox for you.
Managing your consumers to prevent friday afternoon rushes can be built into the price structure: all movies are, say, $14.99, but there's a $5 discount for 12 hour notice and an extra 'rush' $5 handling fee if you order it in-store as a 'while you wait'.
What's in it for Apple? Besides the sale of movies themselves, its one way to increase foot traffic in your stores, for anytime a consumer is in the store, there might be an add-on sale or two.
In theory, Apple could make this a rental service model as well if they wanted to, but I consider that to be fairly unlikely. Similarly, a simliar idea could be done with the localized publishing (at the Apple Store) of iPhoto books ... what all of these ideas have in common is to reduce the delay in delayed gratification.
-hh
koruki
Apr 7, 05:39 PM
I think the thing to note here is that, yes Apple has the power and money to hold down the main supply of the worlds touchscreen panels but we shouldn't go and believe they are doing it JUST to be anti-competative, they are hardly getting enough for themselves. Its not their fault everyone wants an iPad (blame the competition lol) , so at least the panels are getting used :)
isomorphic
May 6, 12:32 AM
Can always have a system with ARM AND x86 CPUs.
You beat my post by mere moments. ;)
You beat my post by mere moments. ;)
gigidey
Mar 26, 10:12 PM
TechCrunch likely doesn't know jack about dates or new features in iOS 5. Just saying.
They have a terrible track record. I think the fact that they're still going with the iPad 3 release this fall completely invalidates anything they're saying.
They have a terrible track record. I think the fact that they're still going with the iPad 3 release this fall completely invalidates anything they're saying.
wovel
Apr 7, 12:13 PM
Apple is extremely proactive. Which means they have a plan in place. When competition does something good that fits with their plans, then Apple can add it as a line item to their existing plans and assign it to a specific iOS release.
The competition on the other hand is defining their plans and goals completely based on what Apple does or what Apple's critics are saying. They do not have a very long-term vision of where they want to be and are by-and-large reactionary to what Apple is doing.
I will say that Google does indeed have a long-term vision, but not for Android's features. Google's long-term vision is to do anything they can to ensure they sit in between the user and the information on the Internet so they can advertise to them. They see Facebook as a major threat in this regard as well as Apple. Google's long-term plans are being disrupted by these other major players. Android/Honeycomb is a reactionary attempt to correct for some of that.
Good to see some people get it. It is weird how so many people here that think things like the Tab,Xoom, and Playbook will inspire Apple to keep improving. I am not sure how companies that are releasing products that will all be ranked by independent reviewers as similar or inferior to the iPad 1 will inspire Apple to do anything. They can't even inspire consumers to buy them.
The competition on the other hand is defining their plans and goals completely based on what Apple does or what Apple's critics are saying. They do not have a very long-term vision of where they want to be and are by-and-large reactionary to what Apple is doing.
I will say that Google does indeed have a long-term vision, but not for Android's features. Google's long-term vision is to do anything they can to ensure they sit in between the user and the information on the Internet so they can advertise to them. They see Facebook as a major threat in this regard as well as Apple. Google's long-term plans are being disrupted by these other major players. Android/Honeycomb is a reactionary attempt to correct for some of that.
Good to see some people get it. It is weird how so many people here that think things like the Tab,Xoom, and Playbook will inspire Apple to keep improving. I am not sure how companies that are releasing products that will all be ranked by independent reviewers as similar or inferior to the iPad 1 will inspire Apple to do anything. They can't even inspire consumers to buy them.
JeffLebowski41
Apr 5, 04:49 PM
This thread is hilarious. This isn't apple shaking it's fist against jailbreakers, it's about apple wanting to protect it's advertising model that they get profit from. Keep getting mad at "the man" though if it makes you feel better.
jamied95
Mar 28, 10:45 AM
Makes sense - WWDC is a developers conference and the iPhone is a consumer's device.
bloodycape
Apr 18, 03:41 PM
Yes, the interface do looks similar, but one thing most people are forgetting here is that it's not the home screens that look alike it is the Touchwiz app drawer that looks similar to the home screen, not the Touchwiz home screen.
JesterJJZ
Apr 21, 07:33 PM
I need:
8 Internal Bays.
More PCIe Slots.
Thunderbolt.
Keep Dual Optical Bays.
More Ram Slots.
Built in Fibre Channel (This is a stretch)
That should be a MacPro. What you guys want is that magic headless iMac. I want more, not less.
Working in Video I need the most horsepower possible. 32 Cores would be nice.
At home I can live with my iMac, but editing on it is a pain. A MiniMacPro might work there, but it will still cost 2k and people will bitch.
For work I can justify spending $8,000 on a high powered PRO machine.
What he said...
8 Internal Bays.
More PCIe Slots.
Thunderbolt.
Keep Dual Optical Bays.
More Ram Slots.
Built in Fibre Channel (This is a stretch)
That should be a MacPro. What you guys want is that magic headless iMac. I want more, not less.
Working in Video I need the most horsepower possible. 32 Cores would be nice.
At home I can live with my iMac, but editing on it is a pain. A MiniMacPro might work there, but it will still cost 2k and people will bitch.
For work I can justify spending $8,000 on a high powered PRO machine.
What he said...
Small White Car
Apr 5, 01:34 PM
I just don''t like to see Apple flex their power to do things they cannot legally force under the DMCA (per The Library of Congress).
They didn't flex anything. They asked.
What more do you want? They already did it in the nicest way they possibly could have.
They didn't flex anything. They asked.
What more do you want? They already did it in the nicest way they possibly could have.
bloodycape
Nov 22, 10:53 PM
You took the words right out of my mouth.
I remember when Napster and Rio laughed at the iPod and iTunes, and 5 years later.:rolleyes:
The ipod almost just caught up to rio in terms of audio.
I remember when Napster and Rio laughed at the iPod and iTunes, and 5 years later.:rolleyes:
The ipod almost just caught up to rio in terms of audio.
vartanarsen
Mar 28, 10:45 AM
It's the usual geek misconception of what a device needs. They are all about checklist items. And thus they are missing the fact that a major paradigm shift is occurring in this world where the far larger non-tech audience is now buying tech toys. This audience does not know much about specs, and cares even less. All they care about is cost (Apple is right there in phones), how their apps work (just great on the iPhone), choice of apps (no one has more choice than Apple), and what they have read or heard about (Apple is the advertising leader).
So geeks will continue to stamp their feet and pout about checklists that Apple is "failing" at. The rest of the world will keep happily using their amazing iPhones.
Agreed that its not about a checklist. Apple takes time to make sure hardware, software, features, everything, all works together seamlessly in 1 nice neat, durable, elegent piece.
Sometimes, jamming highest specs all into a crappy product is not the answer. What good is an 8 MP camera in a plasticky-phone?
So geeks will continue to stamp their feet and pout about checklists that Apple is "failing" at. The rest of the world will keep happily using their amazing iPhones.
Agreed that its not about a checklist. Apple takes time to make sure hardware, software, features, everything, all works together seamlessly in 1 nice neat, durable, elegent piece.
Sometimes, jamming highest specs all into a crappy product is not the answer. What good is an 8 MP camera in a plasticky-phone?
MikeTheC
Nov 26, 10:31 AM
There are already GNU/Linux based cellphones. And what about the iPhone implies that it would be open in a way that, say, an average Nokia isn't? I appreciate they ported GNU/Linux to the iPod, but for the most part the reason similar things haven't happened on more regular cellphones has been an issue of the amount of work involved, with it being somewhat harder to write a GSM stack from scratch and port a kernel than it is to simply port an off-the-shelf kernel. (And I guess there's the additional issue that there are six zillion cellphones using about one quillion completely incompatible hardware platforms, whereas there are only a handful of MP3 players and only one that's achieved marketshare heaven.)
Oh, sure. But GNU/Linux could slowly introduce a standardized set of cell phone hardware platforms to build from, just like Intel and AMD and ATI (now a part of AMD, of course) and NVidia produce reference platform hardware that then anyone can make a compatible motherboard/daughter card from, what needs to happen is to have one particularly successful and particularly popular cell phone interface, and then (potentially) everyone would be clamoring to sell it to their customers.
Now, the difference between cell phones and computers is in the history. Cell phones achieved popularity and mass market penetration before a unifying hardware platform or OS platform came into being; whereas computers didn't achieve that kind of success until afterward. So really the dynamic and all the sequencing here is different.
Oh, sure. But GNU/Linux could slowly introduce a standardized set of cell phone hardware platforms to build from, just like Intel and AMD and ATI (now a part of AMD, of course) and NVidia produce reference platform hardware that then anyone can make a compatible motherboard/daughter card from, what needs to happen is to have one particularly successful and particularly popular cell phone interface, and then (potentially) everyone would be clamoring to sell it to their customers.
Now, the difference between cell phones and computers is in the history. Cell phones achieved popularity and mass market penetration before a unifying hardware platform or OS platform came into being; whereas computers didn't achieve that kind of success until afterward. So really the dynamic and all the sequencing here is different.
Watabou
Apr 9, 08:32 PM
So your math teacher is telling us that Mac OS X is giving us a wrong answer...You might need to watch waiting for Superman.
Spotlight is giving me 288.
Spotlight is giving me 288.
gonnabuyamacbsh
Apr 18, 04:40 PM
touchwiz I can understand. should've stuck with simple vanilla android.
as for hardware, how else are you supposed to maximize screen space on a rectangle tablet or phone. it's way too simplistic and although they look similar, apple shouldn't really have a case there.
lame
edit: maybe apple feels threatened by the upcoming galaxy s2. looks sexy
http://androidos.in/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/galaxy2_seine.jpg
apple makes great products and they will always sell well. they shouldn't worry
as for hardware, how else are you supposed to maximize screen space on a rectangle tablet or phone. it's way too simplistic and although they look similar, apple shouldn't really have a case there.
lame
edit: maybe apple feels threatened by the upcoming galaxy s2. looks sexy
http://androidos.in/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/galaxy2_seine.jpg
apple makes great products and they will always sell well. they shouldn't worry
gnasher729
Aug 11, 10:49 AM
Merom and Yonah are replacements for Pentium-M. While Conroe is the replacement for the Pentium D.
That is just marketing. In reality, Merom, Conroe and Woodcrest are all based on exactly the same archicture, with Merom optimised for low power consumption and Conroe optimised for clock speed.
That is just marketing. In reality, Merom, Conroe and Woodcrest are all based on exactly the same archicture, with Merom optimised for low power consumption and Conroe optimised for clock speed.
takao
Apr 10, 08:41 AM
i think we can leave it at 'bad style'
IMHO it proves again that mixing on-the-paper-notation (leaving out the multiplication sign) and computer notation ( '/' instead of the paper notation) simply leads to confusing situation and needs to be avoided
yes the answer is mathematical clear but why write it down that way in the first place ?
IMHO it proves again that mixing on-the-paper-notation (leaving out the multiplication sign) and computer notation ( '/' instead of the paper notation) simply leads to confusing situation and needs to be avoided
yes the answer is mathematical clear but why write it down that way in the first place ?
No comments:
Post a Comment