s1nt4x
Apr 27, 03:41 AM
cloud based this and cloud based that, what about the traffic that comes with that? , i pay a lot for mobile internet and i`m not willing to pay a **** load more just so i can use my ipod, why wold i pay my cell phone network every time i want to listen to a song i already pay`d for.
As far as i`m concern cloud based stuff shod be introduced when cell phone network providers are willing to give unlimited traffic plans at a decent cost, until that time it`s pure nonsense.
As far as i`m concern cloud based stuff shod be introduced when cell phone network providers are willing to give unlimited traffic plans at a decent cost, until that time it`s pure nonsense.
appleguy
Aug 18, 07:05 PM
No, that's the opposite of what I was after, that's the bug it has now. Sigh, this is exactly what I predicted, they added a bunch of new features but haven't fixed any of the major usability bugs and flaws it already has. Why does apple show iCal such contempt?
what are you after then?
what are you after then?
Padraig
Jul 12, 07:55 AM
Don't know how true this is, but if correct demonstrates MS determination to take losses to dominate the market. From Engadget,
But it gets better. To attract current iPod users Microsoft is going to let you download for free any songs you've already bought from the iTunes Music Store. They'll actually scan iTunes for purchased tracks and then automatically add those to your account. Microsoft will still have to pay the rights-holders for the songs, but they believe it'll be worth it to acquire converts to their new player.
http://www.engadget.com/page/4/
But it gets better. To attract current iPod users Microsoft is going to let you download for free any songs you've already bought from the iTunes Music Store. They'll actually scan iTunes for purchased tracks and then automatically add those to your account. Microsoft will still have to pay the rights-holders for the songs, but they believe it'll be worth it to acquire converts to their new player.
http://www.engadget.com/page/4/
reflex
Oct 24, 07:54 AM
Wonderful update. I hope the 160GB upgrade isn't too expensive, but 1GB standard and starting at 120GB are more than I expected or even hoped for.
I was also still doubting if I should get a MB or MBP, but that question has been settled today.
I was also still doubting if I should get a MB or MBP, but that question has been settled today.
more...
southernpaws
Apr 23, 11:35 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
You enjoy seeing every issue from the perspective of someone who wants Apple to fail.
Apple cares very deeply about their product, which is why they don't give in to every spec junkie who demands the latest and greatest immediately. The current chips don't give a usable battery life in Apple's eyes. If you want to get a phone that eats batteries that's your business, but Apple doesn't have an interest in developing anything like that.
Nope. I see every issue from the consumer perspective - as I should (being a consumer). Any other perspective would be an abomination (unless for those who hold tons of AAPL shares).
Phrases like "in Apple's eyes" is a good example of what I am talking about. Apple does not use iPhones, consumers do. Consumer eyse are the only eyes that matter. And that is exactly why people are switching to Android. If Apple cares more about what they think is right than what I think is right (for me) it would be stupid for me to care about what Apple thinks or does.
They would still have to use two chips as I understand it: one to support CDMA and then the other to support LTE.
I doubt that but even if that was the case then what? Every other phone manufacturer on the planet can design a phone that has LTE and Apple could not? Because they spend on R&D much less than any other hi-tech company of comparable size?
And there we have it friends! This guy has no clue what he's talking about. There are no hybrid LTE/3G chips available yet, so the multiple chips thing has nothing to do with GSM/CDMA. If Apple wanted to support 3G AND LTE which they would have to do considering how scarce LTE is at the moment, the only way for them to do it is to use two chips. Battery life would drain.
Here's a site for you to consider: Thunderbolt Battery Life (http://www.gottabemobile.com/2011/03/18/htc-thunderbolt-battery-life/)
This is what people are talking about when they say the iPhone's battery life would be horrible. It has nothing to do with a hybrid CDMA/GSM chip, and has everything to do with the lack of a hybrid 3G/LTE chip.
In fact, hybrid CDMA/GSM chips exist, and are already being used by Apple.
You miss the point. I did not investigate the details about the number of chips. Not everyone cares. The point here is that there many people who want LTE and the there is Apple with their "single phone fits all" strategy. Here is a piece of relevant information for you from Information Week:
"In its recently quarterly earnings report, Verizon Wireless noted that more than 500,000 customers signed up for LTE services and/or devices during its most recent quarter. Add that to the 65,000 who signed up in December, and Verizon has about 565,000 people using its next-generation wireless network. At this rate, Verizon may have more than 2 million 4G users by the end of the year.
Of the 500,000 who signed up for 4G services this quarter, more than half (260,000) chose a 4G phone--the HTC Thunderbolt--that went on sale in mid-March. It scored a significant number of customers in its first two weeks of availability. That means between January 1 and March 15, about 240,000 people purchased other 4G devices, such as USB modems."
As you can see 260K people bought HTC Thunderbolt since Verizon started selling them (about a month). This translates to about 3 million phones annually. Clearly the demand is there. Also, you keep forgetting that other phones have swappable batteries.
Unfortunately, you don't see everything from your so called consumer perspective. Millions of people own iPhones, and it's not like they had no choice. Apple does a fine job of listening to the majority of consumers. Just not you
You enjoy seeing every issue from the perspective of someone who wants Apple to fail.
Apple cares very deeply about their product, which is why they don't give in to every spec junkie who demands the latest and greatest immediately. The current chips don't give a usable battery life in Apple's eyes. If you want to get a phone that eats batteries that's your business, but Apple doesn't have an interest in developing anything like that.
Nope. I see every issue from the consumer perspective - as I should (being a consumer). Any other perspective would be an abomination (unless for those who hold tons of AAPL shares).
Phrases like "in Apple's eyes" is a good example of what I am talking about. Apple does not use iPhones, consumers do. Consumer eyse are the only eyes that matter. And that is exactly why people are switching to Android. If Apple cares more about what they think is right than what I think is right (for me) it would be stupid for me to care about what Apple thinks or does.
They would still have to use two chips as I understand it: one to support CDMA and then the other to support LTE.
I doubt that but even if that was the case then what? Every other phone manufacturer on the planet can design a phone that has LTE and Apple could not? Because they spend on R&D much less than any other hi-tech company of comparable size?
And there we have it friends! This guy has no clue what he's talking about. There are no hybrid LTE/3G chips available yet, so the multiple chips thing has nothing to do with GSM/CDMA. If Apple wanted to support 3G AND LTE which they would have to do considering how scarce LTE is at the moment, the only way for them to do it is to use two chips. Battery life would drain.
Here's a site for you to consider: Thunderbolt Battery Life (http://www.gottabemobile.com/2011/03/18/htc-thunderbolt-battery-life/)
This is what people are talking about when they say the iPhone's battery life would be horrible. It has nothing to do with a hybrid CDMA/GSM chip, and has everything to do with the lack of a hybrid 3G/LTE chip.
In fact, hybrid CDMA/GSM chips exist, and are already being used by Apple.
You miss the point. I did not investigate the details about the number of chips. Not everyone cares. The point here is that there many people who want LTE and the there is Apple with their "single phone fits all" strategy. Here is a piece of relevant information for you from Information Week:
"In its recently quarterly earnings report, Verizon Wireless noted that more than 500,000 customers signed up for LTE services and/or devices during its most recent quarter. Add that to the 65,000 who signed up in December, and Verizon has about 565,000 people using its next-generation wireless network. At this rate, Verizon may have more than 2 million 4G users by the end of the year.
Of the 500,000 who signed up for 4G services this quarter, more than half (260,000) chose a 4G phone--the HTC Thunderbolt--that went on sale in mid-March. It scored a significant number of customers in its first two weeks of availability. That means between January 1 and March 15, about 240,000 people purchased other 4G devices, such as USB modems."
As you can see 260K people bought HTC Thunderbolt since Verizon started selling them (about a month). This translates to about 3 million phones annually. Clearly the demand is there. Also, you keep forgetting that other phones have swappable batteries.
Unfortunately, you don't see everything from your so called consumer perspective. Millions of people own iPhones, and it's not like they had no choice. Apple does a fine job of listening to the majority of consumers. Just not you
BenRoethig
Jul 24, 09:49 AM
This statement worries me, yes a increased market share is good, but in the end I want it to be for the entire platform, the hardware and OS X! I run Parrallels for a few ancient windows only games but even then I somehow feel like Im betraying my decision to use OS X, I just hope leopord is a big success and that more and more cool apps are writen to keep people trying OS X and not windows.
Out of interest, why havn't you tried OS X server? Is there a specific reason you went with Windows 2003 server?
I think the low marketshare for OSX is working against OSX server. It is, however, a problem of Apple's own making.
Out of interest, why havn't you tried OS X server? Is there a specific reason you went with Windows 2003 server?
I think the low marketshare for OSX is working against OSX server. It is, however, a problem of Apple's own making.
more...
Mherm88
May 3, 08:21 AM
Hopefully the ifixit teardown will reveal if there is a 2nd bay accessible for manually adding an SSD if I choose the 1TB option, I want to just put a 128GB or even a 64GB SSD just for applications and the system and store music/movies/photos/docs on the 1TB. I have my windows desktop setup this way with a 64GB and it is wonderful, I don't want to pay $600 to get a 256GB SSD plus 1TB.
playaj82
Jul 26, 01:32 PM
It's possible but they better not do this (not release such a product). I WANT this.
I'm still not too sure how gestures would work to control such a device unless there was a camera.
Imagine you are in an airport trying to get your tablet to open up by swinging your arm up and down in front of your computer's camera.
Now that would be an invention...
The Headline "Apple Patents Technology So You Look Really Really Stupid In Public"
I'm still not too sure how gestures would work to control such a device unless there was a camera.
Imagine you are in an airport trying to get your tablet to open up by swinging your arm up and down in front of your computer's camera.
Now that would be an invention...
The Headline "Apple Patents Technology So You Look Really Really Stupid In Public"
more...
ComputersaysNo
Apr 28, 04:17 PM
I noticed that a jpeg of a white iphone is more kb's also, so it must be true.
puma1552
Nov 11, 07:36 AM
B&O Beosound 8 (http://www.bang-olufsen.com/beosound8)
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2010/11/10x11109b243bandog.jpg
This would go really well in the dining room.
:apple:
It looks like a pair of tits? lol
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2010/11/10x11109b243bandog.jpg
This would go really well in the dining room.
:apple:
It looks like a pair of tits? lol
more...
Collin973
Jul 11, 02:37 PM
Doesn't look terrible, but similar to the ipod (if that pic is legit). Competition is good though, because it'll stimulate new ideas and better products (hopefully). We'll see what happens, but I love my video ipod (as long as apple doesn't release a better one).
Spyriadon
Apr 24, 07:14 PM
Id love to know why this is page one....
more...
FloatingBones
Nov 17, 03:42 PM
Hey Apple - ya think your user base might be interested in Flash??
The response means that users are interested in viewing videos -- even if those views are encapsulated in a legacy wrapper of Flash. Once content providers have updated their videos, there will be no need for this bridge.
In case you missed the news, there was yet another zero day bug in Adobe Flash (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). Read that transcript: the bug affects Windows, Mac, Solaris, Linux, and Android (!) devices. Adobe still thinks that quarterly updates of their software are good enough, and the next one isn't scheduled until February of 2011. As Steve Gibson notes in the podcast:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?"
Apple was not willing to bind the safety and performance of their browser to Adobe Flash. Good choice!
Yeah, you know what's best for us users though - so we should be elated that you are resisting support for it tooth and nail.
Apple approved the app. They are allowing individuals in the marketplace to decide what's best for them.
Hopefully, the websites that provide their videos through a legacy Flash wrapper will soon be providing their users with a choice.
I am elated that iOS Safari has no Flash support. I do not want the CPU suck, the identity suck, the unpredictable behavior, and the exposure to Adobe bugs. If you want those things, feel free to get an Android device.
The response means that users are interested in viewing videos -- even if those views are encapsulated in a legacy wrapper of Flash. Once content providers have updated their videos, there will be no need for this bridge.
In case you missed the news, there was yet another zero day bug in Adobe Flash (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). Read that transcript: the bug affects Windows, Mac, Solaris, Linux, and Android (!) devices. Adobe still thinks that quarterly updates of their software are good enough, and the next one isn't scheduled until February of 2011. As Steve Gibson notes in the podcast:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?"
Apple was not willing to bind the safety and performance of their browser to Adobe Flash. Good choice!
Yeah, you know what's best for us users though - so we should be elated that you are resisting support for it tooth and nail.
Apple approved the app. They are allowing individuals in the marketplace to decide what's best for them.
Hopefully, the websites that provide their videos through a legacy Flash wrapper will soon be providing their users with a choice.
I am elated that iOS Safari has no Flash support. I do not want the CPU suck, the identity suck, the unpredictable behavior, and the exposure to Adobe bugs. If you want those things, feel free to get an Android device.
kurosov
Jun 27, 05:41 AM
But then I realized all the little games we bought and put on my iPhone a long time ago were not going to be transferable to her iPod Touch without re-purchasing them. No way I was going to re-buy them, and she was getting all upset she had stuff on my phone that wasn't on her Touch. So I wound up redoing her Touch so it shared MY iTunes account. Not happy about that though, and sure enough, despite my warnings, she bought about $10 in software one time!
Log on to their device using your account and download the games from the app store, it is free because you already purchased them. LOG OUT of your account. Simple.
OR
have all the devices synced to a single computer that is authorised to each itunes account then simply choose the apps you want on each device from this shared list and sync. Easy.
If you cannot be bothered to spend what little time it takes to get this information to safeguard your own money or to prevent a child from seeing things you don't want them to see then the best policy is to outright disable the features. Unless you enjoy taking a risk with your bank balance.
Log on to their device using your account and download the games from the app store, it is free because you already purchased them. LOG OUT of your account. Simple.
OR
have all the devices synced to a single computer that is authorised to each itunes account then simply choose the apps you want on each device from this shared list and sync. Easy.
If you cannot be bothered to spend what little time it takes to get this information to safeguard your own money or to prevent a child from seeing things you don't want them to see then the best policy is to outright disable the features. Unless you enjoy taking a risk with your bank balance.
more...
Bubba Satori
Apr 13, 04:37 PM
Top Ten Apple Branded TV features.
10. Requires iTunes $500 remote.
9. Costs twice as much and has half as many channels as other TVs.
8. Can't watch BD movies on it.
7. No pRon.
6. Requires 7 Apple adapters to access all features.
5. TV bezel constantly runs iAds.
4. Not able to display politically incorrect programming.
3. Al Gore circuit turns off TV after 200 watts are consumed.
2. Comes in only one size.
1. WOOOOO!!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUh6LDz177k
10. Requires iTunes $500 remote.
9. Costs twice as much and has half as many channels as other TVs.
8. Can't watch BD movies on it.
7. No pRon.
6. Requires 7 Apple adapters to access all features.
5. TV bezel constantly runs iAds.
4. Not able to display politically incorrect programming.
3. Al Gore circuit turns off TV after 200 watts are consumed.
2. Comes in only one size.
1. WOOOOO!!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUh6LDz177k
IJ Reilly
Jan 27, 11:35 AM
True, that's why I like to look at the PEG Ratio (P/E to Growth). If we take the current price of 130 minus cash net of payables and receivables (approx $17 a share), you get 113 for the "enterprise" value of Apple. I'll give it a conservative $5/share earnings this year, for a P/E of 23. According to Yahoo, we have an estimate of 30% growth this year, so we are getting a PEG of less than 1 for this year. Less than 1 is cheap, HOWEVER, it doesn't mean it can't/won't get cheaper.
Excellent comments. Long-time AAPL investors have seen these moments of despair before -- too many times before, to be honest. The markets have always treated Apple this way, unfortunately. It's difficult to imagine Apple's prospects being any brighter. The company is moving forward on all fronts. These are times when you have look down the road instead of at the potholes at your feet.
Excellent comments. Long-time AAPL investors have seen these moments of despair before -- too many times before, to be honest. The markets have always treated Apple this way, unfortunately. It's difficult to imagine Apple's prospects being any brighter. The company is moving forward on all fronts. These are times when you have look down the road instead of at the potholes at your feet.
more...
marksman
Apr 13, 06:45 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)
Anytime an "analyst" opens their mouth, it should be page 2 material at best.
wat!
Anytime an "analyst" opens their mouth, it should be page 2 material at best.
wat!
jon1987
Apr 28, 04:58 PM
Surely by now there is someone out there with a White iPhone, a messuring tape or calipers that can just tell us these photos are nonsense? Please? Pretty please? Xxx
Hisdem
Sep 12, 07:42 PM
Some Adidas stuff and a set of 3 Moleskine Ruled Journals. :cool:
InuNacho
May 1, 10:35 PM
Since he's dead doesn't this technically mean that the "War on Terror" is technically over?
DrumApple
Apr 22, 07:32 PM
So everyone's going to have to re-develop and update their apps??:mad:
Yamcha
Mar 31, 12:07 PM
That looks really ugly, and that is coming from a web designer :P.. I liked the original look, but It's not something I'm too concerned about, since its just a calendar app.. I can manage..
But I do hope to see something better in the final release..
But I do hope to see something better in the final release..
phineas
Oct 2, 10:21 AM
Come on Verizon, 2010 and the iPhone, yea baby, a REAL network , with real support, and not some call center junkie who doesn't know jack about the device and the network
profets
Apr 25, 08:40 AM
why do people believe this is possible? Apple will not allow one carrier to undersell the other on the SAME DEVICE...just won't happen it's bad for sales...which is why there is no competition between AT&T and Verizon...similar plans on voice text and data...otherwise everyone would play carrier swap every few month to get the best deal...if Tmobile gets the iPhone while still independent from AT&T you better believe you won't get unlimited everything for 70 bucks
I would guess its because outside of the US there's countries with multiple carriers that compete on price/features/plans as well. I don't think Apple will not allow it to happen, I'd say that AT&T won't allow it to happen (assuming the buyout goes through).
Besides, if the iPhone gets the 1700 3G band added, I know theres people here in Canada who will use it on Wind with $35 unlimited everything.
I would guess its because outside of the US there's countries with multiple carriers that compete on price/features/plans as well. I don't think Apple will not allow it to happen, I'd say that AT&T won't allow it to happen (assuming the buyout goes through).
Besides, if the iPhone gets the 1700 3G band added, I know theres people here in Canada who will use it on Wind with $35 unlimited everything.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий