Tomorrow
Apr 20, 11:01 AM
Automatics are for the elderly, and for fat and/or lazy people.
http://paradoxdgn.com/junk/avatars/trollface.jpg
Wow, really? :rolleyes:
So if someone wants to buy a Corvette, and they're neither elderly, fat, nor lazy, they should shell out extra and order one with a manual transmission rather than buy one off the lot?
If someone wants to buy a Ford Taurus, Nissan Maxima, Chevrolet Impala, or a host of similar cars, then they must be either elderly, fat, or lazy, right? Because none of those are available with a manual transmission.
That's because you only have automatics to drive :p
No, my first car had a manual transmission (on the column). It was even worse, but that's mostly because the car was a 1965 model and had no air conditioning, no power steering, no power brakes, no power windows, torn-up seats, and oddly chewed through right rear tail light bulbs at a blistering pace. That was back in the days when driving was less of a headache than it is today (I was much younger), but even then I would still rather ride shotgun.
http://paradoxdgn.com/junk/avatars/trollface.jpg
Wow, really? :rolleyes:
So if someone wants to buy a Corvette, and they're neither elderly, fat, nor lazy, they should shell out extra and order one with a manual transmission rather than buy one off the lot?
If someone wants to buy a Ford Taurus, Nissan Maxima, Chevrolet Impala, or a host of similar cars, then they must be either elderly, fat, or lazy, right? Because none of those are available with a manual transmission.
That's because you only have automatics to drive :p
No, my first car had a manual transmission (on the column). It was even worse, but that's mostly because the car was a 1965 model and had no air conditioning, no power steering, no power brakes, no power windows, torn-up seats, and oddly chewed through right rear tail light bulbs at a blistering pace. That was back in the days when driving was less of a headache than it is today (I was much younger), but even then I would still rather ride shotgun.
chameleon81
May 2, 04:33 PM
you people like to discuss about everything.
SchneiderMan
Sep 16, 06:22 PM
The Incipio DermaSHOT would have better quality, right?
It should I don't know really. It might have more silicone in it which is what you want.
It should I don't know really. It might have more silicone in it which is what you want.
boncellis
Sep 6, 07:39 PM
:p I concur. iTunes is getting too busy with Music/Audiobooks/Podcasts/TV Shows and Video already...
As some have suggested perhaps "Showtime" refers to something like a new app...
B
It could be, but Apple has so much invested in the iTunes "brand" that I don't see them moving away from it. I agree they really should improve it though, the video playback and iTMS browsing need to be faster.
As some have suggested perhaps "Showtime" refers to something like a new app...
B
It could be, but Apple has so much invested in the iTunes "brand" that I don't see them moving away from it. I agree they really should improve it though, the video playback and iTMS browsing need to be faster.
johnnyham
Jun 24, 10:52 AM
As is the norm for most rumored Apple products... it's been done before to some extent. In this case, a company in Valencia, CA, humorously called Troll Touch (http://www.trolltouch.com) (wonder if they hang out on forums much?) performs touchscreen upgrades to virtually any Mac product. As I understand it, the majority of their customers are businesses (http://www.tomsguide.com/us/macworld-touchscreen-mac,news-417.html) that use touchscreen iMacs as point of sale machines, equipped with the [/url="http://www.xsilva.com"]Lightspeed POS[/url] software. And no, POS does not stand for what you call your '79 Ford Pinto.
I could see there being a strong market for systems like these, especially considering the markup Apple could put on them. I've worked heavily with Radiant POS systems which run XP Embedded and used a few other XP Pro software packs and CE based devices - most of which crashed on a weekly basis. When running a retail/restaurant business, the last thing you want is to lost precious time and customers due to a faulty system. Macs have a great reputation with not crashing, so I can see why a smart business owner would see the advantage of investing in a few of these.
As for incorporating iOS in there, I could see it being a very light "embedded" version of OS X that would be great for running on smaller, less powerful computers - much like XP Embedded. Kind of like what it is already, except capable of being run on other hardware platforms.
And finally, I could see an iMac-based Surface-like Mac. You know, tabletop computing and all. Not as much market, but pretty dang cool, even if Microsoft has done it before. We all know Apple's always trying to one-up Microsoft.
Be as it may though, I couldn't see Apple pumping out a consumer-level touchscreen iMac. For anything other than light, 15 minute usage, it would be a real pain. I couldn't see many non-business owners buying one. I'm putting my money (har har) on seeing an Apple produced iMac POS either running OS X or a slightly beefed up form of iOS. What do you think about the name OS X$?
I could see there being a strong market for systems like these, especially considering the markup Apple could put on them. I've worked heavily with Radiant POS systems which run XP Embedded and used a few other XP Pro software packs and CE based devices - most of which crashed on a weekly basis. When running a retail/restaurant business, the last thing you want is to lost precious time and customers due to a faulty system. Macs have a great reputation with not crashing, so I can see why a smart business owner would see the advantage of investing in a few of these.
As for incorporating iOS in there, I could see it being a very light "embedded" version of OS X that would be great for running on smaller, less powerful computers - much like XP Embedded. Kind of like what it is already, except capable of being run on other hardware platforms.
And finally, I could see an iMac-based Surface-like Mac. You know, tabletop computing and all. Not as much market, but pretty dang cool, even if Microsoft has done it before. We all know Apple's always trying to one-up Microsoft.
Be as it may though, I couldn't see Apple pumping out a consumer-level touchscreen iMac. For anything other than light, 15 minute usage, it would be a real pain. I couldn't see many non-business owners buying one. I'm putting my money (har har) on seeing an Apple produced iMac POS either running OS X or a slightly beefed up form of iOS. What do you think about the name OS X$?
mltaylor
Mar 22, 10:03 AM
Can't please everybody. Someone will always be upset over something. This time people are upset, next time maybe I will be upset with something on the App Store. Deal with things people and move on.
blueflame
Sep 6, 09:22 PM
I think everyone is obsessing about quality. someone here said earlier that its about convinience. these are going to be the same resoluition as the tv shows, and cost 3.99. i actually dont think they will be letting you burn it on a disk either. I agree that a movie rental system is the way to go. but honestly, for these prices, i can get through time warner all the on demand stations, (stars, stars2, cinemax, showtime, and like 3 hbo channels.) this is the future, there is no waiting to download anything, this model is waht for all reality needs to be used, then if you like the movie enough, you pay $15 for you to burn it to one dvd only (comes with label pictures and cover) maybe they even mail you the emtpy case. for that price, they will afford it.) anywy. maybe this set top box everyone wants is some sort of propriatary thing they are making like tivo, with a burner, from an apple cable server, with an ipod port. I like it. but this is such an exciting time.
A
A
dr Dunkel
Mar 24, 04:32 PM
I'll likely build a Hackintosh so as to prevent this problem in the future. That is unless Apple finally sells computers that can be repaired for less then the price of a new computer.
Why make such a computer when money so easily can be made selling you a new one... generally speaking, that is :D
But I agree, :apple: really should build a computer for the consumers that actually knows something about computers and are interested in the area. But I guess that would be bad business, as it would be impossible to sell parts att 200% of the normal price if that box could be opened by the user.
Why make such a computer when money so easily can be made selling you a new one... generally speaking, that is :D
But I agree, :apple: really should build a computer for the consumers that actually knows something about computers and are interested in the area. But I guess that would be bad business, as it would be impossible to sell parts att 200% of the normal price if that box could be opened by the user.
Porco
Sep 6, 09:01 AM
Dude, the MBP was updated in late April of this year, why would you think it'll be updated four and a half months later??
Yeah, next thing you know people will saying machines could have their processors upgraded before they're even released!! Oh, wait... :p
Seriously, I think it's been widely stated that with the move to intel chips, processors are likely to be updated more regularly... don't know when the MBP will get upgraded, but if the chips are there, they need to be going in the machines ASAP for Apple to maintain a competitive line-up compared with otherwise-similarly specced PCs.
Yeah, next thing you know people will saying machines could have their processors upgraded before they're even released!! Oh, wait... :p
Seriously, I think it's been widely stated that with the move to intel chips, processors are likely to be updated more regularly... don't know when the MBP will get upgraded, but if the chips are there, they need to be going in the machines ASAP for Apple to maintain a competitive line-up compared with otherwise-similarly specced PCs.
abhimat.gautam
Mar 31, 12:04 AM
Urgh, new iCal really is horrible.
Does the realistic texture show up only in full screen mode, or is it that way all the time? In a window, I think it might be distracting, but in full screen, I don't think I would mind it.
Does the realistic texture show up only in full screen mode, or is it that way all the time? In a window, I think it might be distracting, but in full screen, I don't think I would mind it.
cube
Mar 25, 12:53 PM
It doesn't mean anything, as I've noted about three times already.
That's not the correct answer. The possible answers concerning the documented hardware capabilities are:
- That's not enough for any OpenCL
- That's enough for OpenCL 1.0
- That's enough for OpenCL 1.1
That's not the correct answer. The possible answers concerning the documented hardware capabilities are:
- That's not enough for any OpenCL
- That's enough for OpenCL 1.0
- That's enough for OpenCL 1.1
PBF
Apr 1, 09:33 PM
Google Chrome Beta and regular version allow me to use them for around a minute, and then crash. Anyone else having this problem, and how to fix?
I already submitted a bug report.
Use the dev version instead. A lot more stable than the beta one.
I already submitted a bug report.
Use the dev version instead. A lot more stable than the beta one.
*LTD*
Mar 27, 06:46 AM
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)
On screen buttons and dpads are terrible. Street fighter on the iphone was really hard to control. Buttons are a requirement for any gaming console.
Tell that to the hundreds (at times over a thousand) reviewers who are raving about it.
Yeah, "terrible" my ass.
Doubters need to wrap their head around this new concept. They can start accepting this new paradigm for the standard setting phenomenon it is (and I don't mean the 3DS, LOL), or get left behind.
On screen buttons and dpads are terrible. Street fighter on the iphone was really hard to control. Buttons are a requirement for any gaming console.
Tell that to the hundreds (at times over a thousand) reviewers who are raving about it.
Yeah, "terrible" my ass.
Doubters need to wrap their head around this new concept. They can start accepting this new paradigm for the standard setting phenomenon it is (and I don't mean the 3DS, LOL), or get left behind.
steviem
Apr 25, 08:57 AM
The more publicity on this, the more likely a hack will be developed. I love how many news organizations believe that this open file is some kind of new issue!
There is a reason that some of us Jailbreak, outside of the desire to add applications outside of the appstore.
There are other ways to access data on an iPhone outside of Apple tools. If you think a Passcode is making your phone secure, you are mistaken.
If someone is getting into your iPhone, the least of your worries is a file showing an approximation of where you've been.
There is a reason that some of us Jailbreak, outside of the desire to add applications outside of the appstore.
There are other ways to access data on an iPhone outside of Apple tools. If you think a Passcode is making your phone secure, you are mistaken.
If someone is getting into your iPhone, the least of your worries is a file showing an approximation of where you've been.
ranviper
Feb 18, 08:20 AM
New pics for the new thread. :eek:
http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/4420/openb.jpg
http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/3604/clamshell.jpg
http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/4420/openb.jpg
http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/3604/clamshell.jpg
TuffLuffJimmy
Jun 24, 01:45 AM
buh-bye porn guy!:eek:
You're that ignorant that you think the only benefit of an open platform is pornography?
You're that ignorant that you think the only benefit of an open platform is pornography?
BenRoethig
Aug 29, 04:49 PM
Exactly!!!
I media center like this would sell like crazy... small, simple and elegant. Just imagine how many switchers you would get at the same time.
I don't know about switchers, but it should be a success in the home entertainment center/ media PC market.
I media center like this would sell like crazy... small, simple and elegant. Just imagine how many switchers you would get at the same time.
I don't know about switchers, but it should be a success in the home entertainment center/ media PC market.
drzeus
Sep 6, 06:38 PM
So this is interesting.
Everything is core duo, incuding the minis.
There is a movie announcement next week.
I still can't help but think that the mini has been silently hardware upgraded and will be the video iPod of the coming months. Download to the mini, keep your movies on it, it gets directly connected to your TV and you potentially have an HD movie solution to compete with netflix.
Very interesting. . .
Everything is core duo, incuding the minis.
There is a movie announcement next week.
I still can't help but think that the mini has been silently hardware upgraded and will be the video iPod of the coming months. Download to the mini, keep your movies on it, it gets directly connected to your TV and you potentially have an HD movie solution to compete with netflix.
Very interesting. . .
fixyourthinking
Nov 28, 10:42 AM
My local Office Depot has sold 1 (one) (a white one) since it launched. They have 8 in stock.
I predict it will be one of the biggest flops in consumer history but will be sugarcoated for many more months to come.
I also predict that Apple will beat the iPod holiday sales estimates by greater than 10%.
MSNBC or the Today show will certainly try to do other "puff pieces" to hype it (the Zune) up.
I predict it will be one of the biggest flops in consumer history but will be sugarcoated for many more months to come.
I also predict that Apple will beat the iPod holiday sales estimates by greater than 10%.
MSNBC or the Today show will certainly try to do other "puff pieces" to hype it (the Zune) up.
czardmitri
Nov 28, 02:30 PM
Is anybody surprise by this?
Seriously we knew this all along.
Plus, what surprises me is that Microsoft did no TV advertising for the Zune at all. So many people out there have no idea it even exists.
Zune has no chance until they have an integration like ipod and itunes have. Maybe in Vista they will have a chance to get that but my feeling is too late for them.
Apple will not let down and I am pretty sure before spring we'll see updates across the ipod line and maybe finally the widescreen ipod.
I saw a zune ad on TV the other night. The same sweaty teenagers as in every other Zune ad. This time they were breaking through a fence or something. Then "Welcome to the Social" appeared over it. I don't think they showed the actual Zune at all.
Seriously we knew this all along.
Plus, what surprises me is that Microsoft did no TV advertising for the Zune at all. So many people out there have no idea it even exists.
Zune has no chance until they have an integration like ipod and itunes have. Maybe in Vista they will have a chance to get that but my feeling is too late for them.
Apple will not let down and I am pretty sure before spring we'll see updates across the ipod line and maybe finally the widescreen ipod.
I saw a zune ad on TV the other night. The same sweaty teenagers as in every other Zune ad. This time they were breaking through a fence or something. Then "Welcome to the Social" appeared over it. I don't think they showed the actual Zune at all.
h'biki
Apr 16, 03:21 AM
when marketshare is almost 0 % you are close to dying, look a 1 % of all new machines built is not giving me any confidence in the platform. sure we have 10 % in a installed platform but are loosing everywhere( thank you motorola for holding up the ass end. Fact is Pcs are running away from Mac and when a 500 dollar machine kicks a new $2000 Imac its time to say so long to Jobs and his croonies. Supported you guys way to long at my expense.
Layman's version:
When you CEASE TO MAKE A PROFIT then you are dying*. Until then, it doesn't matter what your market share is.
If 1% of the world's population gave me a dollar, I'd be very rich. If 50% of the world's population gave you 1 cent, you'd also be rich, but not as rich as me... even though you have a greater market share. Its all about margins!
For those who are actually interested in understanding the world of business:
*Well, possibly dying... You have to continue to lose money and do it over a period of time before you are dying. Even then, that may be a result of mismanagement, rather than the company itself being dead -- there may still be the potential for money to be made. Really, the only time a company is dead is when its bankrupt and/or when its taken over and its assets stripped (because its been mis-valued).
To give two recent examples. Gateway has been losing money for some time. It has gone from a all time high in 1997 of $61 per share to its current price of around $6 (which it has been at for over the last year). In other words, its been devalued by a magnitude of 10. (They may have refinanced during that time and devalued the price per share, while increasing their overall market value... but I can't remember them doing that. Gateway may have greater marker share, but Apple is valued at around $28 per share. Just to make the comparison properly fair, Gateway has a market value of $1,999 Million, while Apple's market value is around $10,000 million. In other words, Apple is worth ten times as much as Gateway, despite their smaller market share. (Admittely, Apple's share price flucates like crazy, but thats arguably a result of the FUD of uninformed gits, like those at C|Net). Nonetheless, Gateway is likely to be around for some time. Until it continues to burn through money and its share price drops even lower, and it becomes the target of a hostile takeover... which will result in (1) a merger/total buyout/absortion; (2) a massive corporate governance change because the hostile company thinks there's money to be made; and (3) its bought out, its assets stripped and resold.
Example 2 is Media 100. They were also burning through money. Unlike Gateway, however, they weren't generating much gross revenue. Their technology was good, but not that good, and their management was baaad. They weren't generating much gross revenue, which is why no one was really interested in buying them or giving them a loan. They just didn't seem capable of even making a profit (and thats what matters). They were a dying company (unlike Gateway, which is just troubled). So they were forced to file for bankruptcy. Now their assets are being bought by Optibase -- when that deal is complete, they will be dead.
Point is, corporate finance is a very convuluted world. They're like stars. The bigger they are, the longer it usually takes them to die. Sometimes there are corporate "supernovas" (like Enron or HIH or OneTel) in which the whole corporate structure implodes, but thats because of criminal negligence, lack of transparency, and dodgy account practices. (All of which render the mechanisms of the market for corporate control to be rather useless. Noone wants to touch a company when you don't want to know what you're buying).
The most important thing to the world of corporate finance -- the one in which a company lives or dies -- is profit per share, then revenue. Both of which Apple has. Thus it is healthy. Oh, and its debt free. This is a good thing, because it signals to potentially future creditors that it pays off it loans... thus they're likely to bail it out, if it finds itself in trouble again. (Of course, there are mitigating factors there, but thats true of anything).
The only reason that Apple's market share is an issue is because uninformed gits in the IT press (tautology that) scream about it being an issue. This creates information asynchronicity (imnsho) and distorts the market (both the share market and the IT market). Personally I reckon that if people didn't think market share was an issue, Apple would actually be increasing its marketshare. Of course, thats exactly the reason companies like C|NET do scream about it, so it becomes a quasi self-fulfililng prophercy.
Here endeth the lesson on "Introduction to Corporate Financing 101"
Layman's version:
When you CEASE TO MAKE A PROFIT then you are dying*. Until then, it doesn't matter what your market share is.
If 1% of the world's population gave me a dollar, I'd be very rich. If 50% of the world's population gave you 1 cent, you'd also be rich, but not as rich as me... even though you have a greater market share. Its all about margins!
For those who are actually interested in understanding the world of business:
*Well, possibly dying... You have to continue to lose money and do it over a period of time before you are dying. Even then, that may be a result of mismanagement, rather than the company itself being dead -- there may still be the potential for money to be made. Really, the only time a company is dead is when its bankrupt and/or when its taken over and its assets stripped (because its been mis-valued).
To give two recent examples. Gateway has been losing money for some time. It has gone from a all time high in 1997 of $61 per share to its current price of around $6 (which it has been at for over the last year). In other words, its been devalued by a magnitude of 10. (They may have refinanced during that time and devalued the price per share, while increasing their overall market value... but I can't remember them doing that. Gateway may have greater marker share, but Apple is valued at around $28 per share. Just to make the comparison properly fair, Gateway has a market value of $1,999 Million, while Apple's market value is around $10,000 million. In other words, Apple is worth ten times as much as Gateway, despite their smaller market share. (Admittely, Apple's share price flucates like crazy, but thats arguably a result of the FUD of uninformed gits, like those at C|Net). Nonetheless, Gateway is likely to be around for some time. Until it continues to burn through money and its share price drops even lower, and it becomes the target of a hostile takeover... which will result in (1) a merger/total buyout/absortion; (2) a massive corporate governance change because the hostile company thinks there's money to be made; and (3) its bought out, its assets stripped and resold.
Example 2 is Media 100. They were also burning through money. Unlike Gateway, however, they weren't generating much gross revenue. Their technology was good, but not that good, and their management was baaad. They weren't generating much gross revenue, which is why no one was really interested in buying them or giving them a loan. They just didn't seem capable of even making a profit (and thats what matters). They were a dying company (unlike Gateway, which is just troubled). So they were forced to file for bankruptcy. Now their assets are being bought by Optibase -- when that deal is complete, they will be dead.
Point is, corporate finance is a very convuluted world. They're like stars. The bigger they are, the longer it usually takes them to die. Sometimes there are corporate "supernovas" (like Enron or HIH or OneTel) in which the whole corporate structure implodes, but thats because of criminal negligence, lack of transparency, and dodgy account practices. (All of which render the mechanisms of the market for corporate control to be rather useless. Noone wants to touch a company when you don't want to know what you're buying).
The most important thing to the world of corporate finance -- the one in which a company lives or dies -- is profit per share, then revenue. Both of which Apple has. Thus it is healthy. Oh, and its debt free. This is a good thing, because it signals to potentially future creditors that it pays off it loans... thus they're likely to bail it out, if it finds itself in trouble again. (Of course, there are mitigating factors there, but thats true of anything).
The only reason that Apple's market share is an issue is because uninformed gits in the IT press (tautology that) scream about it being an issue. This creates information asynchronicity (imnsho) and distorts the market (both the share market and the IT market). Personally I reckon that if people didn't think market share was an issue, Apple would actually be increasing its marketshare. Of course, thats exactly the reason companies like C|NET do scream about it, so it becomes a quasi self-fulfililng prophercy.
Here endeth the lesson on "Introduction to Corporate Financing 101"
princealfie
Nov 29, 01:36 PM
Maybe the iTV can zap the MPAA and all those movie execs into white dust :D
roland.g
Sep 1, 01:37 PM
Aw, man! I was sooooo ready to shell out for a new 23" iMac, might it come out. But now it's on the verge of actually doing so, I'm starting to get greatly mostly underwhelmed by the rumours. Merom? What? I want a Conroe, at least in the 23" top model. And 2,33GHz? The Conroe goes way up to 2,93GHz. I'm sure the Merom line goes higher than 2,33GHz...
Bleh... maybe I should wait for the rumoured headless iMac. Maybe that machine actually will come with a Conroe.
First of all, have you seen the price on a 2.93 Conroe. It is up there. It would only by BTO, and cost you a bundle.
Second, if they release a 23" iMac, you can stop all the talk about a headless Mac, there won't be one. Sorry.
Bleh... maybe I should wait for the rumoured headless iMac. Maybe that machine actually will come with a Conroe.
First of all, have you seen the price on a 2.93 Conroe. It is up there. It would only by BTO, and cost you a bundle.
Second, if they release a 23" iMac, you can stop all the talk about a headless Mac, there won't be one. Sorry.
gekko513
Jul 18, 04:52 AM
It does make more sense renting movies than renting music. It's not often I like to see the same movie several times.
If the service is cheap enough, I can see that the convenience of getting a movie with just a couple of clicks in iTunes will make this an attractive offer for many. It is a hassle having to rent physical DVDs.
If the service is cheap enough, I can see that the convenience of getting a movie with just a couple of clicks in iTunes will make this an attractive offer for many. It is a hassle having to rent physical DVDs.
