ten-oak-druid
Apr 20, 08:32 AM
Samsung has no honor.
It seems their problem is that they had access to Apple's design and so were able to copy more closely than is usually the case with Apple competitors.
It seems their problem is that they had access to Apple's design and so were able to copy more closely than is usually the case with Apple competitors.
turtlebud
Aug 7, 11:47 PM
does anyone see a potential for a security breach with the ichat feature that lets you take over someone's desktop? (the purpose is of course to collaborate or to help them fix a problem)
KnightWRX
Apr 20, 02:11 PM
Of course, had the case been deemed totally unfounded by Apple Legal and their bunch of advisors, it wouldn't have been brought to court at all.
At the same time, if there is any chance that the case has some merit, a company will sue for sure, if points 1 and 2 above are not considered to do more damage than good.
There is probably some merit to some of the claims, so are probably more ambitious and some are probably completely sure to get thrown out. The thing is, the more claims they throw in there the better they have a footing for eventual settlement negotiations.
Just like you never open with your lowest price, you never open with only the claims you are 100% sure are going to win. ;)
At the same time, if there is any chance that the case has some merit, a company will sue for sure, if points 1 and 2 above are not considered to do more damage than good.
There is probably some merit to some of the claims, so are probably more ambitious and some are probably completely sure to get thrown out. The thing is, the more claims they throw in there the better they have a footing for eventual settlement negotiations.
Just like you never open with your lowest price, you never open with only the claims you are 100% sure are going to win. ;)
Bill McEnaney
Apr 27, 12:39 PM
I now know that the certificate is a copy, and no, I don't trust President Obama.
PCClone
Apr 27, 09:44 AM
This is a lie
Keeping a database of our general location is logging our location. :mad: Does Apple really think this double talk, where they say they keep a database of location but don't log the location is going to fly?
At least our overlord will now, I hope, stop collecting location data when location services are turned off. It's a disgrace that it took a media storm to shame them into action.
Maybe your name should be full of sh#%. We know you are a goo fan troll.
Keeping a database of our general location is logging our location. :mad: Does Apple really think this double talk, where they say they keep a database of location but don't log the location is going to fly?
At least our overlord will now, I hope, stop collecting location data when location services are turned off. It's a disgrace that it took a media storm to shame them into action.
Maybe your name should be full of sh#%. We know you are a goo fan troll.
NJRonbo
Jun 14, 11:40 AM
BTW...
Quick question...
How does Radio Shack know what your upgrade
price will be?
I mean, I know already I am not eligible for a
discount and will have to pay $399 or $499.
Does Radio Shack have access to your AT&T
account to determine your upgrade price?
Quick question...
How does Radio Shack know what your upgrade
price will be?
I mean, I know already I am not eligible for a
discount and will have to pay $399 or $499.
Does Radio Shack have access to your AT&T
account to determine your upgrade price?
princealfie
Nov 29, 08:58 AM
Time for Apple to change the paradigm again. I think it's time for Apple to start putting together a music production house. Offer musicians the ability to go direct to iTunes with all the marketing necessary to promote their catalogs. I'm not very familiar with the music industry, but I "think" Apple is quite prepared to create their own studios, handle their own promotion/marketing and already have a HIGHLY efficient distribution system in place. Granted, they are not supposed to be creating music according to their Apple Music agreement, but if they just bought Apple Music outright it would make a great fit, eh?
B
Perhaps we need to have a iTube website eh?
B
Perhaps we need to have a iTube website eh?
notabadname
Apr 25, 03:32 PM
There is also a difference in whether the phone keeps and uses data to function and perform services, and whether that data is transmitted to Apple and used by Apple for tracking. The burden of proof (it would seem - in my non-laywer opinion) would be to show that Apple is specifically collecting that data and using or storing it. Not just that the phone keeps it resident, on-board for use by Apps which the user may "allow" to use location data.
I'm betting Apple is smart enough not to be collecting the data outside the SLA.
I'm betting Apple is smart enough not to be collecting the data outside the SLA.
Bill McEnaney
Apr 27, 11:52 AM
I'm not a birther. But I would love to know why the certificate looks new when the president is nearly 50. Now I'm about five months older than he, my original birth certificate has faded. The certificate he produced clearly isn't the original. Or if it is the original, it's astoundingly well-preserved.
Silentwave
Sep 19, 09:16 PM
well they're working through a pretty active period right now, what with the major architecture change. It'll sorta taper out a bit in a while, and so the next 'big thing' besides more cores will be 45nm, followed by the Common System Interface for the Xeons in '08.
jmbear
Nov 29, 12:39 PM
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
buffalo
Aug 11, 11:11 AM
Is it possible for Apple to release a phone sold in their stores that would work on all networks? Or have several versions of the phone that will work for Verizon, Cingular...
Whyren
Nov 28, 07:06 PM
Sounds like trying to get royalties off of blank CDs by selling "Music CD-Rs" at a higher cost.
Apple could just let them distribute Universal-branded "Music-Ready" iPods that are set at $50 more than any standard iPod. See how well that'll go for 'em.
Apple could just let them distribute Universal-branded "Music-Ready" iPods that are set at $50 more than any standard iPod. See how well that'll go for 'em.
Erasmus
Jul 22, 03:59 AM
I agree with your point on never saying a computer is too powerful, although living in computers is probably not going to happen. Sounds a bit too Matrix-like for me.
:D You never know, you never know.
Ye of little faith in technology!
Never mind.
I think its more along the lines of whether the public will let it happen without turning it into a big moral/ethical/religeous dilemma.
Well, anyway, I am going to stop, because this is way, way, way off topic. I shouldn't have brought it up to begin with.
:D You never know, you never know.
Ye of little faith in technology!
Never mind.
I think its more along the lines of whether the public will let it happen without turning it into a big moral/ethical/religeous dilemma.
Well, anyway, I am going to stop, because this is way, way, way off topic. I shouldn't have brought it up to begin with.
Spanky Deluxe
Apr 27, 08:01 AM
Poo. I'd rather have the option to keep backing up that cache file to iTunes. I like the ability to see a map of where I've been using the iPhoneTracker app. :(
Platform
Sep 13, 09:13 AM
Most people run more than one app at once.
Most are multi-threaded though and if I am not incorrect it doesn't matter for Photoshop if there are two or 72 cores...;)
Most are multi-threaded though and if I am not incorrect it doesn't matter for Photoshop if there are two or 72 cores...;)
gorgeousninja
Mar 22, 08:18 PM
10" Tab, here I come!
cool.. maybe if you hang out long enough at your local store you'll find another Tab customer one day and you can both form a support group...
cool.. maybe if you hang out long enough at your local store you'll find another Tab customer one day and you can both form a support group...
tumblebird
Nov 28, 11:30 PM
That Doug Morris is a slimeball. Who's to say I even own any Universal music. I listen to Indie, primarily. I buy all my music, most of it on CD which I digitize, or via the iTunes Music Store. Who is Universal to demand my dollar? Or three for that matter, one for each iPod I have purchased. There are a lot of labels out there. They can't all get a portion. Apple owes them NOTHING. Did they get music from Sony for the Walkman? How many of us listened to mix tapes from friends on those? I know that most of my tapes were mixes from records and CDs. Universal is off base and greedy. Don't let this happen, Mr. Steve Jobs! You're in the right.
Josias
Sep 19, 10:20 AM
I think any rumorsite reporting new MBP's after September 1st, should be taken down:p
What I really want for Apple to announce in the MBP is:
68 Wh battery on all (4.5 hrs sucks compared to MacBooks 6 hours)
FW800 on all (really should be there on a pro)
Magnetic latch (so cool!:D)
Merom (of course)
DL SuperDrive (I'm not using it, but I think it is required for a pro machine)
Many people say the X1600 is too slow to take advantage of 256 MB? WTF?:p
So my friends 128 MB Radeon 9000 could just as well be 32 MB?
I think Apple should consider putting 256 MB on all models, X1600 Pro in low end, and X1800 in hi-end.
I'm not saying I need this stuff, but this is what I'd like for Apple to release.
What I really want for Apple to announce in the MBP is:
68 Wh battery on all (4.5 hrs sucks compared to MacBooks 6 hours)
FW800 on all (really should be there on a pro)
Magnetic latch (so cool!:D)
Merom (of course)
DL SuperDrive (I'm not using it, but I think it is required for a pro machine)
Many people say the X1600 is too slow to take advantage of 256 MB? WTF?:p
So my friends 128 MB Radeon 9000 could just as well be 32 MB?
I think Apple should consider putting 256 MB on all models, X1600 Pro in low end, and X1800 in hi-end.
I'm not saying I need this stuff, but this is what I'd like for Apple to release.
nagromme
Aug 7, 04:08 PM
I'm kinda bummed that even with Vista sneaking up that Aqua hasn't changed much.
Aqua is great and doesn't NEED to change much--it badly needs to be gone over for consistency, but it's already light years ahead of Vista in consistency, looks (MS loves clutter), and most importantly, functionality. Change for change's sake can be fun, but it can also get in the way.
That said, I think we haven't seen all the changes that next year will bring.
Anyway, Vista is not "sneaking up"... it still looks like a fiasco that nothing can save. It will sell well even so--that's a monopoly for you--but it doesn't threaten Tiger, much less Leopard (which we haven't even seen all of yet).
Aqua is great and doesn't NEED to change much--it badly needs to be gone over for consistency, but it's already light years ahead of Vista in consistency, looks (MS loves clutter), and most importantly, functionality. Change for change's sake can be fun, but it can also get in the way.
That said, I think we haven't seen all the changes that next year will bring.
Anyway, Vista is not "sneaking up"... it still looks like a fiasco that nothing can save. It will sell well even so--that's a monopoly for you--but it doesn't threaten Tiger, much less Leopard (which we haven't even seen all of yet).
Val-kyrie
Jul 30, 01:27 PM
Gee, talk about getting ahead of yourself.
Core 3 will be out before Vista is. I'm going to call it now.
Everybody, be my witness, Core 3 (any processor that goes beyond Core 2 because I don't know if they'll call it "Core 3") will be out before a consumer version of Vista is shipped.
You don't think Vista will be out before the revision to the Core 2 Duo due in Q1 2007 with the Santa Rosa chipset??? I bet Vista will ship by the time the Santa Rosa chipset is ready, especially because MS is suggesting Vista systems use harddrives or Mobos with flash RAM to speed up the boot process.
Core 3 will be out before Vista is. I'm going to call it now.
Everybody, be my witness, Core 3 (any processor that goes beyond Core 2 because I don't know if they'll call it "Core 3") will be out before a consumer version of Vista is shipped.
You don't think Vista will be out before the revision to the Core 2 Duo due in Q1 2007 with the Santa Rosa chipset??? I bet Vista will ship by the time the Santa Rosa chipset is ready, especially because MS is suggesting Vista systems use harddrives or Mobos with flash RAM to speed up the boot process.
xxBURT0Nxx
Apr 7, 09:20 AM
I'm getting tired of Apple Mac's being INTEL's BIATCH!
Integrated graphics on a laptop costing THAT MUCH? PLEASE!
Steve Jobs should threaten to switch to AMD/ATI solutions even if just for leverage with Intel to get discreet graphics chips in these machines.
If this is true, this is a pathetic technology compromise in my opinion.
I would say the decision not to use discrete graphics is apples in order to save room inside the machine and make it small. If you want discrete graphics you can buy a macbook pro...? You make it seem like intel told apple they can't use the sb chips unless they use the IGP, which is obviously false. You are paying for the small, lightweight, portable laptop with the air, obviously not what's inside of it, save for maybe the SSD.
Integrated graphics on a laptop costing THAT MUCH? PLEASE!
Steve Jobs should threaten to switch to AMD/ATI solutions even if just for leverage with Intel to get discreet graphics chips in these machines.
If this is true, this is a pathetic technology compromise in my opinion.
I would say the decision not to use discrete graphics is apples in order to save room inside the machine and make it small. If you want discrete graphics you can buy a macbook pro...? You make it seem like intel told apple they can't use the sb chips unless they use the IGP, which is obviously false. You are paying for the small, lightweight, portable laptop with the air, obviously not what's inside of it, save for maybe the SSD.
Super Dave
Aug 5, 06:38 PM
More speculation than rumour, but for Leopard I'd bet on:
-Resolution Independent UI http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2006/5/22/4065
-Quartz 2D Extreme http://arstechnica.com/reviews/os/macosx-10.4.ars/14
Honestly, I'm surprised they're not in the rumour roundup.
David :cool:
-Resolution Independent UI http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2006/5/22/4065
-Quartz 2D Extreme http://arstechnica.com/reviews/os/macosx-10.4.ars/14
Honestly, I'm surprised they're not in the rumour roundup.
David :cool:
Moyank24
Apr 27, 12:45 PM
Maybe the certificate is legitimate, but I think the original short form would have been more convincing than a pristine copy of the long one. I like Obama, but I loathe his extreme liberalism.
Maybe I'm beating a dead horse, but the copy is pristine because it is a copy. If you requested your birth certificate, they wouldn't give you an original...they would give you a certified copy. Brand new. Just typed up. They aren't going to hand you the original long form.
I suspected it was a copy, I've never trusted the president, and I probably never will. It's one thing to doubt that the certificate is legitimate. It's quite another to believe that the certificate is not legitimate.
You sure do like to go back and edit, don't you? :D
And you sure do like to talk in circles. So doubting and not believing the certificate is legitimate are two different things. What in the heck are you talking about?? You birthers are all alike...in the face of being proven wrong, you just try to make stuff up as you go along.
I now know that the certificate is a copy, and no, I don't trust President Obama
You don't trust Obama because of his extreme liberalism, or because of this certificate?
Maybe I'm beating a dead horse, but the copy is pristine because it is a copy. If you requested your birth certificate, they wouldn't give you an original...they would give you a certified copy. Brand new. Just typed up. They aren't going to hand you the original long form.
I suspected it was a copy, I've never trusted the president, and I probably never will. It's one thing to doubt that the certificate is legitimate. It's quite another to believe that the certificate is not legitimate.
You sure do like to go back and edit, don't you? :D
And you sure do like to talk in circles. So doubting and not believing the certificate is legitimate are two different things. What in the heck are you talking about?? You birthers are all alike...in the face of being proven wrong, you just try to make stuff up as you go along.
I now know that the certificate is a copy, and no, I don't trust President Obama
You don't trust Obama because of his extreme liberalism, or because of this certificate?
No comments:
Post a Comment