shawnce
Nov 28, 07:05 PM
I think it is crazy for everyone to think that the music industry is greedy when it getting squeezed out of all of their revenue streams. So, Apple makes hundreds of millions off of their back on the itunes site, and a billion off of iPod sales, and they cannot share in the wealth? Huh?
Apple pays the record labels for every song sold via iTMS, a vast majority of the "99 cents" for a song goes to the record labels (or direct to independent artist). iTMS is providing a new sales channel with effectively zero cost to the record labels (one that avoids manufacturing, shipping and stocking of physical units). This is a totally NEW revenue stream that arguable provides the record labels more bang for their buck then prior revenue streams and it is arguable more secure from copyright violations then prior revenue streams (FairPlay DRM). It also more directly connects customers with music (easy to do impulse purchases, etc.).
Now for the other half of your statement... just why should record companies get money for every iPod sold? This type of thinking is in some ways similar to demanding that paint manufactures should get a cut of the profits of every paint brush sold.
As a side note... I support the record companies/artist going after major copyright violators using legal proceedings.
Apple pays the record labels for every song sold via iTMS, a vast majority of the "99 cents" for a song goes to the record labels (or direct to independent artist). iTMS is providing a new sales channel with effectively zero cost to the record labels (one that avoids manufacturing, shipping and stocking of physical units). This is a totally NEW revenue stream that arguable provides the record labels more bang for their buck then prior revenue streams and it is arguable more secure from copyright violations then prior revenue streams (FairPlay DRM). It also more directly connects customers with music (easy to do impulse purchases, etc.).
Now for the other half of your statement... just why should record companies get money for every iPod sold? This type of thinking is in some ways similar to demanding that paint manufactures should get a cut of the profits of every paint brush sold.
As a side note... I support the record companies/artist going after major copyright violators using legal proceedings.
shaun319
Apr 11, 06:18 PM
sept release will fall into my upgrade period. great
SevenInchScrew
Aug 20, 09:40 AM
I laugh at both dirt games because of this...
Personally, I think Codemasters do a great job with racing games, but the problem is, the games they make are always a little more geared toward arcade-style racing. Realistic enough to really get you into the feel of rallying, or touring cars, or whatever, but not SO realistic that only pros can play the game. The early "Colin McRae Rally" games were tons of fun for that very reason. I only played the demo for Dirt though, so I can't really speak for it.
...Forza 3 online was a much unneeded step backwards.
I didn't like it at all either... until recently. They've finally added production hoppers, where everyone in the race is using the exact same car. It makes for some GREAT racing. I've only done a few races so far, but they have been some of the best yet.
Personally, I think Codemasters do a great job with racing games, but the problem is, the games they make are always a little more geared toward arcade-style racing. Realistic enough to really get you into the feel of rallying, or touring cars, or whatever, but not SO realistic that only pros can play the game. The early "Colin McRae Rally" games were tons of fun for that very reason. I only played the demo for Dirt though, so I can't really speak for it.
...Forza 3 online was a much unneeded step backwards.
I didn't like it at all either... until recently. They've finally added production hoppers, where everyone in the race is using the exact same car. It makes for some GREAT racing. I've only done a few races so far, but they have been some of the best yet.
Squire
Aug 7, 06:31 AM
this is me going out an a limb here.
but do you think the desktop lineup could become this?
Mac mini (2 models)
the Mac
iMac
Mac Pro
I'd like to see your "Mac" model bumped up past the iMac. I think a lot of people, myself included, would pay a premium for the ability to upgrade. In fact, I wouldn't care if they didn't offer a completely new model as long as they offer some "affordable" manifestations of the Mac Pro. So how's this (and go easy on me here because I rarely delve into the technical aspect of things):
Eventually (i.e. by November), Core 2 Duo/Woodcrest across he board:
1) Mac mini: 2 models both with the 1.86 GHz Core 2 Duo
2) iMac: 2 models with 1.86 GHz and 2.13 GHz Core 2 Duo
3) Mac Pro: 4 models; 2 Core 2 Duo-based systems (2.40 GHz and 2.66 GHz) and 2 Xeon-based systems (2.80 GHz and 3.0 GHz). The higher-end Xeon systems would sport the same enclosure as the Core 2 Duo systems (similar to the PM G5) but would come in an anodized charcoal black enclosure.
Any takers?
-Squire
but do you think the desktop lineup could become this?
Mac mini (2 models)
the Mac
iMac
Mac Pro
I'd like to see your "Mac" model bumped up past the iMac. I think a lot of people, myself included, would pay a premium for the ability to upgrade. In fact, I wouldn't care if they didn't offer a completely new model as long as they offer some "affordable" manifestations of the Mac Pro. So how's this (and go easy on me here because I rarely delve into the technical aspect of things):
Eventually (i.e. by November), Core 2 Duo/Woodcrest across he board:
1) Mac mini: 2 models both with the 1.86 GHz Core 2 Duo
2) iMac: 2 models with 1.86 GHz and 2.13 GHz Core 2 Duo
3) Mac Pro: 4 models; 2 Core 2 Duo-based systems (2.40 GHz and 2.66 GHz) and 2 Xeon-based systems (2.80 GHz and 3.0 GHz). The higher-end Xeon systems would sport the same enclosure as the Core 2 Duo systems (similar to the PM G5) but would come in an anodized charcoal black enclosure.
Any takers?
-Squire
RebootD
Apr 10, 01:29 AM
Enough Nostradamusesque mysticism and lets get to the real demo already! (Impatient) :D
deadpoet
Mar 31, 10:35 PM
Iphone are sold BOGO and even just free on contract over in other countries.
iPhone is sold as buy-one-get-one-free? In what country would that be?
iPhone is sold as buy-one-get-one-free? In what country would that be?
mwswami
Jul 20, 11:56 AM
See http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=2772 for comparison of Woodcrest, Opteron, and Ultrasparc T1.
Dual Woodcrest (4 threads) easily outperformed Ultrasparc T1 (32 threads). The power consumption of the dual 3.0GHz Woodcrest system came out to be 245W compared to 188W for the Sun T2000 with 8-core Ultrasparc T1. But, the metric that's most important is performance/watt and that's where Woodcrest came out as a clear winner.
Dual Woodcrest (4 threads) easily outperformed Ultrasparc T1 (32 threads). The power consumption of the dual 3.0GHz Woodcrest system came out to be 245W compared to 188W for the Sun T2000 with 8-core Ultrasparc T1. But, the metric that's most important is performance/watt and that's where Woodcrest came out as a clear winner.
Hallivand
Mar 25, 10:57 PM
Um, there's only been one release since leopard. Too soon to know if Lion will wow or not.
From the developer builds and such, there doesn't appear to be anything compelling or major to warrant anything more than a minor upgrade.
Yeah, disappearing scroll bars. A full size screen. Woo.
The UI and basic functionalities have stayed the same since Leopard, sprinkled with a bit of iOS features. Snow Leopard was a tune up, to establish the Intel line completely and such.
Yet retained most, if not all of the Leopard UI elements.
Personally, it just looks like a rough merge of iOS into the OS X environment without any refinement.
If we have to fork out $120 or something, forget it.
I guess my Leopard PowerPC Macs still look up to date then :)
From the developer builds and such, there doesn't appear to be anything compelling or major to warrant anything more than a minor upgrade.
Yeah, disappearing scroll bars. A full size screen. Woo.
The UI and basic functionalities have stayed the same since Leopard, sprinkled with a bit of iOS features. Snow Leopard was a tune up, to establish the Intel line completely and such.
Yet retained most, if not all of the Leopard UI elements.
Personally, it just looks like a rough merge of iOS into the OS X environment without any refinement.
If we have to fork out $120 or something, forget it.
I guess my Leopard PowerPC Macs still look up to date then :)
Snowy_River
Jul 28, 05:34 PM
I appreciate the thoughts on my quandry whether or not to return my 20 " iMac and purchase after the WWDC. Of course my decision is not any easier with one vote for and one vote against.
Thanks Grokgod and Multimedia for the thoughts...
I'll chime in and try to help alleviate your quandary. I would take it back. You've got a narrow window of opportunity to take it back, and we're just a few days away from an event that will likely harold the release of a new iMac. Even if you wanted to keep this model, if you take it back and then buy it after the release of the new one, you'll likely be able to get it at a fairly discounted price. So, that's what you have to weigh against having a computer to play with for the next couple of weeks...
Thanks Grokgod and Multimedia for the thoughts...
I'll chime in and try to help alleviate your quandary. I would take it back. You've got a narrow window of opportunity to take it back, and we're just a few days away from an event that will likely harold the release of a new iMac. Even if you wanted to keep this model, if you take it back and then buy it after the release of the new one, you'll likely be able to get it at a fairly discounted price. So, that's what you have to weigh against having a computer to play with for the next couple of weeks...
rdowns
Jun 8, 06:56 PM
Apple really geared up for this rollout. Look how many countries and how fast they're ramping up. I bet all their big retail partners have it on launch day. Those retailers want in on the iPhone rush too.:D
Zadillo
Aug 27, 04:06 PM
The consequence is a laptop with a power cord attach to them feeding the insatiable appetite of the thermo nuclear reactor we call the CPU. For the love of reason and common sense, why can't Apple make a laptop with a day worth of battery powered. How about OLED display and multicore chip running at much lower frequency. Enough with the Ghz BS; what is the different between a 2.16Ghz and a 2.33 Ghz processors again?
Cinch
For the same reason that pretty much no-one else makes a laptop like what you described either. The only thing I've seen that even gets close to the sort of battery life you are talking about are some of the Japanese ultraportables that can get 6-11 hours of battery life, using 10-12" screens and very slow and power efficient ULV Core Solo or ULV Pentium M chips. These laptops also tend to cost in the $2000-3000 range.
I would venture to say that even if you slapped one of those ULV processors in a larger notebook with a larger battery, you still wouldn't be able to balance things out to get 24 hours of battery life.
And one has to wonder if people would put up with the performance hit.
OLED display technology at least probably isn't ready to be used for something like a laptop screen.
So, for the "love of reason and common sense", can we stop expecting Apple to create a product that isn't even technically feasible right now?
I think if you want 24 hours of battery life, you're probably better off carrying 6 or 7 spare batteries (and the $600-700 cost of doing so and added weight is still probably less than what it would take to get some laptop that actually had a reliable 24 hour battery life.)
-Zadillo
Cinch
For the same reason that pretty much no-one else makes a laptop like what you described either. The only thing I've seen that even gets close to the sort of battery life you are talking about are some of the Japanese ultraportables that can get 6-11 hours of battery life, using 10-12" screens and very slow and power efficient ULV Core Solo or ULV Pentium M chips. These laptops also tend to cost in the $2000-3000 range.
I would venture to say that even if you slapped one of those ULV processors in a larger notebook with a larger battery, you still wouldn't be able to balance things out to get 24 hours of battery life.
And one has to wonder if people would put up with the performance hit.
OLED display technology at least probably isn't ready to be used for something like a laptop screen.
So, for the "love of reason and common sense", can we stop expecting Apple to create a product that isn't even technically feasible right now?
I think if you want 24 hours of battery life, you're probably better off carrying 6 or 7 spare batteries (and the $600-700 cost of doing so and added weight is still probably less than what it would take to get some laptop that actually had a reliable 24 hour battery life.)
-Zadillo
illegalprelude
Jul 14, 09:25 PM
im with the others, im not jumping on the ship till they offer me Blue-Ray. Till then, I got everything I need in my 1.6 :cool: :D
ctachme
Sep 18, 11:07 PM
All I have to say is:
"what the hell is taking them so frigging long?"
"what the hell is taking them so frigging long?"
gnasher729
Mar 22, 01:38 PM
You are the funniest poster on here. Thanks for the entertainment. (Not sure if it's your intent, but thanks anyway.)
Here's what he doesn't realise: Every product has both a price, and a value. In case of the iPhone, Apple has left a lot of space for others to undercut it in price. And many people will go for something that is cheaper, even when it doesn't have quite the value. But as we can see now, Apple hasn't left any margin with the iPad for competitors to undercut it in price. If the iPad was starting at around $1000 as had been suggested originally, then Samsung would be able to sell lots and lots of tablets for $499. But the iPad starts at $499. Samsung could sell lots and lots of tablets for $249 or $299, but they can't build them for the price. The reason why none of these tablets are cheaper than the iPad is because they just can't build them cheaper.
For the same price, people are going to buy the original and not a cheap copy. So they will buy and continue buying the iPad. And the iPad is the one that you know will be around next year, unlike others.
Here's what he doesn't realise: Every product has both a price, and a value. In case of the iPhone, Apple has left a lot of space for others to undercut it in price. And many people will go for something that is cheaper, even when it doesn't have quite the value. But as we can see now, Apple hasn't left any margin with the iPad for competitors to undercut it in price. If the iPad was starting at around $1000 as had been suggested originally, then Samsung would be able to sell lots and lots of tablets for $499. But the iPad starts at $499. Samsung could sell lots and lots of tablets for $249 or $299, but they can't build them for the price. The reason why none of these tablets are cheaper than the iPad is because they just can't build them cheaper.
For the same price, people are going to buy the original and not a cheap copy. So they will buy and continue buying the iPad. And the iPad is the one that you know will be around next year, unlike others.
JM-Prod
Apr 10, 09:44 AM
It needs to come with a 27 inch multi-touch surface to use as the primary work surface, with my current 27 inch monitor as the head-up dual-monitor (input-output-view).
This is long overdue. If apple won't make it, AVID should. ASAP! :)
And for all us professionals, price is not an issue. We want it to be expensive, and so nice that people will rent out facilities.
Bring it on Apple!
This would be the perfect gifts for the pro-world, after helping you back from bankruptcy, remember dear Apple?
Best,
Jon M.
This is long overdue. If apple won't make it, AVID should. ASAP! :)
And for all us professionals, price is not an issue. We want it to be expensive, and so nice that people will rent out facilities.
Bring it on Apple!
This would be the perfect gifts for the pro-world, after helping you back from bankruptcy, remember dear Apple?
Best,
Jon M.
thatisme
Apr 27, 08:43 AM
No it's not.
And I think MOST people aren't blowing anything out of proportion. Being concerned about tracking information/privacy issues is important. Most people (stop generalizing just because some on this board are) are NOT over-reacting but were calling for deeper investigation into the issue.
Pot, meet kettle.
And I think MOST people aren't blowing anything out of proportion. Being concerned about tracking information/privacy issues is important. Most people (stop generalizing just because some on this board are) are NOT over-reacting but were calling for deeper investigation into the issue.
Pot, meet kettle.
AppleScruff1
Apr 11, 05:46 PM
Iphone 5 on Sprint?
Verizon will buy Sprint since AT&T is buying TMobile.
Verizon will buy Sprint since AT&T is buying TMobile.
happyduck42
Apr 19, 02:12 PM
According to Wikipedia It was released in Feb before the iPhone was released..
Wikipedia is wrong then; it was announced in Feb after the iPhone in January 2007.
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_f700-1849.php
Wikipedia is wrong then; it was announced in Feb after the iPhone in January 2007.
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_f700-1849.php
epitaphic
Aug 19, 09:06 AM
Can I rotate the 2nd display 90 degrees like I can in Windows?
Short answer: Yes
Long answer: Yes you can
;)
Short answer: Yes
Long answer: Yes you can
;)
alent1234
Apr 20, 07:37 AM
I'm surprised to see iPhones have outsold iPod Touches by so much; I've never really considered the figures but just assumed that there would be way more iPod Touches around than iPhones.
most ipods i see are Nano's for people to listen to music on the train home. why buy a Touch when it's useless unless you have wifi. it's just a lower priced SKU for apple to defend the iphone market share
most ipods i see are Nano's for people to listen to music on the train home. why buy a Touch when it's useless unless you have wifi. it's just a lower priced SKU for apple to defend the iphone market share
Hellhammer
Nov 27, 02:21 AM
Somehow I feel this game is too short and easy. I've had it for 3 days and I'm already level 18 and all races are way too easy to win. When I look at it, there aren't that many races in the game. IMO too many of those "you need this specific car to compete" races and then there is on race. Spent 400k on a Lambo to get into one race lol.
Maybe I waited too much but unless the Extreme Series is going to offer some more challenge, this will feel a bit lame. Sure there is online but still.
Maybe I waited too much but unless the Extreme Series is going to offer some more challenge, this will feel a bit lame. Sure there is online but still.
Multimedia
Aug 27, 11:33 PM
Core 2 Duo is here. Looks like Toshiba is first out of the gate with Core 2 Duo laptops:Toshiba Qosmio G35-AV660 - AVPC Laptop (http://www.toshibadirect.com:80/td/b2c/pdet.to?poid=347885&coid=-30600&seg=HHO)
Wow! And only $3499 :rolleyes: I think a lot of us here would have a problem with the 10.1 pounds part. I agree the 17" 1920 x 1200 would be wonderful. I like all the features - esp if we could have an HD-DVD SuperMultiDrive and dual HDs. But the battery life of 2.5 hours leaves a lot to be desired. I guess you can't have it all without losing something in the process - like reasonable weight, battery life and price. :p
Wow! And only $3499 :rolleyes: I think a lot of us here would have a problem with the 10.1 pounds part. I agree the 17" 1920 x 1200 would be wonderful. I like all the features - esp if we could have an HD-DVD SuperMultiDrive and dual HDs. But the battery life of 2.5 hours leaves a lot to be desired. I guess you can't have it all without losing something in the process - like reasonable weight, battery life and price. :p
NJRonbo
Jun 23, 12:36 PM
My name is on a list at one of the busier Central
Jersey stores (Monmouth Mall) but I am being told
that they aren't getting any phones on launch day.
So, if THAT store isn't getting any I don't hold much
hope for a lot of these others.
Jersey stores (Monmouth Mall) but I am being told
that they aren't getting any phones on launch day.
So, if THAT store isn't getting any I don't hold much
hope for a lot of these others.
Alexsaru
Sep 13, 06:54 AM
I was interested to see that they were unable to max out CPU utilization on all 8 cores in the system. I hope it's due to the software these days not being ready to fully utilize more than one or two cores and not due to OSX's ability to scale to larger core counts. Since that's obviously where we're heading. Does anyone know about the potential for scalability of OSX to large numbers of CPU's/cores? I know some *nix varieties and BSD varieties do this really well, but one wonders if they were thinking this far in the future when they developed OSX. It'll be interesting to see...
No comments:
Post a Comment