2nyRiggz
Sep 13, 09:17 PM
Its an ipod with a longer screen and a slider.....well at least for me I see nothing too interesting in it...just another ipod you can talk to.
Still neat though.
Bless
Still neat though.
Bless
SeattleMoose
Apr 30, 03:20 PM
for a couple more years.....
Thunderboy is still "bleeding edge" and nobody wants to go and have to buy a bunch of new peripherals (as if there were any yet....:eek:)
Thunderboy is still "bleeding edge" and nobody wants to go and have to buy a bunch of new peripherals (as if there were any yet....:eek:)
lilo777
Apr 19, 12:56 PM
if samsung stops providing displays to apple, it would be the best thing ever..NO MORE YELLOW TINT ISSUES!!!
Right. No screens - no tint. Great solution.
Yeah, because Samsung doesn't have a huge interest in Apple buying it's product. If you think being dropped as a vendor for Apple's consumption of 40 + million iPad screens and iPhone screens, per year, wouldn't hurt, you're delusional.
No they don't,. Apple is just 4% of their sales. Apple, on the other hand, can hardly release any hardware (with exception of battery chargers, perhaps) without Samsung components.
Right. No screens - no tint. Great solution.
Yeah, because Samsung doesn't have a huge interest in Apple buying it's product. If you think being dropped as a vendor for Apple's consumption of 40 + million iPad screens and iPhone screens, per year, wouldn't hurt, you're delusional.
No they don't,. Apple is just 4% of their sales. Apple, on the other hand, can hardly release any hardware (with exception of battery chargers, perhaps) without Samsung components.
vitaboy
Aug 24, 04:34 PM
First, $100 million is load of money for anyone. Time was, not so long ago, that reporting a $100 million quarterly profit was a big deal for Apple. The iPod doesn't "make" $6 billion a year for Apple. That's just revenue. Profits are a faction of that revenue.
This might be a valid point, except that the $100 million payout isn't being charged against profits. Instead, it is being recorded as an asset and ammortized over many years, meaning it will have very minimal impact to the bottom line.
Second, Creative doesn't "give up" anything but a license to Apple for technology Apple was using before for nothing. No matter how you cut it, the license fee come right out of Apple's bottom line.
I believe this is incorrect. Just because Apple is paying the fee doesn't mean it comes directly out of Apple's profits. As stated above, the licensing fee will be ammortized over several years and thus the impact to the bottom line will be nil.
Secondly, the fee is conditional. If Creative manages to secure other licensing deals, they pay Apple back some of that $100 million. Perhaps all, if the other fees are substantial. That sounds more like a "loan" to me.
If this can be called a "win" for Apple, it's in their getting this issue squared away relatively quickly, so it doesn't overhang the next generation of iPod releases. The long-term impacts of allowing the suit to drag on could have been considerable, just as it was for RIM. Especially if in the end, they lost.
No disagreement with this. The only thing is that NTP never agreed to pay RIM back part of its licensing fee if it was successful in securing new licensees. And NTP didn't decide to become a maker of Blackberry add-on devices.
By officially becoming a member of the "Made for iPod" program, Creative is basically unofficially pre-announcing that it is exiting the player business (contrary to official denial, which are necessary in order for it to sell of remaining inventory). Zen's lost huge marketshare against Sandisk, of all companies, and there's no way Zen will hold on to what little marketshare it has with Zune entering the scene. Not to mention that "Zen" and "Zune" are phonetically similar, which all but guarantees the situation will be hopeless for the Zen line of players.
Creative realized it makes more sense to extract licensing fees from Microsoft for Zune than try to compete directly as it had against the iPod.
With that exit strategy tucked under its belt, it's now free to focus on creating great iPod accessories, which will require far less R&D than music players, and will actually be profitable.
Apple "lost" all right. Here's a summary from The Motley Fool
Apple Gets Creative (http://www.fool.com/News/mft/2006/mft06082410.htm)
What's more, Apple is allowed to recoup costs if others agree to license Creative's patent. Will there be other deals? It's a good bet Creative will try to secure some; the $100 million the firm is getting from Apple will juice per-share earnings by $0.85 in the current quarter.
Plus, there are plenty of targets, with the biggest and most obvious being Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT). Its planned Zune player is expected out before the holiday season. Creative could get ahold of a beta version of the device and, if there's evidence of a patent violation, file suit and petition for an injunction.
Apple would love nothing better, of course. But even if Mr. Softy and other i-wannabes avoid the courts, they're unlikely to avoid the extra time and expense of working around Creative's patent. That, too, is a win for the Mac maker. Well done, Steve.
This is what would be called Pyrrhic victory for Creative. Sure, it looks like they won the battle, but only at such a cost that it ends up being a defeat in the long term.
This might be a valid point, except that the $100 million payout isn't being charged against profits. Instead, it is being recorded as an asset and ammortized over many years, meaning it will have very minimal impact to the bottom line.
Second, Creative doesn't "give up" anything but a license to Apple for technology Apple was using before for nothing. No matter how you cut it, the license fee come right out of Apple's bottom line.
I believe this is incorrect. Just because Apple is paying the fee doesn't mean it comes directly out of Apple's profits. As stated above, the licensing fee will be ammortized over several years and thus the impact to the bottom line will be nil.
Secondly, the fee is conditional. If Creative manages to secure other licensing deals, they pay Apple back some of that $100 million. Perhaps all, if the other fees are substantial. That sounds more like a "loan" to me.
If this can be called a "win" for Apple, it's in their getting this issue squared away relatively quickly, so it doesn't overhang the next generation of iPod releases. The long-term impacts of allowing the suit to drag on could have been considerable, just as it was for RIM. Especially if in the end, they lost.
No disagreement with this. The only thing is that NTP never agreed to pay RIM back part of its licensing fee if it was successful in securing new licensees. And NTP didn't decide to become a maker of Blackberry add-on devices.
By officially becoming a member of the "Made for iPod" program, Creative is basically unofficially pre-announcing that it is exiting the player business (contrary to official denial, which are necessary in order for it to sell of remaining inventory). Zen's lost huge marketshare against Sandisk, of all companies, and there's no way Zen will hold on to what little marketshare it has with Zune entering the scene. Not to mention that "Zen" and "Zune" are phonetically similar, which all but guarantees the situation will be hopeless for the Zen line of players.
Creative realized it makes more sense to extract licensing fees from Microsoft for Zune than try to compete directly as it had against the iPod.
With that exit strategy tucked under its belt, it's now free to focus on creating great iPod accessories, which will require far less R&D than music players, and will actually be profitable.
Apple "lost" all right. Here's a summary from The Motley Fool
Apple Gets Creative (http://www.fool.com/News/mft/2006/mft06082410.htm)
What's more, Apple is allowed to recoup costs if others agree to license Creative's patent. Will there be other deals? It's a good bet Creative will try to secure some; the $100 million the firm is getting from Apple will juice per-share earnings by $0.85 in the current quarter.
Plus, there are plenty of targets, with the biggest and most obvious being Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT). Its planned Zune player is expected out before the holiday season. Creative could get ahold of a beta version of the device and, if there's evidence of a patent violation, file suit and petition for an injunction.
Apple would love nothing better, of course. But even if Mr. Softy and other i-wannabes avoid the courts, they're unlikely to avoid the extra time and expense of working around Creative's patent. That, too, is a win for the Mac maker. Well done, Steve.
This is what would be called Pyrrhic victory for Creative. Sure, it looks like they won the battle, but only at such a cost that it ends up being a defeat in the long term.
UberMac
Sep 15, 05:30 PM
A shame about scrapping the idea of a ground up design - I hope that doesn't lead to a lack of innovation. That's what really leads Apple along! Although if they just make a killer phone (I'm sure they will at some point...) it's bound to sell buckets loads!
Uber
Uber
Chef Medeski
Sep 12, 05:11 PM
Kind of a huge gap, don'cha think? For an extra $100 I can nearly TRIPLE the capacity? Why would I even consider a 30 GB model?
Or you could purchase a 8GB Nano for the same price which is less than 1/3 the capacity.
Or you could purchase a 8GB Nano for the same price which is less than 1/3 the capacity.
Benjy91
Mar 29, 11:35 AM
When Windows starts to come close to SL in terms of ease of use and functionality let me know ;)
Sorry I'm late, Windows 7 launched October 22, 2009. And its been awesome since.
Sorry I'm late, Windows 7 launched October 22, 2009. And its been awesome since.
BRLawyer
Sep 9, 11:48 AM
Well, since I have to suffer from your rabid fanboyishness as well (and it seems that I'm not the only one), then surely I can say something? I mean, it's not like your posts are invisible or something. Besides, if you post public messages on a public web-forum, do you REALLY have any grounds to complain if someone replies to your post?
Yes, I do, when such replies tell of personal offenses and nothing else...just read the rules of the forum. I was writing to Mr. Shaw, bashing PCs and praising Macs...nothing else.
The only remarks that may be close to "offenses" occur exactly when I have to reply to your stressed words that show a really angry and stupid degree of overreaction...relax, this is just a computer forum, and a MAC one for that matter.
Ah yeah, from the Apple Suisse website:
Le Mac le plus rapide jamais conçu.
Depuis l'annonce de la transition vers les nouveaux processeurs Intel, vous rêvez certainement d'un ordinateur de bureau professionnel offrant des performances hors pair.
Yes, I do, when such replies tell of personal offenses and nothing else...just read the rules of the forum. I was writing to Mr. Shaw, bashing PCs and praising Macs...nothing else.
The only remarks that may be close to "offenses" occur exactly when I have to reply to your stressed words that show a really angry and stupid degree of overreaction...relax, this is just a computer forum, and a MAC one for that matter.
Ah yeah, from the Apple Suisse website:
Le Mac le plus rapide jamais conçu.
Depuis l'annonce de la transition vers les nouveaux processeurs Intel, vous rêvez certainement d'un ordinateur de bureau professionnel offrant des performances hors pair.
pmjoe
Mar 23, 08:29 AM
LaCie 1TB Little Big Disk (http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?pid=11625), available Summer 2011. 10Gb/s transfer rate; copy an HD movie in 30 seconds.
LOL! You might want to ask them what the data rates on the actual hard drive (or drives) in the case is. LaCie makes nice stuff, but it's quite gimmicky to only talk about interface transfer rates when the real performance is dependent on the hard drives.
LOL! You might want to ask them what the data rates on the actual hard drive (or drives) in the case is. LaCie makes nice stuff, but it's quite gimmicky to only talk about interface transfer rates when the real performance is dependent on the hard drives.
Hellhammer
Apr 14, 01:27 PM
So is TB actually included in the chipset or does it still need a separate controller? Sandy Bridge and Intel 6-series chipsets already support Thunderbolt "capability". In my ears this sounds like TB will not be included in the chipset which makes this piece of news more or less useless. USB 3.0 support has been known for months now.
MagnusVonMagnum
Apr 16, 09:23 AM
Or you could just buy a multi-port Thunderbolt adapter(that supports USB 3) for less than $10 when they are released making your half-baked scenario completely worthless.
Yes because everyone loves to carry around external breakout boxes with their sleek portable Macbooks.... :rolleyes:
And $10? For Thunderbolt? You are DREAMING. You can't even get a decent USB2 hub for $10.
Oh and why would someone pay extra money for a drive that can reach at the LOWEST twice the performance of USB 3? Gee, I wonder. I'd love to know where you got the sales figures from also. From your ass perhaps?
Twice the performance of USB3? That would be Thunderbolt's maximum possible data rate. No single consumer hard drive on earth supports that kind of speed (let alone even USB3's top speed) so I haven't a clue what you're getting at. Why would someone pay MORE to get a drive that is no faster than a USB3 drive? They would almost certainly have to as demand determines price/availability and there is nearly zero demand for TB devices at this point in time while USB3 are backwards compatible with the vast majority of the computers on the planet. My sales figures are based on the relative cost of drives with Firewire interfaces (the closest example that already exists to Thunderbolt in terms of technology versus low demand) against drives that only support USB2 and/or USB3. There is always a large premium for a drive with a FW interface, even today when a fair amount of computers exist with FW interfaces (i.e. SOME demand). Therefore TB compatible drives will likely cost considerably more money than USB3 drives for the SAME underlying drive. You will pay a premium for the interface just like Firewire to offset the higher costs of low production numbers created by little demand compared to USB3/2 interfaces. There will be no speed advantage on a consumer drive because no consumer drive even comes CLOSE to the limits of either interface. So unlike YOUR $10 scenario, I didn't just make a number up out of thin air. Furthermore, the scenario is hardly half-baked given USB drives are already common at places like Best Buy (I personally already own TWO 3TB USB3 drives) so the unlikely 'friend' in the stated scenario would be more likely to already own a USB3 drive than a currently non-existent TB drive that will undoubtedly cost MORE when it does finally arrive.
TB is more suited to high-end professional use where maximum overall data throughput (probably across multiple banks of drives per interface) and low overhead is desired (e.g. professional video, future high-speed server banks, live audio, etc.) The average consumer doesn't want to pay $50-100 more for FW800 drive interface over USB2 today (nor is their computer even likely to have FW if it's not a Mac) even if does have a benefit over USB2. They certainly aren't going to want to pay a potentially larger premium to get the same relative performance (perhaps with a bit of CPU overhead differences) versus USB3 with today's drives that don't come near USB3 levels, let alone Thunderbolt.
Be my guest and continue to insult and rant and dream big of TB heaven where USB doesn't exist. I live in a more practical and logical world.
Yes because everyone loves to carry around external breakout boxes with their sleek portable Macbooks.... :rolleyes:
And $10? For Thunderbolt? You are DREAMING. You can't even get a decent USB2 hub for $10.
Oh and why would someone pay extra money for a drive that can reach at the LOWEST twice the performance of USB 3? Gee, I wonder. I'd love to know where you got the sales figures from also. From your ass perhaps?
Twice the performance of USB3? That would be Thunderbolt's maximum possible data rate. No single consumer hard drive on earth supports that kind of speed (let alone even USB3's top speed) so I haven't a clue what you're getting at. Why would someone pay MORE to get a drive that is no faster than a USB3 drive? They would almost certainly have to as demand determines price/availability and there is nearly zero demand for TB devices at this point in time while USB3 are backwards compatible with the vast majority of the computers on the planet. My sales figures are based on the relative cost of drives with Firewire interfaces (the closest example that already exists to Thunderbolt in terms of technology versus low demand) against drives that only support USB2 and/or USB3. There is always a large premium for a drive with a FW interface, even today when a fair amount of computers exist with FW interfaces (i.e. SOME demand). Therefore TB compatible drives will likely cost considerably more money than USB3 drives for the SAME underlying drive. You will pay a premium for the interface just like Firewire to offset the higher costs of low production numbers created by little demand compared to USB3/2 interfaces. There will be no speed advantage on a consumer drive because no consumer drive even comes CLOSE to the limits of either interface. So unlike YOUR $10 scenario, I didn't just make a number up out of thin air. Furthermore, the scenario is hardly half-baked given USB drives are already common at places like Best Buy (I personally already own TWO 3TB USB3 drives) so the unlikely 'friend' in the stated scenario would be more likely to already own a USB3 drive than a currently non-existent TB drive that will undoubtedly cost MORE when it does finally arrive.
TB is more suited to high-end professional use where maximum overall data throughput (probably across multiple banks of drives per interface) and low overhead is desired (e.g. professional video, future high-speed server banks, live audio, etc.) The average consumer doesn't want to pay $50-100 more for FW800 drive interface over USB2 today (nor is their computer even likely to have FW if it's not a Mac) even if does have a benefit over USB2. They certainly aren't going to want to pay a potentially larger premium to get the same relative performance (perhaps with a bit of CPU overhead differences) versus USB3 with today's drives that don't come near USB3 levels, let alone Thunderbolt.
Be my guest and continue to insult and rant and dream big of TB heaven where USB doesn't exist. I live in a more practical and logical world.
TheManOfSilver
Sep 5, 08:49 PM
I'll drink to this club "iWillBuyWhateverCoolAppleGadgetComesOutOnThe12th"
Seconded :D
Seconded :D
LagunaSol
Apr 28, 11:02 PM
The interesting part is that Microsoft makes almost the same profit as Apple on far less revenue, but you never hear any outrage about Microsoft overpricing its products. :confused:
gnasher729
Oct 28, 01:07 PM
This has NOTHING to do with environmentalism, president Bush, or freedom of speech. It has to do with a the organizers of a privately held event kicking out an attendee for violating the terms it had set.
Not quite. This is one attendee that proved to be troublemaker in the past, who made the mistake of not following the terms to the tiniest detail, thereby giving the organisers an excuse for kicking them out. If lets say NVidia or ATI were showing graphics cards that are of interest to Macintosh users, and they were violating the terms of the organizers in the same way, nothing would happen at all.
That said, I wouldn't have let them in in the first place. It seems that their attack against Apple was mostly caused by Apple not making any actual promises about environmental issues - Greenpeace measured companies mostly by the amount of promises they made, and Apple is more into action.
Not quite. This is one attendee that proved to be troublemaker in the past, who made the mistake of not following the terms to the tiniest detail, thereby giving the organisers an excuse for kicking them out. If lets say NVidia or ATI were showing graphics cards that are of interest to Macintosh users, and they were violating the terms of the organizers in the same way, nothing would happen at all.
That said, I wouldn't have let them in in the first place. It seems that their attack against Apple was mostly caused by Apple not making any actual promises about environmental issues - Greenpeace measured companies mostly by the amount of promises they made, and Apple is more into action.
cube
Mar 30, 01:31 PM
Notice how its 1 word. "RoomStore". Room Store wouldn't fly. Its the little things
When would "Room Store" not fly? For a hotel?
When would "Room Store" not fly? For a hotel?
shartypants
Apr 28, 04:16 PM
he he, time Microsoft took some Viagra in its old age ;)
bleaknik
Mar 22, 02:10 PM
Perfect, just the news I've been waiting for. Currently have an Early-2008 model which I purchased in September just in need of a bit more power really! Also welcoming the extra USB ports and built in SD reader, Thunderbolt on the newer ones will be nice for an external HDD!
The built-in optical drive on my iMac seems broken too, keeps spitting out disks! :(
Looking forward to the new models!
Spitting out disks! I had problems with the slot loading drives in my Mac Mini and Macbook Pros. It was greatly improved with a $10 DVD/CD cleaning kit. Worth giving a shot...
The built-in optical drive on my iMac seems broken too, keeps spitting out disks! :(
Looking forward to the new models!
Spitting out disks! I had problems with the slot loading drives in my Mac Mini and Macbook Pros. It was greatly improved with a $10 DVD/CD cleaning kit. Worth giving a shot...
mi5moav
Sep 1, 07:10 AM
yup, this would be vertical acquisition, well probably more diagonal
Consumer Photography/Video- Apple knows something about this
Consumer Printing - Apple knows something about this
Apple has shipped over a million cameras in the last quarter alone so they do know something about the business.
Business- Canon is a big name in business Apple needs to get in
Medical - Canon is a big name in Medicine Apple needs to get in
Apple needs to grow, they must make shareholders Happy... this world revolves around shareholders, that's it, well actually making WallStreet Happy.
Then tell me what you would do with $10billion in Cash?
It's either that or give it all to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
Consumer Photography/Video- Apple knows something about this
Consumer Printing - Apple knows something about this
Apple has shipped over a million cameras in the last quarter alone so they do know something about the business.
Business- Canon is a big name in business Apple needs to get in
Medical - Canon is a big name in Medicine Apple needs to get in
Apple needs to grow, they must make shareholders Happy... this world revolves around shareholders, that's it, well actually making WallStreet Happy.
Then tell me what you would do with $10billion in Cash?
It's either that or give it all to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
bchreng
May 3, 01:45 PM
GPU - Are you graphic editing? I don't think any of the games on the Mac really tax the GPU yet. I'd say no.
If allows me to run Starcraft 2 at the insanely high native resolution with all the details set to high at 60 fps, I'd spring for it.
If allows me to run Starcraft 2 at the insanely high native resolution with all the details set to high at 60 fps, I'd spring for it.
miles01110
Apr 20, 10:21 AM
News flash... your cell phone provider already has all this data anyways. It's somewhat disturbing that Apple decided to store it in cleartext, but who cares? Mobile security is nonexistant anyways.
jonnysods
Mar 30, 12:32 PM
MS: Spend some money on R&D
Reach
Sep 14, 09:32 AM
Macbook Pro's and photographers fits perfectly imo, I can't see why some of you think hardware for photographers is unlikely..
GFLPraxis
Jul 14, 07:25 PM
Did anyone pay attention to the power and thermal requirements of Conroe?
Is it more than a G5? I see someone posted PowerMac processor power consumption, but those were dual processors in a PowerMac. I want to see how much power the single G5 in an iMac consumed.
Is it more than a G5? I see someone posted PowerMac processor power consumption, but those were dual processors in a PowerMac. I want to see how much power the single G5 in an iMac consumed.
myca
Mar 23, 04:04 PM
I will be tempted by new 27" imac once they hit, got some in our office a few weeks ago and they are lovely machines, and as much as I'd prefer a mac pro, they really beyond what I need from a machine (and the price).
I would like to know if the new thunderbolt port can still do the target display mode, as if I get one I'd be getting rid of my two old 22" displays and I'd want to have my windows rig running through the display for certain things.
I heard lame snide remarks like yours when USB first showed up. "Only Macs have it! Are you sure compatible devices will arrive within 22 years? What USB devices are you planning to buy? When will they be available?" You don't even have the name right. Meh.
It was similar with the introduction of firewire, it took a while for peripherals to make use of the connection, and whenever rumours of it being dropped come around some users (myself included) are up in arms.
I would like to know if the new thunderbolt port can still do the target display mode, as if I get one I'd be getting rid of my two old 22" displays and I'd want to have my windows rig running through the display for certain things.
I heard lame snide remarks like yours when USB first showed up. "Only Macs have it! Are you sure compatible devices will arrive within 22 years? What USB devices are you planning to buy? When will they be available?" You don't even have the name right. Meh.
It was similar with the introduction of firewire, it took a while for peripherals to make use of the connection, and whenever rumours of it being dropped come around some users (myself included) are up in arms.
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar