Earendil
Nov 27, 03:16 PM
I find you the one that is incorrigible. The 23" inch price is competitive where it is as your link so eloquently points out. The Apple displays are easily worth a 15-20% mark-up. The problem is since the last time the display prices were updated 20" wide-screen panel prices have dropped nearly in half. So a year ago when Apple released this $699 price point it was a good price because competitors were selling the same panels at $599. Now they are at $399 and some times as low a $299. Apple's display is worth extra just not 75% to 100% extra.
I find what you say quite plausible. However a quick search finds all monitors in that price point to be of the S-PVA panel type, and not SWOP certified (or at least advertised as such). Perhaps a more in depth search would reveal the monitors you are talking about, or perhaps since you are making the claim, you are aware of some?
I fully suspect Apple has a markup on their pro-sumor monitors. However I'm tired of people using Dell monitors as an example for outrageous pricing. No one here, or in any argument I've seen recently, has offered a different comparison. My knowledge of monitors may not be up to date, but when I bought my monitor, Apple's prices were in line.
My apologies if I'm not easily swayed from what my own research has shown to be true, until someone can come up with something besides "you're wrong" :(
I mean absolutely no disrespect in any of my arguments...
I find what you say quite plausible. However a quick search finds all monitors in that price point to be of the S-PVA panel type, and not SWOP certified (or at least advertised as such). Perhaps a more in depth search would reveal the monitors you are talking about, or perhaps since you are making the claim, you are aware of some?
I fully suspect Apple has a markup on their pro-sumor monitors. However I'm tired of people using Dell monitors as an example for outrageous pricing. No one here, or in any argument I've seen recently, has offered a different comparison. My knowledge of monitors may not be up to date, but when I bought my monitor, Apple's prices were in line.
My apologies if I'm not easily swayed from what my own research has shown to be true, until someone can come up with something besides "you're wrong" :(
I mean absolutely no disrespect in any of my arguments...
LethalWolfe
Apr 12, 09:07 PM
Change that is an actual improvement is great. Change for the sake of change is not. On the consumer side things can almost never be made too simple or easy. On the manufacturing side, the creating side the professional side there are many times complex problems to solve and those problems require more complicated tools.
Lethal
Lethal
kasei
Sep 6, 06:06 PM
High quality and the ability to burn them is at the top of my list. I would also like to see a reduction of time it takes for a movie to go from the big screen to my laptop screen.
If Apple and the Entertainment Indudstry are able to do that, they will have a hit on their hands.
If Apple and the Entertainment Indudstry are able to do that, they will have a hit on their hands.
miloblithe
Aug 31, 02:36 PM
I really think it's about time the Superdrive came standard on all Apple computers, it 2006 not 1996. Hopefully the MacBook will also get Superdrive in both models.
The first mac to even come with the option of a superdrive (meaning writes DVDs) was the PowerMac G4 that came out January 2001. In 1996, Macs didn't even come with CD-R drives.
The first mac to even come with the option of a superdrive (meaning writes DVDs) was the PowerMac G4 that came out January 2001. In 1996, Macs didn't even come with CD-R drives.
gkarris
Nov 29, 09:26 AM
I think that 17" is great - they've got'em already with the iMac. Prices to need to drop with the market. They'll still be more as the monitors are of better quality. IMHO:
17" - $399
20" - $599
23" - $899
30" - $1899
Bring back a $499 Mac Mini and a basic mouse and you have an inexpensive system!
(Maybe Apple could make a special "bundle" for $899?)
17" - $399
20" - $599
23" - $899
30" - $1899
Bring back a $499 Mac Mini and a basic mouse and you have an inexpensive system!
(Maybe Apple could make a special "bundle" for $899?)
newdeal
Mar 25, 06:38 PM
It makes me laugh that people are saying bad things about this when the playbook did it it was the best thing ever and the software it was displaying wasn't nearly so advanced
WannaBMW3
Mar 22, 08:34 PM
Thank goodness...
I'm in desperate need to upgrade my 2nd gen. iPod... :(
I'm in desperate need to upgrade my 2nd gen. iPod... :(
Erwin-Br
Mar 24, 04:40 PM
Because they suck, and have put up subpar product offerings. Also, those products need a NUCLEAR REACTOR to power and burn houses quicker than gas does.
Okay, so it's more power hungry. Not an issue on a Mac Pro workstation, though. Anything else?
Okay, so it's more power hungry. Not an issue on a Mac Pro workstation, though. Anything else?
prady16
Oct 23, 09:38 AM
http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/intelcoreduo.html
That no longer exists. Go to the mbp page and click the core duo icon, and I get a page not found.
This will probably change by the time anyone verifies it. :rolleyes:
This has been so for a loooong time now. Probably over a month.
The correct link is: http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/intel.html
I guess the webmaster is just sleeping on the job!
Or is too busy preparing new pages for the *redesigned* MBP! :D
Edit: Oops deputy_doofy beat me to it!
That no longer exists. Go to the mbp page and click the core duo icon, and I get a page not found.
This will probably change by the time anyone verifies it. :rolleyes:
This has been so for a loooong time now. Probably over a month.
The correct link is: http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/intel.html
I guess the webmaster is just sleeping on the job!
Or is too busy preparing new pages for the *redesigned* MBP! :D
Edit: Oops deputy_doofy beat me to it!
laynemoseley
Sep 14, 09:40 AM
They are just doing it for publicity I bet...
I've only had one dropped call with my iPhone 4 since it came out... Way better than my 3GS.
I've only had one dropped call with my iPhone 4 since it came out... Way better than my 3GS.
Evangelion
Jul 14, 05:33 AM
There will be more media once there are more players, and there will be more players once there is more media. Which goes first? Players, naturally. Apple and the rest of the industry will just have to begin selling the players, and then the content will follow. Very soon I'd guess. The new Blu-Ray media can be sold at premium, so I think there will be a lot of discs to buy once certain threshold of players have been installed.
Well, PS3 will have Blu-Ray in it. And if PS3 is even moderately succesfull, it would mean lots of Blu-Ray-players in the market.
Well, PS3 will have Blu-Ray in it. And if PS3 is even moderately succesfull, it would mean lots of Blu-Ray-players in the market.
KnightWRX
Apr 26, 02:09 PM
Does apple use the term "applications" for their software as opposed to "programs" like windows.
Microsoft has used both programs and application for decades.
ding ding ding. I agree.
The store is called the App Store. You can't copy someones store name.
The point that has been brought forth to the USPTO is that Apple has no right to an exclusive mark on App Store because of its descriptive and generic nature. This is not like the examples you cite, the problem is not that Apple has a shoe store they want to call Yellow, it's that they have a shoe store they want to call shoe store.
Microsoft has used both programs and application for decades.
ding ding ding. I agree.
The store is called the App Store. You can't copy someones store name.
The point that has been brought forth to the USPTO is that Apple has no right to an exclusive mark on App Store because of its descriptive and generic nature. This is not like the examples you cite, the problem is not that Apple has a shoe store they want to call Yellow, it's that they have a shoe store they want to call shoe store.
DrEasy
Mar 23, 02:08 AM
With a bigger hard drive, it would be conceivable to think of the iPod classic as a portable hard drive that you could also use for Time Machine backups. I would have a greater incentive in backing up my files if I could use my iPod that is always nearby. It would back up my files as I'm recharging it.
Or look at it the other way: there's plenty of portable hard drives in the market, but how many of you carry one "just in case"? Whereas if the portable hard drive doubles up as a very competent MP3 player, you will always have it with you.
Now there should be some data protection scheme so that if someone steals your iPod they can't use all your data. Encryption + some kind of pairing with your machines should do the job.
I know I'd buy such a thing...
Or look at it the other way: there's plenty of portable hard drives in the market, but how many of you carry one "just in case"? Whereas if the portable hard drive doubles up as a very competent MP3 player, you will always have it with you.
Now there should be some data protection scheme so that if someone steals your iPod they can't use all your data. Encryption + some kind of pairing with your machines should do the job.
I know I'd buy such a thing...
aquajet
Sep 6, 09:22 AM
The latest pathetic Mac Mini upgrade continues to highlight the idiocy of the decision to build a cheap 'switcher' computer using expensive notebook parts.
Sometimes it's about form over function. This is nothing new for Apple.
Sometimes it's about form over function. This is nothing new for Apple.
JesterJJZ
Jul 13, 11:48 PM
there are what, about four movies on BluRay? how much do each cost? If there are barely any players, what's the point of blank media? BTW, don't tell me about storage. if you want storage, get a portable 30 GB HD.I'm not saying I don't think BluRay won't be really cool. it'll just be more reasonable come MWSF time.
I think there are about 20-30 titles available for both BluRay and HDDVD, though I know I only saw a small selection at Best Buy. They were all priced around $24.99. Perfectly reasonsable and comparable to how the launch of standard DVDs went, though I think those had a higher launch price. I rememver movies debuting at $30 bucks. Players started around $700 i think.
I think there are about 20-30 titles available for both BluRay and HDDVD, though I know I only saw a small selection at Best Buy. They were all priced around $24.99. Perfectly reasonsable and comparable to how the launch of standard DVDs went, though I think those had a higher launch price. I rememver movies debuting at $30 bucks. Players started around $700 i think.
aswitcher
Jan 12, 04:16 PM
Perhaps AIR is an acronym?
Apple I______ R______ :)
Apple Is Righteous
Apple Internet Remote
Apple I______ R______ :)
Apple Is Righteous
Apple Internet Remote
ten-oak-druid
Apr 26, 02:11 PM
Try again what ? It's not a word mark, it's a typed drawing, meaning you could trademark Pet Store too if it is a different drawing all together (different font, different shape, different color).
It's basically a logo trademark, like let's say : :apple:
Your point is that you cannot find such a trademark as "app store" in the standard character format because "app store" is too general right? The other person posted that "pet store" would be a ridiculous example of this.
"Registration of a mark in the standard character format will provide broad rights, namely use in any manner of presentation."
Source: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/index.jsp
Ok fair enough. Pet store was registered in the stylized or design format.
But your basic argument against Apple is that they cannot use app store as a trademark in the broader text format because it is too general. But this is not the only example of such a thing.
If this is the case then Apple Store will be thrown out too. It is the same type of trademark. Two words, not one and not preceded by "the".
App Store
Apple Store
The other argument is that "app" is too generic and that the term was around prior to the trademark. I do not believe this is valid either as "app" may have existed but was not widely used. The argument would have been used agains the prior trademark of "appstore" in that case.
One thing is for sure. Our opinions will have no bearing on the final outcome.
1. Look, the form in which it was trademarked matters. Otherwise, there would only be 1 type of mark. You can overrule it all you want, in the end you were wrong.
2. App is as much a part of the lexicon as pet. I know I've been using it for more than a decade.
You define the lexicon of the overall society?
The point that has been brought forth to the USPTO is that Apple has no right to an exclusive mark on App Store because of its descriptive and generic nature. This is not like the examples you cite, the problem is not that Apple has a shoe store they want to call Yellow, it's that they have a shoe store they want to call shoe store.
That is the problem defined by people who object to Apple's trademark. It has not been decided whether Apple's trademark should be invalidated based on this opinion yet.
It's basically a logo trademark, like let's say : :apple:
Your point is that you cannot find such a trademark as "app store" in the standard character format because "app store" is too general right? The other person posted that "pet store" would be a ridiculous example of this.
"Registration of a mark in the standard character format will provide broad rights, namely use in any manner of presentation."
Source: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/index.jsp
Ok fair enough. Pet store was registered in the stylized or design format.
But your basic argument against Apple is that they cannot use app store as a trademark in the broader text format because it is too general. But this is not the only example of such a thing.
If this is the case then Apple Store will be thrown out too. It is the same type of trademark. Two words, not one and not preceded by "the".
App Store
Apple Store
The other argument is that "app" is too generic and that the term was around prior to the trademark. I do not believe this is valid either as "app" may have existed but was not widely used. The argument would have been used agains the prior trademark of "appstore" in that case.
One thing is for sure. Our opinions will have no bearing on the final outcome.
1. Look, the form in which it was trademarked matters. Otherwise, there would only be 1 type of mark. You can overrule it all you want, in the end you were wrong.
2. App is as much a part of the lexicon as pet. I know I've been using it for more than a decade.
You define the lexicon of the overall society?
The point that has been brought forth to the USPTO is that Apple has no right to an exclusive mark on App Store because of its descriptive and generic nature. This is not like the examples you cite, the problem is not that Apple has a shoe store they want to call Yellow, it's that they have a shoe store they want to call shoe store.
That is the problem defined by people who object to Apple's trademark. It has not been decided whether Apple's trademark should be invalidated based on this opinion yet.
MacMan86
Apr 23, 12:03 PM
It's fun reading about people who try to justify privacy invasion because Apple does it but would be raising a ruckus if it was Microsoft or anyone else. The double standard and blind following is funny.
If that is your idea of fun, you really need to get out more.
See my post above for innocuous reasoning behind all of this. It's nothing like as sinister as you would like to believe. Data is not being sent back to Apple.
If that is your idea of fun, you really need to get out more.
See my post above for innocuous reasoning behind all of this. It's nothing like as sinister as you would like to believe. Data is not being sent back to Apple.
Josias
Aug 7, 01:22 AM
They should post this:
http://img206.imageshack.us/img206/2733/windowsvistagc0.jpg
I love Apple slaughtering Windows...:D
http://img206.imageshack.us/img206/2733/windowsvistagc0.jpg
I love Apple slaughtering Windows...:D
michaelrjohnson
Aug 6, 10:16 PM
Yeah, I'll be taking my lunch at noon (Central)... Maaaybe, just Maaaaybe I might be late getting back to work. ;)
On another note, I'm as excited about WWDC as the next member, but all these threads are starting to sound the same! :rolleyes::)
On another note, I'm as excited about WWDC as the next member, but all these threads are starting to sound the same! :rolleyes::)
Surely
Nov 24, 03:32 PM
http://img4.realsimple.com/images/0911/chicken-trader-joes_300.jpghttp://library.thinkquest.org/03oct/00923/carrots.jpghttp://www.juicingcafe.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/celery2.jpg
http://www.scienceinmotion.co.il/blog/uploaded_images/onion-726176.jpghttp://www.thedailygreen.com/cm/thedailygreen/images/SA/garlic-pf2-lg.jpghttp://visualrecipes.com/images/uploads/recipe_images/91_image7.jpg
http://www.wegmans.com/prodimg/645/200/070227500645.jpg
Nom.
http://www.scienceinmotion.co.il/blog/uploaded_images/onion-726176.jpghttp://www.thedailygreen.com/cm/thedailygreen/images/SA/garlic-pf2-lg.jpghttp://visualrecipes.com/images/uploads/recipe_images/91_image7.jpg
http://www.wegmans.com/prodimg/645/200/070227500645.jpg
Nom.
bobsentell
May 2, 05:53 PM
Man that Windows dialog is horrible. Why is there so much info? Are the file size and image dimensions influencing whether or not I want to delete it? And the classic Windows "Yes" and "No" buttons (instead of having something useful like Cancel and Delete. If that dialog pops up, you have to squint your eyes and look all over until you see "Delete ..." in the upper left corner, then take a second to make sure "Yes" actually means "Delete". And if you want to cancel, should you hit "No" or the X in the top right?
Man, that OS X dialog IS NOTHING like that Aero dialog.
Well, considering the dialog box says "Are you sure you want to delete xxxx?" I think a "Yes" or "No" are the best possible choices.
Man, that OS X dialog IS NOTHING like that Aero dialog.
Well, considering the dialog box says "Are you sure you want to delete xxxx?" I think a "Yes" or "No" are the best possible choices.
Starbuckfsd
Mar 23, 09:23 PM
The chance that the iPod Classic is updated to 220GB is zero. Apple has no plans to ever update a hard drive based non-touch portable device (they would not waste their time), and they've shown even less interest in increasing the capacity of any device beyond even 64GB flash.
Tony
You wanna know WHY they haven't gone past 64GB Flash? It's too damn expensive still....Sucks they can't bump the iPhone up to 64GB, although there are rumors to a 64GB iPhone5....we can only hope
Tony
You wanna know WHY they haven't gone past 64GB Flash? It's too damn expensive still....Sucks they can't bump the iPhone up to 64GB, although there are rumors to a 64GB iPhone5....we can only hope
FireStar
Oct 24, 06:06 PM
$1 cases on eBay is good enough to protect from scratches IMO.
Any case that covers it protects from scratches other than slides, I think. :confused:
We need more of a definition than prevents scratches. That slims it down to most cases.
Any case that covers it protects from scratches other than slides, I think. :confused:
We need more of a definition than prevents scratches. That slims it down to most cases.
No comments:
Post a Comment