Synapple
Apr 20, 02:00 PM
Let's not forget that big companies file lawsuits not only when they think they have a rock solid case.
Lawsuits are also filed to 1) deter competitors (not only the specific one that gets sued) and 2) raise a point in the media (in this case the point being Apple invents, competitors are copycats).
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.
Conversely, solid lawsuits are not brought forward because of the bad impact sueing might have in the media.
In this case Apple might have sued not necessarily because they think they'll win, but also, and maybe most importantly, to reinstate their position in the market. Even though some might read this as a crazy action from Apple, it is also likely that people with no particular tech interest (and still potential customers) will hear about it and get the message that Apple is defending what they have invented against a copycat.
Lawsuits are also filed to 1) deter competitors (not only the specific one that gets sued) and 2) raise a point in the media (in this case the point being Apple invents, competitors are copycats).
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.
Conversely, solid lawsuits are not brought forward because of the bad impact sueing might have in the media.
In this case Apple might have sued not necessarily because they think they'll win, but also, and maybe most importantly, to reinstate their position in the market. Even though some might read this as a crazy action from Apple, it is also likely that people with no particular tech interest (and still potential customers) will hear about it and get the message that Apple is defending what they have invented against a copycat.
dclocke
Sep 19, 02:29 AM
2. It won't be any cooler and it won't have greater battery life, period. Unless Apple has an amazing new design in store.
I know there are conflicting sources on this issue. But here it is anyway:
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=288&type=expert&pid=10
These tests were conducted with no powersave features and wireless disabled. For what it's worth...
I know there are conflicting sources on this issue. But here it is anyway:
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=288&type=expert&pid=10
These tests were conducted with no powersave features and wireless disabled. For what it's worth...
rorschach
Apr 25, 01:46 PM
Hope nobody tells these lawyers that anybody who can access the location data can also get at the address book and text messages - OMG PRIVACY VIOLATION!
Exactly This is what I don't get. If the info was being sent back to Apple, THEN there would be a very legitimate complaint. But the only issue is that if someone gets a hold of your computer or phone, they could potentially access the file. That's no different than any other personal information! Keep your devices password protected and the backup file encrypted and the "issue" goes away.
Exactly This is what I don't get. If the info was being sent back to Apple, THEN there would be a very legitimate complaint. But the only issue is that if someone gets a hold of your computer or phone, they could potentially access the file. That's no different than any other personal information! Keep your devices password protected and the backup file encrypted and the "issue" goes away.
Denarius
Mar 22, 07:36 PM
Don't tell me a flagship armed with 100 Tomahawk missiles and full targeting information just happened to be passing.
I think if military action of this scale is even a possibility, whether you've made a decision, it's pretty normal to put the necessary pieces on standby. I believe keeping strategic targeting information regularly up to date is pretty normal military practise even when you're not at war.
I think if military action of this scale is even a possibility, whether you've made a decision, it's pretty normal to put the necessary pieces on standby. I believe keeping strategic targeting information regularly up to date is pretty normal military practise even when you're not at war.
shamino
Jul 14, 04:17 PM
According to Appleinsider, the Mac Pro would have 2 4x and 1 8x PCIe slots. I see two problems with this. (1) All higher-end PC mobos out now have at least 1 16x slot, some have 2 for SLI/Crossfire.
Re-read the article.
It says there will be three available slots - 2 4x and 1 8x. These are the slots that will not be used by factory-bundled devices.
The bundled ATI X1800/X1900 video card will be in a 16x slot. It probably won't physically fit anywhere else!
(2) Why only 3 slots? PCs have 6 or so (as did the Power Mac 9500 & 9600) with a few regular PCI slots.
4 slots. 3 unused. Not 3 total.
Most PCs don't have more slots, either. Sure you can find a few counter-examples, but 6-slot systems are not common. And with the exception of the PM 9500/9600, Apple has never shipped a 6-slot system. (The Quadra 950 had 5. Everything else shipped with 4 or less.)
Why would Apple shoot itself in the foot like this? The Mac Pro is supposed to be a lot better than all other PCs. It would be nice to have 2 16x lanes for SLI and a few PCI slots for older expansion cards and cards that don't need the bandwidth of PCIe. Besides, this is supposed to be a Pro Mac, which means professional people would want to add a bunch of cards, not just 3. I'd expect a person working in something like movie production would want to have dual graphics cards, a fiber channel card to connect to an xServe RAID and maybe an M-Audio sound card for audio input. Since I don't work in movie production, I wouldn't know, but it would make sense.
You seem to think that a Pro system must have the capability of accepting every hardware device ever invented. (And how do you do this without making the case six feet tall?)
Dual video cards are only used by gamers. I doubt gamers are going to be interested in buying one of these, for the same reason they don't buy other Macs - the software comes out for other platforms first.
As for FC interfaces, they can work fine in any of the available slots. And there's no need for audio cards when you've got S/PDIF optical audio in/out.
Remember also that a studio won't be doing both video and audio editing on the same console! The people who are expert at one job are not going to be expert at the other. And if your studio is so strapped for cash that the different editors have to share a single computer, then you're in pretty sad shape!
I don't think you realize what you're asking for. A system that is capable of performing all possible tasks at once is just unrealistic. Nobody will ever equip a system like that, because no user will have those kinds of requirements.
Even in the PC world, where more slots are common, you almost never find a system that has actually filled all those slots with devices.
Re-read the article.
It says there will be three available slots - 2 4x and 1 8x. These are the slots that will not be used by factory-bundled devices.
The bundled ATI X1800/X1900 video card will be in a 16x slot. It probably won't physically fit anywhere else!
(2) Why only 3 slots? PCs have 6 or so (as did the Power Mac 9500 & 9600) with a few regular PCI slots.
4 slots. 3 unused. Not 3 total.
Most PCs don't have more slots, either. Sure you can find a few counter-examples, but 6-slot systems are not common. And with the exception of the PM 9500/9600, Apple has never shipped a 6-slot system. (The Quadra 950 had 5. Everything else shipped with 4 or less.)
Why would Apple shoot itself in the foot like this? The Mac Pro is supposed to be a lot better than all other PCs. It would be nice to have 2 16x lanes for SLI and a few PCI slots for older expansion cards and cards that don't need the bandwidth of PCIe. Besides, this is supposed to be a Pro Mac, which means professional people would want to add a bunch of cards, not just 3. I'd expect a person working in something like movie production would want to have dual graphics cards, a fiber channel card to connect to an xServe RAID and maybe an M-Audio sound card for audio input. Since I don't work in movie production, I wouldn't know, but it would make sense.
You seem to think that a Pro system must have the capability of accepting every hardware device ever invented. (And how do you do this without making the case six feet tall?)
Dual video cards are only used by gamers. I doubt gamers are going to be interested in buying one of these, for the same reason they don't buy other Macs - the software comes out for other platforms first.
As for FC interfaces, they can work fine in any of the available slots. And there's no need for audio cards when you've got S/PDIF optical audio in/out.
Remember also that a studio won't be doing both video and audio editing on the same console! The people who are expert at one job are not going to be expert at the other. And if your studio is so strapped for cash that the different editors have to share a single computer, then you're in pretty sad shape!
I don't think you realize what you're asking for. A system that is capable of performing all possible tasks at once is just unrealistic. Nobody will ever equip a system like that, because no user will have those kinds of requirements.
Even in the PC world, where more slots are common, you almost never find a system that has actually filled all those slots with devices.
evilgEEk
Aug 11, 03:58 PM
I'm eligible for a new phone in just five days. As of right now I'm going to get the Chocolate because I like the style. Couldn't really care less about listening to music on my phone, that's what my iPod's for. ;)
But...but...if Apple does release a phone and I've already bought the Chocolate then I'll be kicking myself to no end. But on the other hand, how likely is it that the iPhone will even work on Verizon?
Bah! I need a new phone! :(
But...but...if Apple does release a phone and I've already bought the Chocolate then I'll be kicking myself to no end. But on the other hand, how likely is it that the iPhone will even work on Verizon?
Bah! I need a new phone! :(
Macnoviz
Jul 20, 10:02 AM
Notice time. I bags it, I said it first, it's MINE!!!
My only...
My Mactopus...
Mactopus on Google gives you 18 hits
My only...
My Mactopus...
Mactopus on Google gives you 18 hits
cmaier
Apr 19, 01:42 PM
Apple better not win this case and anyone who thinks that they should are a fool.
Anyone who offers an opinion that people who disagree with them are fools, without even having read the 350+ complaint, might be a fool.
Wich of apple's specific claims do you disagree with?
Anyone who offers an opinion that people who disagree with them are fools, without even having read the 350+ complaint, might be a fool.
Wich of apple's specific claims do you disagree with?
bep207
Aug 15, 01:03 PM
has adobe dropped any hints as to when CS3 will be available
Macnoviz
Jul 20, 08:23 AM
Would be a very long keynote too:
- release date of 10.5 revealed - possibly more stuff revealed
- new software (considerable update to iWork if the rumours are true)
- iMac/MacBook updates
- iPod/iTunes stuff
Strike:
- release date of 10.5 revealed - possibly more stuff revealed
Insert:
-release of 10.5
- release date of 10.5 revealed - possibly more stuff revealed
- new software (considerable update to iWork if the rumours are true)
- iMac/MacBook updates
- iPod/iTunes stuff
Strike:
- release date of 10.5 revealed - possibly more stuff revealed
Insert:
-release of 10.5
jholzner
Jul 27, 03:54 PM
Maybe not way too low, but a bit low, especially when you compare specs to the $799 mini. The problem with MAC by itself as a name is that people will ask "what kind of mac" and the response is "Mac". It's a bad slapstick routine. It's like Ford selling a car called the Ford.
Actually, it'd be like Ford selling a car named Model. Instead, they used to use Model-T etc. What model is it? It's a T model. What Mac is it? it's a mini...and i(Mac) etc.
Actually, it'd be like Ford selling a car named Model. Instead, they used to use Model-T etc. What model is it? It's a T model. What Mac is it? it's a mini...and i(Mac) etc.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 02:26 PM
That is totally reasonable and understandable, although I do disagree. I can't with good heart support sending my neighbors son/daughter overseas to fight for another people.
Well, we have allies, don't we? I simply consider the UN an attempt to permanently ally the world's nations to the extent that these sort of situations can be dealt with based on broader consensus. We are far from the ideal, but we must keep working towards it and an imperfect UN is better than no UN at all.
I just find it pretty disgusting when we have the VP going on the record talking out his arse about "Unless we are attacked or unless there is proof we are about to be attacked", then a couple years later nary a peep when we start bombing a foreign country that is not even close to a threat to us. Did Biden qualify it with a " we should be able to intervene in a nation's affairs if it is thought necessary to either 1) protect other nations from harm or 2) protect a nation's own people from its government, or in the case of a civil war, one or more factions." NOPE!
I'm not going to defend Biden, he puts his foot in his mouth quite a bit - though he is FAR from the only politician in Washingotn with that problem. Besides, unlike Cheney, he is very much playing second fiddle in the administration (actually he's so far down the pecking order only fiddles when someone lends him one, if I can stretch that saying to the breaking point).
It is worth remembering that the Bush Administration sent that clown Bolton as our representative to the UN - a man who opposes that organization's very existence. Incredibly counterproductive. No, I expect hypocrisy from both Democrats and Republicans.
I think it all boils down to whether you buy into the notion that the UN is a global representative body. If you do, then sending troops to enforce UN resolutions is not just fighting for "other people" but fighting for ouselves. If member nations took the concept of the UN more seriously, UN resolutions alone might be enough to stabilize situations like this without the need for major military intervention.
Well, we have allies, don't we? I simply consider the UN an attempt to permanently ally the world's nations to the extent that these sort of situations can be dealt with based on broader consensus. We are far from the ideal, but we must keep working towards it and an imperfect UN is better than no UN at all.
I just find it pretty disgusting when we have the VP going on the record talking out his arse about "Unless we are attacked or unless there is proof we are about to be attacked", then a couple years later nary a peep when we start bombing a foreign country that is not even close to a threat to us. Did Biden qualify it with a " we should be able to intervene in a nation's affairs if it is thought necessary to either 1) protect other nations from harm or 2) protect a nation's own people from its government, or in the case of a civil war, one or more factions." NOPE!
I'm not going to defend Biden, he puts his foot in his mouth quite a bit - though he is FAR from the only politician in Washingotn with that problem. Besides, unlike Cheney, he is very much playing second fiddle in the administration (actually he's so far down the pecking order only fiddles when someone lends him one, if I can stretch that saying to the breaking point).
It is worth remembering that the Bush Administration sent that clown Bolton as our representative to the UN - a man who opposes that organization's very existence. Incredibly counterproductive. No, I expect hypocrisy from both Democrats and Republicans.
I think it all boils down to whether you buy into the notion that the UN is a global representative body. If you do, then sending troops to enforce UN resolutions is not just fighting for "other people" but fighting for ouselves. If member nations took the concept of the UN more seriously, UN resolutions alone might be enough to stabilize situations like this without the need for major military intervention.
ssk2
Mar 22, 04:40 PM
You know, on second thought....there never will be an iPad "killer".
Show me a single tablet, from any manufacturer...that will out-sell the iPad.
You can't.
Which of the announced competitors will sell over 15 million in a year? To be the iPad killer...something will have to sell at least 15 million...and that was before iPad2 was released.
Even if you take into account something that has not been announced yet...you can't find an iPad killer. There are too many competitors to the throne...how can the public differentiate between the competitors, some of which are the same thing hardware and software wise....and pick one that will be the "killer".
There has not been an iPhone killer released ever....there has not been an iPod killer released ever...and there will not be an iPad killer released...ever.
And yes, the Android fanboi cult will chime in and tout the latest and greatest...which will be superseded in two weeks by something else from HTC or Motorola or whoever...if any of these are the killer..why are their sales so much lower than a comparative iDevice?
And don't toss me total number of Android sales or activations....show me a single model from any manufacturer that has sold greater than any comparable Apple portable device (iPad, iPhone, iPod)....there isn't one.
(awaiting the "sales don't matter" comments...and "specs are where its at" dribble.....)
This is EXACTLY what I was talking about in my first post on this thread - fanboyism at its worst.
"There will never be an iPad killer"? What a ridiculous statement to make. Who knows where mobile tablet computing is heading in the next 1/2/3/10 years. Maybe demand for small tablets will rise? Maybe other operating systems will outstrip iOS? You knows how many units ANY particular tablet will sell next year? It so dismaying to see such a ridiculous view spouted as gospel.
And anyway, why the obsession with a 'killer'? People don't use a Dyson vacuum cleaner because its a Bosch vacuum killer, people don't use chopsticks because they are cutlery killers, hell, apply the analogy to anything. People will ALWAYS pick (rabid fanboys aside) the consumer tool that works best for them. If that means that I find the Playbook fits my needs, I don't give two hoots if it's not an iPad killer. It really doesn't matter to the sane individual.
FWIW, I believe that for all its failings, Android's spread across many developer platforms DOES have its benefits - who knows, we may seem a really strong Android OS this time next year?
Show me a single tablet, from any manufacturer...that will out-sell the iPad.
You can't.
Which of the announced competitors will sell over 15 million in a year? To be the iPad killer...something will have to sell at least 15 million...and that was before iPad2 was released.
Even if you take into account something that has not been announced yet...you can't find an iPad killer. There are too many competitors to the throne...how can the public differentiate between the competitors, some of which are the same thing hardware and software wise....and pick one that will be the "killer".
There has not been an iPhone killer released ever....there has not been an iPod killer released ever...and there will not be an iPad killer released...ever.
And yes, the Android fanboi cult will chime in and tout the latest and greatest...which will be superseded in two weeks by something else from HTC or Motorola or whoever...if any of these are the killer..why are their sales so much lower than a comparative iDevice?
And don't toss me total number of Android sales or activations....show me a single model from any manufacturer that has sold greater than any comparable Apple portable device (iPad, iPhone, iPod)....there isn't one.
(awaiting the "sales don't matter" comments...and "specs are where its at" dribble.....)
This is EXACTLY what I was talking about in my first post on this thread - fanboyism at its worst.
"There will never be an iPad killer"? What a ridiculous statement to make. Who knows where mobile tablet computing is heading in the next 1/2/3/10 years. Maybe demand for small tablets will rise? Maybe other operating systems will outstrip iOS? You knows how many units ANY particular tablet will sell next year? It so dismaying to see such a ridiculous view spouted as gospel.
And anyway, why the obsession with a 'killer'? People don't use a Dyson vacuum cleaner because its a Bosch vacuum killer, people don't use chopsticks because they are cutlery killers, hell, apply the analogy to anything. People will ALWAYS pick (rabid fanboys aside) the consumer tool that works best for them. If that means that I find the Playbook fits my needs, I don't give two hoots if it's not an iPad killer. It really doesn't matter to the sane individual.
FWIW, I believe that for all its failings, Android's spread across many developer platforms DOES have its benefits - who knows, we may seem a really strong Android OS this time next year?
relimw
Sep 13, 11:13 AM
Do you mean like how BeOS did things?
Sorry, never played with BeOS so I don't know how they did it :)
Sorry, never played with BeOS so I don't know how they did it :)
Man9z0r
Apr 5, 05:01 PM
I hope this to be true. I have been wanting to get this software!
New to video and have heard a lot of good things. :eek:
New to video and have heard a lot of good things. :eek:
bazaarsoft
Mar 31, 02:30 PM
At least, that's what the Fandroids wanted us to believe when Android fragmentation started being tossed around as a problem. Where are those guys now that Google is actually acknowledging that it's a problem? :eek:
KEL9000
Jul 14, 03:29 PM
Since apple is part of the Blu Ray consortium wouldn't you think they will use blu ray only?
NoSmokingBandit
Sep 1, 08:55 AM
So i'm wondering, if the standard cars are indeed copy/pasted from GT4, then what about the new standard cars they will be adding (like updated models from the past 5 years)? Obviously the ps3 can handle higher poly models, so surely they wouldn't build new models then scale them down to match gt4... That would be idiotic.
kevin.rivers
Jul 15, 04:42 PM
You can be quiet now. Go on Dell's medium/large business site, which is the *only* section you can find the Woodcrests in single/dual configs (HP doesn't have theirs out yet), and configure one with a decent video card, 250GB HD, no monitor, and any of the rumored processor configurations (which I think some are not correct), a DL DVD+/-RW burner, and optical mouse and you tell ME how much it costs.
I will tell you how much... Very Expensive.
I must say it boils my blood to read some of the ignorant posts on here. Give me the top parts in a small box, all for $999.
Jiggie2g, your assumptions are way off. I configured the Dell Silentwave mentioned with:
One 5130
1GB DDR2 667
250GB HD
DVD+/-RW burner
price: $2983
Far from $1199. Oh but wait, you pulled a good move. Talking about woodcrest systems and giving a theoretical pricing for a Conroe system. Nice move. ;)
Anyway. Us loyalist Mac buyers are fully aware of current pricing and when price and specs are announced we will make a decision to buy or not to buy. I doubt Apple insults us. Maybe you, even when the data puts the pricing in the same spectrum, you will buy Dell anyway to make yourself feel good. Cheers.
I will tell you how much... Very Expensive.
I must say it boils my blood to read some of the ignorant posts on here. Give me the top parts in a small box, all for $999.
Jiggie2g, your assumptions are way off. I configured the Dell Silentwave mentioned with:
One 5130
1GB DDR2 667
250GB HD
DVD+/-RW burner
price: $2983
Far from $1199. Oh but wait, you pulled a good move. Talking about woodcrest systems and giving a theoretical pricing for a Conroe system. Nice move. ;)
Anyway. Us loyalist Mac buyers are fully aware of current pricing and when price and specs are announced we will make a decision to buy or not to buy. I doubt Apple insults us. Maybe you, even when the data puts the pricing in the same spectrum, you will buy Dell anyway to make yourself feel good. Cheers.
Tomaz
Aug 7, 06:02 PM
They way I understand it, Time Machine is SUPPOSED to be used with an external...the page on the Leopard site even has an icon of an iMac connected to an External. I'm sure you can use your Internal drive if you want, but I don't see the point of that.
So how about the MacBooks?? I don't carry around an external HD all the time. So when I do changes to a document on a flight, there's no TimeMachine backup?? Cool whould be, if the programm did backups to an external HD when available and locally when there's no external HD. But as soon as one connects the extrenal HD again, those local backups should be automatically moved to the extrenal to save space on the internal HD. That would eliminate the need for an additional external backup.
So how about the MacBooks?? I don't carry around an external HD all the time. So when I do changes to a document on a flight, there's no TimeMachine backup?? Cool whould be, if the programm did backups to an external HD when available and locally when there's no external HD. But as soon as one connects the extrenal HD again, those local backups should be automatically moved to the extrenal to save space on the internal HD. That would eliminate the need for an additional external backup.
11thIndian
Apr 5, 10:14 PM
sorry but that's not the case. While some contend it's jaw-dropping, that's only because they're stacking it up against what FCS is currently. Compared to what Avid and Adobe are doing, Apple now has a mountain to climb. Apple has been too interested in their entertainment business to worry about their "pro" line (hardware/software). I know quite a few studios who have already shifted BACK to Avid and some are taking on the Adobe Suite completely as their software of choice. While some may find the new FCS exciting, and it does have some bells and whistles, it's typical Apple doing an incremental bump to keep up with what others are doing. Sad really.
So if you were one of the 100 people up to now who's seen it and can accurately make this evaluation, let's see your invite....
So if you were one of the 100 people up to now who's seen it and can accurately make this evaluation, let's see your invite....
SWC
Aug 7, 08:01 PM
great . . . i just get a new macbook with tiger now i'm gonna have to get leopard . . . how much will this put me back?
$129 is history proves true
$129 is history proves true
Multimedia
Aug 27, 08:57 AM
I want to see:
CFreymarc
Apr 6, 04:18 PM
Oh yeah, well just wait until people find out iOS is a closed system and the Xoom uses Android which is open....
oh nevermind :D
"Hey babe, I just relinked the kernal of my tablet." is a line that really doesn't work.
"My girl, pet this." (iFur app runs on iPad) Yup iPads get you laid.
oh nevermind :D
"Hey babe, I just relinked the kernal of my tablet." is a line that really doesn't work.
"My girl, pet this." (iFur app runs on iPad) Yup iPads get you laid.
No comments:
Post a Comment