MagnusVonMagnum
Nov 20, 10:40 AM
If you don't address those very good reasons, your argument won't be very convincing. We do not want the CPU suck, the identity leaking, the UI inconsistencies, and the very real risk of "zero day" Adobe bugs.
Whom am I trying to convince? Illogical and irrational people who worship Steve Jobs and hate what he hates? Such people will not care or listen to any form of reason. That's why the word fanatic is in fanboy. No, I talk about an option to turn Flash on or off at will and you find it offensive to even offer an option. That is irrational at best.
Everything you fear would be avoided if someone just turned Flash OFF (or it could default to off and have to be turned on). I've said since the first post the word OPTION. You don't seem to comprehend that word or understand why those of us that would want the choice of having Flash are not asking you to give up anything in the process. You could always turn it off if it were present. We cannot turn it on if it's not present.
In other words, you are not competent to carry on a rational discussion. You're just here to vent.
No, I just don't see any point in trying to carry on a logical, rational discussion with someone whose "argument" is based purely on emotion. If it weren't, you wouldn't object to an option for those of us that don't agree with Steve Jobs point of view because an option satisfies all your arguments against having Flash because you can always just leave it OFF. It cannot do harm if it's off no matter how paranoid you may become about having it on your device.
Many millions of people have Flash installed on their Macs (let alone those using Windows and Linux) and they could remove it. They know that if they do, some web sites will cease to function properly and thus they leave it on. The security concerns you mentioned will be addressed as all security bugs are in both OSX and Windows.
Users of those 120M+ devices don't have to hope. They are already free of Flash!
Free of Flash? You say that in a tone that sounds like they're free of slavery or something. No, what they're free of is the ability to access millions of web sites that require Flash to view them or much of their content and I do not see that as a good thing. But my point of view doesn't require you to see it. I said from the first post I wanted an option to use Flash. You could still choose to turn it off if it were there. I cannot turn on what is not present nor should I have to buy some absurd 3rd party converter that requires their web site to be running to use it.
The analogy makes no sense. Nobody is forcing you to use any Apple product.
And so that makes it OK for him to behave as he does? A lot of us like Apple products, but we would like them a lot better if Steve would just stick to making the products unfettered instead of trying to force his opinions and world view on people in the process. He doesn't like Flash so he decides for everyone they should not use Flash. What if Steve decided iOS shall no longer support MP3 files, only AAC? I suppose you would accept that as OK too? Update iOS and your MP3s no longer function. Yes, that would be just wonderful if they did that. After all, AAC is superior to MP3, so why should Apple support a legacy inferior heavily pirated format? By your logic, they should not.
If you really want the "full web experience" of zero-day Adobe bugs, get an Android phone. Note: Android phones were vulnerable to the last zero-day Adobe bug. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I don't want a phone period guy. I only want and use an iPod Touch. Is there an Android iPod Touch? Android didn't exist when Apple made the claims of accessing the full Internet either and it doesn't make that any less a lie.
The fact that I can't catch zero-day Adobe attacks on my iPhone is a great reason to praise Apple's decision.
You act as if Apple has no vulnerabilities to attack. That is extremely naive to the point of emotionalism once again. In fact it's just the opposite. Apple's security is rated as bad compared to Windows and only the fact that there are so few Mac users compared to Windows has saved it thus far. As the popularity of iOS devices has exploded, it's inevitable that it will start attracting malware. It's only a matter of time. Will you wish you never bought an iPhone on that day or will you recognize that companies simply have to find and patch vulnerabilities. Apple has patched numerous security flaws in OSX over the years. Should we plug our ears and say there is no such thing?
Do tell: what exact sites are you talking about? What exact legacy flash applications are running on those sites to which you can find no substitute?
A quick search (you do know how to do that don't you?) reveals offhand a few example sites that don't use HTML5 video (which could and may in the future, but that doesn't help someone today):
Gametrailers
GiantBomb
Vimeo
Playstation Blog
Stiq of Joy
Engadget
Try some of these effects on this site this with HTML5:
http://superior-web-solutions.com/
Maybe read this article on Flash. Most HTML5 is just a video player. Flash isn't just a video player and it didn't even start as one.
http://www.andrewgreig.com/2010/06/html5-is-not-a-flash-replacement-and-shouldnt-be-seen-that-way/
Perhaps you want an open standard? So when does Apple stop requiring Quicktime on their web sites? :rolleyes:
Nobody is holding a gun to your head. Nobody is holding you hostage.
If you don't like the choices that Apple made, then ditch your iOS device and get an Android. Simple.
No, they're just boring me to death with emotional arguments why everyone should either worship Steve Jobs or leave the platform and get an Android instead similar to the "love OSX or leave it" arguments the fanboys regularly produce.
This is the first little lie in your rant. The iOS users don't find it inconvenient. If Flash were so damn important to them, they would have bought some device that could run Flash.
The fact that you think my statement is a "lie" based on a subjective opinion tells me you cannot even tell fact from fiction let alone lies from opinions. Trying to see someone else's point of view is completely foreign to you. You view the world through tinted lenses. What you say is akin to if you don't like something about OSX, go buy a Windows machine, as if there aren't any compromises along the way on that platform either (not to mention having to replace possibly thousands and thousands of dollars worth of software for a given platform to do so). Not liking something about a given platform and wanting to change it doesn't mean another platform is more viable in ALL areas or that a person may wish to spend a lot of money to make that change just because of that one issue. Perhaps you'd like to send me a free Android phone to replace my aging 1st Gen iPod Touch that I bought before Android even existed? I'd happily consider such an offer. Of course I'll need replacement apps as well.
The people who bought those 120M+ devices disagree with you.
You seem to forge that I and others that actually want Flash are part of those people dude. Get over yourself. Just because you don't like Flash doesn't mean the rest of us have hatred for it. Some of us simply don't like our iPhones, iPads and iPod Touches crippled for no reason. Besides, how you try to turn my initial argument that I'd prefer to see an option to use Flash for those of us that want it rather than no option into this flipping crusade against all things Apple and Flash alike is beyond me. You are making mountains out of mole hills and lies out of opinions. For what? I can't make you see things the way I see them. I never wanted to try. That's why I said OPTION. But you would deny everyone who wants that option to have it just like Steve Jobs. Steve does it because he's a control freak (he was once ousted from Apple for this very reason). I imagine you do it because you love Apple. Sadly, I actually prefer Steve's reason.
This is the second little lie. Apple did provide a choice: they approved the SkyFire App. They didn't have to do that.
Didn't they? It doesn't violate their rules for an app so how could they not approve it without being outright liars? Oh wait. They have done that before so I can see your point. ;)
Apple has also announced they will approve Flash Apps using Adobe's cross-compiler for iOS. If there actually are crucial Flash apps -- you haven't named a single specific one so far -- the owners of those apps should be able to easily cross-compile their apps for the iOS App Store.
Apple formerly announced they would NOT support it. Why did they change their minds? Could it have something to do with the Justice Department starting an investigation into anti-trust behaviors by Apple policies? Noooo....it couldn't be that. Apple is allowed to single out companies it doesn't like and compete with to just willy-nilly throw specifically into their license agreements.
And that is the third little lie. Flash is a proprietary and legacy platform. It's on the way down now.
I say if you don't have Flash you don't have the full Internet and you call that a "lie" based on the above quote? What freaking UNIVERSE do you live in??????? ROTFLMAO. You cannot tell a statement of fact from an idea in your head that somehow says that the "full internet" doesn't include sites that use "propriety" formats. Come on man. That position not only ignore reality it even invalidiates Apple's own web site as being part of the "full Internet" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You need to try harder. Calling someone a liar when they are obviously stating facts and/or opinions just makes you look immature.
because accusing someone of lying when it's obvious
Even Adobe has acknowledged that a Flash-only choice is a bankrupt strategy (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999). After websites start offering their content with an open standard, you've gotta ask: what exactly is the value in continuing to prop up Flash?
First of all, you are the one that is calling it a "bankrupt strategy". I see nothing in that thread by Adobe that even addresses the matter. Adobe is simply trying to sell products and if they can easily sell more products to Apple users by providing an easy way to convert their hard work Flash sites into HTML5, they are going to do so and laugh all the way to the bank. That in NO WAY invalidates the fact that there are still plenty of Flash only sites out there and plenty of flash uses (e.g. Flash games) that HTML5 is no simple substitute for regardless. Until the Internet is Flash free, there is going to be a need and a will by people to have the option to view Flash.
The mere fact that this Skyfire app has raked in over $1 MILLION in sales already shows just how big that will is. Yet you reject the desire to be able to use Flash web sites as meaningless and unnecessary while the thread title alone proves you wrong.
Hayden Panettiere wears a sexy
Whom am I trying to convince? Illogical and irrational people who worship Steve Jobs and hate what he hates? Such people will not care or listen to any form of reason. That's why the word fanatic is in fanboy. No, I talk about an option to turn Flash on or off at will and you find it offensive to even offer an option. That is irrational at best.
Everything you fear would be avoided if someone just turned Flash OFF (or it could default to off and have to be turned on). I've said since the first post the word OPTION. You don't seem to comprehend that word or understand why those of us that would want the choice of having Flash are not asking you to give up anything in the process. You could always turn it off if it were present. We cannot turn it on if it's not present.
In other words, you are not competent to carry on a rational discussion. You're just here to vent.
No, I just don't see any point in trying to carry on a logical, rational discussion with someone whose "argument" is based purely on emotion. If it weren't, you wouldn't object to an option for those of us that don't agree with Steve Jobs point of view because an option satisfies all your arguments against having Flash because you can always just leave it OFF. It cannot do harm if it's off no matter how paranoid you may become about having it on your device.
Many millions of people have Flash installed on their Macs (let alone those using Windows and Linux) and they could remove it. They know that if they do, some web sites will cease to function properly and thus they leave it on. The security concerns you mentioned will be addressed as all security bugs are in both OSX and Windows.
Users of those 120M+ devices don't have to hope. They are already free of Flash!
Free of Flash? You say that in a tone that sounds like they're free of slavery or something. No, what they're free of is the ability to access millions of web sites that require Flash to view them or much of their content and I do not see that as a good thing. But my point of view doesn't require you to see it. I said from the first post I wanted an option to use Flash. You could still choose to turn it off if it were there. I cannot turn on what is not present nor should I have to buy some absurd 3rd party converter that requires their web site to be running to use it.
The analogy makes no sense. Nobody is forcing you to use any Apple product.
And so that makes it OK for him to behave as he does? A lot of us like Apple products, but we would like them a lot better if Steve would just stick to making the products unfettered instead of trying to force his opinions and world view on people in the process. He doesn't like Flash so he decides for everyone they should not use Flash. What if Steve decided iOS shall no longer support MP3 files, only AAC? I suppose you would accept that as OK too? Update iOS and your MP3s no longer function. Yes, that would be just wonderful if they did that. After all, AAC is superior to MP3, so why should Apple support a legacy inferior heavily pirated format? By your logic, they should not.
If you really want the "full web experience" of zero-day Adobe bugs, get an Android phone. Note: Android phones were vulnerable to the last zero-day Adobe bug. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I don't want a phone period guy. I only want and use an iPod Touch. Is there an Android iPod Touch? Android didn't exist when Apple made the claims of accessing the full Internet either and it doesn't make that any less a lie.
The fact that I can't catch zero-day Adobe attacks on my iPhone is a great reason to praise Apple's decision.
You act as if Apple has no vulnerabilities to attack. That is extremely naive to the point of emotionalism once again. In fact it's just the opposite. Apple's security is rated as bad compared to Windows and only the fact that there are so few Mac users compared to Windows has saved it thus far. As the popularity of iOS devices has exploded, it's inevitable that it will start attracting malware. It's only a matter of time. Will you wish you never bought an iPhone on that day or will you recognize that companies simply have to find and patch vulnerabilities. Apple has patched numerous security flaws in OSX over the years. Should we plug our ears and say there is no such thing?
Do tell: what exact sites are you talking about? What exact legacy flash applications are running on those sites to which you can find no substitute?
A quick search (you do know how to do that don't you?) reveals offhand a few example sites that don't use HTML5 video (which could and may in the future, but that doesn't help someone today):
Gametrailers
GiantBomb
Vimeo
Playstation Blog
Stiq of Joy
Engadget
Try some of these effects on this site this with HTML5:
http://superior-web-solutions.com/
Maybe read this article on Flash. Most HTML5 is just a video player. Flash isn't just a video player and it didn't even start as one.
http://www.andrewgreig.com/2010/06/html5-is-not-a-flash-replacement-and-shouldnt-be-seen-that-way/
Perhaps you want an open standard? So when does Apple stop requiring Quicktime on their web sites? :rolleyes:
Nobody is holding a gun to your head. Nobody is holding you hostage.
If you don't like the choices that Apple made, then ditch your iOS device and get an Android. Simple.
No, they're just boring me to death with emotional arguments why everyone should either worship Steve Jobs or leave the platform and get an Android instead similar to the "love OSX or leave it" arguments the fanboys regularly produce.
This is the first little lie in your rant. The iOS users don't find it inconvenient. If Flash were so damn important to them, they would have bought some device that could run Flash.
The fact that you think my statement is a "lie" based on a subjective opinion tells me you cannot even tell fact from fiction let alone lies from opinions. Trying to see someone else's point of view is completely foreign to you. You view the world through tinted lenses. What you say is akin to if you don't like something about OSX, go buy a Windows machine, as if there aren't any compromises along the way on that platform either (not to mention having to replace possibly thousands and thousands of dollars worth of software for a given platform to do so). Not liking something about a given platform and wanting to change it doesn't mean another platform is more viable in ALL areas or that a person may wish to spend a lot of money to make that change just because of that one issue. Perhaps you'd like to send me a free Android phone to replace my aging 1st Gen iPod Touch that I bought before Android even existed? I'd happily consider such an offer. Of course I'll need replacement apps as well.
The people who bought those 120M+ devices disagree with you.
You seem to forge that I and others that actually want Flash are part of those people dude. Get over yourself. Just because you don't like Flash doesn't mean the rest of us have hatred for it. Some of us simply don't like our iPhones, iPads and iPod Touches crippled for no reason. Besides, how you try to turn my initial argument that I'd prefer to see an option to use Flash for those of us that want it rather than no option into this flipping crusade against all things Apple and Flash alike is beyond me. You are making mountains out of mole hills and lies out of opinions. For what? I can't make you see things the way I see them. I never wanted to try. That's why I said OPTION. But you would deny everyone who wants that option to have it just like Steve Jobs. Steve does it because he's a control freak (he was once ousted from Apple for this very reason). I imagine you do it because you love Apple. Sadly, I actually prefer Steve's reason.
This is the second little lie. Apple did provide a choice: they approved the SkyFire App. They didn't have to do that.
Didn't they? It doesn't violate their rules for an app so how could they not approve it without being outright liars? Oh wait. They have done that before so I can see your point. ;)
Apple has also announced they will approve Flash Apps using Adobe's cross-compiler for iOS. If there actually are crucial Flash apps -- you haven't named a single specific one so far -- the owners of those apps should be able to easily cross-compile their apps for the iOS App Store.
Apple formerly announced they would NOT support it. Why did they change their minds? Could it have something to do with the Justice Department starting an investigation into anti-trust behaviors by Apple policies? Noooo....it couldn't be that. Apple is allowed to single out companies it doesn't like and compete with to just willy-nilly throw specifically into their license agreements.
And that is the third little lie. Flash is a proprietary and legacy platform. It's on the way down now.
I say if you don't have Flash you don't have the full Internet and you call that a "lie" based on the above quote? What freaking UNIVERSE do you live in??????? ROTFLMAO. You cannot tell a statement of fact from an idea in your head that somehow says that the "full internet" doesn't include sites that use "propriety" formats. Come on man. That position not only ignore reality it even invalidiates Apple's own web site as being part of the "full Internet" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You need to try harder. Calling someone a liar when they are obviously stating facts and/or opinions just makes you look immature.
because accusing someone of lying when it's obvious
Even Adobe has acknowledged that a Flash-only choice is a bankrupt strategy (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999). After websites start offering their content with an open standard, you've gotta ask: what exactly is the value in continuing to prop up Flash?
First of all, you are the one that is calling it a "bankrupt strategy". I see nothing in that thread by Adobe that even addresses the matter. Adobe is simply trying to sell products and if they can easily sell more products to Apple users by providing an easy way to convert their hard work Flash sites into HTML5, they are going to do so and laugh all the way to the bank. That in NO WAY invalidates the fact that there are still plenty of Flash only sites out there and plenty of flash uses (e.g. Flash games) that HTML5 is no simple substitute for regardless. Until the Internet is Flash free, there is going to be a need and a will by people to have the option to view Flash.
The mere fact that this Skyfire app has raked in over $1 MILLION in sales already shows just how big that will is. Yet you reject the desire to be able to use Flash web sites as meaningless and unnecessary while the thread title alone proves you wrong.
Intell
Apr 25, 04:05 PM
It was a lovely party, with everyone dressed up in their finest costumes and wears. lbro was a rock star wearing a fur coat, Plutonius was a musketeer, and nies was that dude that discovered the Galapagos. He even had a stuffed dog named Bagel. By early morning the party goers where going home and the lights where being snuffed out.
chrmjenkins was part way through his first cup of tea of the morning, when his good friend, appleguy312 burst through the door wielding a towel and satchel. "Going out for a walk?" said chrmjenkins as he chocked on his tea. "We gotta go, NOW" said appleguy213 as he went through chrmjenkins' linen closet. "Here we are!" exclaimed appleguy123 as he pulled out a pink flowery bath towel. He promptly pushed chrmjenkins out the door of his little bungalow and out on to the front lawn.
"What are those things?!?" demanded chrmjenkins as he pointed to the blocks floating in the sky above.
"Wolves, they're here to eat the people then mine the world to make a new super Wal-Mart and diamond picks." appleguy312 spoke these words as he fiddled with something around his lowest finger (Giggity). "We need to get a signal to escape! Take my hand!"
And with that they vanished into the sky, with chrmjenkins trailing drool out of his unconscious mouth.
Willow Smith whips her hair
hayden panettiere hair bob
Hayden wore an asymmetrical
Hayden Panettiere has gone
HAYDEN PANETTIERE HAIR BACK
Hayden Panettiere Hairstyles
hayden panettiere hair. hayden
hayden panettiere
Hayden Panettiere is dropped
Hayden Panettiere looked
Hayden Panettiere Hairstyles
Last year, Hayden Panettiere
hayden panettiere haircut ack
hayden panettiere bob ack.
Work it, Hayden. Work it.
Hayden Panettiere Is Finally
hayden panettiere 2011
chrmjenkins was part way through his first cup of tea of the morning, when his good friend, appleguy312 burst through the door wielding a towel and satchel. "Going out for a walk?" said chrmjenkins as he chocked on his tea. "We gotta go, NOW" said appleguy213 as he went through chrmjenkins' linen closet. "Here we are!" exclaimed appleguy123 as he pulled out a pink flowery bath towel. He promptly pushed chrmjenkins out the door of his little bungalow and out on to the front lawn.
"What are those things?!?" demanded chrmjenkins as he pointed to the blocks floating in the sky above.
"Wolves, they're here to eat the people then mine the world to make a new super Wal-Mart and diamond picks." appleguy312 spoke these words as he fiddled with something around his lowest finger (Giggity). "We need to get a signal to escape! Take my hand!"
And with that they vanished into the sky, with chrmjenkins trailing drool out of his unconscious mouth.
Blackcat
Oct 23, 08:08 AM
B ULLSHIT.
The word "same" never occurs in the text, which never contemplates multiple installs.
It says you can't use it in a virtual machine. End of story. End of discussion.
It's legalise. It's saying you can't run it in a VM on a device it is already installed on, or a VM on another device than it is installed on. If the VM is another OS (or another Vista license) you're allowed providing it's the only installation.
The word "same" never occurs in the text, which never contemplates multiple installs.
It says you can't use it in a virtual machine. End of story. End of discussion.
It's legalise. It's saying you can't run it in a VM on a device it is already installed on, or a VM on another device than it is installed on. If the VM is another OS (or another Vista license) you're allowed providing it's the only installation.
praetorian909
Jun 6, 09:53 AM
That's what mommy gets for letting the Cheerios run out
LOL I like this explanation the best :)
LOL I like this explanation the best :)
spencers
Jan 28, 12:17 PM
To add to my post-workout recovery drink:
creatinepower.jpg
Drink lots and lots of water
creatinepower.jpg
Drink lots and lots of water
twoodcc
Nov 11, 11:18 AM
looks like we've had a slow 24 hours
Tragedies
Apr 12, 08:24 AM
First real try with light painting;
http://i55.tinypic.com/vwslg2.png
http://i55.tinypic.com/vwslg2.png
FoxyKaye
Oct 18, 11:44 PM
Thanks for the chart...I always like to see stuff like this. But your 3Q and 4Q numbers for 2003 and 2004 looked a bit fishy, so I looked into it and made the corrections below for 2004. Don't know if there are any other errors.
2000 was right after the original iMacs were released, wasn't it? It's interesting that it has taken five or so years to reach the same numbers again. Then again, there were a couple times when the only improvement to the PowerMacs was a 100-300 MHz G4 speed bump... :rolleyes:
I remember Apple's colossal market share in the early to mid 1980s, back then it was pretty much given that developers had to make a DOS/Windows and MacOS version of their programs. I think the Universal Binary was brilliant - it keeps G3/G4/G5 users in the loop while moving OS X compatible software forward. Hopefully as more developers take note of Apple's slowly growing market share (come on 5%!) everyone will experience more cross-platform goodness.:D
2000 was right after the original iMacs were released, wasn't it? It's interesting that it has taken five or so years to reach the same numbers again. Then again, there were a couple times when the only improvement to the PowerMacs was a 100-300 MHz G4 speed bump... :rolleyes:
I remember Apple's colossal market share in the early to mid 1980s, back then it was pretty much given that developers had to make a DOS/Windows and MacOS version of their programs. I think the Universal Binary was brilliant - it keeps G3/G4/G5 users in the loop while moving OS X compatible software forward. Hopefully as more developers take note of Apple's slowly growing market share (come on 5%!) everyone will experience more cross-platform goodness.:D
MattInOz
Aug 15, 09:38 PM
Making the entire computer experience simple, easy and fun is what Apple has always been about, and this is a natural continuation of those ideals. In fact, I hope they expand this functionality to include upgrading ram and hard disks (as long as they don't go overboard with the prices like in the b.t.o. options at the apple store).
Really this is a wonderful new breakthrough in Apple's quest for computing easiness.
While their at it, the same feature could not only order the ram or hard drive for you, but using the the new iCal server features could have at look at the nearest Apple Store and give you list of free booking times to drop in and have the upgrade done for you.
Really this is a wonderful new breakthrough in Apple's quest for computing easiness.
While their at it, the same feature could not only order the ram or hard drive for you, but using the the new iCal server features could have at look at the nearest Apple Store and give you list of free booking times to drop in and have the upgrade done for you.
phineas
Sep 30, 08:16 PM
From the local AT&T reps here in town they just do NOT give a crap. There network sucks, and the bigshots get there big fat checks and thats it.
They will NEVER catch up, heck they don't even have 3G in every place that they have there bars in the advertisements.
They have the iPhone deal/contract and do not give a dam, money rolls in and goes back out in dribs and drabs.
Come on Verizon and Apple.
I like another posters opinion, get a BB on Verizon and an iPod touch. Luckily my contract is over in December.
They will NEVER catch up, heck they don't even have 3G in every place that they have there bars in the advertisements.
They have the iPhone deal/contract and do not give a dam, money rolls in and goes back out in dribs and drabs.
Come on Verizon and Apple.
I like another posters opinion, get a BB on Verizon and an iPod touch. Luckily my contract is over in December.
Manacit
Apr 22, 06:32 PM
That is the ugliest thing I have ever seen. Obviously, this won't be the next iPhone, because Apple would never come out with something that ugly.
Honestly, the iPhone 4 looks great, an iPhone 4S would be ideal, not this ugly PoS
Honestly, the iPhone 4 looks great, an iPhone 4S would be ideal, not this ugly PoS
biggerbearbrian
Oct 19, 09:03 AM
*sigh* How many times do we have to refute your assertions with facts before you stop repeating them?
To wit, the iPod is not Apple's "cash cow". By definition, if there is something that gains more revenue/profit than the iPod, then the iPod cannot be the cash cow. 58% of Apple's revenue still came from sales of Macs. Gross margins for both Macs and iPods has always been similar (hovering a bit below 30%), so the Mac also generates the majority of the profit for Apple.
As for Apple's innovative spirit lacking when it comes to the Macs, let's just point out that it Apple updated the iPod in October 2005 to the 5th generation, and we JUST got the 5.5th generation last month. Apple took a year to add slightly brighter screens, better battery life (only for video), and games. The nano just gained the anodized aluminum exterior -- wow, Apple's reaching back to the past for it's innovation now! And the shuffle got slimmed down and consolidated into one product. All this doesn't sound exactly like innovation to me. (Of course, Apple doesn't really need to innovate, since they're already selling iPods by the boatload.)
In contrast, Apple brought all of its Macs over to the Intel processor. The Mac Pro was dramatically higher value, what with double-wide graphics card slot, dual optical drives, 4 internal hard drive bays, etc., etc. All Macs (except for the Mac Pro) now have Front Row and a remote, which is a great feature. Built-in iSights have also migrated across the entire product line. The MacBook and MacBook Pro now have MagSafe -- a great innovation. Boot Camp is now supported on all new Macs. The Xserve has new features like lights-out management, redundant power supplies, etc. And we've seen some great things coming for Leopard, what with Time Machine and Spaces and iChat Theater and Core Animation and iCal Server, etc., etc., etc.
It seems to me that Apple is innovating more on the Macintosh side of things than they are with the iPod. What are they going to add next on the iPod -- wireless? *gasp*, so innovative!
Seriously, can we stop with this myth already? It's the same thing with all of Apple's "woes" with quality control (which was busted by the recent consumer reports articles where Apple has actually brought DOWN the number of new computers needing repair in their first year). It's something that's repeated ad nauseum by a few vocal people, when it's really not a problem at all. Same here: everybody gawks and writes about the iPod precisely because more people can afford it and more people can use it with whatever computer they have. So, obviously, you will hear more about the iPod.
Let's see if repeating myself again has any effect: the iPod is not Apple's cash cow!
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :rolleyes:
I think the argument can go either way. While iPod (which I love btw) is less than half Apple revenue ok. But if they were to just add the iPod line today, and have the amount of revenue they are reporting from it, the financial report would be "iPod has given us nearly a 100% increase in revenue".
So get some hershey's syrup, cause we got milk.
To wit, the iPod is not Apple's "cash cow". By definition, if there is something that gains more revenue/profit than the iPod, then the iPod cannot be the cash cow. 58% of Apple's revenue still came from sales of Macs. Gross margins for both Macs and iPods has always been similar (hovering a bit below 30%), so the Mac also generates the majority of the profit for Apple.
As for Apple's innovative spirit lacking when it comes to the Macs, let's just point out that it Apple updated the iPod in October 2005 to the 5th generation, and we JUST got the 5.5th generation last month. Apple took a year to add slightly brighter screens, better battery life (only for video), and games. The nano just gained the anodized aluminum exterior -- wow, Apple's reaching back to the past for it's innovation now! And the shuffle got slimmed down and consolidated into one product. All this doesn't sound exactly like innovation to me. (Of course, Apple doesn't really need to innovate, since they're already selling iPods by the boatload.)
In contrast, Apple brought all of its Macs over to the Intel processor. The Mac Pro was dramatically higher value, what with double-wide graphics card slot, dual optical drives, 4 internal hard drive bays, etc., etc. All Macs (except for the Mac Pro) now have Front Row and a remote, which is a great feature. Built-in iSights have also migrated across the entire product line. The MacBook and MacBook Pro now have MagSafe -- a great innovation. Boot Camp is now supported on all new Macs. The Xserve has new features like lights-out management, redundant power supplies, etc. And we've seen some great things coming for Leopard, what with Time Machine and Spaces and iChat Theater and Core Animation and iCal Server, etc., etc., etc.
It seems to me that Apple is innovating more on the Macintosh side of things than they are with the iPod. What are they going to add next on the iPod -- wireless? *gasp*, so innovative!
Seriously, can we stop with this myth already? It's the same thing with all of Apple's "woes" with quality control (which was busted by the recent consumer reports articles where Apple has actually brought DOWN the number of new computers needing repair in their first year). It's something that's repeated ad nauseum by a few vocal people, when it's really not a problem at all. Same here: everybody gawks and writes about the iPod precisely because more people can afford it and more people can use it with whatever computer they have. So, obviously, you will hear more about the iPod.
Let's see if repeating myself again has any effect: the iPod is not Apple's cash cow!
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :rolleyes:
I think the argument can go either way. While iPod (which I love btw) is less than half Apple revenue ok. But if they were to just add the iPod line today, and have the amount of revenue they are reporting from it, the financial report would be "iPod has given us nearly a 100% increase in revenue".
So get some hershey's syrup, cause we got milk.
irishv
Apr 26, 05:08 PM
as do i. right now you cannot use a custom domain name on mobileme email. thats why i use Google Apps, which offers this MX record functionality for free.
You can use your own domain, but you can't host anything requiring server-side scripting (wordpress, mediawiki, etc). Unless that has changed in the past year (which would be welcome news).
You can use your own domain, but you can't host anything requiring server-side scripting (wordpress, mediawiki, etc). Unless that has changed in the past year (which would be welcome news).
icerabbit
Aug 15, 10:09 AM
More important than an "empty" button I would like to see a restore function in the Trash, where you can highlight one or more files or folders and click the "restore" button.
Glideslope
Apr 28, 07:38 PM
The iPhones kind of look like oreos from those views.
The new ones with the chocolate covering on top of filling and one wafer are to kill for. :apple:
The new ones with the chocolate covering on top of filling and one wafer are to kill for. :apple:
LostTitan
Mar 17, 10:42 AM
Heard Brea had only 9 iPads today. Anyone confirm? Over 100+ waiting in line. Crazy.
Le Big Mac
Oct 23, 11:28 AM
So this is true?? I suppose this isn't any different than Apple saying that you can't run Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware, is it?
That's what makes all the rancor about this so funny. Depending on the reading of this EULA provision, Apple's limits are still as, or more, restrictive than Microsoft's.
That's what makes all the rancor about this so funny. Depending on the reading of this EULA provision, Apple's limits are still as, or more, restrictive than Microsoft's.
AppleScruff1
May 1, 10:15 PM
It's about time! Too bad he didn't suffer.
Demoman
Aug 15, 07:51 PM
I think that black bezel stripe is IDENTICAL to the taskbar in VISTA. It looks good, but its too similar. eek!
Microsoft - no one has accused them of being creative, except in monopoly.
Microsoft - no one has accused them of being creative, except in monopoly.
nefan65
Apr 12, 09:35 AM
Also, Apple is Evil and you are living in Steve Job's RTF.
and... and... 4G.
and... widgets.
Okay, now you're just antagonizing people...lol
Widgets? Blah...waste of time/space IMO. 4G? No carrier yet has true 4G. Sprint I guess? They're the closest. Most the others are all 3.5G
and... and... 4G.
and... widgets.
Okay, now you're just antagonizing people...lol
Widgets? Blah...waste of time/space IMO. 4G? No carrier yet has true 4G. Sprint I guess? They're the closest. Most the others are all 3.5G
MacManX
Apr 17, 05:04 PM
3rd party apps crash, all of the them :mad: The standard Apple apps still work.
Terrible update. :mad:
Some apps, like Wikipedia, crash immediately after you try launching them. Not all 3rd party apps crash, but many do. Do NOT install this update! :mad:
Terrible update. :mad:
Some apps, like Wikipedia, crash immediately after you try launching them. Not all 3rd party apps crash, but many do. Do NOT install this update! :mad:
LarzStarz
Apr 13, 02:31 PM
Time to start the following threads...
"Apple HDTV Shipping Thread"
"What do you use your Apple HDTV for?"
"Apple HDTV Backlight Bleeding"
"I've got a speck of dust under my Apple HDTV glass cover, should I return?"
"Darn Apple HDTV Scalpers!!!"
"What color Apple HDTV should I get?"
"Apple HDTV Shipping Thread"
"What do you use your Apple HDTV for?"
"Apple HDTV Backlight Bleeding"
"I've got a speck of dust under my Apple HDTV glass cover, should I return?"
"Darn Apple HDTV Scalpers!!!"
"What color Apple HDTV should I get?"
iEvolution
Apr 29, 08:26 PM
Sorry, I'm actually being sarcastic, but you will find a lot of users here who behave just as I have described. You'd think that they sat on the board of directors. I agree with you, competition is good and it is good to be open minded and not have blind loyalty to one company. But the majority here will disagree with that.
LOL pretty sad when I couldn't read that as sarcasm as it is not unheard of that people are like that on this board.
LOL pretty sad when I couldn't read that as sarcasm as it is not unheard of that people are like that on this board.
Surely
Mar 1, 12:42 PM
Emilio? Isn't he still at home waiting for a script for Breakfast Club 2?
I thought he was the head coach of The Anaheim Ducks......
I thought he was the head coach of The Anaheim Ducks......