Naimfan
Mar 22, 01:06 PM
As for funerals somehow they find out where they are and play music, throw a party, cause a nascence basically to ruin the moment of memory and putting someone to rest. (Emphasis added.)
I reiterate my suggestion you take advantage of the educational opportunities available to you. Your nascent reasoning ability might benefit. ;)
I reiterate my suggestion you take advantage of the educational opportunities available to you. Your nascent reasoning ability might benefit. ;)
Chris Bangle
Sep 5, 09:06 AM
9AM Eastern is the most obvious time to do it, I guess. (But, to be pedantic, did you mean 2pm GMT or BST? ;) :) )
I time i meant was London time which is the same as GMT but i dont know th difference between GMT and British Standard time. Come on new imacs....
Apple you morans, no updates to the store, my life is over.
I time i meant was London time which is the same as GMT but i dont know th difference between GMT and British Standard time. Come on new imacs....
Apple you morans, no updates to the store, my life is over.
archer75
Apr 20, 08:20 AM
Fixed!
The 6950m and 6970m are also available in 2gb models. That would help with the larger resolution of the 27" display. Let's hope for that as well!
The 6950m and 6970m are also available in 2gb models. That would help with the larger resolution of the 27" display. Let's hope for that as well!
kdarling
Apr 22, 10:40 PM
A HUGE stretch. There are other, easier ways of finding people.
Not this easy.
It's not so much about finding people at any moment, but knowing where they've been. And this file makes it dirt simple to find that out.
Undercover agents? LOL WTF is this, Russia House? I'm pretty sure they're "UNDERCOVER", meaning, tracking them would be useless, since there is nothing advertising their personal information. All anyone would get is random location data that could belong to anyone.
A guy in your terrorist cell claims he's not FBI, because he's never been to Washington DC. Even his phone contacts are all people nowhere near there. Yet what if his cache list says otherwise. He's probably dead.
Dumbest examples ever. And you're a smart guy otherwise, so it's surprising.
By now, you also know that I always speak from personal experience when possible.
I was Military Intelligence and NSA in the heart of the Cold War. I did undercover field work at times. This kind of easy info is both priceless and dangerous. I've seen field officers compromised in almost every way imaginable. My scenarios are not stretches by any means.
Not this easy.
It's not so much about finding people at any moment, but knowing where they've been. And this file makes it dirt simple to find that out.
Undercover agents? LOL WTF is this, Russia House? I'm pretty sure they're "UNDERCOVER", meaning, tracking them would be useless, since there is nothing advertising their personal information. All anyone would get is random location data that could belong to anyone.
A guy in your terrorist cell claims he's not FBI, because he's never been to Washington DC. Even his phone contacts are all people nowhere near there. Yet what if his cache list says otherwise. He's probably dead.
Dumbest examples ever. And you're a smart guy otherwise, so it's surprising.
By now, you also know that I always speak from personal experience when possible.
I was Military Intelligence and NSA in the heart of the Cold War. I did undercover field work at times. This kind of easy info is both priceless and dangerous. I've seen field officers compromised in almost every way imaginable. My scenarios are not stretches by any means.
daneoni
Jan 4, 05:02 AM
Im not really holdng my breath.
Sales and figures
Leopard pitch
iPod updates (excluding Nano)
iLife/iWork updates (Lasso?)
Mac Pro updates
Display updates
I think thats it. Then further down the line...say April/May/June, we'll get iTV, iPhone, MBP/MB updates etc. I feel a Leopard release coming on at WWDC. iPod refreshes and more iTunes content in october and then Merry Christmas to all.
Sales and figures
Leopard pitch
iPod updates (excluding Nano)
iLife/iWork updates (Lasso?)
Mac Pro updates
Display updates
I think thats it. Then further down the line...say April/May/June, we'll get iTV, iPhone, MBP/MB updates etc. I feel a Leopard release coming on at WWDC. iPod refreshes and more iTunes content in october and then Merry Christmas to all.
roland.g
Sep 1, 01:37 PM
Aw, man! I was sooooo ready to shell out for a new 23" iMac, might it come out. But now it's on the verge of actually doing so, I'm starting to get greatly mostly underwhelmed by the rumours. Merom? What? I want a Conroe, at least in the 23" top model. And 2,33GHz? The Conroe goes way up to 2,93GHz. I'm sure the Merom line goes higher than 2,33GHz...
Bleh... maybe I should wait for the rumoured headless iMac. Maybe that machine actually will come with a Conroe.
First of all, have you seen the price on a 2.93 Conroe. It is up there. It would only by BTO, and cost you a bundle.
Second, if they release a 23" iMac, you can stop all the talk about a headless Mac, there won't be one. Sorry.
Bleh... maybe I should wait for the rumoured headless iMac. Maybe that machine actually will come with a Conroe.
First of all, have you seen the price on a 2.93 Conroe. It is up there. It would only by BTO, and cost you a bundle.
Second, if they release a 23" iMac, you can stop all the talk about a headless Mac, there won't be one. Sorry.
iToaster
Jan 12, 01:48 PM
I'm pretty sure Lord Steve is sitting back with a cup of coffee reading all this and laughing.
windowsblowsass
Mar 27, 11:41 AM
Sorry but I disagree - what you say here is just something you made up !!!! Safari is a good browser and Apple only made it cause MS pulled IE. Think about it. Apple may have money but it needs to do something else to kick start growth....The Ipod doesn't have long to go...Itunes will still do well but it doesn't give Apple enough money !
Don't forget - please sign the petition.....
reasons your wrong
1. he didnt make up a word of it
2. apple made safari before ms pulled ie
3.the ipod has a long time to go their not going to just say screw it when its selling
4.ITMS is making them money after the record companies are paid back for the use of the songs every cent is profit
5. less than 20 people have signed your petition and do you really think its going to get apple to change their entire strategyi can see it now steve jobs sees our online pettion and immediatly calls a meating "i just had an appihany some kid said to make a cheap computer that hooks up to your tv weve been completely wrong all theese yearsapple is now only going to make web tv type systems and nothing else my god what have i been doing"
Don't forget - please sign the petition.....
reasons your wrong
1. he didnt make up a word of it
2. apple made safari before ms pulled ie
3.the ipod has a long time to go their not going to just say screw it when its selling
4.ITMS is making them money after the record companies are paid back for the use of the songs every cent is profit
5. less than 20 people have signed your petition and do you really think its going to get apple to change their entire strategyi can see it now steve jobs sees our online pettion and immediatly calls a meating "i just had an appihany some kid said to make a cheap computer that hooks up to your tv weve been completely wrong all theese yearsapple is now only going to make web tv type systems and nothing else my god what have i been doing"
G4R2
Nov 29, 03:09 PM
I would say some obvious features that were not shown in the iTV demo but might make it onto the final product would include:
- Web browsing
- iPod games
- E-mail
- iChat/VOIP
- iPod/iTunes music/video purchasing and sync (via wireless iPod or iPod cradle?)
- Wireless N router
There may be more functions that are related to Leopard or future Apple devices. Will it stream content to an iPhone like a Slingbox or Orb on the PC? Will it sync with a video iPod?
It really depends on how Apple intends to position this device, either as a standalone wireless hub for media content or an accessory to other Macs.
- Web browsing
- iPod games
- iChat/VOIP
- iPod/iTunes music/video purchasing and sync (via wireless iPod or iPod cradle?)
- Wireless N router
There may be more functions that are related to Leopard or future Apple devices. Will it stream content to an iPhone like a Slingbox or Orb on the PC? Will it sync with a video iPod?
It really depends on how Apple intends to position this device, either as a standalone wireless hub for media content or an accessory to other Macs.
iSamurai
Apr 12, 10:21 PM
hmm... I've just edited a video for a uni project in After Effects... and having done another video in FCP before I thought these two programmes had similar interfaces though AE was much better though I do like FCP's automatic snapping when dragging video clips around.
As for this preview for the new FCPX, quite a few features I thought were great (especially audio clean up), but not so sure on the layout (similarity to iMovie) and compared to AE all the buttons and knobs are clearly allocated... But yeah I'm keen to give it a try.
As for this preview for the new FCPX, quite a few features I thought were great (especially audio clean up), but not so sure on the layout (similarity to iMovie) and compared to AE all the buttons and knobs are clearly allocated... But yeah I'm keen to give it a try.
FearNo1
Apr 23, 12:30 AM
Its good that you are at least suspicious of apple's actions. There has to be a reason why apple inc still has not responded to this. BTW, before someone asks, no I do not have an android or other smart phone as they could be worse at spying than iphone.
Not this easy.
It's not so much about finding people at any moment, but knowing where they've been. And this file makes it dirt simple to find that out.
A guy in your terrorist cell claims he's not FBI, because he's never been to Washington DC. Even his phone contacts are all people nowhere near there. Yet what if his cache list says otherwise. He's probably dead.
By now, you also know that I always speak from personal experience when possible.
I was Military Intelligence and NSA in the heart of the Cold War. I did undercover field work at times. This kind of easy info is both priceless and dangerous. I've seen field officers compromised in almost every way imaginable. My scenarios are not stretches by any means.
Not this easy.
It's not so much about finding people at any moment, but knowing where they've been. And this file makes it dirt simple to find that out.
A guy in your terrorist cell claims he's not FBI, because he's never been to Washington DC. Even his phone contacts are all people nowhere near there. Yet what if his cache list says otherwise. He's probably dead.
By now, you also know that I always speak from personal experience when possible.
I was Military Intelligence and NSA in the heart of the Cold War. I did undercover field work at times. This kind of easy info is both priceless and dangerous. I've seen field officers compromised in almost every way imaginable. My scenarios are not stretches by any means.
Object-X
Nov 27, 08:26 PM
Well, see... there's this little thing called market analysis and listening to the people you sell things to. I highly doubt Apple was sitting around going "we need to release something new because its been months. I know! How about a different monitor size!"
Why not reduce the 20" to $399? Why should they when they seem to be selling just fine at where they are?
Dell is putting IMAGINED price pressure on Apple with their monitors. Selling cheaper crap will cost you less.
IMAGINED?
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
Why not reduce the 20" to $399? Why should they when they seem to be selling just fine at where they are?
Dell is putting IMAGINED price pressure on Apple with their monitors. Selling cheaper crap will cost you less.
IMAGINED?
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
Mr-Stabby
Apr 12, 09:29 PM
Isn't this utterly fantastic? These are the kinds of updates we used to get before Apple went all iPhone and iPad crazy. Glad to see they are finally giving such love to their Pro customers. Although i imagine this has been in the pipeline for a very long time!
If Apple give me a new Mac Pro to run this on, i will spend my entire years wage on them!
If Apple give me a new Mac Pro to run this on, i will spend my entire years wage on them!
Full of Win
Apr 12, 08:31 PM
Here comes Super Final Cut Express (SFCE)...
LERsince1991
Feb 27, 01:39 PM
^^^ What monitor stand is that? :confused: I really like it. :)
Thanks! :)
Sorry :)
It's custom made
I made it myself for a design project
http://www.lukeriggall.co.uk/design/novanta/
http://www.lrdesignltd.co.uk/
It's only MDF with a plastic based paint spray finish.
I'd make a proper one out of corian though next time if I ever make the final prototype lol :)
Thanks! :)
Sorry :)
It's custom made
I made it myself for a design project
http://www.lukeriggall.co.uk/design/novanta/
http://www.lrdesignltd.co.uk/
It's only MDF with a plastic based paint spray finish.
I'd make a proper one out of corian though next time if I ever make the final prototype lol :)
I'mAMac
Sep 1, 01:18 PM
What is this chin on the iMac that everybody is talking about?
bassfingers
Apr 26, 12:52 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Here we go again
"what about windows being generic?!"
-well Microsoft isn't actually selling window panes
"app store is generic"
-if it were 'mobile software store' or 'application store', it would definitely be generic, but 'app store' is arguable
"this is stupid, apple being such a girl"
-they've built a name with 'app store', and it would be to the competitions advantage to use it. Otherwise, they would just use something else.
"apple didn't invent the word app"
-well they made it popular
"nuh-uh, I've been using app, since blah blah..."
-congratulations (but we're talking about millions, not 1 and a few friends)
Here we go again
"what about windows being generic?!"
-well Microsoft isn't actually selling window panes
"app store is generic"
-if it were 'mobile software store' or 'application store', it would definitely be generic, but 'app store' is arguable
"this is stupid, apple being such a girl"
-they've built a name with 'app store', and it would be to the competitions advantage to use it. Otherwise, they would just use something else.
"apple didn't invent the word app"
-well they made it popular
"nuh-uh, I've been using app, since blah blah..."
-congratulations (but we're talking about millions, not 1 and a few friends)
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
sbrage2000
Apr 12, 10:19 PM
Some definite improvements but I wouldn't go as far as to call it a "jaw-dropper". I was really hoping to see more about how it integrates with the rest of the suite.
Synchromesh
Apr 10, 02:21 PM
My first car years ago was an automatic (had no choice). Since then all were manual and that's the only way to go imho. I do not and will not buy automatic car for a long time because I despise them. Nothing more pathetic than a sports car with an automatic. Honestly, any man not driving a family car/taxi/limo/truck that drives an automatic is not very manly in my eyes.
I remember going to Dominican Republic a few years back. We couldn't take a Jeep tour because it required 2 drivers the could handle a manual and I was the only one who could drive it out of 6 people (3 guys and 3 girls). Very sad.
I remember going to Dominican Republic a few years back. We couldn't take a Jeep tour because it required 2 drivers the could handle a manual and I was the only one who could drive it out of 6 people (3 guys and 3 girls). Very sad.
Object-X
Nov 28, 03:25 AM
Wow. For someone who seems to have all the answers, you're not reading the rest of this thread very well.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327
In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.
I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?
There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.
Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.
Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.
Well, you just made my point better than me. Of the millions of Macs sold, how many are to customers needing correct color and really care about the finer details of the monitor's specs? If you're buying a $2400 + Mac Pro the choice is obvious and you could justify the higher price, but what about the low end?
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20". The Apple monitor is extremely dim, so much so I'm not buying the superior color argument with that model, it's very noticable; the iMac however is very bright and the colors look much richer. If you want to argue that the Apple monitor is sooo much better with color reproduction and the numbers don't lie, than OK, I'll give you that. But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one. Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper. Apple won't make as much money off of a mini/cinema combo as they will off of a 20" iMac; especially if the profit margin on the monitor is razor thin.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it. I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right? But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327
In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.
I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?
There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.
Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.
Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.
Well, you just made my point better than me. Of the millions of Macs sold, how many are to customers needing correct color and really care about the finer details of the monitor's specs? If you're buying a $2400 + Mac Pro the choice is obvious and you could justify the higher price, but what about the low end?
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20". The Apple monitor is extremely dim, so much so I'm not buying the superior color argument with that model, it's very noticable; the iMac however is very bright and the colors look much richer. If you want to argue that the Apple monitor is sooo much better with color reproduction and the numbers don't lie, than OK, I'll give you that. But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one. Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper. Apple won't make as much money off of a mini/cinema combo as they will off of a 20" iMac; especially if the profit margin on the monitor is razor thin.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it. I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right? But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
Kilger
Feb 23, 01:50 PM
http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/8707/img0388uf.jpg (http://img7.imageshack.us/i/img0388uf.jpg/)
This is my first Mac computer so nothing special but I love it.
This is my first Mac computer so nothing special but I love it.
pyramid6
Apr 26, 02:54 PM
I think that these two quotes from Tim Cook during the last Apple quarterly call, put the nail in the coffin:
"We've got the largest app store ..."
"... iPhone's integrated approach is materially better than Android's fragmented approach, where you have multiple OSs on multiple devices with different screen resolutions and multiple app stores with different ... "
Since Apple itself uses the word generically, I don't see how anyone can argue that it's not.
Isn't this what Amazon filed recently?
There are some interesting reads about trademarks on Wikipedia. I think one of the reasons Google doesn't want people to use the term "google it", is because it makes the trademark generic, and they can lose it.
"We've got the largest app store ..."
"... iPhone's integrated approach is materially better than Android's fragmented approach, where you have multiple OSs on multiple devices with different screen resolutions and multiple app stores with different ... "
Since Apple itself uses the word generically, I don't see how anyone can argue that it's not.
Isn't this what Amazon filed recently?
There are some interesting reads about trademarks on Wikipedia. I think one of the reasons Google doesn't want people to use the term "google it", is because it makes the trademark generic, and they can lose it.
ingenious
Apr 5, 02:00 PM
Now that has to be the most double standard quote that I have ever read !!!
Apple had to expand beyond its computers to be profitable....If not for the Ipod - Apple wouldnt be making money.
Steve get Apple into gear man ! Drop prices - Take on the market...With good marketing , Apple will not cheapen..
excuse me, but WHAT WORLD DO YOU LIVE IN? JK! seriously tho, you should just do one of two things:
1)give up cuz ur obviously wrong and not gaining much support!
2)move to mars and live in your own little dream world where apple is dying.
apple did not have to create the ipod to stay profitable. they are debt free and have 5b in the bank. computers are making more the double what the ipod's making. c'mon man, do ur research! some mod should just delete this thread. it's pointless!
Apple had to expand beyond its computers to be profitable....If not for the Ipod - Apple wouldnt be making money.
Steve get Apple into gear man ! Drop prices - Take on the market...With good marketing , Apple will not cheapen..
excuse me, but WHAT WORLD DO YOU LIVE IN? JK! seriously tho, you should just do one of two things:
1)give up cuz ur obviously wrong and not gaining much support!
2)move to mars and live in your own little dream world where apple is dying.
apple did not have to create the ipod to stay profitable. they are debt free and have 5b in the bank. computers are making more the double what the ipod's making. c'mon man, do ur research! some mod should just delete this thread. it's pointless!
