gregorsamsa
Jan 12, 08:55 PM
Actually, I find your post to be spot off. I find your portrayal of Mac owners to be shallow, self-serving, stereotyping and weak. I did notice you used the term 'some' in an attempt to mitigate your attack.
The fact is, of the 50-100 Mac users I know, I only know one other person who reads these boards. The majority are just owner/users who love their machines. If I were to pick a group of smug zealots around here, it would be the the Apple bashers.
I expected the trolls to come flying out of the woodwork after Tuesday. You are living up to all my expectations.
The "some" in my post wasn't meant to mitigate anything. I meant every word I said in exactly the way I said it. That you then choose to attach your own paranoid interpretation to it is entirely down to you.
There's actually no Apple bashing in my post whatsoever but, as is all too typical with a few people, feathers are all too easily ruffled & then we get the tired, old accusations of trollism coming out. That you should talk about "living up to all my expectations" is kind of rich in the circumstances.
The fact is, of the 50-100 Mac users I know, I only know one other person who reads these boards. The majority are just owner/users who love their machines. If I were to pick a group of smug zealots around here, it would be the the Apple bashers.
I expected the trolls to come flying out of the woodwork after Tuesday. You are living up to all my expectations.
The "some" in my post wasn't meant to mitigate anything. I meant every word I said in exactly the way I said it. That you then choose to attach your own paranoid interpretation to it is entirely down to you.
There's actually no Apple bashing in my post whatsoever but, as is all too typical with a few people, feathers are all too easily ruffled & then we get the tired, old accusations of trollism coming out. That you should talk about "living up to all my expectations" is kind of rich in the circumstances.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 15, 06:34 PM
The title of this is bad. It sounds like the problem has to do with contract negotiations with record labels. This in fact means that google is having trouble getting its itunes store competitor off the ground.
Itunes is the application for playing media and the itunes store is the business for selling media through itunes.
Itunes began without any store for purchasing music. You do not need to go to the itunes store to use itunes. The application imports music from CDs. Other audio and movie files can be added without visiting the store.
The store is just a convenience.
I'm sure google can make a media player to compete with Apple's itunes. The title of this thread should refer to the store, not the application.
As for the store, I don't understand why the record labels do not just advertise their own stores for music. They sell DRM free music files on itunes so why not on their own sites? And why not on other sites? What is the big deal? If I buy an mp3 file from sony directly I can put it in itunes.
Amazon does this. They sell you digital music and you can choose to put it in itunes or whatever application you choose.
I imagine the real issue is with the movies which still have protection in the itunes store.
Still, the movie companies sell digital movie files outside of itunes for itunes. On DVDs for instance you can get a digital copy and use itunes or other applications to unlock the file. Why do the movie companies not just open a store front of their own for this?
Itunes is the application for playing media and the itunes store is the business for selling media through itunes.
Itunes began without any store for purchasing music. You do not need to go to the itunes store to use itunes. The application imports music from CDs. Other audio and movie files can be added without visiting the store.
The store is just a convenience.
I'm sure google can make a media player to compete with Apple's itunes. The title of this thread should refer to the store, not the application.
As for the store, I don't understand why the record labels do not just advertise their own stores for music. They sell DRM free music files on itunes so why not on their own sites? And why not on other sites? What is the big deal? If I buy an mp3 file from sony directly I can put it in itunes.
Amazon does this. They sell you digital music and you can choose to put it in itunes or whatever application you choose.
I imagine the real issue is with the movies which still have protection in the itunes store.
Still, the movie companies sell digital movie files outside of itunes for itunes. On DVDs for instance you can get a digital copy and use itunes or other applications to unlock the file. Why do the movie companies not just open a store front of their own for this?
markm1101
Mar 25, 07:35 AM
Happy Birthday OS X! I made the switch back in '03 when I got my 1.8 ghz PPC G5, running 10.2, I believe. 10.3 came out not too long after I rec'd my computer, and Apple sent me a free copy since I'd purchased my computer so close to the 10.3 release. Been a HUGE fan ever since. :)
Gugulino
Mar 24, 04:11 PM
Cheers! I wish Mac OS X a long and successful life! Keep going on�
more...
-hh
Oct 19, 10:16 AM
The market share (and Princeton report) are favorable news for the Mac platform and for Apple.
But it is interesting to read this from Gartner, in the light that this very same Company is also in the news right now for their "Macs should be made by Dell" splash (actual paper was "Apple Should License the Mac to Dell")
In conjunction with this articles observation that Dell's PC marketshare has been sliding (lost worldwide #1 to HP, etc), along with business reports that aren't rosey on Dell's margins (nor their get well plan, which isn't working), the newsfolk who picked up on Gartner really got their headline wrong. It really should have been IMO:
"Dell sliding bad - needs rescue in form of Mac licence from Apple".
In said report (the other one, not this one) Gartner suggested that 'Apple should concentrate on what it does best - create software - and make use of Dell's production and distribution infrastructure.' In this report, there's not a peep of such 'black clouds on the horizon' for Apple ... must be two different guys in the Gartner shop :)
Quite interesting, since the bottom line right now is that the Mac Pro is known to be less expensive than the Dell equivalent, for what does that suggest about expertise in cutting deals with Intel, and efficiently running production & distrubution?
The reality is that Apple generally contracts out much of their manufacturing, true. However, so does Dell. As such, why should Apple bother to pay to go through Dell? That's called using a "Middle Man" and this intermediate step would increase costs, which would then either lower Apple's unit profits, or force them to raise prices ... which hearkens the 'Macs cost more' paradigm.
This is why Gartner's suggestion seems to be more aimed to help Dell through their current fiscal troubles but does not help Apple in any meaningful way at this time.
Perhaps Apple will need Dell for access to Dell's assemblers, but that would only occur when Apple's total market share gets huge - say exceeds 33%. Barring a Vista-catastrophy, at the current rate of market share growth, we're still more than a year or two away from having to cross that bridge, which ironically gives Michael Dell plenty of time to become more retrospective and apologetic about inflammatory comments he has made of Apple in the past.
-hh
PS: if you look more closely at Apple's 3Q numbers, you'll see that desktop sales were relatively flat: the growth was in laptops.
But it is interesting to read this from Gartner, in the light that this very same Company is also in the news right now for their "Macs should be made by Dell" splash (actual paper was "Apple Should License the Mac to Dell")
In conjunction with this articles observation that Dell's PC marketshare has been sliding (lost worldwide #1 to HP, etc), along with business reports that aren't rosey on Dell's margins (nor their get well plan, which isn't working), the newsfolk who picked up on Gartner really got their headline wrong. It really should have been IMO:
"Dell sliding bad - needs rescue in form of Mac licence from Apple".
In said report (the other one, not this one) Gartner suggested that 'Apple should concentrate on what it does best - create software - and make use of Dell's production and distribution infrastructure.' In this report, there's not a peep of such 'black clouds on the horizon' for Apple ... must be two different guys in the Gartner shop :)
Quite interesting, since the bottom line right now is that the Mac Pro is known to be less expensive than the Dell equivalent, for what does that suggest about expertise in cutting deals with Intel, and efficiently running production & distrubution?
The reality is that Apple generally contracts out much of their manufacturing, true. However, so does Dell. As such, why should Apple bother to pay to go through Dell? That's called using a "Middle Man" and this intermediate step would increase costs, which would then either lower Apple's unit profits, or force them to raise prices ... which hearkens the 'Macs cost more' paradigm.
This is why Gartner's suggestion seems to be more aimed to help Dell through their current fiscal troubles but does not help Apple in any meaningful way at this time.
Perhaps Apple will need Dell for access to Dell's assemblers, but that would only occur when Apple's total market share gets huge - say exceeds 33%. Barring a Vista-catastrophy, at the current rate of market share growth, we're still more than a year or two away from having to cross that bridge, which ironically gives Michael Dell plenty of time to become more retrospective and apologetic about inflammatory comments he has made of Apple in the past.
-hh
PS: if you look more closely at Apple's 3Q numbers, you'll see that desktop sales were relatively flat: the growth was in laptops.
AppliedVisual
Oct 17, 01:22 PM
$4,000 for a TV? Quoting an commercial for Circuit City or Best Buy(?) when asking people about "HD", one of the answers was "Wicked expensive...."
Just about any major electronics purchase at CC or BB is "wicked expensive". They're both known for listing large ticket items higher than MSRP. I paid $3600 for a new 71" Samsung from an authorized deal with white-glove delivery, they even called me a week later to see if I was still happy with it or if I wanted to swap it for something else. BestBuy wanted over $5K for a two year old 73" Mitsubishi or nearly $6200 for the same Samsung set I bought (price included delivery - ooooooh). :rolleyes: MSRP on that 71" Samsung is $4,499. Where does BB (or rather the Magnolia Center in BB) get off charging a $1,200 premium over MSRP? ...Should be a law against that.
...But then again, other than the occasional DVD or small purchase I never shop there. It just gives me that sick to the stomach feeling knowing I'm buying something from a place that charges $100 for a $5 cable on a daily basis.
But the general consumer is oblivious to most of this. They don't understand the products, let alone whether or not they're getting a fair deal. ...Sad, really.
Just about any major electronics purchase at CC or BB is "wicked expensive". They're both known for listing large ticket items higher than MSRP. I paid $3600 for a new 71" Samsung from an authorized deal with white-glove delivery, they even called me a week later to see if I was still happy with it or if I wanted to swap it for something else. BestBuy wanted over $5K for a two year old 73" Mitsubishi or nearly $6200 for the same Samsung set I bought (price included delivery - ooooooh). :rolleyes: MSRP on that 71" Samsung is $4,499. Where does BB (or rather the Magnolia Center in BB) get off charging a $1,200 premium over MSRP? ...Should be a law against that.
...But then again, other than the occasional DVD or small purchase I never shop there. It just gives me that sick to the stomach feeling knowing I'm buying something from a place that charges $100 for a $5 cable on a daily basis.
But the general consumer is oblivious to most of this. They don't understand the products, let alone whether or not they're getting a fair deal. ...Sad, really.
more...
Starship77
Apr 15, 03:34 PM
Actually, shooting up close with a wide-angle lens will give you exactly that distortion. Here is a photo I just took of a REAL iPhone with a 17mm lens. Sorry about the fuzziness - handheld and did not use a flash:
http://www.marulla.com/files/perspective.jpg
So I don't think text in the 3rd photo is skewed. That being said, I agree it's a fake.
What gives the bad impression is that, since is a 3D rendering, it doesn't have lens distortion (because the guy "forgot" about it). Real lenses always gives you some barrel distortion because they are curved, and the standard camera in a 3D software is always just straight 3 point perspective. When you put it in an angle that gives too much perspective it looks strange.
Specially the first image, is a good 3D, but is not realistic enough to be perceived as a photo because of:
1- Lack of lens distortion
2- Very linear noise, obviously applied.
3- Un-natural light
4- Not so realistic dynamic range and exposure
5- Shadows are too smooth for that kind of flash-light
6- Light is too uniform
7- The model is good, but you can see that there are some hard edges that are not natural.
8- Doesn't have any camera meta-data. (he "forgot" to fake that also)
and a few other minor things... but yeah, it's a very good 3D work!:)
if you want to do a little test with your abilities to tell if it's cg or not:
http://area.autodesk.com/fakeorfoto/challenge
a little too easy though... ;)
http://www.marulla.com/files/perspective.jpg
So I don't think text in the 3rd photo is skewed. That being said, I agree it's a fake.
What gives the bad impression is that, since is a 3D rendering, it doesn't have lens distortion (because the guy "forgot" about it). Real lenses always gives you some barrel distortion because they are curved, and the standard camera in a 3D software is always just straight 3 point perspective. When you put it in an angle that gives too much perspective it looks strange.
Specially the first image, is a good 3D, but is not realistic enough to be perceived as a photo because of:
1- Lack of lens distortion
2- Very linear noise, obviously applied.
3- Un-natural light
4- Not so realistic dynamic range and exposure
5- Shadows are too smooth for that kind of flash-light
6- Light is too uniform
7- The model is good, but you can see that there are some hard edges that are not natural.
8- Doesn't have any camera meta-data. (he "forgot" to fake that also)
and a few other minor things... but yeah, it's a very good 3D work!:)
if you want to do a little test with your abilities to tell if it's cg or not:
http://area.autodesk.com/fakeorfoto/challenge
a little too easy though... ;)
markm1101
Mar 25, 07:35 AM
Happy Birthday OS X! I made the switch back in '03 when I got my 1.8 ghz PPC G5, running 10.2, I believe. 10.3 came out not too long after I rec'd my computer, and Apple sent me a free copy since I'd purchased my computer so close to the 10.3 release. Been a HUGE fan ever since. :)
more...
ECUpirate44
Mar 24, 03:09 PM
Great OS!
langis.elbasunu
Mar 17, 11:29 AM
I would just like people to know a few things about me:
I'm an Indian Shaman and a King
I had coffee this morning
I'm sick of NYC and the scalpers
My P is about 3 inches (from the ground)
I wrote Jobs an email for free **** because I can't wait for shipping
I was raised in the everybody wins society by useless parents
I hate everyone that has an iPad 2 right now
Did I mention the NYC scalpers?
I love useless threads on MacRumors
I'm entitled to whatever I want as long as I say so
There I think I covered just about every useless thread this place has seen lately. :D
you forgot to bash the xoom
I'm an Indian Shaman and a King
I had coffee this morning
I'm sick of NYC and the scalpers
My P is about 3 inches (from the ground)
I wrote Jobs an email for free **** because I can't wait for shipping
I was raised in the everybody wins society by useless parents
I hate everyone that has an iPad 2 right now
Did I mention the NYC scalpers?
I love useless threads on MacRumors
I'm entitled to whatever I want as long as I say so
There I think I covered just about every useless thread this place has seen lately. :D
you forgot to bash the xoom
more...
aristobrat
Oct 6, 06:32 PM
I think the biggest problem is when Apple had the chance to change the game by not doing subizided cost they instead give in and just make it worse by forcing a much larger than average subsudize on there phone ($400 vs $250).
Unlock phones puts the network and the phone separete.
I'm not sure why you think Apple's original iPhone sales model was changing the game.
The customer paid the full price of the iPhone, the iPhone was still locked to a specific carrier, and the carrier agreed to pay Apple monthly for every iPhone customer they had.
On top of that, AT&T created a special, cheaper data plan to lure customers in, as the full-priced phone was very off-putting to some.
Sounds like the original iPhone ended up costing AT&T more than the subsidy on the iPhone 3G/3GS did.
And why did Apple change its original sales model? Because they weren't selling nearly as fast as Apple had hoped.
I agree with you that being able to buy any phone and have it work on any network would be awesome. Logistically, I just don't ever see it happening.
Unlock phones puts the network and the phone separete.
I'm not sure why you think Apple's original iPhone sales model was changing the game.
The customer paid the full price of the iPhone, the iPhone was still locked to a specific carrier, and the carrier agreed to pay Apple monthly for every iPhone customer they had.
On top of that, AT&T created a special, cheaper data plan to lure customers in, as the full-priced phone was very off-putting to some.
Sounds like the original iPhone ended up costing AT&T more than the subsidy on the iPhone 3G/3GS did.
And why did Apple change its original sales model? Because they weren't selling nearly as fast as Apple had hoped.
I agree with you that being able to buy any phone and have it work on any network would be awesome. Logistically, I just don't ever see it happening.
Abstract
Apr 11, 08:41 AM
Phiaton Moderna MS-400 headphones. :)
Review. (http://www.digitaltrends.com/headphone-reviews/phiaton-ms-400-second-generation-review/)
Another review from Head-fi (http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/495667/review-phiaton-ms-400).
I got them because the hardshell case will be very useful, and it's easy to drive, un-amped, with an iPhone. :) I could have bought them in all-black, but these are less boring!! I was also considering the Denon D510r (includes iPhone remote), Klipsch Image One (supposedly has overwhelming bass and only average sound quality), Shure SRH-750 and 840 (both are too big), or even Beyerdynamics t50p (was in serious consideration). I still think I made a good choice though!
http://www.digitaltrends.com/wp-content/uploads/cache/2009/07/ms-400-3.jpg/430_310_resize.jpg
I also bought a pair of Denon C560r in-ears. I bought the same pair 6 months ago, but I lost them. :( They're fantastic, and the remote control is sooooo useful!! I have also owned Klipsch S4i, and I think these are better.
http://www.gayakuman.com/uploads/2010/05/denon-ah-c560r-and-ah-c260r-ear-buds-ipod-control.jpg
Review. (http://www.digitaltrends.com/headphone-reviews/phiaton-ms-400-second-generation-review/)
Another review from Head-fi (http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/495667/review-phiaton-ms-400).
I got them because the hardshell case will be very useful, and it's easy to drive, un-amped, with an iPhone. :) I could have bought them in all-black, but these are less boring!! I was also considering the Denon D510r (includes iPhone remote), Klipsch Image One (supposedly has overwhelming bass and only average sound quality), Shure SRH-750 and 840 (both are too big), or even Beyerdynamics t50p (was in serious consideration). I still think I made a good choice though!
http://www.digitaltrends.com/wp-content/uploads/cache/2009/07/ms-400-3.jpg/430_310_resize.jpg
I also bought a pair of Denon C560r in-ears. I bought the same pair 6 months ago, but I lost them. :( They're fantastic, and the remote control is sooooo useful!! I have also owned Klipsch S4i, and I think these are better.
http://www.gayakuman.com/uploads/2010/05/denon-ah-c560r-and-ah-c260r-ear-buds-ipod-control.jpg
more...
FreeState
Sep 12, 02:51 AM
Does anyone know what time this even will be in GMT?
GMT-7
(edited to fix errrr)
GMT-7
(edited to fix errrr)
MacRumors
Apr 15, 04:13 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/15/google-facing-difficulties-getting-itunes-competitor-off-the-ground/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/15/171049-android_music_cloud_syncing.jpg
more...
love you friend quotes.
i love you friend sayings.
more...
i love you friend quotes. i
love you friend quotes. i love
i love you friend quotes. i
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/15/171049-android_music_cloud_syncing.jpg
more...
Arcus
Oct 28, 11:06 PM
Logic Pro 7 has yet to be cracked,
LOL. Look harder.
LOL. Look harder.
Applejuiced
Apr 27, 12:46 PM
same with me. On IE7 running Vista
Edit: Now works! :)
Works now for me too.
Win7 with IE9.
Had to log out of the forum, delete all cookies and restart the computer.
Then I logged back in and the arrows work without bringing me to the main forum section any more:)
Edit:
It was working fine for 15-20 and now started doing it again. I didnt log out or even closed the IE page I had open.
I dont know whats up, seems like its still buggy....
Edit: Now works! :)
Works now for me too.
Win7 with IE9.
Had to log out of the forum, delete all cookies and restart the computer.
Then I logged back in and the arrows work without bringing me to the main forum section any more:)
Edit:
It was working fine for 15-20 and now started doing it again. I didnt log out or even closed the IE page I had open.
I dont know whats up, seems like its still buggy....
more...
tkermit
Apr 5, 03:34 PM
Apple loves its customers so much, they let you view ads for free!
This could actually be made useful if Apple let you accumulate iTunes credit for voluntarily looking at some of the ads
This could actually be made useful if Apple let you accumulate iTunes credit for voluntarily looking at some of the ads
dethmaShine
Apr 16, 02:31 PM
While I agree with you overall, I think there have been plenty of features that NeXT-Apple has teased, but not ultimately delivered on. "Home on the iPod" is one and "resolution independence" is another, I'm sure there are more but these are two that might actually have mattered to me.
B
I think 'Home on iPod' might be coming in iOS 5.
But yes, Resolution Independence did matter to me a lot. But somewhere, I feel that it might not be the best thing available; but still Mac OS X has better capabilities of displaying content than windows (incl. windows 7) although I really think win8 will be a game changer in this regard; they have had tones of time, now.
B
I think 'Home on iPod' might be coming in iOS 5.
But yes, Resolution Independence did matter to me a lot. But somewhere, I feel that it might not be the best thing available; but still Mac OS X has better capabilities of displaying content than windows (incl. windows 7) although I really think win8 will be a game changer in this regard; they have had tones of time, now.
Hastings101
Apr 9, 12:22 AM
Go for it! If they deserve it, they deserve it!
Yea, the other people working there deserve to suffer for something one person does :p
Yea, the other people working there deserve to suffer for something one person does :p
JML42691
Dec 13, 10:42 AM
Dont underestimate the power of marketing. They might have this LTE/CDMA combo where the LTE is not all that functional but is there only for the publicity. Think about the splash of the FIRST 4G iPhone!
That would seem very un-Apple like, like somebody said earlier in this thread, they wouldn't allow homescreen background images on two of their phones because of performance issues (which can't be more than a fraction of a second), so why would they allow not fully-functioning LTE capabilities. Apple isn't a company that'll do something just so they can say they did it first, look at multitasking, Steve's quote when they announced it was something like, "we were certainly not the first to do it but we were the first to do it right." In Apple's eyes, if it isn't perfect they won't do it.
That would seem very un-Apple like, like somebody said earlier in this thread, they wouldn't allow homescreen background images on two of their phones because of performance issues (which can't be more than a fraction of a second), so why would they allow not fully-functioning LTE capabilities. Apple isn't a company that'll do something just so they can say they did it first, look at multitasking, Steve's quote when they announced it was something like, "we were certainly not the first to do it but we were the first to do it right." In Apple's eyes, if it isn't perfect they won't do it.
hvfsl
Oct 10, 05:05 PM
Well if they do launch it so soon, it probably won't replace the current iPods, but be a new highend model.
MacBoy108
Jan 8, 10:21 PM
iBook G5 and Newton Pro.
wordoflife
Apr 25, 03:39 PM
It doesn't look fake to me, but who am I to judge?
Anyways, I'll welcome that screen.
Anyways, I'll welcome that screen.
AlphaBob
May 2, 01:30 PM
I wonder how many people have been targeted/prosecuted based on the false assumption that the data logged was a record of the user's location, and not simply a list of WiFi and Cell tower devices obtained over a series of months.
I'd hate to think someone is sitting in jail as a result of this pseudo science being accepted as 'fact' by the courts.
I'd hate to think someone is sitting in jail as a result of this pseudo science being accepted as 'fact' by the courts.
No comments:
Post a Comment