snebes
Apr 8, 04:56 PM
This would be especially true if person claiming to be a current or former employee knows the term BBY at all. Hell, I'd believe them for my own sake, as I don't want to believe in a world where anyone outside of the Best Buy "family" would ever be concerned with such trivial things.
You do know that BBY is their ticker symbol, right? Same reason the "stock holders" here say AAPL instead of Apple. Its not exactly top secret info.
You do know that BBY is their ticker symbol, right? Same reason the "stock holders" here say AAPL instead of Apple. Its not exactly top secret info.
Detlev
Mar 28, 02:44 PM
When was the last time a standards setting, headline grabbing, everyone's gotta have it Mac application created?
Starship77
May 3, 10:43 PM
Pity I can't buy the product.
Why are Apple spending so much money on advertising when they can't even keep up with demand? Makes no sense.
Because they want to continue not being able to keep up with the demand for more time... ;)
Why are Apple spending so much money on advertising when they can't even keep up with demand? Makes no sense.
Because they want to continue not being able to keep up with the demand for more time... ;)
roadbloc
Mar 13, 04:34 AM
Transition.
The industry is undergoing a massive paradigm-shift, thanks to Apple
No. A new market has been opened by Apple. That is as far as it goes. An iPad is not for everyone. Tablets will never kill off Laptops or Desktops or Servers.
The industry is undergoing a massive paradigm-shift, thanks to Apple
No. A new market has been opened by Apple. That is as far as it goes. An iPad is not for everyone. Tablets will never kill off Laptops or Desktops or Servers.
snberk103
Apr 15, 02:38 PM
...
If your argument is that security changes post 9/11 have made things better than the previous decade, I think showing it via statistics will be shaky at best. Zero passenger-carrying hijacks in the U.S. in the decade before 9/11 followed by zero passenger-carrying hijacks in the U.S. in the decade after 9/11 is not a statistic you can make a very solid conclusion off of.
...
My only claim is that something the TSA is doing is working to help prevent hijackings. This was in response to some arguments that nothing airport security was doing was in fact useful. If you go back, you will see I quoted both TSA and European stats, not just TSA. And that while there may have been no passenger hijackings in the 90s in the USA, there were a couple in Europe, and one in Japan. And then nothing in Europe and Japan or the USA since 9/11. Which I believe is due to increased airport security, similar to what the TSA does.
That's all I'm saying. I'm not advocating for the current screening, just refuting some baseless arguments that it's a total waste of money ("baseless" as in - "it's my opinion, and I'm not presenting any evidence to support it"). Opinions are fine, and everyone is entitled to them. Just don't expect me to accept an opinion as fact, if I can support my opposing opinion with at least some evidence.
(I'm using Japan and Europe 'cause they also have a tradition of terrorist organizations targeting their planes, and because they "harmonized" their screening standards to the TSA. No choice, if they wanted to continue flying their planes into or over US airspace. Other countries may have also harmonized (like Canada) but either they don't have a tradition of terrorism, or I don't have enough info about them.)
If your argument is that security changes post 9/11 have made things better than the previous decade, I think showing it via statistics will be shaky at best. Zero passenger-carrying hijacks in the U.S. in the decade before 9/11 followed by zero passenger-carrying hijacks in the U.S. in the decade after 9/11 is not a statistic you can make a very solid conclusion off of.
...
My only claim is that something the TSA is doing is working to help prevent hijackings. This was in response to some arguments that nothing airport security was doing was in fact useful. If you go back, you will see I quoted both TSA and European stats, not just TSA. And that while there may have been no passenger hijackings in the 90s in the USA, there were a couple in Europe, and one in Japan. And then nothing in Europe and Japan or the USA since 9/11. Which I believe is due to increased airport security, similar to what the TSA does.
That's all I'm saying. I'm not advocating for the current screening, just refuting some baseless arguments that it's a total waste of money ("baseless" as in - "it's my opinion, and I'm not presenting any evidence to support it"). Opinions are fine, and everyone is entitled to them. Just don't expect me to accept an opinion as fact, if I can support my opposing opinion with at least some evidence.
(I'm using Japan and Europe 'cause they also have a tradition of terrorist organizations targeting their planes, and because they "harmonized" their screening standards to the TSA. No choice, if they wanted to continue flying their planes into or over US airspace. Other countries may have also harmonized (like Canada) but either they don't have a tradition of terrorism, or I don't have enough info about them.)
J Radical
Jan 9, 05:01 PM
Ha it won't play for me. The website is probably being hammered. Anyone having any luck?
Mac.World
Apr 17, 05:07 AM
Uh...wow. I don't know where you went to school, but we were indeed taught about the struggles of all those people. Why should gay people be left out? This is not a special class being taught. It's just including the things gay people went through to gain equal rights in a history class that talks about all those other groups as well.
And yeah, it's just you. Why are you afraid of learning and knowledge? Why does this entire country seem to wish to remain ignorant rather than learn? What the hell is wrong with us? Seriously, it's becoming ridiculous. It really is. Knowledge is power. How is knowing less a good thing?
You completely missed the point. Let me be more specific for comprehension purposes. There is no way to teach the persecution of all peoples throughout the history of our planet with the way the school system is today. So where should the line be drawn? You never answered the question. Do gays deserve more attention than say slavery or the holocaust? It appears to me that you feel that a select few individuals, that may have been gay, deserve more attention than the plight of entire civilizations or race of people?
And this is not ignorance. Pointing out the sexuality of a person that made a contribution to society is irrelevant. Completely and utterly irrelevant! Do people remember Einstein for being a Jew or as the father of modern physics? You would prefer he was remembered as a Jew first?
As for me afraid of learning? Don't presume anything about anyone. I can make an educated guess by your spelling and grammar that you have an education. You are intelligent. We simply view this differently.
And yeah, it's just you. Why are you afraid of learning and knowledge? Why does this entire country seem to wish to remain ignorant rather than learn? What the hell is wrong with us? Seriously, it's becoming ridiculous. It really is. Knowledge is power. How is knowing less a good thing?
You completely missed the point. Let me be more specific for comprehension purposes. There is no way to teach the persecution of all peoples throughout the history of our planet with the way the school system is today. So where should the line be drawn? You never answered the question. Do gays deserve more attention than say slavery or the holocaust? It appears to me that you feel that a select few individuals, that may have been gay, deserve more attention than the plight of entire civilizations or race of people?
And this is not ignorance. Pointing out the sexuality of a person that made a contribution to society is irrelevant. Completely and utterly irrelevant! Do people remember Einstein for being a Jew or as the father of modern physics? You would prefer he was remembered as a Jew first?
As for me afraid of learning? Don't presume anything about anyone. I can make an educated guess by your spelling and grammar that you have an education. You are intelligent. We simply view this differently.
aliensporebomb
Apr 25, 11:50 AM
Curiouser and curiouser.
If it's a fake, whoever did it did a pretty interesting job on it.
It looks plausible.
I mean we had:
iphone 3g
iphone 3gs
why not
iphone 4
iphone 4gs
Which would give incentive for people to go for the white one I guess.
then the 5 comes out later?
If it's a fake, whoever did it did a pretty interesting job on it.
It looks plausible.
I mean we had:
iphone 3g
iphone 3gs
why not
iphone 4
iphone 4gs
Which would give incentive for people to go for the white one I guess.
then the 5 comes out later?
twoodcc
Aug 11, 07:06 PM
^^ is 200mhz really that important :p
i'm tellin ya, there's something about starting with the number 4.
but it got too hot, and i had to turn it down to 3.98 ghz. not quite 4. hopefully it'll stay at that though
i'm tellin ya, there's something about starting with the number 4.
but it got too hot, and i had to turn it down to 3.98 ghz. not quite 4. hopefully it'll stay at that though
NAG
Jan 12, 09:12 PM
If given a chance? What does that mean?
You think if Wired had done this they wouldn't have been banned?
See, loaded. You're warping what I'm saying so you can brush me off and continue to scapegoat gizmodo for something completely separate.
Think about this.
Did I ever say gizmodo probably wasn't going to get banned?
Did I actually say the opposite?
Did I bring up Wired anywhere in this thread or link them to various pranks?
Was I actually trying to make you look at the statement that implied blind faith in print media as being a bastion of truth and being isolated from such pranking?
You think if Wired had done this they wouldn't have been banned?
See, loaded. You're warping what I'm saying so you can brush me off and continue to scapegoat gizmodo for something completely separate.
Think about this.
Did I ever say gizmodo probably wasn't going to get banned?
Did I actually say the opposite?
Did I bring up Wired anywhere in this thread or link them to various pranks?
Was I actually trying to make you look at the statement that implied blind faith in print media as being a bastion of truth and being isolated from such pranking?
IJ Reilly
Oct 19, 10:22 AM
Do you believe that the perpetual delay of Microsoft's Vista OS is allowing Apple to temporarily grab up some of the markey share?
Maybe, but the "Vista effect" is really just a reminder of how slowly Microsoft moves, compared to Apple. It has always been thus. Long wait, yawn. Long wait, yawn. This is what it means to be a Microsoft customer. Have you heard anyone say that they are anxiously anticipating Vista? Microsoft will try to generate some synthetic excitement over Vista, but in reality, hardly anyone will really care.
The bottom line is, Apple is cool again -- and this is reflected in their sales numbers. This is due in no small part to the iPod, of course.
Maybe, but the "Vista effect" is really just a reminder of how slowly Microsoft moves, compared to Apple. It has always been thus. Long wait, yawn. Long wait, yawn. This is what it means to be a Microsoft customer. Have you heard anyone say that they are anxiously anticipating Vista? Microsoft will try to generate some synthetic excitement over Vista, but in reality, hardly anyone will really care.
The bottom line is, Apple is cool again -- and this is reflected in their sales numbers. This is due in no small part to the iPod, of course.
Becordial
Apr 15, 02:07 PM
If you had access to these, why would your camera be this bad?
Think about it, even if you were using a 3G iPhone to take the shots, they'd be better quality than this.
Think about it, even if you were using a 3G iPhone to take the shots, they'd be better quality than this.
wolfboy
Apr 29, 03:20 PM
To the people posting screenshots: You do know that you're breaking the non disclosure agreement you made with Apple when you signed up for the Mac Dev Program? If they track you down, the small print pretty much says they can do very evil things to you. Tred carefully, it's likely Apple will be watching out for people like you.
Who reads those things anyway...
Who reads those things anyway...
The Scotsman
Jan 12, 06:36 PM
Look, people--
There is nothing amazingly new or innovative technology-wise in the iPhone. Everything in it has been done before, and it does not even employ some of the latest (3G) features that its competition does.
Niether did the original iPod. Grasshopper, go and learn from Thread #500. People thought that product was "crippled" by high price and no new technology ("An overpriced HDD-based mp3 player with a B&W LCD display? Who cares?").
I predict that Apple will have 20% of the entire cell phone market and 50+% of the high-end communication device within three years of its June release. That will mean 150-200 million units.
In the intervening six months before formal release, or shortly thereafter, some of the smaller issues will be attended to (like the ability to at least open and review MS files, sync'ing issues, interfacing w/iTunes Store, what have you). The rest won't matter.
Apple does not sell products, people. They sell personal productivity, great user experiences, wow and chic. This phone phone meets all of those criteria. For consumer devices like these, a streamlined and intuitive user experience is like money in the bank. The only thing innovative about the iPod is the stupid click-wheel, and yet 75% of the ENTIRE aac/mp3 player market is controlled by ONE COMPANY. The one with the click-wheel.
So it is with this product. If the final build quality of the unit proves durable, reliable, and cosmetically superior, and the unit functions as billed, it will not only make a huge forray into that giant market, but essentially create a new one.
Right now, the "smartphone" is really a piece of business equipment. Apple just invented the quintessential "consumer" version of the same product. It doesn't matter that it is expensive or lacks some high-end features. If is actually works as effortlessly and seamlessly as billed, it will become another cultural icon. Apple marketing will see to it that everyone on the planet is aware of how "cool" this device is.
I'm glad to be on record here. I hope that when this thread is reviewed three years from now, everyone is talking about the foolish naysayers of Thread #3245138 (or whatever this one is).
I agree with your predictions but I do not think it will be got with the 1st gen iPhone. iPod was not good until a range started and I think the phone will be the same.
There is nothing amazingly new or innovative technology-wise in the iPhone. Everything in it has been done before, and it does not even employ some of the latest (3G) features that its competition does.
Niether did the original iPod. Grasshopper, go and learn from Thread #500. People thought that product was "crippled" by high price and no new technology ("An overpriced HDD-based mp3 player with a B&W LCD display? Who cares?").
I predict that Apple will have 20% of the entire cell phone market and 50+% of the high-end communication device within three years of its June release. That will mean 150-200 million units.
In the intervening six months before formal release, or shortly thereafter, some of the smaller issues will be attended to (like the ability to at least open and review MS files, sync'ing issues, interfacing w/iTunes Store, what have you). The rest won't matter.
Apple does not sell products, people. They sell personal productivity, great user experiences, wow and chic. This phone phone meets all of those criteria. For consumer devices like these, a streamlined and intuitive user experience is like money in the bank. The only thing innovative about the iPod is the stupid click-wheel, and yet 75% of the ENTIRE aac/mp3 player market is controlled by ONE COMPANY. The one with the click-wheel.
So it is with this product. If the final build quality of the unit proves durable, reliable, and cosmetically superior, and the unit functions as billed, it will not only make a huge forray into that giant market, but essentially create a new one.
Right now, the "smartphone" is really a piece of business equipment. Apple just invented the quintessential "consumer" version of the same product. It doesn't matter that it is expensive or lacks some high-end features. If is actually works as effortlessly and seamlessly as billed, it will become another cultural icon. Apple marketing will see to it that everyone on the planet is aware of how "cool" this device is.
I'm glad to be on record here. I hope that when this thread is reviewed three years from now, everyone is talking about the foolish naysayers of Thread #3245138 (or whatever this one is).
I agree with your predictions but I do not think it will be got with the 1st gen iPhone. iPod was not good until a range started and I think the phone will be the same.
Popeye206
Apr 5, 04:44 PM
Seems silly... would be useful if you got coupons or something special out of the Ads.
Silly App.
Silly App.
mdntcallr
Sep 25, 10:59 AM
I'd like to say that this update really makes Aperture fully integrated with the rest of Apple products. Love it and will buy asap.
Well. was hoping to buy it pre-installed on a core 2 Duo Macbook Pro. but now... may buy a 24" imac or mac pro instead. tired of waiting for that model
Well. was hoping to buy it pre-installed on a core 2 Duo Macbook Pro. but now... may buy a 24" imac or mac pro instead. tired of waiting for that model
KnightWRX
Mar 13, 12:32 PM
For me, I do see the iPad (and actually the App Store) as a change in computing. By removing the complex processes that we go through in a computer (eg instead of downloading an app, moving it into a folder, deleting the dmg its a simple case of downloading the app), the iPad is changing our computer experience by simplifying it to the extent that it's only the part we want to use rather than need to use.
But that is not redefining "Computing" or computers at all. It's simply making them easier to use. If you want it to absolutely be about redefining something, talk about usability, not computing.
The iPad is still receiving network/USB input for that app, processing the data and eventually storing it. It is still doing the very same concept of computing we were doing 50 years ago on massive mainframes. There is no shift in "computing".
You again failed to address this point in your quest to see redefinition where there is none. You're thinking at way to precise of a level to even talk about computers/computing.
The iPad and the App Store process have the potential to kickstart and similarly drastic change in computing as moving from a line based OS to a GUI.
Again, no change in "Computing" there. You're talking about usability once again. Line based or GUI based, it was all about taking input, processing it, storing the resulting data or outputting it. Be it with printf() statements or XCreateWindow() and then drawing to it.
The concept of computing is the same in both line based or GUI based interface. The output mechanism is different, the input device is different.
In this case, "input is not input": a GUI opened up computers to more than just programmers
You have not proven your hypothesis of "input is not input". It very much is. Clicking and typing are both types of input. I challenge you to prove otherwise.
but increasingly I think the computer is moving away from the idea of a desktop PC.
The computer has never been so intimate with Desktop PCs. Every desktop PC is a computer, not every computer is a desktop PC. Again, last 50 years of computing has seen tremendous boost in computer usage in about everything. The desktop PC has been one small segment of computer usage and of the very large computing industry. Embedded systems is another. Mainframe systems are still very much alive. Thin client computing is an idea of the 70s that saw a come back in the 90s with Sun's push ("The network is the computer"). Today, it's all about "mobile" devices, which are a type of embedded system.
I think you're just very ignorant (not meant as an insult, just a casual observation based on your replies) of what computing and computers actually are that you see a "new segment" as a massive paradigm shift. There is no shift. Again :
Input. Process. Output. Store.
There is no more to it than that and until you change this very simple definition, you have not shifted any paradigms in computing.
But that is not redefining "Computing" or computers at all. It's simply making them easier to use. If you want it to absolutely be about redefining something, talk about usability, not computing.
The iPad is still receiving network/USB input for that app, processing the data and eventually storing it. It is still doing the very same concept of computing we were doing 50 years ago on massive mainframes. There is no shift in "computing".
You again failed to address this point in your quest to see redefinition where there is none. You're thinking at way to precise of a level to even talk about computers/computing.
The iPad and the App Store process have the potential to kickstart and similarly drastic change in computing as moving from a line based OS to a GUI.
Again, no change in "Computing" there. You're talking about usability once again. Line based or GUI based, it was all about taking input, processing it, storing the resulting data or outputting it. Be it with printf() statements or XCreateWindow() and then drawing to it.
The concept of computing is the same in both line based or GUI based interface. The output mechanism is different, the input device is different.
In this case, "input is not input": a GUI opened up computers to more than just programmers
You have not proven your hypothesis of "input is not input". It very much is. Clicking and typing are both types of input. I challenge you to prove otherwise.
but increasingly I think the computer is moving away from the idea of a desktop PC.
The computer has never been so intimate with Desktop PCs. Every desktop PC is a computer, not every computer is a desktop PC. Again, last 50 years of computing has seen tremendous boost in computer usage in about everything. The desktop PC has been one small segment of computer usage and of the very large computing industry. Embedded systems is another. Mainframe systems are still very much alive. Thin client computing is an idea of the 70s that saw a come back in the 90s with Sun's push ("The network is the computer"). Today, it's all about "mobile" devices, which are a type of embedded system.
I think you're just very ignorant (not meant as an insult, just a casual observation based on your replies) of what computing and computers actually are that you see a "new segment" as a massive paradigm shift. There is no shift. Again :
Input. Process. Output. Store.
There is no more to it than that and until you change this very simple definition, you have not shifted any paradigms in computing.
KnightWRX
Mar 13, 12:45 PM
They also helped create an entire new software development industry
Which software development industry would this be ? Embedded systems ? Mobile devices ?
Nope, nothing new there. They expanded maybe, but they did not create.
I'm not talking about the lower levels of computing. I'm talking about the parts of computing that End Users, who will never see an IDE in their entire lives. This is where computing is being redefined. They're shifting the way people use the "input. Process. Output.Store".
Again for the people wanting very much to redefine computing, "shifting the way people use" is not redefining computing. At least qualify it properly as a shift in usability, not in computing. You are talking about the lower levels when you use the word computing.
Why are some of you uninitiated insisting on using "computing" and claiming it is redefined ? Is it because a shift in usability doesn't sound as great accomplishment and you want to make what Apple did much bigger than it really is ? Stay objective please, don't involve emotions you have for a corporation in this discussion.
Which software development industry would this be ? Embedded systems ? Mobile devices ?
Nope, nothing new there. They expanded maybe, but they did not create.
I'm not talking about the lower levels of computing. I'm talking about the parts of computing that End Users, who will never see an IDE in their entire lives. This is where computing is being redefined. They're shifting the way people use the "input. Process. Output.Store".
Again for the people wanting very much to redefine computing, "shifting the way people use" is not redefining computing. At least qualify it properly as a shift in usability, not in computing. You are talking about the lower levels when you use the word computing.
Why are some of you uninitiated insisting on using "computing" and claiming it is redefined ? Is it because a shift in usability doesn't sound as great accomplishment and you want to make what Apple did much bigger than it really is ? Stay objective please, don't involve emotions you have for a corporation in this discussion.
bartelby
Nov 14, 03:02 AM
I forgot one other thing, which is also driving me mad... the foot steps. For some reason, Treyarch decided to take basically all sound of footsteps out of the game. That makes "Ninja" a worthless perk now, as you don't need it to be silent. But, it also makes it much easier to get ridiculously stabbed in the back.
I've heard that foot steps, along with the spawn issues, are a couple of the main things being fixed in the first patch/update. I really hope so. The fact that they made it into the final release like this is mind-boggling, so a fix is the least they can do.
Yes, I'm fed up of being stabbed in the back too
I've heard that foot steps, along with the spawn issues, are a couple of the main things being fixed in the first patch/update. I really hope so. The fact that they made it into the final release like this is mind-boggling, so a fix is the least they can do.
Yes, I'm fed up of being stabbed in the back too
MorphingDragon
May 4, 05:33 AM
But yes, at least the ads are great and really work the "magic". The only problem is that you won't stay in Wonderland with your iPad, and in the real world, it's just a nice toy for a couple of minutes but not really good for anything.
Thats what people said about the Kinect. Now look at what its doing when, especially when Academia got a hold of it. Just because you can't think of any uses doesn't make it a toy.
Thats what people said about the Kinect. Now look at what its doing when, especially when Academia got a hold of it. Just because you can't think of any uses doesn't make it a toy.
Kenya
Oct 3, 01:34 PM
They might get laughed at but apple will be the ones laughing when their the first to debut santa rosa with 800mhz fsb and nand flash. Hopefully this is whats going to happen
This is my prediction as well. We'll see!
This is my prediction as well. We'll see!
OneMike
Apr 6, 10:45 AM
http://img709.imageshack.us/img709/3282/photoapr06114008am.jpg (http://img709.imageshack.us/i/photoapr06114008am.jpg/)
Re-upped on my sunburst mix
Re-upped on my sunburst mix
0815
May 3, 02:34 PM
Why is it that Google always touts how open is so good, then they realize that, oh, guess we should tighten things up a bit, maybe being too open is not such a good thing.
Problem is that it is mostly open for the carriers to do whatever they want - less open for the user thanks to carrier modifications to the OS.
Shocking that carriers would take steps to stop people from stealing service from them.
Too many people think they are entitled to get everything for free. No matter if it is a new service for $20 a year or if it is tethering they didn't pay for ... Don't know where people get it from that they should get everything for free (or cheap). If you want tethering, pay for it. The cell phone planes (without tethering) are calculated on a typical single (mobile) device usage - using it for more devices is stealing (you know, you signed the contract with the rules - if you don't like it you shouldn't have signed up)
Problem is that it is mostly open for the carriers to do whatever they want - less open for the user thanks to carrier modifications to the OS.
Shocking that carriers would take steps to stop people from stealing service from them.
Too many people think they are entitled to get everything for free. No matter if it is a new service for $20 a year or if it is tethering they didn't pay for ... Don't know where people get it from that they should get everything for free (or cheap). If you want tethering, pay for it. The cell phone planes (without tethering) are calculated on a typical single (mobile) device usage - using it for more devices is stealing (you know, you signed the contract with the rules - if you don't like it you shouldn't have signed up)
kresh
Oct 19, 12:49 PM
Check out this to boost Mac OS X market share:
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/business/0,39020645,39284186,00.htm
If Apple does it, Windows (read M$) will be out of business in three years!
What these guys forget, and everyone else who proposes this, is the fact that OS X solely exists to sell Apple's hardware and not the other way around.
iLife, iWork, OS X, Pro Apps all have the single purpose of selling hardware. Apple is a hardware company by choice, it's what they want to do.
They are not a software house and I can't see them trading away their hardware business to gain OS X marketshare. It's not not what Apple is all about.
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/business/0,39020645,39284186,00.htm
If Apple does it, Windows (read M$) will be out of business in three years!
What these guys forget, and everyone else who proposes this, is the fact that OS X solely exists to sell Apple's hardware and not the other way around.
iLife, iWork, OS X, Pro Apps all have the single purpose of selling hardware. Apple is a hardware company by choice, it's what they want to do.
They are not a software house and I can't see them trading away their hardware business to gain OS X marketshare. It's not not what Apple is all about.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar