Leoff
Oct 29, 05:50 AM
Apple is a hardware company.
Apple is a hardware company.
If they didn't sell Macintoshes and iPods they would be out of business.
If they didn't sell Macintoshes and iPods they would be out of business.
The software is what makes the hardware valuable.
The software is what makes the hardware valuable.
The software is easy to use and works well.
The software is easy to use and works well.
If the software worked on any hardware, it would not be so easy to use.
If the software worked on any hardware, it would not be so easy to use.
It would also not work so well.
It would also not work so well.
What's funny is, you could easily swap "Software" for "Hardware" in your little mantra and it still rings just as true.
"Apple is a Software Company"
"If they didn't sell the Mac OS they would be out of business"
"The Hardware is what makes the Software valuable"
"The Hardware is easy to use and works well"
"If they Hardware worked with any software, it would not be so easy to use"
"It would also not work so well"
Apple is not a hardware company, it is a computer company. There is quite a difference. Apple has a symbiotic relationship between it's hardware and software. One without the other, the company would be dead.
Apple is a hardware company.
If they didn't sell Macintoshes and iPods they would be out of business.
If they didn't sell Macintoshes and iPods they would be out of business.
The software is what makes the hardware valuable.
The software is what makes the hardware valuable.
The software is easy to use and works well.
The software is easy to use and works well.
If the software worked on any hardware, it would not be so easy to use.
If the software worked on any hardware, it would not be so easy to use.
It would also not work so well.
It would also not work so well.
What's funny is, you could easily swap "Software" for "Hardware" in your little mantra and it still rings just as true.
"Apple is a Software Company"
"If they didn't sell the Mac OS they would be out of business"
"The Hardware is what makes the Software valuable"
"The Hardware is easy to use and works well"
"If they Hardware worked with any software, it would not be so easy to use"
"It would also not work so well"
Apple is not a hardware company, it is a computer company. There is quite a difference. Apple has a symbiotic relationship between it's hardware and software. One without the other, the company would be dead.
MattInOz
Sep 29, 01:21 AM
Does Stevey know feng shui?
Clearly not there is nothing to stop the evil spirits flying in when you open the front door.
Clearly not there is nothing to stop the evil spirits flying in when you open the front door.
gocardsfan1
May 3, 09:31 PM
So is this meant to be an ad for the iPad 2 or the future generations? All it does is make me more excited for upcoming models, not the iPad 2 itself. I don't doubt that it will be effective though.
mattthemutt
Sep 12, 07:22 AM
I hope that this movie store will be as successful as the music store; I wouldn't want Apple to be in trouble.
It just seems as though they are going to have to provide a large amount of bandwidth, and I'm not so sure how easy this will be on today's technology.
It just seems as though they are going to have to provide a large amount of bandwidth, and I'm not so sure how easy this will be on today's technology.
more...
psycoswimmer
Nov 23, 05:01 PM
Does anyone know if you have to go to a store to get the discounts? Can you order from the online Apple store? There's no way I'll be able to get to an Apple Store tomorrow.
Stella
Nov 16, 01:11 PM
I threw up in my mouth a little bit™ for a month with the Intel switch.
I may have to hospitalized if this actually happens.
You should understand the technology a bit more before making assumptions about "evil x86 processors" ( thats Intel and AMD ). The intel processors ( now ) are way better than IBM could produce.
There absolutely nothing wrong with AMD. In recent times they have fallen back a bit ( didn't produce better processors than the AMD64 ) - but thats the way its always been - AMD get ahead of Intel , and vice-versa.
For a long time AMD desktop processsors were cheaper and better than Intels. This has changed since the latest Intel processors. AMD mobile processors have always been second best.
Two years ago, I would have taken an AMD desktop over Intel.
( Yes, I realise this is about mobile processors )
I may have to hospitalized if this actually happens.
You should understand the technology a bit more before making assumptions about "evil x86 processors" ( thats Intel and AMD ). The intel processors ( now ) are way better than IBM could produce.
There absolutely nothing wrong with AMD. In recent times they have fallen back a bit ( didn't produce better processors than the AMD64 ) - but thats the way its always been - AMD get ahead of Intel , and vice-versa.
For a long time AMD desktop processsors were cheaper and better than Intels. This has changed since the latest Intel processors. AMD mobile processors have always been second best.
Two years ago, I would have taken an AMD desktop over Intel.
( Yes, I realise this is about mobile processors )
more...
wvuwhat
Dec 4, 07:40 PM
Famas
-Red Dot Site
Crossbow
Semtex, Willey pete, Claymore
Hardline pro, Hardcore pro, Marathon pro
RC, Care package, Chopper Gunner
I've got my ideal set-up for my style of play.
...AND I HATE HAVANA
-Red Dot Site
Crossbow
Semtex, Willey pete, Claymore
Hardline pro, Hardcore pro, Marathon pro
RC, Care package, Chopper Gunner
I've got my ideal set-up for my style of play.
...AND I HATE HAVANA
ozziegn
Jan 15, 01:46 PM
I'm sitting here laughing at the tons of people who were saying how they were going to buy the new MBP when it came out on MWSF on Jan. 15th. - kept telling all these people "how are you going to buy a new MBP when you don't even know if there is going to be a new MBP????"
-and here I sit and say, "I told you so.........." :D
-and here I sit and say, "I told you so.........." :D
more...
sososowhat
Sep 28, 06:52 PM
Larry Ellison's's place on Mountain Home Rd, also in Woodside, is an unbelievable extravagance -- quite the opposite of Jobs'. http://articles.sfgate.com/2001-03-27/news/17591051_1_hot-tub-pond-tons
I believe the place is built entirely without nails, using old Japanese techniques. He brought in 3750 tons of hand-chisled granite, and 5000 tons of boulders, and moved 81,000 cubic yards of earth for his estate. I haven't been in, but it's intriguing from the gate-house.
-- Bridges and pathways lead to a teahouse, moon pavilion, guesthouse, bridge house, boathouse, barn and "Katsura house," a made-in-Japan near replica of a famous teahouse built as part of a royal compound of the same name in Kyoto, Japan, in the early 1600s.
-- The project: Transform 23 acres in Woodside into Japanese-style imperial villa with 10 hand-crafted buildings, bridges, manicured gardens, ponds, waterfalls and islands.
-- Price tag: Reportedly approaching $100 million, up from $40 million estimate in 1996, with two years to go.
Jobs' current place in Palo Alto is similarly modest to his new one -- though a little less private: You can often see him inside, and occasionally picking apples in the yard.
I believe the place is built entirely without nails, using old Japanese techniques. He brought in 3750 tons of hand-chisled granite, and 5000 tons of boulders, and moved 81,000 cubic yards of earth for his estate. I haven't been in, but it's intriguing from the gate-house.
-- Bridges and pathways lead to a teahouse, moon pavilion, guesthouse, bridge house, boathouse, barn and "Katsura house," a made-in-Japan near replica of a famous teahouse built as part of a royal compound of the same name in Kyoto, Japan, in the early 1600s.
-- The project: Transform 23 acres in Woodside into Japanese-style imperial villa with 10 hand-crafted buildings, bridges, manicured gardens, ponds, waterfalls and islands.
-- Price tag: Reportedly approaching $100 million, up from $40 million estimate in 1996, with two years to go.
Jobs' current place in Palo Alto is similarly modest to his new one -- though a little less private: You can often see him inside, and occasionally picking apples in the yard.
pgw3
Aug 1, 04:27 PM
I don't FEEL ignorant and stupid. Maybe that's because I took the time to READ and UNDERSTAND the limitations imposed on me by iTunes/iPod before I BOUGHT in. And maybe because I understand that what I am BUYING is a DIGITAL DATA FILE that must be interpreted by a certain APPLICATION to become music, and that this was EXPLAINED to me before I BOUGHT. That I don't OWN the MUSIC, and that there are LIMITATIONS to what I can do with it. ( And if you think I'm wrong on that last point, let a copyright holder catch you using their music for commmercial gain. Write back to us and describe the world of hurt that descends on you)!
The fact of the matter is that reasonable DRM's protect the artists who are the source of the music. And Apples DRM is one the most reasonable in the industry, both protecting the artist, and allowing fair use by the customer.
The problem is that the license says that the limitations can change at any time, so one doesn't really know what one buys, even if one has read the license - which I'm sure most people has not. I don't believe that the complaint is first and foremost about the DRM (which one may have opinions about exactly how it is implemented and shared but most anyway recognises it as a necessary evil) but rather what is summarised in these two sentences: "it is unreasonable that the agreement the consumer must give consent to is regulated by English law. That iTunes disclaims all liability for possible damage the software may cause and that it may alter the rights to the music". I think most of us agree that it is not reasonable that that which we buy can destroy anything on our computer and that they can e.g. suddenly just allow me to play a song just five times. And even though we all trust and like Apple these sort of licences are getting sillier and sillier (and it is certainlly not just Apple, it is basically the whole industry) and I think it is really good that someone who has the time and knowledge to fight it takes a stand against it, even though I believe shutting down the store may be overkill but I'm sure it won't come to that.
Cheers,
Peter
The fact of the matter is that reasonable DRM's protect the artists who are the source of the music. And Apples DRM is one the most reasonable in the industry, both protecting the artist, and allowing fair use by the customer.
The problem is that the license says that the limitations can change at any time, so one doesn't really know what one buys, even if one has read the license - which I'm sure most people has not. I don't believe that the complaint is first and foremost about the DRM (which one may have opinions about exactly how it is implemented and shared but most anyway recognises it as a necessary evil) but rather what is summarised in these two sentences: "it is unreasonable that the agreement the consumer must give consent to is regulated by English law. That iTunes disclaims all liability for possible damage the software may cause and that it may alter the rights to the music". I think most of us agree that it is not reasonable that that which we buy can destroy anything on our computer and that they can e.g. suddenly just allow me to play a song just five times. And even though we all trust and like Apple these sort of licences are getting sillier and sillier (and it is certainlly not just Apple, it is basically the whole industry) and I think it is really good that someone who has the time and knowledge to fight it takes a stand against it, even though I believe shutting down the store may be overkill but I'm sure it won't come to that.
Cheers,
Peter
more...
alent1234
Apr 8, 02:03 PM
Probably in the form of "bundles" where you're required to buy an iPad with their special accessory packs just so they can push overpriced accessories out of the door.
and don't forget the yearly cleaning that's a $199 value
and don't forget the yearly cleaning that's a $199 value
Fukui
Oct 20, 01:40 AM
First Scenario: Never. Tiger added very little. Dashboard is nice but the real upgrade was merely Spotlight. Seriously... a little stability here.... fancy features there... nothing special.
Unless your a developer. In which case that is patently false.
Tiger->Leopard is bigger than 10.1 to 10.2 IMO, its huge.
The real winners are the developers.
Unless your a developer. In which case that is patently false.
Tiger->Leopard is bigger than 10.1 to 10.2 IMO, its huge.
The real winners are the developers.
more...
seek3r
Mar 24, 06:18 PM
Yay! Now, where's the cake...
The cake is a lie :p
The cake is a lie :p
MacSedgley
Aug 8, 01:05 PM
I managed scrape together enough money together for a 20 incher and a mini last year (�1000). They gave me the wrong box (a 23") which was the nicest thing thats ever happened to me.
Its a lovely screen, but the colours are all over the place (and people should be very wary when using front row with the macbook linked to a cinema - for some reason it doesnt go to sleep, and this could lead to some nasty screen burn.)
A decent screen is a big investment - you would expect a good LCD to last you at least 5 years if your paying a grand for it. At the moment, Dell's is much better value in my book, even though it is hideously ugly.
Anyone tried the new NECs?
Its a lovely screen, but the colours are all over the place (and people should be very wary when using front row with the macbook linked to a cinema - for some reason it doesnt go to sleep, and this could lead to some nasty screen burn.)
A decent screen is a big investment - you would expect a good LCD to last you at least 5 years if your paying a grand for it. At the moment, Dell's is much better value in my book, even though it is hideously ugly.
Anyone tried the new NECs?
more...
wrlsmarc
Oct 6, 12:42 PM
The ad is very misleading because it leaves out any EDGE coverage. T-Mobile and AT&T do not have roaming for 3G HSPA since they each use different frequencies for their 3G netowrks.
Doesn't AT&T piggyback on T-mobile's network and vice-versa? Shouldn't the map reflect that?
Doesn't AT&T piggyback on T-mobile's network and vice-versa? Shouldn't the map reflect that?
jaw04005
Apr 9, 01:06 PM
If I remember correctly, PDF became an open standard a few years ago. I think it was late-ish in so maybe it was just too late in the development of Windows 7 to get it in, but now it will appear in 8.
Nah. Native PDF support (import and export) was supposed to be a feature of Windows Vista but was pulled at the last minute because of Adobe's lawsuit threat. Apparently, Microsoft and Adobe have worked it out. They've had it ready for a long time. You could even download a PDF plug-in for Office 07 directly from MSFT.
Nah. Native PDF support (import and export) was supposed to be a feature of Windows Vista but was pulled at the last minute because of Adobe's lawsuit threat. Apparently, Microsoft and Adobe have worked it out. They've had it ready for a long time. You could even download a PDF plug-in for Office 07 directly from MSFT.
more...
zombitronic
Oct 7, 01:16 PM
The device should now be the focus. The service should be an afterthought in the background.
that's called an iPod touch - not a phone
The iPod touch does not apply. We're talking about an equation of device > service vs. service > device. You're talking about a device without any service.
that's called an iPod touch - not a phone
The iPod touch does not apply. We're talking about an equation of device > service vs. service > device. You're talking about a device without any service.
Northgrove
May 3, 02:28 PM
Because you then sign a contract that says how you agree to use it. This is outside of that agreement. If you want to sign an agreement to use the data in a different way, I'm sure the carrier will accommodate you. But get your wallet open.
Where I live, and with the operator I use, this isn't out of the contract though. I don't know which contract you have.
Where I live, and with the operator I use, this isn't out of the contract though. I don't know which contract you have.
gonnabuyamacbsh
May 4, 01:13 AM
Love it. iPad really is revolutionary. It's replaced the laptop for so many people I know
jessica.
Jan 10, 07:24 PM
Should they be banned? Yes.
CaoCao
Apr 18, 11:20 PM
oh my stars and garters, please don't get me started...
it's nice that the word is getting out tho, and people are waking up. took me long enough!
What about the absolutely peaceful Muslims brutally attacked out of nowhere by rapacious imperialist crusaders who wanted to savagely impose their religion upon the tolerant and free society?
it's nice that the word is getting out tho, and people are waking up. took me long enough!
What about the absolutely peaceful Muslims brutally attacked out of nowhere by rapacious imperialist crusaders who wanted to savagely impose their religion upon the tolerant and free society?
balamw
Oct 5, 08:23 AM
Your average ipod owner could not possibly give a flying %^@$ about how Fairplay's DRM compares to other mp3 players' DRM. Talking about "DRM transparent" like its something that Joe Consumer has any clue about is delusional at best.
That's the point, if they don't "see" the DRM, hence the transparency, it doesn't bother them one bit. I haven't seen the need for things like hymn since the DRM doesn't stop me from doing anything I want to do with the files, such as burn a CD or move it to another machine.
I'm pretty sure that that's not how FairPlay works. I think it goes something like this...
Definitely not per file, Wikipedia has a pretty good summary of how it actually works here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FairPlay#How_it_works . More that a database of all files the device can play is downloaded from the store...
B
That's the point, if they don't "see" the DRM, hence the transparency, it doesn't bother them one bit. I haven't seen the need for things like hymn since the DRM doesn't stop me from doing anything I want to do with the files, such as burn a CD or move it to another machine.
I'm pretty sure that that's not how FairPlay works. I think it goes something like this...
Definitely not per file, Wikipedia has a pretty good summary of how it actually works here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FairPlay#How_it_works . More that a database of all files the device can play is downloaded from the store...
B
OdduWon
Jul 24, 02:34 PM
wait was that a poke at apple being dead zune :confused:
ctdonath
Oct 1, 08:59 AM
Local people and conservation societies defended the building as a unique witness of the region's architectural development. It's not a particularly pretty building but it's certainly one with some history around it. ... But leaving the building to the elements with no maintenance is in my opinion wrong, immoral and a disregard of what property ownership should be about. ... If Jobs wanted a modern building ... then he should have got his rich ass moved to another large plot and built his modern glassbox there, after he sold Jackling House to somebody who wanted to live in that and respect local conservationist's and planning authorities' wishes.
I appreciate the sentiment. Anything which has outlived its owner[s] should be given some consideration & deference for historical value. One should treat antiques with respect the spirit of its creation and prior ownership, not just abusing/mangling/destroying it out of a sense of "it's mine so I can do what I want with it." Problem is: where to draw the line, and drawing the line is the prerogative of the current owner.
Are the locals & conservators doing so out of genuine concern for the Jackling House? Is it in fact a worthy part of history, or a notable example? or are they closer to naysaying for the self-serving benefits thereof (striving for relevance, trying to keep a billionaire off the street, whatever)? I'm guessing somewhere in the middle: yeah, a mansion of a distinct style is worth consideration for preservation, and those insisting thereon need something to insist thereon lest their relevance evaporate.
Leaving it to rot shows poor character, either by not caring for what one owns (disrespectful of one's own efforts and possessions) or as a tactic against busybodies (a nasty you-can't-make-me tone). It's his, it should at least be in nice enough shape to have lunch or spend a mundane night there. FWIW, I've owned a remote home, so appreciate the annoyance of long-distance maintenance.
Comes down to the fact that it's located in a high-price-tag area, and the value of the land alone exceeds the building's historical value. We don't know if anyone would have paid the millions to live there, and can be sure nobody would have paid the millions to preserve it for its own sake. The only reason AFAIK anybody is taking an interest in it (ex.: we're talking about it here) is that Steve ***** Jobs is about to destroy it. That a tiny number of people may have genuine interest in preserving either Spanish Revival or Jackling artifacts IMHO just does not give enough weight to overrule the house's owner. If they can't come up with enough of their own money (NOT coerced taxpayer-confiscated funds) to buy it outright or at least relocate it, and there isn't any other broad compelling reason (we're talking Jackling here, not Tesla, and Spanish Revival, not F.L.Wright), then fire up the bulldozers. Fact is, there just isn't that much desirable acreage in that region suitable for a billionaire's estate; "go somewhere else" holds little traction when proximity to Apple's campus is vital and there isn't much else suitable.
As I start to peek "over the hill", my perspective of preserving works is changing. Much has sentimental value, but little warrants outright indefinite preservation. Jackling was one man, long gone; time for his spiritual successor in business success and industrial influence to take his place and leave a new mark.
I appreciate the sentiment. Anything which has outlived its owner[s] should be given some consideration & deference for historical value. One should treat antiques with respect the spirit of its creation and prior ownership, not just abusing/mangling/destroying it out of a sense of "it's mine so I can do what I want with it." Problem is: where to draw the line, and drawing the line is the prerogative of the current owner.
Are the locals & conservators doing so out of genuine concern for the Jackling House? Is it in fact a worthy part of history, or a notable example? or are they closer to naysaying for the self-serving benefits thereof (striving for relevance, trying to keep a billionaire off the street, whatever)? I'm guessing somewhere in the middle: yeah, a mansion of a distinct style is worth consideration for preservation, and those insisting thereon need something to insist thereon lest their relevance evaporate.
Leaving it to rot shows poor character, either by not caring for what one owns (disrespectful of one's own efforts and possessions) or as a tactic against busybodies (a nasty you-can't-make-me tone). It's his, it should at least be in nice enough shape to have lunch or spend a mundane night there. FWIW, I've owned a remote home, so appreciate the annoyance of long-distance maintenance.
Comes down to the fact that it's located in a high-price-tag area, and the value of the land alone exceeds the building's historical value. We don't know if anyone would have paid the millions to live there, and can be sure nobody would have paid the millions to preserve it for its own sake. The only reason AFAIK anybody is taking an interest in it (ex.: we're talking about it here) is that Steve ***** Jobs is about to destroy it. That a tiny number of people may have genuine interest in preserving either Spanish Revival or Jackling artifacts IMHO just does not give enough weight to overrule the house's owner. If they can't come up with enough of their own money (NOT coerced taxpayer-confiscated funds) to buy it outright or at least relocate it, and there isn't any other broad compelling reason (we're talking Jackling here, not Tesla, and Spanish Revival, not F.L.Wright), then fire up the bulldozers. Fact is, there just isn't that much desirable acreage in that region suitable for a billionaire's estate; "go somewhere else" holds little traction when proximity to Apple's campus is vital and there isn't much else suitable.
As I start to peek "over the hill", my perspective of preserving works is changing. Much has sentimental value, but little warrants outright indefinite preservation. Jackling was one man, long gone; time for his spiritual successor in business success and industrial influence to take his place and leave a new mark.