mac17
Dec 18, 10:45 PM
guys i think you're being too hard on zune. play with one. it's not THAT bad. it's ugly, but the interface isn't bad at all. I don't plan on buying a zune (my ipod is fine and i'm waiting on a video pod), but it's good to have it in the marketplace for competition sake. maybe apple will actually pay attention to some of the features like the built in radio tuner which is a nobrainer...
actually it is THAT bad i played with one in a local staples and i pressed the back/menu button like 3 times in a row suddenly the thing crashes on me it kept on blinking on and off 5 or 6 times me and my freind walked away laughing after catching it on video on my phone:D :D
actually it is THAT bad i played with one in a local staples and i pressed the back/menu button like 3 times in a row suddenly the thing crashes on me it kept on blinking on and off 5 or 6 times me and my freind walked away laughing after catching it on video on my phone:D :D
sigamy
Jul 18, 11:30 AM
My theory is this: We are going to get first run movies in the iTMS.
This is why it is rental only. The movie companies are worried about releasing DVDs at the same time as a film hits the theater. (Not sure why.) Jobs finally got to them--he tricked them by fighting for the sale/rental but he didn't even care about that. He wanted the first run movies and I think he got them. Now you'll be able to rent a brand new film the day it is released in theaters. This is the only real selling point for movie downloads. Why download a limited copy of a movie when I can get if from numerous other sources?
This will be Jobs' 3rd home run in iTunes. First was music, the no brainer. Second was TV. Nobody was thinking about downloading existing TV shows before Apple did it. Everyone thought they were working on movie downloads. TV was brilliant. There is an immediate need--if you missed Lost and forgot to tape it, you need to get it soon because you can't miss what happened, etc.
Movies don't work that way. You can wait a while to see a movie. Also, movies have been available on other media for 30 years so there were other places to go for the content. TV shows just started appearing on DVD recently.
Would I ever download 1979's Superman The Movie? Nope, never. have it on DVD. Would I download 2006's Superman Returns? Yep, definetly.
This is why it is rental only. The movie companies are worried about releasing DVDs at the same time as a film hits the theater. (Not sure why.) Jobs finally got to them--he tricked them by fighting for the sale/rental but he didn't even care about that. He wanted the first run movies and I think he got them. Now you'll be able to rent a brand new film the day it is released in theaters. This is the only real selling point for movie downloads. Why download a limited copy of a movie when I can get if from numerous other sources?
This will be Jobs' 3rd home run in iTunes. First was music, the no brainer. Second was TV. Nobody was thinking about downloading existing TV shows before Apple did it. Everyone thought they were working on movie downloads. TV was brilliant. There is an immediate need--if you missed Lost and forgot to tape it, you need to get it soon because you can't miss what happened, etc.
Movies don't work that way. You can wait a while to see a movie. Also, movies have been available on other media for 30 years so there were other places to go for the content. TV shows just started appearing on DVD recently.
Would I ever download 1979's Superman The Movie? Nope, never. have it on DVD. Would I download 2006's Superman Returns? Yep, definetly.
carve
Feb 5, 01:05 PM
Soon to be my first car...2001 Volvo S60 :)
http://www.featuredcars.com/images/full-2001-Volvo-S60_15366_1.jpg
http://www.featuredcars.com/images/full-2001-Volvo-S60_15366_1.jpg
tbobmccoy
Mar 23, 11:04 AM
I'm surprised nobody's mentioned the blind. The Classic is the only iPod (other than the tiny Shuffle) that would be of any use to them. The 128,000 bps that's suicide-inducing for music is (sort of) OK for voice, and 220 GB would hold a LOT of Books on "Tape"�Hell, record your lectures too and you could carry a college education in your pocket! I expect quite a negative reaction from handicapped activists if they discontinue the iPod Classic.
Very true. For some, physical keys are essential, and until they create a way to modify the screen to incorporate tactile buttons on demand, there need to be physical key devices out there for those that cannot see. I do think that they will discontinue the use of hard drives sometime soon, though. Flash memory is just the way of the future.
Very true. For some, physical keys are essential, and until they create a way to modify the screen to incorporate tactile buttons on demand, there need to be physical key devices out there for those that cannot see. I do think that they will discontinue the use of hard drives sometime soon, though. Flash memory is just the way of the future.
Zwhaler
Aug 24, 06:39 PM
All I can say is thank god...
zioxide
Jan 12, 05:10 PM
Whatever it is, it better not be 13.3''. That's too big, and definitely not an ultraportable.
12'' widescreen is the key.
12'' widescreen is the key.
dalvin200
Sep 7, 10:24 AM
Do you think that there may be some REALLY BIG new technological/hardware gizmo being intro'd? Something that makes the movie store just a minor part of a larger picture.
I think the 5G iPod with "video capabilities"" was just a test to see how the public took it. And adding TV shows to the US store in iTunes may proved a success depending on the stats they have.
They've had time to seriously think and come up with a product(s) and interface(s) and they are fully aware of all theeir competition and what other products & interfaces exist too.
So in answer to your question, YES :-) I think this will be something revolutionary just as when the 1st iPod was announced.
I've got faith, although we will have to wait and see.
I think the 5G iPod with "video capabilities"" was just a test to see how the public took it. And adding TV shows to the US store in iTunes may proved a success depending on the stats they have.
They've had time to seriously think and come up with a product(s) and interface(s) and they are fully aware of all theeir competition and what other products & interfaces exist too.
So in answer to your question, YES :-) I think this will be something revolutionary just as when the 1st iPod was announced.
I've got faith, although we will have to wait and see.
feedface
Apr 21, 12:15 PM
has anyone actually used the app in question? The data is so wildly inaccurate as to make it pointless. Even recompiling it with a 1000 times more accuracy has me placed in locations I haven't been to since I go an iPhone. So the question is not one of data, per se, but data accuracy: law enforcement have known about this for ages. If my iPhone says I was near a scene of crime, but I disagree, I bet I know which side the police would go with. That is the trouble with this data.
peharri
Aug 19, 08:24 AM
You step into your car. The bluetooth receiver in your dashboard automatically detects the presence of your iPod. The finger controls on the steering wheel switch from controlling radio stations to stepping through playlists etc. It "just works". No cables. No need to even take the iPod out of your pocket or bag.
That's why I want wireless. Well, one of the reasons.
Of course, the bluetooth feature's great and all, but it's the 802.11g support I love using. I walk into the office, and suddenly the playlists of all of my collegues who run iTunes appears on screen. Another collegue has his own wireless iPod, and his playlists appear too. It's just like iTunes's shared playlist feature, only it's on my iPod too. It's nice enough having everyone's iTunes playlists in iTunes, but this really takes it to a dimension where it becomes truly useful.
That's why I want wireless, well, one of the reasons.
But, you know, I have my own music tastes, and there are only two or three fellow classical music fans in the office. I could listen to the radio, but only the NPR station here does classical, and that's only part of the time. Still, there are a bunch of netradio classical radio stations, so I can expose myself to even more sources, and I'm not limited by the relatively conservative selection of my collegues and friends. I go to the root menu, Radio Stations -> Favorites -> Classical 24, and now I'm receiving streamed audio from across the country.
That's another reason why I want wireless.
To all of you saying "I can't see why anyone would want wireless", I can't see why you wouldn't want wireless. Small scale sharing. Automatic integration with music systems. Net radio. What's not to love? And for what, a couple of dollars in chips, some improved firmware, and probably the same amount of battery life (given you'll not be running the hard drive)?
That's why I want wireless. Well, one of the reasons.
Of course, the bluetooth feature's great and all, but it's the 802.11g support I love using. I walk into the office, and suddenly the playlists of all of my collegues who run iTunes appears on screen. Another collegue has his own wireless iPod, and his playlists appear too. It's just like iTunes's shared playlist feature, only it's on my iPod too. It's nice enough having everyone's iTunes playlists in iTunes, but this really takes it to a dimension where it becomes truly useful.
That's why I want wireless, well, one of the reasons.
But, you know, I have my own music tastes, and there are only two or three fellow classical music fans in the office. I could listen to the radio, but only the NPR station here does classical, and that's only part of the time. Still, there are a bunch of netradio classical radio stations, so I can expose myself to even more sources, and I'm not limited by the relatively conservative selection of my collegues and friends. I go to the root menu, Radio Stations -> Favorites -> Classical 24, and now I'm receiving streamed audio from across the country.
That's another reason why I want wireless.
To all of you saying "I can't see why anyone would want wireless", I can't see why you wouldn't want wireless. Small scale sharing. Automatic integration with music systems. Net radio. What's not to love? And for what, a couple of dollars in chips, some improved firmware, and probably the same amount of battery life (given you'll not be running the hard drive)?
Mike84
Apr 26, 02:15 PM
Your point is that you cannot find such a trademark as "app store" in the standard character format because "app store" is too general right? The other person posted that "pet store" would be a ridiculous example of this.
Ok fair enough. Pet store was registered in the stylized or design format.
But your basic argument against Apple is that they cannot use app store as a trademark in the broader text format because it is too general. But this is not the only example of such a thing.
If this is the case then Apple Store will be thrown out too. It is the same type of trademark. Two words, not one and not preceded by "the".
App Store
Apple Store
The other argument is that "app" is too generic and that the term was around prior to the trademark. I do not believe this is valid either as "app" may have existed but was not widely used. The argument would have been used agains the prior trademark of "appstore" in that case.
One thing is for sure. Our opinions will have no bearing on the final outcome.
You define the lexicon of the overall society?
I think you are missing the point:
"What are some other reasons for refusing registration?
Registration may be refused if the mark is:
• Descriptive for the goods/services;
• A geographic term;
• A surname;
• Ornamental as applied to the goods"
Source: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/BasicFacts_with_correct_links.pdf
App Store is descriptive of what it does. In other words, it sells apps or applications. Therefore, it cannot be trademarked. Apple can use it if they want, but so can anyone else doing the same thing.
This is pretty much saying that Microsoft is going to trademark Operating System. Both Microsoft and Apple make operating systems. What Windows is is a type of operating system. Windows does not describe the product.
Example:
Shop that sells windows cannot trademark "Window Seller" because it describes precisely what the shop does. It is generic + descriptive = no trademark.
Ok fair enough. Pet store was registered in the stylized or design format.
But your basic argument against Apple is that they cannot use app store as a trademark in the broader text format because it is too general. But this is not the only example of such a thing.
If this is the case then Apple Store will be thrown out too. It is the same type of trademark. Two words, not one and not preceded by "the".
App Store
Apple Store
The other argument is that "app" is too generic and that the term was around prior to the trademark. I do not believe this is valid either as "app" may have existed but was not widely used. The argument would have been used agains the prior trademark of "appstore" in that case.
One thing is for sure. Our opinions will have no bearing on the final outcome.
You define the lexicon of the overall society?
I think you are missing the point:
"What are some other reasons for refusing registration?
Registration may be refused if the mark is:
• Descriptive for the goods/services;
• A geographic term;
• A surname;
• Ornamental as applied to the goods"
Source: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/BasicFacts_with_correct_links.pdf
App Store is descriptive of what it does. In other words, it sells apps or applications. Therefore, it cannot be trademarked. Apple can use it if they want, but so can anyone else doing the same thing.
This is pretty much saying that Microsoft is going to trademark Operating System. Both Microsoft and Apple make operating systems. What Windows is is a type of operating system. Windows does not describe the product.
Example:
Shop that sells windows cannot trademark "Window Seller" because it describes precisely what the shop does. It is generic + descriptive = no trademark.
firestarter
Apr 12, 10:04 PM
$299 are you out of your mind?
OK, I'm liking this.
OK, I'm liking this.
lordonuthin
Apr 20, 07:22 PM
so i hit 6 million on 17 mar, and today (20 apr) i hit 7 million! that's about 34 days. much better than my last million, but still not as good as it could be. hopefully i'll get everything worked out and going smoothly
7 mil; I remember those days, not so long ago... Grats!
7 mil; I remember those days, not so long ago... Grats!
Linito
Dec 4, 12:58 PM
Actually, I was thinking they were working on a car ;)
no no no think big, an airplane or a satellite maybe even a spaceshuttle :p
no no no think big, an airplane or a satellite maybe even a spaceshuttle :p
Tmelon
Mar 30, 08:55 PM
Is there a DMG or is the App Store / Redemption Code the only way to update? What about offline computers?
Redemption code seems to be the only way. For some reason I can't get mine to work.
Redemption code seems to be the only way. For some reason I can't get mine to work.
MacRumors
Aug 24, 05:38 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
One blog claims (http://www.freemacblog.com/no-to-my-order-again/) that bulk orders for the Mac mini are currently being denied until after Labor Day.
I needed to order another bunch to use as Mac mini servers (and to add to my great wall of Apple boxes) but I was told by the reseller (name withdrawn so they don�t get in trouble) that they can�t take big orders (again), but after Labor Day they�d be able to ship plenty of the new model.
The same blog reported a similar pattern prior to the last Mac Mini update in February. Meanwhile, Appleinsider claims (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1991) to have independent confirmation of the delay in large orders of Mac Minis.
This timeframe supports earlier claims (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060814180417.shtml) that Apple would be launching Core 2 Duo (Merom/Conroe) Macs as early in September. The new Core 2 Duo (http://guides.macrumors.com/Core_2_Duo) processors are drop-in replacements for existing Core Duo processors which power the Mac Mini, MacBook, iMac and MacBook Pro.
One blog claims (http://www.freemacblog.com/no-to-my-order-again/) that bulk orders for the Mac mini are currently being denied until after Labor Day.
I needed to order another bunch to use as Mac mini servers (and to add to my great wall of Apple boxes) but I was told by the reseller (name withdrawn so they don�t get in trouble) that they can�t take big orders (again), but after Labor Day they�d be able to ship plenty of the new model.
The same blog reported a similar pattern prior to the last Mac Mini update in February. Meanwhile, Appleinsider claims (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1991) to have independent confirmation of the delay in large orders of Mac Minis.
This timeframe supports earlier claims (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060814180417.shtml) that Apple would be launching Core 2 Duo (Merom/Conroe) Macs as early in September. The new Core 2 Duo (http://guides.macrumors.com/Core_2_Duo) processors are drop-in replacements for existing Core Duo processors which power the Mac Mini, MacBook, iMac and MacBook Pro.
mefck
Apr 26, 02:57 PM
And for all the non-legal "experts" out there.
Windows can be trademarked because while it is a generic term, it is not a generic term that describes the product or service.
If "Windows" was a window company, it could not be trademarked because it is a generic terms that describes the product or service.
A huge difference.
Windows can be trademarked because while it is a generic term, it is not a generic term that describes the product or service.
If "Windows" was a window company, it could not be trademarked because it is a generic terms that describes the product or service.
A huge difference.
Lepton
Jan 12, 09:27 AM
Subtract keyboard. Add multi-touch and WiMax. Thin as an iPhone.
Queso
Jul 21, 08:20 AM
So we are still not back upto Q1 2000 numbers? :eek:
Except of course that Q1 is the Christmas quarter, not April to June :rolleyes:
Except of course that Q1 is the Christmas quarter, not April to June :rolleyes:
![map of usa with states and cities. [edit] States of the United](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a5/Map_of_USA_with_state_names.svg/700px-Map_of_USA_with_state_names.svg.png "[edit] States of the United")
JGowan
May 3, 01:32 AM
i think this is the wrong way to go!
Its pulling apart mac os into a waterd down version of itself they will continue to add this stuff untill there is no difference between ios and mac os!
What we'll be left with is a powerfull but waterd down mac ios/hybrid platform with downloads through the app store like the iphone and ipad killing the powerfull features we have but running on every apple device!
I personally think apple will kill the ability to download any content through safari in the future in mac os!
So all apps will be vetted by apple and all music/films we have to be made through itunes no popping on to amazon or whever to make a purchase through a browser on your imac or macbook!
I hate the direction this is going they are building a walled garden around mac os slowly and dont be supprised the ports start disapearing on the macbook soon for a 30pin dock!
Bad move apple!f u d !
Its pulling apart mac os into a waterd down version of itself they will continue to add this stuff untill there is no difference between ios and mac os!
What we'll be left with is a powerfull but waterd down mac ios/hybrid platform with downloads through the app store like the iphone and ipad killing the powerfull features we have but running on every apple device!
I personally think apple will kill the ability to download any content through safari in the future in mac os!
So all apps will be vetted by apple and all music/films we have to be made through itunes no popping on to amazon or whever to make a purchase through a browser on your imac or macbook!
I hate the direction this is going they are building a walled garden around mac os slowly and dont be supprised the ports start disapearing on the macbook soon for a 30pin dock!
Bad move apple!f u d !
aliensporebomb
Apr 21, 01:34 PM
Despite the freaked brigade and people wanting to turn this into a huge political argument I think this guy at Reddit had the best thing to say about this:
I went to WWDC last year where the new Core Location system was discussed in great detail. If you went as well, or have the videos, look at the video for session 115, "Using Core Location in iOS". Skip to around 13:45 for the discussion of "Course Cell Positioning" where they discuss the cache in detail.
The purpose of this is offline GPS. Normally, each cell tower has an identifier and Core Location sends that identifier to Apple and asks for the latitude and longitude for that tower. This requires a data connection, and the use of data. Since cell towers don't move, however, it's inefficient to keep going back to Apple for that information so they cache it. Now if a tower appears with the same ID as the cache, tada! you have a cache hit and a faster fix with no data use. Which also means you can get a "course location" (as in rough) if you are near known towers and don't have a data connection.
That's all this is. It's a cache of identifiers (cell and wifi), locations, and their age (it's a cache, after all). Someone made the decision to never clean it out so they would have more and more information about those GPS "assists" (you know, A-GPS) and so they'd use less and less power and data over time for the places you frequent. It's a great idea, technically.
Practically, yes, you can track location over time. The file is readable only by root and you're free to encrypt your backups for now. I'm sure Apple will either encrypt the file or truncate the data in a future update (I would prefer encryption as I think it's technically sound, but I know many will disagree). I'm also sure someone is considering a toggle for the feature or a button to clear the database. Both are great ideas.
This isn't nefarious, this isn't being sent anywhere, and this isn't as bad as everyone is making it. This is a real feature with a major oversight. That's it.
Yes they probably need to encrypt this to keep thieves and insane people from taking it from your phone but it's nothing that other cellular providers aren't doing with their phones, you just can't see it necessarily.
I went to WWDC last year where the new Core Location system was discussed in great detail. If you went as well, or have the videos, look at the video for session 115, "Using Core Location in iOS". Skip to around 13:45 for the discussion of "Course Cell Positioning" where they discuss the cache in detail.
The purpose of this is offline GPS. Normally, each cell tower has an identifier and Core Location sends that identifier to Apple and asks for the latitude and longitude for that tower. This requires a data connection, and the use of data. Since cell towers don't move, however, it's inefficient to keep going back to Apple for that information so they cache it. Now if a tower appears with the same ID as the cache, tada! you have a cache hit and a faster fix with no data use. Which also means you can get a "course location" (as in rough) if you are near known towers and don't have a data connection.
That's all this is. It's a cache of identifiers (cell and wifi), locations, and their age (it's a cache, after all). Someone made the decision to never clean it out so they would have more and more information about those GPS "assists" (you know, A-GPS) and so they'd use less and less power and data over time for the places you frequent. It's a great idea, technically.
Practically, yes, you can track location over time. The file is readable only by root and you're free to encrypt your backups for now. I'm sure Apple will either encrypt the file or truncate the data in a future update (I would prefer encryption as I think it's technically sound, but I know many will disagree). I'm also sure someone is considering a toggle for the feature or a button to clear the database. Both are great ideas.
This isn't nefarious, this isn't being sent anywhere, and this isn't as bad as everyone is making it. This is a real feature with a major oversight. That's it.
Yes they probably need to encrypt this to keep thieves and insane people from taking it from your phone but it's nothing that other cellular providers aren't doing with their phones, you just can't see it necessarily.
mterlouw
Aug 27, 05:26 PM
Or, more likely, when the computer is obsolete you have a good screen that you can't use.
Apple needs something between the horribly constrained MiniMac, and the preposterously huge ProMac.
I agree. I have a 20" widescreen, and don't see a need to replace that any time soon. Over on the PC side, "they" are going to try and push you into upgrading if you want to watch hi-def content, as they will restrict playback to monitors that support HDCP. I guess Apple can try and entice you with a built-in iSight or semi-forced bundling of monitors with the iMac. But really, a good monitor can last you through at least two computers, so why waste the money?
Apple needs something between the horribly constrained MiniMac, and the preposterously huge ProMac.
I agree. I have a 20" widescreen, and don't see a need to replace that any time soon. Over on the PC side, "they" are going to try and push you into upgrading if you want to watch hi-def content, as they will restrict playback to monitors that support HDCP. I guess Apple can try and entice you with a built-in iSight or semi-forced bundling of monitors with the iMac. But really, a good monitor can last you through at least two computers, so why waste the money?
840quadra
Nov 28, 01:32 PM
I have faith that the Zune will do better, based upon the installed base of Xbox users in the world. All it will take is some killer Xbox linked feature that either takes advantage of, or can be somehow linked to the Zune.
CQd44
Apr 26, 12:44 PM
I would think if Apple themselves used the term generically it would be a very simple case.
NYY FaN
Feb 26, 02:03 PM
27" iMac
17" MacBook Pro
iPad 16GB
iPhone 4 16GB
Logitech Z-2300
Time Capsule 1TB
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5048/5318184444_0d940da490_b.jpg
17" MacBook Pro
iPad 16GB
iPhone 4 16GB
Logitech Z-2300
Time Capsule 1TB
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5048/5318184444_0d940da490_b.jpg
No comments:
Post a Comment