rdowns
Apr 16, 04:51 PM
Narrow-mindedness is an affront.
Indeed.
affront |əˈfrənt|
noun
an action or remark that causes outrage or offense
Indeed.
affront |əˈfrənt|
noun
an action or remark that causes outrage or offense
habibbijan
Nov 16, 11:46 PM
I'm all for this.
For years AMD and Intel have played "leap frog" with one another in terms of performance. It's only recently that Intel has taken the lead after a lengthy duration of AMD dominance. Now that Apple has moved to x86, I see nothing wrong with Apple offering a choice of processors based on whatever brand can offer the best price/performance ratio. Say what you want about Dell, but they've recently starting offering AMD-based computers, and in my opinion this competition is good for the consumer.
And for those of you stating that AMD processors run too hot, wake up and smell the coffee. You're about 4 years behind. Ever since Intel introduced their 90 nm "Prescott" core, their temps were blisteringly hot compared to comparable AMD processors. Of course, things are different now, and both AMD's and Intel's offering run quite cool in comparison to their previous generations.
For years AMD and Intel have played "leap frog" with one another in terms of performance. It's only recently that Intel has taken the lead after a lengthy duration of AMD dominance. Now that Apple has moved to x86, I see nothing wrong with Apple offering a choice of processors based on whatever brand can offer the best price/performance ratio. Say what you want about Dell, but they've recently starting offering AMD-based computers, and in my opinion this competition is good for the consumer.
And for those of you stating that AMD processors run too hot, wake up and smell the coffee. You're about 4 years behind. Ever since Intel introduced their 90 nm "Prescott" core, their temps were blisteringly hot compared to comparable AMD processors. Of course, things are different now, and both AMD's and Intel's offering run quite cool in comparison to their previous generations.
Patrick J
Apr 15, 04:06 PM
Which holes are those? All the holes in those pictures correspond correctly to the holes on my 3G.
Bottom: Speaker, screw, dock, screw, microphone
Side: Volume rocker, vibrate switch
Back: Camera
So you have a humongous hole on the side?
Bottom: Speaker, screw, dock, screw, microphone
Side: Volume rocker, vibrate switch
Back: Camera
So you have a humongous hole on the side?
QuarterSwede
Apr 25, 01:27 PM
The phone will be the 4s. The start of production of the CDMA phone in Aug 2010 threw everything off kilter.
The 4s will be a 4 with the 3.7 screen, and a A5 chip. That is it. Period.
The 5 will be out in 2012 with Qualcomms 2nd gen Dual Band Chip which will be ready early 2012. It will will be a complete redesign with LTE. My money is on some type of new chassis with a new hybrid aluminum. The back glass will be gone for sure.
Apple will then produce 1 World iPhone. 5,6,7,8,9.... all Global Phones. :apple:
I'd say that's pretty plausible.
[EDIT] I don't know if I agree with all the names though, but honestly that matters not.
The 4s will be a 4 with the 3.7 screen, and a A5 chip. That is it. Period.
The 5 will be out in 2012 with Qualcomms 2nd gen Dual Band Chip which will be ready early 2012. It will will be a complete redesign with LTE. My money is on some type of new chassis with a new hybrid aluminum. The back glass will be gone for sure.
Apple will then produce 1 World iPhone. 5,6,7,8,9.... all Global Phones. :apple:
I'd say that's pretty plausible.
[EDIT] I don't know if I agree with all the names though, but honestly that matters not.
marksman
May 3, 03:35 PM
Contract terms require "consideration" from both parties to be legally binding. Consideration is something you provide to the other party (i.e., money from you, data services from your carrier).
What consideration are the carriers offering you for tethering? You're already paying $X for Y GB of data used on your phone. It doesn't matter to the carrier if your Netflix app is using it, or your tethering app is sending the data to your laptop. Nothing changes on their end, they just send the data that you've already paid for to your phone, and your phone handles the rest.
You're right, it is black and white. It's a scam aimed at exploiting consumers like yourself who don't know any better, with an illegal contract term. I hope this goes to court soon, before the carriers in Canada (where I am) try to pull the same BS.
They are offering you more bandwidth to use a higher bandwidth service like tethering.
The consideration is very clear. Thanks for quoting the premise for contract law, but claiming there is no consideration there is ridiculous.
People who tether use more bandwidth, so the cost associated with their usage is more expensive. The carriers can either charge those people for tethering or they can raise the price for EVERYONE.
They choose to charge the people who tether. It is a perfectly reasonable choice on their part.
Hey a cable line comes into my house with all the channels on it. I can just jimmy off a filter and get all the channels without paying any more. They are already delivering it to my house, why can't I just get all of them since they are there anyways and I am paying for cable right?
You are not paying for tethering unless you are paying for tethering. The math is simple. People who tether use more bandwidth. Wireless providers set their data prices based on AVERAGE usage. Tethering makes the average usage go up, so the revenue to cover those costs has to come from somewhere.
So they can either charge EVERYONE more or charge the people who tether more.. Again they choose the later.
What consideration are the carriers offering you for tethering? You're already paying $X for Y GB of data used on your phone. It doesn't matter to the carrier if your Netflix app is using it, or your tethering app is sending the data to your laptop. Nothing changes on their end, they just send the data that you've already paid for to your phone, and your phone handles the rest.
You're right, it is black and white. It's a scam aimed at exploiting consumers like yourself who don't know any better, with an illegal contract term. I hope this goes to court soon, before the carriers in Canada (where I am) try to pull the same BS.
They are offering you more bandwidth to use a higher bandwidth service like tethering.
The consideration is very clear. Thanks for quoting the premise for contract law, but claiming there is no consideration there is ridiculous.
People who tether use more bandwidth, so the cost associated with their usage is more expensive. The carriers can either charge those people for tethering or they can raise the price for EVERYONE.
They choose to charge the people who tether. It is a perfectly reasonable choice on their part.
Hey a cable line comes into my house with all the channels on it. I can just jimmy off a filter and get all the channels without paying any more. They are already delivering it to my house, why can't I just get all of them since they are there anyways and I am paying for cable right?
You are not paying for tethering unless you are paying for tethering. The math is simple. People who tether use more bandwidth. Wireless providers set their data prices based on AVERAGE usage. Tethering makes the average usage go up, so the revenue to cover those costs has to come from somewhere.
So they can either charge EVERYONE more or charge the people who tether more.. Again they choose the later.
Lord Blackadder
Aug 3, 11:20 AM
While that part is true that we would burn more fuel at power planets one advantage you are forgetting about is the power planets are by far much more efficient at producing power than the internal combustion engine on your car. On top of that it is much easier to capture and clean the pollution the power planet produces over what the cars produce. On top of that we can easily most our power over to other renewable choices.
I agree with you that series hybrids gain efficiency by running the internal combustion engine at a narrow RPM range representing the engine's most efficient speed. It's been done for over a hundred years that way in generators and a series hybrid drivetrain is set up exactly the same way as a generator.
Power plants are usually more efficent per unit of energy than autos, but right now they do not have the capacity to support a big switch to electrics. Also, the notion that power plants are cleaner than cars is debatable - many are, but many are not all that clean.
The critical point is, our power grid needs to become FAR more robust (more, bigger power plants) before we can make a large-scale switch to electrics - and it will only be worthwhile if the power grid becomes significantly more efficient. It can be done, but it will take a long, long time - and probably have to involve a significant new construction program of nuclear power plants.
I heard it that the reason why BMW stopped selling diesel cars in the US was that the engines failed, due to the very poor quality. In Europe, you can get quality fuel, but in the US, diesel is still the fuel of trucks, primarily.
Just one statistics: in continental Europe (not in the UK), new diesel cars have been outselling petrol ones for almost a decade, despite the premium.
The US began transitioning to ultra-low sulphur diesel in and by now the transition is nearly complete. The new fuel standard brings us in line with European diesel. Before the credit crunch recession hit, many car manufacturers were planning to bring Eurpoean-market diesel cars over here in slightly modified form, but those plans were scuppered in the recession. Subaru, for example, has delayed the introduction of their diesel by a year or two.
But I think diesels will start arriving here in the next couple years, and people will buy them in increasing numbers. The USA is 40 years behind in the adoption of diesel passenger cars.
You shouldn't have any impression about Subarus. They really have the traction of a train (AWD ones, of course - why would you buy anything else?!), but everything else is just midrange quality at best.
I've had a 1998 Impreza estate several years ago and it was OK. Recently, I've had a 2007 Legacy Outback from work. Nice glass on the top and good traction, but I have no intention of trading a BMW or Mercedes for it the next time. The interior is low quality and Subaru has no understanding of fuel efficiency, it seems. OK, it's a 2.5L engine, automatic and AWD, but still... 25 imperial mpg?!
It's not really fair to compare a Subaru to a BMW or Merc though, is it? Those German luxury cars are much more expensive and the AWD variants are even more expensive still. A 5-series with AWD will cost 70%-80% more than a roughly equivalent Legacy. They are very different carsm with totally different customers in mind.
I have a 2000 Forester currently. Mechanically they are well-made cars, they have a strong AWD system and I like the ride quality over rough roads, which they handle much better than the Audis I've driven.
Their biggest weaknesses are only average fuel economy (by US standards; I get about 28 mpg combined), and average interior quality, especially in the Impreza and Foresters, though I have seen the latest models and they are much better. The 2.5L four is really a great engine in a lot of ways, but it's just not quite fuel efficient enough, and in my car that problem is exacerbated by the short-ratio gearbox, which is crying for a 6th gear.
Hybrids actually have an equal to worse carbon footprint than regular gasoline engine cars due to the production and disposal process of the batteries. As such, they are not green at all. They are just another one of these ****** feel good deals for hippies with no brains an engineering knowledge.
I disagree. Real hippies don't work and thus can't afford fancy hybrids.
Of the commercially available cars, a well designed diesel, able to operate on biodiesel from waste oil for example has by far the best carbon footprint or an ethanol burner that can work on ethanol fermented from plant waste via cellulose digesting bacteria.
I would prefer if we could get to the point where we either have cars running on ethanol generated from cellulose or keratin digestion or natural gas buring engines.
Unfortunately fuel cells are not that great either because of the palladium used in the batteries that is pretty toxic in production as well.
Cheers,
Ahmed
The problem with biodiesel is that it's far too scarce to adopt widely. Sure, it's great that Joe Hippie can run his 1979 Mercedes 300D wagon on fast food grease, but once everyone starts looking into biodiesel Joe Hippie won't be getting free oil handouts anymore.
Also, biodiesel demand has already started competing with food production and I can tell you right away I'd rather eat than drive.
You're right about fuel cell carbon footprints - but that's the least of their worries now because they still cost a fortune to make and have short useful lives, making them totally unpractical to sell.
So far the biggest problem is not getting internal combustion engines to burn alternative fuels (we've found many alternative fuels) but to produce enough alternative fuel and distribute it widely enough to replace petroleum - without interrupting things like food production or power generation.
I agree with you that series hybrids gain efficiency by running the internal combustion engine at a narrow RPM range representing the engine's most efficient speed. It's been done for over a hundred years that way in generators and a series hybrid drivetrain is set up exactly the same way as a generator.
Power plants are usually more efficent per unit of energy than autos, but right now they do not have the capacity to support a big switch to electrics. Also, the notion that power plants are cleaner than cars is debatable - many are, but many are not all that clean.
The critical point is, our power grid needs to become FAR more robust (more, bigger power plants) before we can make a large-scale switch to electrics - and it will only be worthwhile if the power grid becomes significantly more efficient. It can be done, but it will take a long, long time - and probably have to involve a significant new construction program of nuclear power plants.
I heard it that the reason why BMW stopped selling diesel cars in the US was that the engines failed, due to the very poor quality. In Europe, you can get quality fuel, but in the US, diesel is still the fuel of trucks, primarily.
Just one statistics: in continental Europe (not in the UK), new diesel cars have been outselling petrol ones for almost a decade, despite the premium.
The US began transitioning to ultra-low sulphur diesel in and by now the transition is nearly complete. The new fuel standard brings us in line with European diesel. Before the credit crunch recession hit, many car manufacturers were planning to bring Eurpoean-market diesel cars over here in slightly modified form, but those plans were scuppered in the recession. Subaru, for example, has delayed the introduction of their diesel by a year or two.
But I think diesels will start arriving here in the next couple years, and people will buy them in increasing numbers. The USA is 40 years behind in the adoption of diesel passenger cars.
You shouldn't have any impression about Subarus. They really have the traction of a train (AWD ones, of course - why would you buy anything else?!), but everything else is just midrange quality at best.
I've had a 1998 Impreza estate several years ago and it was OK. Recently, I've had a 2007 Legacy Outback from work. Nice glass on the top and good traction, but I have no intention of trading a BMW or Mercedes for it the next time. The interior is low quality and Subaru has no understanding of fuel efficiency, it seems. OK, it's a 2.5L engine, automatic and AWD, but still... 25 imperial mpg?!
It's not really fair to compare a Subaru to a BMW or Merc though, is it? Those German luxury cars are much more expensive and the AWD variants are even more expensive still. A 5-series with AWD will cost 70%-80% more than a roughly equivalent Legacy. They are very different carsm with totally different customers in mind.
I have a 2000 Forester currently. Mechanically they are well-made cars, they have a strong AWD system and I like the ride quality over rough roads, which they handle much better than the Audis I've driven.
Their biggest weaknesses are only average fuel economy (by US standards; I get about 28 mpg combined), and average interior quality, especially in the Impreza and Foresters, though I have seen the latest models and they are much better. The 2.5L four is really a great engine in a lot of ways, but it's just not quite fuel efficient enough, and in my car that problem is exacerbated by the short-ratio gearbox, which is crying for a 6th gear.
Hybrids actually have an equal to worse carbon footprint than regular gasoline engine cars due to the production and disposal process of the batteries. As such, they are not green at all. They are just another one of these ****** feel good deals for hippies with no brains an engineering knowledge.
I disagree. Real hippies don't work and thus can't afford fancy hybrids.
Of the commercially available cars, a well designed diesel, able to operate on biodiesel from waste oil for example has by far the best carbon footprint or an ethanol burner that can work on ethanol fermented from plant waste via cellulose digesting bacteria.
I would prefer if we could get to the point where we either have cars running on ethanol generated from cellulose or keratin digestion or natural gas buring engines.
Unfortunately fuel cells are not that great either because of the palladium used in the batteries that is pretty toxic in production as well.
Cheers,
Ahmed
The problem with biodiesel is that it's far too scarce to adopt widely. Sure, it's great that Joe Hippie can run his 1979 Mercedes 300D wagon on fast food grease, but once everyone starts looking into biodiesel Joe Hippie won't be getting free oil handouts anymore.
Also, biodiesel demand has already started competing with food production and I can tell you right away I'd rather eat than drive.
You're right about fuel cell carbon footprints - but that's the least of their worries now because they still cost a fortune to make and have short useful lives, making them totally unpractical to sell.
So far the biggest problem is not getting internal combustion engines to burn alternative fuels (we've found many alternative fuels) but to produce enough alternative fuel and distribute it widely enough to replace petroleum - without interrupting things like food production or power generation.
Torrijos
Jul 21, 04:55 PM
Even if Rim, Palm, etc. exhibit the same antenna problems as the iPhone 4, Apple is acting like a cry baby by trying to shift the discussion to include their competitors. �Teacher, the other kids are being bad too, don�t punish me alone�.
Actually it was the competitors that tried to use the antenna problems as a selling point and as propaganda.
http://conversations.nokia.com/2010/06/28/how-do-you-hold-your-nokia/
So the lot of them are fair game...
As for bloggers that just wanted to troll the issue to drive their numbers up the presentation (and answers that followed) were pretty much Jobs telling them to try and get a journalist degree and get their facts straight, and who could blame him?
Since the iPhone 4 as started shipping we've had the antenna problem that has being described as if the phone could simply not be used (numbers debunked that) without real investigation, fake Jobs e-mail, fake reports of an engineer warnings etc.
If it wasn't for anandtech this all would be a complete disaster. The way different technology sites reported the story is just pathetic.
Actually it was the competitors that tried to use the antenna problems as a selling point and as propaganda.
http://conversations.nokia.com/2010/06/28/how-do-you-hold-your-nokia/
So the lot of them are fair game...
As for bloggers that just wanted to troll the issue to drive their numbers up the presentation (and answers that followed) were pretty much Jobs telling them to try and get a journalist degree and get their facts straight, and who could blame him?
Since the iPhone 4 as started shipping we've had the antenna problem that has being described as if the phone could simply not be used (numbers debunked that) without real investigation, fake Jobs e-mail, fake reports of an engineer warnings etc.
If it wasn't for anandtech this all would be a complete disaster. The way different technology sites reported the story is just pathetic.
Verto
Sep 7, 09:54 PM
And he sucked.
gorgeousninja
Apr 17, 06:24 AM
Everything on the original iPhone was already in use by other phones. Apple simply combined them all together in one phone and made it simpler to use. It revolutionized yeah, by simply bringing that stuff to the front of peoples minds.
oh so they just 'brought all those things together, and made it easier to use'..
Isn't that just a very ungracious way of saying that Apple introduced a phone the like of which no-one had seen before and thus revolutionized the market then?
oh so they just 'brought all those things together, and made it easier to use'..
Isn't that just a very ungracious way of saying that Apple introduced a phone the like of which no-one had seen before and thus revolutionized the market then?
roadbloc
Mar 6, 03:14 PM
No they don't. They just attempt to copy (often badly), then license universally and flood the market with a lot junk that includes a ton of different models at very low price points.
The scary thing is is that you actually believe this nonsense.
The scary thing is is that you actually believe this nonsense.
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 1, 02:37 PM
See he gets it!!!!
He is one of the few people who (if he lives in Scandinavia, needs to be granted amnesty, and sent to a happier place!) actually understands how it is there...
He is telling the truth, but I didn't want to bring up the suicidal rates in those countries and how the youth is just rotting away... But hey, now that he did...
I am sure they don't spend their money on iPods or iTunes, but rather crack and weed... After all their lives suck... so...
OOOOkkkeeyyyy...
First of all, I do live in Sweden. (born and bred). Secondly, my comment shouldn't be taken too seriously.
I don't know where are from, but my guess is that you never been close to scandinavia. If you had done some traveling you would know that all countries have to live with their own moronic politicians for better or worse.
He is one of the few people who (if he lives in Scandinavia, needs to be granted amnesty, and sent to a happier place!) actually understands how it is there...
He is telling the truth, but I didn't want to bring up the suicidal rates in those countries and how the youth is just rotting away... But hey, now that he did...
I am sure they don't spend their money on iPods or iTunes, but rather crack and weed... After all their lives suck... so...
OOOOkkkeeyyyy...
First of all, I do live in Sweden. (born and bred). Secondly, my comment shouldn't be taken too seriously.
I don't know where are from, but my guess is that you never been close to scandinavia. If you had done some traveling you would know that all countries have to live with their own moronic politicians for better or worse.
Mac.World
Apr 17, 05:55 AM
You missed out his suicide which was clearly a direct consequence of how he was treated, they killed him. He could (just) be alive today, but he's not, because of what happened. If any of you think that's "irrelevant" you frankly sicken me.
His life and what he did was not irrelevant. I'm sure a movie or book could be done on his life's story. Teaching kids to look more at a person because of their sexual orientation, rather than their contributions, is irrelevant.
His life and what he did was not irrelevant. I'm sure a movie or book could be done on his life's story. Teaching kids to look more at a person because of their sexual orientation, rather than their contributions, is irrelevant.
fyrefly
Apr 29, 02:39 PM
Whew!! They also brought Safari's "Drag Image to Desktop to save Image File" back in this Preview Build. :D
In previous Lion Builds, dragging an image to the desktop resulted in a Safari Link file to the Image's location on the web.
In previous Lion Builds, dragging an image to the desktop resulted in a Safari Link file to the Image's location on the web.
SgtPepper12
May 4, 03:32 AM
The "Only way" ?
What, you could not use a laptop?
And how would an iPad only owner read the CD in the 1st place?
Yes the iPad made a nice easy to use picture viewer once you had put the images on it from your real computer at home is what you are saying.
You could just of easy taken a laptop which read the CD images off directly onto the screen and no needed this new device whatsoever.
Wait, what, a CD? Do you come from the 90s? Why do you need to put it on a CD? Do you even know how this works? Do you know how heavy a laptop is compared to an iPad 2? Do you know how much it sucks to "just hand over" a laptop?
What, you could not use a laptop?
And how would an iPad only owner read the CD in the 1st place?
Yes the iPad made a nice easy to use picture viewer once you had put the images on it from your real computer at home is what you are saying.
You could just of easy taken a laptop which read the CD images off directly onto the screen and no needed this new device whatsoever.
Wait, what, a CD? Do you come from the 90s? Why do you need to put it on a CD? Do you even know how this works? Do you know how heavy a laptop is compared to an iPad 2? Do you know how much it sucks to "just hand over" a laptop?
kwikdeth
Apr 16, 08:36 AM
Obviously fake. Look at the slanted iPhone writing on the bottom photo. Horrible photoshop skills
yup, that it's tell. unfortunate as I actually rather like the concept. ive never been happy with the iphone's back panel since the 3g got released due to the fact it's not flat.
yup, that it's tell. unfortunate as I actually rather like the concept. ive never been happy with the iphone's back panel since the 3g got released due to the fact it's not flat.
steadysignal
Apr 10, 06:59 PM
I refuse to buy anything from Best Buy because of their ethics and practices.
+1. been done with best buy for a long time. the markup on hdmi cables alone is enough to make me want to throw up in my mouth.
rats.
+1. been done with best buy for a long time. the markup on hdmi cables alone is enough to make me want to throw up in my mouth.
rats.
edifyingGerbil
Apr 25, 05:57 PM
That lady has "issues", just looking at her demeanour. :eek:
'atsa no lady, 'atsa my wife!
'atsa no lady, 'atsa my wife!
jclardy
Apr 29, 04:05 PM
Good to know that Apple is willing to change.
The Expose/Spaces "slider" was one of the first things I noticed that seemed strange when I installed the preview.
The slider makes sense when you have at least 3 icons but with only 2 it is not immediately apparent. I think we have been conditioned to take a darker button as being shadowed and therefore selected.
And the scrollbars being always on seems to be a good decision as well. It is nice to know where you are in a document at a glance, and the scrollbar does that pretty well.
The Expose/Spaces "slider" was one of the first things I noticed that seemed strange when I installed the preview.
The slider makes sense when you have at least 3 icons but with only 2 it is not immediately apparent. I think we have been conditioned to take a darker button as being shadowed and therefore selected.
And the scrollbars being always on seems to be a good decision as well. It is nice to know where you are in a document at a glance, and the scrollbar does that pretty well.
aiqw9182
Mar 28, 02:29 PM
Seriously Apple, how soon until the app store is the only way to install apps on your mac?
I can see it now: How to jailbreak your Mac
Seriously though, Apple's going to have to remove a ton of their current restrictions before that happens so I honestly don't see it happening anytime soon.
I can see it now: How to jailbreak your Mac
Seriously though, Apple's going to have to remove a ton of their current restrictions before that happens so I honestly don't see it happening anytime soon.
*LTD*
Mar 6, 11:14 AM
It's Apple's philosophy. It comes down to building priorities around it and executing on them.
Listen to this guy in the video below. Does he sound like someone who doesn't treat tech as a craft, as an art? This is someone who sounds like he's prepared to make some heavy sacrifices for the sake of perfecting a product. Someone who is prepared to say no to a thousand things, and yes to that one special idea. You wouldn't even believe he's talking about tech but something entirely different.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BY85UiPBAo0
It's not marketing-speak or hyperbole for the camera. It's an artist speaking about his work. Can you identify with this?
Apple operates from a completely different place and mindset from everyone else.
Why?
Simple. They actually give a damn about the User Experience. They understand that tech is used by PEOPLE, and people have lives to get on with. So . . . simplify, simplify, simplify; cut, cut cut; and then work to perfect what's left over.
That's the beauty of it. It's very Zen. Perfection - or rather, sublimity - is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing more to take away.
Why doesn't the competition do this or think this way?
1) Their priority is to make as much money in as little time as possible and to do it as cheaply as possible.
2) They're stupid.
Most of the time, #1 happens because of #2.
And there is no cure for #2.
Listen to this guy in the video below. Does he sound like someone who doesn't treat tech as a craft, as an art? This is someone who sounds like he's prepared to make some heavy sacrifices for the sake of perfecting a product. Someone who is prepared to say no to a thousand things, and yes to that one special idea. You wouldn't even believe he's talking about tech but something entirely different.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BY85UiPBAo0
It's not marketing-speak or hyperbole for the camera. It's an artist speaking about his work. Can you identify with this?
Apple operates from a completely different place and mindset from everyone else.
Why?
Simple. They actually give a damn about the User Experience. They understand that tech is used by PEOPLE, and people have lives to get on with. So . . . simplify, simplify, simplify; cut, cut cut; and then work to perfect what's left over.
That's the beauty of it. It's very Zen. Perfection - or rather, sublimity - is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing more to take away.
Why doesn't the competition do this or think this way?
1) Their priority is to make as much money in as little time as possible and to do it as cheaply as possible.
2) They're stupid.
Most of the time, #1 happens because of #2.
And there is no cure for #2.
darkwing
Apr 4, 08:21 AM
I bought the 360 on launch day back in 2005 with cash. Camped out at Wal-Mart for 18 hours for it too. Again, didn't do this so some idiot could steal it :(
I suggest you buy a PS3 instead. With their sales numbers, it's obvious nobody wants one! Therefore, nobody will steal it!
(The PS3 is my favorite console, as everyone knows. I'm just making a joke. No need to move this post to console war. :P)
I suggest you buy a PS3 instead. With their sales numbers, it's obvious nobody wants one! Therefore, nobody will steal it!
(The PS3 is my favorite console, as everyone knows. I'm just making a joke. No need to move this post to console war. :P)
tvguru
Sep 12, 08:39 AM
It has to come back soon, think of all the sales they're losing!
People aren't going to remember the songs they wanted? Plus there not making much on each song anyways.
People aren't going to remember the songs they wanted? Plus there not making much on each song anyways.
ifjake
Oct 3, 09:37 AM
The way I imagine Apple liscensing/opening up the iPod/iTunes/iTMS system would be for Apple to completely control what the user sees, how the user gets content, even if it doesn't control what the user gets. Like how you can choose which country to set the Music Store to, adding maybe an Amazon.com store to the list, Real.com, etc. But as a "reward" for opening itself up to competition, Apple would recieve a slight liscence fee, an teensy bit of the price of whatever's sold. This way Apple could control the look of the iTMS no matter where it comes from by supplying a template, a "user interface guideline" sort of thing for this new multi-store, and all media from Apple or Amazon or wherever could all happily coexist in iTunes. If the other companies want to sell to players other than the iPod, they can use their own system or work out a similar situation with Microsoft and fair play and such.
I don't really like leaving this in the hands of DVD Jon. Maybe Apple will wait and see what kind of response he gets and then take it from there, but I think Apple and especially iTunes still need to be part of the picture.
Maybe Apple could simply provide an easy "Add to Library" handle in iTunes, even if the stuff comes from some browser based store, you buy it and it goes to iTunes and thus the iPod. The whole multi-store thing is to me the ideal that I'd be willing to let go of.
I don't really like leaving this in the hands of DVD Jon. Maybe Apple will wait and see what kind of response he gets and then take it from there, but I think Apple and especially iTunes still need to be part of the picture.
Maybe Apple could simply provide an easy "Add to Library" handle in iTunes, even if the stuff comes from some browser based store, you buy it and it goes to iTunes and thus the iPod. The whole multi-store thing is to me the ideal that I'd be willing to let go of.
twoodcc
Jul 13, 09:49 PM
Good to have you back folding again. We need the points...
^^ yeh i agree! would be nice to get a new bunch of people on having a crack.
Welcome back. We need the points... Our medium term outlook not looking so great right now...
thanks. it's good to be back, but like i said, i'm having serious internet issues here. i'm paying for 12 mb/s, and sometimes i'm getting less than 1! :mad:
Yeah, we moved to 57th place but there is pleasurdome and bitgamer right behind us :( some new guy, awachs, is making 10 mil a week :eek: his electric bill must be outrageous, must have a pile of gtx480's... and he will pass us in about 3 or 4 months.
dang. well once i get the internet situation under control, i'll be able to contribute more.
^^ yeh i agree! would be nice to get a new bunch of people on having a crack.
Welcome back. We need the points... Our medium term outlook not looking so great right now...
thanks. it's good to be back, but like i said, i'm having serious internet issues here. i'm paying for 12 mb/s, and sometimes i'm getting less than 1! :mad:
Yeah, we moved to 57th place but there is pleasurdome and bitgamer right behind us :( some new guy, awachs, is making 10 mil a week :eek: his electric bill must be outrageous, must have a pile of gtx480's... and he will pass us in about 3 or 4 months.
dang. well once i get the internet situation under control, i'll be able to contribute more.
No comments:
Post a Comment