nylonsteel
Mar 25, 05:18 PM
King Tiger or Tiger II for the next series of Tiger names please
Panther II would be cool to
Just dont name it Elephant - last seen burning at Kursk
Panther II would be cool to
Just dont name it Elephant - last seen burning at Kursk
ppilone
Apr 5, 03:10 PM
Maybe the winter interns held an app contest and the winner was guaranteed an app in the app store... :confused:
mdntcallr
Aug 7, 03:05 PM
Sounds like a good idea. Clear out inventory. make some sales. As LCD prices come down, so should apple's list price.
But I am not into these models, I want a HDTV compliant model with speakers.
so i can watch HDTV via HDMI, ie plug in a blu-ray movie or watch HD directv.
give us HDMI with 1080P ability Apple.
with nice speakers, so we can have all in one!!
basically i want a tv/monitor
But I am not into these models, I want a HDTV compliant model with speakers.
so i can watch HDTV via HDMI, ie plug in a blu-ray movie or watch HD directv.
give us HDMI with 1080P ability Apple.
with nice speakers, so we can have all in one!!
basically i want a tv/monitor
miles01110
Apr 22, 07:12 AM
That is because those who oppose will find themselves without the right to vote. :p :D
I will turn this thread into a PRSI faster than you can say "Barack HUSSEIN Obama is a Kenyan!"
;););)
I will turn this thread into a PRSI faster than you can say "Barack HUSSEIN Obama is a Kenyan!"
;););)
ECUpirate44
Mar 24, 03:09 PM
Great OS!
miketcool
Oct 7, 04:26 PM
For whatever reason, Sprint and Verizon started deploying their 3G networks about three years before T-Mobile and AT&T did. Nothing T-Mobile and AT&T can do about that now, except let Verizon gloat while they continue to try to play catch-up.
I can speak for T-Mo in that they bought their 3G frequency from that public auction. It took the government almost 2 years to move emergency bands off and allow T-Mo to actually use what they bought. The early adopters had an easier transition.
I can speak for T-Mo in that they bought their 3G frequency from that public auction. It took the government almost 2 years to move emergency bands off and allow T-Mo to actually use what they bought. The early adopters had an easier transition.
MagicBoy
Mar 25, 06:10 PM
Did I miss something? I was talking about Eidorian. And I don't care if he's secretly Steve Jobs. A troll is a troll.
Yeah, I thought the same. Was trying to work out how Schmye made such a mad link!
He probably OD'd on Mountain Dew ;)
Yeah, I thought the same. Was trying to work out how Schmye made such a mad link!
He probably OD'd on Mountain Dew ;)
MacinDoc
Nov 16, 07:53 PM
That would mean we'd have to pay more for intel machines. intel is giving apple big discounts for not using AMD at all.
Link?
Link?
jelloshotsrule
Sep 9, 03:23 PM
yeah, i think tim mcgraw would've been a much better choice
linknprk
Apr 5, 03:26 PM
why does macrumors link to the appshopper description of the app instead of the actual apple link?
Seems like a useless middle step
Seems like a useless middle step
inkswamp
Oct 3, 04:00 AM
Ug, I can't believe I just defended a monopoly.
Bear in mind, there is nothing inherently bad in a company having a monopoly, not even Microsoft. What's bad (and illegal) is when a company in such a position abuses its monopolistic power. I have to remind MS defenders of this fact as many of them don't seem to grasp the nuance here. MS wasn't in trouble for being a monopoly (rightly so--being one is not illegal.) MS was in trouble for abusing that power.
Speaking of MS defenders, is it my imagination or are there an awful lot of Macrumors newbies on the board now who seem to bash Apple pretty quickly and at every turn? What's that all about?
Bear in mind, there is nothing inherently bad in a company having a monopoly, not even Microsoft. What's bad (and illegal) is when a company in such a position abuses its monopolistic power. I have to remind MS defenders of this fact as many of them don't seem to grasp the nuance here. MS wasn't in trouble for being a monopoly (rightly so--being one is not illegal.) MS was in trouble for abusing that power.
Speaking of MS defenders, is it my imagination or are there an awful lot of Macrumors newbies on the board now who seem to bash Apple pretty quickly and at every turn? What's that all about?
yg17
Apr 22, 12:07 PM
Excuse me if this was already suggested:
Perhaps allow a post that receives a certain number of dislikes to be "hidden" from a general view unless someone decides to view it by clicking on a link.
Similar to how a moderator can you a deleted post, but for the general public.
That's an awful idea. Posts will get downrated because someone disagrees with a perfectly valid opinion? I've already seen posts downrated because someone said they prefer Android over Apple or had a good thing to say about Microsoft. Hell, I'd probably get downrated just for my avatar.
As long as people are going to act like little children, using these ratings to hide posts is a horrible idea.
Perhaps allow a post that receives a certain number of dislikes to be "hidden" from a general view unless someone decides to view it by clicking on a link.
Similar to how a moderator can you a deleted post, but for the general public.
That's an awful idea. Posts will get downrated because someone disagrees with a perfectly valid opinion? I've already seen posts downrated because someone said they prefer Android over Apple or had a good thing to say about Microsoft. Hell, I'd probably get downrated just for my avatar.
As long as people are going to act like little children, using these ratings to hide posts is a horrible idea.
Much Ado
Oct 29, 07:45 AM
Just as same, just as ridiculous, as saying that running Apple software on other hardware makes it "more difficult to use."
Perhaps, (but I still maintain that it's 'easier' to run 'non-Apple' software on a Mac than it is to run OS X on 'non Apple' hardware. But it's true to say that calling Apple exclusively a 'hardware' or 'software' company is a little short sighted, so we're in agreement there.)
It is the hardware sales that keep them afloat, and it's the software that makes the hardware more attractive.
Which is what a lot of people have been saying already :)
To clarify:
Apple is not a normal company. It's a one-off, niche company that do things differently from the rest of the industry. If OS X is licenced to other PC makers then part of the Mac eco-system is lost, and that will kill Apple.
Perhaps, (but I still maintain that it's 'easier' to run 'non-Apple' software on a Mac than it is to run OS X on 'non Apple' hardware. But it's true to say that calling Apple exclusively a 'hardware' or 'software' company is a little short sighted, so we're in agreement there.)
It is the hardware sales that keep them afloat, and it's the software that makes the hardware more attractive.
Which is what a lot of people have been saying already :)
To clarify:
Apple is not a normal company. It's a one-off, niche company that do things differently from the rest of the industry. If OS X is licenced to other PC makers then part of the Mac eco-system is lost, and that will kill Apple.
autrefois
Sep 12, 07:39 AM
Note that it doesn't say "The iTunes Music Store is being updated." That's a pretty clear sign to me that not only are they going to add movies, it's also now just going to be the iTunes Store.
Very good point. I've never seen it called the iTunes Store before by Apple. It can't be a coincidence.
If the iTunes Music Store is going to be called the iTunes Store (iTMS > iTS?) then shouldn't the name iTunes change as well to coincide with the change in available media? :o
I'm sure this was cause for much discussion at Apple. iMovie is taken obviously. iTunes is already very well known, so they must have decided to just stick with that. The "i" doesn't really mean a whole lot anymore anyway (iWeb = Internet Web?!), so why should "Tunes"? ;)
Very good point. I've never seen it called the iTunes Store before by Apple. It can't be a coincidence.
If the iTunes Music Store is going to be called the iTunes Store (iTMS > iTS?) then shouldn't the name iTunes change as well to coincide with the change in available media? :o
I'm sure this was cause for much discussion at Apple. iMovie is taken obviously. iTunes is already very well known, so they must have decided to just stick with that. The "i" doesn't really mean a whole lot anymore anyway (iWeb = Internet Web?!), so why should "Tunes"? ;)
Rodimus Prime
Oct 6, 04:25 PM
I still disagree with you. The device is material. The network is supposed to be invisible. You're not supposed to notice the network. AT&T's service isn't great, but I'll put up with it to use the device of my choice.
The mobile industry has a strange business model compared to other industries. You don't buy a desktop computer that you can only use on one ISP or a car that you can only fill up at particular gas stations (excluding electric). However, If these industries were to operate this way, I still think people would go for the product over the commodity.
To me, and apparently many others, mobile service is just a commodity. Some may be a bit better than others, but in the end you're getting a comparable service. The devices, on the other hand, vary. And, yes, I still think the iPhone was game changing. All I remember before January 2007 were RAZRs and Chocolates. Unintuitive text-based interfaces with linear button-mashing controls in a hyped-up shell.
I think your arugument would be valid if phones were not subsudized and you have to buy them at full price. Because AT&T in this case is paying Apple $400 per phone you should choose a network first.
If ISP were footing the bill for desktop then Verizon add still would work but for cell phones most of the cost of the phone is paid by the networks. Not the other way around.
The mobile industry has a strange business model compared to other industries. You don't buy a desktop computer that you can only use on one ISP or a car that you can only fill up at particular gas stations (excluding electric). However, If these industries were to operate this way, I still think people would go for the product over the commodity.
To me, and apparently many others, mobile service is just a commodity. Some may be a bit better than others, but in the end you're getting a comparable service. The devices, on the other hand, vary. And, yes, I still think the iPhone was game changing. All I remember before January 2007 were RAZRs and Chocolates. Unintuitive text-based interfaces with linear button-mashing controls in a hyped-up shell.
I think your arugument would be valid if phones were not subsudized and you have to buy them at full price. Because AT&T in this case is paying Apple $400 per phone you should choose a network first.
If ISP were footing the bill for desktop then Verizon add still would work but for cell phones most of the cost of the phone is paid by the networks. Not the other way around.
Cassie
Jan 13, 01:20 AM
A lot of whining on these forums the second they reopen.
I'll log on just to laugh myself silly when I read the threads created by n00bs saying "Why didn't Apple release so-and-so" and "I hate apple, im leaving them foreverz!!!11111!"
It's sad, really (And slightly disturbing)
I'll log on just to laugh myself silly when I read the threads created by n00bs saying "Why didn't Apple release so-and-so" and "I hate apple, im leaving them foreverz!!!11111!"
It's sad, really (And slightly disturbing)
phytonix
Nov 24, 12:03 AM
plz discount AppleCare...
TheUndertow
Apr 25, 12:42 PM
I would LOL if it stood for iPhone 4S(print).
bense27
Aug 3, 06:40 PM
just the fact that its name is the "Argo" tells you that its not posing a threat to iPods.
Cynicalone
Apr 29, 02:33 PM
The macbook air's ship with 2gig standard. They wont leave a computer that new behind.
Or the new MacBook Air and all other Macs will move to 4GB standard.
You can use it with 2GB but it is not a very good experience, even with a just handful of Apps open.
Or the new MacBook Air and all other Macs will move to 4GB standard.
You can use it with 2GB but it is not a very good experience, even with a just handful of Apps open.
Slix
Mar 24, 08:26 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
True. :P
I'd like to see more screenshots from earlier OS X too. :D I would boot one up if I had extra old computers laying around right now.
True. :P
I'd like to see more screenshots from earlier OS X too. :D I would boot one up if I had extra old computers laying around right now.
miketcool
Oct 6, 10:25 AM
T-Mo may have screwed the pooch on their 3G rollout, but my phone doesn't drop 30% of my calls. It'll be interesting to see how ATT, and TMo keep up with the 3G coverage, as Verizon and Sprint move forward.
jonnysods
Apr 8, 05:28 PM
This is funny. Welp, glad I don't buy stuff at Best Buy.
It's my 'try before I buy store', as we don't have an Apple Store in our city.
It's my 'try before I buy store', as we don't have an Apple Store in our city.
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.
No comments:
Post a Comment