%252BMade%252Bby%252BBenikari47.png "christina aguilera album.")
HyperZboy
Apr 7, 11:36 PM
This notion that Best Buy is the only one hoarding stock is typical of the stereotypical Apple fan. And once again, I've never bought Apple or Mac products at Best Buy because the staff are not knowledgeable in most cases, the same way I never bought a Mac at Circuit City for the short period they carried Macs.
But which stores are well stocked the best with iPads?
See if you can guess. I'll give you a hint, it begins with an A.
Sure you can say, those are Apple's rules, deal with it, but that doesn't make it right.
The truth probably is that some Best Buys are probably near Walmarts and Targets so they don't want to be out of stock for 2-3 weeks while Apple hoards stock at its stores. I'm sure none of them want to be out of stock for 2-3 weeks and suspect that Best Buy is the not the only offender of conserving stock due to Apple's inability to meet demand.
Not one of these chains wants to be known as the chain that didn't have iPads for 2-3 weeks giving consumers the impression they don't carry it anymore!
The only difference is Best Buy got CAUGHT!
I would bet that this directive came from corporate and applied to a limited number of stores that were faced with the possibility of being out of stock for an extended period of time.
People can conjecture here all they want, but no one really knows the details of Apple's supply promises vs. what it delivered with any of these chains.
But which stores are well stocked the best with iPads?
See if you can guess. I'll give you a hint, it begins with an A.
Sure you can say, those are Apple's rules, deal with it, but that doesn't make it right.
The truth probably is that some Best Buys are probably near Walmarts and Targets so they don't want to be out of stock for 2-3 weeks while Apple hoards stock at its stores. I'm sure none of them want to be out of stock for 2-3 weeks and suspect that Best Buy is the not the only offender of conserving stock due to Apple's inability to meet demand.
Not one of these chains wants to be known as the chain that didn't have iPads for 2-3 weeks giving consumers the impression they don't carry it anymore!
The only difference is Best Buy got CAUGHT!
I would bet that this directive came from corporate and applied to a limited number of stores that were faced with the possibility of being out of stock for an extended period of time.
People can conjecture here all they want, but no one really knows the details of Apple's supply promises vs. what it delivered with any of these chains.
0815
Apr 6, 04:13 PM
debacle? The debacle that's sucking 51% of the profit in the entire smartphone industry? http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/01/31/apple-is-still-sucking-most-of-the-profit-out-of-the-mobile-phone-business/
Market share isn't everything.
B
Finally someone who gets it ....
Some smart-phone OS providers pay companies to put their OS on the devices (not good for profit) and others gain a big market share without making any money.
But at the end - those are all companies that need to make money. And who wins at the end of the day: Whoever makes most money. Market share might be good for some sort of reputation and bragging rights - but if it doesn't bring any money into the bank it is good for nothing. Those are not charities - those are busnisses that have to face at the end of the day the share holders.
So it also doesn't matter if Xoom sells only 100.000 Units and Apple sells many millions. The Xoom would still be a win if it would bring more money home (but this is where the true fail of the Xoom is)
Market share isn't everything.
B
Finally someone who gets it ....
Some smart-phone OS providers pay companies to put their OS on the devices (not good for profit) and others gain a big market share without making any money.
But at the end - those are all companies that need to make money. And who wins at the end of the day: Whoever makes most money. Market share might be good for some sort of reputation and bragging rights - but if it doesn't bring any money into the bank it is good for nothing. Those are not charities - those are busnisses that have to face at the end of the day the share holders.
So it also doesn't matter if Xoom sells only 100.000 Units and Apple sells many millions. The Xoom would still be a win if it would bring more money home (but this is where the true fail of the Xoom is)
Becordial
Apr 27, 08:25 AM
I think the patch to iOS is a good response.
Making it clear the log file especially when you switch off location services is a good response, and that it will shorten the overall storage of it.
I hope it still does fast triangulation as necessary - there is a benefit to that - but just that the record keeping part basically is a non issue any more, because the cache is regularly flushed.
Making it clear the log file especially when you switch off location services is a good response, and that it will shorten the overall storage of it.
I hope it still does fast triangulation as necessary - there is a benefit to that - but just that the record keeping part basically is a non issue any more, because the cache is regularly flushed.
Multimedia
Aug 19, 07:18 AM
Darn it ... I just received my crossgrade upgrade yesterday eventhough I only own powerbook and am waiting for merom based laptop. While on the topic of fcp, can I install on my powerbook for now and in install on later on my future intel-laptop? (reading the legal eula it seems install is only allowed for one laptop and desktop... I guess I will have to uninstall first on powerbook .....) I am just not sure if apple will block my serial number or something ...No they won't block your serial number. It's the honor system. Yes you can put it on what you have now and what you get later.
matticus008
Nov 29, 06:13 AM
One wonders why it hasn't been used in a Court of Law.
Not really, though. There are countless ways of maneuvering around any such royalties, from framing it as an access toll to a deposit or anything in between. This added cost doesn't actually get you anywhere in litigation, most importantly because it in no way stipulates between you, the customer, and the label.
What's also interesting is that if this fee is added they have now unwittingly legimized the stolen music.
Far from it. Each tax payer contributes to fund their local DMV, and yet their services aren't free. The state collects a tax on car sales, which goes in most cases to road improvement, police departments, and the DMV (along with a truly bizarre array of other causes), but it's only part of the cost. You also pay taxes to a general fund, which is distributed to agencies and services you may never use (or even be aware of). Contributing some money cannot be construed as contributing sufficient money here.
You also pay for car insurance which protects you in the event of an accident; intentionally putting yourself in an accident is insurance fraud. There's no such thing as "music fraud" (at least in this construction), but the result is a sort of piracy insurance policy for the label. Naturally, though, the labels claim such exorbitant losses and damages from piracy that even $1 per iPod would hardly dent that figure.
If this went into effect, I would have a defense in court when I downloaded the entire Universal Label Catalog (All Their Music) off the net.
If only it worked that way...
Just to be clear, this whole idea of collecting on music players is nothing short of outrageous. But it doesn't have the legal implications or weight that have been popularized here. They CAN have their cake and eat it, too, and they know it. That's why it's important for me to ensure that these false notions don't become ingrained as part of the Internet groupthink--when you step back into the real world, you'll be equally screwed, with or without this fee.
Not really, though. There are countless ways of maneuvering around any such royalties, from framing it as an access toll to a deposit or anything in between. This added cost doesn't actually get you anywhere in litigation, most importantly because it in no way stipulates between you, the customer, and the label.
What's also interesting is that if this fee is added they have now unwittingly legimized the stolen music.
Far from it. Each tax payer contributes to fund their local DMV, and yet their services aren't free. The state collects a tax on car sales, which goes in most cases to road improvement, police departments, and the DMV (along with a truly bizarre array of other causes), but it's only part of the cost. You also pay taxes to a general fund, which is distributed to agencies and services you may never use (or even be aware of). Contributing some money cannot be construed as contributing sufficient money here.
You also pay for car insurance which protects you in the event of an accident; intentionally putting yourself in an accident is insurance fraud. There's no such thing as "music fraud" (at least in this construction), but the result is a sort of piracy insurance policy for the label. Naturally, though, the labels claim such exorbitant losses and damages from piracy that even $1 per iPod would hardly dent that figure.
If this went into effect, I would have a defense in court when I downloaded the entire Universal Label Catalog (All Their Music) off the net.
If only it worked that way...
Just to be clear, this whole idea of collecting on music players is nothing short of outrageous. But it doesn't have the legal implications or weight that have been popularized here. They CAN have their cake and eat it, too, and they know it. That's why it's important for me to ensure that these false notions don't become ingrained as part of the Internet groupthink--when you step back into the real world, you'll be equally screwed, with or without this fee.
rfahey
Apr 8, 03:11 AM
Wow. I bought mine at Best Buy on opening day and they sold out of them. Why in anybody's right mind would best buy not sell what they have?
You only "think" they sold out. If this is what they were practicing all along they probably had like 3 weeks rations.
You only "think" they sold out. If this is what they were practicing all along they probably had like 3 weeks rations.
jlewis2k1
Aug 11, 11:41 AM
am i the only one here that really thinks this is just a pathetic to even think apple is coming out with a phone? Personally, I can not see apple coming out with one. Honestly, I'm quite sick of hearing all of these posts about potential iPhone stuff. i just dont believe it would happen.
mozumder
Apr 5, 06:55 PM
- Major revamp of asset cataloguing system with integrated final cut server, something similiar to what Aperture does with photos. This will be it's biggest feature
- Core image fx with integrated Shake-style fx compositing
and the usual obvious things (64 bit, new formats, updated quicktime, etc..)
- Core image fx with integrated Shake-style fx compositing
and the usual obvious things (64 bit, new formats, updated quicktime, etc..)
heisetax
Jul 14, 03:43 PM
This is good news for me.. it will make it easy to resist buying one this year. No 3ghz xeon, no bluray, no new case design.
This means that the 2.7 GHz G5 of a year ago or more would still be a high for CPU speeds for the PowerMac/MacPro line. We already have dual dual 2.5 GHz G5 a year ago. An increase to 2.66 GHz means that either 2008 or 2009 we will see the promised 3 GHz PowerMac/MacPro.
Any bets on which year it will be?
Bill the TaxMan
This means that the 2.7 GHz G5 of a year ago or more would still be a high for CPU speeds for the PowerMac/MacPro line. We already have dual dual 2.5 GHz G5 a year ago. An increase to 2.66 GHz means that either 2008 or 2009 we will see the promised 3 GHz PowerMac/MacPro.
Any bets on which year it will be?
Bill the TaxMan
NebulaClash
Apr 27, 09:40 AM
It's nice that this month's "Apple-gate" story will start to die. I can't wait to see what the media generates next month in the "Apple-gate" saga.
Antennagate
Locationgate
C'mon, Apple competitors, think up your next outrage.
Antennagate
Locationgate
C'mon, Apple competitors, think up your next outrage.
dampfnudel
Mar 31, 09:44 PM
Well, it's about time Google did this.
Chundles
Jul 20, 11:46 AM
Sorry I don't see that happening... Apple has basically always given developers a few months (to several months) lead time with the next major version of Mac OS X. That has taken place yet... so I don't see it being released at WWDC 2006.
He was referring to my post in which I was referring to MWSF '07, not the WWDC.
I still don't think we'll se a full release at MWSF but I think the date will be announced.
He was referring to my post in which I was referring to MWSF '07, not the WWDC.
I still don't think we'll se a full release at MWSF but I think the date will be announced.
layte
Mar 31, 03:58 PM
First, I have a Dell Streak. Wanted to see what the fuss was about. Took a year for the official Froyo release to appear. Yeah, fragmentation exists.
(I appreciate Android on the Streak, but GOOD GOD does it feel like a laggy piece of software compared to my iPhone and iPad. It has widgets and tons of convenient apps for pirating software or games (no... I own ALL those ROMS)... but I digress.)
So, Android unifies. Google forces handset/tablet manufacturers to adopt a stock OS interface. How will they differentiate themselves? What incentive, beyond a free OS, will there be to creating "phone B" that looks just like "phone A". This is where Google will shoot itself in the foot. The less the carriers and handset manufacturers can customize, the less incentive they have to launch on Android. Heck, just emulate Android if you want the apps, right RIM?
Weren't there waves a few weeks about about Motorola wanting its own OS? I'd want to control my own destiny. This is creating a "walled garden" (Andy as caretaker) for the device manufacturers/carriers, and they're the ones that Google needs to be pushing the platform.
The thing is, if handset manufacturers want to crap up a handset with their own gunk they are free to do so still. They will have to wait longer than has been the case (is there an echo in here?) but it is still possible. This isn't Google completely shutting off access, just them making things a bit harder (some will think this is a good thing, some wont).
Perhaps they can differentiate with hardware, or custom applications (just not anything that messes with the base OS by the looks of things). Horrible skins need to die a death, even hardcore fandroids would agree with that.
(I appreciate Android on the Streak, but GOOD GOD does it feel like a laggy piece of software compared to my iPhone and iPad. It has widgets and tons of convenient apps for pirating software or games (no... I own ALL those ROMS)... but I digress.)
So, Android unifies. Google forces handset/tablet manufacturers to adopt a stock OS interface. How will they differentiate themselves? What incentive, beyond a free OS, will there be to creating "phone B" that looks just like "phone A". This is where Google will shoot itself in the foot. The less the carriers and handset manufacturers can customize, the less incentive they have to launch on Android. Heck, just emulate Android if you want the apps, right RIM?
Weren't there waves a few weeks about about Motorola wanting its own OS? I'd want to control my own destiny. This is creating a "walled garden" (Andy as caretaker) for the device manufacturers/carriers, and they're the ones that Google needs to be pushing the platform.
The thing is, if handset manufacturers want to crap up a handset with their own gunk they are free to do so still. They will have to wait longer than has been the case (is there an echo in here?) but it is still possible. This isn't Google completely shutting off access, just them making things a bit harder (some will think this is a good thing, some wont).
Perhaps they can differentiate with hardware, or custom applications (just not anything that messes with the base OS by the looks of things). Horrible skins need to die a death, even hardcore fandroids would agree with that.
OutThere
Apr 27, 09:13 AM
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2711155/posts?q=1&;page=101
There you have it. The birthers aren't satisfied. I knew it.
The tinfoilhatism in the comments on that link is out of hand.
There you have it. The birthers aren't satisfied. I knew it.
The tinfoilhatism in the comments on that link is out of hand.
JAT
Apr 27, 11:27 AM
It clearly is an issue if they have a federal lawsuit on it. The fact that Apple are rolling out an update that changes the way it works alone shows that there is clearly a problem. Apple vary rarely roll out updates that change things, even if consumers are screaming for it (mouse acceleration in OS X for example).
You refuse to accept there is a problem. You refuse to see the breech of privacy. Why? The government and Apple have clearly accepted it.
You should probably learn what "lawsuit", "federal", and "government" actually mean before saying such things.
You refuse to accept there is a problem. You refuse to see the breech of privacy. Why? The government and Apple have clearly accepted it.
You should probably learn what "lawsuit", "federal", and "government" actually mean before saying such things.
whatever
Jul 20, 12:10 PM
Hmm, would make for an awesome rev b. MacPro on or around MWSF (probably "around" as MWSF is really a big consumer event).
Bring on the serious grunt!!
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Kentsfield will not be appearing in any of the Pro machines for some time.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
Bring on the serious grunt!!
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Kentsfield will not be appearing in any of the Pro machines for some time.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
Zadillo
Aug 27, 05:28 PM
I see where you're coming from.
So does this mean there will be no Powerbook G5s next tuesday?
Hey, you never know.... ;)
So does this mean there will be no Powerbook G5s next tuesday?
Hey, you never know.... ;)
Popeye206
Apr 11, 02:17 PM
LOL at all of the people saying it's a big mistake and bad move on Apple's part. They know what they are doing. Why would they do something that would hurt their iPhone sales?!
They just put out the iPhone 4 verizon. If they refresh in June they will have to do both AT&T and Verizon. Otherwise, Verizon will always play second fiddle with updates. Dumb move. They are waiting for enough time to pass where it won't be just 6 months between verizon updates.
I don't think Apple is waiting because of the Verizon phone. I think they just are making more changes than just simple upgrades and it's going to take longer. I think they also see that iPhone4 sales are still heathy so why rush it?
Release iOS 5.0 this summer, then follow-up with the new iPhone5 in the fall. Keep up the momentum and slaughter the competition in the fall during the busiest season for gadgets.
I see nothing wrong with the iPhone5 in the fall. "Na sayers" can say what they want, but in the long run it does not matter as long as the iPhone5 is a healthy upgrade.
The only downside is, Apple may be so darn busy in the fall with new products, that you won't even be able to get in their stores!
They just put out the iPhone 4 verizon. If they refresh in June they will have to do both AT&T and Verizon. Otherwise, Verizon will always play second fiddle with updates. Dumb move. They are waiting for enough time to pass where it won't be just 6 months between verizon updates.
I don't think Apple is waiting because of the Verizon phone. I think they just are making more changes than just simple upgrades and it's going to take longer. I think they also see that iPhone4 sales are still heathy so why rush it?
Release iOS 5.0 this summer, then follow-up with the new iPhone5 in the fall. Keep up the momentum and slaughter the competition in the fall during the busiest season for gadgets.
I see nothing wrong with the iPhone5 in the fall. "Na sayers" can say what they want, but in the long run it does not matter as long as the iPhone5 is a healthy upgrade.
The only downside is, Apple may be so darn busy in the fall with new products, that you won't even be able to get in their stores!
MacRumors
Apr 5, 04:43 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/05/apple-to-introduce-new-final-cut-pro-on-april-12th/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/02/23/003359-FCP.jpg
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/02/23/003359-FCP.jpg
asiayeah
Aug 25, 06:14 PM
In US, people get free shipping for their new batteries.
In Hong Kong, we have to visit the service providers in person TWICE! First we have to go there and give up our old battery for registration. Then we have to wait for at least 10 days and visit the service providers AGAIN to get the new battery.
It's simply poor service from Apple!
P.S. The Apple HK support staff actually told me they just know about the news on the same day as me. They also incorrectly told me that only MacBook's batteries replacements have free shippings...
In Hong Kong, we have to visit the service providers in person TWICE! First we have to go there and give up our old battery for registration. Then we have to wait for at least 10 days and visit the service providers AGAIN to get the new battery.
It's simply poor service from Apple!
P.S. The Apple HK support staff actually told me they just know about the news on the same day as me. They also incorrectly told me that only MacBook's batteries replacements have free shippings...
Consultant
Mar 31, 03:09 PM
So Google is becoming big brother of the open wasteland? :D
sierra oscar
Sep 19, 09:39 AM
I don't know how many times we have to go round and round with this here. I've been on MacRumors since '01 and it's always the same-old, same-old. It's not legitimate. It's "I-wantism." You have no basis to believe that a Rev B would be more "stabled and refined." That's a hope, backed by nothing -- and nothing Apple ever comments on, either. The bottom line is that you can hope if you want, and you can wait if you want, but to bash Apple for being slow on the trigger, and to make the argument that Meroms are amazing and Yonahs are crap is, frankly, horse manure. Like I said, 64 bit is pretty irrelevant for most users, and the speed and battery differences are quite negligible. And the argument that Apple is losing tons of sales to PC manufactuers is, frankly, laughable too.
Sure... I have no basis to believe a revB will be more stable and refined. But I'm participating in 'discussion' - so no real proof - but I wasn't seeking any.
I did state - I was hoping a revB would 'maximise' my chances though. Ironically just as I have no 'proof' neither do you that this won't be the case.
I find your tone very condescending and doesn't encourage open and accepting dialogue between ppl here. I don't understand why you would participate then... If you need to be the oldest forum member (you win) or 100% right (you can win that too).... but I want to engage with ppl here in a friendly and warm atmosphere.
Sure... I have no basis to believe a revB will be more stable and refined. But I'm participating in 'discussion' - so no real proof - but I wasn't seeking any.
I did state - I was hoping a revB would 'maximise' my chances though. Ironically just as I have no 'proof' neither do you that this won't be the case.
I find your tone very condescending and doesn't encourage open and accepting dialogue between ppl here. I don't understand why you would participate then... If you need to be the oldest forum member (you win) or 100% right (you can win that too).... but I want to engage with ppl here in a friendly and warm atmosphere.
Benjy91
Mar 26, 12:39 PM
Windows 7 is available in six editions, and three of those (bolded) are available through normal retail channels.
- Windows 7 Starter
- Windows 7 Home Basic
- Windows 7 Home Premium
- Windows 7 Professional
- Windows 7 Enterprise
- Windows 7 Ultimate
You also need to decide on the architecture before purchase, unlike OS X.
If you count those (they are packaged in different boxes after all), this brings the number up to 11. Starter doesn't come in a 64-bit edition.
Finally, this of course doesn't include the server editions of the Windows 7 kernel.
The only versions of Windows 7 Ive seen available at retail are Home Premium, Proffessional and Ultimate.
Starter and Home basic only come bundled with Netbooks.
And if you're choosing which version of Windows you want for home use, why would Enterprise and Server versions even come into it?
So if you're looking to pick up Windows 7 for your PC, the only serious choices are Home Premium, Professional and Ultimate, and is it really that confusing to compare a feature list of 3 versions and decide which features you need?
- Windows 7 Starter
- Windows 7 Home Basic
- Windows 7 Home Premium
- Windows 7 Professional
- Windows 7 Enterprise
- Windows 7 Ultimate
You also need to decide on the architecture before purchase, unlike OS X.
If you count those (they are packaged in different boxes after all), this brings the number up to 11. Starter doesn't come in a 64-bit edition.
Finally, this of course doesn't include the server editions of the Windows 7 kernel.
The only versions of Windows 7 Ive seen available at retail are Home Premium, Proffessional and Ultimate.
Starter and Home basic only come bundled with Netbooks.
And if you're choosing which version of Windows you want for home use, why would Enterprise and Server versions even come into it?
So if you're looking to pick up Windows 7 for your PC, the only serious choices are Home Premium, Professional and Ultimate, and is it really that confusing to compare a feature list of 3 versions and decide which features you need?
ergle2
Sep 20, 01:50 PM
No, one that just ignores you and your inquiries because it was already clear where you were coming from..thus I feel no obligation to engage you in my thought process and your self important questioning. Has nothing to do with my maturity, and everything to do with my lack of caring about you or your opinion.
Ah, a response that is pompous, imperious, petulant, inconsistent AND incorrect -- you didn't ignore me, after all, you were simply obnoxious and evasive with a serious of ridiculous replies.
Nice projection with the "self-important", though.
Where I was coming from was purely from a sense of curiosity as to why someone would apparently feel that technology can advance too quickly. It's not unobvious, I grant you, but a rather unobjectionable query to my mind.
Interestingly, it would appear you do care enough about my opinion - or perhaps that of other forum denizens? - to respond in a way you apparently consider to be "clever". Feel free to ignore me -- really, I can take it! I mean, I'm sure I'll probably suffer a couple of seconds of heartbreak sometime around, say, 2020, but I'll survive.
Oh and "thought process" - ROTFL - lovely!
Ah, a response that is pompous, imperious, petulant, inconsistent AND incorrect -- you didn't ignore me, after all, you were simply obnoxious and evasive with a serious of ridiculous replies.
Nice projection with the "self-important", though.
Where I was coming from was purely from a sense of curiosity as to why someone would apparently feel that technology can advance too quickly. It's not unobvious, I grant you, but a rather unobjectionable query to my mind.
Interestingly, it would appear you do care enough about my opinion - or perhaps that of other forum denizens? - to respond in a way you apparently consider to be "clever". Feel free to ignore me -- really, I can take it! I mean, I'm sure I'll probably suffer a couple of seconds of heartbreak sometime around, say, 2020, but I'll survive.
Oh and "thought process" - ROTFL - lovely!