bigandy
Nov 29, 08:27 AM
Universal can want all they want.
Steve ain't giving up $10 to $16 million a quarter to some music bully.
My thoughts exactly. Apple would laugh this out of the building.
Steve ain't giving up $10 to $16 million a quarter to some music bully.
My thoughts exactly. Apple would laugh this out of the building.
aswitcher
Jul 20, 04:55 PM
First rev prices for any such beasts are going to be "excessive"
Grokgod
Jul 28, 03:36 PM
merk850
dont take it back.
I dont think that the difference will be that much, with the new systems.
If your happy with its performance then keep it.
A mild CPU boost isnt all that, and I doubt that the video cards will be upped that much.
I wouldnt take the hit in money lost, cause you can always sell it later down the line and get the lastest and greatest thats really a must buy.
dont take it back.
I dont think that the difference will be that much, with the new systems.
If your happy with its performance then keep it.
A mild CPU boost isnt all that, and I doubt that the video cards will be upped that much.
I wouldnt take the hit in money lost, cause you can always sell it later down the line and get the lastest and greatest thats really a must buy.
afrowq
Apr 10, 12:20 AM
Yes, I agreed there are professionals, but not LOTS of professionals. You don't know, cause... you don't know them, and neither do I. So these "lots" outside of your field of view may or may not be looking to switch. You see the difference, yes?
So you really think it's just a handful of people on Macrumors?
Oh, and people I know.
So, how many do you think? Less than 10? Less than 100? What is your definition of "a lot"? Also please note I never said it was any kind of majority of FCP users or anything like that. I never said it was an industry-wide pandemic, although you'd like to put those words into my mouth as well. You'd also like to paint my claim that "a lot of pros are leaving FCP" as "combative", even though it's not. It's just an observation. I don't know why you're taking it so personally.
So you really think it's just a handful of people on Macrumors?
Oh, and people I know.
So, how many do you think? Less than 10? Less than 100? What is your definition of "a lot"? Also please note I never said it was any kind of majority of FCP users or anything like that. I never said it was an industry-wide pandemic, although you'd like to put those words into my mouth as well. You'd also like to paint my claim that "a lot of pros are leaving FCP" as "combative", even though it's not. It's just an observation. I don't know why you're taking it so personally.
twoodcc
Aug 12, 09:04 PM
I don't really care if you count the Prologues as full releases or not. The fact remains...
GT1 + GT2 + GT3 + GT4 = 46M
...not 57M like you originally, and incorrectly, said.
but you do care. you are pointing out that you care by what you just typed. if you count the prologues, you get over 57M sold.
You brought up sales, not me. And last I checked, objectively, 100 is more than 57, regardless of how you subjectively look at it.
i disagree. let's bring math into the equation, since you seem to have missed it.
100,000,000/15 = 6,666,667.
57,000,000/8 = 7,125,000.
so GT has sold more copies per game.
No, the only thing that adds to is a stat point on the back of the box. I mean, hooray, someone's 87 CRX is in a racing game. YAY!! :rolleyes:
That is the problem with GT these days. Too much fluff, and lacking in the racing. I mean, whatever, they can make whatever kind of game they want. If they want to fill the game with 1000 cars, 800 of which most people never touch, they can do that. To me, though, they are losing what made the series great years ago.
well again this is your opinion. we all have one. i personally think that if someone is into cars, they will care about their car. not everyone can afford the cars in the game, but it might be nice to see that car that you can afford and have in real life in the game. i mean, the game is meant for people into cars.
NO WAY!!! I never knew that. :rolleyes:
just pointing out the facts. are you doing any different?
Sure, but a "Guinness Record" for it? Again, to much fluff.
they have records for everything. like how much cheese you can eat, or whatever. that's what Guinness Records are
No, it is a concept car that Citro�n paraded around at car shows. Lots of concept cars get built with the fake intention of going into production. But you know what? Almost none of them do. This Citro�n is no different.
but the intention of the car was for the game. how do you not see that? specifically for the game. in fact, it's named GT after the game
My point is, he was trying to use GT's high sales as a quantifier of the series greatness. Then, when I showed 2 examples of other racing game series with higher sales, he said they were different types of racing games, and that they don't count. Which is understandable, because they are not the same type of game. But then, ultimately, as I said before, if you don't count those other types of racing games, you're really only comparing GT to Forza, since that is the only other similar game.
But what does that prove? A game series that has been out for almost 13 years has sold more than a similar type of game series that has only been out for a little over 5 years. Big shock there. I'll be the first to admit that Forza isn't even remotely close to as big of a sales hit as the GT series. But, like I've said before, liking a game is a subjective thing, and everyone is entitled to their own choices. But sales are an objective thing, that has no relevance to somethings greatness.
how does sales have no relevance if something is great? so iPhone sales show nothing to how good it is? or iPod sales mean nothing to how well it is? of course it does. you make games to sell. if they don't sell, you stop making games. and then there wouldn't be this thread, b/c there would be no GT5.
GT1 + GT2 + GT3 + GT4 = 46M
...not 57M like you originally, and incorrectly, said.
but you do care. you are pointing out that you care by what you just typed. if you count the prologues, you get over 57M sold.
You brought up sales, not me. And last I checked, objectively, 100 is more than 57, regardless of how you subjectively look at it.
i disagree. let's bring math into the equation, since you seem to have missed it.
100,000,000/15 = 6,666,667.
57,000,000/8 = 7,125,000.
so GT has sold more copies per game.
No, the only thing that adds to is a stat point on the back of the box. I mean, hooray, someone's 87 CRX is in a racing game. YAY!! :rolleyes:
That is the problem with GT these days. Too much fluff, and lacking in the racing. I mean, whatever, they can make whatever kind of game they want. If they want to fill the game with 1000 cars, 800 of which most people never touch, they can do that. To me, though, they are losing what made the series great years ago.
well again this is your opinion. we all have one. i personally think that if someone is into cars, they will care about their car. not everyone can afford the cars in the game, but it might be nice to see that car that you can afford and have in real life in the game. i mean, the game is meant for people into cars.
NO WAY!!! I never knew that. :rolleyes:
just pointing out the facts. are you doing any different?
Sure, but a "Guinness Record" for it? Again, to much fluff.
they have records for everything. like how much cheese you can eat, or whatever. that's what Guinness Records are
No, it is a concept car that Citro�n paraded around at car shows. Lots of concept cars get built with the fake intention of going into production. But you know what? Almost none of them do. This Citro�n is no different.
but the intention of the car was for the game. how do you not see that? specifically for the game. in fact, it's named GT after the game
My point is, he was trying to use GT's high sales as a quantifier of the series greatness. Then, when I showed 2 examples of other racing game series with higher sales, he said they were different types of racing games, and that they don't count. Which is understandable, because they are not the same type of game. But then, ultimately, as I said before, if you don't count those other types of racing games, you're really only comparing GT to Forza, since that is the only other similar game.
But what does that prove? A game series that has been out for almost 13 years has sold more than a similar type of game series that has only been out for a little over 5 years. Big shock there. I'll be the first to admit that Forza isn't even remotely close to as big of a sales hit as the GT series. But, like I've said before, liking a game is a subjective thing, and everyone is entitled to their own choices. But sales are an objective thing, that has no relevance to somethings greatness.
how does sales have no relevance if something is great? so iPhone sales show nothing to how good it is? or iPod sales mean nothing to how well it is? of course it does. you make games to sell. if they don't sell, you stop making games. and then there wouldn't be this thread, b/c there would be no GT5.
nerveosu
Aug 7, 04:23 PM
It says somewhere on the apple web site that macs with G3s will be supported with Leopard.. any word on specific computers that will be supported? I have a iMac DV 400 G3 that I am curious about.
iMikeT
Apr 7, 10:22 PM
Having once worked for BB, their behavior in this matter does not surprise me. They got what was coming to them.
Chundles
Jul 20, 08:14 AM
I wonder what they're going to call them, Quad sounds cool but "Octa or Octo" just sounds a bit silly.
MacPro8?
The Mactopus??
MacPro8?
The Mactopus??
ender1122333
Apr 5, 08:47 PM
This could make me very happy.
Any news on a Logic studio refresh happening any time soon?
Any news on a Logic studio refresh happening any time soon?
lieb39
Aug 7, 06:49 PM
...
If time machine lets you preview the contents of documents before you restore them, instead of going restore... is it that one? nope, try this one? nope... ah here we go found it. then hot damm thats a slick new feature
Well it looked like just a normal finder window in the Quicktime on the Apple site, so I'm sure you could open it, explore it, all that, before restoring..
Cheers!
If time machine lets you preview the contents of documents before you restore them, instead of going restore... is it that one? nope, try this one? nope... ah here we go found it. then hot damm thats a slick new feature
Well it looked like just a normal finder window in the Quicktime on the Apple site, so I'm sure you could open it, explore it, all that, before restoring..
Cheers!
Deefuzz
Aug 11, 08:20 PM
Using TimeMachine, Steve is going to release it two years ago.
LOL...the gem of the thread! Thanks for the laugh :D
LOL...the gem of the thread! Thanks for the laugh :D
Willis
Sep 13, 07:37 PM
One could run a Folding@Home process on each core :D
ooooor.... use multiple cores to do one fold... 4 days like my g5 would cut down to like 16 hours... thats mental. awesome... but god damn mental!!
ooooor.... use multiple cores to do one fold... 4 days like my g5 would cut down to like 16 hours... thats mental. awesome... but god damn mental!!
Mattie Num Nums
Apr 20, 11:32 AM
I'd say even the icon grid claim is reaching. The pictures shown all show the Android application drawer. The actual home screen on Galaxy S devices, what shows up after unlocking, is not the icon grid with a dock. You have to dig into the phone to get to the grid of icons, which frankly again has been shown to be a pretty standard phone UI. Older Palm/Sony models had the "icon grid" UIs in their phones also. :
http://www.mobiledia.com/reviews/sonyericsson/t610/images/front.jpg[/tim]
[timg]http://www.mobileincanada.com/images/unlock/att-palm-treo-600.jpg
Let's face it, the "icon grid" has been a UI for quite a while now :
http://www.computerhope.com/jargon/p/progman.jpg
http://i55.tinypic.com/jzzc53.png
http://www.guidebookgallery.org/pics/gui/system/managers/filemanager/cde15solaris9.png
I pointed out the Grid layout many times in the other thread and was told that wasn't part of the lawsuit. If it is than Apple isn't just stretching... they are being idiotic.
Another thing to mention to is that Androids/Samsungs homepage may look similar but is in fact a lot different. When was the last time you could place a widget on the home screen of iOS?
http://www.mobiledia.com/reviews/sonyericsson/t610/images/front.jpg[/tim]
[timg]http://www.mobileincanada.com/images/unlock/att-palm-treo-600.jpg
Let's face it, the "icon grid" has been a UI for quite a while now :
http://www.computerhope.com/jargon/p/progman.jpg
http://i55.tinypic.com/jzzc53.png
http://www.guidebookgallery.org/pics/gui/system/managers/filemanager/cde15solaris9.png
I pointed out the Grid layout many times in the other thread and was told that wasn't part of the lawsuit. If it is than Apple isn't just stretching... they are being idiotic.
Another thing to mention to is that Androids/Samsungs homepage may look similar but is in fact a lot different. When was the last time you could place a widget on the home screen of iOS?
Xian Zhu Xuande
Mar 31, 03:02 PM
This is a smart move. It had to happen sooner or later.
John Gruber would eat Steve Job's ***** if he could. His opinion is extremely biased.
Except... he's right. This was a bait-and-switch from Google. I don't think it was a bad move for the future of the platform, but it does render a lot of their PR commentary through history as bogus. As for Gruber, you clearly don't like him, but while he is certainly a fan of Apple he is usually correct.
John Gruber would eat Steve Job's ***** if he could. His opinion is extremely biased.
Except... he's right. This was a bait-and-switch from Google. I don't think it was a bad move for the future of the platform, but it does render a lot of their PR commentary through history as bogus. As for Gruber, you clearly don't like him, but while he is certainly a fan of Apple he is usually correct.
krcbkidz
Mar 22, 05:07 PM
You obviously don't know much about samsung. Samsung makes RAM and CPU that apple uses in iphone/ipad. Possibly LCD too. A4 was definitely made by samsung. It's pretty certain A5 is also made by samsung, despite rumors TSMC will make them for apple.
Samsung being samsung, they can match Apple in price in tablet forever (well maybe not forever but for a long time) even without making much profit (not that they would do it). Samsung is HUGE. They have plenty of other stuff they can sell with profit.
I know about Samsung & the company's size. Yes, Samsung does manufacture parts for Apple; the parts they manufacture are according to Apple's R&D specifications & are designed by/for Apple only. Apple holds the license for specific parts (ie. the A5/A4 chip designs). Therefore even though Samsung manufactures the parts, they cannot put these parts in other hardware unless deemed so by Apple. Apple pays Samsung a fee to utilize their production facilities, which is a profit for Samsung. This profit is small compared to the margin of parts/production to MSRP that Apple reaps on each iPad. Apple controls hardware development, OS development, & UI development by keeping everything in house. Samsung utilizes a third party OS, & third party processor technology. I don't feel their user experience is as good as it could be. Samsung ultimately controls the manufacturing of the Tab but they leave money on the table as opposed to Apple's business model.
Samsung being samsung, they can match Apple in price in tablet forever (well maybe not forever but for a long time) even without making much profit (not that they would do it). Samsung is HUGE. They have plenty of other stuff they can sell with profit.
I know about Samsung & the company's size. Yes, Samsung does manufacture parts for Apple; the parts they manufacture are according to Apple's R&D specifications & are designed by/for Apple only. Apple holds the license for specific parts (ie. the A5/A4 chip designs). Therefore even though Samsung manufactures the parts, they cannot put these parts in other hardware unless deemed so by Apple. Apple pays Samsung a fee to utilize their production facilities, which is a profit for Samsung. This profit is small compared to the margin of parts/production to MSRP that Apple reaps on each iPad. Apple controls hardware development, OS development, & UI development by keeping everything in house. Samsung utilizes a third party OS, & third party processor technology. I don't feel their user experience is as good as it could be. Samsung ultimately controls the manufacturing of the Tab but they leave money on the table as opposed to Apple's business model.
aaronsullivan
Apr 11, 11:43 AM
To me this means 4G and Verizon/AT&T hardware convergence. Both, good news.
My biggest concern is the next iOS version. Will it be delayed to coincide with the hardware? With little info, I'd guess/hope no. If it's impressive enough it can fight competition using software enhanced iPhone 4 for awhile. Without the big iOS update seems a long stretch to 2012.
Either way, I'll personally be sticking with my iPhone 4 'til late June 2012 anyway for contract reasons.
How about this for the iPhone 5
5 4 3 2 1
iPhone 5, 4G (4 cameras), 3D, 2 carriers, 1 easy choice.
Yeah, that's why I'm not in marketing. :o/
My biggest concern is the next iOS version. Will it be delayed to coincide with the hardware? With little info, I'd guess/hope no. If it's impressive enough it can fight competition using software enhanced iPhone 4 for awhile. Without the big iOS update seems a long stretch to 2012.
Either way, I'll personally be sticking with my iPhone 4 'til late June 2012 anyway for contract reasons.
How about this for the iPhone 5
5 4 3 2 1
iPhone 5, 4G (4 cameras), 3D, 2 carriers, 1 easy choice.
Yeah, that's why I'm not in marketing. :o/
rovex
Apr 11, 02:30 PM
Does Arn write every single article on this forum?
cmaier
Apr 19, 02:35 PM
Yes. People here are failing to understand the difference between traditional patents that we usually hear about here, and design patents. I believe what Apple is suing over is infringed design patents.
7 utility patents and 3 design patents, plus 3 trade dress registrations and a bunch (7? i forget) trademark registrations, plus some unregistered state-law unfair competition/trademark stuff.
7 utility patents and 3 design patents, plus 3 trade dress registrations and a bunch (7? i forget) trademark registrations, plus some unregistered state-law unfair competition/trademark stuff.
princealfie
Nov 29, 11:26 AM
I really don't harbor any hope that this could really be considered as royalty payment by the courts, it was just a little fantasy.
The real implication is on the moral front. You mentioned "group think" and I think that is the real danger for the record labels. If enough people were to convince themselves that the record label has grabbed enough money upfront, then they could step across the moral line that keeps them from piracy.
It's not law enforcement, or the actions of RIAA, that prevents the vast majority from crossing the line into piracy, it's their own built-in moral objection to it.
If the record labels remove this moral hurdle through their own actions, then there are not enough police officers, federal agencies, or private enforcement groups to even begin to stem the resulting piracy wave.
Uhhh... right. :eek:
The real implication is on the moral front. You mentioned "group think" and I think that is the real danger for the record labels. If enough people were to convince themselves that the record label has grabbed enough money upfront, then they could step across the moral line that keeps them from piracy.
It's not law enforcement, or the actions of RIAA, that prevents the vast majority from crossing the line into piracy, it's their own built-in moral objection to it.
If the record labels remove this moral hurdle through their own actions, then there are not enough police officers, federal agencies, or private enforcement groups to even begin to stem the resulting piracy wave.
Uhhh... right. :eek:
robbyx
Apr 25, 04:29 PM
Normally I would argue that the customer doesn't have a right to a lot of things. But in this case - if you bought a device and it is tracking you (I'm not saying it is or it isn't) - the customer does have a right to know.
This (sort of) reminds me of how now your are legally allowed to get a free credit report once a year to determine whether or not it's correct. Companies used to make a fortune charging for something that people, inherently had the right to know.
Where does these RIGHTS you speak of come from? Frankly, I don't know if it's a right or not, but I hear the word "right" used a lot these days by people who have no idea what it means.
Much ado about nothing.
This (sort of) reminds me of how now your are legally allowed to get a free credit report once a year to determine whether or not it's correct. Companies used to make a fortune charging for something that people, inherently had the right to know.
Where does these RIGHTS you speak of come from? Frankly, I don't know if it's a right or not, but I hear the word "right" used a lot these days by people who have no idea what it means.
Much ado about nothing.
Details Matter
Mar 31, 03:48 PM
Let the Apple fanboys begin patting each other on the back, and taking something and running wild with it.
By the end of this thread, it'll be impossible to decipher what the original story was about.
Ironic. You took the thread off-topic to complain about people taking the thread off-topic. Thanks for the giggle.
By the end of this thread, it'll be impossible to decipher what the original story was about.
Ironic. You took the thread off-topic to complain about people taking the thread off-topic. Thanks for the giggle.
tigres
Apr 8, 06:37 AM
Isn't apple as equally guilty of this exact accusation against BB? Holding stock back until the next day; or is the difference that they sell everything they have available from the previous day.
iMeowbot
Sep 19, 08:43 AM
All you people who keep whining about "But I want 64 bit!!!" need to step back and think about what possible benefit a 64-bit system will give you. Those of you who need to address more than 4 gigs of RAM are excused. The rest of you, tell me WHY you need 64-bit computing.
There is a general unease about the AMD64 instruction set. We are already seeing a few programs that only run on Intel Macs. What's to stop developers from ignoring the x86 target in new software, especially on the high end, given the short sales cycle of x86-only Macs? The Mac Pro didn't even have a 32-bit version.
There is a general unease about the AMD64 instruction set. We are already seeing a few programs that only run on Intel Macs. What's to stop developers from ignoring the x86 target in new software, especially on the high end, given the short sales cycle of x86-only Macs? The Mac Pro didn't even have a 32-bit version.
asiayeah
Aug 25, 06:36 PM
Apple support for me has been nothing but great. This year my household has bought an intel iMac and a macbook. Being revision A I was expecting some sort of problems with them at some point and the problems did come. First I had some serious video problems on the iMac. So, I made an appt using Concierge and it was right on time. So, the genius looked at the problem and in ten mintues told me I needed to have the logic board replaced. So, I left it at the store and picked it up 2 days later. I wasn't glad that I had problems with the mac but their support was great.
Now the macbook was having the dreaded problem of turning off at random times. This one was a bit more tricky. I made my appt just as I did for the iMac and saw the genius. She had to replicate the problem of it turning off at random before she could put it into their system in order to be fixed. Thankfully it turned off within a couple of minutes so she put in the request to have the logic board replaced. However, it took 4 days this time to get it fixed. While I would have loved to have had it fixed in the same time it took to fix the iMac I realized that just wasn't in the cards. It has been fine ever since. Although, a few weeks later the battery started to buldge but they replaced it right away and we were only at the genius bar for around 15 minutes to get a new battery.
After hearing the horror story of my best friend trying to get his Dell fixed I was certainly happy about my experience with Apple. (as far as the dell story goes he still doesn't have it replaced because Dell lost his notebook after he sent it back to them and they are trying to tell him that it was somehow his fault) The people at the genius bar were excellent with good customer service skills. While I realize that some have had experiences that weren't quite as good I thought I would point out that some of our experiences with Apple support have been excellent.
I think you are in the States, aren't you?
Now the macbook was having the dreaded problem of turning off at random times. This one was a bit more tricky. I made my appt just as I did for the iMac and saw the genius. She had to replicate the problem of it turning off at random before she could put it into their system in order to be fixed. Thankfully it turned off within a couple of minutes so she put in the request to have the logic board replaced. However, it took 4 days this time to get it fixed. While I would have loved to have had it fixed in the same time it took to fix the iMac I realized that just wasn't in the cards. It has been fine ever since. Although, a few weeks later the battery started to buldge but they replaced it right away and we were only at the genius bar for around 15 minutes to get a new battery.
After hearing the horror story of my best friend trying to get his Dell fixed I was certainly happy about my experience with Apple. (as far as the dell story goes he still doesn't have it replaced because Dell lost his notebook after he sent it back to them and they are trying to tell him that it was somehow his fault) The people at the genius bar were excellent with good customer service skills. While I realize that some have had experiences that weren't quite as good I thought I would point out that some of our experiences with Apple support have been excellent.
I think you are in the States, aren't you?
