themadrussian
Mar 18, 12:38 AM
And your point is?
You said public perception overrides performance. I believe that in your case, specifically with the Inspire, that you are incorrect. The iPhone 4 is absolutely capable of outperforming the Inspire, especially in upload speeds. Theoretically the Inspire should trounce the iPhone 4 in download speeds but I have yet to see a speedtest or review that shows its download speeds at any level which the iPhone cannot match (over real world HSPA 7.2 speeds, which are consistently in the neighborhood or 3-6 Mbps depending on location and network congestion). The fastest Inspire 4G test I've seen was 4.5 Mbps, a download speed that the iPhone 4 reaches with extreme ease.
There are intangible elements involved in smartphone operating system preference and of course, people should buy what makes them happy. The fact is, people like the way iOS works. A lot of people do. There's a reason it's widely emulated. There are advantages and disadvantages to every phone and every OS - the iPhone 4 lacks some features that some people would value greatly (removable storage, replaceable battery, larger screen, hardware keyboard, OTA OS updates, ability to install applications from any site/APK) but personally (and this is key here, personally) I prefer its overall experience to that of Android and WP7. I have spent a great deal of time using an Android phone (HTC Droid Incredible) on a regular basis, as well as occasional use of an HTC HD7 (WP7), and I can say firmly that iOS and the iPhone 4 provide the best combination of high quality hardware (and superior battery life) and simple, efficient, and fast software.
My point is - it's not some mass-media brainwashing that makes people like (or even love) their iPhones. They are very nice phones running a very nice, mature operating system.
You said public perception overrides performance. I believe that in your case, specifically with the Inspire, that you are incorrect. The iPhone 4 is absolutely capable of outperforming the Inspire, especially in upload speeds. Theoretically the Inspire should trounce the iPhone 4 in download speeds but I have yet to see a speedtest or review that shows its download speeds at any level which the iPhone cannot match (over real world HSPA 7.2 speeds, which are consistently in the neighborhood or 3-6 Mbps depending on location and network congestion). The fastest Inspire 4G test I've seen was 4.5 Mbps, a download speed that the iPhone 4 reaches with extreme ease.
There are intangible elements involved in smartphone operating system preference and of course, people should buy what makes them happy. The fact is, people like the way iOS works. A lot of people do. There's a reason it's widely emulated. There are advantages and disadvantages to every phone and every OS - the iPhone 4 lacks some features that some people would value greatly (removable storage, replaceable battery, larger screen, hardware keyboard, OTA OS updates, ability to install applications from any site/APK) but personally (and this is key here, personally) I prefer its overall experience to that of Android and WP7. I have spent a great deal of time using an Android phone (HTC Droid Incredible) on a regular basis, as well as occasional use of an HTC HD7 (WP7), and I can say firmly that iOS and the iPhone 4 provide the best combination of high quality hardware (and superior battery life) and simple, efficient, and fast software.
My point is - it's not some mass-media brainwashing that makes people like (or even love) their iPhones. They are very nice phones running a very nice, mature operating system.
baummer
Mar 17, 11:34 AM
Go back and pay the balance. Explain what happened. At least try to pay what you OWE. What you've done is essentially theft, even moreso by the fact that you know how much it costs and know how much you paid.
KnightWRX
Mar 10, 04:34 AM
Umm, a touch screen on a computer like that is really stupid because if your using it solidly for more than 1 hour your arms would fall off :rolleyes:
Funny how before Steve said that, you would have been one to repeatedly ask for a touch screen iMac. ;)
I just look to Steve to see the trends in posting on Macrumors. Whatever the guy says, it means it will become defacto opinion on this site.
Funny how before Steve said that, you would have been one to repeatedly ask for a touch screen iMac. ;)
I just look to Steve to see the trends in posting on Macrumors. Whatever the guy says, it means it will become defacto opinion on this site.
Met
May 4, 12:16 AM
As Android has gained in popularity, however, things have begun to tighten up, with Google recently exerting control (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/31/google-tightening-control-over-android-as-fragmentation-increases/) in an attempt to reduce fragmentation in what has long been billed as an open system available for tweaking and customization by any and all who wish to deploy hardware utilizing the platform.
I wish people would stop making a big deal about this rule that has existed from the beginning of Android. It has ALWAYS been there; it's not something new! Google implemented this for OEM's that want EARLY access to the code and OEM's that want access to Google's closed sources apps, such as the Market and other Google apps for Android.
I wish people would stop making a big deal about this rule that has existed from the beginning of Android. It has ALWAYS been there; it's not something new! Google implemented this for OEM's that want EARLY access to the code and OEM's that want access to Google's closed sources apps, such as the Market and other Google apps for Android.
ChazUK
Apr 5, 03:53 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.3; en-gb; Nexus S Build/GRI40) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)
As a showcase of ads it can't be bad can it? I bet it'll be useful to some out there and is good advertising for the iAd service.
This app isn't hurting anyone.
As a showcase of ads it can't be bad can it? I bet it'll be useful to some out there and is good advertising for the iAd service.
This app isn't hurting anyone.
goober1223
Apr 6, 09:38 AM
And what was the motivation of the third party app makers? To make a fast buck out of serving ads to people more interested in the ad than the product. That is bad for advertisers and probably the real reason the app was rejected.
Who know whether clicks inside this app count as regular impressions? Unlike any third party, Apple is in a position to refund any advertisers for clicks on these ads. If they are doing that then I don't see anything wrong with them releasing this niche product.
I see your point, but I think that it's quite uncharitable to question the motives of individuals but let apple have a pass. They are in the position to do whatever they want, and there's no way that they WOULD reimburse those whose apps were rejected for the same function, but my point is that they shouldn't have rejected those apps at all. It's hypocritical of them to reject an app for a reason, and then when they get desperate for their iAd program to catch on more with advertisers (which apparently aren't as excited for the platform as Apple had hoped) they change their mind and create their own app.
And besides, an ad impression is an ad impression. The only iAds that I click on are accidental. If people want to download an app to see what an iAd looks like, they are also getting the best of what the advertisers had hoped for: the chance to make somebody want to use their product. They pay for the option of changing somebody's mind, not to actually do it. They pay to put the advertisement in partial view. Not to actually sell products directly.
It doesn't matter who makes the app, if they are putting the ads in front of people, they deserve the money. That goes for Apple or any of the several individuals that have already created such apps.
Who know whether clicks inside this app count as regular impressions? Unlike any third party, Apple is in a position to refund any advertisers for clicks on these ads. If they are doing that then I don't see anything wrong with them releasing this niche product.
I see your point, but I think that it's quite uncharitable to question the motives of individuals but let apple have a pass. They are in the position to do whatever they want, and there's no way that they WOULD reimburse those whose apps were rejected for the same function, but my point is that they shouldn't have rejected those apps at all. It's hypocritical of them to reject an app for a reason, and then when they get desperate for their iAd program to catch on more with advertisers (which apparently aren't as excited for the platform as Apple had hoped) they change their mind and create their own app.
And besides, an ad impression is an ad impression. The only iAds that I click on are accidental. If people want to download an app to see what an iAd looks like, they are also getting the best of what the advertisers had hoped for: the chance to make somebody want to use their product. They pay for the option of changing somebody's mind, not to actually do it. They pay to put the advertisement in partial view. Not to actually sell products directly.
It doesn't matter who makes the app, if they are putting the ads in front of people, they deserve the money. That goes for Apple or any of the several individuals that have already created such apps.
Renverse
Apr 11, 03:19 PM
As an Apple user, I'm thrilled that I'm not afflicted with the need to put down Windows in order to boost my ego.
I never quite understood what made people do this. I'm buying my first Mac, some of my friends already have one, and I told them I was going to dual-boot Windows 7.
Their reaction? Fanboy outcries. Invalid arguments about Windows, and how it's "trash", while I'm absolutely sure that they haven't touched Windows since XP, or Vista. I can't stand people like that.
I never quite understood what made people do this. I'm buying my first Mac, some of my friends already have one, and I told them I was going to dual-boot Windows 7.
Their reaction? Fanboy outcries. Invalid arguments about Windows, and how it's "trash", while I'm absolutely sure that they haven't touched Windows since XP, or Vista. I can't stand people like that.
twoodcc
Apr 13, 06:13 PM
Oh yeah thanks to your help in getting the SMP client and giving the GPU client a go, I am now in the top 20 producers. Not bad considering when a few years back I had only an iBook and I was producing 48 points a day and did that for over a year!
I don't know how long I will be able to sustain that rate though might have to drop back.
yeah no problem.
well just put up those numbers for as long as you can. our team can use the points, and of course for the cause
I don't know how long I will be able to sustain that rate though might have to drop back.
yeah no problem.
well just put up those numbers for as long as you can. our team can use the points, and of course for the cause
paolo-
Apr 30, 01:12 AM
Don't really see the point of making OSX look like something that was designed to be used with a touch interface when they specifically said there would be no mac device with a touch screen.
Good thing they are changing it up, I hope we don't get an orange faux-cuir iCal. I can just see what great inspiration that'll be to so many great designers of the App Store :rolleyes:
Good thing they are changing it up, I hope we don't get an orange faux-cuir iCal. I can just see what great inspiration that'll be to so many great designers of the App Store :rolleyes:
-hh
Oct 19, 10:16 AM
The market share (and Princeton report) are favorable news for the Mac platform and for Apple.
But it is interesting to read this from Gartner, in the light that this very same Company is also in the news right now for their "Macs should be made by Dell" splash (actual paper was "Apple Should License the Mac to Dell")
In conjunction with this articles observation that Dell's PC marketshare has been sliding (lost worldwide #1 to HP, etc), along with business reports that aren't rosey on Dell's margins (nor their get well plan, which isn't working), the newsfolk who picked up on Gartner really got their headline wrong. It really should have been IMO:
"Dell sliding bad - needs rescue in form of Mac licence from Apple".
In said report (the other one, not this one) Gartner suggested that 'Apple should concentrate on what it does best - create software - and make use of Dell's production and distribution infrastructure.' In this report, there's not a peep of such 'black clouds on the horizon' for Apple ... must be two different guys in the Gartner shop :)
Quite interesting, since the bottom line right now is that the Mac Pro is known to be less expensive than the Dell equivalent, for what does that suggest about expertise in cutting deals with Intel, and efficiently running production & distrubution?
The reality is that Apple generally contracts out much of their manufacturing, true. However, so does Dell. As such, why should Apple bother to pay to go through Dell? That's called using a "Middle Man" and this intermediate step would increase costs, which would then either lower Apple's unit profits, or force them to raise prices ... which hearkens the 'Macs cost more' paradigm.
This is why Gartner's suggestion seems to be more aimed to help Dell through their current fiscal troubles but does not help Apple in any meaningful way at this time.
Perhaps Apple will need Dell for access to Dell's assemblers, but that would only occur when Apple's total market share gets huge - say exceeds 33%. Barring a Vista-catastrophy, at the current rate of market share growth, we're still more than a year or two away from having to cross that bridge, which ironically gives Michael Dell plenty of time to become more retrospective and apologetic about inflammatory comments he has made of Apple in the past.
-hh
PS: if you look more closely at Apple's 3Q numbers, you'll see that desktop sales were relatively flat: the growth was in laptops.
But it is interesting to read this from Gartner, in the light that this very same Company is also in the news right now for their "Macs should be made by Dell" splash (actual paper was "Apple Should License the Mac to Dell")
In conjunction with this articles observation that Dell's PC marketshare has been sliding (lost worldwide #1 to HP, etc), along with business reports that aren't rosey on Dell's margins (nor their get well plan, which isn't working), the newsfolk who picked up on Gartner really got their headline wrong. It really should have been IMO:
"Dell sliding bad - needs rescue in form of Mac licence from Apple".
In said report (the other one, not this one) Gartner suggested that 'Apple should concentrate on what it does best - create software - and make use of Dell's production and distribution infrastructure.' In this report, there's not a peep of such 'black clouds on the horizon' for Apple ... must be two different guys in the Gartner shop :)
Quite interesting, since the bottom line right now is that the Mac Pro is known to be less expensive than the Dell equivalent, for what does that suggest about expertise in cutting deals with Intel, and efficiently running production & distrubution?
The reality is that Apple generally contracts out much of their manufacturing, true. However, so does Dell. As such, why should Apple bother to pay to go through Dell? That's called using a "Middle Man" and this intermediate step would increase costs, which would then either lower Apple's unit profits, or force them to raise prices ... which hearkens the 'Macs cost more' paradigm.
This is why Gartner's suggestion seems to be more aimed to help Dell through their current fiscal troubles but does not help Apple in any meaningful way at this time.
Perhaps Apple will need Dell for access to Dell's assemblers, but that would only occur when Apple's total market share gets huge - say exceeds 33%. Barring a Vista-catastrophy, at the current rate of market share growth, we're still more than a year or two away from having to cross that bridge, which ironically gives Michael Dell plenty of time to become more retrospective and apologetic about inflammatory comments he has made of Apple in the past.
-hh
PS: if you look more closely at Apple's 3Q numbers, you'll see that desktop sales were relatively flat: the growth was in laptops.
davepoint
Aug 14, 01:29 PM
the world sucks
ziggyonice
May 3, 11:54 PM
I got chills.
Nice work, Apple! Now do the same thing to your iPhone ads.
(And Mac ads, for that matter.)
Nice work, Apple! Now do the same thing to your iPhone ads.
(And Mac ads, for that matter.)
MindlessJD
Mar 28, 02:43 PM
I can't see how people can vote this negative...
The App Stores are Apple's thing. Why can't they award the best apps on those stores?
Seems like a good idea to me. :)
The App Stores are Apple's thing. Why can't they award the best apps on those stores?
Seems like a good idea to me. :)
MagnusVonMagnum
May 1, 07:55 PM
Too bad they don't rethink/switch back their changes to Spaces.... UGH. :(
Because it took them 7 years to get it right.
Does that mean it took Apple 10 years to get OSX right? :p
Because it took them 7 years to get it right.
Does that mean it took Apple 10 years to get OSX right? :p
abhimat.gautam
May 3, 11:52 PM
Great ad, but the music seemed to fit completely with the "We Believe" ad and not really with this one.
crees!
Oct 10, 04:28 PM
Just bring it! That's all. Bring it!
b0r3dguy
Apr 26, 01:43 AM
Screen size looks just fine. Large devices like the EVO with its 4.3" screen is TOO large. I hope this will come out sooner instead of later.
QuarterSwede
Oct 12, 08:26 AM
I'm not sure I understand the people who (a) don't believe this is coming soon, or (b) don't believe it's coming at all because "people won't use it - it's too small." That's garbage.
Not everything Apple releases has to be an "earth shattering" revolution. Some stuff can just have a niche market and be better than what's out there. They're in it to make money first and foremost. And frankly, if people could carry an iPod-sized object, with wireless headphones, and that could play widescreen movies on a 4" or so screen (AND, oh by the way, carry their iTunes library to boot), it would be the death of the portable DVD player.
No, that's not a huge market, or a cash cow by any means. Nor is it a revolutionary product. But at the end of the day, it's pretty damned cool which means most of us will buy it (despite our attempts not to), and it's certainly another cha-ching to add to the list for Apple.
That's exactly what happened with the iPod. It was just another mp3 player but had an interface that was very simple to use, plus it looked much nicer than the competition.
Not everything Apple releases has to be an "earth shattering" revolution. Some stuff can just have a niche market and be better than what's out there. They're in it to make money first and foremost. And frankly, if people could carry an iPod-sized object, with wireless headphones, and that could play widescreen movies on a 4" or so screen (AND, oh by the way, carry their iTunes library to boot), it would be the death of the portable DVD player.
No, that's not a huge market, or a cash cow by any means. Nor is it a revolutionary product. But at the end of the day, it's pretty damned cool which means most of us will buy it (despite our attempts not to), and it's certainly another cha-ching to add to the list for Apple.
That's exactly what happened with the iPod. It was just another mp3 player but had an interface that was very simple to use, plus it looked much nicer than the competition.
blonde redhead
Aug 8, 06:19 AM
umm no neither is lying. They both are using the same panel but DIFFERENT backlights. Dell back lights are brighter so it allows for a larger contrast ratio and more cd/m2
edit: The panel is pretty much just a color filter. It takes the white light from the back light and filters it colors for what you see on the screen (it more complex than that but it is the simplest way to explain it)
Sorry to say this, but you're simplifying things too much. Just because a monitor has the same size/resolution, doesn't mean that the LCD sources are identical.
FYI, Apple is using LCDs from Lg.Philips, Dell's LCDs come from Samsung. As a matter of fact, the 30" from Samsung for example is an exact copy of the Lg.Philips panel that they developed for Apple: same module dimensions (even fixation holes), electrical interface, etc.
Because Dell is doing copy-paste, some of the specs are indeed identical. However, Apple displays use IPS (in-plane switching) LCD technology, while Samsung uses PVA (patterned vertical alignment). Consequence of this is that optical specs are slightly different:
- higher brightness for Dell (because of higher LCD transmission of PVA)
- higher contrast for Dell (but only perpendicular: contrast decreases very rapidly if you look off-axis at PVA-based panels)
- superior color stability for Apple (large color shift with viewing angle for PVA, especially for grey tones)
The latter characteristic is why Apple chooses for Lg.Philips, and why Apple displays are better for graphical applications, despite the slightly lower specifications on paper.
edit: The panel is pretty much just a color filter. It takes the white light from the back light and filters it colors for what you see on the screen (it more complex than that but it is the simplest way to explain it)
Sorry to say this, but you're simplifying things too much. Just because a monitor has the same size/resolution, doesn't mean that the LCD sources are identical.
FYI, Apple is using LCDs from Lg.Philips, Dell's LCDs come from Samsung. As a matter of fact, the 30" from Samsung for example is an exact copy of the Lg.Philips panel that they developed for Apple: same module dimensions (even fixation holes), electrical interface, etc.
Because Dell is doing copy-paste, some of the specs are indeed identical. However, Apple displays use IPS (in-plane switching) LCD technology, while Samsung uses PVA (patterned vertical alignment). Consequence of this is that optical specs are slightly different:
- higher brightness for Dell (because of higher LCD transmission of PVA)
- higher contrast for Dell (but only perpendicular: contrast decreases very rapidly if you look off-axis at PVA-based panels)
- superior color stability for Apple (large color shift with viewing angle for PVA, especially for grey tones)
The latter characteristic is why Apple chooses for Lg.Philips, and why Apple displays are better for graphical applications, despite the slightly lower specifications on paper.
gugy
Aug 8, 02:14 PM
I think the new specs and price cuts are good. I'm so tempted in buying one 23" with a new Mac Pro..
But somehow I think that Apple will come up with a new Mac Pro (new case enclosure) with new lineup of Apple Cinema Display in Spring 2007. Does anyone agree with me?..
Boy..I really don't know what to do now..
If you really need it now, buy it.
I don't think any major cosmetic design on the enclosure is happening anytime soon as well as the displays. The current designs are just beautiful. Plus the extra space now for hard drives and optical drive just make me think Apple will keep the same look for awhile.
Only in 2008 maybe they will update IMHO.
But somehow I think that Apple will come up with a new Mac Pro (new case enclosure) with new lineup of Apple Cinema Display in Spring 2007. Does anyone agree with me?..
Boy..I really don't know what to do now..
If you really need it now, buy it.
I don't think any major cosmetic design on the enclosure is happening anytime soon as well as the displays. The current designs are just beautiful. Plus the extra space now for hard drives and optical drive just make me think Apple will keep the same look for awhile.
Only in 2008 maybe they will update IMHO.
Nekbeth
Apr 27, 10:25 AM
I see where you going wlh99, and don't worry.. my full intention is to learn, not to get code from all of you. Many people in this thread underestimate my knowledge of objective C (and I understand why, I got lost with the pointers). I have 2 1/2 months since I started development and had 0 idea of the language or programming (I was a Pastry Chef actually :D, which is the name of my first app).
Believe me when I tell you that I know what's going on with my code. I'm aware that If you release an object that it doesn't exist you'll get an exception every time.
Making it work is a lot less important than knowing how to do it, for future work.
Back to the Code, let me go give it try.. b-back
UPDATE**
Ok, it doesn't crash now but timer still won't restart. I'm going to create another timer object (not pointer, I'll use the same pointer). I get this idea that I can't reuse or reset the same timer over again (invalidating and releasing it only pauses the timer). Wish me luck :)
Believe me when I tell you that I know what's going on with my code. I'm aware that If you release an object that it doesn't exist you'll get an exception every time.
Making it work is a lot less important than knowing how to do it, for future work.
Back to the Code, let me go give it try.. b-back
UPDATE**
Ok, it doesn't crash now but timer still won't restart. I'm going to create another timer object (not pointer, I'll use the same pointer). I get this idea that I can't reuse or reset the same timer over again (invalidating and releasing it only pauses the timer). Wish me luck :)
Matt-M
Apr 15, 02:33 PM
...or integrate it into the aluminum enclosure on the back. Not knowing metallurgy, I am not sure if there is a way to turn aluminum to a receptive material or could the case be of an aluminum alloy to allow reception?
Actually, Aluminum is a good conductor and makes an excellent antenna material. Almost all television and amateur radio antennas are aluminum.
Why is it a poor idea on a phone? As soon as you touch the case, you ground the antenna and get no reception!
Actually, Aluminum is a good conductor and makes an excellent antenna material. Almost all television and amateur radio antennas are aluminum.
Why is it a poor idea on a phone? As soon as you touch the case, you ground the antenna and get no reception!
Some_Big_Spoon
Sep 26, 01:34 AM
ummmm... may have been said, it's grea that it runs like a normal app now, but hwo do I get it to load from my 1.0 disk to my 12" pb and Macbook? Do I have to shell out again? Where's the love?
!� V �!
Apr 29, 05:40 PM
iCal has taken a turn for the worse. I makes me uneasy. :(