Leoff
Oct 29, 08:36 AM
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.
To clarify further:
We both agree. Apple is not a Hardware OR Software company. I was simply responding to the earlier rediculous notion that Apple is simply a Hardware company, which both you and I know it isn't. :)
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.
To clarify further:
We both agree. Apple is not a Hardware OR Software company. I was simply responding to the earlier rediculous notion that Apple is simply a Hardware company, which both you and I know it isn't. :)
KnightWRX
Mar 25, 06:21 AM
Happy BD keynote?!
They didn't even put up a small square on their Mac sub-page.
I do hope OS X still has a good 10 years in front of it. The best of both worlds for Unix people.
They didn't even put up a small square on their Mac sub-page.
I do hope OS X still has a good 10 years in front of it. The best of both worlds for Unix people.
Dr Kevorkian94
Sep 28, 06:00 PM
he can control everything from his ipad and his iphone, he will be so happy with the house we cant have. but in all seriousness that is awesome but i wonder if it will be technological, and everything will run on ios. lol
iShater
Jul 28, 12:36 PM
I think the Volt is a success in terms of meeting it's intended design parameters. However, I think the whole notion of the all-electric car and plug-in hybrids are flawed due to our current infrastructure.
As long as we burn fossil fuels to get the electricity, the electric car is just sweeping the fossil fuel/pollution problem under the rug by putting the "dirty" side of power consumption out of sight (back at the power plant). Also, there's no way our current power generation infrastructure could support even a fraction of the population switching to electric cars. California already has rolling blackouts - if people stopped burning gas and switched to electrics, the problem would get drastically worse.
I think electric cars are a dead end for the present...At least until our entire power grid makes large-scale switches to alternative energy, and there is no timeline for that currently. Also, there is currently no guarantee that practical fuel-cell systems will ever be truly affordable or mass-producable. The current offerings are all extremely expensive, proof-of-concept vehicles with short useful lives.
We'd be better off with diesels or diesel hybrids. People don't want to admit it, but those are currently our best options IMO.
I really wish I didn't sound so cynical, but that's the picture as I understand it.
All very valid points. However, keep in mind that even how we get our power varies from state to state. Switching to electric vehicles does need to come hand in hand with a change on not only how we generate electricity, but also how we consume it.
As long as we burn fossil fuels to get the electricity, the electric car is just sweeping the fossil fuel/pollution problem under the rug by putting the "dirty" side of power consumption out of sight (back at the power plant). Also, there's no way our current power generation infrastructure could support even a fraction of the population switching to electric cars. California already has rolling blackouts - if people stopped burning gas and switched to electrics, the problem would get drastically worse.
I think electric cars are a dead end for the present...At least until our entire power grid makes large-scale switches to alternative energy, and there is no timeline for that currently. Also, there is currently no guarantee that practical fuel-cell systems will ever be truly affordable or mass-producable. The current offerings are all extremely expensive, proof-of-concept vehicles with short useful lives.
We'd be better off with diesels or diesel hybrids. People don't want to admit it, but those are currently our best options IMO.
I really wish I didn't sound so cynical, but that's the picture as I understand it.
All very valid points. However, keep in mind that even how we get our power varies from state to state. Switching to electric vehicles does need to come hand in hand with a change on not only how we generate electricity, but also how we consume it.
tjb1
Apr 6, 02:03 PM
I'd be very interested to hear your thoughts on it once you've had a chance to get comfortable with it.
:apple:
I use one of those at work. It's an absolute necessity with CAD work, but it tends to 'walk' around my desk.
Well I dont really have a cad program set up right now but in mastercam and google maps its a little difficult to use. Cant wait to get started in solidworks or inventor with it and hopefully learn how to use the little bugger.
:apple:
I use one of those at work. It's an absolute necessity with CAD work, but it tends to 'walk' around my desk.
Well I dont really have a cad program set up right now but in mastercam and google maps its a little difficult to use. Cant wait to get started in solidworks or inventor with it and hopefully learn how to use the little bugger.
Sedrick
Mar 19, 07:36 AM
Not that they need to change anything, obviously. Keep the same shatter prone design, horrible ergonomics, 3.5" screen and just bolt on the A5 chip and everyone'll still lap it up ;)
This, actually, is my biggest concern: That Apple will just be smug enough to think they don't need to do anything with the design.
This, actually, is my biggest concern: That Apple will just be smug enough to think they don't need to do anything with the design.
CalBoy
Apr 15, 04:21 PM
As I said, I understood the point you were trying to make. But.... you can't take two non-TSA incidents and use those to make a case against the TSA specifically. All you can do is say that increased security, similar to what the TSA does, can be shown to not catch everything. I could just as easily argue that because the two incidents (shoe and underwear bombers) did not occur from TSA screenings then that is proof the TSA methods work. I could, but I won't because we don't really know that is true. Too small a sample to judge.
Well actually we know the TSA methods don't work because both of the incidents were from European airports that mirror what the TSA does. Added to the number of weapons that make it through TSA checkpoints, it's easy to see that the TSA does in fact not work to the extent that it is expected to.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
cd quality lyrics,kesha take
Off kesha album mothers,
Kesha+tik+tok+album+cover
of the sun album cover,
of the sun album cover,
kesha cannibal album cover.
kesha album cover,
in: 2011 New CD#39;s, Ke$ha
album cover, Kesha+youtube
Cannibal album cover,
Ke$ha landed on the scene with
kesha blow album art
Well actually we know the TSA methods don't work because both of the incidents were from European airports that mirror what the TSA does. Added to the number of weapons that make it through TSA checkpoints, it's easy to see that the TSA does in fact not work to the extent that it is expected to.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
guzhogi
Dec 13, 12:31 PM
I'm getting really tired of reading "iPhone on Verizon 4G after Christmas!" rumors on here. WHy is it that every time someone says "Oh, I've heard the iPhone's coming to Verizon in January," MacRumors puts it on the front page or Page 2? Are enough people so totally obsessed with the iPhone, they pee their pants if they don't hear a Verizon iPhone rumor every day/every other day?
TheBobcat
Mar 29, 11:12 AM
This is really exciting!
Too bad we don't have caning here like they do in Singapore. I'll bet if we did little punks like this wouldn't pull this crap.
Too bad we don't have caning here like they do in Singapore. I'll bet if we did little punks like this wouldn't pull this crap.
ranviper
Apr 9, 10:56 AM
http://www.gamesload.no/images/products/Ubisoft/AssassinsCreed_Brotherhood_EN_140.gif
PC Deluxe Edition. Amazing game.
As well as my 750GB Scorpio Black 7200 RPM
http://eshop.macsales.com/imgs/ndesc/owc_express_enclosure/prod_owc-express_diy_slv.jpg
PC Deluxe Edition. Amazing game.
As well as my 750GB Scorpio Black 7200 RPM
http://eshop.macsales.com/imgs/ndesc/owc_express_enclosure/prod_owc-express_diy_slv.jpg
peas
Sep 28, 12:39 PM
what sucks is that academic ve4rsions are not allowed this free update.
what bs. considering i just bought the freakin app not more than 3 weeks ago.
what bs. considering i just bought the freakin app not more than 3 weeks ago.
drsmithy
Oct 5, 02:25 AM
Squarely wrong. Even "The Inquirer" has talked about the vastly superior multitasking AND SMP features of OS X Leopard, as compared to what Vista seems to offer. Damn, even today any version of Windows crawls far behind OS X in that (XP Home didn't even have SMP support in the first place).
The Inquirer is wrong (and it certainly wouldn't be the first time). Not only is Windows's SMP capability ahead of OS X's right now, it's improved even more in Vista. All those improvements in 10.4 regarding SMP ? NT was getting them 7 - 8 years ago.
Oh, and XP Home most certainly *does* support SMP (and seeing as it uses the same kernel as other versions of Windows, it makes better use of multiple CPUs than OS X does).
Windows NT was designed from day one for multiprocessor machines and has been running on them since 1993. It's at least as good as its contemporaries.
The Inquirer is wrong (and it certainly wouldn't be the first time). Not only is Windows's SMP capability ahead of OS X's right now, it's improved even more in Vista. All those improvements in 10.4 regarding SMP ? NT was getting them 7 - 8 years ago.
Oh, and XP Home most certainly *does* support SMP (and seeing as it uses the same kernel as other versions of Windows, it makes better use of multiple CPUs than OS X does).
Windows NT was designed from day one for multiprocessor machines and has been running on them since 1993. It's at least as good as its contemporaries.
Koronis
Apr 8, 12:45 PM
What a surprise, Tech Crunch got a story completely wrong
4np
Nov 17, 06:15 AM
The laptops are hot enough right now; AMD's tend to run even hotter so I hope this rumor is fake :S
amin
Oct 10, 09:07 PM
Yeah, Apple isn't going to sit back and let Zune steal its lunch!
Those who bought the 5.5g ipods lately probably are going to feel bummed.
Can't speak for the others, but as a happy new 80GB iPod owner, I wouldn't be bummed. A new iPod doesn't make mine any less great!
Those who bought the 5.5g ipods lately probably are going to feel bummed.
Can't speak for the others, but as a happy new 80GB iPod owner, I wouldn't be bummed. A new iPod doesn't make mine any less great!
Meanee
Mar 17, 12:28 PM
Nice. Too bad some kid is going to have $300 docked from his pay...
I believe labor laws say that this is illegal, he won't have to reimburse the store. Don't think they will flat out fire him, but it's a "one more time you are missing even a cent, your ass it outta here" type of deal. If he ever made a mistake in past, they can give him the boot as well. Best Buy is not corner drug store. The pinch of losing 300 bucks for them is not as bad. But the kid might easily be out of the job very soon.
I believe labor laws say that this is illegal, he won't have to reimburse the store. Don't think they will flat out fire him, but it's a "one more time you are missing even a cent, your ass it outta here" type of deal. If he ever made a mistake in past, they can give him the boot as well. Best Buy is not corner drug store. The pinch of losing 300 bucks for them is not as bad. But the kid might easily be out of the job very soon.
Geckotek
Dec 19, 09:03 PM
Also if Apple was going to release a CDMA phone why haven't they for countries like China where I is the dominate cell phone tech. Instead they went with the second place carrier who supports GSM.
CDMA is not even close to being the dominate tech in cellular in China.
Correct. Some numbers to back that up.
China Mobile (GSM) = 558M subscribers (World's largest carrier)
China Unicom (GSM) = 152M subscribers
Verizon (CDMA) = 92M subscribers
China Telecom (CDMA) = 85M subscribers
China Mobile (TD-SCDMA*) = 17M subscribers
*not the same CDMA Verizon or China Telecom uses so doesn't really count
As you can see, GSM subscribers in China FAR outweigh the CDMA subscribers. Also, Verizon has more CDMA subscribers than China (not counting TD-SCDMA since it's not the same tech).
However, China Mobile's GSM network is 2G. They are rapidly rolling out TD-SCDMA as their 3G replacement. This will eat away at the GSM subscriber base. This is also why China Unicom has the iPhone and China Mobile didn't. A lot of people wondered why the larger company didn't get it.
CDMA is not even close to being the dominate tech in cellular in China.
Correct. Some numbers to back that up.
China Mobile (GSM) = 558M subscribers (World's largest carrier)
China Unicom (GSM) = 152M subscribers
Verizon (CDMA) = 92M subscribers
China Telecom (CDMA) = 85M subscribers
China Mobile (TD-SCDMA*) = 17M subscribers
*not the same CDMA Verizon or China Telecom uses so doesn't really count
As you can see, GSM subscribers in China FAR outweigh the CDMA subscribers. Also, Verizon has more CDMA subscribers than China (not counting TD-SCDMA since it's not the same tech).
However, China Mobile's GSM network is 2G. They are rapidly rolling out TD-SCDMA as their 3G replacement. This will eat away at the GSM subscriber base. This is also why China Unicom has the iPhone and China Mobile didn't. A lot of people wondered why the larger company didn't get it.
lmalave
Oct 20, 09:59 AM
When will we see these numbers broken out into business/enterprise vs. consumer?
Seriously, Apple is pretty much a non-factor in the enterprise. There simply is no integration, no large-scale server application use other than web, and few enterprise-ready applications. There's no Biztalk/Websphere/SQL/Oracle running on Apple outside of a few educational institutions. Microsoft and IBM own the enterprise and considering Apple in an enterprise outside of some limited marketing/advertising/media/audio verticals is absurd. I personally deal with 130 companies that have 500-250k computers and Apple is simply not a factor at all.
However, in the consumer world it's a very different story. Apple has the potential to continue making huge inroads into the consumer/home user/SOHO segments where the lack of enterprise applications means little if anything.
I'd like to see the numbers of how Apple compares in the home segment rather than just the overall. Why can't we see this broken out?
Hmm...well another thread mentioned a survey that something like 18% of consumers are considering buying a Mac. I'll bet in the lasest quarter, Apple broke 10% in the consumer market. This is a good strategy for Apple. Macs have a chance to make inroads in the consumer market, whereas they have no chance in the corporate market. Even things like XServe and XRaid are marketed to industries where the Apple is still relatively strong (e.g. video production, scientific research).
Seriously, Apple is pretty much a non-factor in the enterprise. There simply is no integration, no large-scale server application use other than web, and few enterprise-ready applications. There's no Biztalk/Websphere/SQL/Oracle running on Apple outside of a few educational institutions. Microsoft and IBM own the enterprise and considering Apple in an enterprise outside of some limited marketing/advertising/media/audio verticals is absurd. I personally deal with 130 companies that have 500-250k computers and Apple is simply not a factor at all.
However, in the consumer world it's a very different story. Apple has the potential to continue making huge inroads into the consumer/home user/SOHO segments where the lack of enterprise applications means little if anything.
I'd like to see the numbers of how Apple compares in the home segment rather than just the overall. Why can't we see this broken out?
Hmm...well another thread mentioned a survey that something like 18% of consumers are considering buying a Mac. I'll bet in the lasest quarter, Apple broke 10% in the consumer market. This is a good strategy for Apple. Macs have a chance to make inroads in the consumer market, whereas they have no chance in the corporate market. Even things like XServe and XRaid are marketed to industries where the Apple is still relatively strong (e.g. video production, scientific research).
asphalt-proof
Jan 10, 07:09 PM
I go to Gizmodo's site regularly and saw where they had admitted to their prank. I really didn't think much of it and even thought it was funny. However, i never read past the headlines so i didn't know they screwed with someone's presentation. That's just bad form and extremely inconsiderate. These presentors put a lot of time and energy preparing for that 10 miinutes or so that they have to spotlight. Yes, some are very lame, stupid, whatever. But for the most part, these people work very hard to do the best job they can. Not to mention that their job may be put in jeopardy if their presentation tanks.
I imagine that the Gizmodo staff were seriously CES-fatigued, over-stimulated by the flashy lights and loud, continuous noise, and slightly drunk. Fine. Most of the other bloggers were in the same state of mind. But none of them (at least as far as we know) didn't ******* with someone's presentation. I think they should be banned from CES next year as a punishment. Macworld? Not so much. It didn't happen there. Well, it didn't happen there. But I think that Apple would very carefully interview Gizmodo before giving them a press pass then make them sweat. Maybe even frisk them in public, before they entered the convention center. THat would make a lot of bloggers and vendors smile. Really make them sweat. But let them in anyways. Gizmodo is a very popular tech blog and for the most part, a very well done blog. Their coverage is important to Macworld. This way, Apple can ensure they get coverage but also get some karma points from other bloggers and vendors when they see how Apple deals with Gizmodo.
I imagine that the Gizmodo staff were seriously CES-fatigued, over-stimulated by the flashy lights and loud, continuous noise, and slightly drunk. Fine. Most of the other bloggers were in the same state of mind. But none of them (at least as far as we know) didn't ******* with someone's presentation. I think they should be banned from CES next year as a punishment. Macworld? Not so much. It didn't happen there. Well, it didn't happen there. But I think that Apple would very carefully interview Gizmodo before giving them a press pass then make them sweat. Maybe even frisk them in public, before they entered the convention center. THat would make a lot of bloggers and vendors smile. Really make them sweat. But let them in anyways. Gizmodo is a very popular tech blog and for the most part, a very well done blog. Their coverage is important to Macworld. This way, Apple can ensure they get coverage but also get some karma points from other bloggers and vendors when they see how Apple deals with Gizmodo.
Macopotamus
May 3, 02:29 PM
I'm not surprised by this, it's pressure from the carriers.
BTW the AT&T link doesn't work.
BTW the AT&T link doesn't work.
Ommid
Apr 25, 12:21 PM
Would love a larger screen if they can maintain the same body size. I have no interest in something like the giant PDA-sized Android phones.
Maybe the phone is smaller and it makes it look like the screen is bigger, food for thought!
Maybe the phone is smaller and it makes it look like the screen is bigger, food for thought!
Calidude
Apr 15, 09:24 PM
Typical promotion of homosexuality. What else is new. They gotta find new ways to bankrupt us here in California.
DeathChill
May 3, 11:38 PM
Since I am the local technology guru, people are just shy of harassing given the constant barrage of questions just asking if I own one. They are amazed that I do not own an iPad or tablet since they are "popular".
I can afford one but the lack of MKV playback is the deal killer. So that makes it $499 to browse the internet.
Just curious, what is wrong with Air Video?
I can afford one but the lack of MKV playback is the deal killer. So that makes it $499 to browse the internet.
Just curious, what is wrong with Air Video?
WestonHarvey1
Apr 29, 02:43 PM
Thank you for reminding me of that analogy. It really is a good one, and your points are excellent. Nobody complains when pickup trucks and tractors get cushy seats and high-end sound systems, but add an app store to OS X and people are ready to jump to Windows! Silly.
That is an excellent add-on to the truck analogy!
That is an excellent add-on to the truck analogy!
0 comments:
Post a Comment