longofest
Jul 19, 03:48 PM
What, the analysts weren't even close? I'm shocked. :rolleyes:
Actually, the analysts were pretty close this time, except for the profit margins. I'm thinking that the fact that the iPod is now using older parts (therefore cheaper parts) is pushing the cost down for Apple, and hence really making it a big cash cow and driving up the profit margin, even if they aren't selling quite as many as last quarter (which also has to do with seasonal decline).
Edit: oops... it appears as though the analysts definitely did blow the whole revenue expectation a bit. Missed that.
Actually, the analysts were pretty close this time, except for the profit margins. I'm thinking that the fact that the iPod is now using older parts (therefore cheaper parts) is pushing the cost down for Apple, and hence really making it a big cash cow and driving up the profit margin, even if they aren't selling quite as many as last quarter (which also has to do with seasonal decline).
Edit: oops... it appears as though the analysts definitely did blow the whole revenue expectation a bit. Missed that.
pyramid6
Apr 26, 01:39 PM
Apple doesn't have the trademark yet.
It's still in the opposition phase. ;)
There you go. They'll sort it out in court.
It's still in the opposition phase. ;)
There you go. They'll sort it out in court.
ErikGrim
Apr 6, 08:50 AM
Yes, I do!
For me, TextEdit and Preview crash on launch. I suspected Dropbox 1.1.13 but killing Dropbox didn't 'cure' the crashes.
Not getting any of these at all.
For me, TextEdit and Preview crash on launch. I suspected Dropbox 1.1.13 but killing Dropbox didn't 'cure' the crashes.
Not getting any of these at all.
mrgreen4242
Nov 28, 10:43 AM
OK, this is out of hand... all of you who are complaining about Dell being half the price of the Apple LCDs read the topic that's been linked like 5 times, it's pretty interesting and informative.
Now, all of you who are complaining about those people complain shut up and listen (or read) for a minute. They aren't complaining that Apple is charging to much for what they are offering, it's that they aren't offering any alternative for non-pro users. There are people who want, and would pay a bit more than Dell prices, for a similar piece of hardware with Apple's quality and design, but they aren't willing to pay 50%+ more for a professional grade piece of hardware.
A 17" consumer line of displays would solve the problem without negatively effecting the pro line of hardware. If it sold well (and I'm betting it would, especially if it was the same panel as the 17" iMac with a USB2 hub, iSight, and built in speakers in an iPod styled casing for ~$249) a 19" with the same features but a higher res (although all the 19" widescreens I've seen have had the same res as 17" WS ... someone must make a 19" panel with res between 1440x900 and 1680x1050) for ~$349 or so it'd really fill out Apple product line to meet the needs of all consumers, "prosumers", and real pros.
Now, all of you who are complaining about those people complain shut up and listen (or read) for a minute. They aren't complaining that Apple is charging to much for what they are offering, it's that they aren't offering any alternative for non-pro users. There are people who want, and would pay a bit more than Dell prices, for a similar piece of hardware with Apple's quality and design, but they aren't willing to pay 50%+ more for a professional grade piece of hardware.
A 17" consumer line of displays would solve the problem without negatively effecting the pro line of hardware. If it sold well (and I'm betting it would, especially if it was the same panel as the 17" iMac with a USB2 hub, iSight, and built in speakers in an iPod styled casing for ~$249) a 19" with the same features but a higher res (although all the 19" widescreens I've seen have had the same res as 17" WS ... someone must make a 19" panel with res between 1440x900 and 1680x1050) for ~$349 or so it'd really fill out Apple product line to meet the needs of all consumers, "prosumers", and real pros.
dguisinger
Aug 7, 07:53 AM
Huh....so VM Ware finally got their act together; and its only pre-register for a future upcoming beta.
....you know, I'd have to say they dropped the ball on this one.
parallels not only did the public beta first, they released a final product a full month before VMWare announced beta.....and is in the Apple Store, office depot, staples.... heck, its even in Apple's TV commercials.....
VMWare might use to have had a good edge, but I think they lose out on the Mac oppurtunity.....
....you know, I'd have to say they dropped the ball on this one.
parallels not only did the public beta first, they released a final product a full month before VMWare announced beta.....and is in the Apple Store, office depot, staples.... heck, its even in Apple's TV commercials.....
VMWare might use to have had a good edge, but I think they lose out on the Mac oppurtunity.....
rosalindavenue
Jul 18, 06:45 AM
I don't think the time is right for online digital movie rentals. Even with a relatively fast broadband service, it still is going to take a fair amount of time to download the file. If the file only plays once, or just for a day, or a few days it's just not worth the effort, IMO.
I agree with respect to downloads-- but I think this is going to be streaming. Did you ever try the frontrow movie trailers? (before Apple let it go dead in January or so-- it was a beta test, I'm sure) Even with a hacked version on my ibook, the trailers were instantaneous and high quality. I think that's how these are going to be rented-- you'll have either a period of time you can stream (preferable) or a number of times you can stream before losing the rights.
EDIT: Poster below me is 100% correct-- this is about ipods; they'll have to sell downloads for those and they wont be anything like DVD quality.
I agree with respect to downloads-- but I think this is going to be streaming. Did you ever try the frontrow movie trailers? (before Apple let it go dead in January or so-- it was a beta test, I'm sure) Even with a hacked version on my ibook, the trailers were instantaneous and high quality. I think that's how these are going to be rented-- you'll have either a period of time you can stream (preferable) or a number of times you can stream before losing the rights.
EDIT: Poster below me is 100% correct-- this is about ipods; they'll have to sell downloads for those and they wont be anything like DVD quality.
MacRumors
Sep 6, 05:52 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
With the new iMac updates ("]Mac mini[/url] and [url=") released today, it appears Apple will focus on their Movie initiative during their September 12th media event. Variety provides (http://www.variety.com/VR1117949519.html) some details of the upcoming announcement.
As reported elsewhere, Variety expects Apple to provide movies for $9.99/download for older movies and $14.99 for new releases. This price range is reportedly a concession to movie studios who want variable pricing. Apple has long been a proponent of a one-price model. As a result, only Disney is said to be definitely on board with the initial launch with the other studios potentially joining in the next year.
In contrast, Amazon is also launching a movie store later this week, and they are expected to have all major movie studios signed on. Amazon's pricing will be in line with current movie download services ($9.99-$19.99).
An Associated Press report (http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/060906/apple_online_movies.html?.v=1) offers a similar perspective on the ongoing negotiations between Apple and the movie studios:
...substantial disagreements between studios and Apple remain to be resolved and Apple's movie service could launch with a limited number of films, according to two studio executives who asked to remain anonymous because talks were still ongoing.
With the new iMac updates ("]Mac mini[/url] and [url=") released today, it appears Apple will focus on their Movie initiative during their September 12th media event. Variety provides (http://www.variety.com/VR1117949519.html) some details of the upcoming announcement.
As reported elsewhere, Variety expects Apple to provide movies for $9.99/download for older movies and $14.99 for new releases. This price range is reportedly a concession to movie studios who want variable pricing. Apple has long been a proponent of a one-price model. As a result, only Disney is said to be definitely on board with the initial launch with the other studios potentially joining in the next year.
In contrast, Amazon is also launching a movie store later this week, and they are expected to have all major movie studios signed on. Amazon's pricing will be in line with current movie download services ($9.99-$19.99).
An Associated Press report (http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/060906/apple_online_movies.html?.v=1) offers a similar perspective on the ongoing negotiations between Apple and the movie studios:
...substantial disagreements between studios and Apple remain to be resolved and Apple's movie service could launch with a limited number of films, according to two studio executives who asked to remain anonymous because talks were still ongoing.
KnightWRX
May 2, 05:28 PM
iOS style multitasking features (benefits) are indeed in Lion.
Applications written for Lion can "suspend and resume" without having to "save and close" documents. The reason the little light below running apps on the Dock was removed is that "running" is now more of a decision between the App and OS -- not so much the user. (APP - "Am I idle right now? Can I resume from this point very quickly? If so, I'll just suspend myself till the user or an event wakes me back up. No need to burn RAM or CPU, the user won't even notice I'm not here.)
There is no reason with modern computer architecture for humans to do memory management by getting involved with which programs are actually physically in memory/active. We have 7200rpm SATA3 or SSD drives, multicore processors with Gigahertz speeds, and Gigabytes of RAM...
The way we interact with Multitasking in Windows 7 and OS X Snow Leopard is based on the hardware limitations imposed by 640K RAM, 4.7 Megahertz single core processor, and Floppy Disks. Apple took the first brave step away from that with iOS. It's good to see it moving forward in Lion.
So you're saying we should go back to Mac OS Classic cooperative multi-tasking ?
Hello ?
The 80s called, they want their computing paradigms back. Cooperative multi-tasking makes sense on ressource limited architectures. Even the iPhone/iPad like devices are far from "ressource limited". We had pre-emptive multi-tasking on much less capable devices (think 386s with 8 MB of RAM).
Applications written for Lion can "suspend and resume" without having to "save and close" documents. The reason the little light below running apps on the Dock was removed is that "running" is now more of a decision between the App and OS -- not so much the user. (APP - "Am I idle right now? Can I resume from this point very quickly? If so, I'll just suspend myself till the user or an event wakes me back up. No need to burn RAM or CPU, the user won't even notice I'm not here.)
There is no reason with modern computer architecture for humans to do memory management by getting involved with which programs are actually physically in memory/active. We have 7200rpm SATA3 or SSD drives, multicore processors with Gigahertz speeds, and Gigabytes of RAM...
The way we interact with Multitasking in Windows 7 and OS X Snow Leopard is based on the hardware limitations imposed by 640K RAM, 4.7 Megahertz single core processor, and Floppy Disks. Apple took the first brave step away from that with iOS. It's good to see it moving forward in Lion.
So you're saying we should go back to Mac OS Classic cooperative multi-tasking ?
Hello ?
The 80s called, they want their computing paradigms back. Cooperative multi-tasking makes sense on ressource limited architectures. Even the iPhone/iPad like devices are far from "ressource limited". We had pre-emptive multi-tasking on much less capable devices (think 386s with 8 MB of RAM).
Psychic Shopper
Jul 18, 11:18 AM
I must have watched 20 different video clips from the Daily Show on You Tube, streaming in almost real time. Why would I want to buy that content on the Itunes store?
Carniphage
Nov 30, 03:22 AM
I'll speak loud and clear:
DVR
iTunes Store can't now nor will it likely ever replace Dish Network for me. Just let me record my shows either directly with iTV or via something connected to it. I hope when this is released, HD DVD and Blu-ray make there way into Macs.
No No No No No!
All a DVR is - is a better VHS. A way of watching broadcast TV a little more easily. It's a timeshifter, but it is not revolutionary.
DVRs are popular with the (few) people who have them because they end some of the scheduling tyranny of the broadcasters.
But the problem is not scheduling. The problem is broadcasting itself.
Every modern business has had to face up to the opportunities and challenges of the Internet. One of the most significant is what they call disintermediation. Cutting out the middle men. Buying direct.
TV needs to be disintermediated. The advertisers and the networks get in the way. There needs to be a better pathway between producers and consumers.
Advertisers screw-up television. They influence content. Great shows are pulled, not because they don't have enough enthusiastic viewers, but because they don't attract enough consumers of sanitary towels or tooth whitener.
Lousy shows clog up the airwaves because they attract a large number of bottom-dwelling viewers who might just notice the ad for low-price hemorrhoid cream.
Broadcast TV is a business model from the 50s which needs to die. But if you *really* want your TV content determined by the marketeers of ant-acid remedies then stick with your DVR. Stick with Celebrity Love Spacktard. Cheer it up for American Idle. Wave pom poms like a sixteen year-old for the vacuous, empty spam that the networks churn out, to fill the gaps between revenue-generating advertising.
But while dreaming of Celebutard Love Assault... just for a second, imagine how much better TV could be if we could pay Joss Wheadon for Firefly DIRECTLY, or pay someone to make Star Trek with the same level of integrity as Battlestar.
Hint - if it started to suck, we would stop paying.
I'd prefer my television direct.
Screw the advertisers. Screw the networks. Screw Rupert Murdoch. In fact, pull down your dish and cram it in Rupert Murdoch.
Go iTV
C.
DVR
iTunes Store can't now nor will it likely ever replace Dish Network for me. Just let me record my shows either directly with iTV or via something connected to it. I hope when this is released, HD DVD and Blu-ray make there way into Macs.
No No No No No!
All a DVR is - is a better VHS. A way of watching broadcast TV a little more easily. It's a timeshifter, but it is not revolutionary.
DVRs are popular with the (few) people who have them because they end some of the scheduling tyranny of the broadcasters.
But the problem is not scheduling. The problem is broadcasting itself.
Every modern business has had to face up to the opportunities and challenges of the Internet. One of the most significant is what they call disintermediation. Cutting out the middle men. Buying direct.
TV needs to be disintermediated. The advertisers and the networks get in the way. There needs to be a better pathway between producers and consumers.
Advertisers screw-up television. They influence content. Great shows are pulled, not because they don't have enough enthusiastic viewers, but because they don't attract enough consumers of sanitary towels or tooth whitener.
Lousy shows clog up the airwaves because they attract a large number of bottom-dwelling viewers who might just notice the ad for low-price hemorrhoid cream.
Broadcast TV is a business model from the 50s which needs to die. But if you *really* want your TV content determined by the marketeers of ant-acid remedies then stick with your DVR. Stick with Celebrity Love Spacktard. Cheer it up for American Idle. Wave pom poms like a sixteen year-old for the vacuous, empty spam that the networks churn out, to fill the gaps between revenue-generating advertising.
But while dreaming of Celebutard Love Assault... just for a second, imagine how much better TV could be if we could pay Joss Wheadon for Firefly DIRECTLY, or pay someone to make Star Trek with the same level of integrity as Battlestar.
Hint - if it started to suck, we would stop paying.
I'd prefer my television direct.
Screw the advertisers. Screw the networks. Screw Rupert Murdoch. In fact, pull down your dish and cram it in Rupert Murdoch.
Go iTV
C.
bigpics
Mar 23, 11:37 PM
One more vote to keep the old gal around.
And another to keep giving it facelifts that:
a) Improve what it already does (without destroying its core philosophy),
b) Add new functions extending those functions (e.g., people have mentioned updating the DAC, allowing bluetooth and HD video out, etc. and faster syncing if TB will accomplish that (FW sustained transfer rates are faster than USB, but agree the FW port's not coming back on its own).
Plus etc., etc. and so forth as (generally) eloquently already laid down elsewhere.
c) Keep it a part of the modern Apple ecosystem via serving iDevices and ATV's as others have suggested and in many other clever, not unfeasible ways.
d) Keep it looking fresh and up-to-date. It does appear that the screen could be made larger without compromising the click-wheel functionality.
Another reason to have a lot of music/media BTW is not that you're a "hoarder" as someone suggested, but to include music that's not your fave but may be perfect when you have guest riders in your car - people of different ages and backgrounds and tastes so you can DJ for all (and at parties too). Call me a people pleaser but, hey.....
And if I have an 16 or even 32GB iPhone, I have little use for a Touch, but just as much a need for a Classic. My iPod Photo 60 is still looking/running like new and has been my car music server for years. But it's too low in capacity for me, so breaking 200GB + some of the above refinements would likely tip me.
There's also an aspect that hasn't been in this thread - and the "tech specs" on Apple.com no longer mention either target disk mode - nor using it to load up general files, but I remember an earlier gen being usable as an external hard drive that was also an iPod in the bargain!
One that a photographer, e.g., could have in a pocket to download pics from a DSLR to free up an SD card for more shooting in the field. Or today, back up an entire maxxed out MBAir for that matter. Voila: A mini Time Machine + all of the above.
If it does still allow that, add it to the marketing. It's an iPod. It's a mini-media server. It's an external HD. Music, Movies, Videos, Podcasts, Photos, Games, Storage, Backup. In less than 5 ounces.
What's not to like for 2 and a half Ben Franks??
Finally I get a kick out of the people dissing people who prefer uncompressed music. The ONLY advantage of compression is to store more files/GB and it ALWAYS degrades the quality of the recording. Always. And you're championing this as preferable because......?????
Apple already has algorithms for optimizing file size on the Mac side when maxxing out files to be placed on an iDevice. With our multi-terabyte setups, why wouldn't we want the best originals available?
And most who want uncompressed music (and those who want better than CD's already dumbed-down wave forms) actually CAN discern the diff (tho' some only think they can, as tests have shown, to be frank).
But seriously, guys, you remind me of people who've been conditioned to think a McDouble is a gastronomic improvement on the T-bone steak. Sheesh.
:rolleyes:
And another to keep giving it facelifts that:
a) Improve what it already does (without destroying its core philosophy),
b) Add new functions extending those functions (e.g., people have mentioned updating the DAC, allowing bluetooth and HD video out, etc. and faster syncing if TB will accomplish that (FW sustained transfer rates are faster than USB, but agree the FW port's not coming back on its own).
Plus etc., etc. and so forth as (generally) eloquently already laid down elsewhere.
c) Keep it a part of the modern Apple ecosystem via serving iDevices and ATV's as others have suggested and in many other clever, not unfeasible ways.
d) Keep it looking fresh and up-to-date. It does appear that the screen could be made larger without compromising the click-wheel functionality.
Another reason to have a lot of music/media BTW is not that you're a "hoarder" as someone suggested, but to include music that's not your fave but may be perfect when you have guest riders in your car - people of different ages and backgrounds and tastes so you can DJ for all (and at parties too). Call me a people pleaser but, hey.....
And if I have an 16 or even 32GB iPhone, I have little use for a Touch, but just as much a need for a Classic. My iPod Photo 60 is still looking/running like new and has been my car music server for years. But it's too low in capacity for me, so breaking 200GB + some of the above refinements would likely tip me.
There's also an aspect that hasn't been in this thread - and the "tech specs" on Apple.com no longer mention either target disk mode - nor using it to load up general files, but I remember an earlier gen being usable as an external hard drive that was also an iPod in the bargain!
One that a photographer, e.g., could have in a pocket to download pics from a DSLR to free up an SD card for more shooting in the field. Or today, back up an entire maxxed out MBAir for that matter. Voila: A mini Time Machine + all of the above.
If it does still allow that, add it to the marketing. It's an iPod. It's a mini-media server. It's an external HD. Music, Movies, Videos, Podcasts, Photos, Games, Storage, Backup. In less than 5 ounces.
What's not to like for 2 and a half Ben Franks??
Finally I get a kick out of the people dissing people who prefer uncompressed music. The ONLY advantage of compression is to store more files/GB and it ALWAYS degrades the quality of the recording. Always. And you're championing this as preferable because......?????
Apple already has algorithms for optimizing file size on the Mac side when maxxing out files to be placed on an iDevice. With our multi-terabyte setups, why wouldn't we want the best originals available?
And most who want uncompressed music (and those who want better than CD's already dumbed-down wave forms) actually CAN discern the diff (tho' some only think they can, as tests have shown, to be frank).
But seriously, guys, you remind me of people who've been conditioned to think a McDouble is a gastronomic improvement on the T-bone steak. Sheesh.
:rolleyes:
tablo13
Sep 18, 01:17 PM
So, the ipod touch 4G is my first iOS device, and I had a bunch of problems putting on the screen protector when I bought the Dermashot. So much in fact, that I ruined the protector. Not seeing any others for sale on the site, I emailed their customer service to inquire when they'd be on sale. They said "soon," but in the meantime they sent me two FREE ones! Love their customer support and the case looks great on mine. :D
Does the protector reduce fingerprints or is it a fingerprint magnet?
Does the protector reduce fingerprints or is it a fingerprint magnet?
Rt&Dzine
Mar 19, 11:26 PM
It's one thing to give minorities rights and another to give them the key to the city. That's why you should sign this petition (http://www.change.org/petitions/truth-wins-out-stop-with-the-reverse-suppression-from-gays-4) instead of the one to ban apps. We have enough fascism and censorship in this country. It takes a really strong mentality to step away from your personal beliefs for the greater good of our country and uphold the constitution.
What does this have to do with the constitution? Apple is a business. You have the freedom to boycott them if you don't like their choices.
What does this have to do with the constitution? Apple is a business. You have the freedom to boycott them if you don't like their choices.
Thirdeye9
Apr 11, 09:18 AM
All this discussion is apple's cap of tea for :) because we don't speculate if there is any mp3 player better than classic ipod. The only enemy of apple is apple.
I have now big problem, because i ve got Nokia C7, which has everything i would like from ipod touch, but ipod classic is not a really good choice for me... the only thing i apreciate in it is an enormous hdd, but due to its communicating only via itunes - i can't use it for different files than multimedia. If i could store there other files i would buy it. So i hope Apple will release new model with OS which will solve the problem :)
I have now big problem, because i ve got Nokia C7, which has everything i would like from ipod touch, but ipod classic is not a really good choice for me... the only thing i apreciate in it is an enormous hdd, but due to its communicating only via itunes - i can't use it for different files than multimedia. If i could store there other files i would buy it. So i hope Apple will release new model with OS which will solve the problem :)
alfagta
Apr 1, 04:50 PM
Basically. Now they just need to polish what they gave us. It's honestly a lot though. I wouldn't feel ripped off for them charging money for it.
Almost all of the Applications have been enhanced, autosave, Launchpad, Mission Control, Versions, resume, Multitouch gestures, full screen apps and the Mac App Store.
You feel like it�s a new experience? So much better?
Almost all of the Applications have been enhanced, autosave, Launchpad, Mission Control, Versions, resume, Multitouch gestures, full screen apps and the Mac App Store.
You feel like it�s a new experience? So much better?
shawnce
Jul 19, 10:38 PM
Interesting... (http://www.macnn.com/articles/06/07/19/apple.grows.16.in.us/)
skinniezinho
Nov 27, 11:59 AM
first pair of decent headphones.
grado sr60i
http://www.opticaudio.co.uk/images/Grado%20SR60I-2.jpg
Good choice!I have the Alessandro MS1i (http://www.alessandro-products.com/headphones.html) wich are +- a mix of grado models and love them!
grado sr60i
http://www.opticaudio.co.uk/images/Grado%20SR60I-2.jpg
Good choice!I have the Alessandro MS1i (http://www.alessandro-products.com/headphones.html) wich are +- a mix of grado models and love them!
backsidetailsli
Nov 24, 07:31 AM
add Shnitzlizr lets race!
http://www.crunchgear.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/gt5rd.jpg
http://www.crunchgear.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/gt5rd.jpg
MattyMac
Sep 7, 10:11 AM
5 more days!
Surely
Nov 27, 01:59 AM
Fix'd
Replacing my quote with a cliche picture...... how witty.
Oh, I think you missed an 'e'.
/been a member for over three years, never been called that before:rolleyes:
---------
Anyway.....
I bought two more iPad apps. Both are pool games..... I couldn't figure out which to buy, so I bought them both. So far, Pool Bar > Pool Pro Online 3
http://a1.phobos.apple.com/us/r1000/018/Purple/90/60/ab/mzl.qihqavai.480x480-75.jpg http://theportablegamer.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/photo-13.png
Replacing my quote with a cliche picture...... how witty.
Oh, I think you missed an 'e'.
/been a member for over three years, never been called that before:rolleyes:
---------
Anyway.....
I bought two more iPad apps. Both are pool games..... I couldn't figure out which to buy, so I bought them both. So far, Pool Bar > Pool Pro Online 3
http://a1.phobos.apple.com/us/r1000/018/Purple/90/60/ab/mzl.qihqavai.480x480-75.jpg http://theportablegamer.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/photo-13.png
leftbanke7
Mar 19, 12:37 PM
there's no reason to argue that their strategy is wrong...
I don't argue that their strategy is wrong. They are a profitable, debt-free company. They obviously have some clue as to what's going on.
However, as a Mac lover on a budget, I hate only having the option of an iMac or an eMac. I dislike both of them. I dislike the design and I dislike that they are essentually unupgradable. If I am going to spend money on a product, I had better like looking at it. I also don't want to have to use a G4 MDD as it's old technology. Granted, it's life is far from over but I get the impression that Apple is telling me that unless I am willing to pony up $2500.00 - $3000.00, that my only options are either old or unupgradable products.
A Bargain PC may be a POS, but for a good group of people, it's all they can afford...and I am almost to that point. My old computer can only take me so much farther.
I don't argue that their strategy is wrong. They are a profitable, debt-free company. They obviously have some clue as to what's going on.
However, as a Mac lover on a budget, I hate only having the option of an iMac or an eMac. I dislike both of them. I dislike the design and I dislike that they are essentually unupgradable. If I am going to spend money on a product, I had better like looking at it. I also don't want to have to use a G4 MDD as it's old technology. Granted, it's life is far from over but I get the impression that Apple is telling me that unless I am willing to pony up $2500.00 - $3000.00, that my only options are either old or unupgradable products.
A Bargain PC may be a POS, but for a good group of people, it's all they can afford...and I am almost to that point. My old computer can only take me so much farther.
MacMan86
Apr 23, 11:44 AM
for all your defending of this feature ... can you give me even one positive reason this is good for the average person that out-weighs the negative ones ... just one
Well that's easy - it seems the purpose of this file is to help you find your location quickly. Without this cache you'd waste bandwidth, time and battery power to look up information that was fixed (cell tower locations). It also means your phone can find your location when you don't have GPS signal, or simply not bother to turn GPS on, which is a win because it consumes so much power. Seems like a pretty compelling use to me. Read this for more info: http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12432603&postcount=16
Well that's easy - it seems the purpose of this file is to help you find your location quickly. Without this cache you'd waste bandwidth, time and battery power to look up information that was fixed (cell tower locations). It also means your phone can find your location when you don't have GPS signal, or simply not bother to turn GPS on, which is a win because it consumes so much power. Seems like a pretty compelling use to me. Read this for more info: http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12432603&postcount=16
ingenious
Mar 26, 03:47 PM
...For example, Apple had to make Safari due to Microsoft pulling out of the mac - this is just one example where Apple is starting to make software because companies are leaving the platform...
its my understanding that apple made this browser BEFORE MSIE was pulled from the mac. M$ pulled IE because they believed Safari was better and faster and could better serve the mac. it was also part of a marketing plan by M$ to remove IE as a stand alone browser from Win and Mac. Think before you post and do your homework. The rest of use don't want to read something that's not true or thot out.
its my understanding that apple made this browser BEFORE MSIE was pulled from the mac. M$ pulled IE because they believed Safari was better and faster and could better serve the mac. it was also part of a marketing plan by M$ to remove IE as a stand alone browser from Win and Mac. Think before you post and do your homework. The rest of use don't want to read something that's not true or thot out.
ILL Robinson
Jan 12, 12:44 PM
*deleted*
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий