flyakite
Oct 12, 07:00 PM
Who cares what color an iPod is. Shouldn't really matter. Color does not affect funtionality. What matters is what is on the inside.
Yeah, where are all the camo colored MacBook Pro's and magenta Mac Pro towers huh? Come on Apple! :p
Yeah, where are all the camo colored MacBook Pro's and magenta Mac Pro towers huh? Come on Apple! :p
MagnusVonMagnum
Apr 11, 03:28 PM
XBMC might finally be able to totally replace Apple's own software with the same basic functionality (other than rentals). The only thing it lacks really is AirTunes and video tag reading (the latter of which I gather is already supposed to appear in the next major release). An AppleTV Gen1 with a Crystal card running Linux would then be quite the system with full 1080p output and yet still be able to sync music to other speakers in the house with iTunes.
bad03xtreme
Apr 4, 12:41 PM
What a bunch of winey gun-control people in here, the only down side was that the other two involved weren't shot and killed now they get to cost the tax payers more money in court which will be a hell of a lot more than the two the bullets would have cost. :rolleyes:
Evangelion
Aug 23, 11:45 PM
Steve Jobs knew this was a BS patent and it shows in his comments. Absolutely Stupid. Hell, the LISA had a Hierarchal File System.
Not Hierarchial File System! Hierarchial MENU System!
Now, we can freely discuss the "merits" of this patent, but fact is that Apple lost, fair 'n square. If Apple thought that Creatives patent was bogus, they would have NOT paid. 100 million dollars is a lot of cash, no matter how you slice it. If the patent was bogus, and they still paid, Apple would be sending other companies a message that said "Want some cash? Sue us with bogus patents, we'll gladly pay!". No, Apple paid because they felt that they were really infringing and that if they had proceedd with the lawsuit, they would have lost a lot more than 100 million.
Bottom line: Creative knew this was a BS patent, too, but they figured they had to try.
If it's a BS patent, why did Apple pay? Clearly, it was NOT a BS patent. Truem the patent-system might be screwed up, but that is not the point of this discussion.
The question is: Will they go after Microsoft, too? It would be hypocritical not to, after all.
If it's UI infringes on the patentt, sure. If it doesn't, why sue?
Creative is only worth $500 million, how come Apple didn't just buy them?
Because it would have cost the five times more than it did now? Because Creative has very little of interest for Apple? Because if they did that, everyone would be suing Apple with hopes that Apple would just buy them as well?
Wong Hoo to Creative engineer: "This is no good, i give you $1000000 more and i want something much much better"
unCreative engineer: "Wooo Hooo, thanks Mr, Hoo, i'll do it in 128 different colors, am sure that it will turn the market upside-down"
As Jobs said in his most recent keynote more money in R&D isn't everything, and if he says so i believe him.
Unless Woo has something extraordinary under his sleeve - which he doesn't cause if he did he would not need more money - i see Creative in the same position in a couple of years from now. And then they'll try to sue somebody else.
The article you are quoting was published two years ago....
Not Hierarchial File System! Hierarchial MENU System!
Now, we can freely discuss the "merits" of this patent, but fact is that Apple lost, fair 'n square. If Apple thought that Creatives patent was bogus, they would have NOT paid. 100 million dollars is a lot of cash, no matter how you slice it. If the patent was bogus, and they still paid, Apple would be sending other companies a message that said "Want some cash? Sue us with bogus patents, we'll gladly pay!". No, Apple paid because they felt that they were really infringing and that if they had proceedd with the lawsuit, they would have lost a lot more than 100 million.
Bottom line: Creative knew this was a BS patent, too, but they figured they had to try.
If it's a BS patent, why did Apple pay? Clearly, it was NOT a BS patent. Truem the patent-system might be screwed up, but that is not the point of this discussion.
The question is: Will they go after Microsoft, too? It would be hypocritical not to, after all.
If it's UI infringes on the patentt, sure. If it doesn't, why sue?
Creative is only worth $500 million, how come Apple didn't just buy them?
Because it would have cost the five times more than it did now? Because Creative has very little of interest for Apple? Because if they did that, everyone would be suing Apple with hopes that Apple would just buy them as well?
Wong Hoo to Creative engineer: "This is no good, i give you $1000000 more and i want something much much better"
unCreative engineer: "Wooo Hooo, thanks Mr, Hoo, i'll do it in 128 different colors, am sure that it will turn the market upside-down"
As Jobs said in his most recent keynote more money in R&D isn't everything, and if he says so i believe him.
Unless Woo has something extraordinary under his sleeve - which he doesn't cause if he did he would not need more money - i see Creative in the same position in a couple of years from now. And then they'll try to sue somebody else.
The article you are quoting was published two years ago....
w00master
Nov 13, 03:44 PM
Please be more specific when you say "wrong", in what way?
Apple owns the rights to their intellectual property, this includes images and icons of their products that they have created.
Again, as I have said previously, the way these images/icons came about was USING OS X APIs.
That's how they're wrong.
w00master
Apple owns the rights to their intellectual property, this includes images and icons of their products that they have created.
Again, as I have said previously, the way these images/icons came about was USING OS X APIs.
That's how they're wrong.
w00master
Macnoviz
Oct 12, 01:18 PM
Orpah... I like it :D Kinda like Oompah (ya know, Oompahloompah, as in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, golden ticket? No? Ah, never mind......)
Golden ticket, which brings us to the (fake) keynote invitations, which automatically leads to C2D MBP's tomorrow! :eek: My god! They ARE everywhere
Golden ticket, which brings us to the (fake) keynote invitations, which automatically leads to C2D MBP's tomorrow! :eek: My god! They ARE everywhere
1984
Sep 14, 04:51 AM
My wife busted her phone today, and called me for a recommendation. All she wants as a Mom is a phone with a long battery life and great reception.
She left the Cingular store with a crappy phone with a million features she will never use.
It's too bad the Motorola MOTOFONE (http://www.motorola.com/motoinfo/product/details.jsp?globalObjectId=164) isn't available yet. It would have been perfect. A phone where battery life, reception and ease of use are the main features? Finally some gets it.
She left the Cingular store with a crappy phone with a million features she will never use.
It's too bad the Motorola MOTOFONE (http://www.motorola.com/motoinfo/product/details.jsp?globalObjectId=164) isn't available yet. It would have been perfect. A phone where battery life, reception and ease of use are the main features? Finally some gets it.
iScott428
Mar 29, 11:45 AM
Next thing the IDC will say is that if GM and Chrysler went into partnership, they might produce one good car. The only problem is that even if they do make a good phone or even great one, who the hell is going to buy it? After countless years of a terrible OS called Windows, who really wants to carry around a phone the same name on it? Not me ever, I dont care how good the phone is I would get an Android phone first, and then go with out a cell phone or resort to sign language to avoid needing a windows phone.
Vegasman
Mar 30, 01:29 PM
It looks descriptive to you because there is an App Store for your Mac and there is an App Store for the iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad. If Apple hadn't invented the term "App Store" and used it for its super successful site, you would never have heard the term, and you wouldn't know what it means.
Uh!? Anytime someone tells me there is a YYYY store, my first reaction is that it is a store that sells YYYY's. It is no different with an app store.
What would one buy at a record store?
What would one buy at a grocery store?
What would one buy at a paint store?
What would one buy at an app store?
Uh!? Anytime someone tells me there is a YYYY store, my first reaction is that it is a store that sells YYYY's. It is no different with an app store.
What would one buy at a record store?
What would one buy at a grocery store?
What would one buy at a paint store?
What would one buy at an app store?
Aldyn
Apr 25, 02:44 PM
When my mom was a cool, happening chick in the early '70s and added avocado green appliances to replace those big, white 50's-era appliances she looked around her new kitchen and thought to herself "Wow. Gorgeous! How much better can it get?"
And I'm sure in 15 years my kids will tell their friends "Ugh, my parents have that 2010-era stainless and granite kitchen. So hideous".
I guess what I'm trying to say is I'm hungry.
Hahahaha this.
And I'm sure in 15 years my kids will tell their friends "Ugh, my parents have that 2010-era stainless and granite kitchen. So hideous".
I guess what I'm trying to say is I'm hungry.
Hahahaha this.
Mad Mac Maniac
Apr 30, 01:34 PM
They stuck with the previous design for 3-4 years. It has now been 3 years with the current look.
Yeah! I'm ready! Is that the mbp? What about the iMac?
When the hell are they gonna re-implement spaces !!@$%#^&(&)(#
I need to be able to assign it to any corner I want !!!
What the Hell is wrong with them !!!!!!! :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
Why do they want OS X users to feel as if we were on an iPad!!!???
If I wanted/needed one, I'd buy one. What the hell !!!???????:mad::mad::mad::mad:
Woah boy.... What u talking about....
Yeah! I'm ready! Is that the mbp? What about the iMac?
When the hell are they gonna re-implement spaces !!@$%#^&(&)(#
I need to be able to assign it to any corner I want !!!
What the Hell is wrong with them !!!!!!! :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
Why do they want OS X users to feel as if we were on an iPad!!!???
If I wanted/needed one, I'd buy one. What the hell !!!???????:mad::mad::mad::mad:
Woah boy.... What u talking about....
Machead III
Aug 29, 05:04 AM
You make it sound like companies have an obligation of going public. And what you may say MIGHT be true, you are also forgetting that most of the crummy companies in existence are public. Enron was public, Microsoft is public, Exxon is public, Chiquita is public. The list goes on. And you are forgetting that while in theory investors might force changes in the company, usually they don't. Only time they force changes are when the company is not delivering "enough" ROI for the investors. Investors are the primary reason why we have "quarter-capitalism", where long-term benefits are sacrificed for short-term profits.
Personally I believe all companies not only have an obligation to go public, but have an obligation to surrender the entire control held by the board of directors to the state which is controled absolutely by the public, thereby allowing for the involvement of interests other than those financial and allowing actual democracy to pervade rather than increasingly fascist corporatocracy.
Not that I think Apple is particularly one of the companies creating that trend, it's fairly good in that regard, and I hope to see them make a real effort to improve conditions in the iPod City.
Microsoft on the other hand, regardless of how piss poor their software is, is notoriously ruthless towards workers, other businesses, even public serivces, and definately contributes to the overall erosion of both democracy and any kind of "Wealth of Nations" free market capitalism that remains the only partially benevolent flavour of said economic system.
It's very true, investors rarely act upon non-financial interests, but occasionally. Still, this is what happens when the only method of interaction with a coroporation is through the buying and selling of stocks and products.
Such is the success of neo-liberalism; it's impossible to express social human concerns with the language of GDP and quarter profits imposed by the unanimous corporate landscape of the modern world.
Personally I'd rather pay a lot more for my Macs, have them updated a lot less often and even suffer decreases in the rate of performance improvements, if it meant that the people who manufactured the computers were paid enough to sustain themselves and their families in comfortable, suitable housing with enough money left over for an enjoyable life.
Morality over Mhz!
Personally I believe all companies not only have an obligation to go public, but have an obligation to surrender the entire control held by the board of directors to the state which is controled absolutely by the public, thereby allowing for the involvement of interests other than those financial and allowing actual democracy to pervade rather than increasingly fascist corporatocracy.
Not that I think Apple is particularly one of the companies creating that trend, it's fairly good in that regard, and I hope to see them make a real effort to improve conditions in the iPod City.
Microsoft on the other hand, regardless of how piss poor their software is, is notoriously ruthless towards workers, other businesses, even public serivces, and definately contributes to the overall erosion of both democracy and any kind of "Wealth of Nations" free market capitalism that remains the only partially benevolent flavour of said economic system.
It's very true, investors rarely act upon non-financial interests, but occasionally. Still, this is what happens when the only method of interaction with a coroporation is through the buying and selling of stocks and products.
Such is the success of neo-liberalism; it's impossible to express social human concerns with the language of GDP and quarter profits imposed by the unanimous corporate landscape of the modern world.
Personally I'd rather pay a lot more for my Macs, have them updated a lot less often and even suffer decreases in the rate of performance improvements, if it meant that the people who manufactured the computers were paid enough to sustain themselves and their families in comfortable, suitable housing with enough money left over for an enjoyable life.
Morality over Mhz!
notabadname
Apr 4, 12:49 PM
Normally, with my luck, this would have been the day I would end up setting aside to go in early and get an iPad 2 . . .
iMikeT
Aug 28, 12:34 PM
Quiet upgrade tomorrow?
AidenShaw
Mar 29, 03:15 PM
Love this little gem from that press release:
Perhaps you should spend some time looking at the facts - there are non-Android Linux-based mobile systems out there.
If you knew that, the IDC comment is spot on.
Perhaps you should spend some time looking at the facts - there are non-Android Linux-based mobile systems out there.
If you knew that, the IDC comment is spot on.
BlizzardBomb
Aug 28, 12:21 PM
This Tuesday! This Tuesday!
That would be great! *fingers crossed*
Hmmm... really we shouldn't be getting our hopes up but who cares! :p
That would be great! *fingers crossed*
Hmmm... really we shouldn't be getting our hopes up but who cares! :p
ethana
May 3, 06:35 PM
Just picked up a 3.4GHz i7 with 8GB of RAM from the Apple Store. I took it home and installed a 256GB SSD to replace the hard drive inside. Installing the OS now. I'll post Geekbench numbers soon.
Ethan
Ethan
swingerofbirch
Oct 12, 05:30 PM
As much as I love rumors approximating nearer and nearer some state of acuity, actually seeing the product a day ahead is a tad disspaointing. It reminds me of the late night when Time Canada unveiled the G4 iMac. Well it'll still be fun to watch me Opie tomorrow, especially since she's promoting iPods over the Dell Ditty she did a couple years back.
fxtech
Apr 19, 08:37 AM
Who is this Samsung who has developed most of its own stuff? Living abroad casts a good shadow on Samsung, but in its home country, Sammy is just a thug with endless pockets (thanks to tax freedom granted by the Korean government). Samsung buy out other techs and then put their badge and later, establish their name as the manufacturer. They are NOT innovators.
Yeah Apple has never done that.
Except for NeXT, Motion, Final Cut Pro, Color, Aperture, the list goes on...
Yeah Apple has never done that.
Except for NeXT, Motion, Final Cut Pro, Color, Aperture, the list goes on...
Hastings101
Apr 19, 11:47 AM
What's the point of these lawsuits, nothing ever comes from them lol. Publicity?
Joshuarocks
Apr 19, 10:04 PM
The Economy is IMPROVING!
McDonald's hired 50,000 workers today! :eek:
http://money.cnn.com/2011/04/19/news/companies/mcdonalds_jobs_hiring/index.htm
(*gets up and starts clapping...*)
:rolleyes:
Keep listening to corporate run media which lies and doesn't tell the whole story.. my friend, unemployment and the economy aren't getting any better.. in fact, very soon it will collapse.. as inflation starts to settle in.. and if you wanna know the truth, look at BBC and other non-corporate run media for the truth. I know in my home state its like 7.9 percent and most of the jobs are health care and IT - no industrial, no customer service, nothing else.
McDonald's hired 50,000 workers today! :eek:
http://money.cnn.com/2011/04/19/news/companies/mcdonalds_jobs_hiring/index.htm
(*gets up and starts clapping...*)
:rolleyes:
Keep listening to corporate run media which lies and doesn't tell the whole story.. my friend, unemployment and the economy aren't getting any better.. in fact, very soon it will collapse.. as inflation starts to settle in.. and if you wanna know the truth, look at BBC and other non-corporate run media for the truth. I know in my home state its like 7.9 percent and most of the jobs are health care and IT - no industrial, no customer service, nothing else.
KnightWRX
Apr 19, 08:01 PM
Unable to be a good corporate citizen, unable to satisfy their greed as they rake in more profits than the competition, Apples looking rather desperate. Nothing will ever be enough.
After having seen the actual claims, I don't think so. Apple was forced to do this. Notice there are quite a few trademark claims in there, relating to icon design, and trade dress claims.
The problem with Trademarks is that if Apple doesn't enforce them, they will lose them. As such, their hand is forced in this. However, just the trademark claims would make for one small suit and would make it so some of them might get thrown out. Enter the design patent claims to "pad" the lawsuit and to use as bargaining chips.
In the end, Apple may just drop the patent claims during settlement negotations and get awards for all their trademarks, which is probably what they are seeking.
After having seen the actual claims, I don't think so. Apple was forced to do this. Notice there are quite a few trademark claims in there, relating to icon design, and trade dress claims.
The problem with Trademarks is that if Apple doesn't enforce them, they will lose them. As such, their hand is forced in this. However, just the trademark claims would make for one small suit and would make it so some of them might get thrown out. Enter the design patent claims to "pad" the lawsuit and to use as bargaining chips.
In the end, Apple may just drop the patent claims during settlement negotations and get awards for all their trademarks, which is probably what they are seeking.
mrkramer
Apr 25, 01:51 AM
I wouldn't go so far as to kill someone. If I killed them, how could they learn a lesson?
-Don
You won't be intending to kill someone, but if you get in an accident at or above freeway speeds, you or someone else will be killed wether you are trying to kill them or not, and even if you game the system to get off of any charges you will still have to live with the fact that you killed someone.
-Don
You won't be intending to kill someone, but if you get in an accident at or above freeway speeds, you or someone else will be killed wether you are trying to kill them or not, and even if you game the system to get off of any charges you will still have to live with the fact that you killed someone.
ThomJensen
May 3, 11:26 AM
"Macworld has confirmation from Apple that the new iMacs will support Target Display Mode but only when the device they are connected to is also a Thunderbolt equipped Mac."
Is that true?
If this is true, then the new 27" iMacs will not serve as a mirror device for the iPad 2 (which shoots out video at 1080 p).
Is that true?
If this is true, then the new 27" iMacs will not serve as a mirror device for the iPad 2 (which shoots out video at 1080 p).