coal
Sep 26, 09:41 AM
No iPhone for me then. Cingular blows, we're leaving in December when our contract is up. They have to the the worst cell company in the US, both customer service and the actual cell service
Agreed. From the reviews coming from JP Power and the like, those aren't merely opinions but generally accepted as true traits of Cingular as a company. What do you really expect though from a company that aquired half of its customers through purchase? They basically doubled their user base by acquiring AT&T Wireless and not through honest signups of people enticed by their good service and reputation.
Stan Sigman is seriously the anti-Steve Jobs.
Anyhow, it would be easily unlockable for use on T-Mobile here in the U.S. as well as any of the GSM carriers abroad. At most it would be a $10-$15 charge at your local independent phone dealer.
Agreed. From the reviews coming from JP Power and the like, those aren't merely opinions but generally accepted as true traits of Cingular as a company. What do you really expect though from a company that aquired half of its customers through purchase? They basically doubled their user base by acquiring AT&T Wireless and not through honest signups of people enticed by their good service and reputation.
Stan Sigman is seriously the anti-Steve Jobs.
Anyhow, it would be easily unlockable for use on T-Mobile here in the U.S. as well as any of the GSM carriers abroad. At most it would be a $10-$15 charge at your local independent phone dealer.
ChazUK
Apr 20, 01:50 PM
*Shrug* It is probably a feature enabled on the majority of GSM carriers for statistical purposes. Again, I don't see the problem. If this information is used to improve my network coverage, why should I care? If I'm not part of a secret terrorist cell, I don't see how my life is being negatively impacted by this information especially if it does not have any identifiable information attached to it.
Apparently this feature is not enabled on Verizon phones.
No one was insinuating you were a terrorist so chill, ok?:D
Out of interest, what makes you think its to improve cell coverage? Why is it recording wifi access point names, locations and MAC addresses if that is the case?
If you haven't yet, watch the video. It's quite informative of what is being recorded.
Apparently this feature is not enabled on Verizon phones.
No one was insinuating you were a terrorist so chill, ok?:D
Out of interest, what makes you think its to improve cell coverage? Why is it recording wifi access point names, locations and MAC addresses if that is the case?
If you haven't yet, watch the video. It's quite informative of what is being recorded.
janstett
Apr 14, 08:44 AM
Im not saying the AppleTV 2 is useless for everyone, for many of the dumb masses who are locked into iTunes already its probably the best thing since sliced bread, and really its only advantage is a cheap price and movie rentals, in glorious 720P, but if I want to feed my 42" 1080p plasma with subpar 720P video I could use the xbox or PS3 sitting under the TV, which I also dont bother with. For audiophiles or moviephiles it doesn't cut it.
I used to work in the streaming media industry from 2002-2009. Among other things, I did some work on the Netgear MP-101 (http://kb.netgear.com/app/products/model/a_id/2499) which sold fairly well. We always got the latest gear for competitive analysis, including Sonos systems and other high-end solutions costing thousands of dollars.
Strictly IMO, proprietary, expensive closed ecosystems such as Sonos (and there are/were worse) are a dead end and naturally once you've bought into it you have a vested interest in its survival. The same thing can be accomplished, more cheaply, with products from mixed vendors supporting an open system like UPnP/DLNA.
The exception is Apple -- while their solution is proprietary and the ecosystem is largely closed, it is a massive closed ecosystem (Macs, iDevices) and Apple keeps the "dumb rendering points" such as the Airport Express and ATV2, cheap. My company tried several times to open doors with Apple, to be their gateway into the UPnP/DLNA world. Apple's only interested in what benefits Apple -- i.e. how does supporting UPnP/DLNA help Apple sell hardware? So Apple will always be a closed ecosystem but it's a very very diverse and healthy one.
Sonos is dead, they just don't know it yet. When you can get something that does 90% of what it does for 10% of the price, you're dead.
I used to work in the streaming media industry from 2002-2009. Among other things, I did some work on the Netgear MP-101 (http://kb.netgear.com/app/products/model/a_id/2499) which sold fairly well. We always got the latest gear for competitive analysis, including Sonos systems and other high-end solutions costing thousands of dollars.
Strictly IMO, proprietary, expensive closed ecosystems such as Sonos (and there are/were worse) are a dead end and naturally once you've bought into it you have a vested interest in its survival. The same thing can be accomplished, more cheaply, with products from mixed vendors supporting an open system like UPnP/DLNA.
The exception is Apple -- while their solution is proprietary and the ecosystem is largely closed, it is a massive closed ecosystem (Macs, iDevices) and Apple keeps the "dumb rendering points" such as the Airport Express and ATV2, cheap. My company tried several times to open doors with Apple, to be their gateway into the UPnP/DLNA world. Apple's only interested in what benefits Apple -- i.e. how does supporting UPnP/DLNA help Apple sell hardware? So Apple will always be a closed ecosystem but it's a very very diverse and healthy one.
Sonos is dead, they just don't know it yet. When you can get something that does 90% of what it does for 10% of the price, you're dead.
MagnusVonMagnum
Apr 15, 06:50 PM
Even USB 2.0 has a pathetic 50% effective utilization rate, while Firewire is ~95%. USB 2.0 is 480 Mb/s, which equals 60 MB/s, yet in real world speeds, you're lucky if you see 30 MB/s - HALF it's rated bandwidth. USB is just plain horrible for bulk data transfer, and the new 3.0 iteration is no different. The protocol overhead is atrocious.
No different? What planet on you living on because it's not Earth.... The link quoted tested a slow 2.5" drive and still showed a 3.5x speed improvement. USB3 can only go as fast as the drive it's connected to. You're going to find that out with TB as well. You can't make gold out of dirt.
These people on here suggesting Intel should can USB3 are not real computer users. They're non-computer types that don't know WTF they're talking about. Period. There is NO reason to NOT use USB3 on new computers. Their cost is next to nothing. They're 100% backwards compatible with USB2.0,1.1 and 1.0 and you'll need those ports regardless whether your computer has TB or not. Not having USB3 simply means less flexibility. Even if you hate it, your friend comes over with his 7200RPM USB3 drive and connects it to your Mac using USB 2.0 and instead of going 110MB/sec as it would under USB3, it goes 30-35MB/sec under USB 2.0. He then asks you why your Mac SUCKS SO HARD and your reply will be that he should have paid $400 for that drive with a TB connector instead of $150 with a USB3 connector (even though TB will not go faster because that's the limit of the drive itself). Your friend will then suggest you give him some money since you're stinking loaded to WASTE $250 more on the TB drive when USB3 would have done just as well. But then you remind him that Apple don't support no stinking USB3 and he then tells you that his PC just 'PWNED' your 'Crapple'. :eek:
Apple isn't doing themselves ANY favors to ignore mainstream tech. They want TB? Fine, but don't leave out USB3 to spite yourself. Oh wait. They already did that with Blu-Ray.... :rolleyes:
No different? What planet on you living on because it's not Earth.... The link quoted tested a slow 2.5" drive and still showed a 3.5x speed improvement. USB3 can only go as fast as the drive it's connected to. You're going to find that out with TB as well. You can't make gold out of dirt.
These people on here suggesting Intel should can USB3 are not real computer users. They're non-computer types that don't know WTF they're talking about. Period. There is NO reason to NOT use USB3 on new computers. Their cost is next to nothing. They're 100% backwards compatible with USB2.0,1.1 and 1.0 and you'll need those ports regardless whether your computer has TB or not. Not having USB3 simply means less flexibility. Even if you hate it, your friend comes over with his 7200RPM USB3 drive and connects it to your Mac using USB 2.0 and instead of going 110MB/sec as it would under USB3, it goes 30-35MB/sec under USB 2.0. He then asks you why your Mac SUCKS SO HARD and your reply will be that he should have paid $400 for that drive with a TB connector instead of $150 with a USB3 connector (even though TB will not go faster because that's the limit of the drive itself). Your friend will then suggest you give him some money since you're stinking loaded to WASTE $250 more on the TB drive when USB3 would have done just as well. But then you remind him that Apple don't support no stinking USB3 and he then tells you that his PC just 'PWNED' your 'Crapple'. :eek:
Apple isn't doing themselves ANY favors to ignore mainstream tech. They want TB? Fine, but don't leave out USB3 to spite yourself. Oh wait. They already did that with Blu-Ray.... :rolleyes:
kbmb
Mar 29, 11:11 AM
Remember, having the largest market share != the best experience.
Good for MSFT if they can get back in the game. If anything I look forward to Google and MSFT battling it out. Apple needs these two to help drive their own innovation forward.
-Kevin
Good for MSFT if they can get back in the game. If anything I look forward to Google and MSFT battling it out. Apple needs these two to help drive their own innovation forward.
-Kevin
anthonylambert
Apr 19, 08:02 AM
This is the GUI wars all over again... Last time Apple sued Microsoft for copying their GUI desktop to make Windows....
(and no Xerox didn't invent that they invented windowing not really a desktop Apple did that bit.)
Anyway Apple lost and Microsoft took over the world while Apple dwindled to a market share of less than 5%.
I don't think they want that to happen this time....
(and no Xerox didn't invent that they invented windowing not really a desktop Apple did that bit.)
Anyway Apple lost and Microsoft took over the world while Apple dwindled to a market share of less than 5%.
I don't think they want that to happen this time....
TheKrillr
Sep 5, 05:57 PM
Strange, the movie store is the thing that I am least excited about :confused: But I still hope for new imac and/or mbp.
Why is it everyone says "Ooooh i want a new macbook pro!"? I personally like the macbooks much better. The keyboard is nicer IMO, and I prefer the smaller size and the solid-color as opposed to the metallic finish.
I want a new Macbook, but ONLY if they upgrade the one i ordered last tuesday... >.>
Why is it everyone says "Ooooh i want a new macbook pro!"? I personally like the macbooks much better. The keyboard is nicer IMO, and I prefer the smaller size and the solid-color as opposed to the metallic finish.
I want a new Macbook, but ONLY if they upgrade the one i ordered last tuesday... >.>
Chris Bangle
Aug 31, 02:01 PM
Apple did this same thing before.Streaming it to London..If I recall it was the Front Row type invitation broadcast from a theatre..
Anybody remember that ?
Yeh it was the 5generation launch, they streamed it to the BBC centre i think, Sky News and BBC had the ipod as news article that night.
Anybody remember that ?
Yeh it was the 5generation launch, they streamed it to the BBC centre i think, Sky News and BBC had the ipod as news article that night.
daneoni
Sep 12, 04:30 PM
Educated guess would be "big" iPod sales will slump whilst the Nanos & Shuffles will skyrocket.
QCassidy352
Sep 26, 12:05 PM
I'm pretty happy with verizon's service. I get very good coverage and never a dropped call. OTOH, the phone choices suck, they're pretty expensive, and almost everyone I know has a verizon phone so most of my calls are free. My contract is up next May... would an iphone be enough to make me go Cingular? Depends on how revolutionary it is.
infidel69
Apr 14, 05:36 PM
Glad to hear it:D
Im really stoked to see the Ivy Bridge benchmarks...the i72600k blew my mind:eek: I feel bad for the enthusiast folks who bought a 980x :(
Enthusiasts had the 980 for atleast 6 months now and it's still faster than any sb cpu. Alot of those guys already had x58 mobo's anyway. Now if you purchased a brand new 12 core Mac Pro then then I agree with you.
Im really stoked to see the Ivy Bridge benchmarks...the i72600k blew my mind:eek: I feel bad for the enthusiast folks who bought a 980x :(
Enthusiasts had the 980 for atleast 6 months now and it's still faster than any sb cpu. Alot of those guys already had x58 mobo's anyway. Now if you purchased a brand new 12 core Mac Pro then then I agree with you.
TomCondon
Mar 30, 12:08 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
There's a place in my town called "fresh fish".
Now THAT is a generic term.
There's a place in my town called "fresh fish".
Now THAT is a generic term.
FSUSem1noles
Apr 22, 05:28 AM
Great, another way to chew through our cellular data..
I can see it now, after the release of this "cloud service" the cell companies are going to scream bloody murder "our networks can't handle all this data consumption on, we have to raise rates to upgrade our infrastructure, yada, yada.."
Zooooooom, we the consumer get the shaft yet again!
I can see it now, after the release of this "cloud service" the cell companies are going to scream bloody murder "our networks can't handle all this data consumption on, we have to raise rates to upgrade our infrastructure, yada, yada.."
Zooooooom, we the consumer get the shaft yet again!
wnurse
Aug 23, 09:58 PM
I don't know...with five lawsuits between the companies, I wouldn't be surprised if the litigation would have cost at least $100 million. But I do think Apple wasn't terribly confident...
Edit: The estimates I've seen say that a typical patent infringement case costs up to $5 million per side. This would probably be higher than a typical case, with $100 million in total not out of the question.
If apple paid 100 million, they should then sue their lawyers for fraud. This suit would not even come close to 100 million.
Edit: The estimates I've seen say that a typical patent infringement case costs up to $5 million per side. This would probably be higher than a typical case, with $100 million in total not out of the question.
If apple paid 100 million, they should then sue their lawyers for fraud. This suit would not even come close to 100 million.
tekmoe
Aug 28, 12:52 PM
I think my new rule will be to automatically place anyone using that line on my ignore list.
It lost its funny a long time ago.:rolleyes:
ditto.
It lost its funny a long time ago.:rolleyes:
ditto.
Willis
Sep 20, 06:15 AM
You do know that all this talk of Wal-Mart only applies to the US? They mean nothing out in the rest of the world, which is where Apple is taking this service.
Wal-Mart of big, but they are not that big.
Apple can still make a lot of money with Disney for the moment, they have the hearts of minds of children everywhere and parents are inclined sometimes to do things for their children, including downloading movies.
Then there is art house movies and independent movie companies which probably never see the light of day in a Wal-Mart store. There is to much going on that could be stopped by Wal-Mart.
Sucks to be them but they are not exactly the nicest company around.
Actually. Wal-Mart has a big stand in the UK. It owns ASDA which offers ALOT of crap for cheap prices. However, the cost of Cd's there are about the same as everywhere else even though it was cheaper at ASDA first.
Wal-Mart of big, but they are not that big.
Apple can still make a lot of money with Disney for the moment, they have the hearts of minds of children everywhere and parents are inclined sometimes to do things for their children, including downloading movies.
Then there is art house movies and independent movie companies which probably never see the light of day in a Wal-Mart store. There is to much going on that could be stopped by Wal-Mart.
Sucks to be them but they are not exactly the nicest company around.
Actually. Wal-Mart has a big stand in the UK. It owns ASDA which offers ALOT of crap for cheap prices. However, the cost of Cd's there are about the same as everywhere else even though it was cheaper at ASDA first.
TheKrillr
Sep 5, 05:59 PM
Yes I have..The only difference is I'm including the recording part.
Well, one option would be for the video airTunes, to have an input + hardware Mpeg-2 encoding and stream it back to your computer onto your hard drive.
This would be awesome, especially for rich people who can buy an xserve with xsan to store all their stuff on ;-) One tiny box in the living room, one huge fileserver in a backroom.
But yes, you'd probably need to have Front Row or some such on the front end, on the video airTunes.
Well, one option would be for the video airTunes, to have an input + hardware Mpeg-2 encoding and stream it back to your computer onto your hard drive.
This would be awesome, especially for rich people who can buy an xserve with xsan to store all their stuff on ;-) One tiny box in the living room, one huge fileserver in a backroom.
But yes, you'd probably need to have Front Row or some such on the front end, on the video airTunes.
callme
Mar 29, 12:59 PM
Considering that, when the iPhone was first announced, Jobs stated he would be happy with a 1% share of the market, Apple isn't doing too badly. If MS gets their act together with the Windows phone, I can see it getting a larger share. I guess how big a share depends on how Apple and Google respond with their own innovations.
He said he would be happy with 1% of the TOTAL MOBILE PHONE MARKET SHARE, not just SMARTPHONES!
What % of the total do Apple actually have?
The latest figure I could see was 1.5%, not that much over the target the Steve set.
Don't read the % figure of the Smartphone market as being the target Steve was after!
He said he would be happy with 1% of the TOTAL MOBILE PHONE MARKET SHARE, not just SMARTPHONES!
What % of the total do Apple actually have?
The latest figure I could see was 1.5%, not that much over the target the Steve set.
Don't read the % figure of the Smartphone market as being the target Steve was after!
AppleScruff1
Apr 25, 10:08 PM
And a large portion of that 99% of the market will find integrated graphics fine, until they venture to the Apple App Store, and find that their spanking new MBA have a video card not supported by 99% of the games on sale... In fact, integrated graphics are not only not supported, but are specifically singled out in most game's system requirements.
I don't question the gaming issue, I just wonder what percentage of MBP buyers would not buy because of the Intel graphics. My uneducated guess would be a very small percentage. Remember, Apple caters to the average consumer, not the geeks.
I don't question the gaming issue, I just wonder what percentage of MBP buyers would not buy because of the Intel graphics. My uneducated guess would be a very small percentage. Remember, Apple caters to the average consumer, not the geeks.
Mac Fly (film)
Sep 4, 08:04 PM
I hope the movies are available in HD. Ever since apple started offering HD movie trailers I've been drooling over the idea of downloading a full length movie in that quality.
I know what you mean, cause that quality is delicious. :)
I know what you mean, cause that quality is delicious. :)
mr.steevo
Apr 20, 09:58 AM
Ask Josh Harris what he thinks of this and he'll tell you we're right on track with losing all anonymity due to technology.
Buckle up.
Buckle up.
KingCrimson
Apr 28, 05:26 PM
Wow, Apple is pretty much unstoppable now. And if anyone tries to get in their way, they've got a $60b war chest.
Cite? The latest Yahoo! financial page has them at $29 billion.
Cite? The latest Yahoo! financial page has them at $29 billion.
kurtsayin
Oct 12, 12:52 PM
I would love to have a red iPod, but I don't know why we would ever give money to help fight AIDS on a continent where the people take NO precautions to prevent themselves from getting AIDS... I mean, sure many children are born with it in Africa, but for soooo many adults, they could prevent the spread if they would just be monogamous.
So there, I solved AIDS for free, no Oprah, no Bono, no Ipods. Just have sex only within a lifetime committed relationship and AIDS is all but gone in one generation!
I'll stick to my black aluminum iPod nano, anyhow. I just hope 10% of the proceeds didn't go to research finding cures for the black plague... or frostbite...
So there, I solved AIDS for free, no Oprah, no Bono, no Ipods. Just have sex only within a lifetime committed relationship and AIDS is all but gone in one generation!
I'll stick to my black aluminum iPod nano, anyhow. I just hope 10% of the proceeds didn't go to research finding cures for the black plague... or frostbite...
DrFrankTM
Sep 16, 12:43 AM
Just a quick thought... It's been mentioned in other threads, but I really think the camera has to be able to swivel in some way if we want to be able to take pictures of stuff in front of us while looking at the screen, and have video chats too (during which you want the camera and the screen to both be facing you). I don't recall seeing decent mock-ups that address this issue.
0 comments:
Post a Comment