Evangelion
Jul 12, 09:23 AM
I'm not. What would I like to see from Apple? What would my ideal iPod be like? Let's explore the possibilities.
Bluetooth-headphones. This would kick ass. No more wires that get tangled up. And it CAN be done!
Large touch-screen. No separate controls, the controls would be right in the display (like in the image that was linked before in this thread).
And before you say "but there would be fingerprints on the screen! And it wouldn't provide any tactile feedback!". Ah, but how about that "no-touch" controls that have been rumored? I have no idea that is it really possible, but what if? You could simply hover you finger 1cm from the screen and use the controls. No fingerprints. As to the tactile feedback.... Tactile feedback is used that you know where the controls are without actually looking at the screen. "No-touch" UI does not have this, because you aren't actually touching anything. So how do we make this work? Well, what if you could just put your finger close to the screen ANYWHERE on the screen. If you do circlular motion (like in current iPod) the device would scroll, adjust volume, and do the other things you can do on the current iPod. If you move your finger straigh up, it would be equivaltnof clicking "menu". Straight down would be play/pause and so forth.
As to WLAN and the like.... What if the new iPod could be tied to iChat? You could VOIP to/from the iPod. just turn on the wireless, and browse to the "buddy list" menu on your iPod, and you are all set. Hell, the iPod could have a camera as well! if they can put video-cameras on phones, is there any reason why iPod couldn't have one?
if we assume that the "no-touch" UI is possible, then nothing I have listed is impossible. iPod with those specs would be YEARS ahead of any other device on the market! It would absolutely embarrass all the other devices.
I decided to quote myself here. I would like Apple to REALLY do something revolutionary for a change. iPod was nice. A big improvement over what was available at the time, sure, but not revolutionary. And while iPod has been improved over the years, the steps have been quite small. Larger storage, smaller size, less weight, color-screen, refinements... How about REALLY rocking our world for a change? Enough with these evolutionary steps, take a revolutionary step instead! You have the audience, you have the market, you have the brand. You CAN do it! If there's anyone who can do it, it's you.
Remember the "Think Different"? I would like Apple to do so. Instead of living the status quo, and making small improvements, make something different. Make iPod revolutionary. The groundwork has already been done. You just need to take that one step.
Bluetooth-headphones. This would kick ass. No more wires that get tangled up. And it CAN be done!
Large touch-screen. No separate controls, the controls would be right in the display (like in the image that was linked before in this thread).
And before you say "but there would be fingerprints on the screen! And it wouldn't provide any tactile feedback!". Ah, but how about that "no-touch" controls that have been rumored? I have no idea that is it really possible, but what if? You could simply hover you finger 1cm from the screen and use the controls. No fingerprints. As to the tactile feedback.... Tactile feedback is used that you know where the controls are without actually looking at the screen. "No-touch" UI does not have this, because you aren't actually touching anything. So how do we make this work? Well, what if you could just put your finger close to the screen ANYWHERE on the screen. If you do circlular motion (like in current iPod) the device would scroll, adjust volume, and do the other things you can do on the current iPod. If you move your finger straigh up, it would be equivaltnof clicking "menu". Straight down would be play/pause and so forth.
As to WLAN and the like.... What if the new iPod could be tied to iChat? You could VOIP to/from the iPod. just turn on the wireless, and browse to the "buddy list" menu on your iPod, and you are all set. Hell, the iPod could have a camera as well! if they can put video-cameras on phones, is there any reason why iPod couldn't have one?
if we assume that the "no-touch" UI is possible, then nothing I have listed is impossible. iPod with those specs would be YEARS ahead of any other device on the market! It would absolutely embarrass all the other devices.
I decided to quote myself here. I would like Apple to REALLY do something revolutionary for a change. iPod was nice. A big improvement over what was available at the time, sure, but not revolutionary. And while iPod has been improved over the years, the steps have been quite small. Larger storage, smaller size, less weight, color-screen, refinements... How about REALLY rocking our world for a change? Enough with these evolutionary steps, take a revolutionary step instead! You have the audience, you have the market, you have the brand. You CAN do it! If there's anyone who can do it, it's you.
Remember the "Think Different"? I would like Apple to do so. Instead of living the status quo, and making small improvements, make something different. Make iPod revolutionary. The groundwork has already been done. You just need to take that one step.
ivan2002
Apr 14, 09:14 AM
What makes you think you can call people stupid???
If you paid hundreds of dollars for a hack job that voided your warranty that's now rumored to be made obsolete by a free offering from Apple, you'd lose it too :D
If you paid hundreds of dollars for a hack job that voided your warranty that's now rumored to be made obsolete by a free offering from Apple, you'd lose it too :D
cpgallo
Sep 30, 05:52 PM
I live in upstate NY and I've only had maybe 2-3 dropped calls on my iPhone since I've had the 3g. I now have the 3gs and it's the same.
ender78
Oct 23, 12:00 PM
Remember once someone sells you something they can not tell you how you can use it. That like you buying a car and in the purchase agreement they tell you your not allow to wreck the car. Grant it, they do not have to warranty it after you wreck it, but if you want to wreck it, that is up to you.
I hate to break it to you but when you buy software you are agreeing to the software licensing agreement. You must adhere to that agreement or face the loss of the license.
Microsoft is really trying to double dip. I can't blame Microsoft for preventing people from running on multiple virtual machines [someone that has 20 Vista Virtual Machines running on a server should pay for 20 licenses]. Two licenses [one for native and one for Parallels] is not too much to ask.
I hate to break it to you but when you buy software you are agreeing to the software licensing agreement. You must adhere to that agreement or face the loss of the license.
Microsoft is really trying to double dip. I can't blame Microsoft for preventing people from running on multiple virtual machines [someone that has 20 Vista Virtual Machines running on a server should pay for 20 licenses]. Two licenses [one for native and one for Parallels] is not too much to ask.
jpjandrade
May 3, 08:14 AM
The 21.5'' has a 512MB GPU while the 15'' MBP has a 1GB GPU, same chipset. There's no reason why would they do this except to push potential buyers to the 27''. This is ridiculous. If it were to keep the iMac price down, they would've added as a BTO.
Ridiculous.
Ridiculous.
shawnce
Nov 6, 09:55 AM
No I've been waiting for VM to get their butt in gear to launch Workstation. Parallels was simply a work around, a crappy one at that, until I could get VMWare. There is simply no way in heck I'm spending $80 on a piece of software that can crash my system. And before someone tells me to use Bootcamp. Yah right. Advanced Power Management does not work right under Bootcamp even with the latest version. When Parallels starts making a product that
1. Doesn't crash\freeze my system
2. Doesn't require me to force quite the application once every couple of weeks because the progress bar when I'm suspending a session has stalled.
3. Doesn't have sharing between folders that takes a good 5 seconds to parse the files and doesn't drop a file mapping in your file explorer.
4. Doesn't have the world's crappiest networking passthrough. I can't count how many times I've gone from one network to another to another and had it get confused telling me I might have limited network connectivity. So I need to repair the connection.
Parallels sucks but until now its been the only REAL game in town. Again... weird... I don't have any of the problems you are reporting on the now 4 different systems we run parallels on (2 x MacBook Pro 1 and 2 GiB, 2 x Mac Pro 2 and 6 GiB). On all system not a single crash, system lockup or stall and Windows XP Pro fells like it runs faster then on my dedicated Dell system.
One thing you have to realize is that when Parallels fires up a VM it wires down all of the memory for that VM. So basically it is making the VM memory fully unavailable for use by Mac OS X. If your VMs are large and your working set for the applications you are running on Mac OS X is also large then you will get swapping.
1. Doesn't crash\freeze my system
2. Doesn't require me to force quite the application once every couple of weeks because the progress bar when I'm suspending a session has stalled.
3. Doesn't have sharing between folders that takes a good 5 seconds to parse the files and doesn't drop a file mapping in your file explorer.
4. Doesn't have the world's crappiest networking passthrough. I can't count how many times I've gone from one network to another to another and had it get confused telling me I might have limited network connectivity. So I need to repair the connection.
Parallels sucks but until now its been the only REAL game in town. Again... weird... I don't have any of the problems you are reporting on the now 4 different systems we run parallels on (2 x MacBook Pro 1 and 2 GiB, 2 x Mac Pro 2 and 6 GiB). On all system not a single crash, system lockup or stall and Windows XP Pro fells like it runs faster then on my dedicated Dell system.
One thing you have to realize is that when Parallels fires up a VM it wires down all of the memory for that VM. So basically it is making the VM memory fully unavailable for use by Mac OS X. If your VMs are large and your working set for the applications you are running on Mac OS X is also large then you will get swapping.
whooleytoo
Apr 14, 07:49 AM
Guys, I didn't want to start a new thread, but...
Should I buy the ix.Mac.MarketingName now? I've heard the ix.Mac.MarketingName 2 is going to be much more betterer. Should I buy now or wait? I was waiting for the price to come down, but it hasn't changed in the entire 5 minutes I've known about this product...
Sent by ix.Man.NotVerySerious
Should I buy the ix.Mac.MarketingName now? I've heard the ix.Mac.MarketingName 2 is going to be much more betterer. Should I buy now or wait? I was waiting for the price to come down, but it hasn't changed in the entire 5 minutes I've known about this product...
Sent by ix.Man.NotVerySerious
Rapscallion
Apr 14, 07:15 AM
Its the new device that is implanted in your brain....iThought....
Everyone will want one, or else......
Everyone will want one, or else......
notabadname
Apr 28, 11:19 AM
Hmmmm . . .
Should Google be more excited about how many copies of Android it has sold . . . .
Or Apple about how many copies of the iPhone it has sold ?
(little hint, Google isn't selling the Android OS)
Should Google be more excited about how many copies of Android it has sold . . . .
Or Apple about how many copies of the iPhone it has sold ?
(little hint, Google isn't selling the Android OS)
Pandaboots
Jan 26, 03:29 AM
I've lost a bit. :( actually quite a lot. I bought at around 170ish a while ago in prepare for the surge of macworld like last year but am at a bit of a loss right now. I think my avatar shows my recent mood.
You haven't lost anything until you actually sell. Maybe this story will help:
Apple was the last stock I bought back during the dot com days of the late 90's/early 2000's. I got burned trying to buy and sell all the dot coms on a daily basis, so I decided that I'd "invest" what I had left in Apple. Anyway, I bought Apple at $49/share in the year 2000. I thought it was a great price for whatever reason. Guess what? The price fell to around $7 within a very short period of time. Go look at a chart and you will see the cliff in which I speak of. However, I didn't lose my cool. I was in it for the long haul, so I maintained my position. I think patience is key to investing. Long story short, I did sell at $200 recently because I wanted to diversify those earnings and made a 720% return on my investment. So essentially, my original investment more than doubled itself each year I owned the stock. Why $200? I don't know, they had been so close to it for a while that it just sounded like a good round number. Anyway, I've had my fair share of doubts throughout my 7 year stint with Apple. I never dreamed Apple would be at $200/share. I've seen huge dips in their price in short periods of time, and I've also seen huge gains too. I've also had the stock split on me too. I've also felt it was doomed and there's no way it could ever do this or ever do that....
Think about what all has happened with Apple since 2000: I've seen OS X launched, the iPod launched, iTunes launched, the switch to flat screens, all the computers they've launched, iLife, iWork, iPhone, :apple:TV, addition of movies and tv shows, etc. etc. So here's why I invested in Apple in 2000:
1) I loved the company
2) I loved their products
3) I got excited about their products
4) I was a proud customer
5) I actually kept up with what was going on with the company (mainly through appleinsider and then macrumors shortly thereafter)
6) I knew Apple was innovative and had good leadership
7) I read all of the magazines related to Apple and talked everyones ear off about Apple
However, I didn't choose Apple because of the iPod (it didn't exist then), or whether or not they expected their 2nd qtr to be better than their all time greatest qtr in history. In a nutshell I chose Apple because I believed in their products/their management team/and their ability to produce a quality product that excites people.
So, I guess what you have to ask yourself is, in the next 7 years where will Apple be as far as products and innovation? Only thing I know is since re-investing in them in December at $182, they've released :apple:TV 2, movie rentals, Macbook Air, Time Capsule, an 8 core mac pro and a pink nano (lol). I think Apple is poised and ready to dominate other markets now..pfft iPod, that's so 5 years ago, blah blah blah, Apple owns the market and will maintain their dominance, now it's time for them to dominate in the movies and the phones and hopefully in computers.
If you think they are done, then I'd be worried and sell your shares as soon as you can. If you still believe in Apple, like I do, average down your shares while you can and hold on. At these prices right now, Apple can easily double in value again. They are better positioned than ever to take on their competition. All my 7 reasons above are as true today as they were 7 years ago and 7 years prior to that. :)
You haven't lost anything until you actually sell. Maybe this story will help:
Apple was the last stock I bought back during the dot com days of the late 90's/early 2000's. I got burned trying to buy and sell all the dot coms on a daily basis, so I decided that I'd "invest" what I had left in Apple. Anyway, I bought Apple at $49/share in the year 2000. I thought it was a great price for whatever reason. Guess what? The price fell to around $7 within a very short period of time. Go look at a chart and you will see the cliff in which I speak of. However, I didn't lose my cool. I was in it for the long haul, so I maintained my position. I think patience is key to investing. Long story short, I did sell at $200 recently because I wanted to diversify those earnings and made a 720% return on my investment. So essentially, my original investment more than doubled itself each year I owned the stock. Why $200? I don't know, they had been so close to it for a while that it just sounded like a good round number. Anyway, I've had my fair share of doubts throughout my 7 year stint with Apple. I never dreamed Apple would be at $200/share. I've seen huge dips in their price in short periods of time, and I've also seen huge gains too. I've also had the stock split on me too. I've also felt it was doomed and there's no way it could ever do this or ever do that....
Think about what all has happened with Apple since 2000: I've seen OS X launched, the iPod launched, iTunes launched, the switch to flat screens, all the computers they've launched, iLife, iWork, iPhone, :apple:TV, addition of movies and tv shows, etc. etc. So here's why I invested in Apple in 2000:
1) I loved the company
2) I loved their products
3) I got excited about their products
4) I was a proud customer
5) I actually kept up with what was going on with the company (mainly through appleinsider and then macrumors shortly thereafter)
6) I knew Apple was innovative and had good leadership
7) I read all of the magazines related to Apple and talked everyones ear off about Apple
However, I didn't choose Apple because of the iPod (it didn't exist then), or whether or not they expected their 2nd qtr to be better than their all time greatest qtr in history. In a nutshell I chose Apple because I believed in their products/their management team/and their ability to produce a quality product that excites people.
So, I guess what you have to ask yourself is, in the next 7 years where will Apple be as far as products and innovation? Only thing I know is since re-investing in them in December at $182, they've released :apple:TV 2, movie rentals, Macbook Air, Time Capsule, an 8 core mac pro and a pink nano (lol). I think Apple is poised and ready to dominate other markets now..pfft iPod, that's so 5 years ago, blah blah blah, Apple owns the market and will maintain their dominance, now it's time for them to dominate in the movies and the phones and hopefully in computers.
If you think they are done, then I'd be worried and sell your shares as soon as you can. If you still believe in Apple, like I do, average down your shares while you can and hold on. At these prices right now, Apple can easily double in value again. They are better positioned than ever to take on their competition. All my 7 reasons above are as true today as they were 7 years ago and 7 years prior to that. :)
chrmjenkins
Apr 28, 04:26 PM
First, the volume switch issue, then this. I feel sorry for case manufacturers. What a nightmare.
Oh shucks, people have to buy all new cases to fit this slightly varied iphone.
Bill, I guess open another vault for all the extra money. We just ain't got no more places to put it.
Oh shucks, people have to buy all new cases to fit this slightly varied iphone.
Bill, I guess open another vault for all the extra money. We just ain't got no more places to put it.
cr2sh
Jul 25, 08:45 AM
In response to the ebay comment, why are they seemingly so dumb? ... Don't people do ANY research?
Please try to keep posts on topic. :o :confused:
I bought a kensington wireless mouse/keyboard combo yesterday for my PC. There's no chance of me returning it for this thing... I've got the wired MM and its flakey enough as it is.
Please try to keep posts on topic. :o :confused:
I bought a kensington wireless mouse/keyboard combo yesterday for my PC. There's no chance of me returning it for this thing... I've got the wired MM and its flakey enough as it is.
sevimli
Apr 21, 10:20 PM
Go samy go!
arn
Jun 6, 07:57 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)
15 minutes?
45 Seconds is all it took to get the facts...
Google search: "android market return policy"
First result: http://www.google.com/mobile/android/market-policies.html
For those too lazy to click...
"Returns: You have 24 hours from the time of purchase (not download) to return any applications purchased from Android Market for a full refund of any applicable fees."
Summary: 24 Hours, not 15 minutes.
This is such a great feature that would perhaps stimulate fair pricing and quality paid apps
Problem with this feature is it kills viability fo many non casual games. Pretty much most story/campaign games can be solved in that time period.
arn
15 minutes?
45 Seconds is all it took to get the facts...
Google search: "android market return policy"
First result: http://www.google.com/mobile/android/market-policies.html
For those too lazy to click...
"Returns: You have 24 hours from the time of purchase (not download) to return any applications purchased from Android Market for a full refund of any applicable fees."
Summary: 24 Hours, not 15 minutes.
This is such a great feature that would perhaps stimulate fair pricing and quality paid apps
Problem with this feature is it kills viability fo many non casual games. Pretty much most story/campaign games can be solved in that time period.
arn
jhu
Oct 23, 08:23 PM
how is this any different than apple's end user-license agreement for mac os x? here is section 2A (http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/macosx104.pdf):
This License allows you to install and use one copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time. This License does not allow the Apple Software to exist on more than one computer at a time, and you may not make the Apple Software available over a network where it could be used by multiple computer at the same time.
the language implies that virtualization on the same machine using the same software is forbidden. on the other hand, windows xp's end-user licence agreement (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/eula.mspx) also has similar language disallowing multiple copies of the same software to be run on the same computer:
1.1 Installation and use. You may install, use, access, display and run one copy of the Software on a single computer, such as a workstation, terminal or other device ("Workstation Computer"). The Software may not be used by more than one processor at any one time on any single Workstation Computer.
microsoft's vista license just makes the virtualization part explicit. so i don't know what the hubub is over vista's license since the mac os x and windows xp licenses say the same thing, but not explicitly.
This License allows you to install and use one copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time. This License does not allow the Apple Software to exist on more than one computer at a time, and you may not make the Apple Software available over a network where it could be used by multiple computer at the same time.
the language implies that virtualization on the same machine using the same software is forbidden. on the other hand, windows xp's end-user licence agreement (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/eula.mspx) also has similar language disallowing multiple copies of the same software to be run on the same computer:
1.1 Installation and use. You may install, use, access, display and run one copy of the Software on a single computer, such as a workstation, terminal or other device ("Workstation Computer"). The Software may not be used by more than one processor at any one time on any single Workstation Computer.
microsoft's vista license just makes the virtualization part explicit. so i don't know what the hubub is over vista's license since the mac os x and windows xp licenses say the same thing, but not explicitly.
swingerofbirch
Jul 25, 12:49 AM
I am a little confused.
It says when you move toward the screen the appropriate control appears. So say you move toward the scroll wheel and it appears. Then do you scroll by making a scrolling motion in the air but close to the screen? Or do you scroll by rubbing your finger along the image of the scroll wheel?
One other thought.....when Apple introduced the ROKR, they said it's iTunes on your phone. That sounded a bit odd to me. Apple has never referred to the software on the iPod as iTunes.
But maybe with this increased interactivity Apple will put something on this larger screen that resembles the iTunes screen (Library, Playlists, Video Lists), possibly having iTunes on your iPod? Just an idea.
It says when you move toward the screen the appropriate control appears. So say you move toward the scroll wheel and it appears. Then do you scroll by making a scrolling motion in the air but close to the screen? Or do you scroll by rubbing your finger along the image of the scroll wheel?
One other thought.....when Apple introduced the ROKR, they said it's iTunes on your phone. That sounded a bit odd to me. Apple has never referred to the software on the iPod as iTunes.
But maybe with this increased interactivity Apple will put something on this larger screen that resembles the iTunes screen (Library, Playlists, Video Lists), possibly having iTunes on your iPod? Just an idea.
TimUSCA
Apr 13, 03:21 PM
Id love to see a new standard for "HD". 1440p would be nice...but current media would have to catch up. That said, I dont think Apple could make a cost effective television. Sorry, but theyd sell a 42inch TV for 2000.000 easy.
The reason the cinema display is so expensive is due to the insanely high pixel density and it being LED backlit. It's max resolution is 2560 by 1440.
An Apple Television would only need to be 1080 across and LCD/Plasma.
HUGE difference in price.
The reason the cinema display is so expensive is due to the insanely high pixel density and it being LED backlit. It's max resolution is 2560 by 1440.
An Apple Television would only need to be 1080 across and LCD/Plasma.
HUGE difference in price.
aswitcher
Oct 24, 08:19 AM
FW800 on both sizes.
200GB HDD (at 4200rpm) available.
Good initial RAM 1GB on lower models, 2GB on high end ones.
Everything else seems pretty much the same.
802.11n pending firmware upgrade...
200GB HDD (at 4200rpm) available.
Good initial RAM 1GB on lower models, 2GB on high end ones.
Everything else seems pretty much the same.
802.11n pending firmware upgrade...
thirumalkumaran
May 3, 07:52 AM
The IPS tech screens are removed from specs...
Have they moved to TN panel sinstead...?
Have they moved to TN panel sinstead...?
fatboyslick
May 4, 05:21 AM
ugh. i always laugh at anyone who ends their 'predictions' with "you heard it here first", 'cause they nearly always end up being the most inaccurate.
Travis's claim isnt new or "heard it hear first though". It's been gossiped about on this site for weeks.
Travis's claim isnt new or "heard it hear first though". It's been gossiped about on this site for weeks.
PlipPlop
Apr 12, 09:13 AM
HTC sensation > iphone 5
That is all
That is all
steadysignal
Apr 15, 06:57 AM
Now I'd just wait for the iPhone 5
as will most.
this white phone delay seems rather odd.
hopefully those who wanted the color will now finally be able to get one.
as will most.
this white phone delay seems rather odd.
hopefully those who wanted the color will now finally be able to get one.
acidfast7
May 3, 07:42 AM
Excellent news!
I'm looking to spend some grant money and 4 x 27" iMacs and a couple 2 TB Time Capsules sounds like a great idea!
I'm looking to spend some grant money and 4 x 27" iMacs and a couple 2 TB Time Capsules sounds like a great idea!
FX4568
Apr 17, 06:55 PM
According to CNET, the new Air will be released around June with a Sandy Bridge ULV Core i5 2537M chip 1.4 GHz that can turbo to 2.3 GHz.
So for .17 GHz upgrade we are sacrificing around 30% graphic power?
So for .17 GHz upgrade we are sacrificing around 30% graphic power?
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario