Rodimus Prime
Apr 19, 04:33 PM
Yeah cause a contract breach takes just as long to prove a IP suite. They'd get slapped so fast they wont know what hit them, not to mention other companies would see it as samsung being cowboys for mixing their two business up.
but there are ways to make Apple life hell and cause huge amounts of problems with out breaking the contract.
Examples are shipments get delayed. Takes longer to process orders.
Apple needs to rush order something and get it quickly..... Guess what not going to happen.
I have seen the back world of things like this. Samsung can do a lot with out breaking the contract. Apple is gaining a reputation not to be trusted in any way shape or form.
but there are ways to make Apple life hell and cause huge amounts of problems with out breaking the contract.
Examples are shipments get delayed. Takes longer to process orders.
Apple needs to rush order something and get it quickly..... Guess what not going to happen.
I have seen the back world of things like this. Samsung can do a lot with out breaking the contract. Apple is gaining a reputation not to be trusted in any way shape or form.
FleurDuMal
Sep 14, 08:38 AM
If Apple can show a version of Aperture which will run smoothly on a Mac Pro, then my two grand is practically theirs already...
An iCamera (CameraPro?) of some kind would be nice, though highly unlikely.
An iCamera (CameraPro?) of some kind would be nice, though highly unlikely.
mozmac
Oct 27, 12:13 PM
I tend to despise radical groups (*cough* PITA *cough*), or maybe it's better stated, activist groups that act radically. However, these guys probably have some reason to what they're doing. Apple probably could do better, so...hopefully this will wake them up.
FreeState
Oct 12, 04:17 PM
The mortality rate of HIV is far higher in men than in women - and it always has been. You look this up very easily all over the web, on the CDC's website, and any number of other places... it's very clear. But if you really want to go there, here's an empirical medical fact: at its worst levels of infection (in the mid 1990s), HIV mortality rates were nearly 30 per 100,000 for men, and barely over 5 per 100,000 in women. Look it up.
Maybe we miss understand each other here, but Im talking about mortality rates of woman and children WITH HIV. Not mortality rates of all women and children. Those are two totally different things...
See...
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/455527
Although in some studies HIV infection does not progress more rapidly in women than in men,[12] there does seem to be a propensity among women to progress from AIDS to death more quickly. Delayed diagnosis of HIV-1 infection could explain a more rapid progression to AIDS. Escalating numbers of women contract HIV-1 infection each year, with increasing morbidity and mortality as a result of underrecognition and undertreatment of the disease compared with that in men.[2] Identification of at-risk women is a crucial step in ensuring adequate treatment. A recent study in Baltimore showed that women who use crack or cocaine but not intravenous drugs may still be at great risk for HIV infection because of their involvement in high-risk sexual behaviors and their history of multiple partners.[13] Thus, the range of women who are at risk is broader than initially was realized.
and
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9C0CE0D8143BF93BA15751C1A962958260
Women With H.I.V. Found to Die Faster Than Men
Women who are infected with the virus that causes AIDS die faster than men with the infection, a large study has found.
No medical reason for the difference was apparent, said the study's authors, led by Dr. Sandra L. Melnick, an epidemiologist at the University of Minnesota School of Public Health. They suggested that women may wait until they are sicker before seeking care or may be treated differently.
The study tracked 768 women and 3,779 men, all infected with H.I.V., the human immunodeficiency virus, for about 15 months and found that women were 33 percent more likely to die than men who were comparably ill when they were enrolled in the study.
Maybe we miss understand each other here, but Im talking about mortality rates of woman and children WITH HIV. Not mortality rates of all women and children. Those are two totally different things...
See...
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/455527
Although in some studies HIV infection does not progress more rapidly in women than in men,[12] there does seem to be a propensity among women to progress from AIDS to death more quickly. Delayed diagnosis of HIV-1 infection could explain a more rapid progression to AIDS. Escalating numbers of women contract HIV-1 infection each year, with increasing morbidity and mortality as a result of underrecognition and undertreatment of the disease compared with that in men.[2] Identification of at-risk women is a crucial step in ensuring adequate treatment. A recent study in Baltimore showed that women who use crack or cocaine but not intravenous drugs may still be at great risk for HIV infection because of their involvement in high-risk sexual behaviors and their history of multiple partners.[13] Thus, the range of women who are at risk is broader than initially was realized.
and
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9C0CE0D8143BF93BA15751C1A962958260
Women With H.I.V. Found to Die Faster Than Men
Women who are infected with the virus that causes AIDS die faster than men with the infection, a large study has found.
No medical reason for the difference was apparent, said the study's authors, led by Dr. Sandra L. Melnick, an epidemiologist at the University of Minnesota School of Public Health. They suggested that women may wait until they are sicker before seeking care or may be treated differently.
The study tracked 768 women and 3,779 men, all infected with H.I.V., the human immunodeficiency virus, for about 15 months and found that women were 33 percent more likely to die than men who were comparably ill when they were enrolled in the study.
BWhaler
Aug 28, 11:01 PM
Well, I was disappointed, but not surprised.
Since no manufacturer is shipping until mid-September, it is no great shock that Apple did nothing today. Plus, they don't want to be grouped with those companies anyhow.
Since no manufacturer is shipping until mid-September, it is no great shock that Apple did nothing today. Plus, they don't want to be grouped with those companies anyhow.
iJohnHenry
Apr 25, 10:33 AM
So it seems that the OP may be a liar or have memory recall issues, considering the inconsistences found in his prior posts. Is there a MR rule for that?
Perhaps we need a Fiction forum, in order that the children may play there?
Perhaps we need a Fiction forum, in order that the children may play there?
Flyinace2000
Sep 13, 09:58 PM
It better be GSM based so i can unlock it.
seek3r
May 4, 08:33 AM
Personally I'm a huge fan of daisy chaining. Less devices, less cables, less clutter. You just attach each device to the next.
What is it you have an aversion to?
What if I need to pull a drive somewhere in the chain but I'm still accessing a device farther along the chain? Daisy chaining is a *massive* pain for anyone who deals with external devices that aren't permanently, or at least semi-permanently, hooked up to a single machine!
What is it you have an aversion to?
What if I need to pull a drive somewhere in the chain but I'm still accessing a device farther along the chain? Daisy chaining is a *massive* pain for anyone who deals with external devices that aren't permanently, or at least semi-permanently, hooked up to a single machine!
MagnusVonMagnum
Apr 12, 03:52 PM
I'm confused... What will this give us in XBMC that we don't already have? Since I'm assuming you're running XBMC on Apple TV2, Airplay already works just fine...
Airplay and Airtunes are two different things AFAIK. I was under the impression that AUDIO was routed ONLY through AirTUNES and that AirPLAY was purely the VIDEO portion of the stream. Thus, you could stream a video to XBMC from an iPad, but you would get no audio and/or music could not be streamed with it. At least this was the jist I got from a thread on the matter when Airplay functionality was first added. Cracking the Airtunes key would enable XBMC to be seen from within iTunes as a full fledged audio device and thus you could output audio to it and other speakers at the same time, etc. and control it all from "REMOTE" on an iOS device.
Come to think of it, I see the thread title is "AirPLAY Private Key Exposed". So either that is a misprint or this thread is terribly out of date. AirPLAY has been known for quite a long time and it has NOTHING to do with an Airport Express, which is only AirTUNES so I'm assuming they mean the Airtunes key has been exposed (Airplay was not encrypted to my knowledge, only Airtunes). AppleTV Gen1 only has AirTunes, not AirPlay, for example as does Airport Express.
Hi
Not simultaneous control like AirTunes. You can stream to multiple computers, but it will need to be controlled separately -- as far as I know.
I can't think of a good reason to stream strictly audio to multiple computers, even if each is connected to speakers. Seems very clumsy to me, and you'd be better off getting an Airport Express ($69 refurbished (http://store.apple.com/us/product/FB321LL/A?mco=MTY3ODQ5OTY)) for each speaker system or getting AirPlay-supported speakers.
Why would you want to buy another device and/or set of speakers for a given room if it already has a good set of speakers connected to a computer, especially if that computer is already turned on? You'd need switching of some kind (e.g. receiver) to even use the same speakers with another device and it would just be a waste of money (unless you never plan to have that computer turned on and/or that is not the main speakers in that room). For example, my whole house audio/video server is on 24/7 and has Klipsch THX speakers connected to it. Why on earth would I want an Airport Express in that room, especially when it's normally the computer that is spooling out the iTunes information to begin with?
It makes me grin a little when I see posts like in this thread posted by people who obviously have no shortage of money (with their multiple mac systems) and yet dont want to hand over a little money for something thats been out for 5 years and makes the audio elements of airplay completely redundant.
Sonos. Easier, way better quality, more options, fully upgradeable, completely unrestrictive. And it just works.
For videophiles get a popcorn hour, 1080p streaming goodness which plays formats Apple TV can only dream of.
To host the content (if you dont want to buy an internal hard drive for Popcorn Hour) a simple NAS.
- Sonos is not "way better quality" (AppleTV2 output is DIGITAL and so the "quality" depends entirely on the stereo you connect it to. So sorry but you have no point there.
- It may not be better quality, but it IS "way more expensive". AppleTV2 costs $99 (same price as an Airport Express which is "audio only" like Sonos). Sonos OTOH costs $349 for a basic receiver which then still requires to either be connected directly to a router (wired) OR you have to pay ANOTHER $99 for a "bridge" to send a separate wireless signal off your router just for Sonos devices (waste of bandwidth and clutters the band with more wireless signals instead of just using your existing wireless router, which most people already have (how many used a wired only router and if you did you cannot use the Sonos wireless for anything else). So already you are at LEAST $450 in the hole for a single room with Sonos and you have ONLY AUDIO capability.
-But then I would be forgetting you need a SOURCE of music. You tout the use of an NAS, but most NAS devices aren't exactly cheap or anything. For all intensive purposes they are a just a headless computer and most run Linux. AppleTV2 is out of the box a PITA if you don't want to leave a computer on, but you can put XBMC on it which will use any NAS or networked source. You then have the same functionality as Sonos BUT you also have full video capability. You could instead get a cheap Netbook for $250 (cheaper than most NAS devices) and connect a hard drive to that and run iTunes and the full Apple interface if you'd like and still have XBMC available as well. Personally, I just use an old PPC G4 PowerMac as a server and 24/7 Internet terminal. Intel machines can also be set to Wake On Lan, so you can have your machine sleep while AppleTV is not in use. In short, NAS isn't as great as you make it sound (most are also dog slow compared to a real computer) and there are alternative options even with Apple software like a cheap Netbook as a server.
-Now I come to the heart of the matter...VIDEO. You suggest a Popcorn Hour in ADDITION to the already out of this world priced Sonos system. They start at $179 and go up to $299. That brings your total minimum price for a wireless system for a single room to $629 AND you have to switch between two separate devices to listen to audio and/or watch videos. With AppleTV you have all your movies, tv shows, photos, music, music videos, YouTube and Internet Radio (plus the options of XBMC with a quick hack including non-Apple formats) and your TOTAL COST for **one** room wireless using an existing wireless router is $99. $629 versus $99...Hmmmmmm. And then there's the matter of Popcorn Hour's crappy interface versus Apple's polished one. XBMC makes Popcorn Hour look bad as well. Bugs or popcorn? :confused:
So for the price of your ONE room audio and video, I could have SIX rooms using AppleTV2 with both video and audio and still have $29 to spare. With XBMC installed, it can play any format (just like Popcorn Hour). With the Apple interface running, it can sync audio to all rooms or play independently (just like Sonos). And it all can be controlled by an iOS device as well or programmed to accept the signals from any IR remote out there with extra buttons available.
Using ONE device (AppleTV), I have menu access to ALL my media collection without even having to switch the input on the receiver. I can play slide shows to my music collection and watch my entire video library (including VHS/Laserdisc/DVD/Blu-Ray conversions) and rent HD movies at the push of a button (Netflix is available on ATV2 as well).
I see ZERO advantage to Sonos and it costs a LOT more (what restrictions are you referring to with ATV? iTunes handles WAV, AAC, MP3 and Apple Lossless and seamlessly plays DTS music CDs that have been dumped). 3rd party formats like Flac are easily converted or they can be played in XBMC. Popcorn Hour's only advantage (once you figure XBMC into the fold) is that it can output in 1080p (ATV2 downconverts the final output to 720p at the moment, although my Gen1 ATV can play 1080p with XBMC using the Linux OS install and a cheap Crystal card in the one room where it matters here with a 93" screen).
In other words, I need lack nothing here at a fraction of the price and way better integration than your solution.
Airplay and Airtunes are two different things AFAIK. I was under the impression that AUDIO was routed ONLY through AirTUNES and that AirPLAY was purely the VIDEO portion of the stream. Thus, you could stream a video to XBMC from an iPad, but you would get no audio and/or music could not be streamed with it. At least this was the jist I got from a thread on the matter when Airplay functionality was first added. Cracking the Airtunes key would enable XBMC to be seen from within iTunes as a full fledged audio device and thus you could output audio to it and other speakers at the same time, etc. and control it all from "REMOTE" on an iOS device.
Come to think of it, I see the thread title is "AirPLAY Private Key Exposed". So either that is a misprint or this thread is terribly out of date. AirPLAY has been known for quite a long time and it has NOTHING to do with an Airport Express, which is only AirTUNES so I'm assuming they mean the Airtunes key has been exposed (Airplay was not encrypted to my knowledge, only Airtunes). AppleTV Gen1 only has AirTunes, not AirPlay, for example as does Airport Express.
Hi
Not simultaneous control like AirTunes. You can stream to multiple computers, but it will need to be controlled separately -- as far as I know.
I can't think of a good reason to stream strictly audio to multiple computers, even if each is connected to speakers. Seems very clumsy to me, and you'd be better off getting an Airport Express ($69 refurbished (http://store.apple.com/us/product/FB321LL/A?mco=MTY3ODQ5OTY)) for each speaker system or getting AirPlay-supported speakers.
Why would you want to buy another device and/or set of speakers for a given room if it already has a good set of speakers connected to a computer, especially if that computer is already turned on? You'd need switching of some kind (e.g. receiver) to even use the same speakers with another device and it would just be a waste of money (unless you never plan to have that computer turned on and/or that is not the main speakers in that room). For example, my whole house audio/video server is on 24/7 and has Klipsch THX speakers connected to it. Why on earth would I want an Airport Express in that room, especially when it's normally the computer that is spooling out the iTunes information to begin with?
It makes me grin a little when I see posts like in this thread posted by people who obviously have no shortage of money (with their multiple mac systems) and yet dont want to hand over a little money for something thats been out for 5 years and makes the audio elements of airplay completely redundant.
Sonos. Easier, way better quality, more options, fully upgradeable, completely unrestrictive. And it just works.
For videophiles get a popcorn hour, 1080p streaming goodness which plays formats Apple TV can only dream of.
To host the content (if you dont want to buy an internal hard drive for Popcorn Hour) a simple NAS.
- Sonos is not "way better quality" (AppleTV2 output is DIGITAL and so the "quality" depends entirely on the stereo you connect it to. So sorry but you have no point there.
- It may not be better quality, but it IS "way more expensive". AppleTV2 costs $99 (same price as an Airport Express which is "audio only" like Sonos). Sonos OTOH costs $349 for a basic receiver which then still requires to either be connected directly to a router (wired) OR you have to pay ANOTHER $99 for a "bridge" to send a separate wireless signal off your router just for Sonos devices (waste of bandwidth and clutters the band with more wireless signals instead of just using your existing wireless router, which most people already have (how many used a wired only router and if you did you cannot use the Sonos wireless for anything else). So already you are at LEAST $450 in the hole for a single room with Sonos and you have ONLY AUDIO capability.
-But then I would be forgetting you need a SOURCE of music. You tout the use of an NAS, but most NAS devices aren't exactly cheap or anything. For all intensive purposes they are a just a headless computer and most run Linux. AppleTV2 is out of the box a PITA if you don't want to leave a computer on, but you can put XBMC on it which will use any NAS or networked source. You then have the same functionality as Sonos BUT you also have full video capability. You could instead get a cheap Netbook for $250 (cheaper than most NAS devices) and connect a hard drive to that and run iTunes and the full Apple interface if you'd like and still have XBMC available as well. Personally, I just use an old PPC G4 PowerMac as a server and 24/7 Internet terminal. Intel machines can also be set to Wake On Lan, so you can have your machine sleep while AppleTV is not in use. In short, NAS isn't as great as you make it sound (most are also dog slow compared to a real computer) and there are alternative options even with Apple software like a cheap Netbook as a server.
-Now I come to the heart of the matter...VIDEO. You suggest a Popcorn Hour in ADDITION to the already out of this world priced Sonos system. They start at $179 and go up to $299. That brings your total minimum price for a wireless system for a single room to $629 AND you have to switch between two separate devices to listen to audio and/or watch videos. With AppleTV you have all your movies, tv shows, photos, music, music videos, YouTube and Internet Radio (plus the options of XBMC with a quick hack including non-Apple formats) and your TOTAL COST for **one** room wireless using an existing wireless router is $99. $629 versus $99...Hmmmmmm. And then there's the matter of Popcorn Hour's crappy interface versus Apple's polished one. XBMC makes Popcorn Hour look bad as well. Bugs or popcorn? :confused:
So for the price of your ONE room audio and video, I could have SIX rooms using AppleTV2 with both video and audio and still have $29 to spare. With XBMC installed, it can play any format (just like Popcorn Hour). With the Apple interface running, it can sync audio to all rooms or play independently (just like Sonos). And it all can be controlled by an iOS device as well or programmed to accept the signals from any IR remote out there with extra buttons available.
Using ONE device (AppleTV), I have menu access to ALL my media collection without even having to switch the input on the receiver. I can play slide shows to my music collection and watch my entire video library (including VHS/Laserdisc/DVD/Blu-Ray conversions) and rent HD movies at the push of a button (Netflix is available on ATV2 as well).
I see ZERO advantage to Sonos and it costs a LOT more (what restrictions are you referring to with ATV? iTunes handles WAV, AAC, MP3 and Apple Lossless and seamlessly plays DTS music CDs that have been dumped). 3rd party formats like Flac are easily converted or they can be played in XBMC. Popcorn Hour's only advantage (once you figure XBMC into the fold) is that it can output in 1080p (ATV2 downconverts the final output to 720p at the moment, although my Gen1 ATV can play 1080p with XBMC using the Linux OS install and a cheap Crystal card in the one room where it matters here with a 93" screen).
In other words, I need lack nothing here at a fraction of the price and way better integration than your solution.
AtHomeBoy_2000
Sep 14, 10:41 AM
Along with updated Apature, could Apple launch CS2 universal with Adobe?
Full of Win
Apr 25, 02:51 PM
For those wanting retina displays:
No modern GPU can display anything past 2560x1600 on a single screen.
Please :rolleyes:
Do you mean they lack the power or that its not a selectable option? They have the power, have had it for years. Dual 2560x1600 screen setups off one graphics card is easily attainable.
No modern GPU can display anything past 2560x1600 on a single screen.
Please :rolleyes:
Do you mean they lack the power or that its not a selectable option? They have the power, have had it for years. Dual 2560x1600 screen setups off one graphics card is easily attainable.
syklee26
Sep 13, 09:36 PM
How do you figure this is an awesome design? This is a brainless design! Designing the nano in the first place might have been awesome. But making a nano a phone is hardly a leap of design genius!
And you mentioned chocolate and awesome design in the same sentence!!!:confused: :confused: :confused:
whether you like it or not, chocolate phone is one of the hottest phone in KOREA, the cell phone dynasty. and you have to note that chocolate in Korea and the chocolate in US sport two different designs.
and about that iChat Mobile....that phone is very practical but it might be way too big. and if they shrink the size, the keypad might be too small.
whether that rumor is true or not, i do think that the mock design by macrumors is the best way to incorporate both iPod functions and phone functions
And you mentioned chocolate and awesome design in the same sentence!!!:confused: :confused: :confused:
whether you like it or not, chocolate phone is one of the hottest phone in KOREA, the cell phone dynasty. and you have to note that chocolate in Korea and the chocolate in US sport two different designs.
and about that iChat Mobile....that phone is very practical but it might be way too big. and if they shrink the size, the keypad might be too small.
whether that rumor is true or not, i do think that the mock design by macrumors is the best way to incorporate both iPod functions and phone functions
Daveway
Sep 6, 03:49 PM
Ship times on the Airport Extreme have been pushed back 1-3 weeks. Anyone else notice?
fetchmebeers
Sep 12, 03:07 PM
Looks like the iPods are still at 5G with some tweaks, which is weird considering they had a whole year. I feel no urge to upgrade my current model no major difference for me. Search functions would be pretty sweet though. Wonder why they didnt just give the current 5G iPods that feature with a software update.
The new nanos look really tempting. a 4GB silver would go nicely with my PB.
my thoughts exactly... there aren't that much of a difference, right??
anyway, hey, are the search functions gonna be attainable for the last 5gen ipod as well ? with the software update??? i wish that's the case......please
i've been desperately looking for the reasons as to stick to the old 5gen which i bought just yesterday
The new nanos look really tempting. a 4GB silver would go nicely with my PB.
my thoughts exactly... there aren't that much of a difference, right??
anyway, hey, are the search functions gonna be attainable for the last 5gen ipod as well ? with the software update??? i wish that's the case......please
i've been desperately looking for the reasons as to stick to the old 5gen which i bought just yesterday
reallynotnick
Apr 25, 04:15 PM
Absolutely perfect design? Not even close.
Things apple needs to do to make a better MBP with a redesign:
MUST DO:
(1) IPS screen. I actually don't mind lower resolutions on small screens (1280x800 is fine for 13.3"), but please, please give me a real IPS panel.
(2) Sharp edges need to go. I don't care what people say, working on a macbook for any extended period of time leaves deep grooves in my wrists/palms.
(3) A better design for cooling. Even with light cpu usage, the fans go crazy on my MBP and it gets terribly loud. Awful experience. I'm hoping Ivy Bridge will help with this. Either way, the fans need to be quieter. Maybe larger, slower fans rather than small fast ones?
WOULD BE NICE:
(4) Ability to turn off the super bright glowing apple logo would be nice
(5) Change 13.3" macbook to 14" (they prob won't do this)
(6) Support some kind of docking station (maybe just with thunderbolt?)
I love this idea so I'll just add on
As for 6, I either would like it to be 14in in the same form factor (less bezel) or just make it a smaller 13in with less bezel.
7. Do a hybrid HDD/SSD drive, like Seagate has.
8. Remove optical drive (makes room for things I actually use, like processors/gpus/cooling)
9. Make a matte option on the 13in, (ideally ditch the glass in general for either regular glossy or matte screens)
10. Make the laptop slightly lighter, like .2-.5lbs lighter
11. Put a real GPU in the 13in
12. Also somehow fit a quad core in the 13in
13. Allow for 16GB of RAM
If they did all this by next summer, well gosh I would be the happiest guy in the world but even half of these things would be pretty nice.
Things apple needs to do to make a better MBP with a redesign:
MUST DO:
(1) IPS screen. I actually don't mind lower resolutions on small screens (1280x800 is fine for 13.3"), but please, please give me a real IPS panel.
(2) Sharp edges need to go. I don't care what people say, working on a macbook for any extended period of time leaves deep grooves in my wrists/palms.
(3) A better design for cooling. Even with light cpu usage, the fans go crazy on my MBP and it gets terribly loud. Awful experience. I'm hoping Ivy Bridge will help with this. Either way, the fans need to be quieter. Maybe larger, slower fans rather than small fast ones?
WOULD BE NICE:
(4) Ability to turn off the super bright glowing apple logo would be nice
(5) Change 13.3" macbook to 14" (they prob won't do this)
(6) Support some kind of docking station (maybe just with thunderbolt?)
I love this idea so I'll just add on
As for 6, I either would like it to be 14in in the same form factor (less bezel) or just make it a smaller 13in with less bezel.
7. Do a hybrid HDD/SSD drive, like Seagate has.
8. Remove optical drive (makes room for things I actually use, like processors/gpus/cooling)
9. Make a matte option on the 13in, (ideally ditch the glass in general for either regular glossy or matte screens)
10. Make the laptop slightly lighter, like .2-.5lbs lighter
11. Put a real GPU in the 13in
12. Also somehow fit a quad core in the 13in
13. Allow for 16GB of RAM
If they did all this by next summer, well gosh I would be the happiest guy in the world but even half of these things would be pretty nice.
JAT
Apr 29, 03:56 PM
that was in 2005 when it first came out. by now they are on a revision that costs a lot less to make and they have sold a lot of games and XBL subs to make up for it. back when the 360 first came out it had an attach rate of 8 games, higher than Sony. figure at $10 licensing per game that's $80 per console on average plus XBL. so i don't know if the isuppli numbers are accurate.
a lot of companies in the console market have been doing it like this for years. take a loss the first year or two, sell break even or small profit later in the cycle and make it up on the games. except for nintendo which is doing the opposite. make money early in the cycle and start losing money at the end of the cycle.
2011 the division will probably turn a profit of $3 to $4 billion or so due to kinect. 2010 was also profitable. if the Nokia partnership works out 2012 will be even better.
You do understand that 2008 minus 2001 plus development time is more than 1 or 2, right? That's 7, maybe 9 years of losses.
My original comment was that this is a poor way to do it, from a finance perspective. There was no guarantee, and if Sony and M$ didn't have profit elsewhere, these wouldn't even exist. Nintendo made money on the Wii almost immediately, as you've claimed M$ did. It sounds like you are talking about Nintendo.
a lot of companies in the console market have been doing it like this for years. take a loss the first year or two, sell break even or small profit later in the cycle and make it up on the games. except for nintendo which is doing the opposite. make money early in the cycle and start losing money at the end of the cycle.
2011 the division will probably turn a profit of $3 to $4 billion or so due to kinect. 2010 was also profitable. if the Nokia partnership works out 2012 will be even better.
You do understand that 2008 minus 2001 plus development time is more than 1 or 2, right? That's 7, maybe 9 years of losses.
My original comment was that this is a poor way to do it, from a finance perspective. There was no guarantee, and if Sony and M$ didn't have profit elsewhere, these wouldn't even exist. Nintendo made money on the Wii almost immediately, as you've claimed M$ did. It sounds like you are talking about Nintendo.
Chundles
Sep 15, 07:39 PM
...this law just got passed (today?). It won't be enforced until July next year, I think.
I wouldn't say it is stupid. The other day, I saw a woman driving a big SUV, a cellphone in one hand and an icecream in the other :eek:
It's been law in the whole country here for many years, not a stupid law at all and I've seen it enforced many times. If you're driving that's where 100% of your attention should be, just because you've got away with it before doesn't mean you always will.
I wouldn't say it is stupid. The other day, I saw a woman driving a big SUV, a cellphone in one hand and an icecream in the other :eek:
It's been law in the whole country here for many years, not a stupid law at all and I've seen it enforced many times. If you're driving that's where 100% of your attention should be, just because you've got away with it before doesn't mean you always will.
rovex
Apr 22, 11:42 AM
I think the building consensus is that PC gaming is wearing. Intel's graphic chip shouldn't detour many with the much improved CPU to boot. I'm totally happy I skipped the 2010 refresh.
SeaFox
Sep 16, 07:49 PM
I'd love it to be unlocked too. But they'll probably make it GSM so i'll need to switch networks. Unless they're REALLY nice and make it GSM/CDMA like my Samsung A790 (about to be on my third of those- they have a knack for survival unless you hurl them onto concrete 5 feet below you as hard as you can throw them). I'd pay tons of money for that.
Hardware locked doesn't mean GSM or CDMA. That's about what the actual radio equipment is inside the phone. I'm talking about the programming done to the phone so it will only work with one provider's network. T-Mobile and Cingular both use GSM (T-Mobile: 1900mhz, Cingular: 850mhz mostly), but you can't just take one phone to the other even though most phones from both providers support both frequencies. You would have to apply a text command to the phone to allow that.
I recently had to replace my phone (which was locked to T-Mobile) because I lost it, and I got a Cingular-branded phone which was factory unlocked. I just put my T-Mobile SIM in and it works for voice. GPRS required a call to support, and it has boot and shutdown screens w/ the little orange guy on them, but for the most part it works fine.
I also hate carrier branding on handsets. Which is why I want Apple to sell it unlocked. If they partner with Cingular (given that's how the ROKR went) I'll have to 1) buy at a Cingular dealer, 2) find someone/thing to unlock it from Cingular's network, and 3) still have the dumb Cingular logo ON THE PHONE.
Most handsets today don't have replaceable covers (which is how I usually handle this), or even if they do the carrier will put their branding on a part that is not replaceable.
Hardware locked doesn't mean GSM or CDMA. That's about what the actual radio equipment is inside the phone. I'm talking about the programming done to the phone so it will only work with one provider's network. T-Mobile and Cingular both use GSM (T-Mobile: 1900mhz, Cingular: 850mhz mostly), but you can't just take one phone to the other even though most phones from both providers support both frequencies. You would have to apply a text command to the phone to allow that.
I recently had to replace my phone (which was locked to T-Mobile) because I lost it, and I got a Cingular-branded phone which was factory unlocked. I just put my T-Mobile SIM in and it works for voice. GPRS required a call to support, and it has boot and shutdown screens w/ the little orange guy on them, but for the most part it works fine.
I also hate carrier branding on handsets. Which is why I want Apple to sell it unlocked. If they partner with Cingular (given that's how the ROKR went) I'll have to 1) buy at a Cingular dealer, 2) find someone/thing to unlock it from Cingular's network, and 3) still have the dumb Cingular logo ON THE PHONE.
Most handsets today don't have replaceable covers (which is how I usually handle this), or even if they do the carrier will put their branding on a part that is not replaceable.
ezekielrage_99
May 1, 05:49 AM
I think you're gonna get pretty disappointed. It wont't have blu-ray, likely no usb3, less likely that it'll have 2GBVram, the only way you're getting another hdd is to take out the optical drive, and it won't support 24GB of RAM.
I know I'll be disappointed if it doesn't come with that spec and I did add comments to the side reinforcing the fact I am realistic, but I would expect it to at least support 24GB considering there are Sandy Bridge mainboards that do support that while 1GB graphics is pretty standard now (well for PC).
2 internal HDDs and no i3 option is just wishful thinking though ;) While Bluray I can understand from an Apple stand point why it wont be an addition anytime soon.
However consider this, the last MBP release did surprise many with regards to the specs and performance. Many speculated it would be i3/5 and BTO would have i7 while the other main rumor speculated would not come with Thundercats or a 1GB Video card option.
Lately with regards to specs I think Apple are getting a little better with releasing competitive spec machines.
I know I'll be disappointed if it doesn't come with that spec and I did add comments to the side reinforcing the fact I am realistic, but I would expect it to at least support 24GB considering there are Sandy Bridge mainboards that do support that while 1GB graphics is pretty standard now (well for PC).
2 internal HDDs and no i3 option is just wishful thinking though ;) While Bluray I can understand from an Apple stand point why it wont be an addition anytime soon.
However consider this, the last MBP release did surprise many with regards to the specs and performance. Many speculated it would be i3/5 and BTO would have i7 while the other main rumor speculated would not come with Thundercats or a 1GB Video card option.
Lately with regards to specs I think Apple are getting a little better with releasing competitive spec machines.
G4DP
Mar 22, 01:30 PM
Glad all the consumers machines get this first. All the kinks can be worked out before the MacPro gets it at the end of the year.
LaCie have started making drives etc with Cripplepeak connectivity. There are a few others.
LaCie have started making drives etc with Cripplepeak connectivity. There are a few others.
emaja
Apr 22, 11:31 AM
Well no, not in the true sense of the word, but you do have the data and can use the data elsewhere.
In the same way technically you don't own the music on a record, or cassette or CD, but you do have the ability to use/listen to the music elsewhere.
I can just see this ability, which we have taken for granted since the 1st every records were sold to the public in around 1894 will soon, if big companies get there way and the public buy into it without thinking, will be coming to an end.
I was just pointing this out, but I agree that it could be something that was easier to take away if there was no physical media.
I am stuck between the two worlds of physical and digital media. I prefer to hold something in my hand since it makes me feel like I own something. As soon as I get the disk home I rip it in lossless into iTunes and put it in a box after tagging it meticulously. I enjoy the convenience, but not ready to take that full leap.
In the same way technically you don't own the music on a record, or cassette or CD, but you do have the ability to use/listen to the music elsewhere.
I can just see this ability, which we have taken for granted since the 1st every records were sold to the public in around 1894 will soon, if big companies get there way and the public buy into it without thinking, will be coming to an end.
I was just pointing this out, but I agree that it could be something that was easier to take away if there was no physical media.
I am stuck between the two worlds of physical and digital media. I prefer to hold something in my hand since it makes me feel like I own something. As soon as I get the disk home I rip it in lossless into iTunes and put it in a box after tagging it meticulously. I enjoy the convenience, but not ready to take that full leap.
steviem
Apr 25, 10:33 AM
Holy crap. I just finished reading the thread. Please stay off the road. You did this **** in your moms E60 M5 with 500 HP? I know where this story is heading. Soon you will take that car to an abandoned airport with 3 of your friends which then you will flip it and kill you and your friends. Or you will do that 155 MPH in a neighborhood. These two examples are true stories of 16-18 year olds kids with an E60 M5 who shared the exact same attitude as you and did those stunts. Please do not drive, learn to fly, etc until you gain the maturity to handle these machines.
You will respond to my post saying that you will never do what those people did. That you're a safe driver and claim you will never do that. Guess what pal? Those kids also claimed the exact same thing. Now four people are dead and the other is screwed.
I don't even want him on a pedal bike!
You will respond to my post saying that you will never do what those people did. That you're a safe driver and claim you will never do that. Guess what pal? Those kids also claimed the exact same thing. Now four people are dead and the other is screwed.
I don't even want him on a pedal bike!
gerlitzappel
Oct 27, 07:41 PM
Just for the record, I hate greencepeace and everything they stand for.
No comments:
Post a Comment