DTphonehome
Jul 30, 09:26 PM
Some rumors for the Verizon Chocolate (http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/cellphones/lg-vx8500-chocolate-to-verizon-confirmed-187461.php) suggest an AUGUST 7TH Release Date. That's the same day as the start of WWDC, when Apple's new products will be announced! Just a coincidence?
There's signs all over NYC saying 7/31/06 for the chocolate.
There's signs all over NYC saying 7/31/06 for the chocolate.
nuckinfutz
May 7, 11:32 AM
OK, I'll grant you that MobileMe doesn't suck as much as I make it sound. I just don't like it and so I don't use it anymore. Fair enough.
But, I think you misunderstand how Google's ads work. They aren't indexing and storing your emails in some data bank to sell off to ad companies. They do simple pattern matching on the text in your email to figure out which ads are most relevant and then displays those to you. The ad companies don't have access to your emails and can't read them, etc. I'm not being capitalized. If I don't want the ads I can pay $50 / year, or I can take the ads for free. That's just business, I enter into that in full agreement. And I trust Google just as much (if not more) than some random schmo ISP that would give me shoddy email service and just as much privacy as Google does but without the ads.
Point taken but what kind of FOOL am I to trade my privacy to Google for a paltry $6 at any level?
Where you go, who you speak to and how you communicate is of tremendous value and I recommend that people think about actual value. We're moving from this era where the expectation should be that Cloud services at a basic level should be incorporated into the product without the vendor resorting to advertisements.
Google and Facebook have both come out with disturbing revelations about how they feel about consumer privacy. I think the beauty of the web is that no company is irreplaceable. I could continue to get email, online calendar, pictures, documents and more without Google and that's a great feeling.
But, I think you misunderstand how Google's ads work. They aren't indexing and storing your emails in some data bank to sell off to ad companies. They do simple pattern matching on the text in your email to figure out which ads are most relevant and then displays those to you. The ad companies don't have access to your emails and can't read them, etc. I'm not being capitalized. If I don't want the ads I can pay $50 / year, or I can take the ads for free. That's just business, I enter into that in full agreement. And I trust Google just as much (if not more) than some random schmo ISP that would give me shoddy email service and just as much privacy as Google does but without the ads.
Point taken but what kind of FOOL am I to trade my privacy to Google for a paltry $6 at any level?
Where you go, who you speak to and how you communicate is of tremendous value and I recommend that people think about actual value. We're moving from this era where the expectation should be that Cloud services at a basic level should be incorporated into the product without the vendor resorting to advertisements.
Google and Facebook have both come out with disturbing revelations about how they feel about consumer privacy. I think the beauty of the web is that no company is irreplaceable. I could continue to get email, online calendar, pictures, documents and more without Google and that's a great feeling.
navguy
Jan 6, 06:10 PM
after a week of experimenting ...
no rattle
good bluetooth connection
landscape position is delicate, but holding fine - no movement on bumps (i've tested center position on back and shifted toward bottom in landscape; both work well)
GPS lock is interesting ... 1. definitely takes mount GPS 20-30 seconds from cold start; 2. fast lock is no doubt iPhone assisted GPS initially; 3. there is a moment 30 seconds from cold start when it switches over to mount GPS once lock is achieved (a noticable lag moment - but gotta be watching close)
while i don't have complete facts, i do think the satnavs use the mount most of the time, except from cold start when GPS lock is a bit slower then phone's assisted GPS
speaker works fine - although i'd like to be able to change the inital volume (too loud) w/in the free app
no use of AUX
one add'l thing i've found is that phone boots the mount bluetooth for ear piece - no multi connect option as far as i can tell (iPhone 'feature'?)
otherwise, enjoying the integrated features of the mount so far ...
no rattle
good bluetooth connection
landscape position is delicate, but holding fine - no movement on bumps (i've tested center position on back and shifted toward bottom in landscape; both work well)
GPS lock is interesting ... 1. definitely takes mount GPS 20-30 seconds from cold start; 2. fast lock is no doubt iPhone assisted GPS initially; 3. there is a moment 30 seconds from cold start when it switches over to mount GPS once lock is achieved (a noticable lag moment - but gotta be watching close)
while i don't have complete facts, i do think the satnavs use the mount most of the time, except from cold start when GPS lock is a bit slower then phone's assisted GPS
speaker works fine - although i'd like to be able to change the inital volume (too loud) w/in the free app
no use of AUX
one add'l thing i've found is that phone boots the mount bluetooth for ear piece - no multi connect option as far as i can tell (iPhone 'feature'?)
otherwise, enjoying the integrated features of the mount so far ...
Stella
Apr 18, 04:13 PM
While I don't care who sues who - in the end the laywers win.. and yes, Samsung UI is very similar to iPhone..
However, the iPhone GUI isn't new at all.
Take a look at this screen shot of the SE P910 UI, released well before iPhone.
http://www.files32.com/images/handy_tools_2005_for_sony_ericsson-73554-thumb.gif
Conceptually, the UI is very similar - in that that you have:
(1) application icons
(2) Application short cuts ( at the top )
(3) Power , strength and other status indicators etc ( at the bottom )
I'm sure there are many other examples of conceptual similar iPhone UIs that contain the same properties and behaviour and layout out ina similar fashion.
However, the iPhone GUI isn't new at all.
Take a look at this screen shot of the SE P910 UI, released well before iPhone.
http://www.files32.com/images/handy_tools_2005_for_sony_ericsson-73554-thumb.gif
Conceptually, the UI is very similar - in that that you have:
(1) application icons
(2) Application short cuts ( at the top )
(3) Power , strength and other status indicators etc ( at the bottom )
I'm sure there are many other examples of conceptual similar iPhone UIs that contain the same properties and behaviour and layout out ina similar fashion.
MikhailT
May 7, 03:17 PM
Not sure what you guys think about this, but I think it would make sense on the iPhone if they somehow integrate iAds into it... otherwise I'm not sure why they would take a $99 service and make it free.
Because they aren't making any money off it now and making it free with iAds built in could bring in more profit for them?
It's the same reason Google can afford gmail with 8GB of storage for tens of millions of accounts.
Apple could make a bit of a profit integrating iWork/MobileMe/Lala along with iAds.
Because they aren't making any money off it now and making it free with iAds built in could bring in more profit for them?
It's the same reason Google can afford gmail with 8GB of storage for tens of millions of accounts.
Apple could make a bit of a profit integrating iWork/MobileMe/Lala along with iAds.
tstreete
Nov 3, 07:06 PM
I just received notice that the tomtom car kit I ordered from Bottom Line Telecommunications has shipped, and should be here in a couple of days. I paid $90 shipped. (Don't know if they have any more in stock.) I expect it will be available elsewhere online for discounted prices soon.
I agree that it would be nice if it were cheaper, but if you add up a separate quality car mount, power cable, hands free kit, and external gps, you're going to be close or over $90 in any case. So maybe it's a luxury, but not a ridiculous one. Everyone with an iphone is paying at least $840 a year for the privilege of using it, and if all you wanted was cell phone service you could pay half that. So if you think it's too expensive, don't buy it; but I don't know why so many feel they have to act so outraged over the cost.
Oh - BTW - Anyone know if they are planning to stock them in Apple stores?
As for the price - everyone complains that it is too expensive for "a mount". But, it's not just a mount. A simple mount wouldn't be worth more than about $30. It's got a GPS chip in it that is similar in quality to a standalone units GPS chip, plus a speaker (the built-in speaker isn't loud or clear enough) and a mic. I understand the enhanced GPS chip is accessed via Bluetooth, so other GPS programs can use it instead of the on-board GPS chip. It can serve as a handsfree speakerphone, so no need to buy a car kit if your car doesn't support Bluetooth (mine don't).
All together, I honestly do think this price tag is a little high - it would be more reasonable at $99, but I'm still thinking seriously about getting one.
I agree that it would be nice if it were cheaper, but if you add up a separate quality car mount, power cable, hands free kit, and external gps, you're going to be close or over $90 in any case. So maybe it's a luxury, but not a ridiculous one. Everyone with an iphone is paying at least $840 a year for the privilege of using it, and if all you wanted was cell phone service you could pay half that. So if you think it's too expensive, don't buy it; but I don't know why so many feel they have to act so outraged over the cost.
Oh - BTW - Anyone know if they are planning to stock them in Apple stores?
As for the price - everyone complains that it is too expensive for "a mount". But, it's not just a mount. A simple mount wouldn't be worth more than about $30. It's got a GPS chip in it that is similar in quality to a standalone units GPS chip, plus a speaker (the built-in speaker isn't loud or clear enough) and a mic. I understand the enhanced GPS chip is accessed via Bluetooth, so other GPS programs can use it instead of the on-board GPS chip. It can serve as a handsfree speakerphone, so no need to buy a car kit if your car doesn't support Bluetooth (mine don't).
All together, I honestly do think this price tag is a little high - it would be more reasonable at $99, but I'm still thinking seriously about getting one.
acslater017
Mar 30, 07:28 PM
Dear Apple
PLEASE can we have a UI update, even if it's a minor one (for instance, iTunes 10 scrollbars rather than the blue aqua ones). Just some extra polish really.
Signed
iFanboy
They're updating scrollbars, buttons, drop-downs, etc. It's not an "overhaul" per se but we're not gonna get one of those for awhile.
Quick Look, full-screen windows, Mission Control, Launchpad, etc. I'd say it's a solid update
PLEASE can we have a UI update, even if it's a minor one (for instance, iTunes 10 scrollbars rather than the blue aqua ones). Just some extra polish really.
Signed
iFanboy
They're updating scrollbars, buttons, drop-downs, etc. It's not an "overhaul" per se but we're not gonna get one of those for awhile.
Quick Look, full-screen windows, Mission Control, Launchpad, etc. I'd say it's a solid update
jaxstate
Aug 4, 08:38 AM
How do you know this. Are you some type of design tester for intel?
What is really going to help merom on the Mac are the SSE units. It has three to yonah's one . Mac OS X makes a lot better use of SIMD units than windows.
The 400 series celerons aren't that slow. They're more or less a Core Solo with a smaller cache.
What is really going to help merom on the Mac are the SSE units. It has three to yonah's one . Mac OS X makes a lot better use of SIMD units than windows.
The 400 series celerons aren't that slow. They're more or less a Core Solo with a smaller cache.
lifeofart
Aug 4, 02:03 PM
I think we will probably get an announcement about new designed MacBookPros at WWDC along with MacPro Desktops.
Rumor had it back in January that Apple wanted Intel to pre-release Merom chips to Apple for the MacBook Pro. Instead Apple was forced to rush to market a quick update to the PowerBook line using the Yonah processor.
My guess now is that Apple is going to finally get to roll out the new redsigned MacBook Pro for Merom.
I agree completely. The MacBook Pro just looks like a transition model to me. Apple needed to update the PB badly and it made no sense for them to update with a new PPC chip but the Merom chip wasn't available yet even though it was Apple's chip of choice for a new laptop design.
Voila! slap a Yonah in essentially the same enclosure as a PB, tweak it a bit with new features and you get a MacBook Pro. Now that Merom is here and Apple has re-designed the ibook, the MacBook Pro is poised for a complete re-design.
I want my re-designed Merom MacBook Pro at WWDC.:eek:
Rumor had it back in January that Apple wanted Intel to pre-release Merom chips to Apple for the MacBook Pro. Instead Apple was forced to rush to market a quick update to the PowerBook line using the Yonah processor.
My guess now is that Apple is going to finally get to roll out the new redsigned MacBook Pro for Merom.
I agree completely. The MacBook Pro just looks like a transition model to me. Apple needed to update the PB badly and it made no sense for them to update with a new PPC chip but the Merom chip wasn't available yet even though it was Apple's chip of choice for a new laptop design.
Voila! slap a Yonah in essentially the same enclosure as a PB, tweak it a bit with new features and you get a MacBook Pro. Now that Merom is here and Apple has re-designed the ibook, the MacBook Pro is poised for a complete re-design.
I want my re-designed Merom MacBook Pro at WWDC.:eek:
reiggin
May 6, 12:21 AM
This is the most ridiculous thing to appear on the MacRumors front page in quite some time.
AaronEdwards
Apr 26, 04:09 PM
Yes I know that they operate under their parent group so what's your point? I salute you for having the ability to google that information.
I didn't need to google, that's something I know.
Which you obviously didn't since your argument was why Apple should worry about their market share when Ferrari and Porsche aren't. They should just continue to make exclusive products.
I bet they worried right up and until they got bought by a company that didn't worry about making cheaper products.
I didn't need to google, that's something I know.
Which you obviously didn't since your argument was why Apple should worry about their market share when Ferrari and Porsche aren't. They should just continue to make exclusive products.
I bet they worried right up and until they got bought by a company that didn't worry about making cheaper products.
spazzcat
Mar 29, 09:06 AM
I dont think so, Amazon cannot get the app needed for the streaming/storing of content on your phone or tablet approved in the appstore since. It violates apples terms, if you or anyone else has an issue with it, contact apple.
Queen Elizabeth II coronation
DeaconGraves
queen elizabeth ii coronation
Jaro65
of Queen Elizabeth II from
queen elizabeth ii coronation
DeaconGraves
May 4, 06:00 PM
i "predict" the next car i buy will have four wheels.
i don't "predict" that Lion will be handled the same as every other App Store product, but there's reason to believe it will be, and that's a cause for concern.
please stop putting words in my mouth.
But that's the point, there is no reason to believe that it will be handled like every other app. Because it's not an app!
Your car analogy is perfect. If all cars have four wheels, and your next vehicle is a car, then you can logically predict it has four wheels.
But if all cars have four wheels, and your next vehcile is a Segway, you can't conclude that the Segway will have four wheels. Because its not a car.
You can't logically predict that Lion on the App Store will have to follow the rules of the other Apps. Lion does not fit the definition of any other product currently on the store. It's an operating system with different issues to deal with than a simple app.
As I mentioned previously, I can't conclude that it will be handled differently, but I also can't conclude it will be handled the same. I can only guess that Apple recognizes the issue regarding system restore and will handle it in some fashion.
i don't "predict" that Lion will be handled the same as every other App Store product, but there's reason to believe it will be, and that's a cause for concern.
please stop putting words in my mouth.
But that's the point, there is no reason to believe that it will be handled like every other app. Because it's not an app!
Your car analogy is perfect. If all cars have four wheels, and your next vehicle is a car, then you can logically predict it has four wheels.
But if all cars have four wheels, and your next vehcile is a Segway, you can't conclude that the Segway will have four wheels. Because its not a car.
You can't logically predict that Lion on the App Store will have to follow the rules of the other Apps. Lion does not fit the definition of any other product currently on the store. It's an operating system with different issues to deal with than a simple app.
As I mentioned previously, I can't conclude that it will be handled differently, but I also can't conclude it will be handled the same. I can only guess that Apple recognizes the issue regarding system restore and will handle it in some fashion.
Jaro65
Mar 29, 08:46 AM
I'm glad Amazon rolled this out before Apple in the sense that I hope it pushes Apple to roll out a cloud subscription that handily beats Amazon's offering.
Exactly. Competition is a good thing.
Exactly. Competition is a good thing.
firewood
May 6, 01:16 AM
While you're over here thinking "I can't do bootcamp with ARM" Apple is thinking "Bootcamp will be obsolite when we get done here" :apple:
Or Apple might be thinking that Bootcamp will work just fine on ARM when Windows 8 moves to ARM as well.
Or this rumor could just be a negotiating ploy to keep Intel from thinking of raising prices on Apple.
Or both.
Or Apple might be thinking that Bootcamp will work just fine on ARM when Windows 8 moves to ARM as well.
Or this rumor could just be a negotiating ploy to keep Intel from thinking of raising prices on Apple.
Or both.
BRLawyer
Nov 27, 04:06 AM
God I'm so sick of people making this excuse. So just because no one else has found the right formula it means that Apple can't right?
Have you ever used a tablet before? If not you are missing out. The experience feels much more personal for some reason. It feels like a platform that is begging for Apple to do something with it.
PS- Let me guess you were one of those people screeching that Apple would NEVER go Intel. Would never release an iPod with photo capabilities or video. Would never allow Windows to run on a Mac.
Its running a slightly modified version of Windows. What did you expect? :rolleyes: Anyone who comes out with a tablet needs to do more then slap their OS on it. there needs to be a fundimental shift in HOW you interact with the OS.
Sorry, Silicon, but your "If Apple does it, it works" argument is weak in this case...the Tablet market is simply tiny, period.
And why so? Because, instead of facing a constrained demand for music players or video players (as in the case of the iPod market), the Tablet faces NOTHING which is not already dealt with under other segments.
We have, on one hand, desktops, laptops and notebooks which fit the bill for everyone, notably if we consider the small-sub note market (10"-13").
On the other hand, we have full-fledged mobile phones and PDAs which cover the needs of those preferring portability over sheer power.
And where are the tablets? NOWHERE, because they only fit the bills of us freaks desiring a nice pen-based Mac...sorry, it's not enough for a big company like Apple to base its products on such a small audience...and I am sure their market analysis team has already done its homework.
Windows is a CRAP, granted...but this doesn't block PC fanboys from buying millions of notebooks every year; this argument is moot as well, and OS X will have limited market impact for the adoption of a Tablet.
As for your funny arguments at the end, I may just say that they have nothing to do with other product adoptions such as the vPod and the Intel switch...the former is a basic evolution of the iPod (although still selling much less than normal iPods devoted to music), the latter a clear choice by Apple in face of IBM's lack of devotion to the PowerPC.
You seem to speak from a position of personal knowledge. Is this because you actual know these facts, or is it just the conviction of your analysis?
I happen to know one of your statements is false. My company needs it and wants it. So do many people in the construction industry. In many respects, we are blind to the activities where we make our money. So, we are forced to often depend on a management layer to provide a communication stream between our administrative resources and our jobsites. However, in many cases, we manage in reactionary mode because of the inadequacies of our communication pathway.
When I was hired seven years ago, one of my assigned goals was to automate our field operations. I am going to condense many years of study and experimentation into a single statement. Tablet PC's have the right combination of footprint and technology to 'close the loop' for what we need.
My company has incorporated many advanced technologies. We have hosted numerous 'show and tell' sessions for others in the industry. A by-product of this has been the development of a large peer group of other construction IT professionals. We all see the need to manage field operations through technology, not through untimely reports, telephone calls and/or faxes, weekly meetings, etc.
Sorry, your argument is also insufficient. Construction companies have used PDAs for years, including the Newton...and that's why a mere evolution of such products is more than enough. If you think ONE anecdotal evidence of a company adopting advanced technologies is enough, think again.
For 99% of the market needing portability (including construction, engineering, delivery companies, logistics integrators and the like), people will go either "notebook" or "advanced PDA"...the Tablet is right in-between, squeezed among 2 MUCH clearer choices. "Footprint" and "technology" are pretty much covered by both poles...and not by a vaporware Tablet.
Origami = Tablet = Flop...never forget this.
Have you ever used a tablet before? If not you are missing out. The experience feels much more personal for some reason. It feels like a platform that is begging for Apple to do something with it.
PS- Let me guess you were one of those people screeching that Apple would NEVER go Intel. Would never release an iPod with photo capabilities or video. Would never allow Windows to run on a Mac.
Its running a slightly modified version of Windows. What did you expect? :rolleyes: Anyone who comes out with a tablet needs to do more then slap their OS on it. there needs to be a fundimental shift in HOW you interact with the OS.
Sorry, Silicon, but your "If Apple does it, it works" argument is weak in this case...the Tablet market is simply tiny, period.
And why so? Because, instead of facing a constrained demand for music players or video players (as in the case of the iPod market), the Tablet faces NOTHING which is not already dealt with under other segments.
We have, on one hand, desktops, laptops and notebooks which fit the bill for everyone, notably if we consider the small-sub note market (10"-13").
On the other hand, we have full-fledged mobile phones and PDAs which cover the needs of those preferring portability over sheer power.
And where are the tablets? NOWHERE, because they only fit the bills of us freaks desiring a nice pen-based Mac...sorry, it's not enough for a big company like Apple to base its products on such a small audience...and I am sure their market analysis team has already done its homework.
Windows is a CRAP, granted...but this doesn't block PC fanboys from buying millions of notebooks every year; this argument is moot as well, and OS X will have limited market impact for the adoption of a Tablet.
As for your funny arguments at the end, I may just say that they have nothing to do with other product adoptions such as the vPod and the Intel switch...the former is a basic evolution of the iPod (although still selling much less than normal iPods devoted to music), the latter a clear choice by Apple in face of IBM's lack of devotion to the PowerPC.
You seem to speak from a position of personal knowledge. Is this because you actual know these facts, or is it just the conviction of your analysis?
I happen to know one of your statements is false. My company needs it and wants it. So do many people in the construction industry. In many respects, we are blind to the activities where we make our money. So, we are forced to often depend on a management layer to provide a communication stream between our administrative resources and our jobsites. However, in many cases, we manage in reactionary mode because of the inadequacies of our communication pathway.
When I was hired seven years ago, one of my assigned goals was to automate our field operations. I am going to condense many years of study and experimentation into a single statement. Tablet PC's have the right combination of footprint and technology to 'close the loop' for what we need.
My company has incorporated many advanced technologies. We have hosted numerous 'show and tell' sessions for others in the industry. A by-product of this has been the development of a large peer group of other construction IT professionals. We all see the need to manage field operations through technology, not through untimely reports, telephone calls and/or faxes, weekly meetings, etc.
Sorry, your argument is also insufficient. Construction companies have used PDAs for years, including the Newton...and that's why a mere evolution of such products is more than enough. If you think ONE anecdotal evidence of a company adopting advanced technologies is enough, think again.
For 99% of the market needing portability (including construction, engineering, delivery companies, logistics integrators and the like), people will go either "notebook" or "advanced PDA"...the Tablet is right in-between, squeezed among 2 MUCH clearer choices. "Footprint" and "technology" are pretty much covered by both poles...and not by a vaporware Tablet.
Origami = Tablet = Flop...never forget this.
No comments:
Post a Comment