Akme
Mar 31, 12:23 PM
Anyone else having their menu bar go black regularly? Have to switch into Launchpad (or similar) to get it back to normal. It's often accompanied by the fan spinning up, so I'm assuming it's some sort of issue related to graphics switching/drivers.
zioxide
Jan 12, 11:28 AM
are you kidding me?
Macbook Air?
WORST NAME EVER
There's no way Apple would ever call something that.
Macbook Air?
WORST NAME EVER
There's no way Apple would ever call something that.
jakeDude
Nov 15, 02:11 PM
Programmers should make the effort to accommodate upcoming multi-core designs into their software development cycle. Once a new system is released, it should be a minimal effort to test and tweak the software for the new system and quickly release an update, thus making their customers only wait a week or two from when the systems first ship as opposed to several weeks/months .
This is not true at all. Multi-threading often introduces more problems such as race conditions, deadlocks, pipeline starvations, memory leaks, cache coherency problems. Further more, multithreaded apps are harder and take longer to debug. Also, using threads without good reason too is not efficient (context swtiching) and can cause problems (thread priorities) with other apps running. This is because threads can not yield to other threads and block if such an undesirable condition like a deadlock exists.. Like on Windows when one app has a non responsive thread and the whole system hangs.. Or like when Finder sucks and locks everything..
Also, multithreading behaves differently on different platforms with different language environments. Java threading might behave differently than p-threads (C-based) on the same system (OS X).. I am a prfessional developer etc..
This is not true at all. Multi-threading often introduces more problems such as race conditions, deadlocks, pipeline starvations, memory leaks, cache coherency problems. Further more, multithreaded apps are harder and take longer to debug. Also, using threads without good reason too is not efficient (context swtiching) and can cause problems (thread priorities) with other apps running. This is because threads can not yield to other threads and block if such an undesirable condition like a deadlock exists.. Like on Windows when one app has a non responsive thread and the whole system hangs.. Or like when Finder sucks and locks everything..
Also, multithreading behaves differently on different platforms with different language environments. Java threading might behave differently than p-threads (C-based) on the same system (OS X).. I am a prfessional developer etc..
Chris Bangle
Aug 16, 07:45 AM
Its going to be extremly tough to decide between a wii and a fullscreen ipod. I really want a wii.
Reverend Wally
Jan 1, 08:24 PM
Why not just build the "iThing" ....
Sort of like Bruce Willis' apartment in The Fifth Element.
A small rectangular object with an Apple dial on it that you call up the menu and can choose between an automobile (iCar) and menu again to choose the Macbook Pod, and when you get to the lot you live at you click on a menu item and your house comes out of the ground and you park your iCar and click on a menu item to open the lock on the door, then go into the iKitchen to make dinner in your iMicrowave.
Oh yeah ... and all the doors and windows (yucky word) in the iHouse are shaped like the Apple logo.
Hmmm .... even an Apple logo shaped iSwimming Pool.c
:rolleyes:
Sort of like Bruce Willis' apartment in The Fifth Element.
A small rectangular object with an Apple dial on it that you call up the menu and can choose between an automobile (iCar) and menu again to choose the Macbook Pod, and when you get to the lot you live at you click on a menu item and your house comes out of the ground and you park your iCar and click on a menu item to open the lock on the door, then go into the iKitchen to make dinner in your iMicrowave.
Oh yeah ... and all the doors and windows (yucky word) in the iHouse are shaped like the Apple logo.
Hmmm .... even an Apple logo shaped iSwimming Pool.c
:rolleyes:
DRewPi
Sep 5, 08:27 AM
Well something is happening since the store is down that should be good newz for at least today !!!! we should see some upgrade of a kind, probably the mini with some shiny new MBP C2D !!!
GO APPLE !!! :D :) ;)
GO APPLE !!! :D :) ;)
JGowan
Sep 6, 09:04 PM
Netflix is made for movies! I love Apple but they'll never do for movies what Netflix has! In the past 5 weeks, I've had 21 movies delivered to my door. I'm on the 3-at-a-time plan (unlimited for $17.99/mo). Also, I can buy tons of used DVDs for $5.99 that are 100% guaranteed!
I think a dollar a song is one thing because you can pick and choose from an album so the trade-off for quality is justified. However, $9.99 is a lot to ask for something that is very low quality, only looks really good an a 2" screen and takes a long time to download. Right now, we don't even know if you can back the file up or burn to a DVD. I think Apple will do ok, but I don't see it being the same bonanza that that music was/is.
I think a dollar a song is one thing because you can pick and choose from an album so the trade-off for quality is justified. However, $9.99 is a lot to ask for something that is very low quality, only looks really good an a 2" screen and takes a long time to download. Right now, we don't even know if you can back the file up or burn to a DVD. I think Apple will do ok, but I don't see it being the same bonanza that that music was/is.
twoodcc
Mar 18, 12:35 PM
just started back up on team MR with my GTX 260 equipped PC(play) running 24/7. Don't trust my i5 iMac(work) enough to run it 24/7.
edit: seems that im getting about 8k ppd between a E6750 OC @ 3.4 and GTX 260 Core 216. Normal or not?
Already at 481st place too, this team needs a comeback!
glad to have you back!
well, are you just running the gpu, or are you running the smp client as well?
edit: seems that im getting about 8k ppd between a E6750 OC @ 3.4 and GTX 260 Core 216. Normal or not?
Already at 481st place too, this team needs a comeback!
glad to have you back!
well, are you just running the gpu, or are you running the smp client as well?
Brien
Jun 23, 12:36 PM
I wouldn't mind an iOS-type OS on an iMac as long as it had some more features of a full-fledged desktop OS. As in:
-Multiple Users
-Printing
-Some kind of file system
-More apps of a creative side (ie movie editing, word processing, programming, etc.) instead of just media consuming apps
Note: this list is not exhaustive; there are many more features I'd like that I just can't think of at the moment.
Plus, some games/apps will need to be done, specifically those that need the accelerometers. I don't think people would want to swing around a 20/30 pound computer. But that would be a good way to make more money; people keep breaking them so they'll have to pay for repairs/new ones.
I doubt 10.7 will be such an overhaul. Probably more like Mac OS X 11.0 or a totally new naming scheme.
iMac or not, iOS 4.1 better support printing. Such a glaring omission, and honestly with the hardware/software advancements since the original iPhone, other than maybe (Adobe) Flash, it's really the only minus left.
-Multiple Users
-Printing
-Some kind of file system
-More apps of a creative side (ie movie editing, word processing, programming, etc.) instead of just media consuming apps
Note: this list is not exhaustive; there are many more features I'd like that I just can't think of at the moment.
Plus, some games/apps will need to be done, specifically those that need the accelerometers. I don't think people would want to swing around a 20/30 pound computer. But that would be a good way to make more money; people keep breaking them so they'll have to pay for repairs/new ones.
I doubt 10.7 will be such an overhaul. Probably more like Mac OS X 11.0 or a totally new naming scheme.
iMac or not, iOS 4.1 better support printing. Such a glaring omission, and honestly with the hardware/software advancements since the original iPhone, other than maybe (Adobe) Flash, it's really the only minus left.
poppe
Sep 1, 01:23 PM
knowing Apple they may put a $1,999 price on it at intro, since they know there will be a mad rush of faithful. Then after a month or two when sales settle, drop the price to $1,899 for the holiday season. Both those prices could be $100 lower, depending on what the base config offers.
Has apple done this before? I'm not trying to make it sound like i'm rude, I really just dont know. I know that when the first MBP's came out they did that silent upgrade in power but I didnt think it was price.
Has apple done this before? I'm not trying to make it sound like i'm rude, I really just dont know. I know that when the first MBP's came out they did that silent upgrade in power but I didnt think it was price.
rlhamil
Apr 21, 06:44 PM
The existence of this data has been known for some time now.
Further, some googling suggests that Apple had already responded to some congressmen's inquiries on the subject, again, well before it got this level of publicity.
From what I've read, they apparently collect locations, WiFi MAC addresses, etc, _anonymously_ (not retaining information that would track any particular person or phone, unless you _choose_ to track a lost or stolen iPhone).
Now...why would they do that? I just thought of one reason.
Geolocation by WiFi MAC address (the only way iPod touch or non-3G iPad can geolocate, if they can't use cell towers and don't include GPS) depends on a database of locations and WiFi MAC addresses. Apple probably has previously used one licensed from Skyhook or Google. I imagine that was built with equipment carried in delivery vans, or in the same vehicles that take Google's "street view" panoramic photos. Licensing access to that database must cost Apple something.
Now...what happens? Somebody says "duh, an iPhone has WiFi and a GPS, that means we've got a fleet of surveying equipment already deployed." Doesn't matter that they can't schedule the coverage; sooner or later, someone is likely to drive near just about every fixed WiFi AP on the planet with an iPhone. Now...the data quality wouldn't be as good...but even whoever did the earlier database must've had that problem (people with mobile access points would confuse the heck out of things, for instance). So maybe it takes multiple hits to confirm something as fixed, or to improve the accuracy. But eventually you still get to the same end result - a WiFi MAC address vs location database that Apple owns free and clear.
They might even be able to do some work with cell tower location data, and perhaps produce data good enough to compete with the existing geolocation database providers. After all, Apple does have to maintain some infrastructure for various functions: their notification servers, software update servers, etc. Anything they can get as a side-effect of the normal operation of iDevices and their infrastructure, that helps pay for it, lets them make a bigger profit and/or be more competitive (remember, for all Apple's rep for high prices, the iPad 2 supposedly is as well or better priced compared to competing devices with similar specs).
The question here probably isn't whether the data is being abused; and raising that question is IMO _pandering_, not surprising for a liberal, who after all must have idiots for constituents, or they wouldn't have been elected. (I mean, really, Heinlein summarized economics concisely with TANSTAAFL, and there _is_ something usually ignored called the Tenth Amendment, which basically says the states can be socialist if they want, but the federal government can't.)
The _real_ question is what safeguards are in effect to minimize the potential for abuse. Ok, we theoretically need a warrant for this sort of thing (although I wouldn't put it past individual states to play fast and loose). But what about foreign governments, already inclined towards police state behavior? What about people _knowing_ what risk they're putting themselves at in case of some civil suit?
IMO, Apple needs to provide and prominently _document_ a way to clear the saved data, and/or document the degree to which disabling location services prevents its retention (let alone anonymous reporting) in the first place. (For jailbreakers, I gather there's already a Cydia app that once installed, will automatically delete data older than a few minutes.) People need to understand that encrypted backups would make the information sync'd back to their Mac or PC safer. And so on.
Generating hysteria is perhaps a useful political tool, for those inclined to address themselves to the least common denominator. But asking the more specific questions which would lead to real answers takes more than PR, it takes a functional brain, or at least the sense to hire a staffer who has one or can consult one.
Further, some googling suggests that Apple had already responded to some congressmen's inquiries on the subject, again, well before it got this level of publicity.
From what I've read, they apparently collect locations, WiFi MAC addresses, etc, _anonymously_ (not retaining information that would track any particular person or phone, unless you _choose_ to track a lost or stolen iPhone).
Now...why would they do that? I just thought of one reason.
Geolocation by WiFi MAC address (the only way iPod touch or non-3G iPad can geolocate, if they can't use cell towers and don't include GPS) depends on a database of locations and WiFi MAC addresses. Apple probably has previously used one licensed from Skyhook or Google. I imagine that was built with equipment carried in delivery vans, or in the same vehicles that take Google's "street view" panoramic photos. Licensing access to that database must cost Apple something.
Now...what happens? Somebody says "duh, an iPhone has WiFi and a GPS, that means we've got a fleet of surveying equipment already deployed." Doesn't matter that they can't schedule the coverage; sooner or later, someone is likely to drive near just about every fixed WiFi AP on the planet with an iPhone. Now...the data quality wouldn't be as good...but even whoever did the earlier database must've had that problem (people with mobile access points would confuse the heck out of things, for instance). So maybe it takes multiple hits to confirm something as fixed, or to improve the accuracy. But eventually you still get to the same end result - a WiFi MAC address vs location database that Apple owns free and clear.
They might even be able to do some work with cell tower location data, and perhaps produce data good enough to compete with the existing geolocation database providers. After all, Apple does have to maintain some infrastructure for various functions: their notification servers, software update servers, etc. Anything they can get as a side-effect of the normal operation of iDevices and their infrastructure, that helps pay for it, lets them make a bigger profit and/or be more competitive (remember, for all Apple's rep for high prices, the iPad 2 supposedly is as well or better priced compared to competing devices with similar specs).
The question here probably isn't whether the data is being abused; and raising that question is IMO _pandering_, not surprising for a liberal, who after all must have idiots for constituents, or they wouldn't have been elected. (I mean, really, Heinlein summarized economics concisely with TANSTAAFL, and there _is_ something usually ignored called the Tenth Amendment, which basically says the states can be socialist if they want, but the federal government can't.)
The _real_ question is what safeguards are in effect to minimize the potential for abuse. Ok, we theoretically need a warrant for this sort of thing (although I wouldn't put it past individual states to play fast and loose). But what about foreign governments, already inclined towards police state behavior? What about people _knowing_ what risk they're putting themselves at in case of some civil suit?
IMO, Apple needs to provide and prominently _document_ a way to clear the saved data, and/or document the degree to which disabling location services prevents its retention (let alone anonymous reporting) in the first place. (For jailbreakers, I gather there's already a Cydia app that once installed, will automatically delete data older than a few minutes.) People need to understand that encrypted backups would make the information sync'd back to their Mac or PC safer. And so on.
Generating hysteria is perhaps a useful political tool, for those inclined to address themselves to the least common denominator. But asking the more specific questions which would lead to real answers takes more than PR, it takes a functional brain, or at least the sense to hire a staffer who has one or can consult one.
econgeek
Apr 12, 09:19 PM
I love the adoption of iMovies people detection and shot detection features... this is great.... rolling shutter fixing is a feature adobe previewed but typical for apple they do it on import, rather than as an "effect" you can add.
skunk
Mar 21, 05:39 PM
Loyalists blow with the wind, and the prevailing wind happens to be from Vichy. .... sorry, Tripoli. :oI think that's the prevailing water.
MacMan86
Apr 21, 04:05 PM
But it doesn't need to be as persistent and as precise as it is for that to work. My history of last year is not relevent. The file should be flushed/cleaned out after a certain time. After a point, the data isn't useful to the phone.
The data is nearly always useful to the phone. Cell towers don't move very often, cached data would very rarely be out of date. If you go back to a city you visited several months back but have no data connection, the cached cell tower data could still be used to find your rough location.
It also shouldn't be backed-up. The device starts with a new DB when its new, no reason it shouldn't start over when you restore. That would alleviate some of the privacy concerns at least.
I would agree, but there's a hell of a lot of other information in an iTunes backup (geotagged photos, passwords in clear text in plist files stored by 3rd party apps who don't bother to use the Keychain, SMS messages, call logs etc) and if you're worried about privacy you should already have ticked the 'Encrypt backups' box - that's all it takes. I'd say all the other data in an unencrypted backup is just as, if not more, valuable.
And if this same file isn't what is being sent to Apple, and you have information indicating this, then the summary of the article that makes it sound like it is should be fixed.
It says so quite clearly at the top of Levinson's article which this MR article links to (https://alexlevinson.wordpress.com/2011/04/21/3-major-issues-with-the-latest-iphone-tracking-discovery/):
1) Apple is not collecting this data.
And to suggest otherwise is completely misrepresenting Apple. I quote:
Apple is gathering this data, but it�s clearly intentional, as the database is being restored across backups, and even device migrations.
Apple is not harvesting this data from your device. This is data on the device that you as the customer purchased and unless they can show concrete evidence supporting this claim � network traffic analysis of connections to Apple servers � I rebut this claim in full. Through my research in this field and all traffic analysis I have performed, not once have I seen this data traverse a network.
If the phone sends Apple a cell tower ID and gets back a lat/lon of that tower (this is being done anonymously according to T&C's), what is the benefit to Apple of sending this log back to them? They've already got the information from the calls to their servers, no need to get it twice.
The data is nearly always useful to the phone. Cell towers don't move very often, cached data would very rarely be out of date. If you go back to a city you visited several months back but have no data connection, the cached cell tower data could still be used to find your rough location.
It also shouldn't be backed-up. The device starts with a new DB when its new, no reason it shouldn't start over when you restore. That would alleviate some of the privacy concerns at least.
I would agree, but there's a hell of a lot of other information in an iTunes backup (geotagged photos, passwords in clear text in plist files stored by 3rd party apps who don't bother to use the Keychain, SMS messages, call logs etc) and if you're worried about privacy you should already have ticked the 'Encrypt backups' box - that's all it takes. I'd say all the other data in an unencrypted backup is just as, if not more, valuable.
And if this same file isn't what is being sent to Apple, and you have information indicating this, then the summary of the article that makes it sound like it is should be fixed.
It says so quite clearly at the top of Levinson's article which this MR article links to (https://alexlevinson.wordpress.com/2011/04/21/3-major-issues-with-the-latest-iphone-tracking-discovery/):
1) Apple is not collecting this data.
And to suggest otherwise is completely misrepresenting Apple. I quote:
Apple is gathering this data, but it�s clearly intentional, as the database is being restored across backups, and even device migrations.
Apple is not harvesting this data from your device. This is data on the device that you as the customer purchased and unless they can show concrete evidence supporting this claim � network traffic analysis of connections to Apple servers � I rebut this claim in full. Through my research in this field and all traffic analysis I have performed, not once have I seen this data traverse a network.
If the phone sends Apple a cell tower ID and gets back a lat/lon of that tower (this is being done anonymously according to T&C's), what is the benefit to Apple of sending this log back to them? They've already got the information from the calls to their servers, no need to get it twice.
guffman
Aug 6, 11:41 PM
More photos
http://appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1941
Ok - I've been into Macs for a couple years now, so I don't have the history with the company of many of you do.
That said, it seems to me that with these ads or banners for Leopard, that it is closer to being released than we all might think. Has Apple promoted a product this way -- bashing M$ -- with out releasing the product soon after?
To me it just seems like real strong words to use if Leopard wont be out for a while, esp. if it will only be released around the time Vista will be next year.
Anyone know what I mean, or feel the same way?
http://appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1941
Ok - I've been into Macs for a couple years now, so I don't have the history with the company of many of you do.
That said, it seems to me that with these ads or banners for Leopard, that it is closer to being released than we all might think. Has Apple promoted a product this way -- bashing M$ -- with out releasing the product soon after?
To me it just seems like real strong words to use if Leopard wont be out for a while, esp. if it will only be released around the time Vista will be next year.
Anyone know what I mean, or feel the same way?
Yebubbleman
Apr 19, 04:43 PM
Don't speak so definitively and pompously.
I work with these machines on the daily. Their service manuals are three mouse clicks and the type of my password away. My co-worker has at least two of them bare naked chips and bits exposed and all at his bench on the daily. It's hard not to stare at them as I take my morning walk to the break room to grab a cup of water. I can speak definitively because I know what I'm talking about. As for pompousness, sorry my tone offends you. Perhaps you might try ignoring it?
I work with these machines on the daily. Their service manuals are three mouse clicks and the type of my password away. My co-worker has at least two of them bare naked chips and bits exposed and all at his bench on the daily. It's hard not to stare at them as I take my morning walk to the break room to grab a cup of water. I can speak definitively because I know what I'm talking about. As for pompousness, sorry my tone offends you. Perhaps you might try ignoring it?
aiqw9182
Mar 24, 03:38 PM
Why would I look at anything else if it were OK to use Windows?
Well then why the hell are you even chanting from the rooftops about how great Fusion is *supposedly* going to be when you KNOW that the chances of Apple using it are slim to none? It's like a kid nagging his parents for the ice cream that has a fancier logo and packaging when they know their parents aren't going to buy it for them because in reality it's all the same and will most likely taste worse then what they bought previously despite what their ads say.
Well then why the hell are you even chanting from the rooftops about how great Fusion is *supposedly* going to be when you KNOW that the chances of Apple using it are slim to none? It's like a kid nagging his parents for the ice cream that has a fancier logo and packaging when they know their parents aren't going to buy it for them because in reality it's all the same and will most likely taste worse then what they bought previously despite what their ads say.
captmatt
Mar 25, 03:56 PM
Oh man---I got the iPad to get the kids off the TV. Now I'm going to have to get another TV!
robbieduncan
Apr 9, 04:39 PM
Maybe they are rare where you live. In the UK and the rest of Europe they are more common that automatics.
Dont Hurt Me
Apr 8, 07:48 PM
when marketshare is almost 0 % you are close to dying, look a 1 % of all new machines built is not giving me any confidence in the platform. sure we have 10 % in a installed platform but are loosing everywhere( thank you motorola for holding up the ass end. Fact is Pcs are running away from Mac and when a 500 dollar machine kicks a new $2000 Imac its time to say so long to Jobs and his croonies. Supported you guys way to long at my expense.
Donnacha
Nov 27, 04:14 PM
I'd just like to agree with those who have pointed out that the main thing Apple's monitor division should be worrying about is price, not new sizes - the Apple logo can bear a certain price premium but not that much, especially as they don't yet include Apple-specific goodness such as integrated isight etc.
In October, I considered a 23" ACD at �848 inc. VAT, delivery and 3yrs of Applecare cover.
Instead, I phoned Dell and got the 24" 2407WP for �549.08 inc. VAT, delivery and 4yrs next business day swap-out cover. For the Apple, I would have had to pay a premium of 55% and got 1yr less cover.
Now, as it happens, Dell were running a 25% off special on the 24% in October but these offers are in continual rotation; at the moment, if you ask, you can get:
The 30" 3007WFP for just under a grand inclusive and 4yrs cover, compared to �1,618 for the 30" Apple and 3yrs cover (a premium of 62% and 1yr less cover)
and
The 20" 2007WFP for �316 inc. and 4yrs cover, compared to �598 for the 20" Apple with 3yrs cover (a premium of 89% and 1yr less cover).
As for quality, I know monitors and the one I've got is top-notch - while it isn't Apple, the subtle styling is impressive and the stand's tilting and pivoting are the best I've ever seen. The consensus among reviewers seems to agree.
I'm not posting this to annoy Apple fans, I'm a huge fan myself and, yes, I would have paid a premium for that cute little apple logo but, frankly, it wouldn't have been worth that extra 55% - at Apple prices, I might never have made the jump to 24" but I'm glad I did, I'm even thinking about getting a second one.
With the move to Intel, Apple have done a great job of competing on PC pricing, why are they still in fantasyland when it comes to monitor pricing?
In October, I considered a 23" ACD at �848 inc. VAT, delivery and 3yrs of Applecare cover.
Instead, I phoned Dell and got the 24" 2407WP for �549.08 inc. VAT, delivery and 4yrs next business day swap-out cover. For the Apple, I would have had to pay a premium of 55% and got 1yr less cover.
Now, as it happens, Dell were running a 25% off special on the 24% in October but these offers are in continual rotation; at the moment, if you ask, you can get:
The 30" 3007WFP for just under a grand inclusive and 4yrs cover, compared to �1,618 for the 30" Apple and 3yrs cover (a premium of 62% and 1yr less cover)
and
The 20" 2007WFP for �316 inc. and 4yrs cover, compared to �598 for the 20" Apple with 3yrs cover (a premium of 89% and 1yr less cover).
As for quality, I know monitors and the one I've got is top-notch - while it isn't Apple, the subtle styling is impressive and the stand's tilting and pivoting are the best I've ever seen. The consensus among reviewers seems to agree.
I'm not posting this to annoy Apple fans, I'm a huge fan myself and, yes, I would have paid a premium for that cute little apple logo but, frankly, it wouldn't have been worth that extra 55% - at Apple prices, I might never have made the jump to 24" but I'm glad I did, I'm even thinking about getting a second one.
With the move to Intel, Apple have done a great job of competing on PC pricing, why are they still in fantasyland when it comes to monitor pricing?
lkjoseph
Apr 2, 10:53 PM
I think what you don't realize is that for people who love the iPad either:
a) They don't need something more powerful, or
b) They have other devices (laptops, pcs) that do what other things they want to do.
I fit in camp B. I use my iPad for web surfing, reading, sharing pictures, while listening to Pandora. Could I use my laptop for this? Sure I could - Yes. But I enjoy using my iPad for these types of tasks. It's more comfortable using for these tasks, and more enjoyable.
Think about this for a second. Why do you have a toaster? Can't you toast bread in your oven by putting it on broil? A toaster has so few features compared to an oven. What's the use of a toaster? This points out the reasons for an iPad. My 'toaster' isn't my only cooking device in my house, but it complements my stove, just like my iPad complements my laptop.
I signed up to post to MacRumors just now so I could post and let you know your analogy is perfect. Excellent post.
a) They don't need something more powerful, or
b) They have other devices (laptops, pcs) that do what other things they want to do.
I fit in camp B. I use my iPad for web surfing, reading, sharing pictures, while listening to Pandora. Could I use my laptop for this? Sure I could - Yes. But I enjoy using my iPad for these types of tasks. It's more comfortable using for these tasks, and more enjoyable.
Think about this for a second. Why do you have a toaster? Can't you toast bread in your oven by putting it on broil? A toaster has so few features compared to an oven. What's the use of a toaster? This points out the reasons for an iPad. My 'toaster' isn't my only cooking device in my house, but it complements my stove, just like my iPad complements my laptop.
I signed up to post to MacRumors just now so I could post and let you know your analogy is perfect. Excellent post.
Thirdeye9
Apr 22, 11:02 AM
Ipod touch with a storage of classic... But then we say classic good bye :(
I think apple made mistake calling an Ipod touch - Ipod :) they should call this staff - Itouch :D and there would no be anny problem. Because both machines wouldn't compete with each other and there wouldn't be any discussion which one is better - they would be just different apple staff. And "classic" wouldn't be considered as something old and out of fashion but would sit on his throne of best and timeless mp3 player on market :)
Now if they want turn classic on his road they have to call him "holly grahl of sound" :D and of course improve it a bit.
I think apple made mistake calling an Ipod touch - Ipod :) they should call this staff - Itouch :D and there would no be anny problem. Because both machines wouldn't compete with each other and there wouldn't be any discussion which one is better - they would be just different apple staff. And "classic" wouldn't be considered as something old and out of fashion but would sit on his throne of best and timeless mp3 player on market :)
Now if they want turn classic on his road they have to call him "holly grahl of sound" :D and of course improve it a bit.
CalBoy
Apr 26, 03:17 PM
I doubt any legal battle between titans is a simple case, even if it appears so to us laypersons.
Certainly there are going to be minutiae that most of us won't ever learn about (and even fewer will understand), but in this case the trademark dispute is going to invariably depend on whether or not "app" is specific enough to trademark or whether it is generic to the point that trademarking it would deprive consumers and companies of a simple ands valuable labeling device.
"Amazon" is a generic term and should not be used for a store name.
Generic in a legal sense means that the term describes the product or service. For example, "computer" broadly describes any device with a chip, some storage, and an ability to perform calculations or other functions for the user. A person could not trademark "Computer Store" because it would leave other competitors with no way of describing the service they offer.
Amazon is an online retailer; hence "online retailer" cannot be trademarked but "Amazon" can be.
In much the same way "app store" describes what is being sold and how, and any competitor would want to make use of the same basic naming structure in order to clearly inform consumers about what they could expect to find.
The general population never heard the term "App" until Apple released the iPhone.
Nor did the general population ever shop for Apps online until Apple built the App Store.
The abbreviation "App" used in conjunction with "store" to denote an online marketplace in which to buy applications is a unique combination that is not known in generic parlance.
Apple will win this.
This is just not true. App has long been in use since before the 1990s.
Apple is also not the only company to sell software online; many companies had been doing direct downloads for years before iOS came out.
You make it sound as though this is such an obvious distinction that Apple could never get a trademark for "app store". But apparently this argument is not so strong in trademark law as Apple actually has the trademark already. If that were not the case how could they sue another entity for trademark infringement?
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
It was.
Apple does not actually hold the trademark yet. That is still being decided. They filed their case against Amazon prematurely, hoping to either make Amazon change names or get a leg-up in the trademark hearings (or both).
Certainly there are going to be minutiae that most of us won't ever learn about (and even fewer will understand), but in this case the trademark dispute is going to invariably depend on whether or not "app" is specific enough to trademark or whether it is generic to the point that trademarking it would deprive consumers and companies of a simple ands valuable labeling device.
"Amazon" is a generic term and should not be used for a store name.
Generic in a legal sense means that the term describes the product or service. For example, "computer" broadly describes any device with a chip, some storage, and an ability to perform calculations or other functions for the user. A person could not trademark "Computer Store" because it would leave other competitors with no way of describing the service they offer.
Amazon is an online retailer; hence "online retailer" cannot be trademarked but "Amazon" can be.
In much the same way "app store" describes what is being sold and how, and any competitor would want to make use of the same basic naming structure in order to clearly inform consumers about what they could expect to find.
The general population never heard the term "App" until Apple released the iPhone.
Nor did the general population ever shop for Apps online until Apple built the App Store.
The abbreviation "App" used in conjunction with "store" to denote an online marketplace in which to buy applications is a unique combination that is not known in generic parlance.
Apple will win this.
This is just not true. App has long been in use since before the 1990s.
Apple is also not the only company to sell software online; many companies had been doing direct downloads for years before iOS came out.
You make it sound as though this is such an obvious distinction that Apple could never get a trademark for "app store". But apparently this argument is not so strong in trademark law as Apple actually has the trademark already. If that were not the case how could they sue another entity for trademark infringement?
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
It was.
Apple does not actually hold the trademark yet. That is still being decided. They filed their case against Amazon prematurely, hoping to either make Amazon change names or get a leg-up in the trademark hearings (or both).
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق