HiRez
Apr 12, 10:05 PM
Wow, looks pretty awesome. Nothing about improved typography though? Booooo.
tuna
Mar 23, 11:08 AM
Haven't manufacturers been producing 240-250GB 1.8" iPod sized hard drives for years? I though that was part of the speculation of Apple cutting off the iPod Classics: bigger and bigger hard drives had become available but Apple was no longer updating.
What? The front page article makes it seem like the first time a 1.8" low profile hard drive with capacity over 160GB has been offered.
What? The front page article makes it seem like the first time a 1.8" low profile hard drive with capacity over 160GB has been offered.
Schizoid
Apr 21, 11:33 AM
Is Al Frankin running for president again? :rolleyes:
no, all politicians wave the "privacy" banner... they don't want their employers (i.e. you and me) to know where they've been.
no, all politicians wave the "privacy" banner... they don't want their employers (i.e. you and me) to know where they've been.
G4DP
May 2, 05:12 PM
V-Tech OS anyone?
Shake it till it wobbles children.
Shake it till it wobbles children.
Spongebobk
Apr 19, 12:18 PM
desktops are slowly but surely dying out. Notebooks are becoming more and more powerful and even moreso portable so what will an iMac offer that MacBooks won't have? Larger screen?
You can't beat the real estate that the iMac offers!:)
You can't beat the real estate that the iMac offers!:)
alecmcmahon
Feb 1, 09:10 AM
my rides
2010 dodge ram 1500 hemi
99 jeep wrangler
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4004/5130546008_dce479858d_b.jpg
2010 dodge ram 1500 hemi
99 jeep wrangler
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4004/5130546008_dce479858d_b.jpg
firestarter
Apr 12, 10:04 PM
$299 are you out of your mind?
OK, I'm liking this.
OK, I'm liking this.
deputy_doofy
Oct 23, 09:34 AM
http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/intelcoreduo.html
That no longer exists. Go to the mbp page and click the core duo icon, and I get a page not found.
This will probably change by the time anyone verifies it. :rolleyes:
Sorry to destroy hopes and dreams, but the link is http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/intel.html and has been for a while. Somebody has been SLOW to update that old link.
That no longer exists. Go to the mbp page and click the core duo icon, and I get a page not found.
This will probably change by the time anyone verifies it. :rolleyes:
Sorry to destroy hopes and dreams, but the link is http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/intel.html and has been for a while. Somebody has been SLOW to update that old link.
DewGuy1999
Feb 25, 02:48 PM
http://i884.photobucket.com/albums/ac50/tadziodlu/IMG_1442.jpg
^ I Like! ^
^ I Like! ^
SeaFox
Dec 27, 11:15 PM
Ok, I don�t know what a slingbox is� and I thought it was going to stream or operate like a TiVo, where it downloads while you are asleep, so it would need a harddrive.
TiVo doesn't download your shows over the internet, it records them off the cable TV or satellite receiver. The only reason it requires an internet connection is to get programming schedules and verify you're paying your monthly fee.
Also, I�m not sure what you mean by TV? Do you mean a CRT with an aspect of 4:3? And, I would assume you don�t mean a flat panel LCD or Plasma,
Why not? They are all TV's. There is nothing about the term television that confines it to analog tube sets. If your Plasma/LCD has an over the air tuner or any sort, it is a TV. If it doesn't, it's a monitor.
...which now outsells tube tvs?
Do you have a source for that statement?
And when you download from the iTunes store this does go to a harddrive? So you think I�m going to buy both a new computer and the iTV, and pay $20 to download a few movies?
Apple thinks you are.
My point about price fixing was a wild hope that Apple might step in with iDish and offer a service without all the commercials
Nobody is going to offer TV without commercials. People seriously underestimate the cost of production and distribution of content.
The bandwidth limitation will be an issue if iTV wants to go past a download service.
Remember that songs/movies you buy from Apple are supposed to be yours, if they go to a streaming media service they become like a rental service in effect, as you have to maintain your relationship with Apple to keep viewing the content.
TiVo doesn't download your shows over the internet, it records them off the cable TV or satellite receiver. The only reason it requires an internet connection is to get programming schedules and verify you're paying your monthly fee.
Also, I�m not sure what you mean by TV? Do you mean a CRT with an aspect of 4:3? And, I would assume you don�t mean a flat panel LCD or Plasma,
Why not? They are all TV's. There is nothing about the term television that confines it to analog tube sets. If your Plasma/LCD has an over the air tuner or any sort, it is a TV. If it doesn't, it's a monitor.
...which now outsells tube tvs?
Do you have a source for that statement?
And when you download from the iTunes store this does go to a harddrive? So you think I�m going to buy both a new computer and the iTV, and pay $20 to download a few movies?
Apple thinks you are.
My point about price fixing was a wild hope that Apple might step in with iDish and offer a service without all the commercials
Nobody is going to offer TV without commercials. People seriously underestimate the cost of production and distribution of content.
The bandwidth limitation will be an issue if iTV wants to go past a download service.
Remember that songs/movies you buy from Apple are supposed to be yours, if they go to a streaming media service they become like a rental service in effect, as you have to maintain your relationship with Apple to keep viewing the content.
Chaos123x
Apr 12, 10:06 PM
$299... but this isn't studio
True $299 for each app will get expensive.
True $299 for each app will get expensive.
DMann
Jan 13, 01:56 PM
I could go a MacBook Xenon (quad core) ;)
hot, Hot, HOT!!!!
hot, Hot, HOT!!!!
yg17
Apr 11, 02:26 PM
IMO, if a gearbox has a setting where it will automatically shift gears for you and you don't have to touch it, it's an automatic gearbox.
Sure, some auto gearboxes (DSG) are better than others (torque converter) but they're still automatic.
Sure, some auto gearboxes (DSG) are better than others (torque converter) but they're still automatic.
levitynyc
Mar 25, 03:50 PM
Time to grab a 10 foot HDMI cord.
.jpg "short love quotes and poems.")
Piggie
Mar 25, 11:19 AM
Its unlikely they will fit in an imac case. They are about 30cm long and are all dual slot.
Well, to be fair, I was never expecting a PCI version of such a card to be fitted into an iMac.
Given Apple's money, I thought they would have gone to ATI, Worked with them, and allocated a space inside the frame of a high end iMac, with the aluminium to act as a cooling area, and ATI could have designed a custom layout for this area using the same GPU's as are in the PCI card version.
Well, to be fair, I was never expecting a PCI version of such a card to be fitted into an iMac.
Given Apple's money, I thought they would have gone to ATI, Worked with them, and allocated a space inside the frame of a high end iMac, with the aluminium to act as a cooling area, and ATI could have designed a custom layout for this area using the same GPU's as are in the PCI card version.
rdowns
Mar 19, 11:58 AM
That's one possible reason for delaying. More here (http://www.timeslive.co.za/world/article973767.ece/British-press-raps-Obama-over-Libya-no-fly-zone-delay).
(FWIW, I don't disagree with you that it's time for other nations to do more)
Editorials, they're like *******s. :D
Many on the right and some on the left here have been all over him for dragging his feet. Murdoch's NY rag said Hillary was the only one who wanted to take military action and it took her 3 weeks to gather enough administration support. Then again, who the hell knows?
(FWIW, I don't disagree with you that it's time for other nations to do more)
Editorials, they're like *******s. :D
Many on the right and some on the left here have been all over him for dragging his feet. Murdoch's NY rag said Hillary was the only one who wanted to take military action and it took her 3 weeks to gather enough administration support. Then again, who the hell knows?
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!
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..
ezekielrage_99
Nov 28, 08:59 PM
zune people don't seem to agree what it is bad. they just deny the true. here what they are ridiculous.
http://www.zunescene.com/forums/index.php?topic=3784.0
I have to admitt that was great to read, there are so many PC bashing thugs out there who know nothing about anything outside the realm of Microsoft bliss.
I like to think of myself as a fairly balanced PC and Apple person but the comments in that Zune site were just plain idiotic from the "Windows" people, their arguments wouldn't hold water.
The BIG Zune over iPod sales pitch I am hearing more and more is the "but Zune has a radio and wireless and it works with Windows".
Newsflash morons the iPod works with BOTH Windows and Mac OSX, a radio who really cares the reason I bought an iPod was so that I didn't have to listen to the stupid radio, and wireless I guess that would be nice..... wait you still need to plug the dam thing in the charge it.
Personally I am glad people aren't buying the Zune becuase it means that there aren't nearly as many brain dead people out there as I originally thought.
The reality of the effort with the Zune is that it is too little too late and a poor interpretation of an iPod...... Zune it's fugly
http://www.zunescene.com/forums/index.php?topic=3784.0
I have to admitt that was great to read, there are so many PC bashing thugs out there who know nothing about anything outside the realm of Microsoft bliss.
I like to think of myself as a fairly balanced PC and Apple person but the comments in that Zune site were just plain idiotic from the "Windows" people, their arguments wouldn't hold water.
The BIG Zune over iPod sales pitch I am hearing more and more is the "but Zune has a radio and wireless and it works with Windows".
Newsflash morons the iPod works with BOTH Windows and Mac OSX, a radio who really cares the reason I bought an iPod was so that I didn't have to listen to the stupid radio, and wireless I guess that would be nice..... wait you still need to plug the dam thing in the charge it.
Personally I am glad people aren't buying the Zune becuase it means that there aren't nearly as many brain dead people out there as I originally thought.
The reality of the effort with the Zune is that it is too little too late and a poor interpretation of an iPod...... Zune it's fugly
AdeFowler
Jul 20, 05:06 AM
I found this to be most interesting. I think we could actually see some Adobe apps by Septemeber. Adobe has been going on an 18-24 month cycle and based when CS2 was released Sept/Oct would be 18 months and 24 would be April when Adobe has said basically "no later than".
I think it'll be very awkward for Steve to announce the Mac Pros without a UB version of Photoshop being available, however I can't see CS3 being finished. However we know that Indesign is progressing well, so I wouldn't be surprised if Bruce Chizen came on stage and announced the availability of time limited betas; assuming Adobe are willing to help Apple.
Now what should we spend that 9.5 billion on? ;)
I think it'll be very awkward for Steve to announce the Mac Pros without a UB version of Photoshop being available, however I can't see CS3 being finished. However we know that Indesign is progressing well, so I wouldn't be surprised if Bruce Chizen came on stage and announced the availability of time limited betas; assuming Adobe are willing to help Apple.
Now what should we spend that 9.5 billion on? ;)
Earendil
Nov 27, 09:49 PM
IMAGINED?
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
And what, exactly, is your point? Really, did you read the thread? Okay, mb not, did you read anything that I wrote? No? Did you follow the linked thread that has been used as a counter point to the FUD that is spread? No?
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
Bad apple for not offering a $400 laptop, that pressures me into getting a Dell! Bad apple for not offering me a fast car, that pressures me into buying a BMW!!
I'm sorry, but your conclusions are horrible. You aren't looking at all the "facts", and then with the few you are using (out of context) you are drawing very stretched conclusions.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck,
No, but we have little reason to believe that they aren't selling well enough, and good reason to believe they are. Why? Because if they weren't selling well, and they were highly marked up, than it wouldn't hurt apple to lower the price, and sell more units. But they haven't yet done that. So either Apple's marketing guys are complete idiots and missed business 101, or they are selling enough units to justify the price.
but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
A very interesting theory, that seems plausible. However what is more likely is that Apple is selling enough units, and that they aren't overly priced for their intended purpose and intended competition (which is NOT Dell).
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program.
News flash, any monitor on the market today will work with your Mac. I know, it's amazing. Buy a cheap monitor and slap an Apple sticker on it if you like. Or go complain that NEC is limiting your choice by not offering a monitor in your price range, or that BMW is screwing you out of a car by not offering a car at 10 grand.
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
They might do it, but it won't be a prosumer level monitor like the rest. It will use a cheaper panel so that it's in line with it's target audience (consumer budget mini buyers). There aren't many companies, if any, that sell pro specced monitors at 17" any more. And as those better panels become cheaper, there is even less reason to offer the pro guys such small screen space.
Now, would you please, for the love of knowledge, go read the first post in this thread before making another reply. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
Thank you,
~Tyler
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
And what, exactly, is your point? Really, did you read the thread? Okay, mb not, did you read anything that I wrote? No? Did you follow the linked thread that has been used as a counter point to the FUD that is spread? No?
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
Bad apple for not offering a $400 laptop, that pressures me into getting a Dell! Bad apple for not offering me a fast car, that pressures me into buying a BMW!!
I'm sorry, but your conclusions are horrible. You aren't looking at all the "facts", and then with the few you are using (out of context) you are drawing very stretched conclusions.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck,
No, but we have little reason to believe that they aren't selling well enough, and good reason to believe they are. Why? Because if they weren't selling well, and they were highly marked up, than it wouldn't hurt apple to lower the price, and sell more units. But they haven't yet done that. So either Apple's marketing guys are complete idiots and missed business 101, or they are selling enough units to justify the price.
but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
A very interesting theory, that seems plausible. However what is more likely is that Apple is selling enough units, and that they aren't overly priced for their intended purpose and intended competition (which is NOT Dell).
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program.
News flash, any monitor on the market today will work with your Mac. I know, it's amazing. Buy a cheap monitor and slap an Apple sticker on it if you like. Or go complain that NEC is limiting your choice by not offering a monitor in your price range, or that BMW is screwing you out of a car by not offering a car at 10 grand.
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
They might do it, but it won't be a prosumer level monitor like the rest. It will use a cheaper panel so that it's in line with it's target audience (consumer budget mini buyers). There aren't many companies, if any, that sell pro specced monitors at 17" any more. And as those better panels become cheaper, there is even less reason to offer the pro guys such small screen space.
Now, would you please, for the love of knowledge, go read the first post in this thread before making another reply. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
Thank you,
~Tyler
Manic Mouse
Aug 20, 06:44 AM
But you know what I mean and you cannot possible say that they are easy inpurt methods for even moderately extended use. Or are you?
I'm getting a little confused, are you trying to say keyboards are not easy input methods? QWERTY keyboards are FULL keyboards like the ones you and I are using to type in these forums. I completely agree with you that phone/PSP-esque multi-press solutions are not good for extended use, which is why I think the MYLO is such a good example of what can be done with a "portable WiFi" device because it has a full keyboard.
The iPod would continue to sell "pure" (and I know I'm being contradictory as my original 1Gen iPod is a much different machine than my vid iPod but we're talking of the iPod as a basic walkman-type device) as there will always be demand for a music/media player at a fairly reasonably price. Either through attrition, improvements to current features (bigger screens, easier input methods, color screens, longer battery life, new battery types, etc) there will ALWAYS be demand for the iPod.
As you point out, the current iPod isn't a "pure" machine either. Apple have realised that they have to continually offer new things and more functionality to continue to sell and tempt existing customers to upgrade. As a music player my 4G iPod is more than sufficient: It has a nice enough size, decent enough battery life, 40Gb of space and music will not sound any better no matter how bigger the screen is. If the iPod is only to be a "pure" walkman then there is no reason for me to ever buy a new iPod unless it breaks, which is bad for Apple. Apple realise this, and validate my point by adding extra features to the iPod like photo and video support. Things like a web browser, IM etc are also just natural evolutions of the device.
Using your reasoning, why not add all these features and more to every TV on the market cuz, "Hey, pure machines are going to be extinct soon. Everybody has a TV so we're not going to be selling any more pretty soon... Let's add keyboards and webcams to the remotes. make 'em with wireless net access, hell, throw in Vista and a dock for the refrigerator to show you how much beer is left so you don't have to get up!!!" That's not what happens. Improvements come and are incorporated and even stick around if people like them or are weeded out in the next model. But those improvements are all related to the TV viewing experience. Remember webTV? and that was only offered as a separate add-on if memory serves.
Actually that's exactly what's happening. TV's now are having HDD's built in, PC's are having media centre's built in. Here in the UK, with the BBC, the difference between TV and computer are being blurred. A few minutes ago I watched a TV show on this computer steamed from the BBC.
You can innovate wothout mucking about with a winner by adding a battery draining
Well all the things I'm proposing are software, not hardware, features. So they should have minimal effect on battery life. The new iPod will have a large screen and WiFi regardless of whether it can surf the net/IM/email, and those are the battery draining features.
If apple feels there is a market for what some members of this forum are calling for and said market is large enough the smart move seems to me to be a new device along with that device's new profit stream, limit it's ability to cannibalize your other products in any large way. You get the idea. You don't need to make the iPod the be-all end-all device. In fact, I think if you did, you'd lose market share to other devices without the bloat.
But that is exactly what Apple are doing: When the ipod launched it was nothing more than an MP3 player yet the current iPods are evolving into the "be-all-and-end-all" device I'm suggesting: They play games, they have a calander, they show notes, they play videos, they display photos. Has Apple lost market share by offering these things? Or would they have lost market share if they had not offered them?
And precisely what other Apple product sales would a MYLO iPod cannibalise? What competing product does Apple offer?
And the argument that no one wants a "utility belt" with a million devices each dedicated to one function just doesn't hold water with me. I carry a lot of gear. A laptop, a comm device of some sort and my iPod would do anything I need to do as a civilian back in the world. Obviously I carry much more here as I have the desire to make it back to the real world but that's not what the real market is.
Like I said in my previous post, the mobile phone market (and what Apple have done with added functionality to the iPod) shows the exact opposite trend. I'd much rather have a MYLO iPod than cart a laptop and an iPod around with me EVERYWHERE I go.
But maybe I'm the oddd man out in this argument. I hope not but I have ben wrong once or twice. My wife says so.
Women are always right. Or so my mother tells me... :p
I don't believe that the next iPod will be a MYLO-esque device, but eventually it will offer all that functionality.
I'm getting a little confused, are you trying to say keyboards are not easy input methods? QWERTY keyboards are FULL keyboards like the ones you and I are using to type in these forums. I completely agree with you that phone/PSP-esque multi-press solutions are not good for extended use, which is why I think the MYLO is such a good example of what can be done with a "portable WiFi" device because it has a full keyboard.
The iPod would continue to sell "pure" (and I know I'm being contradictory as my original 1Gen iPod is a much different machine than my vid iPod but we're talking of the iPod as a basic walkman-type device) as there will always be demand for a music/media player at a fairly reasonably price. Either through attrition, improvements to current features (bigger screens, easier input methods, color screens, longer battery life, new battery types, etc) there will ALWAYS be demand for the iPod.
As you point out, the current iPod isn't a "pure" machine either. Apple have realised that they have to continually offer new things and more functionality to continue to sell and tempt existing customers to upgrade. As a music player my 4G iPod is more than sufficient: It has a nice enough size, decent enough battery life, 40Gb of space and music will not sound any better no matter how bigger the screen is. If the iPod is only to be a "pure" walkman then there is no reason for me to ever buy a new iPod unless it breaks, which is bad for Apple. Apple realise this, and validate my point by adding extra features to the iPod like photo and video support. Things like a web browser, IM etc are also just natural evolutions of the device.
Using your reasoning, why not add all these features and more to every TV on the market cuz, "Hey, pure machines are going to be extinct soon. Everybody has a TV so we're not going to be selling any more pretty soon... Let's add keyboards and webcams to the remotes. make 'em with wireless net access, hell, throw in Vista and a dock for the refrigerator to show you how much beer is left so you don't have to get up!!!" That's not what happens. Improvements come and are incorporated and even stick around if people like them or are weeded out in the next model. But those improvements are all related to the TV viewing experience. Remember webTV? and that was only offered as a separate add-on if memory serves.
Actually that's exactly what's happening. TV's now are having HDD's built in, PC's are having media centre's built in. Here in the UK, with the BBC, the difference between TV and computer are being blurred. A few minutes ago I watched a TV show on this computer steamed from the BBC.
You can innovate wothout mucking about with a winner by adding a battery draining
Well all the things I'm proposing are software, not hardware, features. So they should have minimal effect on battery life. The new iPod will have a large screen and WiFi regardless of whether it can surf the net/IM/email, and those are the battery draining features.
If apple feels there is a market for what some members of this forum are calling for and said market is large enough the smart move seems to me to be a new device along with that device's new profit stream, limit it's ability to cannibalize your other products in any large way. You get the idea. You don't need to make the iPod the be-all end-all device. In fact, I think if you did, you'd lose market share to other devices without the bloat.
But that is exactly what Apple are doing: When the ipod launched it was nothing more than an MP3 player yet the current iPods are evolving into the "be-all-and-end-all" device I'm suggesting: They play games, they have a calander, they show notes, they play videos, they display photos. Has Apple lost market share by offering these things? Or would they have lost market share if they had not offered them?
And precisely what other Apple product sales would a MYLO iPod cannibalise? What competing product does Apple offer?
And the argument that no one wants a "utility belt" with a million devices each dedicated to one function just doesn't hold water with me. I carry a lot of gear. A laptop, a comm device of some sort and my iPod would do anything I need to do as a civilian back in the world. Obviously I carry much more here as I have the desire to make it back to the real world but that's not what the real market is.
Like I said in my previous post, the mobile phone market (and what Apple have done with added functionality to the iPod) shows the exact opposite trend. I'd much rather have a MYLO iPod than cart a laptop and an iPod around with me EVERYWHERE I go.
But maybe I'm the oddd man out in this argument. I hope not but I have ben wrong once or twice. My wife says so.
Women are always right. Or so my mother tells me... :p
I don't believe that the next iPod will be a MYLO-esque device, but eventually it will offer all that functionality.
kalun
Oct 23, 11:00 PM
Meanwhile, product checks (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2163) indicate that several European hardware distributers "ran dry" of MacBook and MacBook Pro inventory several weeks ago.
Well, in Japan, there are enough Macbook Pro so that it is shipped within 24 hours. so...ya....
Well, in Japan, there are enough Macbook Pro so that it is shipped within 24 hours. so...ya....
jav6454
Mar 24, 04:20 PM
Llano is not Atom-level hardware. That is Zacate/Ontario.
Llano is the mainstream Sandy Bridge competitor.
Which is not even out yet. Brazos/Zacate and Ontario are the ones I'm referring. Let me edit that out.
Llano is the mainstream Sandy Bridge competitor.
Which is not even out yet. Brazos/Zacate and Ontario are the ones I'm referring. Let me edit that out.
No comments:
Post a Comment