LegendKillerUK
Mar 26, 11:19 PM
I think that Apple will introduce IOS 5 in June/July, when it introduces the iPhone 5 (assuming that's what they call it). If there is some aspect of ios 5 that they can't get ready until Fall, they may have an ios 5.3 update in the Fall.
This is the most sensible conclusion. Game Center wasn't ready for the prime time upon release of the offical 4.0, so it came with 4.1. This is a clever move for Apple as it gives the feeling of extra value added to those who could update as not everyone with these devices even knew it existed until it landed on their device. We of course knew better so it wasn't a shock to us, but the bottom line is we all benefit from it.
This is the most sensible conclusion. Game Center wasn't ready for the prime time upon release of the offical 4.0, so it came with 4.1. This is a clever move for Apple as it gives the feeling of extra value added to those who could update as not everyone with these devices even knew it existed until it landed on their device. We of course knew better so it wasn't a shock to us, but the bottom line is we all benefit from it.
belsokar
Apr 26, 02:37 PM
You'll care when the majority of developers will jump to Android because it has more users. Why do you think most people still use Windows? Because it has more software. Once you get behind, it's tough to keep up. Look at Windows Phone 7. They have to pull really hard to get some developers to build apps for them.
I have to say I'm impressed how Google managed to get this off the ground so fast. Microsoft is still struggling, and they have a pool of traditional .Net developers behind them to potentially build apps for their mobile platform.
As an iOS developer, with both a Java and .Net background, I can say that right now, all the money to be made is primarily in the iOS camp. Android users DO NOT BUY apps. That is a generalization, but it is a TRUE generalization. They do not buy apps like iPhone users. There are many reasons for that. One is that many Android users got free or really cheap phones, and don't tend to come from higher income backgrounds. They are less likely to spend money than iPhone users. Moreover, the infrastructure for buying apps is not setup as well as iPhone. All iPhone users can buy apps the second they are setup, that is not true for Android users.
In terms of monetizing free Android apps...they do not pay well when it comes to Ad revenue. For a client's app I released on an iPhone, using iAds, I needed 10,000 daily users at about 1 minute of use time per user per day to make about $5K/month in Ad revenue. In order to get that kind of revenue on a free Android app, I would need approximately 200,000 daily users. That is a huge discrepancy between ecosystems,...it is not easy to get 10,000 daily users, much less 200,000,...meaning developers are going to stick with iOS as long as it pays better.
So for the time being, I don't concern myself with Android as a developer. Now if google finds a way to make Android phones just as profitable as iPhones, or develops an ecosystem much like Apple's that drives app purchases and app revenue to something resembling, or outpacing Apple, then I would be REALLY worried as an iPhone developer and user. I just don't see it happening as Google is more concerned with it's own Ad business, and how to make Google more money, rather than spending more time and effort on how to best make developers money. Apple has struck a great balance that allows them to keep developers happy while continuing to reap the rewards in terms of company profits.
I have to say I'm impressed how Google managed to get this off the ground so fast. Microsoft is still struggling, and they have a pool of traditional .Net developers behind them to potentially build apps for their mobile platform.
As an iOS developer, with both a Java and .Net background, I can say that right now, all the money to be made is primarily in the iOS camp. Android users DO NOT BUY apps. That is a generalization, but it is a TRUE generalization. They do not buy apps like iPhone users. There are many reasons for that. One is that many Android users got free or really cheap phones, and don't tend to come from higher income backgrounds. They are less likely to spend money than iPhone users. Moreover, the infrastructure for buying apps is not setup as well as iPhone. All iPhone users can buy apps the second they are setup, that is not true for Android users.
In terms of monetizing free Android apps...they do not pay well when it comes to Ad revenue. For a client's app I released on an iPhone, using iAds, I needed 10,000 daily users at about 1 minute of use time per user per day to make about $5K/month in Ad revenue. In order to get that kind of revenue on a free Android app, I would need approximately 200,000 daily users. That is a huge discrepancy between ecosystems,...it is not easy to get 10,000 daily users, much less 200,000,...meaning developers are going to stick with iOS as long as it pays better.
So for the time being, I don't concern myself with Android as a developer. Now if google finds a way to make Android phones just as profitable as iPhones, or develops an ecosystem much like Apple's that drives app purchases and app revenue to something resembling, or outpacing Apple, then I would be REALLY worried as an iPhone developer and user. I just don't see it happening as Google is more concerned with it's own Ad business, and how to make Google more money, rather than spending more time and effort on how to best make developers money. Apple has struck a great balance that allows them to keep developers happy while continuing to reap the rewards in terms of company profits.
kingtj
Mar 31, 08:01 AM
Well, first off? I don't think you have to be a socialist to agree that a better society can't be created completely on the profit motive? I've always held the belief that there's a constant need for charities and donations to good causes. Church groups and non-profit organizations provide much of the real assistance needed by people in need in the U.S. -- despite that happening in a non-socialist system. The less your government imposes taxes on you, the more disposable income you have to be able to freely make a choice to donate to the relief effort in Japan, or to "Habitat for Humanity", next time they build a house for someone in need, or ??
By contrast, a lot of our government mandated aid programs wind up causing people to develop a sense of entitlement. Obviously, they usually do a lot of good too -- but I question the efficiency. When charity is done at a local level (like someone's local church), the people involved in the program get to know the recipients personally. There's also the whole "guilt factor" involved, where some people are a little embarrassed to ask for a hand-out. They'll do it if they really need to, but it's also a motivator to do everything they can to try to better their situation so they're not stuck doing it perpetually. With federal govt. based programs, the money invisibly flows right into a checking account or onto a debit card - so it's "painless".
The 'fair' wages and high standard of living the US enjoyed in the past came in large part from exports, ie participation in the global market. The same global market, driven by capitalism, that now demands a reverse in your fortunes because you can no longer compete... the rest of us have no interest in buying US products if they're not competitive, and without our markets your businesses, even those as successful as Apple, wouldn't survive or benefit the US economy as much as they do.
Globalisation isn't a race to the bottom, it's resulting in a fairer distribution of the wealth around the world, driven by nothing more than the free market; it was never a God given right that the US should enjoy a higher standard of living than anyone else.
Ironically I say this as a socialist who believes a better society can't be entirely created from the profit motive - but socialism is apparantly a dirty word in your country too. You're trapped between a rock and a hard place I'd say.
By contrast, a lot of our government mandated aid programs wind up causing people to develop a sense of entitlement. Obviously, they usually do a lot of good too -- but I question the efficiency. When charity is done at a local level (like someone's local church), the people involved in the program get to know the recipients personally. There's also the whole "guilt factor" involved, where some people are a little embarrassed to ask for a hand-out. They'll do it if they really need to, but it's also a motivator to do everything they can to try to better their situation so they're not stuck doing it perpetually. With federal govt. based programs, the money invisibly flows right into a checking account or onto a debit card - so it's "painless".
The 'fair' wages and high standard of living the US enjoyed in the past came in large part from exports, ie participation in the global market. The same global market, driven by capitalism, that now demands a reverse in your fortunes because you can no longer compete... the rest of us have no interest in buying US products if they're not competitive, and without our markets your businesses, even those as successful as Apple, wouldn't survive or benefit the US economy as much as they do.
Globalisation isn't a race to the bottom, it's resulting in a fairer distribution of the wealth around the world, driven by nothing more than the free market; it was never a God given right that the US should enjoy a higher standard of living than anyone else.
Ironically I say this as a socialist who believes a better society can't be entirely created from the profit motive - but socialism is apparantly a dirty word in your country too. You're trapped between a rock and a hard place I'd say.
Satori
Apr 7, 09:39 AM
I don't understand, Apple can't let RIM have 12 panels? When they sell off those 12 units, Apple can let them have 12 more.
Lol... if they let RIM have 12, then they'll have to let everyone have 12!
Lol... if they let RIM have 12, then they'll have to let everyone have 12!
kavika411
Apr 14, 12:46 PM
Which is exactly what I said. But
you couldn't help twisting the dagger a little bit by saying ...
Democrats - "I am in favor of increasing government taxation, and I have the opportunity to put my money where my mouth is by voluntarily paying more taxes, but I am nonetheless not going to if other people don't."
So are you, on your own, going to voluntarily give money to the government? Or do we get to lump you in with your description of Democrats?
If you'd read and quoted the last two sentences of my post, you would have realized that I'm not in favor of increasing taxes as long as so much of it is spent on three needless wars.
This sewing circle uses sarcasm time-to-time.
you couldn't help twisting the dagger a little bit by saying ...
Democrats - "I am in favor of increasing government taxation, and I have the opportunity to put my money where my mouth is by voluntarily paying more taxes, but I am nonetheless not going to if other people don't."
So are you, on your own, going to voluntarily give money to the government? Or do we get to lump you in with your description of Democrats?
If you'd read and quoted the last two sentences of my post, you would have realized that I'm not in favor of increasing taxes as long as so much of it is spent on three needless wars.
This sewing circle uses sarcasm time-to-time.
Macintosheux
Apr 23, 06:29 PM
We at Consomac.fr have shared this very information last Tuesday. I clearly remember sending you guys an e-mail about this. I'm very disappointed we are again not cited as original source for an exclusive news we've published... :(
Automatic English translation: http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev;=_t&hl;=fr&ie;=UTF-8&layout;=2&eotf;=1&sl;=fr&tl;=en&u;=http%3A%2F%2Fconsomac.fr%2Fnews-1129.html
French original: http://consomac.fr/news-1129.html
Automatic English translation: http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev;=_t&hl;=fr&ie;=UTF-8&layout;=2&eotf;=1&sl;=fr&tl;=en&u;=http%3A%2F%2Fconsomac.fr%2Fnews-1129.html
French original: http://consomac.fr/news-1129.html
wordoflife
Apr 9, 05:19 PM
I did parenthesis, then multiplication or division from left to right. That's how I was taught it.
I'm pretty sure doing PEMDAS left to right is the proper way to do it
48/2(9+3)
48/2(12)
24(12)
288
I'm pretty sure doing PEMDAS left to right is the proper way to do it
48/2(9+3)
48/2(12)
24(12)
288
koruki
Mar 29, 03:00 PM
Hard for me, even as an Apple fan, to weep too much for a company that chooses to do business overseas isntead of here in America, employing Americans.
Hopefully the situation in Japan improves -- for reasons beyond this.
ah nothing like starting the day with a bit of ignorance. :cool:
Hopefully the situation in Japan improves -- for reasons beyond this.
ah nothing like starting the day with a bit of ignorance. :cool:
SandynJosh
Apr 26, 03:21 PM
But if Apple had gotten on board with Verizon a year earlier, those numbers would probably be reversed.
That extra year that Apple sat on their ass with AT&T; was the crucial year that allowed android to gain traction and mindshare.
Neither your or I know what contract details with AT&T; prevented Apple from opening up Verizon earlier than they did, so claiming Apple "sat on their ass" is just your silly opinion.
Once the 'greatly anticipated' Verizon launch finally did come, it was met with a large chorus of "who cares?" from the crowd - the crowd that had gotten their droid phone 6 months earlier.
Again you make a wild-assed leap of logic. I, like many Verizon users, met the news that the iPhone was available on my favorite carrier with, "Oh dam, I'm locked into a two-year contract with a ****** Android Incredible."
Your basic point that Apple needed to open up the iPhone to more U.S. carriers to avoid market share loss is correct and generally regarded as such by most analysts. However, from the launch of the first iPhone, Apple has struggled to meet the accelerating demand for its products, so adding more U.S. carriers may have not been as smart as us outside the company might second-guess.
That extra year that Apple sat on their ass with AT&T; was the crucial year that allowed android to gain traction and mindshare.
Neither your or I know what contract details with AT&T; prevented Apple from opening up Verizon earlier than they did, so claiming Apple "sat on their ass" is just your silly opinion.
Once the 'greatly anticipated' Verizon launch finally did come, it was met with a large chorus of "who cares?" from the crowd - the crowd that had gotten their droid phone 6 months earlier.
Again you make a wild-assed leap of logic. I, like many Verizon users, met the news that the iPhone was available on my favorite carrier with, "Oh dam, I'm locked into a two-year contract with a ****** Android Incredible."
Your basic point that Apple needed to open up the iPhone to more U.S. carriers to avoid market share loss is correct and generally regarded as such by most analysts. However, from the launch of the first iPhone, Apple has struggled to meet the accelerating demand for its products, so adding more U.S. carriers may have not been as smart as us outside the company might second-guess.
Machead III
Sep 16, 11:50 AM
C2D MB by Thanksgiving :D
Too late for me :(
*sheads a tear*
Too late for me :(
*sheads a tear*
dethmaShine
May 4, 03:10 PM
The licence is only for one computer.
If you want to install it on a different machine you must uninstall the original copy first.
The Mac App Store says:
"You can install apps on every Mac you use and even download them again."
That implies that if I go on a friend's computer for 5 minutes once a year I could install Lion on it for no charge.
If I want, I can install Mac OS X SL or Leopard on a 1000 machines using the same CD. :)
If you want to install it on a different machine you must uninstall the original copy first.
The Mac App Store says:
"You can install apps on every Mac you use and even download them again."
That implies that if I go on a friend's computer for 5 minutes once a year I could install Lion on it for no charge.
If I want, I can install Mac OS X SL or Leopard on a 1000 machines using the same CD. :)
thisisahughes
Mar 27, 06:02 AM
sounds plausible, but i really don't see iPad 3 coming out any time this year. it's way too soon
"2011: Year of iPad 2."
"2011: Year of iPad 2."
jfinke
Aug 4, 06:46 AM
the general availablity for the merom and woodcrest chips yet??
All of the benchmarks that people were drooling over the last couple of weeks were for the conroe, which is the desktop version.
So, it would not surprise me at all to see a delay in a merom based machine (or a woodcrest for that matter).
All of the benchmarks that people were drooling over the last couple of weeks were for the conroe, which is the desktop version.
So, it would not surprise me at all to see a delay in a merom based machine (or a woodcrest for that matter).
PatrickCocoa
May 4, 03:01 PM
cons: what if i want to format the hard drive and restart from scratch? or even just archive and install? what if i completely replace my hard drive? what if i want to sell my mac and get a new one, would i retain the license or would the buyer get it? how would they reinstall the OS after I wipe the hard drive? how long is this going to take to download? will we be able and authorized to burn our own install DVDs from the downloaded software?
Then don't buy from the Mac App Store.
