Hamish
Apr 11, 10:36 PM
Looking forward to the new final cut studio.
if apple is smart they will allow access to individual parts of the suite
as seperate Mac App Store downloads.
If it were possible to buy apple Motion on it's own I think many existing After Effects would be very happy to have something else to play with that can take adavantage of their hardware and deliver some fun realtime workflows...
it could be a halo product for such editors as well to end up using the whole suite...
I bought motion for 300 when it used to be sold individually, and I have spent a tonne of money since simply because I love that product.
do it apple. please.
if apple is smart they will allow access to individual parts of the suite
as seperate Mac App Store downloads.
If it were possible to buy apple Motion on it's own I think many existing After Effects would be very happy to have something else to play with that can take adavantage of their hardware and deliver some fun realtime workflows...
it could be a halo product for such editors as well to end up using the whole suite...
I bought motion for 300 when it used to be sold individually, and I have spent a tonne of money since simply because I love that product.
do it apple. please.
jaxstate
Aug 11, 02:58 PM
Who wants to go through the trouble of doing a software change to unlock their phone.
I seem to be missing some information...:confused:
First, a locked phone is ONLY a problem if you have cdma. If you go GSM the "locking" is software based and can be unlocked. The networks here unlock it for you for a fee. (others do that too but that is another story...)
Secondly, if the "iPone" is GSM based you an sell the same phone both locked and unlocked. The question whether a phone will be "subsidized" is a deal between Apple and the carrier. Just how much the phone will be is up to the carrier.
As an example: Here in europe we have vendors that sell cellphones where you can pick which carrier you want and pay different prices for the phone dependent on what carrier and type of contract you pick. However, you can also buy the buy the phone without a contract (unlocked)
...so why do we have this discussion whether this or that carrier will carry it?
If the new "iPhone" is a hit everybody will carry it. Of course, assuming Apple allows it.
I seem to be missing some information...:confused:
First, a locked phone is ONLY a problem if you have cdma. If you go GSM the "locking" is software based and can be unlocked. The networks here unlock it for you for a fee. (others do that too but that is another story...)
Secondly, if the "iPone" is GSM based you an sell the same phone both locked and unlocked. The question whether a phone will be "subsidized" is a deal between Apple and the carrier. Just how much the phone will be is up to the carrier.
As an example: Here in europe we have vendors that sell cellphones where you can pick which carrier you want and pay different prices for the phone dependent on what carrier and type of contract you pick. However, you can also buy the buy the phone without a contract (unlocked)
...so why do we have this discussion whether this or that carrier will carry it?
If the new "iPhone" is a hit everybody will carry it. Of course, assuming Apple allows it.
theBB
Aug 11, 07:28 PM
Confused.
Can somebody explain me the differences between the cellphone market between the US and Europe.
Will a 'iPhone' just be marketed to the US or worldwide (as the iPod does)?
Well, let's see, about 20 years ago, a lot of countries in Europe, Asia and elsewhere decided on a standard digital cell phone system and called it GSM. About 15 years ago GSM networks became quite widespread across these countries. In the meantime US kept on using analog cell phones. Motorola did not even believe that digital cell phone had much of a future, so it decided to stay away from this market, a decision which almost bankrupted the company.
US started rolling out digital service only about 10 years ago. As US government does not like to dictate private companies how to conduct their business, they sold the spectrum and put down some basic ground rules, but for the most part they let the service providers use any network they wished. For one reason or another, these providers decided go with about 4 different standards at first. Quite a few companies went with GSM, AT&T; picked a similar, but incompatible TDMA (IS=136?) standard, Nextel went with a proprietary standard they called iDEN and Sprint and Verizon went with CDMA, a radically different standard (IS-95) designed by Qualcomm. At the time, other big companies were very skeptical, so Qualcomm had to not only develop the underlying communication standards, but manufacture cell phones and the electronics for the cell towers. However, once the system proved itself, everybody started moving in that direction. Even the upcoming 3G system for these GSM networks, called UMTS, use a variant of CDMA technology.
CDMA is a more complicated standard compared to GSM, but it allows the providers to cram more users into each cell, it is supposedly cheaper to maintain and more flexible in some respects. However, anybody in that boat has to pay hefty royalties to Qualcomm, dampening its popularity. While creating UMTS, GSM standards bodies did everything they could to avoid using Qualcomm patents to avoid these payments. However, I don't know how successful they got in these efforts.
Even though Europeans here on these forums like to gloat that US did not join the worldwide standard, that we did not play along, that ours is a hodge podge of incompatible systems; without the freedom to try out different standards, CDMA would not have the opportunity to prove its feasibility and performance. In the end, the rest of the world is also reaping the benefits through UMTS/WCDMA.
Of course, not using the same standards as everybody else has its own price. The components of CDMA cell phones cost more and the system itself is more complicated, so CDMA versions of cell phones hit the market six months to a year after their GSM counterparts, if at all. The infrastructure cost of a rare system is higher as well, so AT&T; had to rip apart its network to replace it with GSM version about five years after rolling it out. Sprint is probably going to convert Nextel's system in the near future as well.
I hope this answers your question.
Can somebody explain me the differences between the cellphone market between the US and Europe.
Will a 'iPhone' just be marketed to the US or worldwide (as the iPod does)?
Well, let's see, about 20 years ago, a lot of countries in Europe, Asia and elsewhere decided on a standard digital cell phone system and called it GSM. About 15 years ago GSM networks became quite widespread across these countries. In the meantime US kept on using analog cell phones. Motorola did not even believe that digital cell phone had much of a future, so it decided to stay away from this market, a decision which almost bankrupted the company.
US started rolling out digital service only about 10 years ago. As US government does not like to dictate private companies how to conduct their business, they sold the spectrum and put down some basic ground rules, but for the most part they let the service providers use any network they wished. For one reason or another, these providers decided go with about 4 different standards at first. Quite a few companies went with GSM, AT&T; picked a similar, but incompatible TDMA (IS=136?) standard, Nextel went with a proprietary standard they called iDEN and Sprint and Verizon went with CDMA, a radically different standard (IS-95) designed by Qualcomm. At the time, other big companies were very skeptical, so Qualcomm had to not only develop the underlying communication standards, but manufacture cell phones and the electronics for the cell towers. However, once the system proved itself, everybody started moving in that direction. Even the upcoming 3G system for these GSM networks, called UMTS, use a variant of CDMA technology.
CDMA is a more complicated standard compared to GSM, but it allows the providers to cram more users into each cell, it is supposedly cheaper to maintain and more flexible in some respects. However, anybody in that boat has to pay hefty royalties to Qualcomm, dampening its popularity. While creating UMTS, GSM standards bodies did everything they could to avoid using Qualcomm patents to avoid these payments. However, I don't know how successful they got in these efforts.
Even though Europeans here on these forums like to gloat that US did not join the worldwide standard, that we did not play along, that ours is a hodge podge of incompatible systems; without the freedom to try out different standards, CDMA would not have the opportunity to prove its feasibility and performance. In the end, the rest of the world is also reaping the benefits through UMTS/WCDMA.
Of course, not using the same standards as everybody else has its own price. The components of CDMA cell phones cost more and the system itself is more complicated, so CDMA versions of cell phones hit the market six months to a year after their GSM counterparts, if at all. The infrastructure cost of a rare system is higher as well, so AT&T; had to rip apart its network to replace it with GSM version about five years after rolling it out. Sprint is probably going to convert Nextel's system in the near future as well.
I hope this answers your question.
gnasher729
Apr 19, 03:36 PM
Does anyone think that a normal person would actually confuse a Samsung Galaxy (especially with that huge "Samsung" on it) with an Apple iPhone when they're buying it?
I mean, is Apple going to claim that they're losing sales because the Galaxy is so close to the iPhone that people can't tell the difference? If so, that sure doesn't say much for the iPhone. Or it says a lot for the Galaxy.
You made up your mind and you argue accordingly. Consider this: Many people know the name "iPhone" and the way it looks, they may even know the name "Macintosh", but not the name "Apple". They might have talked to someone who used an iPhone and was very happy with it, were convinced to buy one, and go to a shop and pick up the phone that looks exactly like the one they wanted to buy. And end up with a Samsung phone when they actually wanted an iPhone.
Your second argument doesn't really make much sense. Samsung knew what the iPhone looks like, so if the Galaxy looks the same, it is because Samsung decided that it should look that way. Confusion surely goes both ways, so there would be a danger for Samsung that someone wanting to buy a Galaxy ends up buying an iPhone. Samsung had to know and accept this. So obviously Samsung is of the opinion that if people who want an iPhone buy a Galaxy by mistake, and people who want a Galaxy buy an iPhone by mistake, then Samsung will overall benefit. Doesn't seem to say much for the Galaxy, if they try to create this confusion.
I mean, is Apple going to claim that they're losing sales because the Galaxy is so close to the iPhone that people can't tell the difference? If so, that sure doesn't say much for the iPhone. Or it says a lot for the Galaxy.
You made up your mind and you argue accordingly. Consider this: Many people know the name "iPhone" and the way it looks, they may even know the name "Macintosh", but not the name "Apple". They might have talked to someone who used an iPhone and was very happy with it, were convinced to buy one, and go to a shop and pick up the phone that looks exactly like the one they wanted to buy. And end up with a Samsung phone when they actually wanted an iPhone.
Your second argument doesn't really make much sense. Samsung knew what the iPhone looks like, so if the Galaxy looks the same, it is because Samsung decided that it should look that way. Confusion surely goes both ways, so there would be a danger for Samsung that someone wanting to buy a Galaxy ends up buying an iPhone. Samsung had to know and accept this. So obviously Samsung is of the opinion that if people who want an iPhone buy a Galaxy by mistake, and people who want a Galaxy buy an iPhone by mistake, then Samsung will overall benefit. Doesn't seem to say much for the Galaxy, if they try to create this confusion.
DocNo
Apr 11, 10:09 AM
This is a little more out there but my friend has a theory that Apple has let Kevin Smith use the new Final Cut to cut and make his new film that is coming it. The importance of this is that he feels movie making is going the way of music making these days. He believes anything under 20 million is going to be funded independently, not released via movie studios and will sell the movies directly to the theaters.
He feels only the big blockbuster movies like Transformers and stuff will be left the studios, much like many musicians are skipping the record companies and making and releasing music themselves.
And as with the iPhone and iPad, if you are hopelessly behind in a traditional market (i.e. Mac OSX vs. Windows) go create a new one (i.e. iOS)! I have no doubt this is where Apple is going...
He feels only the big blockbuster movies like Transformers and stuff will be left the studios, much like many musicians are skipping the record companies and making and releasing music themselves.
And as with the iPhone and iPad, if you are hopelessly behind in a traditional market (i.e. Mac OSX vs. Windows) go create a new one (i.e. iOS)! I have no doubt this is where Apple is going...
cait-sith
Aug 11, 12:44 PM
Doesn't Europe have many many carriers in each country? There's no carrier that spans the entire EU, is there?
Who wants to pay 400$ for a phone that will look like an antique 12 months from now? That's a lot of money to pay for the status of having a brand new phone.
Who wants to pay 400$ for a phone that will look like an antique 12 months from now? That's a lot of money to pay for the status of having a brand new phone.
lars steenhoff
Apr 6, 05:01 PM
For the time being, the new ati macbook pro's won't work as fast with premiere pro, as they could have when premiere would use openCL, instead of Cuda.
Probably in the next version I guess, as openCL was not quite there yet when premiere CS5 was developed
Probably in the next version I guess, as openCL was not quite there yet when premiere CS5 was developed
cult hero
Mar 31, 06:58 PM
John Gruber would eat Steve Job's ***** if he could. His opinion is extremely biased.
Exactly. What we need are more objective, balanced and rational sounding opinions like yours.
Exactly. What we need are more objective, balanced and rational sounding opinions like yours.
gus6464
Mar 22, 08:20 PM
If you meant the HTC View for Sprint (aka the Flyer), then I don't think it needs Honeycomb right away to become popular.
It'll start with Gingerbread, Sense and the Scribe pen technology, which is plenty to play and be useful with.
I'm looking forward to trying its ability to allow typed, drawn, and voice memos during the day, saved into Evernote. Latest demo video here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVK-OTnxnp0). HTC is going out on a limb here, but I think it's a good one.
The Flyer is a good concept but I think holding it back is Sense and not necessarily Gingerbread. Sense has become too clunky and sluggish for it's own good and at the end of the day is it really needed? HTC should just concentrate on making apps that take advantage of the scribe pen than building everything around Sense. Android has evolved enough that there is no need for Sense, Motoblur, Touchwiz anymore. Make it optional not mandatory. I have seen way too many apps not work correctly just because of the damn UI layer that the manufacturer is running. It would be very easy to have all those UI's available on the app market and allow the consumer to make a choice. Differentiate your product by the hardware and build quality, and not some clunky, useless UI overlay.
It'll start with Gingerbread, Sense and the Scribe pen technology, which is plenty to play and be useful with.
I'm looking forward to trying its ability to allow typed, drawn, and voice memos during the day, saved into Evernote. Latest demo video here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVK-OTnxnp0). HTC is going out on a limb here, but I think it's a good one.
The Flyer is a good concept but I think holding it back is Sense and not necessarily Gingerbread. Sense has become too clunky and sluggish for it's own good and at the end of the day is it really needed? HTC should just concentrate on making apps that take advantage of the scribe pen than building everything around Sense. Android has evolved enough that there is no need for Sense, Motoblur, Touchwiz anymore. Make it optional not mandatory. I have seen way too many apps not work correctly just because of the damn UI layer that the manufacturer is running. It would be very easy to have all those UI's available on the app market and allow the consumer to make a choice. Differentiate your product by the hardware and build quality, and not some clunky, useless UI overlay.
cmaier
Apr 20, 12:10 PM
Then it sure doesn't apply to all models then if the trade dress claim is an AND'd combination. If the trade dress claim only applicable to certain models in the ones listed in the complaint ?
The trade dress claims do not list specific models.
Specific models ARE shown for illustration purposes in the background portion of the document, however.
The trade dress claims do not list specific models.
Specific models ARE shown for illustration purposes in the background portion of the document, however.
sotorious
Apr 11, 01:49 PM
Is that source creditable. I was thinking of making the jump ship to an iphone try it out for a year, but the thought of waiting till june to get a phone was a killer in it self. Now waiting till October is def a no go. I already have my phone for a year and that is way to long just for looking at the same phone that whole time.
nealibob
Mar 31, 03:00 PM
John Gruber's take:
Can't say I disagree.
The real Android bait-and-switch is calling the platform "open" to consumers. Sure, there are a few "Google Experience" devices that have not been mutilated by handset makers, but even those often have closed hardware. The way I see it, Google uses this ruse of openness to get geek support. Geeks then advocate their platform, which is a great form of marketing.
The reality is that any Android handset with a locked bootloader or no root access from the factory is just about as closed as any iOS device (or BlackBerry, WebOS, Windows, etc. device). The open vs. closed = Android vs. iOS argument is ridiculous, because it focuses on the part of the platform (underlying source code) that matters the least to almost all users.
Can't say I disagree.
The real Android bait-and-switch is calling the platform "open" to consumers. Sure, there are a few "Google Experience" devices that have not been mutilated by handset makers, but even those often have closed hardware. The way I see it, Google uses this ruse of openness to get geek support. Geeks then advocate their platform, which is a great form of marketing.
The reality is that any Android handset with a locked bootloader or no root access from the factory is just about as closed as any iOS device (or BlackBerry, WebOS, Windows, etc. device). The open vs. closed = Android vs. iOS argument is ridiculous, because it focuses on the part of the platform (underlying source code) that matters the least to almost all users.
aswitcher
Aug 27, 05:17 AM
What would be competitive:
SNIP
iMac 2.4-2.66Ghz Conroe, X1800 and LCD res upgrade
Mac Mini: 1.83Ghz Allendale (going to be much cheaper than Merom, so if they can they will put one in) Integrated graphics
Mac Pro: Dual 2.0-3.0Ghz Xeons
I agree, it would be really good if Apple did what they did with the Mac Pro, and made sure the next updates used the best appropriate tech available.
Alternatively, they should release a grunty half sized Mac Pro for those who need more power and customisation, but dont need a full on work station.
SNIP
iMac 2.4-2.66Ghz Conroe, X1800 and LCD res upgrade
Mac Mini: 1.83Ghz Allendale (going to be much cheaper than Merom, so if they can they will put one in) Integrated graphics
Mac Pro: Dual 2.0-3.0Ghz Xeons
I agree, it would be really good if Apple did what they did with the Mac Pro, and made sure the next updates used the best appropriate tech available.
Alternatively, they should release a grunty half sized Mac Pro for those who need more power and customisation, but dont need a full on work station.
gnasher729
Mar 22, 01:38 PM
You are the funniest poster on here. Thanks for the entertainment. (Not sure if it's your intent, but thanks anyway.)
Here's what he doesn't realise: Every product has both a price, and a value. In case of the iPhone, Apple has left a lot of space for others to undercut it in price. And many people will go for something that is cheaper, even when it doesn't have quite the value. But as we can see now, Apple hasn't left any margin with the iPad for competitors to undercut it in price. If the iPad was starting at around $1000 as had been suggested originally, then Samsung would be able to sell lots and lots of tablets for $499. But the iPad starts at $499. Samsung could sell lots and lots of tablets for $249 or $299, but they can't build them for the price. The reason why none of these tablets are cheaper than the iPad is because they just can't build them cheaper.
For the same price, people are going to buy the original and not a cheap copy. So they will buy and continue buying the iPad. And the iPad is the one that you know will be around next year, unlike others.
Here's what he doesn't realise: Every product has both a price, and a value. In case of the iPhone, Apple has left a lot of space for others to undercut it in price. And many people will go for something that is cheaper, even when it doesn't have quite the value. But as we can see now, Apple hasn't left any margin with the iPad for competitors to undercut it in price. If the iPad was starting at around $1000 as had been suggested originally, then Samsung would be able to sell lots and lots of tablets for $499. But the iPad starts at $499. Samsung could sell lots and lots of tablets for $249 or $299, but they can't build them for the price. The reason why none of these tablets are cheaper than the iPad is because they just can't build them cheaper.
For the same price, people are going to buy the original and not a cheap copy. So they will buy and continue buying the iPad. And the iPad is the one that you know will be around next year, unlike others.
zacman
Apr 19, 03:29 PM
2.5 million more? Apple has likely sold more than double then number of iPhones in q1 2011 than q1 2010 (8.75 million).
I'm speaking about estimated Q1/11 to Q4/10 numbers (the est. Q1/11 numbers is what that news was about...). And what about reading the graphs I posted yourself? :rolleyes:
I'm speaking about estimated Q1/11 to Q4/10 numbers (the est. Q1/11 numbers is what that news was about...). And what about reading the graphs I posted yourself? :rolleyes:
Beaverman3001
Apr 6, 01:17 PM
Won't purchase any Mac with intel graphics.
bedifferent
Apr 5, 07:50 PM
Interestingly this contradicts the information my friend on the design team hinted towards. I know the release is imminent so time will tell.
technicolor
Sep 19, 08:49 PM
DailyTech (http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=4217) has a mention of the Core 2 Quadro processors.
Pricing mentioned was a little lower than I expected, but it's processors in the Conroe line rather than the Xeon. Having said that, the 3GHz Xeon is slightly cheaper than the 2.93GHz Conroe.
As expected, the highest rated speed mentioned is 2.67Ghz. This intel crap updates far too frequently...ugh
:mad:
Pricing mentioned was a little lower than I expected, but it's processors in the Conroe line rather than the Xeon. Having said that, the 3GHz Xeon is slightly cheaper than the 2.93GHz Conroe.
As expected, the highest rated speed mentioned is 2.67Ghz. This intel crap updates far too frequently...ugh
:mad:
bigandy
Jul 27, 09:42 AM
this makes me happy. jumping up and down for wwdc...
:) :) :)
:) :) :)
spencers
Jun 15, 01:55 PM
To follow up to my last post, just got a call from my local Radio Shack and got my PIN.
The waiting begins!
The waiting begins!
MacRumors
Jun 8, 06:03 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2010/06/08/radioshack-to-carry-iphone-4-at-launch/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2010/06/08/190316-radioshack_logo.jpg
![]()
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2010/06/08/190316-radioshack_logo.jpg
Lollypop
Aug 5, 04:25 PM
Im glad we will be getting a bit of closure on monday, while I love the rumors its been getting a bit to much, im actively avoiding all mac related sites... I dont want to be the boy that spoilt his own Xmas! :D
~Shard~
Jul 14, 02:40 PM
They'd better have something in between this and the iMac...
Did you see my above post? Great minds think a like... ;)
Did you see my above post? Great minds think a like... ;)
eelpout
Apr 11, 04:31 PM
And you'll be complaining about battery life and the Android experience in a few days.
Spoken like someone who hasn't used a recent Android device. On my Gingerbread phone I lost like what, 10-12% overnight in 8 hours? Battery life isn't an issue anymore. Though it is acceptable to dislike Android for other reasons. ;)
Spoken like someone who hasn't used a recent Android device. On my Gingerbread phone I lost like what, 10-12% overnight in 8 hours? Battery life isn't an issue anymore. Though it is acceptable to dislike Android for other reasons. ;)
