Apple's Ive on naming products: 'We're really quite careful with the words we use' - Page 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum 

 

I believe you are wrong.  I'd be interested to see any citation.

No offense, if someone wants to prove me wrong, they should provide the evidence. It's only here that it works the other way.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jungmark 


No Woz or Jobs, no Apple. If memory serves me right, Woz brought jobs to the computer club. Woz showed Jobs the Apple I.

It's funny, isn't it, that some of the self-proclaimed Apple aficionados here would have forgotten such an important part of history?

Quote:

Originally Posted by SolipsismX 


1) You didn't state a negative that can't possibly be proven so why you think the burden of proof is therefore up to anyone else but you makes no sense because you've yet to prove yourself right.

2) Logic works here just as it works everywhere else. In fact, I'd say that the quality of the posts here lend to more citations, more proof, and better arguments all around compared to most tech forums. Every try having a discussion on MR?
 

First of all, negatives can be proven. It is done all the time. Only certain classes of negatives cannot be proven either easily or at all. Wish people here would stop implying it cannot be done in general and then using it to turn everything into a heuristic argument.

Second, if we were at a party and I described something that I remembered, someone would disagree only if they know it to be wrong. If they know it to be wrong, they usually know why. People here challenge each other just for the sake here, as if there is a prize for catching someone wrong. Maybe there is something wrong with me, but my psyche needs no such edification. If someone wants to prove me wrong, go ahead. I am sure they can, once in a while. But that doesn't bother me in the least.

I fail to understand how quality of any discussion lends to more citations. Sorry, I don't understand what that means because I don't believe AI is being cited that much.

The $12000 figure was added by someone else after I made my point (i.e. I wasn't contradicting anyone).

Finally, I don't know what MR is but I am guessing it's another forum.

p.s. I get it - MR is MacRumors. Not a participant there and one place is enough for me. Got a job and family :)

I'm sorry but the minute Woz says iTunes should be on other mobile platforms he loses me.  Apple is in the business of using software and their ecosystem to sell hardware.  The reason for iTunes for Windows was to drive more iPod sales since the majority of consumers own Windows PC's.  How would making iTunes available for Windows Phone and Android drive iPhone sales?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rogifan 

I'm sorry but the minute Woz says iTunes should be on other mobile platforms he loses me.  Apple is in the business of using software and their ecosystem to sell hardware.  The reason for iTunes for Windows was to drive more iPod sales since the majority of consumers own Windows PC's.  How would making iTunes available for Windows Phone and Android drive iPhone sales?

It wouldn't.  But it would get iTunes sales that otherwise might never have happened , from hundreds of millions of people who buy non-iPhones anyway.

Perhaps that's worth it.  Perhaps not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by stelligent 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum 

 

I believe you are wrong.  I'd be interested to see any citation.

No offense, if someone wants to prove me wrong, they should provide the evidence. It's only here that it works the other way.

No offense taken.

I knew Woz and his family 1978-1989 and must of had hundreds of encounters with him -- social, business, personal.  I remember when he left Apple, and AIR, the story at the time was that he kept his employee number -- but had no job or received no paycheck.  I remembered wrong!  Others have posted a video of Woz saying he receives a salary.

The Wired article appears to be generally true -- but based on what I was told by Woz's relatives -- I believe there are significant errors... but, hey, Wired had their sources too!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gatorguy 

I found one reference to him getting about 120K per year. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Wozniak#cite_note-iWoz-1

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum 

 

No offense taken.

 

I knew Woz and his family 1978-1989 and must of had hundreds of encounters with him -- social, business, personal.  I remember when he left Apple, and AIR, the story at the time was that he kept his employee number -- but had no job or received no paycheck.  I remembered wrong!  Others have posted a video of Woz saying he receives a salary.

 

The Wired article appears to be generally true -- but based on what I was told by Woz's relatives -- I believe there are significant errors... but, hey, Wired had their sources too!

Looks like there are two conflicting sources of info on this. I honestly don't recall where I read the $100k figure. But this is not an important issue. What is interesting that they continue to pay him out of respect for his status.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KDarling 

 

It wouldn't.  But it would get iTunes sales that otherwise might never have happened , from hundreds of millions of people who buy non-iPhones anyway.

 

Perhaps that's worth it.  Perhaps not.

You think there's that many people out there who have no interest in an iPhone or iPod touch but would want to use iTunes?  Maybe there are more price conscious people who fit into that category but then I see Apple doing a low cost iPhone option before they'd make iTunes app for Windows Phone or Android.

This is OT (but related to Ive).  I stumbled across some building permits for the $17M house he bought in SF.  4 remodeling permits totaling a cool $1.7M.   Looks like he's working with an architect from Norman Foster's group and the general contractors on the project don't do shabby work either: 

http://www.vanacker.com/work#slideshow=all

http://www.gfdseng.com/

So if anyone was wondering If he would remodel the place, I guess we have our answer.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rogifan 

You think there's that many people out there who have no interest in an iPhone or iPod touch but would want to use iTunes?  Maybe there are more price conscious people who fit into that category but then I see Apple doing a low cost iPhone option before they'd make iTunes app for Windows Phone or Android.

I don't disagree.  All I'm proposing is that not supporting iTunes on other phones (not standalone music players), is the same kind of longterm strategic mistake that Apple made when they signed that iPhone exclusive with AT&T for so many years.   That self-lock gave Android unopposed freedom to grow on the other US carriers.

To me, allowing Google Music and Amazon MP3 free reign on opposing smartphones is the same kind of mistake.  It is better to have customers in at least part of your ecosystem, than not at all.   Apple even emphasizes this in their lawsuits, where they spend a lot of time explaining how they believe a customer who buys from their competitors is often lost forever.

Now, many people do still buy from iTunes and use tools to sync their library to their non-iOS device, but it'd be better for Apple to be in charge of that, if they wish to remain in control.

(I'm not invested in this viewpoint, so opposing opinions are welcome.)

Side note:  interesting Lifehacker comparison of the three major music sellers here:  

http://lifehacker.com/5860817/google-music-vs-amazon-mp3-vs-itunes-which-online-music-store-is-the-best-for-you

Quote:

Originally Posted by ankleskater 

According to many here, Android is crap. So has Apple really lost those customers or will they not buy am iPhone the moment their contracts expire?

The second sentence is dependent on the accuracy of the first.  Opinions in an Apple-centric site aside, it may be useful to check your premise.