Steve Jobs on Apple's cash, NetBooks, Apple TV, and Cheap PCs - Page 3

Same experience here. Mac and Windows both runs great for me. The only crashes I had recently is Firefox on Windows and iPhoto on my Mac.

Blackberry Bold is AT&Fee. Blackberry Storm is Verizon. BIG difference.

Pulling my leg, right?. I do know one way you'd be correct though, disconnect XP from the internet. It is then, almost usable . I have been using PCs since pre Windows days and everything since by the way but thanks for the advice.

I totally agree. I lose about a GB of HD space a month to pictures from my camera so I don't want movies taking up any HD space. External storage? That is what DVD's are.

Rent? I have 1.5 Mbps DSL which works good for me. I do email and internet browsing. And Netflix doesn't require faster internet, so I am good.

You needed to read my post that your reply was replying to (if you see what I mean). I use both XP, Mac and Vista too all the time. I was saying on a vacation with a very slow internet connection XP was a pain in the rear due to all the updates and checking for latest versions of everything (Kaspersky etc) whereas an old iBook was more useable. In my office with up-rated FiOS it is not so much of an issue.

Not only are they sold in less markets, they are sold in WAY less markets. Do your own research. Apple pushed the iphone into a very large number of countries.

Maybe you shouldn't wait until vacation to allow your copy of Windows to search for and install updates. Or you could turn off auto-updates. From reading your post, I'd think Microsoft is pushing out updates 24-7, but I doubt they're much faster than Apple's schedule and I seem to get an update for my iMac about once a week (think there's been 2 so far this week, Migration Assistant and the latest security update).

Stay on topic and please spare us the Political Jabs (redacted)

No, I have a XP laptop beside me, I have no issues with it and it is connected to the internet. Someone has said this a well, don't wait until you go on holiday to download all the Windows updates, and if you feel like doing that, pause the downloads.

The only reason XP would crash a lot, is if you have crap hardware, you'll find the same thing happens with the Mac

I've redacted both yours and his.

It would have been nice that you just click the alert button rather than post another political jab while complaining about political jabs. Pot, kettle, black.

$25Billion

Buy Blizzard

Withdraw Windows version of WoW

That's 10 Million Macs right there !

I disagree. I firmly believe it is a game changer. That information just needs to be conveyed to the public. I have an Apple TV in lieu of cable and subscribe to the shows I like to watch via iTunes. I enjoy higher-quality video (in most cases), no commercials, have the ability to re-watch shows whenever I want, and I still save hundreds of dollars per year over forking out money to Comcast (I pay them $14/month for limited basic so I can watch local news and other live broadcasts).


Comcast is not a monopoly; there are plenty of alternatives that do not place limits on network utilisation. My service is through Speakeasy and gives me unrestricted (and unfiltered) access to the Internet.

I bought a Mini for the office; it's the perfect machine for the office. Who needs high-end graphics for running iWork, Office, X11, Terminal and Firefox? The only time I've ever found a limitation is when creating a Keynote presentation that used some of the advanced transitions. The Mini's GMA graphics do not have the power for them, so I transferred my presentation to my MacBook Pro. I also wish 4GB of RAM was supported, because it does hurt running Parallels sometimes.


This is a fairly valid point, although I don't find the quality to be overly lacking. I've rented a few HD movies from iTunes and found the artifacting to be (mostly) acceptable. Definitely not as enjoyable to watch as my HD DVDs, but good enough. I just want the prices to come down, HD purchases, and rental periods that last more than 24 hours. Not allowing a friend to borrow does have me using optical media more than iTunes content still, but I'm very much looking forward to the upcoming season of Battlestar Galactica in HD via my Apple TV!

With such a large warchest Apple could solve the bandwidth issue by partnering with Akamai and Sprint (WiMax).

Content is an interesting question. HBO showed that they could put together their own content and it's not like Jobs has no experience with a studio...*cough*Pixar*cough*.

Band of Brothers cost $125M, about the same as Cars ($120M). But The Sopranos was much cheaper. A few these kinds of titles on iTunes is a great way to start, just like HBO with their own stable of original programming. Nothing breeds success like success.

I wouldn't say it sucks, but it is somewhat inconvenient to use with a large library. Adding the iPhone/Touch remote application makes the thing seriously rock (especially if you've patched it with couch surfer).

I use my Apple TV more than any other device in my entertainment system. It's the most useful device I've ever bought.

What if, maybe, that "information" had already gotten out and maybe "the public" just decided it wasn't for them? The Apple TV is out there, has been advertised and every Apple Store and Best Buy with an Apple table has a working one on display.

Just because it works out spectacularly for you doesn't mean it works out for everyone. Not everything that Apple touches has to turn to gold in terms of broad public acceptance.

Its a good way to get into emerging markets - that is what Apple should use to get its name out in emerging markets so that when the wages do increase - people are already familiar with Apple and its products.

Apple holds over a 5% owner stake in Akamai. They bought 5% back in 1999. They have a decent stake into the corporation. All traffic for Apple goes through Akamai.

Tattling is childish. Calling a spade a spade seems more professional and adult.

Or probably more accurately, 9.9 million less WoW subscribers.

And I'm guessing you're probably one of those people who only watches 4-5 shows and doesn't mind watching them in SD. If so, then, yes, maybe AppleTV could be a cable replacement. Otherwise, not so much. I looked at the Season Pass cost for an HD show on iTunes and it was around $60, which is about what my monthly bill is for cable. So if I watch more than 12 different shows (less than 2 shows a day), I'm better off with cable. And I didn't have to shell out $229 up front.


It pretty much is where I live. There's no DSL service, so the only option for high-speed is Comcast.

Don't kid yourself. Your reciprocity and threat of hurling even more of it was childish too.

Perhaps you're not understanding the definition of the term "Game Changer." If Apple TV had been described as a box that lets you channel surf, then it could be called a "Game Stay-The-Samer."

The information is out there that Apple TV allows you to view your iTunes content on your television (and to listen to your tunes on your good speakers), but I don't think most people realise the amount of money they would save by migrating. When or if people come to this understanding, then the game will have been changed.

Until people understand this, they'll be content to blindingly hand over $100/month to Comcast simply because that's what they've always done (or because they're one of those mind-numbed people who prefer to have one hand in the popcorn and the other on the remote while flipping through 300 channels of crap because they simply watch tv out of habit).

I agree that not everything Apple touches is golden. For many people, they can get the same experience out of their Media Center PCs (and gain the ability to DVR broadcasts as well). I was simply pointing out a benefit of the Apple TV that I don't think many people realise.

Perhaps you don't understand that I was not prescribing any specific or vague changes to Apple TV, much less those. Maybe you confused me with someone else or maybe are remembering maybe a few posts I made when AppleTV was introduced a couple years ago, but I think I've moved on from that.

But my point is still true, even if it is a "game changer", a game changer is irrelevant if people don't play the new game. Did the game really change if most people don't go along with it?


The problem is, the cost benefits aren't there with typical TV use in a typical household. The average household watches over 8 hours of TV a day. Let's assume that an average of two people are watching the same show at the same time, that is 4 hours of media that needs to be acquired. If it's one hour dramas, that is $8 a day, $240 a month doing it Apple's way. Even if half of that is podcasts, that is still $120 a month. It goes up if your favorite shows are ones that fill half hour time slots.

I am not drawing on personal anecdotes for this, my family doesn't watch that much. Here is where I get 8 hours a household per day:
http://www.nielsenmedia.com/nc/porta...00ac0a260aRCRD

Just because you want to call it a game changer doesn't make it so. What's so revolutionary about the AppleTV? The fact that you get to pay for every little thing you want to watch separately? The fact that you'll be restricted to a fairly small amount of content? The fact that if they want live events, they'll either still have to pay for some level of cable or go back to the 70's and 80's and deal with a pair of rabbit ears attached to their TV?


I have a $15 cable that coupled with my iPod allows me to do all that. Why would I want to shell out $229 for AppleTV? Yes, you have to have an iPod for that but I think that would be a given for most iTunes users.


Or maybe they actually prefer to actually have a wide variety of content at their fingertips that they pay for with one monthly bill, instead of multiple payments for everything they want to watch. I'm sure content providers would love you to have to pay for everything you wanted to watch, but how quickly would the ratings for many shows drop when they were charged $1.99 an episode? Would someone be watching Jeopardy at $9.95/week?

How many differnt shows do you watch during a season of TV? If it's more than a few, AppleTV WILL NOT be cheaper than cable. It's that simple. I think the American average is around 4 hours a TV a day. 28 hours a week at $1.99/episode comes out to over $220 a month via Apple TV. Sure makes that $100/month figure you tossed out sound cheap.

You also seem to be forgetting multiple rooms. Want AppleTV in 4 rooms, that's over $900 in equipment alone. Hardly cheap.


Or they could save several hundred dollars and get a TiVo and couple it with their existing cable service and they'd have everything the AppleTV has and more: audio/video streaming, downloadable content from Amazon Unbox and other sources, YouTube, DVR functionality, photo viewing. And TiVo boxes are cheaper than AppleTV. Sure, there's a $13/month charge, but that's peanuts.

Nah, I get that. I still think it's unfortunate that not more people see the cost (and convenience) benefits of migrating away from broadcast television. I myself didn't see it until I upgraded to an HD TV and then saw how much it was going to cost me to upgrade my cable to match. I had an 'a-ha' moment, as my household is very a-typical, because there are only a handful of programs that are regularly watched--the rest of the time the TV is either switched off, or we're watching a DVD.

I see the eight-hour-per-day statistic and am, quite frankly, disgusted by it. Obviously purchasing content is not going to watch for those families, and perhaps that's why systems like the Apple TV and Media Center are not taking off (and may never do). I probably watch about eight hours of TV per month (and don't at all miss the rubbish that most people are getting in those extra twenty-four hours).

Well for those who aren't addicted to television, paying for only the content we watch is much cheaper than paying for content we don't (and again, I love not having to deal with commercials, and I can re-watch episodes if I want). Live events is a factor, but I still pay $14/month to have access to that.




Honestly I considered that (and did shell out $50 for the cable for the iPod Classic), but it's not as seamless. I come home and have video content (from season passes and podcasts) ready and waiting for me. Having hacked my AppleTV, I can also push DivX content onto it.


Fair enough, and as I said in a previous post, this device ain't gonna be a game changer for them (I might suggest a library card could be, however). I never watch Jeopardy nor mind-numbing sitcoms, and do have access to the dramas and a significant portion of the documentaries I want through the iTunes store (or through other means).


As I said, this is a good point. I often forget that the bulk of America lives in their living rooms and doesn't engage in behaviour that doesn't involve their televisions. In my household, we do watch a few shows, but choose to participate in more active activities the majority of the time.


True, but I can't for the life of me imagine having a family whereby we all excuse ourselves to our own rooms to sit in a chair and drool while having the life sucked out of us by a box. Four TVs? That's wrong (in my opinion, of course). Most of us grew up in households with one (maybe two) televisions, and life was good. I don't see disconnecting from my wife and children every night as a way to increase the quality of our lives.


I can't argue that point. I seriously considered the TiVo route myself, but opted for the Apple TV because I was able to get (near) HD content without an expensive cable subscription. To get TiVo HD, I'd still pay $80 to comcast and $13 to TiVo. I'm not saving any money (but am gaining access to a wider variety of content, but that's not worth the increase in cost to me -- but I get that for most people, it is).

http://www.cellhire.com/content/pop_..._countries.htm

http://www.blackberry.com/support/co...lability.shtml

93

http://www.apple.com/iphone/countries/

57

I counted quickly so I may be off a number here or there.

That is certainly proof of the number of countries, but I do see many Caribbean island nations. I wonder what the total per capita difference is.

I think it has been a hobby because it doesn't address more than one aspect of home entertainment. I think with the number of new casual game makers now familiar with ObjectiveC I think you'll see ATV becoming more of an interesting platform in the future for the general public. With connectivity to iPod Touch and iPhones you have interesting synergy across product lines and opportunities for game play.

This isn't to say that MS and Sony will stand still. The PS3 is a very capable set top box and Sony has it's own timetable and game plan for set top dominance.

MS has the ultimate trump card for the 360 should they ever wish to use it: Office Student Edition released as a 360 title. This will royally piss off a lot of OEMs though.

Opps. Well I guess since it has languished for about a year without updates maybe he does consider it a piece of junk.

Bingo. I think paying a bunch of money monthly for a Cable or Satellite package simply means people feel like they "must" "all-u-can-eat" their fill in programming. I get too annoyed with commercials and station holograms superimposed over the picture (like I don't know what station I'm watching) to bother much at this point.

In the future I'll probably do a blend.

Maybe basic cable depending on the sports access it provides.
Netflix -where I'll get my HD programming on disc
HD antenna
Apple TV or HTPC of some sort.


Apple has the opportunity to join this Netbook craze and make their version superior and yet another device that we can carry our media around with. Let's face it and iPhone can play back video content but not as well as a 8" or larger screen.

All I did was google and count. Heck, I probably counted wrong.

Yes, Montserrat and Monaco...not too big (yes, monaco is not in the Caribbean or an island). There are duplicates on both lists. Apple lists Belgium twice (French and Dutch versions).

But given that BlackBerry support is in most of Western Europe, N. America, S. America and India I'm thinking that "WAY less markets" is wrong.

Neither officially lists China but I bet a lot of Hong Kong devices are in Beijing for both Blackberry and iPhone.

That is pretty sad because I know quite a few $500 computers that are not a piece of junk.\

Matter of fact I own one (Compaq C700) and it is running circles around my daughters $1000 MacBook both running Mac OS X 10.5. I love Apple but I'm not willing to pay more money for a lesser product because it is looking prettier.

What is it with those stuck up software/computer giants not believing in choice?

Corporations are stuck in this vortex called Capitalism which pretty much means if massive profits aren't available a product is not worth creating. Despite the hype and lies Capitalism is an anathema to fast forward progress.

Anyone of us could easily build a solid computer for $500 with internet pricing. The level of integration on motherboards makes it very easy. It's pretty much

Case/PS
Motherboard
CPU
RAM/Storage
Mouse/KB
OS

Done. No one expects a barn burner at $500 but a stable machine with 2GB of RAM is certainly possible.

Talking about netbooks... Here's Isamu Sanada's version of a rebirth of the iBook:



8.9" (1280 × 768), SSD drive,...

More picts and other mockups here.

Oh my, that thing is gorgeous. I'll pass on their hideous mock-up of the Mini however!

Wired's review of the Lenovo S10 Nebook.

http://www.wired.com/reviews/product/lenovo_ideapad_s10


2nd Generation Netbook with faster Atom will start the watershed movement to these Netbooks.

You can have one of those:

(8.9" screen, trackpad for amoeba)


I'll have one of these:

(10" touch screen, touch keyboard)

At least, I'm sharing something NEW.

So what I get from all your comments is that you are basically anti-TV and therefore the AppleTV works for you since there is very little you want to watch on TV. Unfortunately, that also puts you into a very small percentage of the population, whether you like it or not (and maybe you could lose the insulting tone toward people who actually like TV). So for maybe 5% of the general populace, the AppleTV would be a game changer. For everyone else, it would greatly increase their monthly entertainment costs.