NO- just simply release the new modelswithout all this unneccesary hoopla. Do you think Sony has to have an event when a new model of Blu-ray machine, HDTV, or PS3 comes out?
There simply is no need for an event if all you're doing is sticking a camera in the Touch which iPhones already have.
I seem to recall a recent event announcing the release of a new PS3...
Apple doesn't have an event for every new model they release, but I would agree that they have a lot of events. What degree of change is needed to make an event "worthwhile" is of course completely subjective. I personally consider the yearly iPod event to be worthwhile and this event will have more than just iPods with cameras. We will probably see a 64 bit iTunes 9, the new cocktail thing (I have no idea what that will be like, so I don't know if it will be significant), and maybe a new AppleTV. Of course if the rumored tablet was announced, the event would definitely be worthwhile.
Edit: Also the processor in the touch will likely be upgraded to match the iPhone, and an OLED screen isn't really out of the question either. Last year the iPod Touch jumped ahead of the iPhone in processing power, perhaps this year the touch will jump ahead in screen technology? Furthermore, we've heard that the iPhone is somewhat capable of 1080p video. Maybe once the iPod touch processor is up to par with the iPhones they will allow 720p video out (with a new dock of course)? That would deal a serious blow to the ZuneHD even before it is released. You are simply assuming nothing will happen and it is therefore not worthwhile. While I don't think anything major will be announced, I think there will be more than enough to make an event out of it.
More like they are waiting for Yoko to die off....
From what I've read about this previously, it seemed the main holdout was McCartney. The last round of speculation was set off when the catalog was valued as a part of his divorce settlement. Anyway, without arguing the relevance of the Beatles (which I think is as pointless as it is ridiculous), it's still apparent that the audience for their material is aging, and isn't going to be growing. If they want to maximize the value of the catalog as digital downloads, then the time is never going to be better than now. Or maybe Paul is planning on taking it with him.
NO- just simply release the new modelswithout all this unneccesary hoopla. Do you think Sony has to have an event when a new model of Blu-ray machine, HDTV, or PS3 comes out?
There simply is no need for an event if all you're doing is sticking a camera in the Touch which iPhones already have.
It's not that Sony wouldn't, it's that Sony couldn't.
And of course, your entire argument is based on the presumption that iPods with cameras (which haven't been confirmed) will be the only thing announced. If the announcements coming tomorrow were that minor, I don't think Apple would bother calling in the press either.
Having been a kid at the time the Beatles arrived in the US, and later taking a deep interest in history and world affairs, I can honestly say that I know of no event in any time in history that created such an instant, immediate, wide-spread, global impact. Those of us who weren't around at the time simply cannot conceive of the profundity of the Beatles effect. Seeing a video of the crowd reaction of the Ed Sullivan show appearances doesn't begin to show what it was like. We are talking about literally millions of people of both genders just going nuts. Girls would get quite literally hysterical just watching them on TV.
It was analagous to a world where there was absolutely nothing but sleepy string quartets and suddenly Joe Satriani appears out of nowhere with "Surfing With the Alien". Ka-POW!
Their stunning arrival, their look, their industry-changing sound and their vocals were just square one. The music that followed hit top marks in a wide variety of songs and musical experimentation. Although they had a number of clunkers, the vast proportion of the song writing was truly brilliant and often so touching as to bring tears to your eyes (such as "Yesterday"). On the other hand, some of their music was so aggressive that it would please any metal head ("Helter Skelter").
Suggested listening: Help, A Hard Day's Night, Can't Buy Me Love, You've Got To Hide Your Love Away, Day Tripper, I Am The Walrus, Across the Universe, Glass Onion, Come Together, and side two of Abbey Road (a 20 minute masterpiece comprised of a number of interlinked songs).
By my teen years my tastes turned to hard rock but it absolutely impossible to overstate the impact of the Beatles on the nature of popular music, and who knows how many musicians lost their careers as a result of this music revolution.
Even people who hated the music could not deny that there has never been a mucisian/group that such an immediate impact on popular culture. Just the opening chord to A Hard Day's night was enough to electrify the listener.
The only reason Apple hasn't offered a limited-edition Sam Sacks iPod is they haven't been able to develop audio circuitry worthy of his vocal masterpieces. I doubt it could happen in any of our lifetimes.
Unfortunately my MobileMe cellular coverage only works in my mind.
It would be a nice fantasy to eliminate all phone companies, but someone has to, you know, install and maintain those pesky towers and switching offices.
At some point in the future (I give it five years at most), cellular service providers like AT&T will become wireless ISPs (WISPs, lol), it's simply a matter of when.
When it does happen, we'll no longer be charged at all for electronic voice communication (let alone text or video messages). Imagine that for a second. It's easy, just imagine using your Mac as you do now, except you won't be tethered to a Wi-Fi network (hah, 'tethered to Wi-Fi'; sounds like an oxymoron).
All Apple will have to do at that point is port iChat to the iPhone and presto, no more paying for minutes, SMS, or MMS, just a flat monthly wireless internet charge. iPhones will probably have user-facing cameras by then too, so we'll be able to have video chat with family or friends, sans computer.
Former Beatles member Paul McCartney would like to see the band's music show up at places like Apple's iTunes Store, but he says that EMI is holding up the process. The Beatles music library has been seen by many as a glaring omission in the legit music download market.
"We were having problems with iTunes -- well not iTunes, EMI was the problem -- with downloading, which we'd like to do because that's how a lot of people get their music," Mr. McCartney told NME.
The Fab Four's digitally remastered library will be released on Wednesday, the same day that Apple is hosting its own special media event. There has been speculation that along with new iPods, Apple would announce that the Beatles' library would finally be available at the iTunes Store. Based on Mr. McCartney's comments, however, that's seeming less likely.
I haven't tried recently but does the iTunes Genius even recognize The Beatles? I know it didn't for a long time after it was introduced though it would recognize all sorts of obscure bands. I never did hear a good reason why Apple chose to make it so iTunes didn't recognize them.
Even though I like The Beatles I wouldn't buy anything of theirs through iTunes for two reasons. First, I have everything I want already and second what I have is ripped in lossless format so it would crazy to buy even "remastered" songs though iTunes if I can only get them at 256 max, a third or less of the lossless rate. I don't care to hear some coughing in the background or 3% better pickup of the sitar strumming. There will be a big bump in sales for a week while all the diehard collector types buy any new Beatles releases and then sales will fall back to earth.
SJ (self proclaimed devoted fan) certainly knew at the time ,1976, that the name Apple was already own by The Beatles. Hence the future payments over the years to Apple Corps.
SJ (self proclaimed devoted fan) certainly knew at the time ,1976, that the name Apple was already own by The Beatles.
And?
Quote:
Hence the future payments over the years to Apple Corps.
Incorrect.
The "future payments over the years to Apple Corps" were because of the lawsuits won by Apple Corp against, Apple Computer, Inc., not because Apple were a bunch of nice guys.
Quote:
Originally Posted by whimvestor
Pardon me for not spending more time tracking down direct quotes amongst the tens of thousands of articles on the topic. Regardless, it is far from "doubtful."
Search all you want. Anything that says it is fact, is not, since even Jobs and Woz have not even said specifically/cannot agree/ are ambicuous to the specifics of why they chose the name.
Comments
NO- just simply release the new modelswithout all this unneccesary hoopla. Do you think Sony has to have an event when a new model of Blu-ray machine, HDTV, or PS3 comes out?
There simply is no need for an event if all you're doing is sticking a camera in the Touch which iPhones already have.
I seem to recall a recent event announcing the release of a new PS3...
Apple doesn't have an event for every new model they release, but I would agree that they have a lot of events. What degree of change is needed to make an event "worthwhile" is of course completely subjective. I personally consider the yearly iPod event to be worthwhile and this event will have more than just iPods with cameras. We will probably see a 64 bit iTunes 9, the new cocktail thing (I have no idea what that will be like, so I don't know if it will be significant), and maybe a new AppleTV. Of course if the rumored tablet was announced, the event would definitely be worthwhile.
Edit: Also the processor in the touch will likely be upgraded to match the iPhone, and an OLED screen isn't really out of the question either. Last year the iPod Touch jumped ahead of the iPhone in processing power, perhaps this year the touch will jump ahead in screen technology? Furthermore, we've heard that the iPhone is somewhat capable of 1080p video. Maybe once the iPod touch processor is up to par with the iPhones they will allow 720p video out (with a new dock of course)? That would deal a serious blow to the ZuneHD even before it is released. You are simply assuming nothing will happen and it is therefore not worthwhile. While I don't think anything major will be announced, I think there will be more than enough to make an event out of it.
Hmmmm- makes you wonder?
More like they are waiting for Yoko to die off....
From what I've read about this previously, it seemed the main holdout was McCartney. The last round of speculation was set off when the catalog was valued as a part of his divorce settlement. Anyway, without arguing the relevance of the Beatles (which I think is as pointless as it is ridiculous), it's still apparent that the audience for their material is aging, and isn't going to be growing. If they want to maximize the value of the catalog as digital downloads, then the time is never going to be better than now. Or maybe Paul is planning on taking it with him.
NO- just simply release the new modelswithout all this unneccesary hoopla. Do you think Sony has to have an event when a new model of Blu-ray machine, HDTV, or PS3 comes out?
There simply is no need for an event if all you're doing is sticking a camera in the Touch which iPhones already have.
It's not that Sony wouldn't, it's that Sony couldn't.
And of course, your entire argument is based on the presumption that iPods with cameras (which haven't been confirmed) will be the only thing announced.
It was analagous to a world where there was absolutely nothing but sleepy string quartets and suddenly Joe Satriani appears out of nowhere with "Surfing With the Alien". Ka-POW!
Their stunning arrival, their look, their industry-changing sound and their vocals were just square one. The music that followed hit top marks in a wide variety of songs and musical experimentation. Although they had a number of clunkers, the vast proportion of the song writing was truly brilliant and often so touching as to bring tears to your eyes (such as "Yesterday"). On the other hand, some of their music was so aggressive that it would please any metal head ("Helter Skelter").
Suggested listening: Help, A Hard Day's Night, Can't Buy Me Love, You've Got To Hide Your Love Away, Day Tripper, I Am The Walrus, Across the Universe, Glass Onion, Come Together, and side two of Abbey Road (a 20 minute masterpiece comprised of a number of interlinked songs).
By my teen years my tastes turned to hard rock but it absolutely impossible to overstate the impact of the Beatles on the nature of popular music, and who knows how many musicians lost their careers as a result of this music revolution.
Even people who hated the music could not deny that there has never been a mucisian/group that such an immediate impact on popular culture. Just the opening chord to A Hard Day's night was enough to electrify the listener.
Beatles? I never understood the fascination with them. They did good for their time, but I'd rather get AC/DC on iTunes.
Objective Vs subjective.
http://blog.wfmu.org/freeform/2007/1...imitable-.html
The only reason Apple hasn't offered a limited-edition Sam Sacks iPod is they haven't been able to develop audio circuitry worthy of his vocal masterpieces. I doubt it could happen in any of our lifetimes.
Unfortunately my MobileMe cellular coverage only works in my mind.
It would be a nice fantasy to eliminate all phone companies, but someone has to, you know, install and maintain those pesky towers and switching offices.
At some point in the future (I give it five years at most), cellular service providers like AT&T will become wireless ISPs (WISPs, lol), it's simply a matter of when.
When it does happen, we'll no longer be charged at all for electronic voice communication (let alone text or video messages). Imagine that for a second.
All Apple will have to do at that point is port iChat to the iPhone and presto, no more paying for minutes, SMS, or MMS, just a flat monthly wireless internet charge. iPhones will probably have user-facing cameras by then too, so we'll be able to have video chat with family or friends, sans computer.
Steve Jobs stole Apple's name
Doubtful.
No Apple TV.
No flash or zoom on mediocre iPod cameras.
iTunes Blu-Ray support yet no Blu- Ray drives.
No Beatles.
No Fab iTab.
Why bother???
He has a point.
Former Beatles member Paul McCartney would like to see the band's music show up at places like Apple's iTunes Store, but he says that EMI is holding up the process. The Beatles music library has been seen by many as a glaring omission in the legit music download market.
"We were having problems with iTunes -- well not iTunes, EMI was the problem -- with downloading, which we'd like to do because that's how a lot of people get their music," Mr. McCartney told NME.
The Fab Four's digitally remastered library will be released on Wednesday, the same day that Apple is hosting its own special media event. There has been speculation that along with new iPods, Apple would announce that the Beatles' library would finally be available at the iTunes Store. Based on Mr. McCartney's comments, however, that's seeming less likely.
Even though I like The Beatles I wouldn't buy anything of theirs through iTunes for two reasons. First, I have everything I want already and second what I have is ripped in lossless format so it would crazy to buy even "remastered" songs though iTunes if I can only get them at 256 max, a third or less of the lossless rate. I don't care to hear some coughing in the background or 3% better pickup of the sitar strumming. There will be a big bump in sales for a week while all the diehard collector types buy any new Beatles releases and then sales will fall back to earth.
http://tinyurl.com/n4cae8
although sky have pulled the story....
curious...embargo?
Doubtful.
Yet highly likely.
SJ (self proclaimed devoted fan) certainly knew at the time ,1976, that the name Apple was already own by The Beatles. Hence the future payments over the years to Apple Corps.
Doubtful.
Actually, this has been documented. "[Steve Jobs] is said to have chosen the name in part as a tribute to The Beatles"
see
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/...in573913.shtml
or
http://db.tidbits.com/article/8471?print_version=1
seems like they are
http://tinyurl.com/n4cae8
although sky have pulled the story....
curious...embargo?
Yet highly likely.
SJ (self proclaimed devoted fan) certainly knew at the time ,1976, that the name Apple was already own by The Beatles.
And?
Hence the future payments over the years to Apple Corps.
Incorrect.
The "future payments over the years to Apple Corps" were because of the lawsuits won by Apple Corp against, Apple Computer, Inc., not because Apple were a bunch of nice guys.
Pardon me for not spending more time tracking down direct quotes amongst the tens of thousands of articles on the topic. Regardless, it is far from "doubtful."
Search all you want. Anything that says it is fact, is not, since even Jobs and Woz have not even said specifically/cannot agree/ are ambicuous to the specifics of why they chose the name.
- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KrZkaj37kA0
Skip
And?
Incorrect.
The "future payments over the years to Apple Corps" were beqause of the lawsuits won by Apple Corp against, Apple Computer, Inc.
Yeah, but Apple Corps. sue Apple Computer ie. Apple Inc. because Apple started "dealing" with the music via iTunes, ITMS, and iPods.
But "Apple" Computer was a tribute to the Beatles... if not, then Paul is certainly dead!