How exactly is it "well put? when it?s a load of BS. You people with your anti-competitive, hatred for the free market is fraked up. Let?s use our thinking caps for a second and compare some of the key differences?
Apple Corps sued Apple Computers several times over the name use so his altruistic Brit theory is now shattered.
Apple Corps took money from Apple for the name use in a settlement.
The word Apple existed long before either company existed, while Apple invented the term iPod thereby getting full rights to the word..
iPodRip is an app to get files of an iPod, Apple Computers was a completely different type of business from Apple Corps with absolutely no crossover at the time.
Apple didn?t sue the makers of iPodRip, they threatened to sue the if they didn?t change their name.
Im not one of THOSE "people" with Anti-competitive, hatred for the free market. So just THINK.
over 96% of the world have rejected apple and steve jobs' idea of computers. No matter how you spin it, only 5% of the world which includes apple fanboys are hipster enough to bend over and get charged twice by apple. Over 90% of the world are smarter than that
wrong.
1) not everyone can afford a mac. It's a premium retail item and priced that way
2) apple doesn't license out their os to everyone and their dog
3) ms relies on ignorance, inertia, and universal licensing.
sure apple has had record sales. When you start with low sales, it easier to make records. If you sell 2 computers today and 4 tomorrow, that's 100% improvement although it is sill a low number
record sales, of higher priced systems (in the presence of cheaper systems that purportedly offer more "value") in a recession. Apple is recession-proof. Apple has a lock on the premium market - the most lucrative market, and the one which the rest of the bottom-feeding industry is dying to get into.
You really don't understand the economics of apple, do you? No surprise, even to this day it has some analysts stumped.
when it comes to the world of computers,everyone is microsoft's bitch.
i'm not. Plenty of people on these forums are not.
even jobs had to beg microsoft for $150m back in 1997 so apple wouldn't collapse
oh you mean the settlement that apple blackmailed out of microsoft because ms was caught red-handed by apple for patent violations? Apple had ms over quite a legal barrel. Ms would have lost the case to apple and the parties settled instead. It helps to get your tech history right. But windows trolls never were very good with history. Most of them would like to forget it, what with vista and all.
stay with that 5% becuase over 85% of you apple fanboys are still in need for windows. When it's time for real work and not playing with ichat, you use windows
windows is a gaming os to us. That's all it's good for. Ms can't even compete with apple in its own core are of expertise. Took them over 8 years to even get something near os x. You seem to forget that ms also makes its bloated, unintuitive office suite for macs. And really, saving in .doc format is no longer that impressive. Iwork does it just fine. I'm perfectly content, however, with using windows at work and coming home to my mac. After all, ms is a corporate/enterprise software vedor masquerading as a home/consumer vendor. Most people can see through the ms home/consumer facade these days. And it shows.
And tell the entertainment industry, for example, that macs aren't for "real work." final cut studio is the industry standard, as well as logic pro. You want to edit, you use a mac. But hey, windows does spreadhseets and outlook! Very impressive, lol.
ps: Even cern (european laboratory for particle physics) which is doing the most sophisticated physics experiments are using microsoft windows. They are some of the worlds brighest minds and they have chosen the real deal; the os that works and it is windows. However if you are a designer that dresses like a woman, then apple is for you
i think you got owned on this later on in the thread, didn't you? Which calls into question the rest of your post. Dollars-to-donuts you got everything else wrong as well. Which is pretty typical of windows sufferers camping apple fansites.
Over 96% of the world have rejected Apple and Steve Jobs' idea of computers. No matter how you spin it, only 5% of the world which includes Apple fanboys are hipster enough to bend over and get charged twice by Apple. Over 90% of the world are smarter than that
Sure Apple has had record sales. When you start with low sales, it easier to make records. If you sell 2 computers today and 4 tomorrow, that's 100% improvement although it is sill a low number
When it comes to the world of computers,everyone is Microsoft's bitch. Even Jobs had to beg Microsoft for $150M back in 1997 so Apple wouldn't collapse
Stay with that 5% becuase over 85% of you Apple fanboys are still in need for Windows. When it's time for real work and not playing with iChat, you use Windows
PS: Even CERN (European Laboratory for Particle Physics) which is doing the most sophisticated physics experiments are using Microsoft Windows. They are some of the worlds brighest minds and they have chosen the real deal; the OS that works and it is Windows. However if you are a designer that dresses like a woman, then Apple is for you
Longhorn was 9 yrs of making or fumbling. it then morphed into vista which bombed so bad most dells etc ship w/ XP / a STRIPPED vista rock solid window 7 is now here . there is still some minor wide spread head aches but it looks like win 7 will be a good OS . you still have bloatware you still pay 100 a year for virus protection . you still have legacy fat binary code that slow's down your programs all the time .
If some one is computer savvy and loves halo /cod crysis doom and can put up with all the extra garbage attached to MSFT then i say go a head . apple is still miles above you
apple can still run win7/office better than a dell .apple still come with free great SW
Apple is almost bloatware free.
On the low end side windows share has plummeted because netbooks to not use windows .
On the high end side $1000 plus per unit cost side that is . apple hold a %91 market share
AND if you include itouch iphone as computers then the massive netbooks sales and massive buisness clone sales skew the numbers apple fares much better than people think in the silly numbers game
So for all your fancy number and funny asides . how happy is the user .
>>> At the end of the day the common kinda scared computer user is far less stressed than the same windows user. <<<
I would say go out right now and buy the cheapest entry level MB white plastic and you have one of the most powerful machines ever made .
SO powerful yet a seamless machine also that is %100 green .
YOU CAN WITH THIS $999 MB beat any 3 yr old computer ever made for sheer user perfect no fault options /SNOWY is so lean so fast it hides when not needed it ramps up when needed and powers all the great programs of the 21 century . except for high end 3d graphics gaming stuff .
the entry level MB is way too much computer than MOST any one OR ANY BIZ would ever need . Make a list of all the projects that one can do over a year and this MB with snowy almost does all of them note perfect .
Can a wintel bloatware crap box say the same ??
AND the CERN PEOPLE ALL HAVE MACS AT HOME
i feel sorry for you , missing out on the steve jobs fun fun fun machines
Funny. He's like "Whatever. Change the name. Punk".
I kind of think its tantamount to the old guy in the neighborhood yelling "get of my lawn you punks" to the school kids cutting across it as they walk to school, except Steve Jobs' lawn is the entire iphone ecosystem.
This is playing out exactly like the 1980s did for the Mac...we now have Google, blackberry, palm and win-blows mobile all saying "come and dev for us, no walled garden here!" and while apple has the lead now, it is only a mater of time before the smartphone genre cool kid on the block status fades, smart phones become as common and essential as PCs and apple is reduced to a marginal player.
Apple needs to seek some advice from 38 special on their overwhelming control of the app store: "Hold on loosely, but don't let go, if you hold too tightly, your gonna lose control!"
How exactly is it "well put” when it’s a load of BS. You people with your anti-competitive, hatred for the free market is fraked up. Let’s use our thinking caps for a second and compare some of the key differences…
Apple Corps sued Apple Computers several times over the name use so his altruistic Brit theory is now shattered.
Apple Corps took money from Apple for the name use in a settlement.
The word Apple existed long before either company existed, while Apple invented the term iPod thereby getting full rights to the word..
iPodRip is an app to get files of an iPod, Apple Computers was a completely different type of business from Apple Corps with absolutely no crossover at the time.
Apple didn’t sue the makers of iPodRip, they threatened to sue the if they didn’t change their name.
*]Good but flawed thing my buddy bo
*]apple is a patented name
*]ipod is a patented name
*]apple inc. admitted its error by paying huge sums of green backs to quiet apple corps
*]apple entered the music biz
*]apple corps sued and won again
yet who can say apple or any words can be patented unless they are used to deceive the buying public into buying a mimic product ,
So apple inc. should have told apple corps to go f itself , it did not for reasons we all know.
Also since apple corps has allowed apple inc. to function for many yrs. with that name apple corps has implied that apple name is ok for apple inc. to use
THE SAME THINKING APPLIES TO IPODRIP
ipodrip existed as function to rip music from ipod to other device HENCE THE accurate name
I p o d r I p... 78 months go by and apple says no go . Yet apple gave no compensation for ipodrip great timely service to apple and apple clients
well the apple corps should sue the ass off of apple inc. for the same reason
facts are facts ,and facts have to applied to both cases equally
apple received great value from the ripping service
Apple inc. could smile at RIAA and say were clean and apple worker;s then would direct people to ipodrip .They directed me dude .
Steve Jobs of OLD would have quietly paid a couple of mill to these great kids who truly love apple and moved on
TOdays steve or todays apple has changed . APPLE today smiles a lot less . Apple today has an almost I want to puke>> slickness. I think celebrity playlist w/ 2 bimbo's was my final straw.
I kind of think its tantamount to the old guy in the neighborhood yelling "get of my lawn you punks" to the school kids cutting across it as they walk to school, except Steve Jobs' lawn is the entire iphone ecosystem.
This is playing out exactly like the 1980s did for the Mac...we now have Google, blackberry, palm and win-blows mobile all saying "come and dev for us, no walled garden here!" and while apple has the lead now, it is only a mater of time before the smartphone genre cool kid on the block status fades, smart phones become as common and essential as PCs and apple is reduced to a marginal player.
Apple needs to seek some advice from 38 special on their overwhelming control of the app store: "Hold on loosely, but don't let go, if you hold too tightly, your gonna lose control!"
Nice, arrogance with style And in this case absolutely justified. The developer wrote Steve half of a business plan, and the answer contained all the relevant information.
Steve's oneliner totally complies with what Jonathan Ive's role model Dieter Rams states:
"Good design is honest"
"Good design is as little design as possible"
The only thing Arrogance does is make people HATE. It makes me hate, Its not what I want from anyone.
And why not talk about who you are, what you do (your "business plan").
The information was IRRELEVANT, and just shows where the world is going.
"Arrogance with style"..... and the laugh gee, get a grip. And besides Jonathan Ive, is getting a bit stale now.
Personally, I think Apple is out of bounds on this issue. It may own the Trademark "iPod", but that doesn't mean it owns the Trademark "iPodRip."
The guy has supposedly been using the name for years with not a peep from Apple. Further, Trademark law is supposed to 1) protect consumers so they know who a product is coming from, and 2) protect businesses so they can properly associate products to their businesses.
Nobody would think iPodRip is an Apple product as opposed to a third party application for the iPod, so there probably is no Trademark violation. It would be an expensive fight though. One not worth undertaking.
Apple did at one time object to one of New York State's Trademarks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud
Or put an Apple in your logo. I'm surpised they haven't sued NewYork state yet - the big Apple. Or the Apple Bank for Savings. https://www.applebank.com/Default.aspx
Trademark and copyright are two different issues all together. Apple doesn't own a copyright in the name iPod. It possesses a Trademark for as long as it uses the Trademark. If it stops using it, the Trademark would likely be considered abandoned, and free to use by others. If Apple owned a copyright in the name, it could prevent people from using the name even if it weren't using the name.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
It's a simple copyright issue. You shouldn't roll someone else's trademarked name into your product to begin with. The developer was wrong and there's no debate here.
Or put an Apple in your logo. I'm surpised they haven't sued NewYork state yet - the big Apple. Or the Apple Bank for Savings. https://www.applebank.com/Default.aspx
I've gotta agree with that one. Next time you know, they'll be suing supermarkets for selling red round fruits, about the size of a pear, and misleading the costumers by calling them apples, when they are clearly not electronic products.
"All big companies have their critics. But what's interesting about Apple's detractors is universal surprise. Their disappointment often stems from finding out that Apple isn't the company they thought it was. So I'm going to do all you would-be critics a favor, and explain some fundamental aspects of Apple's culture," Mike Elgan writes for IDG.net. "Next time, you won't be blindsided and confused."
Here are four things that Apple believes that explain the unexplainable:
1. Everything Apple sells is an Apple product:
Everything Apple offers on iTunes is viewed by Apple in the same way they view music: They're all Apple products... There's a great scene in the upcoming movie, "Me and Orson Welles," in which Welles responds to a fellow actor's complaint that 'he is an arrogant, selfish...' with the line: "I am Orson Welles, and every single one of you stands here as an adjunct to my vision. [If] you don't like the way I work here, there's the door." That, in a nutshell, is Jobs' view of the relationship between Apple and its developer community.
2. Apple products are disposable:
Apple makes high-quality, durable gadgets... But don't let that fool you into thinking Apple wants those products to enjoy years and years of use. Apple expects you to dump your old product and buy the new one just as soon as it comes out. And they don't expect you to sell the old one to someone else. There's no such thing as an old Apple product. There is only the current Apple product, and trash.
3. Nothing exists unless Apple sells it:
In Steve Jobs' world view, nothing exists outside the Appleverse. People don't read because Apple doesn't sell a reader. Mark my words, when Apple ships its tablet or some other device that can be used for the serious reading of books, people will read again.
4. Apple doesn't want to be a successful business:
It has no interest in... imperialist expansion. Apple is interested only in surgical strikes into this business or that product category, where they can solve design problems others have failed to solve... Apple's choices in markets it gets into make no sense, unless you understand that they don't want to dominate industries, or even maximize revenues. They just want to design and sell better products that will affect user experience in markets where that's an achievable goal.
-------------
Tech watchers love the horse race aspect of technology industry competition. Apple competes with Microsoft. Apple competes with Google. Apple competes with companies like HP. But Apple doesn't see it that way.
Industry titans like Microsoft, Google and HP instinctively "fill out" their product lines to dominate huge areas of technology. Microsoft, for example, wants Microsoft software running on wristwatches, supercomputers and everything in between. Google wants to offer every conceivable service that can be squeezed through an internet connection. HP's massive product line runs the gamut from consumer digital cameras sold at Best Buy to entire data centers filled with enterprise systems.
Apple doesn't want to dominate like this. It has no interest in this kind of imperialist expansion. Apple is interested only in surgical strikes into this business or that product category, where they can solve design problems others have failed to solve.
Understanding this about Apple helps explain otherwise inexplicable decisions, such as why Apple got into the mobile phone handset business, and why the company is so ambivalent about business products.
To Apple, the mobile phone industry proved clueless at how to offer a compelling user experience with a phone, with its history of cramped buttons and claustrophobic user interfaces. They believed, correctly it turns out, that their designers could drop a game-changing phone into the market and "change the world" again. But when Apple casts its gaze at the enterprise space, it doesn't see sufficiently compelling design problems that will emotionally affect users. So why bother?
Apple's choices in markets it gets into make no sense, unless you understand that they don't want to dominate industries, or even maximize revenues. They just want to design and sell better products that will affect user experience in markets where that's an achievable goal.
Of course, business success is great. But Apple sees that as only a means to the end of shipping thrilling designs.
Steve Jobs was recently named CEO of the Decade by Fortune Magazine. I'm sure Jobs' ego was pleased by the designation. But ultimately, he doesn't care about this sort of thing as much as you might expect. Jobs doesn't want to be viewed by history as a Lee Iacocca or a Henry Ford. He wants posterity to look at him as a Mozart or a Da Vinci. He wants to be seen as a builder of beautiful things, not a builder of business empires.
Next time Apple does something that infuriates you, or makes you go "huh?" remember that Apple has its own unique world view. And only by understanding that perspective can you understand why Apple does what it does.
Apple's goal isn't to make money. Our goal is to design and develop and bring to market good products. We trust as a consequence of that, people will like them, and as another consequence we'll make some money. But we're really clear about what our goals are... We try not to bring out another product that's just different. "Different" and "new" is relatively easy. Doing something that's genuinely better is very hard. - Jonathan Ive, July 2009
"1) not everyone can afford a mac. It's a premium retail item and priced that way
2) apple doesn't license out their os to everyone and their dog
3) ms relies on ignorance, inertia, and universal licensing. "
1. Please explain to me how 599.00 for a Mac mini is out of the price range of the average consumer. For that matter 999.00 for a MacBook or even 1199.00 or an iMac. What is so premium about those prices? Do you live in a third world country because where I come from people send more then 599.00 eating out in a few weeks.
2. Yes we all know this. Thanks for commenting on it yet again.
3. People use Windows because it dominates the market. Most of us need to use it to get work done. Most of us use it because its what business has adopted as the standard. For someone that is an old XP user you make alot of comments about something you don't even use or know how to use. Its like making of a car you drove 10 years ago. You sound like a retard.
I would really love for you to tell us how Apple most popular systems that cost right around 1000.00 (macbook and macbook pro 13") are so out of the range of the average consumer and so premium. Also explain to me why Apple spends most of its time trying to let users know that overall the cost of ownership is actually less expensive then owning a PC yet you contantly spout this garbage.
Sorry everyone, my bulls&%t detector sometimes overrides troll feeding.
It's great to see that it is working and that you took the time to bring it to our attention. It never fails to amaze me that people will post items with no concern at all as to it's accuracy. You have to wonder what their agenda is. Congratulations on a great catch.
Comments
Actually they use Red Hat Linux.
"All the hardware in the computing center uses off-the-shelf components, and the servers run a customized version of Red Hat Linux."
Source:-
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11386_3-10059911-76.html
Sorry everyone, my bulls&%t detector sometimes overrides troll feeding.
Spot on. They do use linux. your BS detector works perfectly
How exactly is it "well put? when it?s a load of BS. You people with your anti-competitive, hatred for the free market is fraked up. Let?s use our thinking caps for a second and compare some of the key differences?
Im not one of THOSE "people" with Anti-competitive, hatred for the free market. So just THINK.
over 96% of the world have rejected apple and steve jobs' idea of computers. No matter how you spin it, only 5% of the world which includes apple fanboys are hipster enough to bend over and get charged twice by apple. Over 90% of the world are smarter than that
wrong.
1) not everyone can afford a mac. It's a premium retail item and priced that way
2) apple doesn't license out their os to everyone and their dog
3) ms relies on ignorance, inertia, and universal licensing.
sure apple has had record sales. When you start with low sales, it easier to make records. If you sell 2 computers today and 4 tomorrow, that's 100% improvement although it is sill a low number
record sales, of higher priced systems (in the presence of cheaper systems that purportedly offer more "value") in a recession. Apple is recession-proof. Apple has a lock on the premium market - the most lucrative market, and the one which the rest of the bottom-feeding industry is dying to get into.
You really don't understand the economics of apple, do you? No surprise, even to this day it has some analysts stumped.
when it comes to the world of computers,everyone is microsoft's bitch.
i'm not. Plenty of people on these forums are not.
even jobs had to beg microsoft for $150m back in 1997 so apple wouldn't collapse
oh you mean the settlement that apple blackmailed out of microsoft because ms was caught red-handed by apple for patent violations? Apple had ms over quite a legal barrel. Ms would have lost the case to apple and the parties settled instead. It helps to get your tech history right. But windows trolls never were very good with history. Most of them would like to forget it, what with vista and all.
stay with that 5% becuase over 85% of you apple fanboys are still in need for windows. When it's time for real work and not playing with ichat, you use windows
windows is a gaming os to us. That's all it's good for. Ms can't even compete with apple in its own core are of expertise. Took them over 8 years to even get something near os x. You seem to forget that ms also makes its bloated, unintuitive office suite for macs. And really, saving in .doc format is no longer that impressive. Iwork does it just fine. I'm perfectly content, however, with using windows at work and coming home to my mac. After all, ms is a corporate/enterprise software vedor masquerading as a home/consumer vendor. Most people can see through the ms home/consumer facade these days. And it shows.
And tell the entertainment industry, for example, that macs aren't for "real work." final cut studio is the industry standard, as well as logic pro. You want to edit, you use a mac. But hey, windows does spreadhseets and outlook! Very impressive, lol.
ps: Even cern (european laboratory for particle physics) which is doing the most sophisticated physics experiments are using microsoft windows. They are some of the worlds brighest minds and they have chosen the real deal; the os that works and it is windows. However if you are a designer that dresses like a woman, then apple is for you
i think you got owned on this later on in the thread, didn't you? Which calls into question the rest of your post. Dollars-to-donuts you got everything else wrong as well. Which is pretty typical of windows sufferers camping apple fansites.
Over 96% of the world have rejected Apple and Steve Jobs' idea of computers. No matter how you spin it, only 5% of the world which includes Apple fanboys are hipster enough to bend over and get charged twice by Apple. Over 90% of the world are smarter than that
Sure Apple has had record sales. When you start with low sales, it easier to make records. If you sell 2 computers today and 4 tomorrow, that's 100% improvement although it is sill a low number
When it comes to the world of computers,everyone is Microsoft's bitch. Even Jobs had to beg Microsoft for $150M back in 1997 so Apple wouldn't collapse
Stay with that 5% becuase over 85% of you Apple fanboys are still in need for Windows. When it's time for real work and not playing with iChat, you use Windows
PS: Even CERN (European Laboratory for Particle Physics) which is doing the most sophisticated physics experiments are using Microsoft Windows. They are some of the worlds brighest minds and they have chosen the real deal; the OS that works and it is Windows. However if you are a designer that dresses like a woman, then Apple is for you
Longhorn was 9 yrs of making or fumbling. it then morphed into vista which bombed so bad most dells etc ship w/ XP / a STRIPPED vista rock solid window 7 is now here . there is still some minor wide spread head aches but it looks like win 7 will be a good OS . you still have bloatware you still pay 100 a year for virus protection . you still have legacy fat binary code that slow's down your programs all the time .
If some one is computer savvy and loves halo /cod crysis doom and can put up with all the extra garbage attached to MSFT then i say go a head . apple is still miles above you
apple can still run win7/office better than a dell .apple still come with free great SW
Apple is almost bloatware free.
On the low end side windows share has plummeted because netbooks to not use windows .
On the high end side $1000 plus per unit cost side that is . apple hold a %91 market share
AND if you include itouch iphone as computers then the massive netbooks sales and massive buisness clone sales skew the numbers apple fares much better than people think in the silly numbers game
So for all your fancy number and funny asides . how happy is the user .
>>> At the end of the day the common kinda scared computer user is far less stressed than the same windows user. <<<
I would say go out right now and buy the cheapest entry level MB white plastic and you have one of the most powerful machines ever made .
SO powerful yet a seamless machine also that is %100 green .
YOU CAN WITH THIS $999 MB beat any 3 yr old computer ever made for sheer user perfect no fault options /SNOWY is so lean so fast it hides when not needed it ramps up when needed and powers all the great programs of the 21 century . except for high end 3d graphics gaming stuff .
the entry level MB is way too much computer than MOST any one OR ANY BIZ would ever need . Make a list of all the projects that one can do over a year and this MB with snowy almost does all of them note perfect .
Can a wintel bloatware crap box say the same ??
AND the CERN PEOPLE ALL HAVE MACS AT HOME
i feel sorry for you , missing out on the steve jobs fun fun fun machines
no soup for you
9
Funny. He's like "Whatever. Change the name. Punk".
I kind of think its tantamount to the old guy in the neighborhood yelling "get of my lawn you punks" to the school kids cutting across it as they walk to school, except Steve Jobs' lawn is the entire iphone ecosystem.
This is playing out exactly like the 1980s did for the Mac...we now have Google, blackberry, palm and win-blows mobile all saying "come and dev for us, no walled garden here!" and while apple has the lead now, it is only a mater of time before the smartphone genre cool kid on the block status fades, smart phones become as common and essential as PCs and apple is reduced to a marginal player.
Apple needs to seek some advice from 38 special on their overwhelming control of the app store: "Hold on loosely, but don't let go, if you hold too tightly, your gonna lose control!"
How exactly is it "well put” when it’s a load of BS. You people with your anti-competitive, hatred for the free market is fraked up. Let’s use our thinking caps for a second and compare some of the key differences…
*]Good but flawed thing my buddy bo
*]apple is a patented name
*]ipod is a patented name
*]apple inc. admitted its error by paying huge sums of green backs to quiet apple corps
*]apple entered the music biz
*]apple corps sued and won again
yet who can say apple or any words can be patented unless they are used to deceive the buying public into buying a mimic product ,
So apple inc. should have told apple corps to go f itself , it did not for reasons we all know.
Also since apple corps has allowed apple inc. to function for many yrs. with that name apple corps has implied that apple name is ok for apple inc. to use
THE SAME THINKING APPLIES TO IPODRIP
ipodrip existed as function to rip music from ipod to other device HENCE THE accurate name
I p o d r I p... 78 months go by and apple says no go . Yet apple gave no compensation for ipodrip great timely service to apple and apple clients
well the apple corps should sue the ass off of apple inc. for the same reason
facts are facts ,and facts have to applied to both cases equally
apple received great value from the ripping service
Apple inc. could smile at RIAA and say were clean and apple worker;s then would direct people to ipodrip .They directed me dude .
Steve Jobs of OLD would have quietly paid a couple of mill to these great kids who truly love apple and moved on
TOdays steve or todays apple has changed . APPLE today smiles a lot less . Apple today has an almost I want to puke>> slickness. I think celebrity playlist w/ 2 bimbo's was my final straw.
apple legally was correct
apple sucks in the way it handled its minions
I kind of think its tantamount to the old guy in the neighborhood yelling "get of my lawn you punks" to the school kids cutting across it as they walk to school, except Steve Jobs' lawn is the entire iphone ecosystem.
This is playing out exactly like the 1980s did for the Mac...we now have Google, blackberry, palm and win-blows mobile all saying "come and dev for us, no walled garden here!" and while apple has the lead now, it is only a mater of time before the smartphone genre cool kid on the block status fades, smart phones become as common and essential as PCs and apple is reduced to a marginal player.
Apple needs to seek some advice from 38 special on their overwhelming control of the app store: "Hold on loosely, but don't let go, if you hold too tightly, your gonna lose control!"
iphone 1st gen is still far above the rest
iphone 4th gen is coming soon
dream dude dream on
9
iphone 1st gen is still far above the rest
iphone 4th gen is coming soon
dream dude dream on
9
iPhone = iPod phenomenon.
The game's already over and we all know who won.
.. .. ...
.. .. ...
google bots talking
Nice, arrogance with style
Steve's oneliner totally complies with what Jonathan Ive's role model Dieter Rams states:
"Good design is honest"
"Good design is as little design as possible"
The only thing Arrogance does is make people HATE. It makes me hate, Its not what I want from anyone.
And why not talk about who you are, what you do (your "business plan").
The information was IRRELEVANT, and just shows where the world is going.
"Arrogance with style"..... and the laugh gee, get a grip. And besides Jonathan Ive, is getting a bit stale now.
The guy has supposedly been using the name for years with not a peep from Apple. Further, Trademark law is supposed to 1) protect consumers so they know who a product is coming from, and 2) protect businesses so they can properly associate products to their businesses.
Nobody would think iPodRip is an Apple product as opposed to a third party application for the iPod, so there probably is no Trademark violation. It would be an expensive fight though. One not worth undertaking.
Or put an Apple in your logo. I'm surpised they haven't sued NewYork state yet - the big Apple. Or the Apple Bank for Savings. https://www.applebank.com/Default.aspx
It's a simple copyright issue. You shouldn't roll someone else's trademarked name into your product to begin with. The developer was wrong and there's no debate here.
No maybe newbee its because this site is called AppleInsider and it relates to an Apple developer? Jeesh.
So you and iStud are both stalking me now? Think I can handle it?
It's such a sport!
Or put an Apple in your logo. I'm surpised they haven't sued NewYork state yet - the big Apple. Or the Apple Bank for Savings. https://www.applebank.com/Default.aspx
I've gotta agree with that one. Next time you know, they'll be suing supermarkets for selling red round fruits, about the size of a pear, and misleading the costumers by calling them apples, when they are clearly not electronic products.
http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/per...ed-know-apple/
Four things you need to know about Apple
"All big companies have their critics. But what's interesting about Apple's detractors is universal surprise. Their disappointment often stems from finding out that Apple isn't the company they thought it was. So I'm going to do all you would-be critics a favor, and explain some fundamental aspects of Apple's culture," Mike Elgan writes for IDG.net. "Next time, you won't be blindsided and confused."
Here are four things that Apple believes that explain the unexplainable:
1. Everything Apple sells is an Apple product:
Everything Apple offers on iTunes is viewed by Apple in the same way they view music: They're all Apple products... There's a great scene in the upcoming movie, "Me and Orson Welles," in which Welles responds to a fellow actor's complaint that 'he is an arrogant, selfish...' with the line: "I am Orson Welles, and every single one of you stands here as an adjunct to my vision. [If] you don't like the way I work here, there's the door." That, in a nutshell, is Jobs' view of the relationship between Apple and its developer community.
2. Apple products are disposable:
Apple makes high-quality, durable gadgets... But don't let that fool you into thinking Apple wants those products to enjoy years and years of use. Apple expects you to dump your old product and buy the new one just as soon as it comes out. And they don't expect you to sell the old one to someone else. There's no such thing as an old Apple product. There is only the current Apple product, and trash.
3. Nothing exists unless Apple sells it:
In Steve Jobs' world view, nothing exists outside the Appleverse. People don't read because Apple doesn't sell a reader. Mark my words, when Apple ships its tablet or some other device that can be used for the serious reading of books, people will read again.
4. Apple doesn't want to be a successful business:
It has no interest in... imperialist expansion. Apple is interested only in surgical strikes into this business or that product category, where they can solve design problems others have failed to solve... Apple's choices in markets it gets into make no sense, unless you understand that they don't want to dominate industries, or even maximize revenues. They just want to design and sell better products that will affect user experience in markets where that's an achievable goal.
-------------
Tech watchers love the horse race aspect of technology industry competition. Apple competes with Microsoft. Apple competes with Google. Apple competes with companies like HP. But Apple doesn't see it that way.
Industry titans like Microsoft, Google and HP instinctively "fill out" their product lines to dominate huge areas of technology. Microsoft, for example, wants Microsoft software running on wristwatches, supercomputers and everything in between. Google wants to offer every conceivable service that can be squeezed through an internet connection. HP's massive product line runs the gamut from consumer digital cameras sold at Best Buy to entire data centers filled with enterprise systems.
Apple doesn't want to dominate like this. It has no interest in this kind of imperialist expansion. Apple is interested only in surgical strikes into this business or that product category, where they can solve design problems others have failed to solve.
Understanding this about Apple helps explain otherwise inexplicable decisions, such as why Apple got into the mobile phone handset business, and why the company is so ambivalent about business products.
To Apple, the mobile phone industry proved clueless at how to offer a compelling user experience with a phone, with its history of cramped buttons and claustrophobic user interfaces. They believed, correctly it turns out, that their designers could drop a game-changing phone into the market and "change the world" again. But when Apple casts its gaze at the enterprise space, it doesn't see sufficiently compelling design problems that will emotionally affect users. So why bother?
Apple's choices in markets it gets into make no sense, unless you understand that they don't want to dominate industries, or even maximize revenues. They just want to design and sell better products that will affect user experience in markets where that's an achievable goal.
Of course, business success is great. But Apple sees that as only a means to the end of shipping thrilling designs.
Steve Jobs was recently named CEO of the Decade by Fortune Magazine. I'm sure Jobs' ego was pleased by the designation. But ultimately, he doesn't care about this sort of thing as much as you might expect. Jobs doesn't want to be viewed by history as a Lee Iacocca or a Henry Ford. He wants posterity to look at him as a Mozart or a Da Vinci. He wants to be seen as a builder of beautiful things, not a builder of business empires.
Next time Apple does something that infuriates you, or makes you go "huh?" remember that Apple has its own unique world view. And only by understanding that perspective can you understand why Apple does what it does.
Apple's goal isn't to make money. Our goal is to design and develop and bring to market good products. We trust as a consequence of that, people will like them, and as another consequence we'll make some money. But we're really clear about what our goals are... We try not to bring out another product that's just different. "Different" and "new" is relatively easy. Doing something that's genuinely better is very hard. - Jonathan Ive, July 2009
(I'm not a fan of FOX news, but this seems to offer a few insights into the reality of Apple.)
Actually most of that is exactly the impression I get from Apple.
Oh, and it's good to know you're not a fan of Fox News
.. .. ...
"1) not everyone can afford a mac. It's a premium retail item and priced that way
2) apple doesn't license out their os to everyone and their dog
3) ms relies on ignorance, inertia, and universal licensing. "
1. Please explain to me how 599.00 for a Mac mini is out of the price range of the average consumer. For that matter 999.00 for a MacBook or even 1199.00 or an iMac. What is so premium about those prices? Do you live in a third world country because where I come from people send more then 599.00 eating out in a few weeks.
2. Yes we all know this. Thanks for commenting on it yet again.
3. People use Windows because it dominates the market. Most of us need to use it to get work done. Most of us use it because its what business has adopted as the standard. For someone that is an old XP user you make alot of comments about something you don't even use or know how to use. Its like making of a car you drove 10 years ago. You sound like a retard.
I would really love for you to tell us how Apple most popular systems that cost right around 1000.00 (macbook and macbook pro 13") are so out of the range of the average consumer and so premium. Also explain to me why Apple spends most of its time trying to let users know that overall the cost of ownership is actually less expensive then owning a PC yet you contantly spout this garbage.
Actually most of that is exactly the impression I get from Apple.
Oh, and it's good to know you're not a fan of Fox News
He isn't a fan of common sense either.
Actually they use Red Hat Linux.
"All the hardware in the computing center uses off-the-shelf components, and the servers run a customized version of Red Hat Linux."
Source:-
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11386_3-10059911-76.html
Sorry everyone, my bulls&%t detector sometimes overrides troll feeding.
It's great to see that it is working and that you took the time to bring it to our attention. It never fails to amaze me that people will post items with no concern at all as to it's accuracy. You have to wonder what their agenda is. Congratulations on a great catch.