I would say that Apple stopped the music industry from screwing customers. Having to buy a whole cd in order to get just the songs I want is bogus. Before iTunes store I had stopped buying music. Now I have a very long list of purchased songs from iTunes. IMix has shown me lots of music that I eventually bought.
I would even say that Apple actually saved the stupid and ungrateful music industry. How quickly these ingrates forget how old pirate sites like Napster and others were poised to literally destroy the music and movie industry until Apple stepped in. Not to mention the massive underground bit torrent networks.
These music industry SOBs are now making millions because of the superb user experience that Apple has provided and a reasonable price that has stopped piracy. You would think that they would appreciate Apple more and trust it for its innovative ideas... But no, once Apple succeeded, they started copying Apple's idea and making Apple out to be the villain.
Let the smart ones work with Apple and the others can stay on the side line at their perils.
Following up along this line, one thing I recommend most people consider:
Get an iTunes gift card, pay cash for it. Then open an iTunes account with this card and a new, single-purpose webmail account. It's a little tricky IIRC, but if you do it correctly (I know for a fact you could do this several months ago - I did it), you can open an account without a credit card or any other (verified) personal information. This allows you to legitimately purchase music and apps without divulging any personal info for them to use/misuse/abuse, give away or sell.
This also gives you the peace of mind knowing that even if another scammer in China figures out how to tap into iTunes accounts and steal from users' credit cards again, you'll be safe. All you'll ever have at risk is the $15 or $25 that you keep in that account.
Thanks for the advice.
A VAST majority of us have no problems at all with our iTunes accounts.
Possibly, but whatever they are calling it, they should get it done. Printed magazines is such a waste. I completely stopped buying any. We should all do that so publishers will be forced to go digital and find solutions for Digital subscription.
I would even say that Apple actually saved the stupid and ungrateful music industry. How quickly these ingrates forget how old pirate sites like Napster and others were poised to literally destroy the music and movie industry until Apple stepped in. Not to mention the massive underground bit torrent networks.
These music industry SOBs are now making millions because of the superb user experience that Apple has provided and a reasonable price that has stopped piracy. You would think that they would appreciate Apple more and trust it for its innovative ideas... But no, once Apple succeeded, they started copying Apple's idea and making Apple out to be the villain.
Let the smart ones work with Apple and the others can stay on the side line at their perils.
Time will tell.
It's sad, but people Never learn. They keep complaining and wining and don't see the benefit they get.
Please, Steve, bring out a large-format (stay-at-home) iPad for newspapers & magazines.
IMHO, and by way of comparison, reading magazines on the current iPad is merely OK, but trying to read a *newspaper* on the current iPad just won't cut it.
This is a good idea. The model where the publishers make their own apps has had very mixed results. I guess they're publishers not programmers.
Indeed. Is Apple going to create an authoring application so that we can easily use our existing assets from CS5 or are they going to go with the iAds model where they program everything in-house with a huge price tag?
Please, Steve, bring out a large-format (stay-at-home) iPad for newspapers & magazines.
IMHO, and by way of comparison, reading magazines on the current iPad is merely OK, but trying to read a *newspaper* on the current iPad just won't cut it.
How about letting people with desktops play in the walled garden?
Except it's not that simple because the app would be for Newspapers and Magazines together, or "periodicals."
"iPeriodicals" is too long, and the short form would be quite rude given the circumstances, so it's anyone's guess what it will be called.
Apple is good at naming, so I'm sure they will come up with something. Ping might suck as a service for instance, but it's probably the coolest social network name ever.
It's sad, but people Never learn. They keep complaining and wining and don't see the benefit they get.
In fairness to the "other guys" Apple has a very unique business stance. They actually care about their customers and put the customers needs first. They don't believe in "making money above all else," and they are for the most part, honest, straight shooters when in negotiations.
While if you read a book on business theory, this is what businesses are *supposed* to be like the reality is that the vast majority of business is based on deception, lying, cheating and screwing over the other guy. This is the norm.
It's therefore hard for the average business person to believe that when Apple says "we have a deal that's good for us and also good for you," that they are telling the truth. Especially in the entertainment business (which sadly covers newspapers nowadays), Apple is swimming with the sharks. Those guys don't do anyone any favours if they can help it and the idea that Apple might be good for them is a hard sell to jaded types like that.
Apple is good at naming, so I'm sure they will come up with something. Ping might suck as a service for instance, but it's probably the coolest social network name ever.
I dislike when companies take names that are already in use for something else. Ping was originally a Unix networking protocol. Now it is a social network? Dumb.
I dislike when companies take names that are already in use for something else. Ping was originally a Unix networking protocol. Now it is a social network? Dumb.
Ping was a word before it was used as the name of a networking protocol, so you may have a beef with the Unix people as well.
In general, I think it's a bit much to expect marketeers to invent new combinations of letters every time they offer goods or services. Should Google's Buzz, Wave, Chrome and Android initiatives be similarly taken to task?
In fairness to the "other guys" Apple has a very unique business stance. They actually care about their customers and put the customers needs first. They don't believe in "making money above all else,”...
I wholeheartedly disagree with this. Any for-profit company should be looking to make as much money as possible and I think they all do, the difference between Apple and many others is their focal point for making money.
Many companies seem to work quarter-to-quarter and push out HW, SW and services that aren’t quite complete so they can get some quick returns on these R&D cost centers as soon as possible. Apple seems to be focusing on the longterm success of the company. This has allowed them to R&D for products that take many years and changed many times before they were ready.
It also allows them to focus on things that aren’t easily described and therefore aren’t easily stated on a spec sheet or marketable. Things like the user experience of their device or using an expensive IPS display over a TN display in the iPad because a 10” tablet will be viewed at very extreme angles from time to time.
To me, this says Apple cares very strongly about making money above all else, they are just smarter in how they go about it than other companies.
I wholeheartedly disagree with this. Any for-profit company should be looking to make as much money as possible and I think they all do, the difference between Apple and many others is their focal point for making money.
Many companies seem to work quarter to quarter and push out HW, SW and services that aren?t complete but they end up getting some return on these cost centers so they get the green light, whilst Apple seems to be focusing on the long term success of the company. This has allowed them to R&D for products that take many years and changed many times before they were ready.
It also allows them to focus on things that aren?t easily described and therefore aren?t easily stated on a spec sheet or marketable. Things like the user experience of their device or using an expensive IPS display over a TN display in the iPad because a 10? tablet will be viewed at very extreme angles from time to time.
To me, this says Apple cares very strongly about making money above all else, they are just smarter in how they go about it than other companies.
There's also the matter of who the customer is. As has been discussed a lot lately, Apple is selling to consumers and intends to make money from consumers by making highly desirable products (and by using various strategies of product upsell, ecosystem tie in, etc.).
MS, for instance and in contrast, is generally understood to be selling to OEMs and IT people. Google is selling you to advertisers.
Some people seem to imagine that this is a distinction without a difference, but I think it entirely explains the differing styles and product emphasis of the these companies.
Totally agree. Apple needs to raise the bar if they want people to give up their magazines and newspapers and buy iPads. They must offer something better than the paper experience if they expect people to plunk down five hundred bucks or more for an e-reader.
If the iPad is going to "save journalism" then Apple had better get moving. It's been long enough for the revolution to begin.
If Apple had officially announced a product or service, critiquing said item would make sense. But we're talking a rumor here. Rather vague.
Apple's excellence is always in the details. The iPad isn't a significant product and game changer because it's a touchscreen tablet. It's because it's the first tablet anyone has developed that consumers want to use that it matters. The same would hold for Apple tackling any other project. It's not the general idea, explored in the vaguest of terms, that matters. It's the details, the overall execution, that matters. For that we'll have to wait until Apple unveils its product in vivid detail. Then if Apple gets it wrong, by all means complain about it. But don't count on that happening.
Ping was a word before it was used as the name of a networking protocol, so you may have a beef with the Unix people as well.
In general, I think it's a bit much to expect marketeers to invent new combinations of letters every time they offer goods or services. Should Google's Buzz, Wave, Chrome and Android initiatives be similarly taken to task?
Perhaps, however if you wanted to search for Google, buzz, wave, chrome all you have to do is put the word Google in the query. Since those words are not in regular use within the context of the internet, there is no conflict. But since Apple's service is completely Internet related as is the word ping, the context is the same, thus causing confusion.
Pity the poor pastor searching documents regarding the Sabbath with all of the search results related to Ozzy.
In fairness to the "other guys" Apple has a very unique business stance. They actually care about their customers and put the customers needs first. They don't believe in "making money above all else," and they are for the most part, honest, straight shooters when in negotiations.
While if you read a book on business theory, this is what businesses are *supposed* to be like the reality is that the vast majority of business is based on deception, lying, cheating and screwing over the other guy. This is the norm.
It's therefore hard for the average business person to believe that when Apple says "we have a deal that's good for us and also good for you," that they are telling the truth. Especially in the entertainment business (which sadly covers newspapers nowadays), Apple is swimming with the sharks. Those guys don't do anyone any favours if they can help it and the idea that Apple might be good for them is a hard sell to jaded types like that.
My guts tell me that you maybe right, but still I hope, that enogh publishers and producerc flok to the apple (and android) store what ever it will be named to make a significant impact. The new possibilities with digital publishing with interactive content will be so overwhelming, that after short, nobody will be able to resist. I am just happy to see apple amogst the front runners.
Perhaps, however if you wanted to search for Google, buzz, wave, chrome all you have to do is put the word Google in the query. Since those words are not in regular use within the context of the internet, there is no conflict. But since Apple's service is completely Internet related as is the word ping, the context is the same, thus causing confusion.
Pity the poor pastor searching documents regarding the Sabbath with all of the search results related to Ozzy.
I take your context point, and maybe your right, but "Ping" is such a nice word in its own right, with specific technical history predating its use as internet terminology (after all, we only "ping" things on networks because of the noise sonar systems used for audio monitoring) that it seems a shame to keep it forever wed to just that one process.
Also, putting "Apple" in front of "Ping" seems to yield only iTunes social networking hits, so I don't think there's much confusion.
I take your context point, and maybe your right, but "Ping" is such a nice word in its own right, with specific technical history predating its use as internet terminology (after all, we only "ping" things on networks because of the noise sonar systems used for audio monitoring) that it seems a shame to keep it forever wed to just that one process.
Also, putting "Apple" in front of "Ping" seems to yield only iTunes social networking hits, so I don't think there's much confusion.
You are probably right. I just feel that the word was hijacked from me personally since I use the Unix version of it on a daily basis.
Comments
I would say that Apple stopped the music industry from screwing customers. Having to buy a whole cd in order to get just the songs I want is bogus. Before iTunes store I had stopped buying music. Now I have a very long list of purchased songs from iTunes. IMix has shown me lots of music that I eventually bought.
I would even say that Apple actually saved the stupid and ungrateful music industry. How quickly these ingrates forget how old pirate sites like Napster and others were poised to literally destroy the music and movie industry until Apple stepped in. Not to mention the massive underground bit torrent networks.
These music industry SOBs are now making millions because of the superb user experience that Apple has provided and a reasonable price that has stopped piracy. You would think that they would appreciate Apple more and trust it for its innovative ideas... But no, once Apple succeeded, they started copying Apple's idea and making Apple out to be the villain.
Let the smart ones work with Apple and the others can stay on the side line at their perils.
Time will tell.
Following up along this line, one thing I recommend most people consider:
Get an iTunes gift card, pay cash for it. Then open an iTunes account with this card and a new, single-purpose webmail account. It's a little tricky IIRC, but if you do it correctly (I know for a fact you could do this several months ago - I did it), you can open an account without a credit card or any other (verified) personal information. This allows you to legitimately purchase music and apps without divulging any personal info for them to use/misuse/abuse, give away or sell.
This also gives you the peace of mind knowing that even if another scammer in China figures out how to tap into iTunes accounts and steal from users' credit cards again, you'll be safe. All you'll ever have at risk is the $15 or $25 that you keep in that account.
Thanks for the advice.
A VAST majority of us have no problems at all with our iTunes accounts.
iTunes = music
iBooks = books
Logically...
iNews = newspapers
Possibly, but whatever they are calling it, they should get it done. Printed magazines is such a waste. I completely stopped buying any. We should all do that so publishers will be forced to go digital and find solutions for Digital subscription.
I would even say that Apple actually saved the stupid and ungrateful music industry. How quickly these ingrates forget how old pirate sites like Napster and others were poised to literally destroy the music and movie industry until Apple stepped in. Not to mention the massive underground bit torrent networks.
These music industry SOBs are now making millions because of the superb user experience that Apple has provided and a reasonable price that has stopped piracy. You would think that they would appreciate Apple more and trust it for its innovative ideas... But no, once Apple succeeded, they started copying Apple's idea and making Apple out to be the villain.
Let the smart ones work with Apple and the others can stay on the side line at their perils.
Time will tell.
It's sad, but people Never learn. They keep complaining and wining and don't see the benefit they get.
IMHO, and by way of comparison, reading magazines on the current iPad is merely OK, but trying to read a *newspaper* on the current iPad just won't cut it.
This is a good idea. The model where the publishers make their own apps has had very mixed results. I guess they're publishers not programmers.
Indeed. Is Apple going to create an authoring application so that we can easily use our existing assets from CS5 or are they going to go with the iAds model where they program everything in-house with a huge price tag?
Please, Steve, bring out a large-format (stay-at-home) iPad for newspapers & magazines.
IMHO, and by way of comparison, reading magazines on the current iPad is merely OK, but trying to read a *newspaper* on the current iPad just won't cut it.
How about letting people with desktops play in the walled garden?
iTunes = music
iBooks = books
Logically...
iNews = newspapers
Except it's not that simple because the app would be for Newspapers and Magazines together, or "periodicals."
"iPeriodicals" is too long, and the short form would be quite rude given the circumstances, so it's anyone's guess what it will be called.
Apple is good at naming, so I'm sure they will come up with something. Ping might suck as a service for instance, but it's probably the coolest social network name ever.
It's sad, but people Never learn. They keep complaining and wining and don't see the benefit they get.
In fairness to the "other guys" Apple has a very unique business stance. They actually care about their customers and put the customers needs first. They don't believe in "making money above all else," and they are for the most part, honest, straight shooters when in negotiations.
While if you read a book on business theory, this is what businesses are *supposed* to be like the reality is that the vast majority of business is based on deception, lying, cheating and screwing over the other guy. This is the norm.
It's therefore hard for the average business person to believe that when Apple says "we have a deal that's good for us and also good for you," that they are telling the truth. Especially in the entertainment business (which sadly covers newspapers nowadays), Apple is swimming with the sharks. Those guys don't do anyone any favours if they can help it and the idea that Apple might be good for them is a hard sell to jaded types like that.
Apple is good at naming, so I'm sure they will come up with something. Ping might suck as a service for instance, but it's probably the coolest social network name ever.
I dislike when companies take names that are already in use for something else. Ping was originally a Unix networking protocol. Now it is a social network? Dumb.
I dislike when companies take names that are already in use for something else. Ping was originally a Unix networking protocol. Now it is a social network? Dumb.
Ping was a word before it was used as the name of a networking protocol, so you may have a beef with the Unix people as well.
In general, I think it's a bit much to expect marketeers to invent new combinations of letters every time they offer goods or services. Should Google's Buzz, Wave, Chrome and Android initiatives be similarly taken to task?
In fairness to the "other guys" Apple has a very unique business stance. They actually care about their customers and put the customers needs first. They don't believe in "making money above all else,”...
I wholeheartedly disagree with this. Any for-profit company should be looking to make as much money as possible and I think they all do, the difference between Apple and many others is their focal point for making money.
Many companies seem to work quarter-to-quarter and push out HW, SW and services that aren’t quite complete so they can get some quick returns on these R&D cost centers as soon as possible. Apple seems to be focusing on the longterm success of the company. This has allowed them to R&D for products that take many years and changed many times before they were ready.
It also allows them to focus on things that aren’t easily described and therefore aren’t easily stated on a spec sheet or marketable. Things like the user experience of their device or using an expensive IPS display over a TN display in the iPad because a 10” tablet will be viewed at very extreme angles from time to time.
To me, this says Apple cares very strongly about making money above all else, they are just smarter in how they go about it than other companies.
I wholeheartedly disagree with this. Any for-profit company should be looking to make as much money as possible and I think they all do, the difference between Apple and many others is their focal point for making money.
Many companies seem to work quarter to quarter and push out HW, SW and services that aren?t complete but they end up getting some return on these cost centers so they get the green light, whilst Apple seems to be focusing on the long term success of the company. This has allowed them to R&D for products that take many years and changed many times before they were ready.
It also allows them to focus on things that aren?t easily described and therefore aren?t easily stated on a spec sheet or marketable. Things like the user experience of their device or using an expensive IPS display over a TN display in the iPad because a 10? tablet will be viewed at very extreme angles from time to time.
To me, this says Apple cares very strongly about making money above all else, they are just smarter in how they go about it than other companies.
There's also the matter of who the customer is. As has been discussed a lot lately, Apple is selling to consumers and intends to make money from consumers by making highly desirable products (and by using various strategies of product upsell, ecosystem tie in, etc.).
MS, for instance and in contrast, is generally understood to be selling to OEMs and IT people. Google is selling you to advertisers.
Some people seem to imagine that this is a distinction without a difference, but I think it entirely explains the differing styles and product emphasis of the these companies.
MS, for instance and in contrast, is generally understood to be selling to OEMs and IT people. Google is selling you to advertisers
This doesn?t get stated enough.
Totally agree. Apple needs to raise the bar if they want people to give up their magazines and newspapers and buy iPads. They must offer something better than the paper experience if they expect people to plunk down five hundred bucks or more for an e-reader.
If the iPad is going to "save journalism" then Apple had better get moving. It's been long enough for the revolution to begin.
If Apple had officially announced a product or service, critiquing said item would make sense. But we're talking a rumor here. Rather vague.
Apple's excellence is always in the details. The iPad isn't a significant product and game changer because it's a touchscreen tablet. It's because it's the first tablet anyone has developed that consumers want to use that it matters. The same would hold for Apple tackling any other project. It's not the general idea, explored in the vaguest of terms, that matters. It's the details, the overall execution, that matters. For that we'll have to wait until Apple unveils its product in vivid detail. Then if Apple gets it wrong, by all means complain about it. But don't count on that happening.
Ping was a word before it was used as the name of a networking protocol, so you may have a beef with the Unix people as well.
In general, I think it's a bit much to expect marketeers to invent new combinations of letters every time they offer goods or services. Should Google's Buzz, Wave, Chrome and Android initiatives be similarly taken to task?
Perhaps, however if you wanted to search for Google, buzz, wave, chrome all you have to do is put the word Google in the query. Since those words are not in regular use within the context of the internet, there is no conflict. But since Apple's service is completely Internet related as is the word ping, the context is the same, thus causing confusion.
Pity the poor pastor searching documents regarding the Sabbath with all of the search results related to Ozzy.
In fairness to the "other guys" Apple has a very unique business stance. They actually care about their customers and put the customers needs first. They don't believe in "making money above all else," and they are for the most part, honest, straight shooters when in negotiations.
While if you read a book on business theory, this is what businesses are *supposed* to be like the reality is that the vast majority of business is based on deception, lying, cheating and screwing over the other guy. This is the norm.
It's therefore hard for the average business person to believe that when Apple says "we have a deal that's good for us and also good for you," that they are telling the truth. Especially in the entertainment business (which sadly covers newspapers nowadays), Apple is swimming with the sharks. Those guys don't do anyone any favours if they can help it and the idea that Apple might be good for them is a hard sell to jaded types like that.
My guts tell me that you maybe right, but still I hope, that enogh publishers and producerc flok to the apple (and android) store what ever it will be named to make a significant impact. The new possibilities with digital publishing with interactive content will be so overwhelming, that after short, nobody will be able to resist. I am just happy to see apple amogst the front runners.
Perhaps, however if you wanted to search for Google, buzz, wave, chrome all you have to do is put the word Google in the query. Since those words are not in regular use within the context of the internet, there is no conflict. But since Apple's service is completely Internet related as is the word ping, the context is the same, thus causing confusion.
Pity the poor pastor searching documents regarding the Sabbath with all of the search results related to Ozzy.
I take your context point, and maybe your right, but "Ping" is such a nice word in its own right, with specific technical history predating its use as internet terminology (after all, we only "ping" things on networks because of the noise sonar systems used for audio monitoring) that it seems a shame to keep it forever wed to just that one process.
Also, putting "Apple" in front of "Ping" seems to yield only iTunes social networking hits, so I don't think there's much confusion.
I take your context point, and maybe your right, but "Ping" is such a nice word in its own right, with specific technical history predating its use as internet terminology (after all, we only "ping" things on networks because of the noise sonar systems used for audio monitoring) that it seems a shame to keep it forever wed to just that one process.
Also, putting "Apple" in front of "Ping" seems to yield only iTunes social networking hits, so I don't think there's much confusion.
You are probably right. I just feel that the word was hijacked from me personally since I use the Unix version of it on a daily basis.
You are probably right. I just feel that the word was hijacked from me personally since I use the Unix version of it on a daily basis.