It's likely that the camera included in the next iPhone/iPod will be as good as the average point and shoot "digi-cam" and include a comparable video camera as well. People don't want to buy a four hundred dollar camera and drag it around with them anymore when it will be out of date and broken in a year or two anyway.
Putting such a thing in your mobile (which is updated usually on the same schedule), sounds like a perfect solution to me.
Nah. It will take a while before phone cams get as good as even some of the worst compacts are now.
The cheapest 8 MP 3x optical zoom cameras with a much better flash than a phone cam normally has and a removable SD card slot will set you back $99. Samsung has an 8.3 MP model that sells for that, and others have comparable models.
It's not likely that a phone camera that isn't much more bulky than a phone would come close to the IQ that those cameras already have.
But wasn't there some info about the chips having a different density or something along those lines?
I see no evidence of a different, much less a lower density. In fact, I see nothing about the chip densities at all, just the storage capacity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissionGrey
Is it illegal if it is for legitimate usage?
It would illegal if Apple was artificially trying to affect the market price of NAND, but that thing usually occurs from the supplier's end. However, as LTMP has pointed out this is on 2x the NAND bought 10 months ago so I don't think any shady is going in.
If there is a crime it using that Impact font on this forum.
I'm betting that the chips will be an integral part of the Mac OS tying the system to real Apple hardware. Effectively locking out the would-be cloners.
the iphone answering machine! just dock your iphone into the new apple iphone answering machine when you're at home but don't want to answer calls. upon receiving a call, the iphone will automatically connect with the iphone answering machine, which will relay a pre-recorded outgoing message (outgoing messages available from the itunes store for only $2.99 each) and then allow the caller to leave a message (which is automatically uploaded to your .mac account, and can be retrieved from the itunes store for only $0.99 per message). available in white, black, gold, and irridescent greenish.
Nah. It will take a while before phone cams get as good as even some of the worst compacts are now.
The cheapest 8 MP 3x optical zoom cameras with a much better flash than a phone cam normally has and a removable SD card slot will set you back $99. Samsung has an 8.3 MP model that sells for that, and others have comparable models.
It's not likely that a phone camera that isn't much more bulky than a phone would come close to the IQ that those cameras already have.
I agree, the on phone cameras are great for pictures of the moment that people upload to myspace, facebook, flickr, and other network type things. (granted flikr is more serious pictures) I have a nikon d300, I love it. with current technology no phone camera will reach the quality. And phone cameras only take pictures in jpg, high-end cameras can shot in RAW which is an amazing benefit.
Apple may not ship the SDK on Snow Leopard. They don't seem to mind developers DLing a new multi-GB files every month and they are moving all those GBs of print drivers to online only access. This would easily jibe with moving Snow Leopard to USB flash sticks.
Sadly this is true. At least the part about constant SDK updates.
Quote:
I understand the desire to make Snow Leopard smaller as an install, but to remove bulky print drivers that have to be installed via an internet connection only makes sense if your focus is making the actual install disc considerably smaller.
With print drivers I see a different motivation. That would be keeping the drivers up to date at install time. From my standpoint the print drivers are in many cases outdated the day they ship with the new OS. Thus it makes sense for Apple to implement a system to keep these things up to date at install time.
Actually I see Apple moving to something similar to what we have on Linux, that is package installers that allow you to easily keep dependencies in check while updating key components. I doubt that Apple will go to the fine grained approach seen on Linux but for well partitioned subsystems like printing I could see it working. That is Software Update becomes a bit like a package manager.
Quote:
They haven't included the iWork trial since removing the Office for Mac test drive, so the only thing that would be keeping the install bulky is iLife, as I can't see them separating the various languages and fonts from the final build as that seems to be too much of a step backwards to have Windows-like builds for different countries.
Bulky yes but ideally you would want iLife installation separated from the system install. Even then I don't see it fitting on 1GB of Flash.
In any event the mystery remains. Right now I suspect that the paper simply got some information wrong or where supplied with disinformation. There is no doubt about Apples impact on the Flash market, but they are not in the habit of implementing old technology either. We will wait and see.
I don't think we're at the point yet, if we will ever be, where costs for software distribution would be cheaper for Apple using flash than cheap plastics disks.
We see this with HDDs as well. The prices don't keep getting cheaper. At some point it's too cheap to manufacture, and the size is dropped. Then the next larger size is slotted into that price niche.
If chips get too cheap, production is either dropped, or prices actually move back up as the newer larger sizes become popular.
It costs about $0.50 to produce a DVD with software, and silkscreened label. Throw in another .5 cents for a sleeve, and you're done.
Apple is planning to release SnowLeopard on USB memory stick!
So all portables like Air or New tablet can be installed without DVD!
In fact most devices thse days support usb.. why bother with discs anymore?
So Apple's going to take a ubiquitous DVD ROM disc which costs $.10 to duplicate in the millions and move to 1GB of NAND technology that holds 4x less data at likely 40x the cost.
I don't think we're at the point yet, if we will ever be, where costs for software distribution would be cheaper for Apple using flash than cheap plastics disks.
We see this with HDDs as well. The prices don't keep getting cheaper. At some point it's too cheap to manufacture, and the size is dropped. Then the next larger size is slotted into that price niche.
If chips get too cheap, production is either dropped, or prices actually move back up as the newer larger sizes become popular.
It costs about $0.50 to produce a DVD with software, and silkscreened label. Throw in another .5 cents for a sleeve, and you're done.
When will 8.7 GB flash be able to match that?
That is optical disc to 8GB flash stick, and that price will never be matched. Also, aren't there licensing fees associated with including a USB connector on a device that will bring up the price even more?
However, if you include the cost saved from not including an optical drive you have a USB flash install that is cheaper than an optical drive and optical disc shipped. But you also have tremendous savings of space in your notebook chassis and a way to protect your OS a little more from being installed on non-Mac HW as your Mac and flash drive can do a handshake better than the a read-only disc.
That said, I think LTMP has the right answer about this chip purchase.
So Apple's going to take a ubiquitous DVD ROM disc which costs $.10 to duplicate in the millions and move to 1GB of NAND technology that holds 4x less data at likely 40x the cost.
It doesn't pass the "dollars and sense" test.
Agreed. This purchase has to be product related, not operations related.
That is optical disc to 8GB flash stick. Aren't there licensing fees associated with including a USB connector on a device? However, if you include the cost saved from the optical drive you have a Usb flash install that is cheaper than an optical drive and optical disc. But you also have tremendous savings of space in your notebook chassis and a way to protect your OS a little more from being installed on non-Mac HW as your Mac and flash drive can do a handshake better than the a read-only disc.
That said, I think LTMP has the right answer about this chip purchase.
I don't believe this at all.
It will cost much more to do it this way.
Very few computers won't have an optical drive. Some small laptops won't, though even them more people complain about that fact than are happy with it.
I think software is a pretty far out concept. Internet delivery will become even more ubiquitous that it even is now.
You still have to SEND that stick to people. As opposed to getting the download anywhere you may be, even on vacation.
Well, the iPod/phone connection is the most obvious. I can't understand why anyone would even think of anything else, other than that ever so slightly possible netbook-like thingie that Apple has supposedly bought all those 10" screens for.
Well, the iPod/phone connection is the most obvious. I can't understand why anyone would even think of anything else, other than that ever so slightly possible netbook-like thingie that Apple has supposedly bought all those 10" screens for.
I agree, as previously stated, but I can't stress enough how happy I will be when that useless component taking so much space in my MB and using up an entire side of port real estate is gone. I don't even burn discs to install Snow Leopard for testing. Apple's own seed notes walk you through a simple partition-to-partition installation. Without that option I wouldn't be wasting my time and money burning DL-DVDs so I could test the software.
Comments
It's likely that the camera included in the next iPhone/iPod will be as good as the average point and shoot "digi-cam" and include a comparable video camera as well. People don't want to buy a four hundred dollar camera and drag it around with them anymore when it will be out of date and broken in a year or two anyway.
Putting such a thing in your mobile (which is updated usually on the same schedule), sounds like a perfect solution to me.
Nah. It will take a while before phone cams get as good as even some of the worst compacts are now.
The cheapest 8 MP 3x optical zoom cameras with a much better flash than a phone cam normally has and a removable SD card slot will set you back $99. Samsung has an 8.3 MP model that sells for that, and others have comparable models.
It's not likely that a phone camera that isn't much more bulky than a phone would come close to the IQ that those cameras already have.
But wasn't there some info about the chips having a different density or something along those lines?
I see no evidence of a different, much less a lower density. In fact, I see nothing about the chip densities at all, just the storage capacity.
Is it illegal if it is for legitimate usage?
It would illegal if Apple was artificially trying to affect the market price of NAND, but that thing usually occurs from the supplier's end. However, as LTMP has pointed out this is on 2x the NAND bought 10 months ago so I don't think any shady is going in.
If there is a crime it using that Impact font on this forum.
Wow- Apple is becoming the new SONY day by day. No wonder their computers are getting suckier day by day.
I hope you're not using his statement as a fact.
hahaha, you got me.
Is it illegal if it is for legitimate usage?
It's only illegal if it can be shown that Apple and its partners conspired to drive prices up through creating an artificial shortage.
Nah. It will take a while before phone cams get as good as even some of the worst compacts are now.
The cheapest 8 MP 3x optical zoom cameras with a much better flash than a phone cam normally has and a removable SD card slot will set you back $99. Samsung has an 8.3 MP model that sells for that, and others have comparable models.
It's not likely that a phone camera that isn't much more bulky than a phone would come close to the IQ that those cameras already have.
I agree, the on phone cameras are great for pictures of the moment that people upload to myspace, facebook, flickr, and other network type things. (granted flikr is more serious pictures) I have a nikon d300, I love it. with current technology no phone camera will reach the quality. And phone cameras only take pictures in jpg, high-end cameras can shot in RAW which is an amazing benefit.
It's only illegal if it can be shown that Apple and its partners conspired to drive prices up through creating an artificial shortage.
And that makes complete sense.
Apple may not ship the SDK on Snow Leopard. They don't seem to mind developers DLing a new multi-GB files every month and they are moving all those GBs of print drivers to online only access. This would easily jibe with moving Snow Leopard to USB flash sticks.
Sadly this is true. At least the part about constant SDK updates.
I understand the desire to make Snow Leopard smaller as an install, but to remove bulky print drivers that have to be installed via an internet connection only makes sense if your focus is making the actual install disc considerably smaller.
With print drivers I see a different motivation. That would be keeping the drivers up to date at install time. From my standpoint the print drivers are in many cases outdated the day they ship with the new OS. Thus it makes sense for Apple to implement a system to keep these things up to date at install time.
Actually I see Apple moving to something similar to what we have on Linux, that is package installers that allow you to easily keep dependencies in check while updating key components. I doubt that Apple will go to the fine grained approach seen on Linux but for well partitioned subsystems like printing I could see it working. That is Software Update becomes a bit like a package manager.
They haven't included the iWork trial since removing the Office for Mac test drive, so the only thing that would be keeping the install bulky is iLife, as I can't see them separating the various languages and fonts from the final build as that seems to be too much of a step backwards to have Windows-like builds for different countries.
Bulky yes but ideally you would want iLife installation separated from the system install. Even then I don't see it fitting on 1GB of Flash.
In any event the mystery remains. Right now I suspect that the paper simply got some information wrong or where supplied with disinformation. There is no doubt about Apples impact on the Flash market, but they are not in the habit of implementing old technology either. We will wait and see.
Dave
Do I get a prize for stating the obvious?
We see this with HDDs as well. The prices don't keep getting cheaper. At some point it's too cheap to manufacture, and the size is dropped. Then the next larger size is slotted into that price niche.
If chips get too cheap, production is either dropped, or prices actually move back up as the newer larger sizes become popular.
It costs about $0.50 to produce a DVD with software, and silkscreened label. Throw in another .5 cents for a sleeve, and you're done.
When will 8.7 GB flash be able to match that?
Apple is planning to release SnowLeopard on USB memory stick!
So all portables like Air or New tablet can be installed without DVD!
In fact most devices thse days support usb.. why bother with discs anymore?
it's not Iphone/Ipod etc
Apple is planning to release SnowLeopard on USB memory stick!
So all portables like Air or New tablet can be installed without DVD!
In fact most devices thse days support usb.. why bother with discs anymore?
So Apple's going to take a ubiquitous DVD ROM disc which costs $.10 to duplicate in the millions and move to 1GB of NAND technology that holds 4x less data at likely 40x the cost.
It doesn't pass the "dollars and sense" test.
I don't think we're at the point yet, if we will ever be, where costs for software distribution would be cheaper for Apple using flash than cheap plastics disks.
We see this with HDDs as well. The prices don't keep getting cheaper. At some point it's too cheap to manufacture, and the size is dropped. Then the next larger size is slotted into that price niche.
If chips get too cheap, production is either dropped, or prices actually move back up as the newer larger sizes become popular.
It costs about $0.50 to produce a DVD with software, and silkscreened label. Throw in another .5 cents for a sleeve, and you're done.
When will 8.7 GB flash be able to match that?
That is optical disc to 8GB flash stick, and that price will never be matched. Also, aren't there licensing fees associated with including a USB connector on a device that will bring up the price even more?
However, if you include the cost saved from not including an optical drive you have a USB flash install that is cheaper than an optical drive and optical disc shipped. But you also have tremendous savings of space in your notebook chassis and a way to protect your OS a little more from being installed on non-Mac HW as your Mac and flash drive can do a handshake better than the a read-only disc.
That said, I think LTMP has the right answer about this chip purchase.
So Apple's going to take a ubiquitous DVD ROM disc which costs $.10 to duplicate in the millions and move to 1GB of NAND technology that holds 4x less data at likely 40x the cost.
It doesn't pass the "dollars and sense" test.
Agreed. This purchase has to be product related, not operations related.
That is optical disc to 8GB flash stick. Aren't there licensing fees associated with including a USB connector on a device? However, if you include the cost saved from the optical drive you have a Usb flash install that is cheaper than an optical drive and optical disc. But you also have tremendous savings of space in your notebook chassis and a way to protect your OS a little more from being installed on non-Mac HW as your Mac and flash drive can do a handshake better than the a read-only disc.
That said, I think LTMP has the right answer about this chip purchase.
I don't believe this at all.
It will cost much more to do it this way.
Very few computers won't have an optical drive. Some small laptops won't, though even them more people complain about that fact than are happy with it.
I think software is a pretty far out concept. Internet delivery will become even more ubiquitous that it even is now.
You still have to SEND that stick to people. As opposed to getting the download anywhere you may be, even on vacation.
Well, the iPod/phone connection is the most obvious. I can't understand why anyone would even think of anything else, other than that ever so slightly possible netbook-like thingie that Apple has supposedly bought all those 10" screens for.
Anyone else?
Well, the iPod/phone connection is the most obvious. I can't understand why anyone would even think of anything else, other than that ever so slightly possible netbook-like thingie that Apple has supposedly bought all those 10" screens for.
I agree, as previously stated, but I can't stress enough how happy I will be when that useless component taking so much space in my MB and using up an entire side of port real estate is gone. I don't even burn discs to install Snow Leopard for testing. Apple's own seed notes walk you through a simple partition-to-partition installation. Without that option I wouldn't be wasting my time and money burning DL-DVDs so I could test the software.
I'm getting a lot of "database error" pages on the site today.
Anyone else?
Yes, I have had about 6 or 7 today.