I hope you realize that will never, and should never happen. That's how you grow brand recognition. Why even have a logo if you're not even going to put it on your products?
A logo is fine (as long as it's well-designed), but having the company name scrawled everywhere is annoying. The vast majority of respected brands have recognized this. For example, you don't see "Mercedes Benz" printed across the hood of the car.
I'd love to hear Apple Insider or someone with the technical skills commenting on whether it makes sense of Apple to add a Lightning port to Mac laptops.
For charging, it makes no sense. But it might make sense for peripherals such as audio/music/photography accessories and audio/video in/out devices to work with both iPads and MacBook Airs. Apple would get more sales. We'd get double value for what we buy.
Firewire was designed with the same idea in mind (easy to integrate into all sorts of peripherals). But outside of a few Sony cameras (under the iLink moniker), it never took off because everyone flocked to USB, which was cheaper to license, and Intel pushed hard because USB requires a computer (which is where Intel dominates) due to its complexity.
We'll have to wait and see how complicated and expensive it is to integrate Lightning into other products to find out if Apple has this in mind or not.
Edit: Also, I think Thunderbolt would make more sense as the connection choice for peripheral makers.
A crying shame that it's mandatory to upload images in order to post them!
If you are using the Rich Text editor you can drag them from any website directly into the editor window. Some websites won't serve images to another website but other than that restriction it works fine. The only time you need to upload images is if the image only exists on your computer such as a photo you took.
I am going to take this opportunity to state, once again as I have in the past (just 'cause I feel like it), that AI has implemented, hands down, the worst commenting forum system I have ever seen since the introduction of the World Wide Web.
Do you really have to manually feed the Lightning cable through like that? No thanks, I'll wait for one which has a passthrough connector to avoid that tedium.
Do you really have to manually feed the Lightning cable through like that? No thanks, I'll wait for one which has a passthrough connector to avoid that tedium.
I'm wondering if they even have a license to make Lightning cables. They make you use your own cable for the dock and the car charger doesn't sync so perhaps they have manufactured their own pin outs that is reversible since it wouldn't need the authentication chip just for charging. I certainly don't see a Made for iPhone logo on their page.
I am going to take this opportunity to state, once again as I have in the past (just 'cause I feel like it), that AI has implemented, hands down, the worst commenting forum system I have ever seen since the introduction of the World Wide Web.
It's the worst, Jerry... The worst!
It is sucktastic, but for a truly horrible experience, try Gawkers awful Kinja system.
Do you really have to manually feed the Lightning cable through like that? No thanks, I'll wait for one which has a passthrough connector to avoid that tedium.
Yeah, this dock appears to be a design Belkin is rushing to market based on the leaks ... They probably don't have time to incorporate the actual lightning connector. As such, it really doesn't need to be an official lightning connector, as it actually doesn't need to license anything from Apple. This design could just have easily been used with the 30-pin dock connector.
I absolutely hate the optional 1/8" audio jack. That is a horrible solution to anything, and nothing more than a stop gap measure to rush this disaster to market. I would really hate to have to pull this thing apart after every time I docked my phone.
The fact Belkin has announced this is NOT PROOF the conference has taken place. Since the car charger is the only real Lightning accessory, For which there could be no other solution, bviously Belkin is hedging its bets that it will be able to comply with Apple's guidelines, at least as far as the charger is concerned. The dock is merely designed to give people an option of a dock as soon as possible until Apple streamlines the requirements for new docks. This design most likely will get its own built-in Lightning port following he holidays after the interface has been engineered, and sold in two models ... Budget and deluxe.
I hope you realize that will never, and should never happen. That's how you grow brand recognition. Why even have a logo if you're not even going to put it on your products?
I would argue that there are many ways to put your logo on your products. It doesn't have to be big, ugly, and centred on the front of the device. Additionally, this is not actually how you "grow a brand." You grow a brand by making great products associated with that brand. You can put a big logo front and centre on everything you make but if the product isn't good it won't grow the brand. You can also leave off the logo or put it in a more discrete area and still "grow the brand."
Edit: Also, I think Thunderbolt would make more sense as the connection choice for peripheral makers.
Based on what (little) I've seen in the market so far, I'm not optimistic. I'm guessing that Thunderbolt must be more expensive to implement than alternative technologies such as USB, because Thunderbolt versions of Lacie drives and Blackmagic Design interfaces cost 25-33% more than otherwise-identical USB3 versions. Then, on top of that, add ANOTHER FIFTY BUCKS PER DEVICE for the damn cable.
Aside from the obvious benefit of daisy-chaining, I can't find an application in my production rig for which USB3 won't do just as well for much lower cost. Sure, TB has four times the bandwidth, but when USB3 already offers twice as much as I can ever imagine actually *needing* there's no tangible advantage.
Aside from the obvious benefit of daisy-chaining, I can't find an application in my production rig for which USB3 won't do just as well for much lower cost.
Move at 10Gbps simultaneously both ways. 640k ought to be enough for anyone.
And you act as though it will always cost this much.
A crying shame that it's mandatory to upload images in order to post them!
[/quote]
Ah bummer! I thought you'd knew what I meant with that: yes you can simply post a link to the image, but with vBulletin we were able to see the actual URL where the image pointed to. With Huddler, we need to upload the image, in spite of the misleading image you post.
Point, to me, is: we were able to see the URL for the images' origen, and therefore discover sites fellow posters read. But from my brevity I understand no one could've taken my point. Sorry 'bout that.
Point, to me, is: we were able to see the URL for the images' origen, and therefore discover sites fellow posters read. But from my brevity I understand no one could've taken my point. Sorry 'bout that.
Oh, that doesn't happen anymore? I thought you could then travel to the image's own page (each image has a page…) and see the original filename and location. Oh, well.
Ah bummer! I thought you'd knew what I meant with that: yes you can simply post a link to the image, but with vBulletin we were able to see the actual URL where the image pointed to. With Huddler, we need to upload the image, in spite of the misleading image you post.
Point, to me, is: we were able to see the URL for the images' origen, and therefore discover sites fellow posters read. But from my brevity I understand no one could've taken my point. Sorry 'bout that.
I hope you realize that will never, and should never happen. That's how you grow brand recognition. Why even have a logo if you're not even going to put it on your products?
Funny how Apple's iDevices don't have any branding on the front. Before Apple, conventional wisdom had that your brand had to be on the front face of the electronic device.
With this goofy "dock", Belkin is telling us their brand sucks.
Edit: Also, I think Thunderbolt would make more sense as the connection choice for peripheral makers.
Devices with single or dual flash chips don't saturate USB 2.0. Why go to that expense until it does? Also, I don't see TB happening for devices until most computers are shipped with such a connector.
Aside from the obvious benefit of daisy-chaining, I can't find an application in my production rig for which USB3 won't do just as well for much lower cost. Sure, TB has four times the bandwidth, but when USB3 already offers twice as much as I can ever imagine actually *needing* there's no tangible advantage.
The problem with USB is that it has been, and always will be, a computer-centric technology. Given that it's a standard which Intel is behind, it's not hard to understand why they are pushing it.
The logic to control a USB bus is so complex that it's near impossible to do it in hardware alone (or would require some very expensive silicon). Hence why you always need to be connected to a computer or computer-like device. This prohibits the ability to, say, connect a camcorder directly to a TV and stream audio/video to it.
Obviously there's HDMI which can do that, but then you need two connectors: one to get the data off of the device (USB3) and one to stream audio/video to your TV (HDMI). It would be nice to converge both of those into one connector if possible.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHecta
I hope you realize that will never, and should never happen. That's how you grow brand recognition. Why even have a logo if you're not even going to put it on your products?
A logo is fine (as long as it's well-designed), but having the company name scrawled everywhere is annoying. The vast majority of respected brands have recognized this. For example, you don't see "Mercedes Benz" printed across the hood of the car.
[IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/15780/width/500/height/1000[/IMG]
[IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/15781/width/500/height/1000[/IMG]
[IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/15782/width/500/height/1000[/IMG]
[IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/15783/width/500/height/1000[/IMG]
[IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/15784/width/500/height/1000[/IMG]
A crying shame that it's mandatory to upload images in order to post them!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inkling
I'd love to hear Apple Insider or someone with the technical skills commenting on whether it makes sense of Apple to add a Lightning port to Mac laptops.
For charging, it makes no sense. But it might make sense for peripherals such as audio/music/photography accessories and audio/video in/out devices to work with both iPads and MacBook Airs. Apple would get more sales. We'd get double value for what we buy.
Firewire was designed with the same idea in mind (easy to integrate into all sorts of peripherals). But outside of a few Sony cameras (under the iLink moniker), it never took off because everyone flocked to USB, which was cheaper to license, and Intel pushed hard because USB requires a computer (which is where Intel dominates) due to its complexity.
We'll have to wait and see how complicated and expensive it is to integrate Lightning into other products to find out if Apple has this in mind or not.
Edit: Also, I think Thunderbolt would make more sense as the connection choice for peripheral makers.
Quote:
A crying shame that it's mandatory to upload images in order to post them!
If you are using the Rich Text editor you can drag them from any website directly into the editor window. Some websites won't serve images to another website but other than that restriction it works fine. The only time you need to upload images is if the image only exists on your computer such as a photo you took.
I am going to take this opportunity to state, once again as I have in the past (just 'cause I feel like it), that AI has implemented, hands down, the worst commenting forum system I have ever seen since the introduction of the World Wide Web.
It's the worst, Jerry... The worst!
...and they will ship just after Belkin's Thunderbolt dock becomes available.
-kpluck
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie
Do you really have to manually feed the Lightning cable through like that? No thanks, I'll wait for one which has a passthrough connector to avoid that tedium.
Quote:
Originally Posted by auxio
Do you really have to manually feed the Lightning cable through like that? No thanks, I'll wait for one which has a passthrough connector to avoid that tedium.
I'm wondering if they even have a license to make Lightning cables. They make you use your own cable for the dock and the car charger doesn't sync so perhaps they have manufactured their own pin outs that is reversible since it wouldn't need the authentication chip just for charging. I certainly don't see a Made for iPhone logo on their page.
It is sucktastic, but for a truly horrible experience, try Gawkers awful Kinja system.
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie
The grey is all that the dock should be. It's just hideous and bloated as-is.
A crying shame that it's mandatory to upload images in order to post them!
I absolutely hate the optional 1/8" audio jack. That is a horrible solution to anything, and nothing more than a stop gap measure to rush this disaster to market. I would really hate to have to pull this thing apart after every time I docked my phone.
The fact Belkin has announced this is NOT PROOF the conference has taken place. Since the car charger is the only real Lightning accessory, For which there could be no other solution, bviously Belkin is hedging its bets that it will be able to comply with Apple's guidelines, at least as far as the charger is concerned. The dock is merely designed to give people an option of a dock as soon as possible until Apple streamlines the requirements for new docks. This design most likely will get its own built-in Lightning port following he holidays after the interface has been engineered, and sold in two models ... Budget and deluxe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHecta
I hope you realize that will never, and should never happen. That's how you grow brand recognition. Why even have a logo if you're not even going to put it on your products?
I would argue that there are many ways to put your logo on your products. It doesn't have to be big, ugly, and centred on the front of the device. Additionally, this is not actually how you "grow a brand." You grow a brand by making great products associated with that brand. You can put a big logo front and centre on everything you make but if the product isn't good it won't grow the brand. You can also leave off the logo or put it in a more discrete area and still "grow the brand."
Quote:
Originally Posted by auxio
Edit: Also, I think Thunderbolt would make more sense as the connection choice for peripheral makers.
Based on what (little) I've seen in the market so far, I'm not optimistic. I'm guessing that Thunderbolt must be more expensive to implement than alternative technologies such as USB, because Thunderbolt versions of Lacie drives and Blackmagic Design interfaces cost 25-33% more than otherwise-identical USB3 versions. Then, on top of that, add ANOTHER FIFTY BUCKS PER DEVICE for the damn cable.
Aside from the obvious benefit of daisy-chaining, I can't find an application in my production rig for which USB3 won't do just as well for much lower cost. Sure, TB has four times the bandwidth, but when USB3 already offers twice as much as I can ever imagine actually *needing* there's no tangible advantage.
Originally Posted by v5v
Aside from the obvious benefit of daisy-chaining, I can't find an application in my production rig for which USB3 won't do just as well for much lower cost.
Move at 10Gbps simultaneously both ways. 640k ought to be enough for anyone.
And you act as though it will always cost this much.
[/quote]
Ah bummer! I thought you'd knew what I meant with that: yes you can simply post a link to the image, but with vBulletin we were able to see the actual URL where the image pointed to. With Huddler, we need to upload the image, in spite of the misleading image you post.
Point, to me, is: we were able to see the URL for the images' origen, and therefore discover sites fellow posters read. But from my brevity I understand no one could've taken my point. Sorry 'bout that.
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie
Point, to me, is: we were able to see the URL for the images' origen, and therefore discover sites fellow posters read. But from my brevity I understand no one could've taken my point. Sorry 'bout that.
Oh, that doesn't happen anymore? I thought you could then travel to the image's own page (each image has a page…) and see the original filename and location. Oh, well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie
Ah bummer! I thought you'd knew what I meant with that: yes you can simply post a link to the image, but with vBulletin we were able to see the actual URL where the image pointed to. With Huddler, we need to upload the image, in spite of the misleading image you post.
Point, to me, is: we were able to see the URL for the images' origen, and therefore discover sites fellow posters read. But from my brevity I understand no one could've taken my point. Sorry 'bout that.
Funny how Apple's iDevices don't have any branding on the front. Before Apple, conventional wisdom had that your brand had to be on the front face of the electronic device.
With this goofy "dock", Belkin is telling us their brand sucks.
Devices with single or dual flash chips don't saturate USB 2.0. Why go to that expense until it does? Also, I don't see TB happening for devices until most computers are shipped with such a connector.
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v
Aside from the obvious benefit of daisy-chaining, I can't find an application in my production rig for which USB3 won't do just as well for much lower cost. Sure, TB has four times the bandwidth, but when USB3 already offers twice as much as I can ever imagine actually *needing* there's no tangible advantage.
The problem with USB is that it has been, and always will be, a computer-centric technology. Given that it's a standard which Intel is behind, it's not hard to understand why they are pushing it.
The logic to control a USB bus is so complex that it's near impossible to do it in hardware alone (or would require some very expensive silicon). Hence why you always need to be connected to a computer or computer-like device. This prohibits the ability to, say, connect a camcorder directly to a TV and stream audio/video to it.
Obviously there's HDMI which can do that, but then you need two connectors: one to get the data off of the device (USB3) and one to stream audio/video to your TV (HDMI). It would be nice to converge both of those into one connector if possible.