CalBoy
Apr 20, 11:47 AM
All of these September iPhone rumors leave three possibilities:
1) Apple failed to plug all of its leaks and there are genuine sources providing this information, and as a result, the iPhone 5 will really be out in September.
2) Apple is intentionally testing the waters to not only see where remaining leaks are, but also to encourage iPhone 4 sales to not drop off during the late spring/early summer.
3) The original September rumor began from an untested source and spent enough time on the merry-go-round to be viewed as "legitimate" by larger media outlets.
1) Apple failed to plug all of its leaks and there are genuine sources providing this information, and as a result, the iPhone 5 will really be out in September.
2) Apple is intentionally testing the waters to not only see where remaining leaks are, but also to encourage iPhone 4 sales to not drop off during the late spring/early summer.
3) The original September rumor began from an untested source and spent enough time on the merry-go-round to be viewed as "legitimate" by larger media outlets.
hobo.hopkins
Apr 26, 02:20 PM
This argument is getting old now. As usual, iFans are in denial.
While his specific point might be an old one, it does hold some validity. New Android phones can be had at prices and with deals that undercut the relative expensive nature of the iPhone. That's not to talk down Android whatsoever, only to say that Apple is perhaps not taking full advantage of that smartphone segment (save for the old 3Gs at relatively low prices). Android is and has been successful in large part because it is more prevalent at all price points, and is available on more carriers.
While his specific point might be an old one, it does hold some validity. New Android phones can be had at prices and with deals that undercut the relative expensive nature of the iPhone. That's not to talk down Android whatsoever, only to say that Apple is perhaps not taking full advantage of that smartphone segment (save for the old 3Gs at relatively low prices). Android is and has been successful in large part because it is more prevalent at all price points, and is available on more carriers.
JAT
Apr 25, 11:29 AM
If you are [a criminal], then you are probably bright enough to use a burn phone. :p
You should at least watch The Wire to get some hints, anyway.
You should at least watch The Wire to get some hints, anyway.
slipper
Nov 5, 01:57 PM
It is cheaper to buy a standalone unit. But then you have to carry around 2 things instead of 1. For some people (including me), that is the major selling point of using the iPhone for navigation. I don't like bringing stuff with me when I travel. The more my iPhone can do, the less junk I need to take with me. It has already replaced my iPod and my laptop. If it can replace my Garmin too, I'm willing to pay extra to make it work.
As for the apps that download maps on the fly, I'm not interested in those as my ONLY navigation solution. There are plenty of places I drive that don't have any cell coverage at all, let alone 3G. I want an app that has the maps preloaded. I haven't decided between the available apps yet, but I am leaning towards Navigon. If their traffic thingy works well, I'll most likely go that route.
So i assume you will be carrying the TomTom mount and iPhone as one piece at all times? :rolleyes:
As for the apps that download maps on the fly, I'm not interested in those as my ONLY navigation solution. There are plenty of places I drive that don't have any cell coverage at all, let alone 3G. I want an app that has the maps preloaded. I haven't decided between the available apps yet, but I am leaning towards Navigon. If their traffic thingy works well, I'll most likely go that route.
So i assume you will be carrying the TomTom mount and iPhone as one piece at all times? :rolleyes:
Christina1971
May 7, 10:27 AM
Huh? If they aren't making any money for it now (with relatively few people paying for the service) how would it make sense to give it away for free (with many many more people not paying for it?)
I for one use it ALL the time. When you have more than one device (multiple macs, iphone), it's SO nice to have them sync wirelessly, immediately, and without having to login every time, on the native apps. iCal, Contacts, Safari links: I am a very frequent user of the mobileme syncing on all of these.
Maybe as marketing? Like you said, it works well and seamlessly if you have several Apple devices. People might be thinking of buying more than one Apple product, but wondering how they can keep everything synced.
Apple could promote Mobile Me as a "value add" and perhaps get more buyers of other devices that way?
I for one use it ALL the time. When you have more than one device (multiple macs, iphone), it's SO nice to have them sync wirelessly, immediately, and without having to login every time, on the native apps. iCal, Contacts, Safari links: I am a very frequent user of the mobileme syncing on all of these.
Maybe as marketing? Like you said, it works well and seamlessly if you have several Apple devices. People might be thinking of buying more than one Apple product, but wondering how they can keep everything synced.
Apple could promote Mobile Me as a "value add" and perhaps get more buyers of other devices that way?
solvs
Jul 23, 08:16 PM
Makes no sense to me. :rolleyes:
Wow, why all the hatin'? This is what they did before. This is the way things are headed. I see another sub $1000 just like the iBook, that's a given. I'm hoping for a cheaper one, but not expecting it for awhile. Could be months, could be years. But as prices drop, it will happen. It's only a matter of time.
Wow, why all the hatin'? This is what they did before. This is the way things are headed. I see another sub $1000 just like the iBook, that's a given. I'm hoping for a cheaper one, but not expecting it for awhile. Could be months, could be years. But as prices drop, it will happen. It's only a matter of time.
Doraemon
Nov 27, 03:30 PM
Apple had other prototype tablets as well: e.g. PenLite
http://www.theapplemuseum.com/index.php?id=45
http://www.theapplemuseum.com/index.php?id=45
DTphonehome
Jul 30, 09:53 AM
Who'd get a mobile phone on an ESPN or Disney network anyway? Free sport clips or Mickey Mouse backgrounds?
http://disneymobile.go.com/disneymobile/home.do
http://mobile.espn.go.com/
Google is your friend.
http://disneymobile.go.com/disneymobile/home.do
http://mobile.espn.go.com/
Google is your friend.
marvel2
Jan 13, 04:50 PM
Not yet... I get a little beep and they are paired within a few seconds.
I get that beep too, but after I MANUALLY pair the phone to the dock. I'm going to try to erase the TomTom Kit from the iPhone's BT paired devices and start from scratch.
I get that beep too, but after I MANUALLY pair the phone to the dock. I'm going to try to erase the TomTom Kit from the iPhone's BT paired devices and start from scratch.
Don't panic
May 6, 08:37 PM
it's quicker because we can explore two room each round instead of one, so we gain one turn.
the draw back from the strategy is mainly that one of the groups might loose out on a treasure, but since we already explored this rooms, and we have to re-search them only for traps, that part is moot.
this will apply only fron the next round, but by the rules we have to be two groups by then.
we will still be 'together, and we can merge back in a group any time.
anyways. without further ado,
We split
ucfgrad is now his own (single) group
Loras group moves to the next (previous room).
ufcgrad, now you should move to the room with us, and as soon it's our round again, you should explore the room. after that, I will move our group to the next room, then in your second tunr you move and in our second turn we explore that room.
the draw back from the strategy is mainly that one of the groups might loose out on a treasure, but since we already explored this rooms, and we have to re-search them only for traps, that part is moot.
this will apply only fron the next round, but by the rules we have to be two groups by then.
we will still be 'together, and we can merge back in a group any time.
anyways. without further ado,
We split
ucfgrad is now his own (single) group
Loras group moves to the next (previous room).
ufcgrad, now you should move to the room with us, and as soon it's our round again, you should explore the room. after that, I will move our group to the next room, then in your second tunr you move and in our second turn we explore that room.
peharri
Nov 25, 09:06 PM
Consider this. Let's say Apple does something along the lines we're predicting, and sells their phones. Before we plunk down our money, we go around to the various cell carriers and inquire if they'll let us bring our phone to their network. They say either "NO!" or "Not at this time."
The only mobile carriers in a position to do this are the cdmaOne/CDMA2000 ones (Verizon, Sprint PCS, etc.) If Apple makes a GSM or UMTS phone, the carrier has little or no say in whether you use it. T-Mobile and Cingular will, by next year, be running both types of network in the US, and both already run GSM.
The real influence the cellphone companies (at least, the ones not stuck in the 1980s as far as their network infrastructure goes) have on phone purchasing is the ability to subsidize phones that fit their model. This, in practice, usually means rebranding. Cingular is pretty good on that score and rarely insists on more than some ugly logos printed on the phone (unfortunately their network is not the greatest GSM implementation in the world.) T-Mobile, in my experience, is somewhat worse, though not always for bad reasons. For example, they'd probably insist on "My Faves", a proprietary five person phonebook, being grafted on to whatever UI an "iPhone" has, in return for any substantial subsidy.
The fact Apple can't expect carriers to subsidize their phones is one issue they have to deal with. I'm more concerned though with Apple becoming a minority player, with its phone tied to a music store whose success was, in major part, to do with the giant marketshare it had, and thus Jobs's ability to force the labels to compromise on prices.
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
Apple would need not merely infrastructure but spectrum to actually start a carrier. They have neither.
Purchasing a carrier is an interesting pipe dream and would terrify the crap out of most shareholders. Mobile telephony is a long term thing, with very little return on investment yet for most people who've invested in it. It's not even a good time to get involved, most companies are rolling out 3G networks and 4G, in the shape of WiMAX, is already being released in some areas.
Were they to do the carrier thing, the best they could hope for would be to be an MVNO. This would be a major change of business model. It has so many ramifications I don't know where to begin.
The only mobile carriers in a position to do this are the cdmaOne/CDMA2000 ones (Verizon, Sprint PCS, etc.) If Apple makes a GSM or UMTS phone, the carrier has little or no say in whether you use it. T-Mobile and Cingular will, by next year, be running both types of network in the US, and both already run GSM.
The real influence the cellphone companies (at least, the ones not stuck in the 1980s as far as their network infrastructure goes) have on phone purchasing is the ability to subsidize phones that fit their model. This, in practice, usually means rebranding. Cingular is pretty good on that score and rarely insists on more than some ugly logos printed on the phone (unfortunately their network is not the greatest GSM implementation in the world.) T-Mobile, in my experience, is somewhat worse, though not always for bad reasons. For example, they'd probably insist on "My Faves", a proprietary five person phonebook, being grafted on to whatever UI an "iPhone" has, in return for any substantial subsidy.
The fact Apple can't expect carriers to subsidize their phones is one issue they have to deal with. I'm more concerned though with Apple becoming a minority player, with its phone tied to a music store whose success was, in major part, to do with the giant marketshare it had, and thus Jobs's ability to force the labels to compromise on prices.
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
Apple would need not merely infrastructure but spectrum to actually start a carrier. They have neither.
Purchasing a carrier is an interesting pipe dream and would terrify the crap out of most shareholders. Mobile telephony is a long term thing, with very little return on investment yet for most people who've invested in it. It's not even a good time to get involved, most companies are rolling out 3G networks and 4G, in the shape of WiMAX, is already being released in some areas.
Were they to do the carrier thing, the best they could hope for would be to be an MVNO. This would be a major change of business model. It has so many ramifications I don't know where to begin.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 5, 03:05 PM
There should be an app to regain control of the breaks in a toyota.
A panic button app.
A panic button app.
Moyank24
May 2, 11:10 PM
Inzo
dexthageek
Apr 26, 02:53 PM
Where do these survey companies get there data from? I have NEVER been asked any questions about stuff like this. Plus with statistics you can fudge the numbers to represent just about anything.
AppleKrate
Sep 16, 12:03 PM
I think if you risk it, they may let you keep the premiums. I forgot about the deadline today. That would indicate they may announce the new MBPs Tuesday as others have predicted already according to the student Free iPod offer deadline. Thanks for the reminder and good luck.
Limey iPod deal ends October 7th :D http://store.apple.com/Apple/WebObjects/ukstore
Limey iPod deal ends October 7th :D http://store.apple.com/Apple/WebObjects/ukstore
vigilant
Mar 30, 07:45 PM
iCal has been visually overhauled to look like the iPad version
Detlev
Aug 2, 12:03 PM
You got it wrong. If you can't have cameras.. you CAN'T HAVE CAMERAS even if they're NOT being used. I work at a place where you can't have cellphones with cameras on the premises (i.e., the parking lot) let alone inside. Many companies with such policies will not buy displays because of such.
Then, unless it is a pharmaceutical, national security, or some other VII, the company needs to get with the times. So called intellectual property is so last century and quite honestly patents are pretty useless in these fast changing times.
My take is that Steve will spend much time on numbers (how many units sold, how well the Intel switch is going) and then introduce the Pro Line. Expect a bit on Leopard and probably a jab at Vista. Although, that might not happen if Steve has what's-her-name out again to introduce the Universal Office. I would not be suprised if Steve has someone from Adobe out to introduce a Universal suite... for sometime in the future.
Wouldn't it be something if Apple came out with a new piece of hardware. Maybe there will be a new strategic alliance introduced.
How about an official release for DashCode? I mean it is a developer's conference after all ...
And seeing as we are unlikely to see iSights built in to the display - for reasons people have stated here - how about a new version of the iSight, seeing as the old one can't be sold in Europe anymore.
Why not? I have one in excellent condition that I don't need anymore seeing I moved over to the MacTel iMac. I'm across the pond so can I sell it to you?
Then, unless it is a pharmaceutical, national security, or some other VII, the company needs to get with the times. So called intellectual property is so last century and quite honestly patents are pretty useless in these fast changing times.
My take is that Steve will spend much time on numbers (how many units sold, how well the Intel switch is going) and then introduce the Pro Line. Expect a bit on Leopard and probably a jab at Vista. Although, that might not happen if Steve has what's-her-name out again to introduce the Universal Office. I would not be suprised if Steve has someone from Adobe out to introduce a Universal suite... for sometime in the future.
Wouldn't it be something if Apple came out with a new piece of hardware. Maybe there will be a new strategic alliance introduced.
How about an official release for DashCode? I mean it is a developer's conference after all ...
And seeing as we are unlikely to see iSights built in to the display - for reasons people have stated here - how about a new version of the iSight, seeing as the old one can't be sold in Europe anymore.
Why not? I have one in excellent condition that I don't need anymore seeing I moved over to the MacTel iMac. I'm across the pond so can I sell it to you?
The ORly owl
Apr 23, 05:37 PM
I will assume the role of the buzzkiller here and assume that this is in prevision of the fact that Lion's Spaces lets you have a different section of the same wallpaper for each space.
peharri
Nov 25, 09:06 PM
Consider this. Let's say Apple does something along the lines we're predicting, and sells their phones. Before we plunk down our money, we go around to the various cell carriers and inquire if they'll let us bring our phone to their network. They say either "NO!" or "Not at this time."
The only mobile carriers in a position to do this are the cdmaOne/CDMA2000 ones (Verizon, Sprint PCS, etc.) If Apple makes a GSM or UMTS phone, the carrier has little or no say in whether you use it. T-Mobile and Cingular will, by next year, be running both types of network in the US, and both already run GSM.
The real influence the cellphone companies (at least, the ones not stuck in the 1980s as far as their network infrastructure goes) have on phone purchasing is the ability to subsidize phones that fit their model. This, in practice, usually means rebranding. Cingular is pretty good on that score and rarely insists on more than some ugly logos printed on the phone (unfortunately their network is not the greatest GSM implementation in the world.) T-Mobile, in my experience, is somewhat worse, though not always for bad reasons. For example, they'd probably insist on "My Faves", a proprietary five person phonebook, being grafted on to whatever UI an "iPhone" has, in return for any substantial subsidy.
The fact Apple can't expect carriers to subsidize their phones is one issue they have to deal with. I'm more concerned though with Apple becoming a minority player, with its phone tied to a music store whose success was, in major part, to do with the giant marketshare it had, and thus Jobs's ability to force the labels to compromise on prices.
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
Apple would need not merely infrastructure but spectrum to actually start a carrier. They have neither.
Purchasing a carrier is an interesting pipe dream and would terrify the crap out of most shareholders. Mobile telephony is a long term thing, with very little return on investment yet for most people who've invested in it. It's not even a good time to get involved, most companies are rolling out 3G networks and 4G, in the shape of WiMAX, is already being released in some areas.
Were they to do the carrier thing, the best they could hope for would be to be an MVNO. This would be a major change of business model. It has so many ramifications I don't know where to begin.
The only mobile carriers in a position to do this are the cdmaOne/CDMA2000 ones (Verizon, Sprint PCS, etc.) If Apple makes a GSM or UMTS phone, the carrier has little or no say in whether you use it. T-Mobile and Cingular will, by next year, be running both types of network in the US, and both already run GSM.
The real influence the cellphone companies (at least, the ones not stuck in the 1980s as far as their network infrastructure goes) have on phone purchasing is the ability to subsidize phones that fit their model. This, in practice, usually means rebranding. Cingular is pretty good on that score and rarely insists on more than some ugly logos printed on the phone (unfortunately their network is not the greatest GSM implementation in the world.) T-Mobile, in my experience, is somewhat worse, though not always for bad reasons. For example, they'd probably insist on "My Faves", a proprietary five person phonebook, being grafted on to whatever UI an "iPhone" has, in return for any substantial subsidy.
The fact Apple can't expect carriers to subsidize their phones is one issue they have to deal with. I'm more concerned though with Apple becoming a minority player, with its phone tied to a music store whose success was, in major part, to do with the giant marketshare it had, and thus Jobs's ability to force the labels to compromise on prices.
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
Apple would need not merely infrastructure but spectrum to actually start a carrier. They have neither.
Purchasing a carrier is an interesting pipe dream and would terrify the crap out of most shareholders. Mobile telephony is a long term thing, with very little return on investment yet for most people who've invested in it. It's not even a good time to get involved, most companies are rolling out 3G networks and 4G, in the shape of WiMAX, is already being released in some areas.
Were they to do the carrier thing, the best they could hope for would be to be an MVNO. This would be a major change of business model. It has so many ramifications I don't know where to begin.
Mister Snitch
Apr 5, 02:47 PM
Hey, Toyota HAD to pull the plug. Rumor has it that Apple was going to counter with a 'hijack a Toyota' campaign!
wovel
Apr 18, 04:01 PM
Not at all. They can use those components for producing Galaxy devices. And they can use free Foxconn resources (since they would not be assembling iPhones anymore) for assembling. :D
Lol.
There would still be minuscule demand for the galaxy lines. Just millions of people using old technology while Apple found our bought a new supplier :)
Lol.
There would still be minuscule demand for the galaxy lines. Just millions of people using old technology while Apple found our bought a new supplier :)
2ndPath
Aug 7, 05:54 PM
Why is everyone complaining about the graphics card? The baseline option should not be an expensive card as not everyone needs that. And opposed to all other current macs, it can be upgraded when the machine is bought or even down the road. A better base line card would just mean an even higher base line price.
The Mac Pro looks like a really nice work station now in terms of processing power and, compared to the G5, also in terms of expandability of drives. It would be nice to have something with the processing power and pricing like the iMac and some expandability. However I guess Apple expects most people, who buy Mac Pros now, would buy these machines instead and this would mean much less profit for Apple. So it's unlikely to happen.
The Mac Pro looks like a really nice work station now in terms of processing power and, compared to the G5, also in terms of expandability of drives. It would be nice to have something with the processing power and pricing like the iMac and some expandability. However I guess Apple expects most people, who buy Mac Pros now, would buy these machines instead and this would mean much less profit for Apple. So it's unlikely to happen.
Hawkeye411
Mar 29, 03:02 PM
Prayers for our Japanese friends!!
Mattie Num Nums
Apr 25, 10:40 AM
2. Steve Jobs is the CEO of a major company and can't afford to lie in public.
You're holding it wrong. Non-Issue.
You're holding it wrong. Non-Issue.
