crees!
Jul 28, 07:27 AM
As long as the 'finding new music' feature is better than the iTunes Mini store, which is down right bad. Bad. I think it's great.
more...
Michael Scrip
May 5, 02:16 AM
You have to realize one thing. Without market share, company like Apple can not make profit.
Yeah... you have to sell products to make money... but nothing says you have to have the most market share in order to make money.
Let's say Android gets 35% of the market... and Apple only has 25% of the market...
Apple still can sell 20 million iPhones in a quarter and makes a crap-ton of money doing it. That's what I've been saying all along!
Read my other comments here and elsewhere... I HATE market share arguments. It infuriates me every time there is a headline saying "Android beats Apple" and "Android Grows while Apple Stalls"
It's crazy to compare the two anyway... Apple and Google have completely different business models.
My next phone will be an iPhone... I don't care if Android phones outsell the iPhone 2-to-1
Yeah... you have to sell products to make money... but nothing says you have to have the most market share in order to make money.
Let's say Android gets 35% of the market... and Apple only has 25% of the market...
Apple still can sell 20 million iPhones in a quarter and makes a crap-ton of money doing it. That's what I've been saying all along!
Read my other comments here and elsewhere... I HATE market share arguments. It infuriates me every time there is a headline saying "Android beats Apple" and "Android Grows while Apple Stalls"
It's crazy to compare the two anyway... Apple and Google have completely different business models.
My next phone will be an iPhone... I don't care if Android phones outsell the iPhone 2-to-1
more...
maclaptop
Apr 21, 11:16 PM
This is getting funny. :rolleyes:
Well said, fan boys are incredibly entertaining.
Only in an Apple forum do they take things so seriously.
Labeling others and calling names, its so hilarious.
How quickly they forget its just a phone.
Well said, fan boys are incredibly entertaining.
Only in an Apple forum do they take things so seriously.
Labeling others and calling names, its so hilarious.
How quickly they forget its just a phone.
more...
simX
Oct 18, 06:22 PM
Yes, thank you. At least someone else out there is emotionally distanced enough from the iPod and the Apple entertainment sector to be a bit objective.
Innovation: just what happened to Apple's innovative spirit when it comes to computers? The latest Mac Pro was fitted into the existing (and way oversized) G5 case. The MacBook was disappointing in that - proportionally - Apple did not shrink it at all or make it lighter than its predecessor (a design which had been in existence for about four years). There are more things, but I really don't want to sound like a troll here...
Apple needs to come out with new computer models that are unlike anything else out there. What about a tiny, thin ultraportable? What about a smaller tower, so those of us that want a pro computer don't have to invest in an oversized monster (which is larger than any PCs in the market that I am aware of). Aren't computers supposed to get SMALLER as the technology advances? Why is Apple obsessed with making the iPod smaller and smaller, but does not care as much about its laptops and desktops?
The answer: profit, or course. The iPod is Apple's cash cow. And this, my friends, is what I mean when I say that Apple needs to be partitioning off a little of its innovative energy that it is putting into its entertainment sector and bring it back to the computer line.
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :)
*sigh* How many times do we have to refute your assertions with facts before you stop repeating them?
To wit, the iPod is not Apple's "cash cow". By definition, if there is something that gains more revenue/profit than the iPod, then the iPod cannot be the cash cow. 58% of Apple's revenue still came from sales of Macs. Gross margins for both Macs and iPods has always been similar (hovering a bit below 30%), so the Mac also generates the majority of the profit for Apple.
As for Apple's innovative spirit lacking when it comes to the Macs, let's just point out that it Apple updated the iPod in October 2005 to the 5th generation, and we JUST got the 5.5th generation last month. Apple took a year to add slightly brighter screens, better battery life (only for video), and games. The nano just gained the anodized aluminum exterior -- wow, Apple's reaching back to the past for it's innovation now! And the shuffle got slimmed down and consolidated into one product. All this doesn't sound exactly like innovation to me. (Of course, Apple doesn't really need to innovate, since they're already selling iPods by the boatload.)
In contrast, Apple brought all of its Macs over to the Intel processor. The Mac Pro was dramatically higher value, what with double-wide graphics card slot, dual optical drives, 4 internal hard drive bays, etc., etc. All Macs (except for the Mac Pro) now have Front Row and a remote, which is a great feature. Built-in iSights have also migrated across the entire product line. The MacBook and MacBook Pro now have MagSafe -- a great innovation. Boot Camp is now supported on all new Macs. The Xserve has new features like lights-out management, redundant power supplies, etc. And we've seen some great things coming for Leopard, what with Time Machine and Spaces and iChat Theater and Core Animation and iCal Server, etc., etc., etc.
It seems to me that Apple is innovating more on the Macintosh side of things than they are with the iPod. What are they going to add next on the iPod -- wireless? *gasp*, so innovative!
Seriously, can we stop with this myth already? It's the same thing with all of Apple's "woes" with quality control (which was busted by the recent consumer reports articles where Apple has actually brought DOWN the number of new computers needing repair in their first year). It's something that's repeated ad nauseum by a few vocal people, when it's really not a problem at all. Same here: everybody gawks and writes about the iPod precisely because more people can afford it and more people can use it with whatever computer they have. So, obviously, you will hear more about the iPod.
Let's see if repeating myself again has any effect: the iPod is not Apple's cash cow!
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :rolleyes:
Innovation: just what happened to Apple's innovative spirit when it comes to computers? The latest Mac Pro was fitted into the existing (and way oversized) G5 case. The MacBook was disappointing in that - proportionally - Apple did not shrink it at all or make it lighter than its predecessor (a design which had been in existence for about four years). There are more things, but I really don't want to sound like a troll here...
Apple needs to come out with new computer models that are unlike anything else out there. What about a tiny, thin ultraportable? What about a smaller tower, so those of us that want a pro computer don't have to invest in an oversized monster (which is larger than any PCs in the market that I am aware of). Aren't computers supposed to get SMALLER as the technology advances? Why is Apple obsessed with making the iPod smaller and smaller, but does not care as much about its laptops and desktops?
The answer: profit, or course. The iPod is Apple's cash cow. And this, my friends, is what I mean when I say that Apple needs to be partitioning off a little of its innovative energy that it is putting into its entertainment sector and bring it back to the computer line.
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :)
*sigh* How many times do we have to refute your assertions with facts before you stop repeating them?
To wit, the iPod is not Apple's "cash cow". By definition, if there is something that gains more revenue/profit than the iPod, then the iPod cannot be the cash cow. 58% of Apple's revenue still came from sales of Macs. Gross margins for both Macs and iPods has always been similar (hovering a bit below 30%), so the Mac also generates the majority of the profit for Apple.
As for Apple's innovative spirit lacking when it comes to the Macs, let's just point out that it Apple updated the iPod in October 2005 to the 5th generation, and we JUST got the 5.5th generation last month. Apple took a year to add slightly brighter screens, better battery life (only for video), and games. The nano just gained the anodized aluminum exterior -- wow, Apple's reaching back to the past for it's innovation now! And the shuffle got slimmed down and consolidated into one product. All this doesn't sound exactly like innovation to me. (Of course, Apple doesn't really need to innovate, since they're already selling iPods by the boatload.)
In contrast, Apple brought all of its Macs over to the Intel processor. The Mac Pro was dramatically higher value, what with double-wide graphics card slot, dual optical drives, 4 internal hard drive bays, etc., etc. All Macs (except for the Mac Pro) now have Front Row and a remote, which is a great feature. Built-in iSights have also migrated across the entire product line. The MacBook and MacBook Pro now have MagSafe -- a great innovation. Boot Camp is now supported on all new Macs. The Xserve has new features like lights-out management, redundant power supplies, etc. And we've seen some great things coming for Leopard, what with Time Machine and Spaces and iChat Theater and Core Animation and iCal Server, etc., etc., etc.
It seems to me that Apple is innovating more on the Macintosh side of things than they are with the iPod. What are they going to add next on the iPod -- wireless? *gasp*, so innovative!
Seriously, can we stop with this myth already? It's the same thing with all of Apple's "woes" with quality control (which was busted by the recent consumer reports articles where Apple has actually brought DOWN the number of new computers needing repair in their first year). It's something that's repeated ad nauseum by a few vocal people, when it's really not a problem at all. Same here: everybody gawks and writes about the iPod precisely because more people can afford it and more people can use it with whatever computer they have. So, obviously, you will hear more about the iPod.
Let's see if repeating myself again has any effect: the iPod is not Apple's cash cow!
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :rolleyes:
more...
gotohamish
Apr 26, 11:28 AM
You don't need to keep taking computers back you know. You could try and be happy with what you already own. Also why did you buy it if you knew there were new ones on the horizon anyway?
Also, if one were to buy a Mac within two weeks prior to a new model you're entitled to just take it back for the new model, or at least that's how it used to work.
Also, if one were to buy a Mac within two weeks prior to a new model you're entitled to just take it back for the new model, or at least that's how it used to work.
more...
Kingsly
Oct 18, 06:13 PM
This is what interests me: “Looking forward, 2007 is likely to be one of the most exciting new product years in Apple’s history.”
more...
supafly1703
Jul 28, 10:13 AM
I wonder if they have appropriated another $4 BILLION to blow in an effort to overtake a market leader a la XBox...
more...
philr5150
Apr 13, 01:53 PM
Yay. Something new to jailbreak. Just what we needed.
more...
JoeG4
Jul 24, 08:18 PM
Sweet! When is it coming out? >_> I'd love one to replace my Mx700
more...
Nemesis
Oct 23, 05:33 PM
This is great news!
So more and more people will finally realise that running Mac OS X only is far, far, far cheaper, more stabile and less troublesome.
Way to go Microsoft, we love you! Please make Business Edition three times more expensive too, make software registration five time more complicated and annoying as hell, include more ironcurtain restrictions, so people can buy more and more Macs.
So more and more people will finally realise that running Mac OS X only is far, far, far cheaper, more stabile and less troublesome.
Way to go Microsoft, we love you! Please make Business Edition three times more expensive too, make software registration five time more complicated and annoying as hell, include more ironcurtain restrictions, so people can buy more and more Macs.
more...
AndroidfoLife
Apr 24, 04:38 PM
Thanks for the anecdote.
The iPhone sets the bar. Google has to flood the market with a lot of junk to achieve higher share. That's hardly impressive. Google is the MS of mobile. Hardly a compliment. License out your beta OS to anyone that can slam together a box, give it away, and away you go.
The iPhone is still the #1 selling handset. Where are the iPhone killers? There aren't any. Because the competition doesn't know how to make one. Because Apple approaches tech from a totally different place.
The iOS platform still dominates, and given the iPad's success, it'll be that way for the foreseeable future.
Android enjoys highest smartphone market share. Yet the OS is pretty brutal and their ecosystem is a mess. So why do they have greater share? Not because they make a superior product, but because the only alternative to an iPhone was an Android-based device, and Eric T. Mole got to work licensing it out to everyone with no regard for design or User Experience. If you flood the market with what, 70+ (probably a lot more) devices and let everyone and their dog make the devices you'll eventually enjoy force of numbers.
Android is given away free to anyone to manufacture, to make as many POS devices as they wish, to sell for peanuts, in massive volume.
That's all it is. Market flooding at every price point and you get some sort of touchscreen and some sort of app store. And given Google's Microsoftian horizontal business model, that's all it'll ever be.
For instance, THIS is the kind of total junk that Google puts their name to:
http://www.gsmarena.com/zte_racer-reviews-3423.php
And guess what: Dell went ahead and copied it. The DELL XCD28. Same junk. But Android market share just went up!
Here's another amazing Android device:
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/reviews/2010/11/worst-gadget-ever-ars-reviews-a-99-android-tablet.ars
Anything to be proud of? But hey, they're dirt cheap. And uh . . . "open" or whatever.
If Google actually *cared* about what they put the Android name to, if they actually gave a damn about the USER, would they allow this? Ask yourself that. That's the difference. There are some things Apple *will not* allow to exist - namely: garbage.
Yes, highest market share. Until you go hunting for the REASON.
Its only in opinions which OS is better. I know Windows is better for me because it allows me to build my own hardware. Not all android phones are dirt cheap. The top selling ones are not the dirt cheap ones it is the ones that compete directly with the iPhone in the high end smart phone. There are a lot of phones out there that top the iPhone. The Atrix, the G2X, Evo and multiple other ones are all better phones then the iPhone 4. The iPhone is a good phone, But is far from the best. It will never turn into a one horse game. There will never be an "iPhone Killer", And android is here to stay.
The iPhone can not meet everyones needs some people need a physical keyboard, Larger screen, SD slot, Smaller screen, HDMI, High end camaras, various things that end the end the Single model of the iPhone will not work for them
The iPhone sets the bar. Google has to flood the market with a lot of junk to achieve higher share. That's hardly impressive. Google is the MS of mobile. Hardly a compliment. License out your beta OS to anyone that can slam together a box, give it away, and away you go.
The iPhone is still the #1 selling handset. Where are the iPhone killers? There aren't any. Because the competition doesn't know how to make one. Because Apple approaches tech from a totally different place.
The iOS platform still dominates, and given the iPad's success, it'll be that way for the foreseeable future.
Android enjoys highest smartphone market share. Yet the OS is pretty brutal and their ecosystem is a mess. So why do they have greater share? Not because they make a superior product, but because the only alternative to an iPhone was an Android-based device, and Eric T. Mole got to work licensing it out to everyone with no regard for design or User Experience. If you flood the market with what, 70+ (probably a lot more) devices and let everyone and their dog make the devices you'll eventually enjoy force of numbers.
Android is given away free to anyone to manufacture, to make as many POS devices as they wish, to sell for peanuts, in massive volume.
That's all it is. Market flooding at every price point and you get some sort of touchscreen and some sort of app store. And given Google's Microsoftian horizontal business model, that's all it'll ever be.
For instance, THIS is the kind of total junk that Google puts their name to:
http://www.gsmarena.com/zte_racer-reviews-3423.php
And guess what: Dell went ahead and copied it. The DELL XCD28. Same junk. But Android market share just went up!
Here's another amazing Android device:
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/reviews/2010/11/worst-gadget-ever-ars-reviews-a-99-android-tablet.ars
Anything to be proud of? But hey, they're dirt cheap. And uh . . . "open" or whatever.
If Google actually *cared* about what they put the Android name to, if they actually gave a damn about the USER, would they allow this? Ask yourself that. That's the difference. There are some things Apple *will not* allow to exist - namely: garbage.
Yes, highest market share. Until you go hunting for the REASON.
Its only in opinions which OS is better. I know Windows is better for me because it allows me to build my own hardware. Not all android phones are dirt cheap. The top selling ones are not the dirt cheap ones it is the ones that compete directly with the iPhone in the high end smart phone. There are a lot of phones out there that top the iPhone. The Atrix, the G2X, Evo and multiple other ones are all better phones then the iPhone 4. The iPhone is a good phone, But is far from the best. It will never turn into a one horse game. There will never be an "iPhone Killer", And android is here to stay.
The iPhone can not meet everyones needs some people need a physical keyboard, Larger screen, SD slot, Smaller screen, HDMI, High end camaras, various things that end the end the Single model of the iPhone will not work for them
more...
jessica.
Sep 14, 08:08 AM
:D
http://siennaplantationrealtor.com/images/SOLD%20sign.jpg
http://siennaplantationrealtor.com/images/SOLD%20sign.jpg
more...
peapody
Jan 29, 10:57 AM
I'm currently testing one out :)
Wow that guy is a lot smaller than I thought it would be!
Shipping for a couple items just sold..including an Asus Gaming Laptop.
Wow that guy is a lot smaller than I thought it would be!
Shipping for a couple items just sold..including an Asus Gaming Laptop.
more...
crainial
Oct 18, 11:37 PM
Its clear Apple is missing something in the midrange desk top line. Its time for the Cube or Macintosh or headless iMac or Max Mini or something. iMac isnt for everyone and the world has billions of big beautiful displays just waiting for a midrange Mac but if Apple prices it again the same as the towers it will be another failure. Its way past time for the next Macintosh. Needs a real GPU, at least 1 expansion slot and should be priced right along with ugly iMac:D or a pinch below.
I couldn't agree more. A Conroe machine would fit this bill nicely. I don't have $2500 to spend on a CPU, but want a more powerful desktop. Not that a Mac is a mere PC, but the VAST majority of Windoze PCs are under $600. Why not put out a $700-1000 Mac? Increase the market share even more. Of course then Wal-Mart would want them, a sure sign of the end...
I couldn't agree more. A Conroe machine would fit this bill nicely. I don't have $2500 to spend on a CPU, but want a more powerful desktop. Not that a Mac is a mere PC, but the VAST majority of Windoze PCs are under $600. Why not put out a $700-1000 Mac? Increase the market share even more. Of course then Wal-Mart would want them, a sure sign of the end...
more...
cr2sh
Jul 24, 06:29 PM
(Looks at watch)
Is it time for another ****** apple mouse already?
Is it time for another ****** apple mouse already?
more...
twoodcc
Nov 24, 08:42 PM
yeah team lexus should be in the rearview mirror soon
i hope so.
i hope so.
more...
chordate68
Oct 21, 12:33 PM
http://themoment.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/canon_eos_rebel_t2i_3q.jpg
more...
dkoralek
Oct 24, 08:55 AM
And they delayed this update by 6-8 weeks for ... ?
Would/Should we have waited if we knew then what we know now and will know in the future ?
:(
Probably because they needed to wait for sufficient stocks of the faster merom chips (you don't see many of the 2.3GHz offerings from other manufacturers, either). Now I just have to decide if I want to lug a macpro across the pond or go for a 17" mbp.
cheers.
Would/Should we have waited if we knew then what we know now and will know in the future ?
:(
Probably because they needed to wait for sufficient stocks of the faster merom chips (you don't see many of the 2.3GHz offerings from other manufacturers, either). Now I just have to decide if I want to lug a macpro across the pond or go for a 17" mbp.
cheers.
more...
fcortese
Apr 11, 09:21 PM
No robins yet out here. Nice one Rowbear. From this past weekend:
http://img838.imageshack.us/img838/7043/elkpark2332011040912074.jpg
http://img838.imageshack.us/img838/7043/elkpark2332011040912074.jpg
Calbretto
May 3, 08:24 AM
Did Canadian prices actually go down? The 27-inch: 3.1GHz is only $1999, when I think it was $2099 before the refresh.
PghLondon
Apr 28, 11:11 AM
As a platform it seems iOS is getting whooped on.
Except it's not. iOS is on over 50% more devices than Android.
Want to try again?
Except it's not. iOS is on over 50% more devices than Android.
Want to try again?
BigReg
Jul 28, 10:16 AM
APPLE doesn't have much in a choice about keeping patents secret. We (the over-curious consumers) are the ones making all the hype for them.
This is where you are *very* uninformed and making assumptions. I work for a Fortune 100 company and I have a patent pending that is *not* visible in a search for patent applications. The only time they must become visible is when they are issued. In pending state, they very much *do* have a choice.
This is where you are *very* uninformed and making assumptions. I work for a Fortune 100 company and I have a patent pending that is *not* visible in a search for patent applications. The only time they must become visible is when they are issued. In pending state, they very much *do* have a choice.
komodrone
May 3, 11:55 PM
OR another reason: Apple decided to go verizon exclusive and ATT is shunned.
teesquared
Apr 26, 12:17 PM
Amazon charges its cloud service too. Why should Apple give anything away for free? :rolleyes:
amazon gives your first 5 gigs for free. i doubt apple will....
amazon gives your first 5 gigs for free. i doubt apple will....
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar