bad03xtreme
Apr 4, 12:12 PM
Good for the guard darwinism at it's best.
cmaier
Nov 13, 04:09 PM
I believe you are mistaken. As far as I know, there is no risk of losing a copyright if you failed to defend against previous infringers. If I were to guess, I think you are talking about trademark law, which is different.
There are many classic examples, but currently Adobe has a policy where it seeks to prevent people from using "Photoshop" in a generalized way, since if it solidly becomes a synonym for digital photo manipulation in the language, they will lose their trademark. If Adobe is shown to not go after those who use Photoshop in a generalized manner, in the future they will be less able to defend against it in the future.
As far as I know, this has no relevancy to the current situation, since we are talking about copyright, not trademarks.
You are correct.
While I don't defend Apple here, to be fair they do have a trademark/tradedress argument. The issue is whether or not the images of the macs would confuse someone as to the source of the software (i.e.: they would think it's Apple software). Aside from the fact that this is unlikely, referential use of trademarks is ok. For example, if you were to write a book about the New York Giants, a trademarked term, you probably wouldn't have to call it the "New York National Football Conference football club." Here, I think the use of the icons is clearly referential, and no different than if the icon was replaced by text like "Cliff's Macbook Pro" (which also includes trademarked terms).
There are many classic examples, but currently Adobe has a policy where it seeks to prevent people from using "Photoshop" in a generalized way, since if it solidly becomes a synonym for digital photo manipulation in the language, they will lose their trademark. If Adobe is shown to not go after those who use Photoshop in a generalized manner, in the future they will be less able to defend against it in the future.
As far as I know, this has no relevancy to the current situation, since we are talking about copyright, not trademarks.
You are correct.
While I don't defend Apple here, to be fair they do have a trademark/tradedress argument. The issue is whether or not the images of the macs would confuse someone as to the source of the software (i.e.: they would think it's Apple software). Aside from the fact that this is unlikely, referential use of trademarks is ok. For example, if you were to write a book about the New York Giants, a trademarked term, you probably wouldn't have to call it the "New York National Football Conference football club." Here, I think the use of the icons is clearly referential, and no different than if the icon was replaced by text like "Cliff's Macbook Pro" (which also includes trademarked terms).
Silentwave
Jul 17, 06:23 PM
I'd bet it all that the iMac gets an Allendale with maybe a Conroe top-end option.
That makes sense, it offers some product differentiation, and saves Apple a few pennies allowing them to offer a lower priced consumer desktop. Mac Pros will likely get at least one Woodcrest dualie model on the top end and perhaps a Conroe on the bottom but it is entirely possible that it will be Woodcrest across the board, to achieve economies of scale both in purchase power and motherboard engineering.
I'd actually say they'd be more likely to go straight Conroe, TDP is the same, has speedstep so it throttles back, and the Conroe has a bigger L2 Cache- just like the Meroms that would be most likely for the iMac.
Could someone answer me this, who actually understands the Core Microarchitecture. Is the Conroe extreme edition (2.93 GHz) a better high end gaming chip than a quad woodcrest setup, say at 2.66 GHz? I've heard more than a couple comments that the Conroe is better suited for gamers than a Woodcrest but this makes no sense to me. Again please, no fanboy speculators answering this, I'd really like to know the rationale using some expert technological analysis. What makes the conroe EE so expensive? At a higher cost than the 3.0 GHz Woodcrest, it must excel in some regard.
Well, the main thing here is its a desktop chip not a server/workstation chip. Woodcrest is the same microarchitecture and all that. Just a 1333 FSB and slightly different clocks. The woodcrest's additional costs however would be a totally different MB/Chipset, and FB-DIMM RAM.
I suppose it may depend on how the game is written to take advantage of the cores.
That makes sense, it offers some product differentiation, and saves Apple a few pennies allowing them to offer a lower priced consumer desktop. Mac Pros will likely get at least one Woodcrest dualie model on the top end and perhaps a Conroe on the bottom but it is entirely possible that it will be Woodcrest across the board, to achieve economies of scale both in purchase power and motherboard engineering.
I'd actually say they'd be more likely to go straight Conroe, TDP is the same, has speedstep so it throttles back, and the Conroe has a bigger L2 Cache- just like the Meroms that would be most likely for the iMac.
Could someone answer me this, who actually understands the Core Microarchitecture. Is the Conroe extreme edition (2.93 GHz) a better high end gaming chip than a quad woodcrest setup, say at 2.66 GHz? I've heard more than a couple comments that the Conroe is better suited for gamers than a Woodcrest but this makes no sense to me. Again please, no fanboy speculators answering this, I'd really like to know the rationale using some expert technological analysis. What makes the conroe EE so expensive? At a higher cost than the 3.0 GHz Woodcrest, it must excel in some regard.
Well, the main thing here is its a desktop chip not a server/workstation chip. Woodcrest is the same microarchitecture and all that. Just a 1333 FSB and slightly different clocks. The woodcrest's additional costs however would be a totally different MB/Chipset, and FB-DIMM RAM.
I suppose it may depend on how the game is written to take advantage of the cores.
Kardashian
Sep 12, 02:11 PM
I hope Apple releases an iPod software update so those of us who already own 5th generation iPods can take advantage of all these new features.
Exactly what I'm hoping.. I bought my 5G like 3 weeks ago, the only real difference is the software, I don't use videos enough to notice the brighter screen.
Exactly what I'm hoping.. I bought my 5G like 3 weeks ago, the only real difference is the software, I don't use videos enough to notice the brighter screen.
johnparjr
Mar 23, 04:26 PM
I am not sure about other states, but in CA, Law Enforcement is specifically required to announce DUI checkpoints and provide an alternative route. Asking to have these applications removed from app stores contradicts the law regarding DUI checkpoints. Gotta love Politicians. Write a law then contradict it. Awesome.
Yep In CA they have to post the time and locations in the newspaper or on the Police Dept website so pulling the App is a waste of time here.
Yep In CA they have to post the time and locations in the newspaper or on the Police Dept website so pulling the App is a waste of time here.
Detlev
Oct 27, 09:10 PM
So all Greenpeace did was hand out leaflets in areas other than their stand...
Heck, every trade show I ever go to has girls with their tits half hanging out wondering the halls handing out leaflets nowhere near their particular stand.
Yes, when you are a vendor at a show there are strict rules. It's in the contract. If you purchase a booth you have to stay in that booth, period. Booths are available on first come first serve basis usually with returning vendors getting the right of first refusal for booths they have held previously. The ends and large booths near foot traffic are more expensive and they command a higher price. Some shows, fewer today than before, allow for "cigarette girls" or "strollers" but the vendor pays for this as they would for any other perks�and they are not cheap. They are generally given a specific time period in which they may walk the floor (if in costume they need a chaperone). They are not allowed to transact business but hand out "freebies". According to the story Greenpeace only signed up for a booth. All contracts I have seen say you'll get thrown out if you don't obey the rules.
Heck, every trade show I ever go to has girls with their tits half hanging out wondering the halls handing out leaflets nowhere near their particular stand.
Yes, when you are a vendor at a show there are strict rules. It's in the contract. If you purchase a booth you have to stay in that booth, period. Booths are available on first come first serve basis usually with returning vendors getting the right of first refusal for booths they have held previously. The ends and large booths near foot traffic are more expensive and they command a higher price. Some shows, fewer today than before, allow for "cigarette girls" or "strollers" but the vendor pays for this as they would for any other perks�and they are not cheap. They are generally given a specific time period in which they may walk the floor (if in costume they need a chaperone). They are not allowed to transact business but hand out "freebies". According to the story Greenpeace only signed up for a booth. All contracts I have seen say you'll get thrown out if you don't obey the rules.
iDisk
Mar 23, 04:25 PM
I actually agree. Pull 'em. It may be censorship, but it's dangerous not to.
Im in agreement with this.
Remove them from the App Store.
It might be illegal etc.. but we must draw the line somewhere.
Pull them Apple. I'm honestly surprised they were allowed in the first place...
Personally I find it hard to believe that so drunk as to warrant avoiding a checkpoint will be collected enough to use the app effectively in the first place.
Do a poll macrumors.... Us 6 want them pulled Now!!... the others not quoted want them to stay on the App Store for no real good or beneficial reason
Im in agreement with this.
Remove them from the App Store.
It might be illegal etc.. but we must draw the line somewhere.
Pull them Apple. I'm honestly surprised they were allowed in the first place...
Personally I find it hard to believe that so drunk as to warrant avoiding a checkpoint will be collected enough to use the app effectively in the first place.
Do a poll macrumors.... Us 6 want them pulled Now!!... the others not quoted want them to stay on the App Store for no real good or beneficial reason
Sol
Sep 9, 01:57 AM
Did a certain platform jumping red-cap wearing Italian plumber write the headline?
Mama mia! iMac Core 2 Duo Benchamarks!
Mama mia! iMac Core 2 Duo Benchamarks!
vd0t
Sep 9, 11:19 AM
Is one of the 512MB RAM on the iMac soldered on?? :confused:
Mainyehc
Aug 31, 07:00 PM
My crazy/he's hitting the rock again call of the day would be that on the 12th, Steve shocks the world with a redefinition of the whole mobile phone experience. Announcing the new iPod phone.
Where's my pipe?
Hey, you may be on to something there... I was about to buy a Nokia 1100 for €25 (w00t! :D ), but I think I'll just postpone that purchase. I'd gladly get rid of my 1GB Shuffle, as I already carry my cell phone with me at all times (yes, I take both with me even to the beach!).
The only downside to having an Apple cell phone is that it would attract muggers too much for my taste... But hey, I already carry my 60GB 5G iPod with me frequently, and besides, I wouldn't throw away my craptacular vintage Siemens A52 anyway (it could still serve me as a backup for nightlife ;) ).
Yeah, you could say that sometimes, I'm a sucker for monochrome stuff. If it wasn't for its meager HD, I'd have kept my oh-so-gorgeous 20GB 3G iPod with its 12pt Chicago typeface :) . And both the classic Nokia's and Siemens' interfaces, while not as intuitive as most of Apple's stuff, are not that shabby either...
Where's my pipe?
Hey, you may be on to something there... I was about to buy a Nokia 1100 for €25 (w00t! :D ), but I think I'll just postpone that purchase. I'd gladly get rid of my 1GB Shuffle, as I already carry my cell phone with me at all times (yes, I take both with me even to the beach!).
The only downside to having an Apple cell phone is that it would attract muggers too much for my taste... But hey, I already carry my 60GB 5G iPod with me frequently, and besides, I wouldn't throw away my craptacular vintage Siemens A52 anyway (it could still serve me as a backup for nightlife ;) ).
Yeah, you could say that sometimes, I'm a sucker for monochrome stuff. If it wasn't for its meager HD, I'd have kept my oh-so-gorgeous 20GB 3G iPod with its 12pt Chicago typeface :) . And both the classic Nokia's and Siemens' interfaces, while not as intuitive as most of Apple's stuff, are not that shabby either...
prady16
Sep 5, 01:50 PM
I expect upgrades to the laptops, iMac, and Mini. Also, there is a good chance of introducing either a iPhone or a iHome.
iTunes Movie Store is certain, although it would be interesting to note how apple goes about selling movies (like the resolution, download times, pricing etc.)
iTunes Movie Store is certain, although it would be interesting to note how apple goes about selling movies (like the resolution, download times, pricing etc.)
bubbalwz
Sep 12, 02:47 PM
Kind of a huge gap, don'cha think? For an extra $100 I can nearly TRIPLE the capacity? Why would I even consider a 30 GB model?
Shoulda been 60gb and 80gb like originally reported on some outlets. I could actually see myself buying the cheaper one then.
Shoulda been 60gb and 80gb like originally reported on some outlets. I could actually see myself buying the cheaper one then.
kedar
Sep 14, 11:45 AM
Hmmm, an Aperture update would be cool. I wonder if they would make any financial "concessions" to people who have recently purchased Aperture... :o
I have just received two copies of Aperture - what is Apple's policy on this - do I just have to go and buy upgrade two weeks later. :(
I have just received two copies of Aperture - what is Apple's policy on this - do I just have to go and buy upgrade two weeks later. :(
brepublican
Sep 19, 03:54 PM
If it destroys their whole business model, then it is not dumb to not "try it out".
Apple is clearly not interested in the subscription or rental business models.
edit: Clarity
How does it destroy 'their whole business model'? I just think there has to be differentiation between movies and songs. Wheras I have no interest whatsoever (and never will) in renting songs (read: subscription model), I do have an interest in renting movies. I can listen to the same song 10 times over in one day. Can I do the same with a movie? Yes. Will I? No.
I can count the number of movies I've watched more than twice on both my hands. So can a lot of people out there. If you're really interested in being a collector and keeping the movie, downloading it off iTMS is a dumb idea.
So is it dumb for Apple to ignore a market of people such as myself? Yes. Does it destroy their business model to offer movie rentals (NOT TV shows or music)? You explain that to me :confused:
Apple is clearly not interested in the subscription or rental business models.
edit: Clarity
How does it destroy 'their whole business model'? I just think there has to be differentiation between movies and songs. Wheras I have no interest whatsoever (and never will) in renting songs (read: subscription model), I do have an interest in renting movies. I can listen to the same song 10 times over in one day. Can I do the same with a movie? Yes. Will I? No.
I can count the number of movies I've watched more than twice on both my hands. So can a lot of people out there. If you're really interested in being a collector and keeping the movie, downloading it off iTMS is a dumb idea.
So is it dumb for Apple to ignore a market of people such as myself? Yes. Does it destroy their business model to offer movie rentals (NOT TV shows or music)? You explain that to me :confused:
chameleon
Mar 29, 12:35 PM
I'm not even sure anyone at Apple really cares about these numbers because we're talking about dozens of handsets using those OS's vs a single phone on iOS.
No, the reason Apple doesn't care is this:
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/02/02/apples_iphone_extends_lead_in_mobile_profits.html
Their "one phone" makes more profit that all the variations of Android, Windows Phone and BlackBerries combined.
No, the reason Apple doesn't care is this:
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/02/02/apples_iphone_extends_lead_in_mobile_profits.html
Their "one phone" makes more profit that all the variations of Android, Windows Phone and BlackBerries combined.
brepublican
Sep 19, 03:54 PM
If it destroys their whole business model, then it is not dumb to not "try it out".
Apple is clearly not interested in the subscription or rental business models.
edit: Clarity
How does it destroy 'their whole business model'? I just think there has to be differentiation between movies and songs. Wheras I have no interest whatsoever (and never will) in renting songs (read: subscription model), I do have an interest in renting movies. I can listen to the same song 10 times over in one day. Can I do the same with a movie? Yes. Will I? No.
I can count the number of movies I've watched more than twice on both my hands. So can a lot of people out there. If you're really interested in being a collector and keeping the movie, downloading it off iTMS is a dumb idea.
So is it dumb for Apple to ignore a market of people such as myself? Yes. Does it destroy their business model to offer movie rentals (NOT TV shows or music)? You explain that to me :confused:
Apple is clearly not interested in the subscription or rental business models.
edit: Clarity
How does it destroy 'their whole business model'? I just think there has to be differentiation between movies and songs. Wheras I have no interest whatsoever (and never will) in renting songs (read: subscription model), I do have an interest in renting movies. I can listen to the same song 10 times over in one day. Can I do the same with a movie? Yes. Will I? No.
I can count the number of movies I've watched more than twice on both my hands. So can a lot of people out there. If you're really interested in being a collector and keeping the movie, downloading it off iTMS is a dumb idea.
So is it dumb for Apple to ignore a market of people such as myself? Yes. Does it destroy their business model to offer movie rentals (NOT TV shows or music)? You explain that to me :confused:
aegisdesign
Sep 10, 05:09 PM
And that's one of the reasons I don't like all in ones, I dont like throwing away display no matter what the size. My last CRT lasted me about 6 years and I had an old apple 14" monitor that was still working after 10 years! Now that's getting value out of your components! :D
Do you really want to use a monitor from 10 years ago in everyday use? Not likely. I've a 15" CRT from about a decade ago too but it's sitting on a shelf as a spare in case my newer monitor dies.
Most times I've bought a new computer, I've also bought a new monitor. A widescreen 17" monitor back when I bought my iMac was extortionately expensive. I generally figure on spending about �15-1800 every three years on a computer and about 5-6 years of useful life. It's been going up from a G3 iBook to a 17" G5 Mac to a fully kitted out 24" iMac for that money. I can't imagine what it will be in 3 - 6 years time but I guess it'll make a 24" iMac feel just as obsolete as the 500Mhz G3 iBook with a 1024x768 screen feels.
I have to conclude that people who want to use their 10 year old CRT are just incredibly cheap and don't value their screens as much as being able to claim how fast their CPU is. I've been programming for 20+ years professionally and your screen isn't something to skimp on. It's THE most important thing if you value your eyes.
Do you really want to use a monitor from 10 years ago in everyday use? Not likely. I've a 15" CRT from about a decade ago too but it's sitting on a shelf as a spare in case my newer monitor dies.
Most times I've bought a new computer, I've also bought a new monitor. A widescreen 17" monitor back when I bought my iMac was extortionately expensive. I generally figure on spending about �15-1800 every three years on a computer and about 5-6 years of useful life. It's been going up from a G3 iBook to a 17" G5 Mac to a fully kitted out 24" iMac for that money. I can't imagine what it will be in 3 - 6 years time but I guess it'll make a 24" iMac feel just as obsolete as the 500Mhz G3 iBook with a 1024x768 screen feels.
I have to conclude that people who want to use their 10 year old CRT are just incredibly cheap and don't value their screens as much as being able to claim how fast their CPU is. I've been programming for 20+ years professionally and your screen isn't something to skimp on. It's THE most important thing if you value your eyes.
hayesk
May 3, 07:13 PM
I think I covered enough :)
What you've covered is a mishmash of things that Apple did and tried to infer it was because of the iPhone. When in reality, not much except the bringing of some iOS features back into MacOS X (which I agree with even if I won't use them all) has anything to do with the iPhone.
What you've covered is a mishmash of things that Apple did and tried to infer it was because of the iPhone. When in reality, not much except the bringing of some iOS features back into MacOS X (which I agree with even if I won't use them all) has anything to do with the iPhone.
Penfold2711
Apr 11, 05:37 AM
You can bet they are working on a new Firmware/Update to close this loophole Ole Stevie boy will not be a happy bunny today
SockRolid
Mar 29, 01:16 PM
Oracle's lawsuit against Google is airtight. Android's use of a non-compliant virtual machine (the Dalvik VM) is a clear violation of the Java license agreement. And there's legal precedent: Microsoft paid Sun $20 million back in 2001 when Sun successfully sued them for trying to "embrace, extend, and extinguish" Java.
Google will lose the lawsuit. And nobody has ever accused Larry Ellison of being Mr. Nice Guy. He doesn't want money this time. He wants to protect the intellectual property Oracle acquired from Sun. He wants all copies of Android to be "impounded and destroyed" (a direct quote from text of the suit.) Because if Google is allowed to plagiarize and distort Java, others will follow. Ellison is making an example of Google, and it's going to be a law school textbook IP case study for the ages.
Soon Android will be off the market while Google is forced to retool their JVM to be 100% Java compliant. Google is already scrambling to get rid of their non-compliant Dalvik VM. They actually hired James Gosling, the "inventor" of Java, so they've got religion now.
And, although money isn't the motivating factor behind the Oracle lawsuit, it is a factor nonetheless. Google will end up paying Oracle a license fee for each and every generic me-too Android iPhone clone and iPad clone that their hardware partners can mash up. And that erases Android's only advantage over WP7. Android will no longer be free.
So, when Android is off the market, Nokia's WP7 phones will have a chance to avoid becoming KIN 2.0. There will be a window of opportunity for Nokia and Microsoft to build up a little market share. Some corporations and consumers will buy Nokia WP7 phones just because Nokia and Microsoft are "too big to die." (And just when Google thinks it's safe, when they've implemented a 100% compliant JVM, Apple can sue them for GUI patent infringement. But that's another story...)
In the meantime, both WP7 and Nokia will have zero market presence. For all of 2011 and part of 2012. That's an eternity.
Google will lose the lawsuit. And nobody has ever accused Larry Ellison of being Mr. Nice Guy. He doesn't want money this time. He wants to protect the intellectual property Oracle acquired from Sun. He wants all copies of Android to be "impounded and destroyed" (a direct quote from text of the suit.) Because if Google is allowed to plagiarize and distort Java, others will follow. Ellison is making an example of Google, and it's going to be a law school textbook IP case study for the ages.
Soon Android will be off the market while Google is forced to retool their JVM to be 100% Java compliant. Google is already scrambling to get rid of their non-compliant Dalvik VM. They actually hired James Gosling, the "inventor" of Java, so they've got religion now.
And, although money isn't the motivating factor behind the Oracle lawsuit, it is a factor nonetheless. Google will end up paying Oracle a license fee for each and every generic me-too Android iPhone clone and iPad clone that their hardware partners can mash up. And that erases Android's only advantage over WP7. Android will no longer be free.
So, when Android is off the market, Nokia's WP7 phones will have a chance to avoid becoming KIN 2.0. There will be a window of opportunity for Nokia and Microsoft to build up a little market share. Some corporations and consumers will buy Nokia WP7 phones just because Nokia and Microsoft are "too big to die." (And just when Google thinks it's safe, when they've implemented a 100% compliant JVM, Apple can sue them for GUI patent infringement. But that's another story...)
In the meantime, both WP7 and Nokia will have zero market presence. For all of 2011 and part of 2012. That's an eternity.
addicted44
Apr 25, 01:03 PM
Hilarious to all those people who jumped on the THUNDERBOLT bandwagon. No thunderbolt devices yet and they have the hideous old case design.
:rolleyes:
Hideous? Really?
I am guessing this is the kind of laptop you admire for its beautiful case design, right?
http://www.gearfuse.com/a-rugged-dell-laptop-john-connor-would-use/
:rolleyes:
Hideous? Really?
I am guessing this is the kind of laptop you admire for its beautiful case design, right?
http://www.gearfuse.com/a-rugged-dell-laptop-john-connor-would-use/
Joshuarocks
Apr 19, 11:00 PM
That would leave an awful lot of parents dead.
I don't mean the parents, I meant those who run McDonalds.
I don't mean the parents, I meant those who run McDonalds.
Kufat
Sep 12, 02:32 PM
Updated my 5G iPod to 1.2, loaded Quadrophenia, and yes, there is FINALLY gapless. :D
chukronos
Sep 16, 08:38 PM
I am not sure if it is a smart move for apple to enter into the cell phone market. There is a lot of competition and I think resources could be used better elsewhere. But it seems Apple knows a lot more about it than me.