Slashdot Mirror

As every(?) other phone out there can have the simlock removed, I'd think so. However, every other phone needs that facility as they're sold on different networks and thsu can't put the simlock in hardware, so perhaps the iPhone is locked-down harder.

I doubt it'd be possible to make it faster, as it doesn't support 3G. I don't think the speed is a result of the network - it's the phone.

Perhaps this might help with the visual voicemail.

The Inquirer has an article about this.

Is it a commercial success? We shall see. The ME II tag looks like it's beginning to stick. Another new client OS in 2009 makes the comparison even more pointed. Testimonials like these can't help vista.

Because blogs are a way to reach audiences that are not reached through traditional marketing outlets

Yeah, because Apple has a real problem "reaching audiences." I mean, who ever heard of an iPod? They seem to think that TV commercials and word-of-mouth alone will sell the things.

they increase the amount of feedback you receive from your customers, and they provide a way to mine your user base for ideas.

If only there were some website where Apple could gather user opinions and feedback.

-- Brian Boyko
-- Professional Blogger.

It shows.

Well now that people have so kindly pointed out to me which AMP you're talking about... I should probably point to this Apple Tyco link I found. Apple and Tyco share board members. So the odds are fairly high that Tyco/AMP are going to go along with Apple's wishes as regards the dock connector.

Yes, but the MiniDisc division is releasing the Sony MZ-RH1 which will *finally* allow me to upload all the content from my big box of home recorded mini-discs. FINALLY.

Hooray for Sony !!

It's unlikely that their decision had anything to do with Virtual PC, but it's noteworthy that if Vista supported EFI, that'd probably be it for Virtual PC.

The next question is will Virtual PC come out for Intel-based Macs and how will it perform? So far, Microsoft has not committed to it:

Microsoft has issued a statement on the development status of Virtual PC for Intel-based Macs."The Mac BU recognizes the need for the product and believes it is the best virtualization solution for PowerPC users, so it is committed to providing Virtual PC to new and existing PowerPC customers. However, Microsoft is still discussing with Apple the feasibility of bringing Virtual PC for Mac to Intel-based Macs in the future and has not made any announcements about if/how the product might work on the new machines."

It'd be cool if there was a simple convention/architecture/method/whatever for booting to multiple OSs simultaneously so that each used some memory and CPU time and other resources were shared/swapped on the fly...

Saw this after I posted. Hmmm...so Eisner is stepping down this year, and two Disney board members including Roy have already openly said they want Jobs as CEO...

Anyhow, the market for downloadable music is much wider than just iPods and iTMS. All the non-iPod (read WMA) vendors have decided they want to exploit a different part of the market.

And are failing miserably at it precisely because Apple controls 90+% of the player market.

The only party that has a lock on RIAA music is ... say it with me ... the RIAA. (As a cartel it's in their best interest to keep that way.)

The difference is that the RIAA copyright cartel is legally mandated by the constitution and congress. Apple's monopoly is the result of market domination. It is generally understood that monopolies that arise from market domination are not beneficial for anyone but the monopoly holder. Whether the copyright monopoly is good or bad is irrelevant, it is unfortunately 100% legal.

I always wonder... if iPod users were clamoring for WMA would Apple add it?

Of course not, that's because Apple has a monopoly, they would not need to no matter how the ipod users "clamored." If they actually lost sales because of it, then that would mean they no longer hold an effective monopoly.

If Real and Napster wanted a piece of the iPod they would have ponied up. That was Real's decision. I'm sure you know that Real refused to license FairPlay (but they spin it as "Apple wouldn't let us have it" but leave out the words "cheaply enough that we would agree")

That is 100% demonstrably false - Apple refuses to license FairPlay. No matter how much pony they've got, it is not enough for Apple because they have a monopoly on the market and intend to keep it that way.

I'm surprised that no one else has yet mentioned Nine Inch Nails release of The Hand That Feeds in Garage Band format.

"There are some copyright issues involved, so read the notice that pops up. Giving this away is an experiment. I'm interested to see what comes of it, what issues are raised and what the results are."

Can't remember what the copyright notice said - I only tried it a couple of times. My mac was not really powerful enough for it to be much use but it was certainly an interesting idea.

An NDA only applies to the person who signs it. If Bob Smith signs an NDA and then runs to me and tells me what he saw, I am not civilly liable, Bob is. It's unlikely that anyone at this French web site signed an NDA, as they're a news site, not developers.

Maybe you're wrong.

The iPod flea is even smaller.

Also here

This + this = Longhorn.

Oh well, I guess Apple asked for it.

Just wondering out loud...does this release deliberately coincide with the release of the long-awaited NIN album With Teeth? Myself, I was up at 5:30 this morning downloading and burning it off iTunes.

Mr. Reznor did release The Hand That Feeds Garage Band tracks, a first, and a nice Apple marketing ploy to boot. Again, just wondering...

Also, this morning I realized that the only damn reason to keep Windows now that I've discovered Ubuntu is iTunes.

"Redmond, start your photocopiers" [coral]

Some links for the interested:

Introducing Longhorn.
Redmond, start your photocopiers.
This should keep Redmond busy.
Redmond, we have a problem.

Not only was it cute, it was a big "We'll always be one step ahead" from Apple.

Some links for the interested:

Introducing Longhorn.
Redmond, start your photocopiers.
This should keep Redmond busy.
Redmond, we have a problem.

Not only was it cute, it was a big "We'll always be one step ahead" from Apple.

Some links for the interested:

Introducing Longhorn.
Redmond, start your photocopiers.
This should keep Redmond busy.
Redmond, we have a problem.

Not only was it cute, it was a big "We'll always be one step ahead" from Apple.

Some links for the interested:

Introducing Longhorn.
Redmond, start your photocopiers.
This should keep Redmond busy.
Redmond, we have a problem.

Not only was it cute, it was a big "We'll always be one step ahead" from Apple.

October 26, 2004 - 16:54 EDT In addition to the iPod Photo and U2 iPod, Apple also introduced today a set of colored "socks" for carrying iPods. Packaged similar to real socks, the iPod Socks will come in six different color combinations (what appeared to be green, blue, grey, orange, pink, aqua) for US$29. While no information can be found on Apple's Web site, Apple CEO Steve Jobs said they will be available starting in mid-November

...as others in many other forums today have, there is, at least at present, absolutely no proof that Apple legal necessarily did anything here. By all accounts, it was a project by an individual Google engineer that a manager liked enough to display publicly via Google Labs. The creator himself said it was the result of "a fun late-night coding jaunt to help me learn Javascript and DHTML." After other Google managers, executives, or legal staff saw it, there is a distinct possibility that Google itself pulled it because of anything from concerns over possible infringement, to the product not being approved by by the proper authorities before public consumption, to internal disagreement about the rollout process to Google Labs.

To those who may be so inclined to immediately blame Apple, I would say: wait until any facts in this particular instance actually support that position.

Unless the entrails are yours :(

It's not a Dupe.
Slashdot is just implementing Story Redundancy and failover. That way, if one story crashes we will still be able to read the other.

Even better some places like MacMinute and MacNN are co-locating the story to provide further resistance to outages.

Not to reply again, but there's also things like this in K-12:

Georgia school district looking to get 63,000 iBooks

Also, the crowd is way too liberal for me.

Rush Limbaugh is a die-hard Macintosh fan. Doesn't that kind of average it out?

One: It's another proprietary crap-pile from Apple.

Two: You're forced to pay for MacOS X, when you'd rather just put your own Linux distro in for Free.

Three: It's $499. Considering items one and two, that's highway fucking robbery for vendor lock-in.

= 9J =

Yeah, it's kind of a bummer that we won't get this promo, but Pepsi Canada and Apple just finished with this one last month so I'm not too upset. Hmmm... I guess I'd be even less upset if I had actually won anything though.

How much did Creative pay you to write that ad?

Creative is scared out of their collective minds. Have you seen the giant piece of FUD the Creative CEO is trying to spread?

If Creative still *exists* in 18 months, I'll be surprised. Then where will your precious Zen users go for support? (Hint: they'll just buy an iPod if something goes wrong.)

Quite frankly, if this is a design that isn't "stuck in 2002", uh, I'll remain stuck in 2002 for as long as possible, thanks. It's really hard to go wrong with a piece of white/chrome computer gear. As someone else said, the souped-up ricer-dashboard motif gets old fast.

p

That's why they raised their price target on AAPL to $100 (and also why AAPL gained six bucks a share two days ago).

MacWorld UK has a related story today.

No matter how you look at it, if the "halo effect" is real, it's a Good Thing(tm) for Apple, and probably for the industry in general, because it proves that there are legitimate alternatives to Windows for the non-techie crowd.

p

Is it just me or would you take a 4% profit per machine instead of a 23% profit per machine on a deal like this if you were Apple? Which actually points out a small fact. Apple still makes an average of 12% on educational sales (even more if you factor in Applecare and service plans) I think if they are serious about enterprise and education, they'd take 3-4% profit. I also think that they don't realize how many of these workers would love them and buy them for home use.

Redmond, your photocopier has jammed.

Wired 12.03: The Complete Guide to Googlemania!
... The Complete Guide to Googlemania! (continued). 4 Scenarios for the Future of Google Sometimes a liquidity event changes everything. By Tom McNichol. ...

GooOS, the Google Operating System (kottke.org)
GooOS, the Google Operating System. He argues that Google is building a huge computer with a custom operating system that everyone on earth can have an account on. His last few paragraphs are so much more perceptive than anything that's been written about Google

Personalized Results: Exploring The Future Of Google ... Personalized Results: Exploring The Future Of Google.
msgraph Moderator view user profile joined-Nov 29, 2000 posts:1330 msg #:1, 7:29 pm on Feb 12, 2002 (utc 0). ...

MacMinute: The future of Google and Web searching?
* WWDC 2004: Discover how to put Mac OS X to work for you at WWDC! *. The future of Google and Web searching? March 31, 2004 - 07 ... www.macminute.com/2004/03/31/google - 29k -

and you know this (they make a profit) how?

Because they're still in business. Even if they make exactly zero profit, it still proves the "no profit on iTMS" idea to be a crock. Occam's razor, my friend.

...and most illegal activity sells "goods" below market. Why? Because it didn't cost them anything (or little) to get it ... which is what makes Apple's claim of "no profit" so pathetic. Let me restate it, since you seem to be having trouble understanding.

1. Apple charges 99c per song, 35c of which goes straight to Apple.

2. AllofMP3.com charges ~four cents per song. Even if 100% of that goes to them, without paying any royalties, they're still able to stay in business.

3. Therefore, if allofmp3.com is able to cover their expenses (cc processing, bandwidth, hosting, electricity, staff, etc) on FOUR CENTS PER SONG (which is the high estimate, assuming no royalties being paid out), then Apple's claim of making no profit taking in 35c per song is complete bullshit.

And look, Steve Jobs proves me right, in a private conference call.

If apple sold 200 million songs, that fits right in with the $70 million profit figure that Jobs himself mentions.

Of course, publicly, he has a completely different story. Publicly, he pretends that they make no profit on iTMS. It's great PR, it fits in great with Jobs' bullshit faux-hippie image, and it works--

*Because he knows Apple zealots are too sheepish to do their own research.

*Because anyone who contradicts the word of Jobs is shouted down, even if Jobs' statements are completely illogical

This whole "no profit on iTMS" line is just like his famous "$1 salary". That's a load of horseshit too. Because along with that $1 salary, he also receives $74.7 million in restricted stock; Apple also provides him a private jet, which he leases back to Apple for $1.2 million in two years

Hate Microsoft and Real all you want. Their products certainly aren't the best. But Bill Gates actually does good things with his ill-gotten gains. Jobs pathologically lies about what he takes in, then keeps it for himself.

when prices go back to $ 0.99 each I doubt that most people will stay with Real

But by then they'll be locked in to their drm system, unless they can find a way to move that music to another one. Of course this is true of ITMS as well, but at least they have the virtue of having the best interface with the widest selection.

There are two answers as to why Apple should be upset. The first is the long boring one about how Apple is maneuvering for a central position in online distibution of media of all kinds, which has been explored in some depth.

The second explanation (which should not be dismissed lightly) is that Real has been marketing crappy obnoxious invasive software for years, and their mac versions were doubly crappy and obnoxious, not to mention rarely being up-to-date. Despite these fundamental flaws their early lead in streaming video and audio entrenched them in the marketplace. Now that they are losing their advantage and dying as they should have long ago, they have decided to latch their crappy obnoxious invasive software and systems onto Apple's golden boy - the iPod - , whilst bad-mouthing Apple and the iTMS itself. Mac users have every reason to be pissed off. If you're wondering why you're seeing so much vitriol from the Apple rank-and-file, this is why.

In Jobs' letter he notes the type of pancreatic cancer you're referring to, and states that this is not it. Sure he'll likely be a little worse for wear, but I think we'll be stuck with Mr. Jobs for a while yet. Thankfully.

Anyway, now that he's alright and we can joke about it, whats the bet Jobs is just using this as an excuse to hole up for a month with a top-of-the-line PC and play Doom 3?

Here's a link to an article incuding his full letter

ahh, so you were refering to these tiger promotional ads? ;)

Gotta love 'em.

familiar.

No one can blame Apple for being a little prophetic.

--

Could someone please take a club and bash the ingorant iPod tech division to little pieces, since I and many like me, would pay huge sums for this support.

For the first time, Apple sold more iPods in a quarter than it did Macs--and Apple CEO Steve Jobs is happy about it. "We feel great," Jobs told the New York Times. "We sold a lot of Macs, but we've sold more iPods in the quarter than all the Macs put together." As reported by MacMinute Wednesday, Apple sold a record 807,000 iPods in the quarter, a more than 900 percent increase from the period a year earlier.
- MacMinute

basically we all know they're just copying apple once again. apple already saw it coming few weeks ago. check out the banners quite funny.

I love trolls like you...

It's HARD to upgrade when you want to add a little more zip to the machine.

What, exactly, would you want to upgrade? RAM? I think it's easier to install RAM on an iMac or eMac than on a PC. I don't have to take the case off my Mac and fumble through ribbon cables to get to my RAM slots, just take the cover off the bottom.

If something goes wrong (and yes, even Macs go wrong from time to time), my folks won't have a bunch of friends around the corner who know exactly how to fix that problem, or a friend with a CD crammed full of useful little fixer applications.

I don't want a friend around the corner who "knows computers" to come fix mine. I'd rather have Apple's phone support do it. And considering that Apple has the best support, says Consumer Reports, i'm even more comfortable with them.

At the end of the day, I just don't see how a Mac can be any less prone to attacks than a PC with Zonealarm, AVG Anti Virus, Firefox and Thunderbird installed.

Because I don't *want* to have to install ZoneAlarm, AVG, FireFox and Thunderbird? Don't forget Ad-Aware and Windows Update every week!

I love the fact that I can regularly install little upgrades and bleeding edge software onto my Linux box.

And you can't do that on a Mac?

I love the fact that I can check out the code and see exactly what makes it tick.

Apple has open-sourced it's core OS, not to mention that any UNIX-based apps you have can be installed as well, straight from the tarball.

I love the fact that if I pay for any of this, it is usually through choice, and a project's little Paypal tip jar. I love the fact that the money I pay is going directly to the developers that write the applications that improve my life, rather than to a company that holds one hand with the RIAA behind it's back

Just had to get that shot across the bow, right? Well, Apple isn't the only company doing a Music Store, and they're not the only ones who had to deal with the RIAA and license fees. Apple has stated that the artist does get a chunk of money for songs sold.

...and in all likelihood, would spend the majority of the cash on developing some nice new injection moulding techniques for the cases, rather than REALLY innovative software (yes yes I know about iTunes - but innovative SOFTWARE rather than just a shiny new UI would be nice. I've been able to play MP3s since before 1995 on my PC)

Wow, you *really* haven't used a Mac. I can only begin to list the innovative apps that Apple's created: iMovie, iPhoto, iDVD, Final Cut Pro, all the way down to iCal, Address Book, Safari and Mail. Each of these apps has so many features that make it more than just your basic app.

And I smile when I see that Linux desktop share is projected to overtake Apple's within a couple of years.

Aww, that's cute. Too bad people like your mom and pop won't be those people switching to Linux, they'll be too busy installing FireFox and AVG on their PCs.

To be honest, I feel that for Apple to succeed, they need to learn how to cut the elitist attitude.

The elitist attitude comes from knowing exactly what the customer wants then developing a product to fit that need. Example: iPod!

Stop producing overpriced machines in funky colored perspex!

eMacs start at $799. Find me a $800 PC with a 17" CRT, USB 2, FireWire, Combo Drive and video editing software, then I shall bow down to you. SuperDrive eMacs start at $1,000, so find me a $1,000 with a DVD-R/CD-RW. Oh yeah, Apple hasn't done colored computers in a while. so you might want to get a new MacMall catalog that's not from 2000.

Stop loading your desktop PC equivalents with a million and one interfaces that the average Joe will never use.

Okay, so it's been tough, but you've finally managed to stop yourself from taking Dell up on its kind offer to crush your iPod into a thin paste in exchange for $100 off one of its own stellar music players. Good for you. Only now you're finding yourself tempted by those new players that Sony introduced yesterday-- in particular the NW-HD1 Network Walkman. As faithful viewer Mike Scherer pointed out, MacMinute reports that the NW-HD1 (catchy name) has a 20 GB hard drive, but weighs only 4 ounces-- almost thirty percent less than a 20 GB iPod, and only about half an ounce more than a miniPod with a mere 4 GB storage capacity. Trust us, size does matter, as through-the-roof miniPod sales will attest; Dell's player is a clunky slab by comparison, and when we had the misfortune to encounter a 40 GB Nomad Zen last weekend, we mistook the thing for a brick wrapped in tin foil.

Oh, but the temptation doesn't stop at size; whereas the iPod claims 8 hours of use per battery charge, the NW-HD1 boasts 30. What's more, since a 20 GB iPod goes for $399 and Sony's minuscule new player will sell for "less than $400", pricing will likely be a dead heat. So let's recap, here; for the same price as an iPod, Sony offers a smaller and lighter player with gallons more juice per charge, the same size hard disk, and-- did we mention this?-- the ability to store 8,000 more songs. Really! See? Apple claims its 20 GB iPod will put 5,000 songs in your pocket, while Sony's press release insists that the NW-HD1 will hold "up to 13,000 four-minute songs." No wonder you're feeling tempted.

Well, it's cold shower time, kiddies. First of all, any sort of song capacity comparison is a joke, since a 20 GB hard drive is a 20 GB hard drive. Sony's drives aren't enchanted by a dusting of magical pixie dust before leaving the factory or anything. (At least, if they are, you'd expect Sony to play that up as a differentiating factor.) The difference in numbers here is that Apple bases its song count on 128 Kbps AAC files, while Sony's tally assumes "songs recorded at 48 kilobits per second." Yes, 48 Kbps. Considering how many people whine that even 128 Kbps AAC files don't sound good enough, we're going to go out on a limb and assume that 48 Kbps songs in any format are probably going to sound like a portable handheld AM radio playing from the bottom of a well while a few dozen people pop bubble wrap nearby.

And here's the real deal-breaker: about that format? Turns out that Sony's decided to go with its proprietary ATRAC3 format... and nothing else. While Apple pushes AAC pretty heavily (it's the only thing it sells at the iTunes Music Store), at least the iPod can also play AIFF files, WAVs, the new Apple Lossless format, and probably most importantly of all, good ol' MP3s. If you get an NW-HD1, though, you'll have to transcode your entire music library into ATRAC3 before you can carry it around with you, and believe us when we tell you that you're not going to want to do that.

See, aside from the time you'd have to invest, there's the little matter of the fact that, quality-wise, the ATRAC3 format apparently sucks eggs whole through a Crazy Straw. For evidence, we point you towards the results of Roberto Amorim's l

This guy is going to be pissed when he finds out about this.

Currently its 'iPod for BMW' (.com), but surely the generic variety will follow.

they also said the talks with the indies had just begun. same thing happened in the USA. i think it was mostly because of the legal issues. they need the big labels onboard to make the store look valid. the indies were offered "the same deal as the majors" and can choose if they want to sign on. it might also have had a little to do with keeping it under wraps till it was really ready. with so many indies, it would have been easy for info to leak out and we know how Apple hates that.

Good news! Steve Jobs said today that iTunes would be in Europe "later this year".

Well the results are in and between Apple's Press release and the Steve Jobs conference call there are many numbers to consider.

140,000,000 - Annualized song sales at current rate
100,000,000 - Number of songs projected to be sold in 1st year
70,000,000 - Number of songs sold the first 365 days of the service
2,700,000 - Current rate of songs sold per week
1,000,000 - Number of songs available by the end of 2004
700,000 - Number of songs available now (5/04)
450 - Number of indy publishers with music on-line
10 - Previously allowable identical CD burns
7 - Currently allowable identical CD burns
5 - Current number of authorized PCs and/or Macs
3 - Previous number of authorized PCs and/or Macs
70% - Market share of iTMS digital music sales
5% - Market share of Apple desktop/laptop/server sales
0 - Number of more successful on-line music services

According to this article, you usually find drives shipping a few months after engineering samples become available. First to computer makers, and then retail.

Since samples will ship in May, I would expect to see them bundled with new systems around August/September, and available retail before the end of the year.

I've seen the latest version. The aliens always have a distracted look that gives them away.

The iTMS has produced a small profit this quarter, according to this.

1. Not allowing a person to upgrade a DVD/CD drive to a Superdrive. I bought my PowerMac two months before the superdrive was released. I get to use stupid DVD-RAM disks, but I can't burn DVD's unless I buy a whole new computer.

Or you could just buy an superiour quality DVD recorder from a third-party. Unlike Microsoft, Apple allows you to use all standards-compliant hardware with their DVD burning software.

2. Apple keeps its iSync API locked up. There are millions of really cool things I could do to make Apple able to synchronize with things like LDAP servers, competing browsers, PC's, etc. But then Apple could use it as a leverage-point to keep people subscribing to the overpriced .Mac program.

Funny that you mention LDAP; Apple supports LDAP in its acclaimed Mail application, so you don't need to write so much as a speck of code to enable it. Getting LDAP support to work is easy as pie.

I don't subscribe to .Mac, yet I can still use every iApp with ease. Perhaps Joe Sixpack needs his hand held, but I don't.

3. USB video cameras, like the ubiquitous Logitech QuickCam, just don't work (well) and Apple seems to have put blocks into place to refuse iChat AV from working with anything but their iSight hardware product. (I exaggerate a little bit here, but not much.)

Such is the price of progress. Face it: USB cameras simply don't have the throughput to push television-quality video the likes of which iChat AV with Pixlet can support. Would you take vacation photos with a so-called "camera phone"? I know I wouldn't. My wife and children enjoy seeing me using iSight: it's a high-quality multivisual experience. Sorry that your piece-of-junk QuickCam won't work with it.