Slashdot Mirror

According to a story on MacObserver, Apple is offering a limited time offer (expires May 31, 2005) to save $38 off the retail price of Tiger, iLife '05, and iWork by bundling the products for $249.

The offer is only available directly from Apple.

Cute try, but you haven't seemed to figure out the difference between marketing specs and actual tests. Yes, marketing says they should last about 500 cycles so heavy users should generally get about 2-3 years out of them. (Obviously some people will get more.) But the reality is that many people have much less actual time with them and have even sued over it.

As for the total hours, sure some people can get up to 12 hours (often only in the first year) on the generation 4 and 5, but if you read some of the above you'll see some as low as 4-5 hours, and often 8 hours is a typical normal accomplishment. You'll even notice some of the above links report the iPod mini is supposed to get 12 hours but testing suggests it only gets about 7 hours.

We can argue about actual numbers and conditions like crazy, but the point is that real people are getting less than the marketing suggests and a good number have general battery problems.

As far as replacement, yes, you can crack it open yourself using 3rd party battery sources, but a proper battery replacement (they aren't made to be opened) costs $99 from Apple (see above link).

Even more importantly, the actual dollar and length of life is not really the main issue. The point is that iPods have battery problems. It's easy to find all over the internet. While this isn't a big problem with some people, it certainly means that not only "dumbfucks" (as the grandparent post said) have objections to the iPods and there are legitimate reasons to believe that they aren't the best.

It is immensly more funny and interesting that Forbes.com fell for an April Fools joke from The Mac Observer :D

Sue fan sites

Tried to use the DMCA to remove content from source forge

Promise upgrades but never follow through(ibook,performa)

Use DRM to lock product(itunes) to device(ipod) and threaten to use the DMCA to protect the lock in

Reciever of numerous customer lawsuits from selling used products as new, and to lie about about the battery life on ipods

For a company with only less than 3% market share, they sure seem to get sued a lot for shoddy products or unethical business behavior.

And this post will probably last 5 minutes before apple fanboys troll, or flamebait it even though i just posted facts.

Apple filed for a patent covering Spotlight back in January 2000 , which was awarded this year.

Apple didn't copy Longhorn at all.

Apple Spotlight Patent Reveals 3-Year Head Start on Microsoft

Apple Spotlight patent predates Microsoft's Longhorn announcement by three years

You reminded me of an old apple rumor I saw almost 2 years ago. It sounds insanely uncomfortable to me...but you are not that far off from what might have been:

Patent: Mouse having a rotary dial

Mac Observer article with images

If I had a dollar for every windows box at Pixar and Lucasfilm, plus 50 cents for every windows box at professional editing houses in NY and LA, I'd have about $4.50.

Film and TV professionals like Apple, trust Apple, and they use Apple.

From the Mac Observer's August 2004 article "Apple Making Inroads Into Film Editing; Avid Remains King":

...Tim Wilson, senior product marketing manager at Avid Technology, told The Mac Observer that Avid's customers work at every level of video and film production, from education to Hollywood, where Avid is by far the industry's leading solution.

"Over 80 percent of commercials, 85 percent of primetime television and 90 percent of feature films are edited with Avid systems," Mr. Wilson said. "This industry presence is a large part of Avid's success in education, as educators strive to teach their students Avid systems to prepare them for success as they pursue jobs at the industry's highest levels."

Not sure where you got the idea they were using Shake. Lowry Digital did the restoration, and while Macs were used, it was done with proprietory software.

The Mac Mini's ridiculously small case design is only possible because of the low power consumption of the PPC74xx/G4.
Even companies other than Apple have done similar things with the G4 a loong time ago, does anyone here remember the YellowDog Linux Briq
This is not just an x86 issue, even Apple will have a hard time putting a G5 in it's current Mac Mini Case.
Its the result of deeply pipelined processor designs. More latches, more stuff to clock, more power consumption and heat dissapation.
Ah, the good old days of 4 stage processors.
Fetch, decode, execute, commit/writeback. That was it.

My claims? Considering Apple uses RTSP for it's Quicktime streaming it would only make sense for them to use the thing they know for their other products. Any more proof? Shall I telnet to port 554 on my Airport Express and show you the RTSP signature? How about a Apple Press Release in which they updated RTSP in the Airport firmware. I'm sure Apple always updates protocols not supported by their hardware!

It is a bit odd, especially considering George Harrison's death made Apple's front page in November 2001 despite no obvious link to the company.

I think it was Steve Jobs who said Apple has contracts with the record labels to sell songs at .99. These contracts, if I remember correctly, were for at least 5 years. The same rumors happened last year in may. But, I guess we'll see what happens.

You think Sony's Pictures division is going to be interested in supporting someone else's standard? I don't think so. 'Spiderman' is on it's way to a PSP near you but I'll be it would be a LONG time indeed before Jobs would be allowed to sell it.

Yes, it's probably just coincidence that the President of Sony appeared on stage with Jobs at the last MacWorld. He probably was just passing by and thought he'd stop in to say "Hi."

Macobserver quoted the following:

For the third quarter of 2004, the iPod accounted for 92.1% of the market for hard drive-based music players, according to the NPD Group, up from 82.2% a year ago. Players from Creative Technology and Rio were a distant second and third, with 3.7% and 3.2% of the market, respectively. Market share numbers for the fourth quarter have yet to be released.

So for hard drive players (~60% of the portable digital music player market) that is:
- 92.1% Apple iPod (all non-shuffle varieties)
- 3.7% Creative (all HD models)
- 3.2% Rio (all HD models)
- 1% Other HD players

This is a breathtaking dominance of the market space that serves as an indicator for the related on-line music purchase/subscription market. If 7.9% of the hard drive players are non-Apple, and we assume the larger capacity HD player market space is where the most volume from these services is coming from, then that is a small piece of pie for all the players (Napster, Buy, Wal-mart, others?) to carve up into a successful and sustainable (profitable) business.

Further, Apple's iPod Shuffle is targeting the remaining ~40% flash-based player market. Even if the Shuffle is 50% as effective in market penetration as big brother iPod is, that would leave Apple with a (wildly) estimated ~45% of the flash player market. So again, competition would be nosing for larger nibbles, instead of the crumbs of the HD market, but still a far smaller pie to distribute.

All this points (for me anyway) to an impending consolidation of WMA related service offerings. Specifically, I would look for Napster to end it's offerings after Wallstreet destorys an already paltry stock for the failure of a $30M campaign against iTunes Music Store with the "Do the Math" campaign. Also, I would look for Buy.com to further phase out their download music store in favor of higher margin CD sales as they find even offering $0.79 selected tracks isn't creating market traction. The "hope" for WMA may be in Wal-Mart - the icon of the price elastic shopper - who may prefer $0.89 downloads (and $189 players) to Apple's $0.99, $199 combinatons.

Apple Death Knell Counter

As submitter of the original story to Slashdot, I am embarrassed to post this retraction based on new information from Mac Observer.

Though Motorola demonstrated the E1060's ability to play iTunes music at the GSM World Congress "the E1060 is not going to have the ability to play iTunes songs" according to Jason Gales of Mobile Tracker.

A thousand pardons.

What you're experiencing is cognative dissonance.

Apple obituaries are an art form.

Heck, according to The Mac Observer's Apple Death Knell Counter, even Steve Jobs himself weighed in with an Apple Obit at one point.

" MacObserver hilights the key points from the article which will also appear in print in the Feb 21, 2005 issue of Fortune. It provides some interesting insights into the recent history of Apple from Steve Jobs' perspective.

Of interest, according to the article, Apple approached Adobe in 1998 to develop consumer targeted Video/Photo software, but Adobe said "no"... which triggered Apple's decision to develop its own software (FCP, iPhoto, iMovie)."

This UI and development environment seems so much better than the standard KDE/GNOME stuff, I've always wondered why this was not championed as a default desktop environment for Linux. There is also some OS X compatibility there as well as far as getting a single code base to compile for both environments. That, the unified display postscript, the great development environment, etc. seem to make it a natural and *sane* front end to the otherwise fragmented UI world of Linux.

With the relative compatibility to the OS X/OPENSTEP libraries and code re-use, there could be a real network effect by making this a default environment for Linux and other Unixes.

And so is Dubya, as mentioned in this article. :-)

http://www.macobserver.com/editorial/2002/01/16.1. shtml

Steve Jobs is annoyed at this.

From the Seattle Times:

Ciarelli had sought legal help from groups including the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a San Francisco-based organization that Gross has represented in the past.

The EFF declined to take Ciarelli's case.

Given that the EFF is defending AppleInder and PowerPage in a similar case, the question comes to mind: why not defend ThinkSecret?

Does anyone know?

Probably this one.

Did you notice in those photos from your linked article that the font in the Apple ads is identical to the one they still use today? wow.

My favorite is this quote from Bill Gates:

"To create a new standard takes something that's not just a little bit different. It takes something that's really new and captures people's imaginations. Macintosh meets that standard."
- Bill Gates, Chairman of the Board & CEO Microsoft Corporation

While you're at it, check out the real article CmdrTaco found this photo at. Much more informative and interesting read.

My favorite is this quote from Bill Gates:

"To create a new standard takes something that's not just a little bit different. It takes something that's really new and captures people's imaginations. Macintosh meets that standard."
- Bill Gates, Chairman of the Board & CEO Microsoft Corporation

While you're at it, check out the real article CmdrTaco found this photo at. Much more informative and interesting read.

The Truth...

Speaking of resolution, I'm more excited by higher resolution than a speed bump. They need a speed bump, true, but 1280x854 in a 15 inch screen is relatively low resolution compared to the offerings by Dell. For a company that likes to market to graphic artists, you'd think they'd try to sell an ultra high DPI display.

Yup, came up on the conference call Wednesday:

http://www.macobserver.com/article/2005/01/12.14.s html/

Xcode has something called AppleScript Studio which seems like Apple's answer to Visual Basic. Despite the fact that it is a great tool for rapid application development, it doesn't seem to be widely promoted and there doesn't seem to be many books out there specifically on it. There is only one book on Amazon.com at the moment, and for some reason it hasn't been released, even though I ordered a copy months ago. I found an interesting page a while back, describing how it could be used to make weblog application with the combined features of a simple word processor and FTP program very easily, which is why I became interested in it in the first place.

Apple Computer's worldwide market share fell to 1.8% in the third quarter of this year from 2.1%, and dropped to 3.2% from 3.6% in the U.S., according to figures from research company Gartner. The numbers also showed dramatic declines in the quarter-to-quarter growth rate of Macs sold while Apple's Windows-based competitors saw double digit increases in the U.S and an almost 10% rise worldwide ... Compared to other PC vendors, Apple had a 5.0% decline in unit growth worldwide from the previous quarter. While Apple declined, its competitors gained 9.8% in unit growth from Q2. Year-to-year figures showed Apple with a 5.7% jump, as other vendors rose 9.8%. No other PC vendor in the top ten posted a decline in year-to-year unit growth worldwide but Apple. The leader in worldwide market share was Dell in first place with a 16.8% share, followed by HP with 15.0% and IBM at 5.6%.

Apple Computer's worldwide market share fell to 1.8% in the third quarter of this year from 2.1%, and dropped to 3.2% from 3.6% in the U.S., according to figures from research company Gartner. The numbers also showed dramatic declines in the quarter-to-quarter growth rate of Macs sold while Apple's Windows-based competitors saw double digit increases in the U.S and an almost 10% rise worldwide ... Compared to other PC vendors, Apple had a 5.0% decline in unit growth worldwide from the previous quarter. While Apple declined, its competitors gained 9.8% in unit growth from Q2. Year-to-year figures showed Apple with a 5.7% jump, as other vendors rose 9.8%. No other PC vendor in the top ten posted a decline in year-to-year unit growth worldwide but Apple. The leader in worldwide market share was Dell in first place with a 16.8% share, followed by HP with 15.0% and IBM at 5.6%.

Uh, yeah - you left out the next sentence from TFA. :

"This is not what happened."

So the complete version of the paragraph you quoted reads:

"The most disturbing report was that Steve Jobs, after his Mac OS X Server demonstration went awry, was obviously angry, cut his speech short, and left the stage so abruptly, that when the demo began working, he was long gone. This is not what happened."

In other words, Mac Observer wrote that Mr. Jobs didn't storm off the stage and that they don't understand why Jason O'Grady (whose report is the one being mentioned) claimed that he did.

Here is just one of many examples (from a while back).
Of course, keep in mind that he gives demos all the time, and more so than Gates, so it's bound to happen now and then..

This might have something to do with it... http://www.macobserver.com/article/2000/09/05.9.sh tml

I suspect it has something to do with this:

* Feb2004: Apple's Market Share Dips Below 2% According To Merrill Lynch

* Oct2004: Apple Q3 Global Market Share Falls to 1.8%. Everyone else Post Strong Gains

I suspect it has something to do with this:

* Feb2004: Apple's Market Share Dips Below 2% According To Merrill Lynch

* Oct2004: Apple Q3 Global Market Share Falls to 1.8%. Everyone else Post Strong Gains

-S

"In many ways, the story sounds eerily familiar. As was the case in computers, Apple has sprinted ahead in the music market with an innovative product, elegant design and tight links between its hardware and software."

I know he doesn't say it, but it sounds as if he's implying that the Mac market share in the 1980's was as big as the iPod's is now, which (IIRC) simply isn't true: the Mac has never had more than a 10% market share.

According to NPD, the iPod's US market share (Apple- and HP-sold models) fell (!) to just over 90% in September, a 1.1% drop. They've got a looong way to fall, and they're not exactly sitting on their butts.

It's one thing to keep a competitor's product at less than 10% market share; it's quite another to steal an 90% market share. Just ask Apple.

This is just the usual blah article trying to create drama, written by a journalist that'd like ot think that they're full of "insight". The truth and simplicity of the matter is that Apple has high design standards, that costs money, and their stuff will therefore cost a little more. Every other competing exec and "insightful" reporter will never stop trying to tell us that we can get the same quality and/or value for less--it's just not true. They also will never stop telling us that Apple is about to fold, fail, or die.

For your amusement, check out the apple death knell counter if you haven't already.

Don't forget that this is a "one time deal" that no one else can get if they want to build an Apple-based supercomputer.

As this article states, the $5.8 million cost was calculated by adding a $600,000 upgrade cost to the $5.2 million cost of the original PowerMac-based System X. As Dr. Srinidhi Varadarajan said in this article, the original System X cost $3.2 million for cluster hardware plus $2 million for facilities upgrades.

The $600,000 upgrade to System X included upgrading all 1100 PowerMacs to dual 2.3GHz Xserves, plus 50 additional nodes. Note that the fastest Xserves Apple sells to everyone else are only 2.0GHz, so System X got "extreme" versions of the Xserve.

A dual 2.0GHz Xserve "Cluster Node" starts at $2999 at the Apple Store. Since each node has 4GB RAM and the cheapest 4GB RAM upgrade costs $1450 at the Apple store, that makes it $4449 per node. According to this article, Small Tree's InfiniBand cards cost $1095 each, so that makes it $5544 per node (without cables). Therefore, Virginia Tech should have spent at least $277,200 for the additional 50 nodes.

That leaves at most $322,800 to upgrade the 1100 PowerMacs to the special 2.3GHz Xserves. That's about $245 per node, not including any additional costs I can't quantify like labor, additional hardware, and facilities upgrades (if needed).

No one else can buy 1100 dual 2.0GHz PowerMacs and expect to upgrade them all to dual 2.3GHz Xserves (with ECC memory) for only $245 per node (including labor). Comparing the cost/teraflop of System X with non-comparable government-funded, high-bandwidth supercomputers seems silly to me.

Ok so they hate me. Big fucking deal what are they going to do - refuse to sell me something? Act rude? Be hard to track down a sales rep? Not take my money?

okay, here is the link: http://www.macobserver.com/gamingnews/2002/04/17.1 .shtml

Resistance is futile!!! We the collective of Microsoft will consume your computers.

Are ya sure OSX wouldn't be the Borg? After all they are the ones that come in cubes.

And the most bizarre introduction:
iPod Socks
Added with Mini Pocket Warmers you can go jogging in Faribanks, Alaska, with your iPod, and not fear frost-pod-bite. Probably not a real good idea

I thought they had to have some kind of anyi-piracy thing so you couldn't give your mp3s away to people when you plugged into their PC. I guess I spoke without knowing on that part...

I sure dont see it given that the 'official' word back in 2003 is that it was 3rd fastest. The Top 500 list (June of 2004) I can't even find it on that page. And last, if it did reach the 10.6TFlops it'd be #5 after the 11.6TFlop BlueGene/I

Not trying to whore here but if my "google for it" suggestion was too vague for some, here are some articles on why porting OS X would be a very bad idea from Apple's perspective.

No Intel On OS X Part I: Economics 101
Porting Mac OS X to Intel

" People have been predicting the death of MacOS and Apple for almost 2 decades now. That "wizard" over at PCMag, John Dvorak, has been doing so for almost that long, and look at where that prediction has gone."

Uh...this year is the twentieth anniversary of MacOS. I don't think they were predicting the death of MacOS and Apple 2 decades ago...unless they were predicting the death of MacOS the instant it came out. lol

Though your point is correct (above is just a nitpick)- people have been predicting the death of MacOS for a while, and Apple's stocks have been shooting through the roof since OS X came out. lol.

Check out the Apple Death Knell...
http://www.macobserver.com/appledeathknell/index.s html