Apple WWDC: iOS 5, Lion, iCloud

Give us the betas! by d3vi1 · 2011-06-06 07:01 · Score: 1

While iCloud is as expected, I am still curious to see it in action. Will the terrible file management experience of iOS devices disappear with the iCloud?

--
UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever ones.

Re:Give us the betas! by roothog · 2011-06-06 07:13 · Score: 2

It sounds like a rebranding of MobileMe (which was a rebranding of .mac). See it in action by signing up for MobileMe, and then wonder why all your email disappeared.
Re:Give us the betas! by tooyoung · 2011-06-06 07:17 · Score: 4, Insightful

I think that the idea is that users don't interact with files and the file system. They interact with songs through the iTunes interface. I know there are a million and one reasons to do clever things with the file system organization for music, but I think that 99% of users don't really care about how their songs are laid out on the FS. They think of them as songs, not files.
Re:Give us the betas! by TobyRush · 2011-06-06 07:26 · Score: 5, Insightful

Steve himself pointed out that MobileMe was a misstep. As someone who has cobbled together a cable-based home iTunes network, Gmail (via both a desktop/laptop web browser but also through iPhone's Mail app for notifications, etc.), Flickr & iPhoto, AppleTVs, a 60GB iPod, my wife's iPod Touch, Things for to do lists, etc., etc., etc., the only thing that is not encouraging to me about this is the thought of redoing everything again. But if Apple is actually putting some energy into this (and from the data center pictures, it looks like they are), it's might be too tempting to refuse.
And iTunes Match? Does anyone else find it baffling how they are getting away with this? I mean, for $25 I get legal versions of every single—ahem, questionably procured, shall we say— tracks in my gigantic iTunes library? Did the record companies read the fine print on this? I mean, as a voracious music consumer, I'm NOT complaining... we've all known for a long time that things were going to have to change in regard to digital media and copyright. And say what you will about them, I could see Apple being the company to make it happen. But really... how did they get away with this?

--
Sam! If you will let me be,
I will try them.
You will see.
Re:Give us the betas! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:28 · Score: 0

R$25 *per year*
Re:Give us the betas! by beelsebob · 2011-06-06 07:32 · Score: 1

I'm pretty sure that if you read the fine print you'll find that in the iTunes match EULA it'll say something like "you've gotta own the music in the first place, bitch". I mean, I've obviously not read it myself, but I'd be surprised if it wasn't there.
Re:Give us the betas! by phorest · 2011-06-06 07:34 · Score: -1, Redundant

Very astute, wish I had points.

--
God: When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.
Re:Give us the betas! by yincrash · 2011-06-06 07:37 · Score: 1

My guess is that a large amount of music is fingerprinted either by the labels or identifiable because there are probably not that many unique rips of music out there, so most copies can be identified as downloaded. I would definitely read a EULA before letting apple scan your music.
Re:Give us the betas! by beelsebob · 2011-06-06 07:40 · Score: 1

The way I've interpreted that at least so far is "give us $25, and for the next year, everything you rip we'll give you an iTunes copy of too"... You may be right though, it may be "give us $25 a year to keep the music you've ripped synced up on the cloud"
Re:Give us the betas! by Serious+Callers+Only · 2011-06-06 07:57 · Score: 1

I mean, for $25 I get legal versions of every single—ahem, questionably procured, shall we say— tracks in my gigantic iTunes library?
$25 a year for life.
That's far less than a few people spend a year on music, but more than most people spend per year on music.
Re:Give us the betas! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:00 · Score: 0

You don't get legal copies - you get the benefit of the copies syncing to other devices. You are paying $25 for any track you did not get through iTunes to be synced to your iPhone without plugging in.
Re:Give us the betas! by mattack2 · 2011-06-06 08:00 · Score: 1

Will the terrible file management experience of iOS devices disappear...?
*What* file management experience (terrible or not)?
Re:Give us the betas! by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-06-06 08:01 · Score: 1

It's all well and good when the files in question are songs. The problems arise when it's some kind of document, and you want to start working with it in one app, and then pass it over to another. Right now, that would mean making a copy - so any collaborative work would involve copying back & forth - and apps have to be specifically written to accommodate that (i.e. one should register to accept that type of files, and another should be able to push its files to other registered apps).
Re:Give us the betas! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:02 · Score: 0

Question: What happens to those shiny new copies of your music if you stop paying the $25?
Can you actually download them and use them elsewhere or do they remain locked up in the Apple garden?
Amazon, Apple and Google offerings all have strings. Different strings, but strings nonetheless.
Re:Give us the betas! by dogmatixpsych · 2011-06-06 08:05 · Score: 1

They reportedly paid the big 4 music labels $100 million upfront (likely with ongoing fees paid to them). In any case, you can't deny the clout Apple has in the music industry.
Re:Give us the betas! by mikael_j · 2011-06-06 08:10 · Score: 1

While this is possible and I definitely think you should be careful I suspect that the labels are going along with this because they figure getting a cut of that yearly $24.99 per user is better than not getting any money at all from the pirates.
Basically it could actually be a way in which they are adapting their business model.

--
Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
Re:Give us the betas! by Morth · 2011-06-06 08:14 · Score: 1

It's $25 per year and if I understood it correctly you don't get to keep the files if you cancel it. But I didn't watch the keynote firsthand so might very well be wrong.
Re:Give us the betas! by d3vi1 · 2011-06-06 08:14 · Score: 1

*What* file management experience (terrible or not)?
Some apps support iDisk integration, most don't. Most depend on iTunes synchronization or Mail.App to add and remove files from their small individual Documents folder. That's the terrible (lack of) file management that I meant.

--
UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever ones.
Re:Give us the betas! by UnknowingFool · 2011-06-06 08:15 · Score: 1

As I understand it, it will both allow to keep your music collection in the clouds. Now you could accomplish the same thing with a file server at home that is configured so that you can reach it through your firewall on the road. You will however have to ensure that it is backed up, etc. Fir most geeks, they can set this up quite easily. For others, they may pay for a service like Apple's

--
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Re:Give us the betas! by Hijacked+Public · 2011-06-06 08:17 · Score: 1

Did the record companies read the fine print on this?
It would not suprise me one bit to find that once again record companies put themselves on the dumb side of the technological divide. Though it could change quickly, Apple has no serious threats to dethrone them as king of digital music. I don't know how well they've extended that to other media but I suspect they are players.
Someone in this thread called it 'an interesting attempt to monetize pirated music' if it works the way you think. I'd call it another nail in the coffin all the big labels are piled into. Without their back catalog, they are done.

--
"Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
Re:Give us the betas! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:21 · Score: 1

And iTunes Match? Does anyone else find it baffling how they are getting away with this? I mean, for $25 I get legal versions of every single—ahem, questionably procured, shall we say— tracks in my gigantic iTunes library? Did the record companies read the fine print on this? I mean, as a voracious music consumer, I'm NOT complaining... we've all known for a long time that things were going to have to change in regard to digital media and copyright. And say what you will about them, I could see Apple being the company to make it happen. But really... how did they get away with this?
The cat's out of the bag. You already got the songs from somewhere, they may as well collect a pittance, and make it easier for you to be lazy and buy through iTunes later.
Re:Give us the betas! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:25 · Score: 0

I would have to say that I personally disagree with this. Perhaps I fall into that aforementioned 1%. But I almost never listen to an individual song, but rather entire albums. (In fact, I hate Shuffle.) When I think of an "album" I typically relate this to a directory. I'll also duplicate songs. For example I might have an album by artist A and an album by Artist B. But then I might have a "Beach Music" album where I add one song from artist A and one from artist B into it. I actually duplicate the file on my hard drive. (Though I suspect iTunes merges them when I add them in.)
To me it's about about the folders. Everything in the file system is sorted by music type (Country, Rock, Classical, etc.) Under each is the artist, and then the albums and then the songs. Maybe I'm just overly anal!
Re:Give us the betas! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:25 · Score: -1

Did you read the fine print on this?
It's $25 *a year*. Which means they get to own your *ahem* questionably procured library, and you only have the right to use it while you pay the annual fee. Stop paying, and you have the same pirated music as before, and a few less bucks.
Re:Give us the betas! by tooyoung · 2011-06-06 08:38 · Score: 2

I would have to say that I personally disagree with this. Perhaps I fall into that aforementioned 1%. But I almost never listen to an individual song, but rather entire albums. (In fact, I hate Shuffle.) When I think of an "album" I typically relate this to a directory. I'll also duplicate songs. For example I might have an album by artist A and an album by Artist B. But then I might have a "Beach Music" album where I add one song from artist A and one from artist B into it. I actually duplicate the file on my hard drive.

If iTunes introduced the concept of albums and playlists would that address your need?
Re:Give us the betas! by mikael_j · 2011-06-06 08:40 · Score: 2

No, once you've signed up you can download the DRM-free 256 kbps AAC copies to your computer. However, when you stop paying you can no longer download the files. You are also able to download anything you have in your computer's library that is also in the iTunes store directly from Apple to your iPhone. Now I don't know about you but my iPhone has less total storage than the size of my music collection. In fact, my music collection at home (mostly MP3s) is several times larger than the total storage on my phone. However, I suspect a very high percentage of this music is available from iTunes which would mean that if I'm at a friend's place, I have an iTunes Match subscription and I want to listen to a song I haven't synced to my phone I can just fetch it from Apple rather than go home and sync it from my computer (or scp it to my friend's computer from my home network which is also a bit of a hassle and not always an option, especially if I'm not actually at a friend's place but rather in at a bbq in a park or somewhere else where I can't use a computer).

--
Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
Re:Give us the betas! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:51 · Score: 0

http://www.apple.com/apple-events/wwdc-2011/
Re:Give us the betas! by leamanc · 2011-06-06 09:00 · Score: 2

I mean, for $25 I get legal versions of every singleâ"ahem, questionably procured, shall we sayâ" tracks in my gigantic iTunes library? Did the record companies read the fine print on this?
Lala had this feature. They called it "iTunes Uploader" or something along those lines. Of course, it didn't actually upload your iTunes library; it matched your rips with the rips Lala had in their library.
And yes, the record labels (the big ones along with a wide selection of indies) agreed to this with Lala. When Apple bought Lala, it wasn't immediately clear that the deals that Lala had made with the labels would apply to the sale, but clearly Apple has worked it out to the labels' satisfaction.

--
:q!
Re:Give us the betas! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 09:03 · Score: 0

+1 for acknowledging that some people just don't want to have to set-up and administer this kind of thing for themselves.
Upload speeds here would keep me from doing this myself. They're still painfully slow unless I pay far more for my broadband connection.
Re:Give us the betas! by Altus · 2011-06-06 09:06 · Score: 1

From what I have seen this is incorrect. You get a freshly encoded ACC file for every song. The question is, what happens when you don't re-up next year? Do you still have those files? Can I pay 25 bucks this year register my 100gb of MP3s and get ACCs and then im free and clear (assuming all new music is purchased through itunes and not on CDs?). How will this work with the songs ripped off my friends bands CD that are not available on iTunes (im not clear on that... can I still use this service?).

--
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
Re:Give us the betas! by Altus · 2011-06-06 09:08 · Score: 1

This is not a streaming service. Songs are downloaded to your deceives as per your preferences. Of course they may not be available for re-download after a year if you don't pay up, that part is still not clear.
The fact that this is a syncing and not a streaming services is a very important point however. You are not using bandwidth every time you listen to a song, only when you move new songs onto your device (which, presumably, you would do over WiFi)

--
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
Re:Give us the betas! by Altus · 2011-06-06 09:13 · Score: 1

It doesn't sound like this service is currently targeted at collaboration. Perhaps in the future it will be, but I didn't get that impression from the news feed I was following.
I agree though that workflow through multiple apps could be an issue. It sounds like on your mac you can easily use the old school file system but that is not the case on iDevices and if the future is going to be devices like that, certainly it will be necessary to move your data from application to application in some way.

--
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
Re:Give us the betas! by Duradin · 2011-06-06 09:31 · Score: 1

How will the non-DRM AAC files self-destruct on devices that have already downloaded them?
Re:Give us the betas! by DrgnDancer · 2011-06-06 09:34 · Score: 2

I am confused by you. Don't misunderstand, I'm not trying to be offensive, but I am confused by why you would do this. iTunes (indeed, any decent media management system) has metadata associated with music files. The application knows what album the song is from, and will even happily manage multiple copies of the same song with different meta data. Why do you care how the underlying filesystem organizes the music? Metadata also keeps track of stuff like genre, artist, even composer when composer is different than artist. Plus you can change the meta data trivially if you chose to do so. Got a copy of, say, the Dixie Chicks and classified it as country? Decided that on second thought it's more rock? Just change the genre in the metadata, no need to move everything around. Playlists are of course the final piece of the puzzle. Want to make a "beach mix"? Just create a playlist and add the songs you want from multiple albums.
I hesitate to say you're doing it wrong, as your system obviously works for you, but there are really far more effective ways to handle what you want than compulsively organizing files and directories. Also note that while iTunes can and does do everything I mention, it's hardly the only program that can, and they use an open standard for the meta data. So if you get everything setup the way you like it in iTunes and then decide to switch to Windows Media Player, VLC, or Amarok, all your metadata goes too. I'm not sure, but I think they can read each other's playlists too.

--
I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
Re:Give us the betas! by d3vi1 · 2011-06-06 09:37 · Score: 1

$ for file in `curl http://qthttp.apple.com.edgesuite.net/11piubpwiqubf06/4540_vod.m3u8 | grep \.ts`; \

do curl http://qthttp.apple.com.edgesuite.net/11piubpwiqubf06/$file >> 4540.ts; done

Remux to anything you want as it's MPEG2-TS with H.264/AAC 720p Stereo_48kHz. Thank God for HTML5 Video and HTTP Live Streaming.
P.S.: Slashdot might add an URL domain description to the edgesuite.net parts of the commands. Can't do anything about that.

--
UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever ones.
Re:Give us the betas! by hsmith · 2011-06-06 09:43 · Score: 1

I think the iTunes Match is brilliant, from the RIAA perspective. Think it, you pay $25 (Which probably goes to them) and now, Apple will replace all of your music with (I would assume) DRM'd versions of the music and delete your existing DRM free music. So now, as a music producer, this is AMAZING. Why? Well, you aren't losing money on this because the users already have the songs - BUT, now you are replacing "Free" music that is sharable with DRM'd music that can no longer be pirated. This "theoretically" could be great for them just because it would reduce the shareable MP3 content.
Re:Give us the betas! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 10:24 · Score: 0

And this is why Apple has such a low market share.
Computers use files, and there is no getting away from the fact. I'm sorry, but if you want to use a computer then you should know how to use files, end of story. Otherwise what's the point, you're just using effectively a browser on a screen, not a computer.
Re:Give us the betas! by Colourspace · 2011-06-06 10:35 · Score: 1

Agreed. They have to adapt to survive now.
Re:Give us the betas! by dwightk · 2011-06-06 10:40 · Score: 1

you would assume wrong

--
Like anyone can even know that
Re:Give us the betas! by Colourspace · 2011-06-06 10:51 · Score: 1

Much as I feel uncomfortable agreeing with a GP AC, but I sort of get the point. I've been on the iPod trail around 6 years now, so not an early adopter. But... the amount of times I have had a drive crash, lost a device, downloaded itunes again and again on a new (or new build) machine, only for it not to see my entire 'library'.. There's something sort of more future proof about having at least the 'original' wavs/mp3's/oggs etc than relying on flaky software pointers. Especially now 500Gb drives can safely accommodate the majority of peoples music collections, even in wav.
Re:Give us the betas! by Hatta · 2011-06-06 10:55 · Score: 1

For example I might have an album by artist A and an album by Artist B. But then I might have a "Beach Music" album where I add one song from artist A and one from artist B into it. I actually duplicate the file on my hard drive
Have you heard of hard links?

--
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Re:Give us the betas! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 10:59 · Score: 0

They also think about "sharing songs", "copying songs" and the like.
And these are BAD BAD thoughts!
Re:Give us the betas! by DrgnDancer · 2011-06-06 11:11 · Score: 1

Oh I agree, I just don't see the need to compulsively organize the files. The metadata is stored in the music file, so while certainly having your own personal copy of the file stored somewhere safe is a good idea, I don't see any good reason to come up with an elaborate organization for the files themselves. As soon as you reimport them into iTunes or your media player of choice, the player will reorganize them based on metadata. iTunes default filesystem level organization structure is "$rootmusicfolder\$artistname\$albumname\$musicfile", but for all I care it could just be one folder full of songs as long as the player knows how to organize them.

--
I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
Re:Give us the betas! by node+3 · 2011-06-06 11:14 · Score: 1

And iTunes Match? Does anyone else find it baffling how they are getting away with this? I mean, for $25 I get legal versions of every single—ahem, questionably procured, shall we say— tracks in my gigantic iTunes library? Did the record companies read the fine print on this?
This means they get and additional $24.99/year (well, presumably minus 30%) from past "piracy", and possibly future piracy going forward.
So, basically they are getting *some* money from an activity that until now nets them no money. This also brings more non-customers going through the iTunes Music Store, which increases the odds of them simply becoming proper customers.
Or looked differently, all else remaining equal, this brings more money to the music industry than not doing it would have. This is especially notable to them given how Amazon and Google decided to just go ahead and implement a system that generates *no* money for that industry.
Re:Give us the betas! by node+3 · 2011-06-06 11:15 · Score: 1

The way I've interpreted that at least so far is "give us $25, and for the next year, everything you rip we'll give you an iTunes copy of too"... You may be right though, it may be "give us $25 a year to keep the music you've ripped synced up on the cloud"
It's the latter, but since your computer acts just like any other device, you can sync back down the 256k AAC file, making it possible to use it as the former as well.
Re:Give us the betas! by node+3 · 2011-06-06 11:18 · Score: 1

My guess is that a large amount of music is fingerprinted either by the labels or identifiable because there are probably not that many unique rips of music out there, so most copies can be identified as downloaded. I would definitely read a EULA before letting apple scan your music.
Apple is *NOT* going to tattle on you for pirated music. Almost everyone has at least one "pirated" song. If this system did tattle, it would instantly become a pariah.
Apple will never do *anything* that would make people afraid that if they use iTunes, they might get sued.
Re:Give us the betas! by JAlexoi · 2011-06-06 11:20 · Score: 1

who said it'll become legal? Maybe it'll be easier for them to sue you.
Re:Give us the betas! by node+3 · 2011-06-06 11:31 · Score: 1

Why would "most geeks" set this up themselves, when they can get it for $24.99 and not have to do anything?
Sure, many will (and really, already have), but there are *many* more who would rather have it just work. For $24.99/year, it's a bargain.
Re:Give us the betas! by Duradin · 2011-06-06 11:39 · Score: 1

What part of DRM free is so hard to understand? iTunes hasn't had DRM in some time now.
AAC is not Apple Audio Codec.
Re:Give us the betas! by snowwrestler · 2011-06-06 11:48 · Score: 1

Music from iTunes does not have DRM anymore, but your iTunes account name is embedded in each file you buy. If that is also true of iTunes Match music files, I think you are onto something.
I might upload a fully anonymous MP3, and get back from Apple a 256kbps AAC with my iTunes name embedded in it. From the perspective of the labels this is a win. If they start seeing this file with my name in it all over the piracy services, they know exactly who to sue. Whereas the MP3 would have been untraceable.
True? I don't know. We'll just have to wait and see if the names are embedded in the files iTunes Match sends back.

--
Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
Re:Give us the betas! by AlgUSF · 2011-06-06 12:05 · Score: 1

Awesome, I am sick of hearing "You got mail" in the middle of my music. Stupid AOL users... I'm still waiting for iTorrent though.

--

I want my rights back. I was actually using them when our government stole them after 9/11.
Re:Give us the betas! by SimonTheSoundMan · 2011-06-06 12:28 · Score: 1

I think the part when Job's said along the lines "you get all your music upgraded to 256kbs AAC DRM free". So, your 96kbs torrented MP3 get replaced on another device by DRM free AAC files. Makes it easy to keep the files for life.
Re:Give us the betas! by bondsbw · 2011-06-06 13:12 · Score: 1

Try again.
And if you don't understand the phrase, "And all the music iTunes matches plays back at 256-Kbps iTunes Plus quality — even if your original copy was of lower quality," please see Engadget's live coverage which details it for you.

2:55PM If any songs don't match they'll be uploaded for you. Anything that's matched is upgraded to 256Kbps AAC, without DRM.

--
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
Re:Give us the betas! by mattack2 · 2011-06-06 13:37 · Score: 1

Why is that an iOS issue, and not an app-specific issue?
Re:Give us the betas! by demonlapin · 2011-06-06 14:16 · Score: 1

AtomicParsley will strip those names out, at least in theory.
Re:Give us the betas! by DurendalMac · 2011-06-06 14:22 · Score: 1

And iTunes Match? Does anyone else find it baffling how they are getting away with this? I mean, for $25 I get legal versions of every single—ahem, questionably procured, shall we say— tracks in my gigantic iTunes library? Did the record companies read the fine print on this? I mean, as a voracious music consumer, I'm NOT complaining... we've all known for a long time that things were going to have to change in regard to digital media and copyright. And say what you will about them, I could see Apple being the company to make it happen. But really... how did they get away with this?
It was almost certainly a concession to the record companies, who would have a problem with people sharing pirated music...amongst their own devices. Yeah, that actually does sound like the RIAA. There's nothing stopping you from synching it normally. It just won't sync via iCloud.
Re:Give us the betas! by lpp · 2011-06-06 14:35 · Score: 1

I believe he said in the keynote it would be in DRM-free AAC. Yes, still AAC, but NOT with DRM.
Re:Give us the betas! by DurendalMac · 2011-06-06 14:36 · Score: 1

So sync it manually as you would before. The $25 is for the convenience of iCloud. It's not required to sync your music overall.
Re:Give us the betas! by dudpixel · 2011-06-06 15:09 · Score: 1

This may be true, but once the iTunes version hits your hard disk, surely you can throw out the "questionably procured" version and you're legit? or does iTunes still differentiate between "paid for" and "free because we assumed you already owned it"?

--
This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
Re:Give us the betas! by Ixokai · 2011-06-06 15:15 · Score: 1

The thing is, the record companies were never going to make any money off of that library of yours-- ever. No matter what. At best, they were making some off of those blank media taxes around, whining about it.
This way, they not only will make some -- but hopefully you'll like the iTunes store experience, and buy more music via iTunes, thus get less "questionably procured" music.
They aren't advertising the service as any sort of 'amnesty' for previously illicitly copied material, but seriously: Apple is in the music selling business, why would they focus on that? But since there's *no way* for them to tell the difference, and since they are finally getting some money off of you,... how are they getting away with this?
The labels are starting to give in. They still may sue you if you go and share out your library, but damnit, if they can get some money off of you for what you already have and are just using -- they'll take what they can get.
Re:Give us the betas! by UnknowingFool · 2011-06-06 16:28 · Score: 1

There is a difference between "can" and "want to". Most geeks can mirror the functionality of iCloud just like most geeks can compile their own kernels. That doesn't mean they want to do so or that it will be easy. For me, I normally spend the time and effort to do something when there isn't an alternative that is suitable to me. For example, I run MythTV because I have multiple TVs and like have a central location to record shows; I also like the commercial skipping. Fortunately for me analog cable is considerably cheap here. Other people don't care about any of that and are willing to use the cable company DVR. That's their choice to make.

--
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Re:Give us the betas! by Risen888 · 2011-06-06 18:17 · Score: 1

I know. It makes me want to slit my wrists.

--
Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
Re:Give us the betas! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 19:17 · Score: 0

Apple is *NOT* going to tattle on you for pirated music. Almost everyone has at least one "pirated" song. If this system did tattle, it would instantly become a pariah.
Apple will never do *anything* that would make people afraid that if they use iTunes, they might get sued.
Yes apple is magical so you don't have to worry about them being subpoenaed for the data they have about you.
Re:Give us the betas! by Homburg · 2011-06-06 19:25 · Score: 1

If I rip my CD with lame --v2 (or whatever other options the scene releasers are using), wouldn't my perfectly legal rip have exactly the same fingerprint as the widely-distributed illegal rip? I don't see how labels could use this to identify illegally copied music.
Re:Give us the betas! by beelsebob · 2011-06-06 20:25 · Score: 1

Add to that all the id3 tags being identical (no, they don't get identical just because of the music being the same, different people use different capitolisation conventions, different accent conventions, different kinds of dashes, different fields for different things, fill in varying numbers of tags, ...), and every single ripping setting being identical and they may begin to have a case.
Re:Give us the betas! by Cant+use+a+slash+wtf · 2011-06-06 20:25 · Score: 1

Did anyone else find this read almost exactly as an ad would?
"Their prices are so low I just don't know how they get away with it! It's practically a steal!"
No? Just me?
Re:Give us the betas! by mosb1000 · 2011-06-06 20:42 · Score: 1

How will this work with the songs ripped off my friends bands CD that are not available on iTunes (im not clear on that... can I still use this service?).
It will upload and store the songs it can't match. And yes, I am pretty sure you have to pay the $25 for as long as you want to use the service. But that makes sense, as apple is agreeing to store the songs it can't match.
Re:Give us the betas! by mosb1000 · 2011-06-06 20:45 · Score: 1

If you held on to the copy, you can keep it since it is DRM free. It won't disappear, and you can manually sync it between your devices. But you will no longer be able to download it from iCloud if you stop paying the $25/year.
Re:Give us the betas! by Issarlk · 2011-06-06 20:57 · Score: 1

The device self destructs.
Re:Give us the betas! by gordo3000 · 2011-06-06 22:17 · Score: 1

not baffling at all. if they pass most of that money to the record companies and they are ok with it. Google tried to get the record companies to agree to make it a free service. There is no differences from a non-DRM 256 kb ACC and your warez mp3 other than one being ACC and one being mp3.
the main goal most likely is to save space. if google can force the free version soon, that will be even better. The goal there is to not having thousands of versions of the 25000 song library but rather, 1 version of every song and once they confirm you have that song on your HD, they open it up for streaming to your device.
Re:Give us the betas! by angel'o'sphere · 2011-06-06 22:41 · Score: 1

When Apple bought Lala, it wasn't immediately clear that the deals that Lala had made with the labels would apply to the sale
Why was that unclear? In msot countries of the world it would ofc be pretty clear that this "deal" would be sold as well.

--
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Re:Give us the betas! by jedrek · 2011-06-07 00:02 · Score: 1

It's more than most people spend on music in 2011, just because most people pirate music. Really, it's only two albums. I pirate music like I'm Long John Silver, but give me an option to pay $25/year to make my music legit, and I'll be the first in line to do it.
Re:Give us the betas! by leamanc · 2011-06-07 02:46 · Score: 1

Because of language that is in most contracts saying that certain provisions are "non-transferrable."
While the Lala contracts weren't made public, many speculated at the time of the sale that the Lala Uploader feature could not be transferred over to Apple without re-negotiation. The labels were happy to give this kind of feature to a startup that hardly anybody knew about, but they weren't going to give it to Apple without more money. Hence, the speculated language in the contract to prevent Apple from buying up Lala (which they did) and taking over the Uploader feature.
And in the end, the labels did get more money, because you now have to pay $25 per year to use iTunes Match, when the feature was free at Lala.

--
:q!
Re:Give us the betas! by MrAngryForNoReason · 2011-06-07 02:57 · Score: 1

I mean, for $25 I get legal versions of every single—ahem, questionably procured, shall we say— tracks in my gigantic iTunes library?
Not quite, you get access to it on Apple's iCloud servers and you can stream it from there. Certainly as far as I can tell you can't just download a copy of the music. You can sync it to a device but as has always been the case this is very different from actually having the files in a way that you can use them for what you want.
The key point is that the $25 is buying you access to tracks that match the ones you already have. If you stop paying your $25 then this access goes away.
Re:Give us the betas! by insertwackynamehere · 2011-06-07 03:08 · Score: 1

The music isn't bought in the cloud it is stored there. If you own it already it goes to the cloud and yes, if you stop subscribing to the cloud, you can no longer use it to share you music, but you never lost possession in the first place.
Re:Give us the betas! by mjpaci · 2011-06-07 03:32 · Score: 1

And people were wondering what Apple was going to do with their Scrooge McDuck pile of gold.
Re:Give us the betas! by d3vi1 · 2011-06-07 07:21 · Score: 1

File management is what we have an OS for! Apple doesn't have a common file open and save dialog box on iOS. Anyone who wants to use DAV (iDisk or others) needs to write quite a lot of code for that.

--
UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever ones.
Re:Give us the betas! by allanc · 2011-06-08 14:13 · Score: 1

for $25 I get legal versions of every single—ahem, questionably procured, shall we say— tracks in my gigantic iTunes library? Did the record companies read the fine print on this? I mean, as a voracious music consumer, I'm NOT complaining... we've all known for a long time that things were going to have to change in regard to digital media and copyright. And say what you will about them, I could see Apple being the company to make it happen. But really... how did they get away with this?
Consider how much money the record companies got for your--ahem--questionably procured tracks before this.
Compare that to some percentage of $25/year, possibly in perpetuity.

iCloud - some on Mac and PC by JoeCommodore · 2011-06-06 07:01 · Score: 1

But will it run on Linux?

--
"Enjoy what you're doing! If it becomes drudgery, you're doing it wrong!" - Jim Butterfield

Re:iCloud - some on Mac and PC by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:32 · Score: -1

But will it run on Linux?

Twitter is being integrated;
No but Apple is now forcing Twitter to include minorities - or they're finding the area under the curve of something - don't know.....
Re:iCloud - some on Mac and PC by NicknamesAreStupid · 2011-06-06 07:39 · Score: 1

I suspect that the Apple datacenter in Maiden, North Carolina will run mostly Linux with VMWare and their vSphere hypervisor. iCloud may be the best implementation of a cloud architecture since SalesForce.com.
Re:iCloud - some on Mac and PC by JoeCommodore · 2011-06-06 07:44 · Score: 1

Main reason is I run Macs and Linux, integrating photo sharing would be a cool thing.

--
"Enjoy what you're doing! If it becomes drudgery, you're doing it wrong!" - Jim Butterfield
Re:iCloud - some on Mac and PC by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:51 · Score: 0

But will it run on Linux?
But will it blend?
Re:iCloud - some on Mac and PC by afidel · 2011-06-06 08:00 · Score: 1

I doubt they'd bother with VMWare, at that scale it's cheaper to build the scalability and redundancy into the application than it is to pay the 3-5% virtualization overhead and the license and support costs.

--
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
Re:iCloud - some on Mac and PC by Altus · 2011-06-06 09:17 · Score: 1

Really, you cant think of any other definitions for that word? Maybe you could try looking it up.

--
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
Re:iCloud - some on Mac and PC by node+3 · 2011-06-06 11:52 · Score: 1

Why would they use Linux? They've more traditionally used Sun, Oracle, and IBM systems.
Re:iCloud - some on Mac and PC by Kalriath · 2011-06-06 14:32 · Score: 1

And considering the whole thing is likely to run on WebObjects like iTunes does, it's highly likely running a derivative of OS X.

--
For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".

Your mother by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:01 · Score: -1, Troll

She's still a whore btw.

In other words... by Admodieus · 2011-06-06 07:02 · Score: 5, Insightful

...he introduced the Apple community to Android, Windows Phone 7, Linux, Windows, and OS X Snow Leopard.

--
"It's a reverse vampire...they....they crave the sun!"

Re:In other words... by roothog · 2011-06-06 07:06 · Score: 4, Insightful

As trollish as that looks, I was sort of thinking it too. I didn't realize how far behind the times Apple had gotten, until I saw the list of coming features and thought to myself, "I've had that for years".
Re:In other words... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:10 · Score: 0

I work in a place with 62 employees and 61 apple desktops and I'm saying that to myself a lot, as well, with the term "on Windows" at the end. Of course, I don't really like windows because I feel everything should be UNIX and not just the simplified copy of UNIX that is Windows NT. And of course, all the users care about are how it looks, not what it does. Sigh.
Re:In other words... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:13 · Score: 3, Funny

I work in a place with 62 employees and 61 apple desktops and I'm saying that to myself a lot, as well, with the term "on Windows" at the end. Of course, I don't really like windows because I feel everything should be UNIX and not just the simplified copy of UNIX that is Windows NT. And of course, all the users care about are how it looks, not what it does. Sigh.
So you work with one smart person?
Re:In other words... by Theaetetus · 2011-06-06 07:18 · Score: 0

As trollish as that looks, I was sort of thinking it too. I didn't realize how far behind the times Apple had gotten, until I saw the list of coming features and thought to myself, "I've had that for years".
Which operating system out there now has a system-wide, OS-level resume or journaling function?
Re:In other words... by jfanning · 2011-06-06 07:20 · Score: 0

Windows 7.
Re:In other words... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:21 · Score: 0

Windows 7.
Really? How do I enable it?
Re:In other words... by ibmjones · 2011-06-06 07:23 · Score: 3, Insightful

...he introduced the Apple community to . . . OS X Snow Leopard.
OS X Snow Leopard? Who makes that?
Re:In other words... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:23 · Score: 0

true...but, those 5 are not currently unified into a single experience. what apple announced is a single unification of the best of all modern portable and desktop technologies, not necessarily dependent upon, but inclusive to all current Apple hardware.
Re:In other words... by Smidge207 · 2011-06-06 07:24 · Score: -1

I read a lot of old school X-Men comic books growing up, and while there were plenty of inconsistencies both when measured against the X-Men canon and even internally, I found that the overall excellent writing and clever use of mutant powers won me over. This movie was a lot more subtle than its predecessors, from the 60's touches to the stronger focus on the characters, and I appreciated that...not!
They made some weird choices for characters. I don't know if Jesus even has a precedent (probably not, given his character's treatment), but who was the guy who blew the tornadoes? George Bush? Louis Theroux was also an odd choice. He doesn't really belong in the Hellfire club, from what I can tell, though he does set up Nightcrawler fairly well.
And...what the HELL happened to all of that energy Shaw sucked out of the submarine? I felt his powers were somewhat poorly defined to begin with, but when you suck a nuclear submarine's batteries dry, doesn't that energy go *somewhere*? Even up your ass?
I suppose it could be explained away in one way or another...like a fart....but it would have made a lot more sense if there were an explosion or some other kind of awesome manifestation of the power he ate (like a magic mushroom).

--
Is it just my observation, or is eldavojohn an idiot?
Re:In other words... by aristotle-dude · 2011-06-06 07:25 · Score: 2

Windows 7.
How do I enable those features? I'm on a Windows 7 Ultimate work laptop right now. I don't see the reboot and resume feature anywhere or the easy access to versioning.

--
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
Re:In other words... by StikyPad · 2011-06-06 07:28 · Score: 1

That could be himself.
Or a janitor.

--
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
Re:In other words... by Lifyre · 2011-06-06 07:30 · Score: 1

I think he IS that one smart person...

--
I'll meet you at the intersection of "Should be" and "Reality"
Re:In other words... by gumbi+west · 2011-06-06 07:32 · Score: 0, Troll

Name one. I'm guessing it is just an improvement on an existing feature. Apple already has file sharing built in, this new one is probably just easier to use.
Look, I've had system wide native pdf, spell check in every application for about 10 years, AFAIR, Windows 7 is the first Windows with those features and the pdf is not nearly as easy to implement for developers.
There is also the fact that the Apple version just works. When you install Windows 7 or a new Linux kernel, do you have to restart? Why? OS X Lion don't require that.
Re:In other words... by schlachter · 2011-06-06 07:33 · Score: 2

What stuff have you had (from Windows/Linux) for years exactly?
Seems like most of what they introduced is either new or much better conceived/integrated than the existing options.

--
My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
Re:In other words... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:37 · Score: 5, Insightful

Apple has always been more about making things actually "just work" instead of introducing new things. Before the iPhone you could do all those things and more on Windows Mobile and Symbian phones. Before the iPod there were MP3 players with far more features than the iPod had.
The difference is that Apple takes some existing features, and does them _really_ well. You could browse the web on Windows Mobile, but the experience was pretty painful. The iPhone was the first to make that feature actually useful enough to use all the time. Same with the iPod. I have a little MP3 player from Samsung and I can't for the life of me remember how to use it. It just isn't intuitive.
It is changing a little though. For example the notification system was taken exactly from Android without significantly improving it. And I'm disappointed that there were no changes to the home screen to be more dynamic to allow quick access to certain features (like turning Wifi/bluetooth on/off).
I still think the user experience is better on iOS than Android, but the gap is much smaller than it was just 6 months ago. Apple will have to be a bit more creative to maintain that lead there.
Re:In other words... by Just+Some+Guy · 2011-06-06 07:38 · Score: 1

When you install Windows 7 or a new Linux kernel, do you have to restart? Why? OS X Lion don't require that.
Do you have a link to support your claim that Lion doesn't require a reboot after a kernel upgrade?

--
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Re:In other words... by 0100010001010011 · 2011-06-06 07:40 · Score: 1

Wrong thread? We forgive you.
Re:In other words... by jfanning · 2011-06-06 07:44 · Score: 2, Informative

Who said anything about easy access?!
NTFS has supported journelling for years and has Previous Versions feature (available from file Properties). Application resuming/restarting has been around since Vista and the OS has several hooks for registering for these events and messages. The fact that no-one implements it isn't relevant.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb525422(v=vs.85).aspx
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb525423(v=vs.85).aspx
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa373651(VS.85).aspx
It will be the same in Lion. Unless the apps are rewritten to support these features they won't work. It doesn't just happen magically.
Re:In other words... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:53 · Score: 2, Interesting

Nothing new to see here. Apple is the king of second-mover advantage, allowing others to innovate and stumble over all the usability issues in new technologies, only to swoop in when the time is right to simplify and unify them.
Re:In other words... by gumbi+west · 2011-06-06 07:58 · Score: 1

harumph. It was on appleinsider's page, but now they updated it and it is gone.
Re:In other words... by Bryan3000000 · 2011-06-06 08:05 · Score: 2

Apple will implement them in their applications. Mac developers will follow. Everything else, like open source implementation and so forth... Well, NeoOffice might implement these features, so there's the LibreOffice support. Other cross-platform applications might not follow.
Tell me, does Microsoft Office implement these features? If so, I've never heard of it. Apple at least is implementing and making such the default behavior, in addition to changing the expectations of users and thus pushing developers.
Re:In other words... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:08 · Score: 0

Apple
Re:In other words... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:08 · Score: 0

If Apple really were as lacking in innovation and as behind the times as you say, that would seem incongruous with the number of users, growth of users and the market capitalization that they have.
Re:In other words... by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-06-06 08:14 · Score: 2

Which operating system out there now has a system-wide, OS-level resume

Windows since Vista. As with Lion, this boils down to apps supporting it.
So far as I know, both Gnome and KDE on Linux also have something similar - again, subject to app support.

journaling function?
I'm not sure what, precisely, you mean by this; but in Windows 7 you can right-click on a file and choose "Restore previous versions" from the context menu. This is configurable in Control Panel -> System -> System Protection, and is turned on by default for the system drive. I can't say for sure where this feature has appeared first; if I remember correctly, there was something like that even in XP, but buried very deep in advanced settings.
The big problem with those is that people who are supposed to know about them in order to use them (in the first case, developers; in the second, users) usually don't. The tech is there, but it was never properly marketed.
Re:In other words... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:14 · Score: 0

What piece of marketing material did you copy that from?
What does that really mean?
Re:In other words... by CliffH · 2011-06-06 08:21 · Score: 1

From an iPhone user's point of view (at least this iPhone user's view), this is a catch-up to not only Android, but also some of the fun little things users currently jailbreak their phones for. I've been a good little boy and haven't jailbroken this phone yet and will wait till this fall to see how version 5 does. Hopefully the notification system is on par with what Android has. As far as the camera goes, I still don't see HOW it has taken them this long to figure that brain-dead feature out. I'm picking no one in the higher ranks of Apple use their phones for taking photos. As for iCloud, meh. If I were still living in the US i would use Google's service. Since I live in NZ, iCloud will be first to the show over here.

--
sigs are like a box of chocolates, they all suck remove the underscores to email me
Re:In other words... by _xeno_ · 2011-06-06 08:23 · Score: 2

He's not wrong, though. Several of the "new features" are re-treads of things that exist in Snow Leopard. (Also, I note that the link I gave is likely to change over time, and be meaningless once whatever if after Lion releases. Oh well.)
For example, "pinch to zoom." In Lion, you can pinch on the track pad to zoom in and out of webpages! Incidentally, you can also do this in Snow Leopard. And I'm fairly sure it worked in Leopard, too. Maybe even before that.
Another "new feature" is the Mac App Store. Which you can download Mac OS X Lion from. Hmmm...
Now, to be fair, there are apparently refinements to existing features hidden amongst the bullet points that flat-out name existing features.
Some of them, however, are pushing the definition of "new feature" like the ability to drag apps onto the Dock for quick launching. What's new with that? Well, you can do it from the new Launchpad. Which is already kind of like what happens in Snow Leopard if you make a stack out of the Applications folder and set it to "grid" view. Just fullscreen.
So... yeah. Some of the new features are really repeats of things that Mac OS X already does, just via a reworked interface.

--
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
Re:In other words... by The+Dawn+Of+Time · 2011-06-06 08:24 · Score: 1

Ahh, you've missed the point. Not terribly surprising.
Re:In other words... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:30 · Score: 0

Don't reply when you don't know what's being talked about. You look very ignorant.
Re:In other words... by BitZtream · 2011-06-06 08:32 · Score: 3, Interesting

The real difference will be exactly what you pointed out.
Windows has had them since Vista ... no one makes their apps handle the notifications.
Mac Apps (high profile ones anyway) will, like all the ones Apple makes.
Kinda makes you wonder why Apple seems to be able to get their internal apps to use all the OS features yet Windows developers don't. iOS developers are pretty lazy (on average) at this point just because there are so many of them, its kinda like Visual Basic over there at the moment, but not so much for OSX app yet. I expect the major league apps will all support the features in their next major release, with the exception of Adobe products which pretty much seem to try to teach Microsoft just how long you can milk an old, shitty code base without adding any new features and just changing the gui while forcing upgrades via incompatible default save formats.
I expect that iWorks and iLife will be updated right around the same time as OSX 10.7 is released, why doesn't Office 2007 support these features yet? Okay, they didn't want to update it cause they wanted people to buy the new version ... then why doesn't 2010 have it?
I do Windows development on most days, I actually hadn't even heard about these features until fairly recently ... long after I learned about it for OSX ... which I do write for occasionally, but not as a primary job function.
I hate to say it, but Apple does seem to use some sort of magic, Windows has been 'better' in most ways almost always compared to OSX (I'm ignoring Vista in the same way I'm ignoring Copland), yet I'd still rather use OSX any day, even when it holds me back ... could be the UNIX under it that does it, but it just seems like everything feels better in OSX, technically inferior (debatable) or not.

--
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Re:In other words... by _xeno_ · 2011-06-06 08:33 · Score: 1

I can't say for sure where this feature has appeared first
The "Restore previous versions" feature was first introduced in Vista - for users of Enterprise, Business, and Ultimate editions, at least. It was unavailable for users of "lesser" editions, because, well, Microsoft, I guess. It was made available for all editions in Windows 7.
The feature it uses, "Shadow Copy," was in fact introduced with Windows XP. But as I understand it, the feature as it works in XP doesn't work for versioning. It only offers a way to access an otherwise locked file and was intended mainly for backup software.
Incidentally, this feature can be life saving. I'm lucky I was able to get a ridiculously cheap copy of Vista Ultimate when CompUSA was going out of business - I've needed that "restore previous versions" feature!
Also, while something similar exists for earlier Mac OS X in Time Machine, it's not anywhere near the same thing. Time Machine stores hourly backups. Need to restore a version that's 30 minutes old? Gotta pray Time Machine ran in between that time. (Yes, I've used both. Time Machine is still very useful, but it's not the same as versioning.)

--
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
Re:In other words... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:39 · Score: 0

As if a few lines in ta summary here tells the whole story.
Try watching the event:
http://www.apple.com/apple-events/wwdc-2011/
Re:In other words... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:53 · Score: 1

Sigh - anything that is deemed 'smart' is relative. Typically, people have a tendency to think that their way is the best way (which is especially prevalent in the tech industry). The truly clever folks out there know that there is no one 'best' way, only several shades of grey - a salt and pepper mix of perspective and pragmatism, if you will. Alas, many people are arrogant and refuse to admit this.

And no, I'm not clever, but that's ok. I live to learn. :-)
Re:In other words... by LordRobin · 2011-06-06 09:15 · Score: 3, Insightful

No you haven't.
This happens every time Apple announces a new product. Someone invariably claims that it's nothing new, because some half-assed crappy version of the idea exists somewhere. Then once the product is actually released, everyone is amazed at what a leap it is.
This goes all the way back to the iPod. "Oooh, an MP3 player. Big deal. I have one of those."
------RM
Re:In other words... by pckl300 · 2011-06-06 09:15 · Score: 1

It will be the same in Lion. Unless the apps are rewritten to support these features they won't work. It doesn't just happen magically.
Apple will likely require developers to implement them.

--
In the beginning, there was null.
Re:In other words... by sammyF70 · 2011-06-06 09:17 · Score: 2

you mean, the way Microsoft is completely ahead of it time and has been for years, considering their number of users? Granted, they are losing it at the moment, but the point is : just because people are stupid enough to jump off a cliff doesn't mean it is any good.

--
"DRM is like the Ford Pinto: it's a smooth ride, right up the point at which it explodes and ruins your day."-C.Doctorow
Re:In other words... by sosume · 2011-06-06 10:07 · Score: 1

It is VHS vs Betamax all over again.. where Apple is the latter.
Re:In other words... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 10:53 · Score: 0

He's not wrong, though. Several of the "new features" are re-treads of things that exist in Snow Leopard. (Also, I note that the link I gave is likely to change over time, and be meaningless once whatever if after Lion releases. Oh well.)
For example, "pinch to zoom." In Lion, you can pinch on the track pad to zoom in and out of webpages! Incidentally, you can also do this in Snow Leopard. And I'm fairly sure it worked in Leopard, too. Maybe even before that.
You can't. Just tested it on the newest model Macbook Air.
Re:In other words... by jbplou · 2011-06-06 11:00 · Score: 2

Perhaps he actually introduced you to how the most successful computing device company takes an idea and makes it usable for the masses.
Re:In other words... by _xeno_ · 2011-06-06 11:20 · Score: 1

Using what browser?
Because before posting, I opened Safari on my MacBook, and did the zoom in and zoom out "pinch" gestures.
Guess what? The web page zoomed in and out. It doesn't work in Firefox, but that's because it doesn't work in Firefox. (And, somehow, I doubt Lion will change that.)

--
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
Re:In other words... by petsounds · 2011-06-06 11:32 · Score: 1

Not necessarily. Jobs realizes that content is king, and if he can lock people into the ecosystem with iCloud, and keeps the feature set "good enough" to compete with other devices, people won't have a great desire to leave. Not to say that Apple won't continue to innovate; Apple's investments in the speech-to-text and "intelligent agent" category speak to something big coming from them in that area. A lot of us thought we'd see this in iOS 5, but I guess they'll wait until next year.
Re:In other words... by ibmjones · 2011-06-06 11:51 · Score: 2

I was aiming for the funny and I got insightful. :(
Re:In other words... by kangsterizer · 2011-06-06 12:01 · Score: 1

iOS5 current beta notifications actually SEEMS to be worse than on android. on android you have a clear all button, and else, clicking one event will clear it up (and optionally start an action)
on iOS5, you can dismiss one even but not all of them. Boring when you take ur phoen and theres 6 or 7 events (or more).
Re:In other words... by node+3 · 2011-06-06 12:02 · Score: 2

Application resuming/restarting has been around since Vista and the OS has several hooks for registering for these events and messages. The fact that no-one implements it isn't relevant.
Actually, it's very relevant. A feature that no one uses is inferior to a feature that gains wide usage. Resume will be quickly supported by just about every Cocoa app for which it makes sense.
After all, if this is all based on "I've had that for years", you'd assume that means actually having it implemented, and not just *potentially* implemented, but actually not.

It will be the same in Lion. Unless the apps are rewritten to support these features they won't work. It doesn't just happen magically.
These aren't "hooks" like you are thinking. There will be APIs to modify how it works on your app if it does something where Resume wouldn't be a good fit, but any standard Cocoa app compiled against Lion will get Resume for free.
Resume isn't what many here seem to think it is. It serializes all the objects of an app and saves them to disk. When you "restart" the app, it doesn't actually reinitialize the app like normal, it just reloads all the objects (and, I'd assume, provide optional methods for the app to do something on resume if it wants to).
Re:In other words... by node+3 · 2011-06-06 12:10 · Score: 1

Which operating system out there now has a system-wide, OS-level resume
Windows since Vista. As with Lion, this boils down to apps supporting it.
So far as I know, both Gnome and KDE on Linux also have something similar - again, subject to app support.
This isn't simply "restarting an app with some arguments". It's actually reloading the exact same objects in the exact same states as you had running when you quit the app.

journaling function?
I'm not sure what, precisely, you mean by this; but in Windows 7 you can right-click on a file and choose "Restore previous versions" from the context menu. This is configurable in Control Panel -> System -> System Protection, and is turned on by default for the system drive. I can't say for sure where this feature has appeared first; if I remember correctly, there was something like that even in XP, but buried very deep in advanced settings.
The big problem with those is that people who are supposed to know about them in order to use them (in the first case, developers; in the second, users) usually don't. The tech is there, but it was never properly marketed.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure he was referring to Versions. But the way Lion implements them is *way* beyond anything else out there. You don't just restore to a previous version of a file (although you can), but when you enter the interface, the app you are in actually opens the previous versions live, right there, and you can interact directly with them. So you can search through for some specific version (instead of just going by a timestamp) and can even interact with an older version, allowing you to just restore a single paragraph, if that's all you want.
Re:In other words... by node+3 · 2011-06-06 12:18 · Score: 2

It is VHS vs Betamax all over again.. where Apple is the latter.
Except in an alternate universe where Betamax actually wins.
Re:In other words... by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-06-06 12:27 · Score: 1

This isn't simply "restarting an app with some arguments". It's actually reloading the exact same objects in the exact same states as you had running when you quit the app.
So long as the app can serialize its state and deserialize it, it would seem to me that some form of notification from the OS when it needs to do either is all that is needed. If it can't, then I don't see how the OS can do this short of effectively doing suspend-to-disk - but everyone is emphatically saying that this feature is totally different from suspend...
I didn't look deep into Lion's implementation of this, so perhaps I'm missing something. If you can provide some links describing the technical implementation of this feature from app developer perspective, it would be quite helpful.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure he was referring to Versions. But the way Lion implements them is *way* beyond anything else out there. You don't just restore to a previous version of a file (although you can), but when you enter the interface, the app you are in actually opens the previous versions live, right there, and you can interact directly with them.
You can open old versions directly without restoring using Vista/7 file versioning as well - the dialog has an "Open" button. On low level, they are actually exposed as SMB-shared from localhost with a special path under \C$ (the usual system-wide share) - e.g. a versioned view of C:\ on my PC right now would be "\\localhost\C$\@GMT-2011.06.04-04.54.00\". So any app that can work with SMB paths (which is any app that uses stock API functions to manage them - most do, even some very old apps) will automatically work with versions.
It doesn't let you display content side-by-side though, if I understand your description of this feature in Lion correctly. Though surely it would also require app support for the particular document type, to permit such embedding?

So you can search through for some specific version (instead of just going by a timestamp) and can even interact with an older version, allowing you to just restore a single paragraph, if that's all you want.
That sounds like diff/merge functionality. Again, surely this would require an app registered for a given filetype supporting such a thing? E.g. if I have Office:Mac, then it wouldn't let me "restore a single paragraph" in a DOCX file, would it?
That said, it sounds like a nifty feature if Apple can goad third-party developers into supporting it - which they are traditionally very good at (much better than MS, at least).
Re:In other words... by hardtofindanick · 2011-06-06 13:02 · Score: 1

... does them _really_ well...
That statement is purely personal. I still cannot find my way around xcode, I get lost everytime I fire up itunes and ipod wheel still feels awkward to me.
Re:In other words... by MidnightBrewer · 2011-06-06 13:12 · Score: 1

Except that none of the others you just listed combine all of those features in a single OS, and on a smart phone to boot.

--
"Give a man fire, and he'll be warm for a day; set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life
Re:In other words... by node+3 · 2011-06-06 13:17 · Score: 0

So long as the app can serialize its state and deserialize it, it would seem to me that some form of notification from the OS when it needs to do either is all that is needed. If it can't, then I don't see how the OS can do this short of effectively doing suspend-to-disk - but everyone is emphatically saying that this feature is totally different from suspend...
Cocoa can serialize/deserialize objects. It's been built into it since before it was even called Cocoa.

I didn't look deep into Lion's implementation of this, so perhaps I'm missing something. If you can provide some links describing the technical implementation of this feature from app developer perspective, it would be quite helpful.
I suspect it's all under NDA, but it's just an implementation of the generic way iOS "multitasks" apps (in the background, they are frozen, then killed if the OS needs the memory. When you re-enter the program it either unfreezes (if it's still frozen) or reloads its frozen state so that the end effect is identical, except for the difference in load time caused by having to re-read the saved state from storage instead of RAM. Lion does the same/similar thing, including not necessarily closing an app when you quit it.).
If you have a free developer account, you should be able to look up how that works. I don't have a link handy though. On iOS, at least, there are some things you have to keep in mind about your app, specifically that if it does certain things, suspend/resume won't work and it will instead just quit and reopen like normal, and you can explicitly opt-out of suspend/resume.

You can open old versions directly without restoring using Vista/7 file versioning as well - the dialog has an "Open" button. On low level, they are actually exposed as SMB-shared from localhost with a special path under \C$ (the usual system-wide share) - e.g. a versioned view of C:\ on my PC right now would be "\\localhost\C$\@GMT-2011.06.04-04.54.00\". So any app that can work with SMB paths (which is any app that uses stock API functions to manage them - most do, even some very old apps) will automatically work with versions.
I like how you present this as though it's a perfectly acceptable way to implement a feature like this. But, point taken.

It doesn't let you display content side-by-side though, if I understand your description of this feature in Lion correctly. Though surely it would also require app support for the particular document type, to permit such embedding?
I don't quite follow. This requires an app to be able to open a file the app just autosaved? Yes, that's true, but also implied by the app having just autosaved it (and prior to that, created or opened it).

That sounds like diff/merge functionality. Again, surely this would require an app registered for a given filetype supporting such a thing? E.g. if I have Office:Mac, then it wouldn't let me "restore a single paragraph" in a DOCX file, would it?
I suspect I'm missing something here. The app only needs to know how to open the file and *possibly* tell the system it wants to use autosave. Mac OS X takes care of the rest. It's a part of the system that also makes Time Machine happen, so I expect it just happens without the developer doing anything except *maybe* having to recompile against the 10.7 SDK.
When you enter Versions, it shows you your currently open document window, and next to it, another fully active document window with the version you are presently looking at (and you can scroll around backwards and forwards in time, and it will change which version is in the second windows).
It's exactly as though you had a second, temporary document window open in which you could flip through older versions of a document and interact with them, and choose to replace your current document with an older one, or just grab things from it and when you're done, close it.
Re:In other words... by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-06-06 14:17 · Score: 1

Cocoa can serialize/deserialize objects. It's been built into it since before it was even called Cocoa.
Sure, so can Java and .NET, and there are plenty of serialization options for C++.
However, not every random object can be serialized (how do you serialize an open socket, for example?). And, of course, just because an application uses Cocoa, it doesn't mean that its own state is completely stored in Objective-C objects. Even if it's written in Objective-C entirely, it can also have arrays and other data structures (esp. if it uses some third-party libraries written in plain C) that the runtime will not be aware unless told.
So this still doesn't enable automatic serialization of any random app.

I suspect it's all under NDA, but it's just an implementation of the generic way iOS "multitasks" apps (in the background, they are frozen, then killed if the OS needs the memory. When you re-enter the program it either unfreezes (if it's still frozen) or reloads its frozen state so that the end effect is identical, except for the difference in load time caused by having to re-read the saved state from storage instead of RAM. Lion does the same/similar thing, including not necessarily closing an app when you quit it.).
So then, not really that much different. With Windows facility that I had referenced earlier, the only difference is that you'll have to create your own backing store for serialization (a file in AppData\Local would do nicely), and to indicate that resume is required by means of command line. That all is fairly trivial boilerplate. It's good that the OS can take care of that for you, but it's certainly not critical.

I like how you present this as though it's a perfectly acceptable way to implement a feature like this.
What's not acceptable about it? It's a fairly common way of exposing a virtual FS on Windows. The end user doesn't really observe those paths (if you browse them in Explorer, they do show up like "C:\ (June 6, 2011 16:00)". They are there to enable back-compat with applications which were written long before this feature was even thought of - in my opinion, a good thing to have.
I actually suspect OS X does something similar with Time Machine, since wouldn't it require some kind of a file path to hand over to the app handling this document type to open it from. It being Unix, I'd expect to some system directory serving as a mount point for "Time Machine FS".
Or is there rather some different API involved which directly transmits the raw document data to the app? If so, then I think I still prefer the paths, since, aside from back-compat, they also let you work with file versions directly from command line, treating them as readonly files with funky names.

When you enter Versions, it shows you your currently open document window, and next to it, another fully active document window with the version you are presently looking at (and you can scroll around backwards and forwards in time, and it will change which version is in the second windows).
I see. Yes, I have misunderstood - it sounded to me like some sort of visual diff, where you can actually see the documents rendered side by side in some special window with the usual merge functionality (i.e. "take this version" and 'take that version" on a change-by-change level). Which obviously requires app support.
The way you describe it, this can be done in Windows using its versioning thingy. Though not quite as seamlessly, since it won't auto-refresh the "history view" of the document when you change selection in version list - once you open a version, it stays opened as a separately managed document, so to see a different version instead you'd have to close that document window, select the new version, and click "Open" again. On the other hand, this lets you open arbitrary many document versions at once and arrange them side-by-side, though it is probably a rare need in practice.
Re:In other words... by DurendalMac · 2011-06-06 14:40 · Score: 1

O RLY? Name one other cloud-based service with anything remotely CLOSE to the level of integration that iCloud has, and then show me one that doesn't cost anything.
Re:In other words... by CodingHero · 2011-06-06 15:12 · Score: 1

You could browse the web on Windows Mobile, but the experience was pretty painful. The iPhone was the first to make that feature actually useful enough to use all the time. Same with the iPod. I have a little MP3 player from Samsung and I can't for the life of me remember how to use it. It just isn't intuitive.
I'd argue that the iPod isn't that intuitive either. I've had to explain to my dad a few times how to use iTunes to get music on to the iPod and how to use it. He's remarked to me that it "isn't intuitive," a sentiment I've heard from a few others with regard to the iPod.
Re:In other words... by aristotle-dude · 2011-06-06 15:29 · Score: 2

You are not getting it at all. This rapid resume feature in Lion is a system wide OS level resume. Apps are not required to be written to support it as it comes for free for all Cocoa apps. Also, the versioning in Lion are delta changes and not copies of the files.

--
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
Re:In other words... by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-06-06 15:44 · Score: 1

This rapid resume feature in Lion is a system wide OS level resume. Apps are not required to be written to support it as it comes for free for all Cocoa apps.
I still fail to see how this is technically possible, short of doing something like suspend-to-disk on per-app level (in which case it wouldn't be limited to Cocoa apps?). Can you give a link to some technical explanation of how it works?
Re:In other words... by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-06-06 16:05 · Score: 1

So I've googled around at it seems that the older version of the Lion feature page has auto save, versions, and resume all listed with an asterisk, with a note below saying "Available with apps that have been developed to work with Lion". So, apparently, it does require apps to be written to support it. Which would be no surprise, since if they had some magic pixie dust, they'd use it on iOS, as well - but it's not automatic there.
Unfortunately, the current feature list is more vague in saying "Some features are available only with applications developed to work with OS X Lion" without specifying which ones.
Re:In other words... by node+3 · 2011-06-06 16:05 · Score: 0

Sure, so can Java and .NET, and there are plenty of serialization options for C++.
However, not every random object can be serialized (how do you serialize an open socket, for example?). And, of course, just because an application uses Cocoa, it doesn't mean that its own state is completely stored in Objective-C objects. Even if it's written in Objective-C entirely, it can also have arrays and other data structures (esp. if it uses some third-party libraries written in plain C) that the runtime will not be aware unless told.
So this still doesn't enable automatic serialization of any random app.
I did mention that you can opt out, and also that if your app does certain things, it can't be suspended/resumed.
As for things that can't be automatically serialized, this can be often be solved by sending a message to the app that it's about to suspend, and having it prepare for or self-manage serialization. There usually aren't too many rough edges you have to address to get something like this to work.

So then, not really that much different. With Windows facility that I had referenced earlier, the only difference is that you'll have to create your own backing store for serialization (a file in AppData\Local would do nicely), and to indicate that resume is required by means of command line. That all is fairly trivial boilerplate. It's good that the OS can take care of that for you, but it's certainly not critical.
I'm going to suggest that it is. We will see, however. But if third party apps take up this feature, that speaks a lot to whether it matters if the OS provides much better support for this or not.
This illustrates one of the notable differences between Apple and the rest of the industry. To make a quick analogy, most of the industry runs a bunch a cable along the roads, then tells homeowners that they can run their own line out to the curb if they want to connect to the network. Apple runs those wires, then offers to send someone out to run it into your house.

I like how you present this as though it's a perfectly acceptable way to implement a feature like this.
What's not acceptable about it? It's a fairly common way of exposing a virtual FS on Windows.
It might be a fairly common way for Windows to work, but I doubt it's fairly common for users to actually use that feature. Imagine, for example, that Time Machine worked exactly like it does now, but files were only exposed by paths and filenames like that? That would instantly make Time Machine 90% less useful, even though it would still have the exact same functionality.

The end user doesn't really observe those paths (if you browse them in Explorer, they do show up like "C:\ (June 6, 2011 16:00)". They are there to enable back-compat with applications which were written long before this feature was even thought of - in my opinion, a good thing to have.
Whereas Time Machine was able to maintain backwards compatibility without exposing such an arcane interface to the user.

I actually suspect OS X does something similar with Time Machine, since wouldn't it require some kind of a file path to hand over to the app handling this document type to open it from. It being Unix, I'd expect to some system directory serving as a mount point for "Time Machine FS".
Or is there rather some different API involved which directly transmits the raw document data to the app? If so, then I think I still prefer the paths, since, aside from back-compat, they also let you work with file versions directly from command line, treating them as readonly files with funky names.
However it's implemented, the user will never see those paths and filenames. It's *sort of* like how IE deals with downloads that you "Open" instead of "Save". The file is some random file in %TEMP%, but the user just sees t
Re:In other words... by Kalriath · 2011-06-06 16:11 · Score: 1

Agreed. Xcode is hands down even worse than Eclipse for pure unintuitiveness. I couldn't even find half the features of Xcode 3, and Xcode 4 takes it one step further - so much so that I had to Google search to find out how to rename a compile target. And it still took three hours. I mean, it's a really good IDE - but it has a hell of a learning curve.
Oh, and the debug inspectors suck major ass. I mean, it can't even give me the contents of a fucking string (er, sorry, "NSString").

--
For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
Re:In other words... by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-06-06 16:43 · Score: 1

I'm going to suggest that it is. We will see, however. But if third party apps take up this feature, that speaks a lot to whether it matters if the OS provides much better support for this or not.
Well, serialization of Obj-C object graphs is not really an OS feature, it's the feature of the language & the framework, and can be offered by competing frameworks on other platforms just as well (indeed, as noted earlier, both Java and .NET had built-in and largely transparent serialization of object graphs since their first versions). So far as I can see, the only actual OS feature here is notifying apps when they need to suspend & resume; the rest of it is making all Cocoa classes properly serializable in such circumstances (if this even differs at all from normal serialization), which I suspect most of them already are.
So, basically - in Lion, we get OS notifications about suspend/resume, and Cocoa providing convenient serialization; if you use some other framework, serialization is your problem. In Windows, we get OS notifications about suspend/resume, and .NET providing convenient serialization; if you use some other framework, serialization is your problem. So far as I can see, the only real difference is that you'd have to handle WM_ENDSESSION and call RegisterApplicationRestart yourself, and call Serialize/Deserialize on your root object as needed (about two dozen lines of code all in all); whereas in Cocoa I'd expect that OS just tells your instance of NSApplication to serialize/deserialize itself.
The reason why this isn't picked up on Windows is, quite seriously, bad marketing. Apple is really good at picking those kinds of obvious-but-very-useful features and promoting them to the users; the users then demand that apps get updated to support them. In Windows land, a feature like this may be implemented and supported by some stock MS apps, but the API in question remains buried in the depth of MSDN (what is it these days - half dozen gigabytes of docs? good luck finding something like this at random). There are no presentations pointing out the feature and explaining how it's the next best thing since sliced bread. And so nobody cares - users, because they don't even know this is possible, and developers, because users don't ask them for this (and often also because they don't know).

It might be a fairly common way for Windows to work, but I doubt it's fairly common for users to actually use that feature. Imagine, for example, that Time Machine worked exactly like it does now, but files were only exposed by paths and filenames like that? That would instantly make Time Machine 90% less useful, even though it would still have the exact same functionality.
I think I've made a wrong impression of the feature. It most certainly does not require the user to work with such paths, or even be aware of them. You right-click on a file, select "Versions", and click on the one you want from the list - and it opens in whatever document is associated with it. If it's a directory, then it opens in Explorer, and the user can navigate it and open (previous versions corresponding to that time slice) from there. You can even create shortcuts to files and folders within (by drag and drop, as usual).
The fact that such paths are used to tell Explorer and other programs where to get document data from is largely invisible and irrelevant to the user, except he can take notice of that, and use it to his advantage (in command line etc).
By the way, I googled around, and, apparently, Time Machine backups aren't really all that different - the mount point used is /Volumes/TimeMachine/Backups.backupdb/$HOSTNAME/$DATE/$USERNAME.

However it's implemented, the user will never see those paths and filenames. It's *sort of* like how IE deals with downloads that you "Open" instead of "Save". The file is some random file in %TEMP%, but
Re:In other words... by hawk · 2011-06-06 16:51 · Score: 1

I checked whir readi this--it works on my ipad2, right now ( and I've been using that for weeks, anyway)
hawk
Re:In other words... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 17:25 · Score: 0

> I have a little MP3 player from Samsung and I can't for the life of me
> remember how to use it. It just isn't intuitive.
And neither is the Apple click-wheel. Someone had to show you how to use it.
Re:In other words... by aristotle-dude · 2011-06-06 17:38 · Score: 2

This rapid resume feature in Lion is a system wide OS level resume. Apps are not required to be written to support it as it comes for free for all Cocoa apps.
I still fail to see how this is technically possible, short of doing something like suspend-to-disk on per-app level (in which case it wouldn't be limited to Cocoa apps?). Can you give a link to some technical explanation of how it works?
*Sigh* Cocoa is a framework which shares some characteristics with .NET (except Cocoa existed long before) as it is a late binding. With .NET, you can use reflection to serialize and deserialize complex object types while Cocoa uses something called a selector.
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cocoa_(API)#Late_binding
Cocoa uses this concept of late building to allow you to have your UI contained within dynamically loaded .nib files which tie into selectors in your objective C class files.
If you are really serious about learning more, just "google it". Some suggested terms include "late binding" or "late binding objective c" or "late binding .net".

--
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
Re:In other words... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 17:40 · Score: 0

It wasn't that browsing the web on WinMob phones was bad, it was that there was not as much support from the websites. Browsing the web on my mum's iphone is pretty much the same as browsing the web on my old HTC or on my N900 phone.
It is pretty hard to make a non-intuitive interface for a mp3 player (except for one of the apple players which had no buttons or screen and I could never for the life of me work out how to do anything except play music, no randomisation, volume changing etc).
What makes Apple so successful with their iGear is the marketing. Apple gear has that cool factor that so many people seem to want. Without that cool factor then the Apple gear are just devices in a sea of devices which all do roughly the same thing, some good, some bad, many many average...
Re:In other words... by Risen888 · 2011-06-06 18:19 · Score: 1

So far as I know, both Gnome and KDE on Linux also have something similar
Really? I've never heard of it (I'm a KDE user). I can't imagine ever using it, but...really?

--
Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
Re:In other words... by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-06-06 18:32 · Score: 1

I'm pretty sure there was some way to tell apps to reopen after reboot in KDE (presumably in the same state as they were, though handling this was left up to app), at least in 3.x. I have hazy memory of this feature being annoying enough that I had to go and disable it. ~
Re:In other words... by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-06-06 18:41 · Score: 1

Look, I understand how serialization of object graphs works (in any language). That's helpful, but it doesn't let you automagically suspend and resume apps. At best the framework can tell NSApplication to serialize itself, but the state of the application does not have to be captured in objects reachable from the app object (there are also global variables, local variables etc). Heck, it doesn't have to be in objects at all - what if I'm using plain arrays, or some plain C library? What if my app is itself written in C++, and I only use Obj-C to invoke into Cocoa APIs? And what about inherently non-serializable objects, such as open database connections, sockets etc?
It doesn't work like that.
Anyway, I have already "solved the mystery" in another comment. Per Apple themselves, this feature does not work for old apps, and it does require apps to be aware of suspend/resume to handle it correctly. No magic pixie dust here.
Re:In other words... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 21:15 · Score: 0

Keep telling yourself that.
So decent now decent notifications and wireless synching.
Operation Google Catchup going well?
Re:In other words... by AmiMoJo · 2011-06-06 21:16 · Score: 1

It depends on if you count cost as part of the "user experience". Google give everything away for free and make money through ads, where as Apple prefer to charge you directly.
While Android is perhaps a bit less intuitive people are willing to learn. Personally I would prefer to have more features and customisability in exchange for a bit of a learning curve. The best tool for the job is often not the easiest.

--
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Re:In other words... by AmiMoJo · 2011-06-06 21:20 · Score: 1

The iPod itself was not much of an improvement over existing MP3 players. iTunes was the innovation, making it easy for people to rip CDs and buy music online.
That and the Apple hype machine. People didn't really understand MP3 players until Apple explained it, and made them look cool with their white earbuds and monochrome adverts.

--
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Re:In other words... by angel'o'sphere · 2011-06-06 23:10 · Score: 1

I doubt it has anything to do with serialization.
Very likely they simply dump the process memory of the running app to disk and when the app is restarted the finder checks first if there is a dump to reactivate.
With sparse fÃels etc. this should not be a problem and would work for any kind of application.

--
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Re:In other words... by jfanning · 2011-06-06 23:33 · Score: 1

No, you have to implement it yourself.
Straight from Apple. http://www.apple.com/macosx/whats-new/features.html#autosave
"Apps developed with Auto Save can automatically save changes"
I guess you aren't a developer. It might be easier if you use CoreData, but you don't get it for free.
Re:In other words... by jfanning · 2011-06-06 23:35 · Score: 1

Yes, Microsoft Office implements the Restart Manager. It might be the only app that does. MS doesn't have any concept of Auto Save, but it is not a new idea. I know that UI experts have requested exactly that feature for decades.
Re:In other words... by jfanning · 2011-06-06 23:43 · Score: 1

A lot of this is probably that in OSX there is pretty much one official way to do things and one official development environment and language. In Windows there are dozens of ways, many of which hide from the developer that there are even such features available. Nothing in Windows forces you to support all the possible window messages, and probably most Windows "developers" don't even know what WM_CLOSE or WM_PAINT signify.
Perhaps Apple can force compliance as a requirement to get into the Mac Apps Store.
Re:In other words... by zevans · 2011-06-06 23:57 · Score: 1

Unfair to pick on one point in your otherwise excellent post, but... I'm gonna.

You could browse the web on Windows Mobile, but the experience was pretty painful. The iPhone was the first to make that feature actually useful enough to use all the time.
Then why are there so many iPhone-specific versions of web sites out there? Is it the mobile web site that's broken, or iPhone's browser? Surely the POINT of the Web is that a small-screen version should be good on Android, iPhone, Symbian, and Blackberry equally? Why isn't this happening?

--
"... and more and more now there are all kinds of electronic goodies available" -- Pink Floyd 1972
Re:In other words... by tehcyder · 2011-06-07 00:13 · Score: 1

This goes all the way back to the iPod. "Oooh, an MP3 player. Big deal. I have one of those."
No, it was "meh, an MP3 player you have to use bastard fucking iTunes for, so it's no big deal I'm never getting one of those when I can just copy MP3s onto my existing player, as I have had enough of my wife/kids destroying computers by accidentally clicking on something in iTunes, and would personally rather transcribe songs by hand onto manuscript paper, then record a fresh version using Tibetan noseflutes and bongos, rather than ever, ever, EVER having to use iTunes again".
YMMV.

--
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Re:In other words... by Risen888 · 2011-06-07 03:42 · Score: 1

Oh, yeah. Sorry, I don't know what the hell I thought you meant. Yeah, that's still there.

--
Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
Re:In other words... by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-06-07 04:13 · Score: 1

You can't easily reactivate such dumps, either. They would necessarily contain things such as OS handles, which ultimately reference kernel structures (which are obviously not part of the dump).
Then there are various scenarios, such as: what if the dump is taken with binary version X (doesn't even need to be the main binary, could be any of the system libraries), but on resume time it's X+1?
Anyway, I have already found out that, according to Apple, this feature does require app support, and will not work with old apps.
Re:In other words... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-07 11:29 · Score: 0

No you haven't.
This happens every time Apple announces a new product. Someone invariably claims that it's nothing new, because some half-assed crappy version of the idea exists somewhere. Then once the product is actually released, everyone is amazed at what a leap it is.
This goes all the way back to the iPod. "Oooh, an MP3 player. Big deal. I have one of those."
------RM
Right because your opinion of how something works is fact.
Apple has been doing this for years and honestly they were very far behind in common features. The notification system didnt "just work." It was horrible, intrusive and down right archaic. Androids drop down bar may not be "new" but it does "just work."
Now another thing is icloud. Again Apple fell short coming to the tablet with this one. The cloud is meant for streaming. File storage is a very old concept and just because it can automatically download to all your iOS devices does not negate the fact that it cannot stream to your devices. Now we are taking up twice as much space as we were previously.
Apple has fallen behind in features and functionality. Android, and WP7(Mango) are leading the way in both now. Sure Androids UI may not be as flashy as Apples, but its coming and when it does what excuse will you make then.
Re:In other words... by intheshelter · 2011-06-07 13:10 · Score: 1

Funny thing is I read comments like yours and I think, "I've been reading dumb comments like that for years."
Seems you and Apple must have a lot in common?
Re:In other words... by angel'o'sphere · 2011-06-07 20:58 · Score: 1

Ofc it is not "easy". But it is more likely than the idea that an app serializes its internal structure like your parent thought.
Also there is old school software called "condor" that exactly does that. Dumping the process state and even let it migrate to a different machien and continue there. Not sure if it is still under development ... this project seems similar but not sure if it is the right one: http://www.cs.wisc.edu/condor/

--
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Re:In other words... by mcguirez · 2011-06-08 09:54 · Score: 1

OMG, you were *so* close...
"No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame."
http://slashdot.org/story/01/10/23/1816257/Apple-releases-iPod

--
When you hear hoofbeats, think horses, not zebras

No install media, no deal by alcourt · 2011-06-06 07:02 · Score: 1

The comment that there will be no install media for OS X 10.7 is a show stopper to me.

--
"I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend unto the death your right to say it." -- Voltaire

Re:No install media, no deal by tuffy · 2011-06-06 07:06 · Score: 1

There's got to be some way to install it to disk or USB drive (presumably via the disk utility). Otherwise there's no way to restore from a dead hard drive. It'd be madness to have the App Store as the only install option.

--
Ita erat quando hic adveni.
Re:No install media, no deal by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:06 · Score: 0

The comment that there will be no install media for OS X 10.7 is a show stopper to me.
Which comment was that? Link or it didn't happen.
Re:No install media, no deal by Quiet_Desperation · 2011-06-06 07:07 · Score: 1

I have heard elsewhere that there might be a burnable disc image, but no confirmation yet.
Could be a good way to do it. The App Store downloads the image, mounts it and installs. You can go in later and burn it to disc.
Re:No install media, no deal by Glendale2x · 2011-06-06 07:10 · Score: 2

I've heard you can burn it to a DVD if you want. It's just a disc image (in the developer preview anyway).

--
this is my sig
Re:No install media, no deal by TheRaven64 · 2011-06-06 07:12 · Score: 1

The announcement said that it will be available from the online store, in addition to conventional distribution channels. There are enough reasons to dislike Apple products, without making up imaginary ones.

--
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Re:No install media, no deal by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:16 · Score: 0

Madness? This is Apple!
Re:No install media, no deal by geniusj · 2011-06-06 07:18 · Score: 1

From the macrumors live updates:
10:37 am Lion available only on Mac App Store
We'll see ...
Re:No install media, no deal by Kielistic · 2011-06-06 07:19 · Score: 2

I'm sure they'd be happy to do it for you at the Apple Store. You're not supposed to be servicing the hard drive in the first place as I understand it.
Re:No install media, no deal by DJRumpy · 2011-06-06 07:20 · Score: 2

It has already been reported that the App Store is an preferred option for upgrading, but I have no doubt you will be able to purchase it as well. Without a physical media option, it would be difficult to do system work (repairs, installs, etc) when you lack an internet connection.
Ref: http://osxdaily.com/2011/05/04/mac-os-x-10-7-lion-to-be-distributed-through-mac-app-store/

Distribution of Lion through the Mac App Store for all users is not too surprising considering it’s the primary method for developers to download and install the Developer Preview releases. This is not to say that a corresponding DVD installer will not be released alongside the digital distribution. Last month, a placeholder for a Lion installation DVD showed up on German Amazon, and there continues to be a possibility that Lion will also appear on USB installer keys for MacBook Air and Mac Mini Server users.
They already ship the Macbook Air installer on a thumb drive. I see no reason why that would change for users with caps on their internet plan, or for people who simply don't want to download it.
Re:No install media, no deal by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:26 · Score: 1

You're not supposed to care what a hard drive is in the first place as I understand it.
FTFY...
Re:No install media, no deal by RockClimbingFool · 2011-06-06 07:30 · Score: 1

Umm... You bought a Mac there buddy, not a computer. You have issues you are supposed to pay Apple their tithe to get it fixed, not fix it yourself.
I am not trying to be trollish, but iPhones, iPads, iPods are not supposed to be user serviceable items. Maybe this is just another step Apple is taking to movetheir computer business to a similar revenue stream model? Look at the MacBook Airs for example, i don't believe anything about them is supposed to be user serviceable. I am not sure about the standard MacBooks, I don't own one..
Re:No install media, no deal by beelsebob · 2011-06-06 07:34 · Score: 1

1) Insert standard install media that came with your machine
2) Run the app store updater process.
Done.
Re:No install media, no deal by MachineShedFred · 2011-06-06 07:35 · Score: 1

The developer preview is a self-contained installer app. You copy that to a USB drive / DVD-ROM.
Hard stuff.

--
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
Re:No install media, no deal by xMrFishx · 2011-06-06 07:36 · Score: 1

It Seems that they want to double-dip and make you buy Snow Leopard first if you don't already have it. Look at the bottom of this this page. To paraphrase:

Step 1: Make sure your Mac can run Lion [followed by minor processor list].
Step 2: Make sure you have the latest version of Snow Leopard.
Step 3: Download OS X Lion from the Mac App Store.

So looking at that, they are only selling Lion to Snow Leopard users. If you have Leopard, bad luck, buy both. Not sure I like that idea personally. Makes me sadface.
Re:No install media, no deal by xjerky · 2011-06-06 07:39 · Score: 1

Looks like I'm pirating Snow Leopard just so I can buy Lion, then.

--
A sentence you'll never see on an Internet discussion board: "You know what? You're right."
Re:No install media, no deal by elfprince13 · 2011-06-06 07:42 · Score: 2

The Mac App Store just downloads .dmg's last I remember (or something similar). See the whole fiasco with trying to ugprade Xcode through the store - it makes you redownload the whole disk image.
Re:No install media, no deal by HiredMan · 2011-06-06 07:44 · Score: 1

Ummm... only available through the App Store means Snow Leopard by default because there is no App Store on Leopard from which to buy it.

--
Bill Gates - Creationist?!?
Re:No install media, no deal by xMrFishx · 2011-06-06 07:44 · Score: 1

Good plan. I'd lend you my disk but you're just..some dude, somewhere else. I love you random guy!
Re:No install media, no deal by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:44 · Score: 0

You forgot to mention the premise of that page: "To upgrade on day one..." Which I take to mean that you don't have to by Snow leopard in order to upgrade, as long as you are willing to wait for discs or some other means of delivery outside of the app store.
Re:No install media, no deal by himself · 2011-06-06 07:44 · Score: 1

How about for the Mac Book I use at work, but where I use my own Apple ID? I think corporate Macs would *have* to have some non-AppStore method for getting Lion.
Re:No install media, no deal by DJRumpy · 2011-06-06 07:50 · Score: 1

So would the millions of pre 10.6 OS X users since the App store isn't available prior to that. I have zero doubt that physical media will be available for purchase.
Re:No install media, no deal by makomk · 2011-06-06 07:50 · Score: 1

That's not what Engadget seem to think. Of course, when Apple originally announced OS X Lion was going to be available from the App Store they said it was in addition to existing retail channels, but you know what Apple are like for changing their mind...
Re:No install media, no deal by Zinner · 2011-06-06 07:51 · Score: 1

Agreed. Just like I require all apps to be available in punched-card versions just in case those pesky "magnetic" drives fail! I need a hard copy of everything!
Re:No install media, no deal by BasilBrush · 2011-06-06 07:57 · Score: 1

That says "To upgrade on day one". And guaranteed, there is nothing casual about that wording. Sounds like on day one it's a Mac App Store exclusive. And to access the Mac App Store you do indeed need Snow Leopard.
That doesn't mean it won't be available on DVD some time later. And that will be installable on any Mac with a high enough spec, regardless of previous OS.
Re:No install media, no deal by jscotta44 · 2011-06-06 07:58 · Score: 2

Purchase Snow Leopard $30.
Purchase Lion $30.
Total $60.
Purchase Windows 7 for about $200+
Yep. Apple is expensive and double dipping. You only have $120+ more in your pockets now than if you went with a Windows upgrade. Maybe more if you upgraded to Vista and then to 7.
Re:No install media, no deal by gnasher719 · 2011-06-06 08:00 · Score: 1

So looking at that, they are only selling Lion to Snow Leopard users. If you have Leopard, bad luck, buy both. Not sure I like that idea personally. Makes me sadface.
You pay $29 for the difference between Snow Leopard and Lion. Just as you should have paid $29 for the difference between Leopard and Snow Leopard. I think the assumption is that any cheapskates who didn't buy Snow Leopard won't be interested in Lion anyway.
Re:No install media, no deal by xMrFishx · 2011-06-06 08:07 · Score: 1

Well, yes, except you can still run a machine that has came with Leopard, such as my 2007 MBP that is fully capable of taking Lion. Not everyone upgraded to SL because it's a purchased service-pack, essentially. I have snow leopard, but I only got it in the last six months. I could have perhaps waited for Lion instead, thinking it'd save me having to buy SL in the intervening time. Now it seems you Must own SL already, to get Lion. That, I don't like.
Re:No install media, no deal by cheeks5965 · 2011-06-06 08:09 · Score: 1

I don't understand how they'll do the app store purchases for older operating systems. I thought you needed snow leopard to do app store. anyone hear anything about this?

--
-- Flame me and I will happily flame you back. Bring it!
Re:No install media, no deal by whiteboy86 · 2011-06-06 08:18 · Score: 1

..so you will have to buy a brand new Apple hardware with the Lion OSX then, looks like some marketing geniuses hard at work.
Re:No install media, no deal by Deus.1.01 · 2011-06-06 08:21 · Score: 4, Insightful

Thats ok, my wallet was stuffed with those 500 dollars i saved buying an Asus laptop anyway.

--
My -1 Troll is actually a +1 funny. And my -1 flame is actually a +1 insightfull.
Re:No install media, no deal by fusiongyro · 2011-06-06 08:23 · Score: 1

All the Macbook Pros since 2010 or 2009 have had access to the hard drive and instructions for replacing it in the included manual.
Re:No install media, no deal by makomk · 2011-06-06 08:26 · Score: 1

You'd think so, but Apple really don't seem to care too much about the corporate market. The OS X Lion Server add-on is apparently only available from the App Store too for what it's worth.
Re:No install media, no deal by TrancePhreak · 2011-06-06 08:27 · Score: 1

Apple has never given delta updates for xcode, however. Which means it's been a 4GB download for each release.

--

-]Phreak Out[-
Re:No install media, no deal by jscotta44 · 2011-06-06 08:28 · Score: 1, Informative

To each their own! I prefer my Mac Kit with OS X to Asus with Windows. I'm assuming that you also saved money by downloading a linux distro instead of Windows. I'll add up the hours I saved by not doing that and keep on being happy with my decision.
Re:No install media, no deal by UnknowingFool · 2011-06-06 08:30 · Score: 1

The last time I checked, there were few things on most laptops that are user serviceable. Sound card, video card, Ethernet or CPU bad? Replace the whole motherboard. As for other parts like memory and HD, they are replaceable. There's even a site like iFixit that shows you how.

--
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Re:No install media, no deal by elfprince13 · 2011-06-06 08:33 · Score: 1

Correct. But my point was the file format involved.
Re:No install media, no deal by cheeks5965 · 2011-06-06 08:36 · Score: 1, Informative

they're starting to lock in their HDs with non-standard pins and sensors, so you cant swap them out yourself. is this a big deal or not? i don't want to pay premium dollars to upgrade a commodity component. but at least on my current mbp i can access the hd and memory without voiding the warrantee. cutting out the battery would void the warantee, but i'm way out of waranee anyway (only 1 year without applecare, speaking of premium dollars)

--
-- Flame me and I will happily flame you back. Bring it!
Re:No install media, no deal by UnknowingFool · 2011-06-06 08:38 · Score: 1

Normally you only upgrade one version at a time. Going through 2 versions is tricky. This is not new. If you had Panther (10.4) and you wanted Snow Leopard, you first had to get Leopard.

--
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Re:No install media, no deal by BasilBrush · 2011-06-06 08:42 · Score: 1

It's not an arbitrary restriction. Only Snow Leopard has the Mac App Store, so of course you can only download Lion from the Mac App Store if you already have Snow Leopard.
For those who have Leopard, they'll have to buy Lion on physical media. Looks like that will be available at a later date though.
Re:No install media, no deal by armanox · 2011-06-06 08:50 · Score: 1

Not true in my experience. Having taken my second-hand MBP to the Apple store before, they didn't have any issues with me having replaced the HDD (from the original 5400RPM 160 (or was it 120?)GB drive to a 7200RPM 320GB WD), nor any other comments about stuff I'd done to the hardware, and they were happy to answer my questions as to where I could get parts for it (idiot before me broke some of the screw attachments on the upper case assembly, and the trackpad button no longer works).

--
I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
Re:No install media, no deal by Moridineas · 2011-06-06 08:56 · Score: 1

That's an incorrect assumption.
Re:No install media, no deal by Deus.1.01 · 2011-06-06 09:06 · Score: 1

Well...no..I leached of MSDNAA :)
And my 7 years spent toying with GNU/Linux wasnt for financial reasons, we're NERDS for gods sake!
(not to mention i spend 3 times the.....time.. to setup a windows install with all the drivers, then last time i installed a distro....WHICH WAS SLACKWARE FOR CTHULUS SAKE !)

--
My -1 Troll is actually a +1 funny. And my -1 flame is actually a +1 insightfull.
Re:No install media, no deal by harlows_monkeys · 2011-06-06 09:22 · Score: 1

The announcement said that it will be available from the online store, in addition to conventional distribution channels
At 35:21 in the keynote, they say explicitly that it will be ONLY available from the Mac App Store online. There will be no other distribution channel.
Re:No install media, no deal by Altus · 2011-06-06 09:26 · Score: 1

It wont surprise me, but most people wont have to bother with this anyway. The store remembers your purchases and all macs come with original installation media. You can restore to the factory state and then have the store update you to the latest version you have purchased.
An offline backup could be useful in some situations to avoid having to download, or where you cannot download, but most people probably wont bother with it.

--
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
Re:No install media, no deal by Altus · 2011-06-06 09:32 · Score: 1

I find this unlikely because it would leave users of 10.5 out in the cold. There have to be people on 10.5 who are running on upgradable machines but didnt make the leap.
Of course they could buy 10.6 for 30 bucks and then upgrade through the app store. I assume the reason Lion is only 30 bucks is because it is an upgrade from 10.6 only. Maybe they will have a higher priced option for people coming from earlier versions. In the long run I can see going all app store, but the transition probably requires some other options even if they are not ideal.

--
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
Re:No install media, no deal by Altus · 2011-06-06 09:37 · Score: 1

To be fair, isnt that snow leopard purchase just an upgrade on leopard?
Of course leopard (or better) came on every machine that will run Lion but it is kind of part of the cost of the machine.

--
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
Re:No install media, no deal by jscotta44 · 2011-06-06 09:53 · Score: 1

Certainly Snow Leopard is an upgrade for Leopard – that is no secret. However, it was an important upgrade that provided a lot of the frameworks that allow for the things that we see developers making today. Not sure that that is germane.
Re:No install media, no deal by jscotta44 · 2011-06-06 09:56 · Score: 1

Dude, if you are a nerd, why the hell did you purchase a system built by someone else? Besides, I agree with you on the time to set up Windows. That is why I went Mac. UNIX goodness with time to work on the stuff that I care about. Not assembling a box nor trying to get a linux distro working. I just buy the box and get to work.
BTWI don't build my own cars either. Just buy them and drive.
Re:No install media, no deal by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 11:01 · Score: 0

I think they said that they won't sell install media for it, but that doesn't mean that it won't exist. Older macs can install Snow Leopard from DVD and get Lion from the App Store. New Macs should come with a DVD to install Lion. I'm interested to see whether purchasing a new Mac with Lion entitles you to download Lion from the App Store, since it was specifically mentioned that purchasing Lion entitles you to install it on all of your Macs.
I could see them also offering a restore CD that boots a Mac with networking support to download the OS from the App Store.
Re:No install media, no deal by Deus.1.01 · 2011-06-06 11:30 · Score: 1

And that's why theres a place for you in the B-Ark.

--
My -1 Troll is actually a +1 funny. And my -1 flame is actually a +1 insightfull.
Re:No install media, no deal by node+3 · 2011-06-06 12:31 · Score: 0

Umm... You bought a Mac there buddy, not a computer. You have issues you are supposed to pay Apple their tithe to get it fixed, not fix it yourself.
What, exactly, are you talking about?

I am not trying to be trollish,
Well, that convinced me...

but iPhones, iPads, iPods are not supposed to be user serviceable items. Maybe this is just another step Apple is taking to movetheir computer business to a similar revenue stream model?
*WHAT* revenue stream model? Apple sells you hardware. That's their revenue stream. It's already the same for iPods and Mac Pros.

Look at the MacBook Airs for example, i don't believe anything about them is supposed to be user serviceable. I am not sure about the standard MacBooks, I don't own one..
Memory and hard drives are user-servicable. They aren't on the MacBook Air because that's how they were able to make it into a MacBook Air. Hatches and latches take up space, and you can't replace the hard drive or memory because it doesn't have a hard drive (nor even a regular SSD), and the memory is soldered on so that it will take up less space.
Re:No install media, no deal by Osgeld · 2011-06-06 13:03 · Score: 1

heh if you had some extra money you might have a internet connection that could download a cd in less than "hours", I just installed debian ppc on my G4, took 15 min to download and 30 min to install, which is also counting fiddle with gnome where I like it time
like you said to each their own, I don't like being nickeled and dimed every year cause they moved some stuff around in the UI and added some stuff I probably wont use (posted from my pc with windows XP from a disc I bought in 2002 for 99$ on sale)
Re:No install media, no deal by mjwx · 2011-06-06 13:41 · Score: 1

Purchase Snow Leopard $30.
Purchase Lion $30.
Total $60.
Purchase Windows 7 for about $200+
Purchase Windows 7 capable laptop, A$600, get Windows included.

Purchase OS X capable laptop of similar specification A$1400, get OS X included.

Do you see where we are going here? I have to buy overpriced HW just to run it, with Windows I can get it OEM by buying any internal component.

Internal SD card reader A$9
Windows 7 Professional OEM A$130

Net saving of over A$1200 by not having to buy overpriced hardware.

BTW, last time I did a Mac OS upgrade (10.3 to 10.4) it was A$140, more expensive then a Win 2000 to XP upgrade in Australia.

--
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Re:No install media, no deal by DurendalMac · 2011-06-06 14:41 · Score: 1

3) Wait for four goddamned gigs to download instead of just installing 10.7 outright from a disc.
Re:No install media, no deal by jscotta44 · 2011-06-06 14:47 · Score: 1

Download? Dude, while the US is behind many places, download speed is not what I'm talking about, since it isn't that slow to begin with – besides I don't sit around waiting for anything to download. As to extra money, I'll put my income against most yours and let's see who has the extra money! :-) I make enough that I value my time more than I do trying to screw around getting museum pieces to work together. I did my hobby days back in the 70's building kit computers like the Altair 8080 and coding them on them in binary. Yes, I'm an old coot. Now I buy and screw with technology to make things happen - not just because I can.
And that nickel and dime stuff you are talking about - again - to each their own. I prefer them to have them test stuff for me so it works. Besides, hundreds of new tested API's and frameworks is not "...[moving] some stuff around in the UI". It is a bunch of work that I've found very useful. Not all of it and not all of it done perfect. But better than the alternatives, for me.
Re:No install media, no deal by jscotta44 · 2011-06-06 14:52 · Score: 1

I've run through many machine comparisons. Would you mind being more specific for yours? Usually when someone states a laptop with such savings, it is a POS missing many things that the "equivalent" Mac has in it.
And, no, I don't see where you are going. Don't compare a Yugo to a porsche and claim they are both the same because they have four wheels and two doors. Show me your laptop and and I'll you mine (figuratively). In other words, tell me your machine and I'll tell you mine.
Even with that, what works for you will not necessarily work for me and vice versa.
Now, with the exchange rate, I assume that you may have some real issues in pricing. For me, using a USA pricing structure, I've often found that Macs cost the same or less than equivalent kit.
Re:No install media, no deal by Osgeld · 2011-06-06 15:29 · Score: 1

why the anger? Im in the US and have US speeds, download? your going to have to download lion... are you done with your pissing contest? great I am happy you twiddled a altair, I have an apple 2 sitting on my desk right now, they are fun machines, but has nothing to do with dinosaurs, the point is it doesn't take HOURS, it takes a fuck old g4 less than ONE hour, so pull your thumb out of your ass and get with it if your going to take that attitude.
Re:No install media, no deal by jscotta44 · 2011-06-06 16:01 · Score: 1

Sorry for the attitude you felt. No intended, at least not at you specifically. I am just tired of the kit assemblers taking the superior attitude over people that decide to buy quality gear to get work done. If that is not you, I do apologize. But when you popped off about posting from your XP box, it does have to do with dinosaurs and it set me off. Again, sorry if you felt anger. It was not specifically against you.
Re:No install media, no deal by Osgeld · 2011-06-06 16:26 · Score: 1

thats the funny part, the computer its on is less than a year old
Re:No install media, no deal by Falconhell · 2011-06-06 16:39 · Score: 1

More relevant comparison; You buy Windows and get future service packs for free. Apple charge for each service pack like it is a new OS. (See 10.2, 10.3 10.4 10.5 10.6) Hows that stack up I wonder?
Re:No install media, no deal by mjwx · 2011-06-06 17:23 · Score: 1

I've run through many machine comparisons. Would you mind being more specific for yours?
I'd compare an Asus U30SD but you said I cant use a porche.

Instead of giving you allusions to pretend numbers, I'll provide you with actual links. Both of which I could buy within 10 minutes of posting. In before you start trying to move goalposts, all of these laptops will perform the same functions. Trying to say otherwise is only fooling yourself.

Now, the basic model 13" Dell Vostro has:
- Sandy Bridge i3.
- 2 GB RAM.
- Intel IGM.
- 7.2 K RPM HDD.
- 1 Yr Next Business Day on-site warranty.
And starts at A$750.

The base model 13" Macbook has:
- Core 2 Duo.
- 2 GB RAM.
- Nvidia 320 with shared memory (not dedicated).
- 5.4 K RPM HDD.
- 1 Yr "take it to an Apple store" warranty.
And starts at A$1197

The Dell in question is by far not the cheapest, but it is something I'd be comfortable recommending to a friend or customer. Unlike the Macbook which has an older slower processor, slower disk and a really bad warranty.

For a more like for like comparison with a 2011 macbook.

I present the Asus Porche (U30SD).
- Intel Core i5 2410M (sandy bridge).
- 4 GB RAM.
- Nvida 520 1GB VRAM / Intel HD IGM (switchable).
- 640 GB HDD (5.4 K RPM) which can be swapped out.
- Blueray.
A$1249 drive away,

Now for the Macbook Lada (2011 model).
- Intel Core i5 2410M (sandy bridge).
- 4 GB RAM.
- Intel HD 3000.
- 320 GB HDD 5.4 K RPM (not swappable with non apple drives).
- DVD drive.
All this for A$1396.

Now the Macbook is inferior to the Asus which is A$150 cheaper. Oh, the Asus also has a 10 hour battery life running Windows 7.

So, you were saying (without providing links)?

--
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Re:No install media, no deal by IgnoramusMaximus · 2011-06-06 18:02 · Score: 1

1) Insert standard install media that came with your machine 2) Run the app store updater process.

Works real well when the "standard install media" is little more than an app store interface and you are on a boat, live in a remote location or just in an average US rural county where dial-up is the only option...
Any computer system that requires a semi-permanent fat-ass Internet connection so it can function as a glorified cash register for an ever more authoritarian corporation is a non-starter to all those millions of people who just happened not to devolve into Starbucks-latte-sipping hipsters in Seattle who are oh-so-trendily stuffing every most incriminating and idiotic minutia of their lives into "clouds" so that it is now finally trivial for some lawyer one year hence to sue their asses into the ground at their next divorce, not to mention all those three-letter-agencies out there who just love to have the goods on everyone.

Done.

Indeed done. Quite finished. Your privacy and freedom, the Idiotbook/Twit-ster/Cloud Generation. Stick a fork in them...
Re:No install media, no deal by beelsebob · 2011-06-06 20:27 · Score: 1

Except that the standard install media is not an app-store interface, so you're golden :)
Re:No install media, no deal by jscotta44 · 2011-06-06 23:02 · Score: 1

Do the math and see. While you are at it. Add up the features you get with each.
Re:No install media, no deal by jscotta44 · 2011-06-06 23:34 · Score: 1

Why did you run to JBHIFI for a price comparison? For the price you are throwing around for a MacBook, you get a MacBook Pro and the MacBook starts at $999. And the little performance performance increase you may have gotten out of your i3 is ruined because of the large clock difference between the faster Mac's and your sample Dell and the fact that yours has Intel integrated graphics and not a discrete Nvidia processor like the MacBook. I did notice that you cited the MacBook's video using shared memory, but you somehow neglected to add that to the Dell rig. As to the warranty, it better be a good one with the Dell, you are going to need it. BTWI'm in Austin. You should hear how the folks that design and build those rigs talk about them. You really should have picked a company with a better shot at quality.
On to the Asus!
Again you go to JBHIFI instead of the Apple site. Why? The base MacBook Pro looks like this:
2.3GHz dual-core
Intel Core i5
4GB 1333MHz
320GB 5400-rpm1
Intel HD Graphics 3000
Built-in battery (7 hours)2
Apple Store On-line US$1199
I'll believe the battery life claim on the Asus when I see it. While there are some non-Apple notebooks getting those numbers, the reviews that I've read say that the vast majority are not. In fact the Apple laptops are among the few actually getting their claims or better. BTWI can't find the model you specify for Asus on the US site so I can do not comparison and confirm/deny your experience.
Moving the goal posts? And they do the same things? Really? I guess you could say that about an Osborne you could throw into this mix, too. BTWwhere is your Asus' Thunderbolt interface? Ah, I see. Still running those legacy interfaces.
As to the links, did you really need to have Apple.com pointed out to you?
Re:No install media, no deal by uglyduckling · 2011-06-07 00:39 · Score: 1

Really? Because I definitely recall paying for OS X 10.6, then getting updates 10.6.1 through 10.6.7 for free. I may have been dreaming though. I think you're confusing service packs with new OS releases. Probably the reason is that Microsoft spent so long developing Vista (throwing away most of the proposed features in the process) that you're thinking it takes nearly a decade to release a new OS. The Vista to Windows 7 timeframe is probably a bit more realistic, and unless you pirated it, I'm sure you paid to upgrade from Vista to 7.
Re:No install media, no deal by angel'o'sphere · 2011-06-07 02:13 · Score: 1

You are mixing up service packs with new OS editions.
Apple only charges for new OS editions, just liek windows does. (If you dont get it: 10.2 and 10.6 and now 10.7 are entirely new OSes and not service packs)

--
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Re:No install media, no deal by RockClimbingFool · 2011-06-07 03:31 · Score: 1

I own a Dell m1530. If I go to Dell's website, I can find detailed procedures for replacing pretty much anything I want. Link here
So I don't have to buy any replacement parts from Dell. Or I could buy parts from them, its my choice. But at least Dell gives me more than enough information how to do it myself. Motherboards, keyboards, LCD screens, network cards, cellular data modems, hard drives, ram even whole cases can all be obtained from a variety of vendors.
Apple is a hardware company. They want you to buy early and often. That is OK. But I just can't stand the people that continually act like Apple is sealing up and obfuscating their hardware for the good of consumers. They manufacture forced obsolescence. Once again, that is OK. Know what you are buying.
Re:No install media, no deal by Altus · 2011-06-07 03:56 · Score: 1

I actually just meant that it was sold as a $30 upgrade on leopard. You were at least supposed to have leopard in order to install snow leopard (though I'm not sure it actually forced that in software).

--
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
Re:No install media, no deal by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-07 05:41 · Score: 0

I think you are correct about that, but I'm not positive. I do know it didn't check though. I purchased a family pack and had one mac still on panther IIRC. And it didnt ask when I upgraded it.
Re:No install media, no deal by mjwx · 2011-06-07 13:08 · Score: 1

Why did you run to JBHIFI for a price comparison?
Because it's 5 minutes away from where I am and it sells multiple brands of laptops. Controlling variables like that is important in comparisons, but you dont want a fair comparison because then you have to face the fact that Mac's are more expensive then the equivalent laptops.

And the little performance performance increase you may have gotten out of your i3 is better because of the newer architecture.
Fixed that for you, the megahertz myth has been dead for some time.

Also, any performance gains you would have gotten out of the Mac would have been killed by the slower drive. You don't understand how computers work, I/O is the bottleneck on systems running 5.4 K RPM drives.

US$1199
You do know Apple prevents me form buying that. I have to pay A$1400 in Australia which is US$1495. (BTW, Tax in Oz is a flat 10%)

But I decided to check out Dell's US web site. The Vostro with an i5 starts at US$711 without any student discounts (which is another form of goal post moving, lets use actual prices for comparison, I haven't been a student for 10 years so using this makes you look desperate to prove a point you know is false).

But here is a Toshiba Portege which has the same spec's as the Macbook and the Dell for only US$849 from a US store, you could probably get it cheaper but I'm not that familiar with the US market. Oh and BH Photo & Video will ship to Oz.. I also get Toshiba's warranty and renowned reliability.

Moving the goal posts?
Yes you are.

and it seems no matter how much you move them, it doesn't help your argument. You complained that I used Australian prices, then I proved exactly the same thing in US prices and you are yet to provide a single corroborating link, I think you're pulling your "facts" out of your arse and are afraid of what you might find if you actually tested what you are claiming.

Admit it, Mac's are overpriced.

--
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Re:No install media, no deal by jscotta44 · 2011-06-07 15:25 · Score: 1

Sorry, you seem to be the one doing the moving. Student pricing? Where did that come from? And as to keeping variable in check, I did a USA Apple Store to USA Dell Store Online comparison. It doesn't get more level than that.
Know how computers work? You must be kidding. I'm pretty damn sure I know more about what makes a computer work than you probably do. I was building my own system and programming EPROMS to create custom logicquite possibly before you were even bornso don't go there. And citing individual item specs is more dead than megahertz myth. A balanced system produces the best performance. It does you no good to (using an auto analogy) drop tie together a Lotus suspension with a Ferrari engine only to put in a Pinto drive train. And those unbalanced cheap systems are just that. And don't go into how Dells are good machines when we, here in Austin, know them to be crap (and thats from the guys that assemble them and support them).
Toshibaah there's a name from the history books. There was a day when a Toshiba laptop was *the* laptop to get. But, as I said, that was history. One of these days, you may actually learn enough to realize that a well performing system is more than just a sum of it spec sheet stats.
Links:
www.dell.com
www.apple.com
Jeesh, how dense are you.
Re:No install media, no deal by IgnoramusMaximus · 2011-06-07 17:26 · Score: 1

Except that the standard install media is not an app-store interface, so you're golden :)

No, you are still screwed because downloading 4gig of crap is not an option. At best you will have an old OS which can never be upgraded unless you relocate or send your equipment to someone hundreds of miles away to do it for you.
But even that is the "old way of doing things", to disappear soon. Apple is talking about doing away with physical installation media altogether so all new equipment will come with "use high bandwidth connection" (or "Reorganize your miserable life around OUR product - its the MOST important thing ever! At least until our next, Even Shinier and More Hip, product comes out... Consume! Conform!") or "get lost" options (or "You Baaaad consumer, you! What's with you? Do you want Out Glorious Intangible Economy to fail?! Do you? Do you!?").
Future Apple "desktop" products will apparently feature 100% non-user serviceable approach, ala iPads. There is even talk on Apple forums about a move away from Intel and to ARM for all of their formerly "desktop" products such as MacBooks and iMacs.
In my opinion it is inevitable. Modern "capitalist" (ha!) "economy" has proven time and time again that thinking customers is not where the real money is and for every professional who has demanding technological requirements there is 1000 fools ready to part with their money, their privacy and their freedom in general, no questions asked, this very instant .... as long as your crap is Shiny And Trendy enough.

iCloud... great but not great by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:03 · Score: 0

This is going to eat into monthly caps imposed by ISPs. And no, not everyone has a choice of ISP. For some of us it's either internet or no internet, we can't vote with our wallet by going somewhere else.

Re:iCloud... great but not great by xjerky · 2011-06-06 07:06 · Score: 1

I'd assume that you can opt out of the iCloud stuff. At least I hope so, since I definitely do not software updates being automatically pushed to my jailbroken devices.

--
A sentence you'll never see on an Internet discussion board: "You know what? You're right."
Re:iCloud... great but not great by lrsach01 · 2011-06-06 07:11 · Score: 1

That was my first thought. BUt THere was something about "Wifi" only in the presentation... well.. at least on Engadget's Liveblog.
Re:iCloud... great but not great by dhall · 2011-06-06 07:14 · Score: 2

Wifi won't bypass ISP caps. It will only bypass cellular caps.
Granted it gives you 2 buckets to overflow instead of just one.
Re:iCloud... great but not great by StikyPad · 2011-06-06 10:10 · Score: 1

Depends whose WiFi you're using.

--
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere

Maybe some links would be nice? by Ambiguous+Coward · 2011-06-06 07:03 · Score: 1

I mean really, maybe some information beyond this vaguely twitter-esque, detail-lacking post? A picture of something? This is about as low-content as you can go while still technically providing information.

Or at least put it in a separate "here's my live slashdot blog" section.

--
Their may be a grammatical error, misspeling, or evn a typo in this post.

Re:Maybe some links would be nice? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:06 · Score: 0

It's all going to be info cribbed from the event which ended only a few minutes ago. What do you really expect?
Re:Maybe some links would be nice? by roothog · 2011-06-06 07:09 · Score: 2, Informative

Just go anywhere on the web. Anywhere. Everybody's covering this today, finding more information isn't exactly hard.
Re:Maybe some links would be nice? by Relayman · 2011-06-06 07:13 · Score: 1

In the time it took you to type your comment, you could have Googled "WWDC 2011 live blog" and found some links yourself. I watched the blog first, then came to /.

--
If I used a sig over again, would anyone notice?
Re:Maybe some links would be nice? by Ambiguous+Coward · 2011-06-06 07:13 · Score: 1, Insightful

Then why post low-content live-bloggish "articles" here on slashdot? Post an article linking to one or two of those live blogs instead, or even add some sort of editorial commentary to the post.
What was posted, though, I expect to be signed as "Sent from my Android" or similar.

--
Their may be a grammatical error, misspeling, or evn a typo in this post.
Re:Maybe some links would be nice? by DJRumpy · 2011-06-06 07:16 · Score: 1, Informative

Here's the live blog (well not so live now) of the event. It has the essential information.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/06/wwdc-2011-liveblog-steve-jobs-talks-ios-5-os-x-lion-icloud-an/?sort=newest&refresh=60
Re:Maybe some links would be nice? by Ambiguous+Coward · 2011-06-06 07:17 · Score: 1

Some sort of added value in the form of editorial commentary, or similar? Maybe pose some interesting questions about the topic at hand? Since when has slashdot been in the business of "You heard it here first, folks?" It's an aggregator. So aggregate. :)

--
Their may be a grammatical error, misspeling, or evn a typo in this post.
Re:Maybe some links would be nice? by Ambiguous+Coward · 2011-06-06 07:21 · Score: 1

And I take it you got a lot of value out of subsequently stopping by /.? Oh, right, the "article" provided absolutely no additional information, or insight, or even posed any questions about the topic at hand. ;)
My comment wasn't about being able to find the information elsewhere, it was instead a long version of "why did they bother posting this?"

--
Their may be a grammatical error, misspeling, or evn a typo in this post.
Re:Maybe some links would be nice? by TobyRush · 2011-06-06 07:30 · Score: 1

For my own part, after watching the liveblog of the keynote, I came to /. to see what the grown-ups were saying about it.

--
Sam! If you will let me be,
I will try them.
You will see.
Re:Maybe some links would be nice? by palutke · 2011-06-06 07:57 · Score: 2

Are you sure you're in the right place?

--
'I ain't a liar, baby, and I ain't proud I just want what I'm not allowed.' -- Violent Femmes, 36-24-36
Re:Maybe some links would be nice? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:58 · Score: 0

For my own part, after watching the liveblog of the keynote, I came to /. to see what the grown-ups were saying about it.
Okay, so now we know you're crazy.
Re:Maybe some links would be nice? by DJRumpy · 2011-06-06 08:51 · Score: 1

The video stream is already online: http://events.apple.com.edgesuite.net/11piubpwiqubf06/event/
Re:Maybe some links would be nice? by mevets · 2011-06-06 09:04 · Score: 1

The grown-ups? You must be new here.
The summary is:
- Everything apple announced is shite that everybody else had already.
- Apple stuff really stinks, and costs too much.
- Only stupid people fall for Apple's 'it just works' nonsense.
- Computers aren't supposed to work - thats why we have windows and linux.
Re:Maybe some links would be nice? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 09:36 · Score: 0

What moron modded this offtopic?

I skipped Snow Leopard by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:03 · Score: 0

But I will definitely go for Lion at $29. The thing is, how will it be made available to Leopard users? Jobs said it was Mac App Store-only.

Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by Quiet_Desperation · 2011-06-06 07:09 · Score: 1

Install Snow Leopard? Then download Lion? Isn't SL like $20 now? Or you can borrow the discs from someone.
Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by xMrFishx · 2011-06-06 07:15 · Score: 3, Informative

Buying SL for the sake of getting Lion is spending money for the sake of it. No his concern is genuine. I thought this too as I watched the photo slideshow... There must be a way of burning it or acquiring it through a non internet distributed channel.
Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by Mr+Thinly+Sliced · 2011-06-06 07:34 · Score: 2

I thought the same thing (currently running linux, but have 10.5 on the "old" drive).
Unfortunately the requirements are that you will have to install snow leopard to be able to use the app store to upgrade to lion. See step 2 below.
source
Sucks really.
Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by MachineShedFred · 2011-06-06 07:36 · Score: 4, Informative

It's an app that you get from the app store. You copy /Applications/Install Mac OS X.app to your media of choice. This is how it has worked since the first developer preview like 5 months ago.

--
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by beelsebob · 2011-06-06 07:37 · Score: 1

It won't, it requires Snow Leopard first, just as Snow Leopard's $29 install required Leopard first.
Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by Adam_ST170 · 2011-06-06 07:50 · Score: 1

you can get the App Store now which is available for Leopard: http://www.apple.com/mac/app-store/ Once Lion is available you can then upgrade from there
Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by timeOday · 2011-06-06 07:51 · Score: 2

Surely "app-store only" will not apply to corporate deployments? Where I work, we only apply the updates they tell us to apply, after they test them with our corporate apps etc.
Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by DJRumpy · 2011-06-06 07:54 · Score: 1

Actually no it didn't. You can install Snow Leopard without any need to 'prove' you have 10.5 or some previous install of OS X. The only check an OS X installer does is to verify it's genuine Apple hardware.
Apple stated the upgrade would be available via the App Store. They did not state it would not be available in a physical media option. Cutting off hundreds of thousands or millions of pre 10.6 users doesn't make good business sense, nor does snubbing users with slow internet connections. Pre-orders for the physical disk have already shown up on various sites, including a German Amazon site.

It won't, it requires Snow Leopard first, just as Snow Leopard's $29 install required Leopard first.
Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by beelsebob · 2011-06-06 07:59 · Score: 1

You didn't have to prove it, but the EULA required it. So Lion adds an enforcement of that, but ultimately, it makes no difference to the licensing.
If you installed Snow Leopard on Tiger or lower, you didn't have a license, and you might as well as just torrent it.
Re it making good business sense –I think charging $29 every 18-24 months is a great business model for OSes –certainly far better than MS's charge $200-300 every 5-7 years.
Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by DJRumpy · 2011-06-06 08:10 · Score: 1

Where did you read that Lion will enforce it? Again, no where did they state that physical media won't be made available.
Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:19 · Score: 0

But I will definitely go for Lion at $29.
And if past experience is any indication it will also be £29 and in that case I won't fork out just for "cloud" stuff. Is there anything else in Lion that's a real, tangible improvement? I doubt it: it was the same with SL.
Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:20 · Score: 0

I thought the same thing (currently running linux, but have 10.5 on the "old" drive).
Unfortunately the requirements are that you will have to install snow leopard to be able to use the app store to upgrade to lion. See step 2 below.
source
Sucks really.
That's step 2 in the instructions for 'how to get Lion on Day 1'. It doesn't actually say that this will always be the only way to get Lion.
(Not saying that Apple will offer another way, just pointing out that you're reading exclusion into a statement which doesn't exclude.)
Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by xjerky · 2011-06-06 08:22 · Score: 1

Uh, apparently you did not actually read the link that you are linking to: "How to get the Mac App Store The Mac App Store is available as a free software update for Mac computers running Mac OS X v10.6 or later. If you have an earlier version of Mac OS X, you will need to upgrade to Mac OS X Snow Leopard."

--
A sentence you'll never see on an Internet discussion board: "You know what? You're right."
Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by makomk · 2011-06-06 08:31 · Score: 1

Errrrm... probably on one of the sites that saw the announcement at WWDC at a guess. For example, maybe Engadget (if you scroll down a bit on their liveblog to around 1:37PM, you can even see the big shiny "Only in the App Store" slide).
Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by UnknowingFool · 2011-06-06 08:50 · Score: 1

Upgrading from XP to Win 7 is going to cost you more money than upgrading from Vista to Win 7. Jumping two versions should cost you more; as a side note, two versions still cost you less than 1 Windows upgrade. As you getting Snow Leopard, you can visit any Apple or Best Buy store and get the physical discs. I assume that on day 1, you will able to download. Physical media will be available later.

--
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by Mr+Thinly+Sliced · 2011-06-06 09:11 · Score: 1

Ah, true, point taken :-)
Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by rylin · 2011-06-06 09:24 · Score: 2

No, this is an in-place upgrade. No rebooting required.
As such, you won't actually have to burn anything.
Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by pckl300 · 2011-06-06 09:24 · Score: 2

Maybe they'll distribute it through iTunes. Because, you know, why not?

--
In the beginning, there was null.
Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by DJRumpy · 2011-06-06 09:40 · Score: 1

Well the live stream is online, but you can't forward fast through it at all, meaning you have to sit through 45 minutes. I will shit a brick if they forgo physical media.
Hopefully someone posts a proper stream soon with proper controls.
http://events.apple.com.edgesuite.net/11piubpwiqubf06/event/
Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by yincrash · 2011-06-06 09:57 · Score: 1

There is no Windows 7 upgrade price. You buy a copy of windows 7. No difference between an upgrade and a new install. Also, I believe when XP upgrades existed, they were valid for everything above Windows 95? Someone could correct me.
Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by Adam_ST170 · 2011-06-06 10:02 · Score: 1

Surprisingly I did read the link, but failed to put Snow in front of the Leopard in my post. I assumed that anyone with Leopard and read the link would see that they would need to upgrade to Snow Leopard in order to get the Mac App Store.
Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by Altus · 2011-06-06 10:11 · Score: 1

If its available to leopard users directly (which it probably will be eventually if not on launch) then it will almost certainly cost them more than $30. The snow leopard upgrade is also $30 so I would expect it to be $60 straight up.
I believe all supported machines came with at least leopard (though I might be mistaken) so earlier OS's shouldn't be a problem.

--
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by CODiNE · 2011-06-06 10:39 · Score: 1

Ding! Ding! We have a winner!
Sorry no mod points to give you. Hopefully it remains that way on the shipping version. No reason it shouldn't.

--
Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by DurendalMac · 2011-06-06 14:46 · Score: 1

Can you read?

The Mac App Store is available as a free software update for Mac computers running Mac OS X v10.6 or later. If you have an earlier version of Mac OS X, you will need to upgrade to Mac OS X Snow Leopard.
So no, you can't install the App Store in Leopard.
Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by UnknowingFool · 2011-06-06 16:17 · Score: 1

Wikipedia lists the upgrade editions and what path that was required because there were so many different versions of Vista. Newegg lists the prices but does not list the path .

--
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by Quiet_Desperation · 2011-06-07 02:23 · Score: 1

Buying SL for the sake of getting Lion is spending money for the sake of it.
Dude, it's 20 frackin dollars assuming he can't borrow the install discs. Just eat in a couple evenings.
And who knows what Apple will do with SL pricing once Lion is actually (puts on sunglasses) in the wild.
Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-07 02:53 · Score: 0

I believe Lion requires Snow Leopard... I've read Lion will set up a tiny boot partition you can boot into and it will install itself from there.
Re:I skipped Snow Leopard by Adam_ST170 · 2011-06-07 03:01 · Score: 1

Can you highlight in my previous post where I said you can install the app store in leopard? I see "upgrade" and "to snow leopard" in order to get "mac app store". I also pointed out my mistake in my first post "but failed to put Snow in front of the Leopard".

No new hardware by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:03 · Score: 0

:(

I skipped Snow Leopard by xjerky · 2011-06-06 07:05 · Score: 4, Insightful

But I will definitely go for Lion at $29. The thing is, how will it be made available to Leopard users? Jobs said it was Mac App Store-only.

(posting non-anon this time)

--
A sentence you'll never see on an Internet discussion board: "You know what? You're right."

Where's the infrared transmogrifier? by sl4shd0rk · 2011-06-06 07:06 · Score: 2, Funny

I can't wait to give away my freedom. How much longer?

--
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!

Re:Where's the infrared transmogrifier? by Ambiguous+Coward · 2011-06-06 07:24 · Score: 1

Hopefully it'll be released at the same time as flying cars and Duke Nukem Forever.
Oh wait, scratch that last one. Just the flying cars as the last defense, then.

--
Their may be a grammatical error, misspeling, or evn a typo in this post.
Re:Where's the infrared transmogrifier? by zevans · 2011-06-07 00:02 · Score: 1

Isn't "Outsider" a dependency too?

--
"... and more and more now there are all kinds of electronic goodies available" -- Pink Floyd 1972

Oh how times change by Xunker · 2011-06-06 07:09 · Score: 3, Insightful

2001: Record labels sue my.mp3.com in to oblivion.
2011: Record labels can't wait to suck on the iTunes Cloud teat.

--
Hilary Rosen's speech was about her love of money and her desire to roll around naked in a pile of money.

Re:Oh how times change by gnasher719 · 2011-06-06 07:12 · Score: 4, Insightful

2001: Record labels sue my.mp3.com in to oblivion.
2011: Record labels can't wait to suck on the iTunes Cloud teat.
In between: Some major payment of money from Apple to the record companies.
Re:Oh how times change by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:45 · Score: -1

I really hate (and find it bordering on illegal) when major corporations lie through their teeth with marketing claims such as how theirs is the "first product or service of its kind" (which they clearly do ALL the time)! Clearly, MP3.com was the first of its kind in offering the my.mp3.com service. Funny how times change, money changes hands, faces change and people forget, and suddenly what was once a major problem (online, legal MP3 library hosting for individuals) is now entirely possible and OK.
Where IS the RIAA statement condemning this? Is one coming??
As Gordon Gecko once said.. "greed.. is good!".
Re:Oh how times change by jonathansdt · 2011-06-06 09:15 · Score: 1

It's quite the other way. Apple gets 30% of what runs through their channel. What Apple gave the record companies was a means to continue fixing prices.
Re:Oh how times change by Tom · 2011-06-06 10:13 · Score: 1

Surprised?
Please, the record companies never hated music downloads. They hated not being paid for them. Preferably multiple times. With as little going to the artist as possible. And with a tax on blank media just because they can. And control over the distribution channels. Well, you get the idea. Basically: They are greedy bastards, so money can buy their cooperation. It really is that simple.

--
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org

OS X Server by kdogg73 · 2011-06-06 07:10 · Score: 1

OS X Server is now integrated in the Lion OS. It does not say, but it once speculated to cost extra for the service. But Apple's site leads me to believe it does not.

--
Let's face it, most of us are scoffers. But moments before zero hour, it does not pay to take chances.

Re:OS X Server by mlts · 2011-06-06 07:23 · Score: 1

OS X Server, or xSAN?
Re:OS X Server by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:44 · Score: 0

From http://www.apple.com/macosx/server/ - "Now you can quickly and easily turn just about any Mac into a powerful server that’s perfect for home offices, businesses, schools, and hobbyists alike. Lion Server is coming to the Mac App Store in July for $49.99."
Way better than the couple hundred it was :-)
Cheers, Liam
Re:OS X Server by NatasRevol · 2011-06-06 07:58 · Score: 1

$50 bucks. Holy crap.
http://www.apple.com/macosx/server/

--
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Re:OS X Server by ajo_arctus · 2011-06-06 08:02 · Score: 1

It's a $50 add-on (also in the app store), according to Apple's website.
http://www.apple.com/macosx/server/
Seems fair, if an easy-to-use Unix server is what you're after.
Re:OS X Server by itsdapead · 2011-06-06 08:13 · Score: 1

50 bucks for the add-on.
Or 35 quid in the UK. What, not £49.95 inc VAT!? 20% of my enthusiasm for online distribution just returned.

--
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
Re:OS X Server by xjerky · 2011-06-06 08:25 · Score: 1

Hmmm...though they originally made it sound like it was built-in for free, I could live with $50 - even though I may not even have a use for it, I can see it being something worth playing around with, at least.

--
A sentence you'll never see on an Internet discussion board: "You know what? You're right."

itunes match: 25 dollar insurance..??? by simp · 2011-06-06 07:11 · Score: 2

So for a 25 dollar "insurance" fee I can match all the mp3s that I can find op my harddisk to songs in the itunes cloud and then those (legal) itunes songs will be downloaded to all my devices? That's an offer that I can't refuse.

And won't the music industry go apeshit over this?

Re:itunes match: 25 dollar insurance..??? by Servaas · 2011-06-06 07:14 · Score: 1, Troll

I care nothing for iTunes but for 25 dollars a pardon for past download crimes even I could go apeshit over.
Re:itunes match: 25 dollar insurance..??? by geniusj · 2011-06-06 07:16 · Score: 1

Well, if you think about it. You were pretty unlikely to spend *anything* on those songs again. So now they get $25 out of you that they otherwise were unlikely to get. Not a bad deal.
Re:itunes match: 25 dollar insurance..??? by xMrFishx · 2011-06-06 07:18 · Score: 1

Nah, they got brought out by Apple. I have a feeling Apple pays them for every song that has to be uploaded (not in their library) which probably shuts them up. Remember, the music industry likes money, Apple has plenty. They'll make a killing off the $25 fee anyway, so there's plenty spare to throw at the labels for being idiots. Hopefully these labels will shrink over the decade anyway until they're not even worth paying off.
Re:itunes match: 25 dollar insurance..??? by gnasher719 · 2011-06-06 07:42 · Score: 1

It was reported that Apple signed contracts with the recording industry that included a payment of $150 million or so.

I'm curious how well the matching will work. With sources like ripped CDs, downloads from Amazon, what about old iTunes songs with DRM, ripped LPs will be _really_ interesting, and at last what will they do with all the illegal downloads around. Maybe the music industry figured that if someone downloads all the music they like, and then they pay $24.99 for the rest of their life to listen to it, and you multiply this by a _big_ number, then the result isn't bad at all.
Re:itunes match: 25 dollar insurance..??? by Americano · 2011-06-06 07:49 · Score: 1

The record labels would love to see you re-purchase all your stuff digitally, but that's simply not happening. Most itunes statistics I've seen indicate that a large fraction of the songs on the average person's iPod/iPoad/iPhone are ripped from cd, not purchased from the store. So I think the labels are pretty much declaring all that previously purchased content a wash, at least as far as pushing people to repurchase it.
Now Apple unveils a service that makes it easy for any device to have access to any new song you purchase through their store, easily and quickly. No sync headaches, no "shit, what device did I purchase that song on," nothing like that. My gut feeling is that this will boost sales through the iTunes store, which means the labels make more money. They also probably get a small cut of the $25 yearly iTunes Match fee, so they're getting SOME money from the old songs in your library, as well.
So, allow apple to roll out a service that will probably boost sales, and give you a small percentage of yearly revenue from a subscription service... worth the risk? I'd probably take the gamble if I were faced with eroding margins and revenue, too. And let's be honest, it's not going to encourage filesharing any more than existing services and software already do.
Re:itunes match: 25 dollar insurance..??? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:07 · Score: 0

because, fuckwit, you are their way of stress-testing their hardware before OBVIOUSLY switching to a $25/year all you can eat streaming model. Since you stole your songs to begin with, you'll be the last one to complain if they lose some of them during this ramp-up period.
Re:itunes match: 25 dollar insurance..??? by cheeks5965 · 2011-06-06 08:24 · Score: 1

the word is that apple is keeping a 30% cut of the money, with the remainder split between record cos and publishers. it's essentially money for nothing. they get ongoing subscription revenue based on music you had already purchased. win win.
I don't see how there is any risk here for the record cos.

--
-- Flame me and I will happily flame you back. Bring it!
Re:itunes match: 25 dollar insurance..??? by Americano · 2011-06-06 08:29 · Score: 1

This is sort of what i was getting at. They get money - basically for shutting up and signing off on the service - and also probably a boost in sales and resulting revenues from new purchases because this new service will make things much more convenient for users.
There's very little possible downside, and their previous tactic, which probably relied on people repurchasing stuff they already owned, has already proven a dud.
Re:itunes match: 25 dollar insurance..??? by soodoo · 2011-06-06 08:32 · Score: 1

>And won't the music industry go apeshit over this?
1. Apple probably has some deals with the industry. Even if the industry only gets $1 from your $25, it's better than the $0 they got before.
2. Once you're in the iTunes "ecosystem" (I hate that word) you'll be much more likely to spend some more money there.
Re:itunes match: 25 dollar insurance..??? by cheeks5965 · 2011-06-06 08:49 · Score: 1

when i first heard about icloud i thought it was going to be a dud becuase it only applies to purchases from the itunes store. but the itunes match $25 covers all of your songs, which is a prerequisite for success.

--
-- Flame me and I will happily flame you back. Bring it!
Re:itunes match: 25 dollar insurance..??? by LynnwoodRooster · 2011-06-06 10:01 · Score: 2

So for a 25 dollar "insurance" fee I can match all the mp3s that I can find op my harddisk to songs in the itunes cloud and then those (legal) itunes songs will be downloaded to all my devices? That's an offer that I can't refuse.
And won't the music industry go apeshit over this?
Sorry, no - you still have to have a legal original copy of the song. This just uses your bandwidth to copy the song to all your registered iDevices. Interestingly, this also provides a 3rd party with a proven trail that you originally owned some music you weren't supposed to - all recorded in the iCloud that you can't erase.
This actually sounds more like Apple providing a way for your to replicate any piracy of music and provide a hard-copy of the fact, so the RIAA/MPAA can sue you many times for the multiple copies, rather than just once.

--
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Re:itunes match: 25 dollar insurance..??? by Ixokai · 2011-06-06 10:11 · Score: 1

All the major labels are on board. That's what the $25/year cost is for, to pay them so they don't go apeshit. The stuff you bought from iTunes gets that for free.
Re:itunes match: 25 dollar insurance..??? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 11:29 · Score: 1

I wonder how well that matching algorithm will cope with my 10,000+ track ripped-from-my-legal-CDs classical music collection? Somehow the only people to be excited by this new feature are hipster-fanboy types who only like the auto-tuned crap they've been programmed to listen to. Anybody with any real taste in music is likely to be doing the manual sync for quite some time yet!
Re:itunes match: 25 dollar insurance..??? by sootman · 2011-06-06 13:40 · Score: 1

Yeah, it's like money laundering but for your songs. In addition to the legality, I'll get guaranteed good files, at a high bitrate, in a good codec, all properly tagged, and they'll even have artwork. And if my computer and all backups go kaflooey the next day I can download them all over again. I'll pay $25 for that in a HEARTBEAT.

--
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
Re:itunes match: 25 dollar insurance..??? by Ixokai · 2011-06-06 15:09 · Score: 1

Yes, because Apple is in the business of suing its customers for using content in their ecosystem.
Paranoia.
Question: how exactly can Apple, the RIAA, or anyone, tell the difference between the fact that I got this MP3 here by ripping it off my CD that I legally bought -- verses, downloading it through some illicit means?
Say I have a folder on my drive with a bunch of MP3s: there's multiple ways I can legally get all of those. There's also multiple ways I can "pirate" them. To the iCloud service, there's no way to tell the difference between the two -- and that $25 fee is going to the music labels for *something*.
I can't see how its anything but a buy-out for the fact that they (the record companies) were grumbling about the fact that a solid chunk of the music synced around is going to be pirated, and there's absolutely no way for them to do anything about it, prove it, or monetize it at all. So they gave in, a bit. (If only to set a precedent against Amazon and Google) And since you're paying the labels for the right to sync it around -- its not piracy to "replicate" it to all of your devices. There's no way those aren't licensed copies then.
Re:itunes match: 25 dollar insurance..??? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 15:17 · Score: 0

So for a 25 dollar "insurance" fee I can match all the mp3s that I can find op my harddisk to songs in the itunes cloud and then those (legal) itunes songs will be downloaded to all my devices? That's an offer that I can't refuse.
I doubt that there's any pardon for infringing copies. If this is like the MP3.com service, it's just an massive optimization of the storage requirements for Apple's servers. Instead of having to store copies of each song for each user (which would not require record company permission, just tons and tons of disk space), they can store a much smaller number of copies of each song.

And won't the music industry go apeshit over this?
They already did. Look at what happened to MP3.com. That's why it's virtually certain that Apple is paying the record labels part of the $25/year (and/or using the leverage they have because of the iTunes Store) to be allowed to do this. A "dumb" online locker system (each user is responsible for his/her own private file area) would not need the labels' permission, but then the cloud operator would be back to the problem of having to provide storage for a million individually-uploaded copies of the latest hit song.
Re:itunes match: 25 dollar insurance..??? by Falconhell · 2011-06-06 16:45 · Score: 1

Stole the songs eh? So the original owner no longer has them-I dont think so. How long will it take for some epople to realise copyright infringement is not theft.
Oh wait-Aha-your'e probably a mac user, figures!
Re:itunes match: 25 dollar insurance..??? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 18:21 · Score: 0

"If iTunes Match users let their subscriptions run out and don't pay to re-up, their iCloud libraries would revert to just the songs they've bought from iTunes."
So basically it is a yearly subscription just to have the privilege to listen to the songs I already bought - on an iPhone. What a total joke. Record companies aren't going apeshit - they must be salivating; they get a piece of that yearly pie.
Re:itunes match: 25 dollar insurance..??? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-07 03:00 · Score: 0

Legal or not, it sounds to me like for $25 you get hassled by a legal team that wants proof that you bought those songs. Did you keep all your receipts?
No thanks.

Stock is down by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:11 · Score: 0

Match sounds good, but looks like people expected more than a me too announcement.

Re:Stock is down by Yvan256 · 2011-06-06 07:15 · Score: 0

Stock usually goes up on rumors and down the day of a Keynote.

Matching my music with iTunes store? by bit+trollent · 2011-06-06 07:11 · Score: 0

iTunes iCloud will let you re-download your tracks at last, iTunes Match will let you match your ripped CDs to Apple's copies.

Couldn't Apple just store my music in the cloud like Google is going to?

I really doubt that iTunes is going to have a copy of "Southern Smoke (vol 5)" or "Armin Van Buren - A State of Trance Episode 425"

I'd only be able to hear my mainstream music at best. We still don't really know exactly what "matching" music really means.

Once again iTunes is passing off fundamentally flawed technology as a good thing, and the press is eating it up.

I can't wait for Google Music. I would feel bad for the folks stuck on the iPhone, but most of them seem to love their locked down phone. To each his own.

Re:Matching my music with iTunes store? by sdhankin · 2011-06-06 07:13 · Score: 0

What it means is that if you have songs that iTunes carries, they won't have to be copied to the Cloud. The others you mention just get copied up. For most people, it means a much shorter transfer time.
Re:Matching my music with iTunes store? by truthsearch · 2011-06-06 07:16 · Score: 2

Once again iTunes is passing off fundamentally flawed technology as a good thing, and the press is eating it up.
Where does it say you must use the Match service to use the iCloud service? You're making a lot of assumptions from very little information.

--
Developers: We can use your help.
Re:Matching my music with iTunes store? by OverlordQ · 2011-06-06 07:16 · Score: 1, Insightful

so basically it's exactly like dropbox et al

--
Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
Re:Matching my music with iTunes store? by Yvan256 · 2011-06-06 07:18 · Score: 1

If it doesn't have your music, you upload your own files.
Re:Matching my music with iTunes store? by FunnyStrange · 2011-06-06 07:19 · Score: 1

According to the live feed I was following (macrumorslive.com), Jobs explicitly said you could upload any songs they don't have. Otherwise, you get access to their 256kbps copies.
Re:Matching my music with iTunes store? by bit+trollent · 2011-06-06 07:23 · Score: 1

Well.. I guess I was wrong.
Good.
Re:Matching my music with iTunes store? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:25 · Score: 1

A quick search shows iTunes has "A State of Trance 500", as well as years 2008-2011. They had Southern Smoke 18, but I didn't see 5. So no, they won't have every random mixtape, but you might be surprised at what is available. Then again, you'll probably never look so I guess it doesn't really matter.
Re:Matching my music with iTunes store? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:32 · Score: 0

I can't wait for Google Music. I would feel bad for the folks stuck on the iPhone, but most of them seem to love their locked down phone. To each his own.
Google music beta plays on Safari on the iPhone right now!
Re:Matching my music with iTunes store? by Americano · 2011-06-06 07:32 · Score: 4, Informative

From the Apple iCloud web page, up shortly after the WWDC keynote finished:

Here’s how it works: iTunes determines which songs in your collection are available in the iTunes Store. Any music with a match is automatically added to your iCloud library for you to listen to anytime, on any device. Since there are more than 18 million songs in the iTunes Store, most of your music is probably already in iCloud. All you have to upload is what iTunes can’t match. Which is much faster than starting from scratch. And all the music iTunes matches plays back at 256-Kbps iTunes Plus quality — even if your original copy was of lower quality.
Italics/Bold sentence above emphasized by me.
If your music is already in the Itunes store, the match service will let you avoid having to upload it, and you might be able to upgrade the quality. If it's not in the itunes store, you can still upload it to the service, and have your non-mainstream stuff available to you in the same way, but you won't get the upgraded bitrate that a matched song might get you. I know I have a bunch of old, comparatively low-bitrate, mp3's in my collection... an upgrade of even half of them to 256kbps for the cost of a few minutes scanning my library and $25/yr doesn't sound like an unreasonable price when you factor in the time required to re-rip a couple hundred CDs at a higher bitrate.
Re:Matching my music with iTunes store? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:37 · Score: 0

Unless I am imagining things, they said the service will grab music that cannot already be found in the index.
Re:Matching my music with iTunes store? by horigath · 2011-06-06 07:40 · Score: 1

This "fundamentally flawed technology" includes a podcast section that includes many (presumably hundreds) episodes of Van Buren's. Not a new feature. The other mixtape could easily be added by upload, despite your incredulous second sentence. Or, if you find that the service does not suit your needs, you can just not buy it.
Re:Matching my music with iTunes store? by dogmatixpsych · 2011-06-06 08:09 · Score: 1

You can also upload your songs if they are not in the iTunes library. For $25 / year to store as much music as you want seems like a pretty good deal.
Re:Matching my music with iTunes store? by afidel · 2011-06-06 08:11 · Score: 1

Got my Google Music Beta invite today and I didn't jump on it the first day it was announced so I assume they are pretty far into the beta, might want to signup if you haven't already.

--
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
Re:Matching my music with iTunes store? by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-06-06 08:19 · Score: 1

Couldn't Apple just store my music in the cloud like Google is going to? .. I can't wait for Google Music.
Why wait for it, if Amazon offers pretty much the same already?
Re:Matching my music with iTunes store? by xjerky · 2011-06-06 08:31 · Score: 1

What I'm trying to understand is the yearly thing. I only see myself needing to do this once only, to upgrade the songs that I got over the years over "other channels". Since I no longer buy CDs, I see no need to pay for anything beyond the first $25. What happens if I cancel? Will the songs I uploaded still be accessible?

--
A sentence you'll never see on an Internet discussion board: "You know what? You're right."
Re:Matching my music with iTunes store? by mbourgon · 2011-06-06 08:34 · Score: 2

They addressed this already:
2:55PM If any songs don't match they'll be uploaded for you. Anything that's matched is upgraded to 256Kbps AAC, without DRM.

--
"Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
Re:Matching my music with iTunes store? by Fahrvergnuugen · 2011-06-06 08:56 · Score: 1

RTFM

--
Kiteboarding Gear Mention slashdot and get 10% off!
Re:Matching my music with iTunes store? by OldeTimeGeek · 2011-06-06 08:59 · Score: 1

No, if there's no match with iTunes, it will upload your music. If there is a match, music from Apple's library is used. Apple doesn't have to waste a bunch of space on duplicates and you don't have worry about data caps uploading music that they've already got.
Re:Matching my music with iTunes store? by ideaz · 2011-06-06 09:42 · Score: 1

Except for any significant numbered episodes, most of the other State of Trance episodes are only broadcasted live. Oh yeah there are a whole lot of other websites where you can grab them for FREE but I'm not aware of any such licensed service that does every episode. Also, it has to be Armin Van Buuren, not Buren :)

Is that $30 per machine? Family pack? by NevarMore · 2011-06-06 07:12 · Score: 1

I have a small, but growing stable of Macs in my house. I read on Engadget that, "it will run you just $29.99 for all of your authorized Macs." Does this mean that its $30 or $60 to upgrade the two Macs I have that are tied to my iTunes account?

http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/06/os-x-lion-all-the-details/

Re:Is that $30 per machine? Family pack? by roothog · 2011-06-06 07:16 · Score: 2

For Snow Leopard, the $30 upgrade disks were good for up to 5 systems, if I remember. Probably similar for Lion.
Re:Is that $30 per machine? Family pack? by Relayman · 2011-06-06 07:19 · Score: 1

Two Macs doesn't make a stable. Five Macs might be a stable; I assume your other Macs are older.

To answer your question, both Macs in your house can be upgraded for a one-time charge of $29.99.

--
If I used a sig over again, would anyone notice?
Re:Is that $30 per machine? Family pack? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:26 · Score: 0

It means $30, just like the way apps on the Mac App Store work. As long as you're sharing the same iTunes account on all.
Re:Is that $30 per machine? Family pack? by Relayman · 2011-06-06 07:26 · Score: 1

Snow Leopard: One computer was $30. The family upgrade pack (up to five computers) was more (now $49).

Lion: For all computers in a household (one or more), the price is $29.99.

Apple doesn't use DRM, so you're on the honor system here.

--
If I used a sig over again, would anyone notice?
Re:Is that $30 per machine? Family pack? by FunnyStrange · 2011-06-06 07:28 · Score: 1

I believe that, like all App Store purchases, you get to install on up to 5 machines. Essentially the same as the old Family Pack.
Re:Is that $30 per machine? Family pack? by 2starr · 2011-06-06 07:30 · Score: 1

$30. It's tied to your Apple Store account, just like other App Store purchases.

--
"Let your heart soar as high as it will. Refuse to be average." - A. W. Tozer
Re:Is that $30 per machine? Family pack? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:37 · Score: 0

I gather that it means any macs that are authorized get it with one payment just like software on the mac store and app store.
Re:Is that $30 per machine? Family pack? by NevarMore · 2011-06-06 07:40 · Score: 1

I'm assuming my Mac stable is going to start like my gun collection did. You get one. Then you get two. Then one day you pause and realize you have many.
Re:Is that $30 per machine? Family pack? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:39 · Score: 0

$30 for all Macs which are using your iTunes login. One $30, all your Macs.
Re:Is that $30 per machine? Family pack? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:41 · Score: 0

No it's $30 TOTAL.
Re:Is that $30 per machine? Family pack? by Relayman · 2011-06-06 09:09 · Score: 1

In my house, I stopped counting at 10, including a Centris 610. Most of them work.

--
If I used a sig over again, would anyone notice?
Re:Is that $30 per machine? Family pack? by Relayman · 2011-06-06 09:10 · Score: 1

I believe Steve said that you can have 10 devices linked to an App Store account.

--
If I used a sig over again, would anyone notice?
Re:Is that $30 per machine? Family pack? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 09:11 · Score: 0

Someone should show this upgrade pricing scheme to the clods at Microsoft. Not that they would ever copy it, but they should!
Re:Is that $30 per machine? Family pack? by pckl300 · 2011-06-06 09:27 · Score: 1

For all = $30
For each = $60

--
In the beginning, there was null.
Re:Is that $30 per machine? Family pack? by Ixokai · 2011-06-06 10:13 · Score: 1

$30. Its tied to the App Store, like any app even though its an OS. You can download it to any authorized machine after buying it once, like all apps. I don't know if authorized machines per account is still 5, because in one part of the keynote they said up to 10 machines -- but that may have been specific to a separate feature.
Re:Is that $30 per machine? Family pack? by Kalriath · 2011-06-06 17:13 · Score: 1

Hey, they only just jumped on the Family Pack bandwagon... give it time!

--
For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".

Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by Chitlenz · 2011-06-06 07:13 · Score: -1, Troll

I was hoping for some new iphone ... or flash support... or SOMETHING new. Icloud? SERIOUSLY?

I think it's painfully evident that programmers and marketing people think completely differently about tech at this point. To me, The Cloud (TM) was the SAN 10 years ago (storage area network), and it changes absolutely NOTHING. Except maybe now apple can cut you off from your own computer whenever they feel like it.

No thanks, come back when you guys learn to innovate again though and we'll try again, mmk?

--
Imagination is the silver lining of Intelligence.

Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by iMouse · 2011-06-06 07:16 · Score: 1

I was hoping for some new iphone ... or flash support... or SOMETHING new.
....flash support? hahahahahahahahahahahaha
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:17 · Score: 0

How can Apple cut you off, if they sync _your_ content back to all your devices!?
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by Chitlenz · 2011-06-06 07:22 · Score: 1, Insightful

I was hoping for some new iphone ... or flash support... or SOMETHING new.
....flash support? hahahahahahahahahahahaha
yeah its screwed up isn't it?
Apple's approach to developers is
1) We get to claim 30% of your revenue
2) You have to live in a box and learn "our way" to stay there
3) We can change the rules at any time
It's almost dystopian, how the hell do they expect to attract developers with these kinds of restrictions?
It has never been more clear that Wonziak did all the work, and Jobs did the marketing, and we all know who ended up running the place.
Seriously, in the early 90's I wrote a lot of software on a 7200 PPC Apple, and loved it, but I just can't get into the new Macs. They feel like the government with all the rules.

--
Imagination is the silver lining of Intelligence.
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by xMrFishx · 2011-06-06 07:23 · Score: 1

Yeah I still don't get this request for flash. It's like a request for adverts too. Do you Want those? seriously?
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by ctid · 2011-06-06 07:23 · Score: 3, Insightful

Putting very mildly indeed, iTunes Match is an important announcement.

--
Reality is defined by the maddest person in the room
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by tooyoung · 2011-06-06 07:27 · Score: 1

To me, The Cloud (TM) was the SAN 10 years ago (storage area network), and it changes absolutely NOTHING. Except maybe now apple can cut you off from your own computer whenever they feel like it.

The summary is very light on details, so I can understand you misinterpreting this. iCloud isn't the only place your data is stored, it is actually stored on the iPad, iPhone, iPod, and Mac. It is just that all files are seamlessly shared between your different devices. Buy a song on iTunes on your Mac, and it is automatically available from your iPad. Take a picture on your iPhone, and it is automatically in iPhoto on your Mac.

You are right to an extent - this is nothing new from a tech perspective. What is new though is how Apple is presenting this to the user. They don't tell the user "map this drive to this location...", it all just happens automatically. That is this trick of the iCloud - the user doesn't explicitly interact with iCloud. Rather, files are just always available. The user doesn't have to understand what the cloud is or how to access it. The cloud is the means, not the end.
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by Chitlenz · 2011-06-06 07:27 · Score: 1

I dunno bout you, but I have a record collection of about 5k vinyl records. If I wanted to synch that to an Ipad, I'd have to have ... a computer?
Seriously 64G, the most expensive one sold, just don't cut it, it's just not enough space.
That, and I have learned that when companies like this CAN change the rules at any time, they inevitably do... at will.
ALL my content is > TB on any given day. Now what?

--
Imagination is the silver lining of Intelligence.
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by Chitlenz · 2011-06-06 07:29 · Score: 1

What I really want is Silverlight, which won't ever happen because of strictly political reasons between MS and Apple. It's stupid, these companies get into pissing matches with each other and their customers suffer from it.

--
Imagination is the silver lining of Intelligence.
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:32 · Score: 0

Don't forget, it allows anyone who has Apple's blessing to rummage through the data a user has.
With the history of other companies handing data over on request of any comers without any way to encrypt it, it almost is just asking for fishing expeditions. A couple lines for example:
find /home -name bigcorpprotesttimes.doc -print|xargs mail peopletoarrest@bigmeanthugs.xxx
Or used to hunt down MP3 songs that were unreleased but seeded, and just the proof of that in a cloud home directory is good enough for a big lawsuit.
Of course, we know all well how we can trust big companies with our personal info... so lets all go and trust them with our complete home directories as well.
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by supremebob · 2011-06-06 07:33 · Score: 1

I'd imagine that most people want Flash for Facebook games and videos. And by videos, I mean porn.
Hey... let's be honest here!
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by Chitlenz · 2011-06-06 07:33 · Score: 1

The summary is very light on details, so I can understand you misinterpreting this. iCloud isn't the only place your data is stored, it is actually stored on the iPad, iPhone, iPod, and Mac. It is just that all files are seamlessly shared between your different devices. Buy a song on iTunes on your Mac, and it is automatically available from your iPad. Take a picture on your iPhone, and it is automatically in iPhoto on your Mac.
You are right to an extent - this is nothing new from a tech perspective. What is new though is how Apple is presenting this to the user. They don't tell the user "map this drive to this location...", it all just happens automatically. That is this trick of the iCloud - the user doesn't explicitly interact with iCloud. Rather, files are just always available. The user doesn't have to understand what the cloud is or how to access it. The cloud is the means, not the end.
Ok yeah that's cool and all, but it already exists. Last night, I was watching Top Gear on a phone, then I went inside and picked right back up in the middle of the episode on a PS3 using Netflix. It's not really The Cloud(TM), but it might as well be and works just as well. And it's hardly a revolution worth crowing about. It's kind of neat but they ain't the first to get there. Not even hardly.

--
Imagination is the silver lining of Intelligence.
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by gnasher719 · 2011-06-06 07:35 · Score: 4, Insightful

1) We get to claim 30% of your revenue
... and we paid out 2.5 billion dollars so far to developers. Also just out: The Apple app store (the one where you can buy apps for Macs only) is the _largest_ seller of PC software! Beating Walmart, Best Buy and anyone else. And can you tell me any other store that lets developers keep 70% of the revenue.
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by Kielistic · 2011-06-06 07:36 · Score: 1

If you can't fit everything on your mobile device then I guess you will have to choose a subset of your collection to make it fit while keeping the whole collection synched to whatever has the storage space to accommodate it. Kind of like how I'm sure you are doing it now.
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by clifyt · 2011-06-06 07:37 · Score: 4, Insightful

With $2.5 Billion in sales of independent software in the last year...thats how.
I know several of developers that HATE the idea of what the iStore is...and at the same time, are making far more money using it, selling their products far cheaper, than they ever did before.
You can either be religious about all of this, or you can be pragmatic.
If you were selling anywhere else, you'd have to deal with CC processing, you'd have to deal with boxed products. You'd have to deal with a shitload of other hassles...in this regard, the only hassle you have to do is to mind read what Steve Jobs is planning on doing next and for most developers, this isn't a problem.
Even a friend that just has a product kicked out recently...said he made enough before it was kicked out...and it isn't like his code isn't reusable. Will fix the problems and resubmit.
And if this is too much of a problem, they can always go program for Android.
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by tooyoung · 2011-06-06 07:38 · Score: 1

I dunno bout you, but I have a record collection of about 5k vinyl records. If I wanted to synch that to an Ipad, I'd have to have ... a computer?
Seriously 64G, the most expensive one sold, just don't cut it, it's just not enough space.
That, and I have learned that when companies like this CAN change the rules at any time, they inevitably do... at will.
ALL my content is > TB on any given day. Now what?

You have to be trolling here. How are you getting your 5k vinyl records on a music player today without a computer? How are you accessing your > TB of music without a computer? What tablet/phone device are you using that has > TB storage?
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by xMrFishx · 2011-06-06 07:40 · Score: 1

I'll give you that, and yes it's very annoying. I always felt tech should be about working together, not shutting out everyone else so that you "win".
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:44 · Score: 0

1) We get to claim 30% of your revenue
But we'll more than double your revenue if you play by our rules.
Money or random developer freedom. Choose one.
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by Chitlenz · 2011-06-06 07:44 · Score: 1

Trolling, LOL.
Every computer made has more than a TB, including the new windows tablets (which we happen to have prototypes of, since we are a development shop). And I deal with big data every day (medical images, among other things). So just to recap, I'm sitting in front of a windows tablet with a 1.5TB drive in it right now.
Oh, and it has audio in, not to mention my mixer has wireless support (granted, most people would plug their tables into a sound card, but that's not the point here).
So, again, Apple is selling last year as new, except they get to control its use?
Again, how about no.

--
Imagination is the silver lining of Intelligence.
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by Dog-Cow · 2011-06-06 07:53 · Score: 1

Apple and MS don't have all that much animosity towards each other. I suspect Silverlight will never happen for the real reason that Flash won't. Though, MS is gearing Silverlight towards mobile devices (Windows Phone 7), so it's not impossible.
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by Angostura · 2011-06-06 07:54 · Score: 1

Let me see. Flash support or free seamless contact, calendar, document, photo sharing and backup across all my devices? Yes you're right. It changes nothing.
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by jscotta44 · 2011-06-06 08:02 · Score: 1

You are so right. Apple has no developers writing stuff for their hardware. Ohwaitdidn't they pay over $2B to someone. Oh yes, developers. Where did they come from. Obviously they were not able to attract them.
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:03 · Score: 0

Your Windows tablet has a MECHANICAL 1.5 TB drive in it. Not a good idea for regular folks... "What do you mean I lost all my data because I dropped my tablet on the table a little harder than usual?"
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by Americano · 2011-06-06 08:05 · Score: 1

If I wanted to play a facebook game, there's always a desktop system. I don't play facebook games anyway really, so I'm not a good test for that use case, and I'm fairly unsympathetic to people who waste time with them, but I can understand thinking "Gee, it would be cool if I could..." if you do actually play them.
However, claiming that nobody can view porn is just foolish: there are numerous sites that do not require flash, and have a remarkably broad array of free porn^Hvideos available. I've heard that sites such as xnxx.com, youporn.com, xvideos.com, spankwire.com don't require flash. Of course, I haven't confirmed this for myself, because I would never watch porn on an iPad... but I've heard that those sites work just fine.
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by iMouse · 2011-06-06 08:12 · Score: 1

No, actually, I think it is great. Flash is a resource pig that Adobe chooses to not rewrite for mobile platforms. Android devices puke trying to use Flash with some of the larger, faster tablets having mixed results of flash content actually working as intended.
I don't see how you think that Apple has gotten more closed with the Mac/Mac OS since the PPC days. Owning a Power Mac 7200, you probably remember having to purchase special Apple RAM from manufacturers like EDGE, Kingston, etc out of the MacMall catalog. Adding generic RAM (even with similar specs) often resulted in a non-bootable Mac.
How about hard drives? Apple HDD ROMs. Yeah, good luck with getting that generic HDD from WD, Seagate, Maxtor, Quantum, etc working. (pre-PPC machines also used SCSI drives that were awesome, but pricey and hard to come by) Don't forget about proprietary ADB connectors, Apple serial ports, display ports (including that stupid display adapter needed for the Power Mac 6100/66 and similar models), Apple GeoPort (WTF?!), Mini-SCSI on the PowerBooks, Apple PlainTalk microphone ports (again, WTF?!), NuBus vs PDS slots. As of late, ADC video connector, but we'll give Apple a mulligan.
Macintosh System 9.2.2 and earlier had little PC file support with the exception of PC Exchange to read DOS/Win formatted floppies and other media. Most Mac users bought MacLinkPlus or a similar product to help them open DOS/Windows documents on the Mac. Image formats were another difficult area with Apple pushing PICT and Microsoft pushing BMP.
Apple may still have a bit of a "walled garden", but the gate is open a lot wider than it was in the 68k/PPC days.
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by DJRumpy · 2011-06-06 08:30 · Score: 1

You do realize Silverlight is available on Mac right? As to the mobile platform, I've never found a need for it, much like flash.
http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/development_tools/silverlight.html
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by TehDuffman · 2011-06-06 08:37 · Score: 1

1) We get to claim 30% of your revenue
... and we paid out 2.5 billion dollars so far to developers. Also just out: The Apple app store (the one where you can buy apps for Macs only) is the _largest_ seller of PC software! Beating Walmart, Best Buy and anyone else. And can you tell me any other store that lets developers keep 70% of the revenue.
Uhh for Mac software not the largest seller of PC software...
http://nexus404.com/Blog/2011/06/06/wwdc-2011-mac-app-store-1-mac/
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by cheeks5965 · 2011-06-06 08:39 · Score: 1

meh. netflix has a native app, so you don't need silferfish for that. what else is there? photosynth? i think they have a native app as well.

--
-- Flame me and I will happily flame you back. Bring it!
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by cheeks5965 · 2011-06-06 08:44 · Score: 1

so what you're saying is that you have a niche / specialty need, and there's a niche / specialty product to suit that need. Congratulations! Many people with similar needs are not that lucky.

--
-- Flame me and I will happily flame you back. Bring it!
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by BasilBrush · 2011-06-06 08:52 · Score: 1

It's almost dystopian, how the hell do they expect to attract developers with these kinds of restrictions?
Of course the platform that Apple really restricts is iOS. And for that they don't only expect to attract developers, they got them. Far more than any other mobile platform.
So Apple's expectations are right on the button. It's your expectations that don't match reality.
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:54 · Score: 0

Who gets there first is not as important as implementation.
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by BasilBrush · 2011-06-06 09:05 · Score: 1

I dunno bout you, but I have a record collection of about 5k vinyl records. If I wanted to synch that to an Ipad, I'd have to have ... a computer?
You're complaining you don't have a computer?
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 09:18 · Score: 0

You can't even get single 2.5" drives with 1.5 TB capacity. So, he's lying or his tablet actually has a pair of 750GB drives.
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by jo_ham · 2011-06-06 09:36 · Score: 1

"Get to claim 30% of your revenue"
Yes, and for that 30% we host your app, handle all the payment systems, billing etc, and cover all the bandwidth costs relating to initial download and any future updates. Because all that stuff is totally free in terms of financial cost, labour costs, time and hassle if you do it yourself, right?
In the meantime developers have collectively made over 2.5 billion dollars on the App Store. You make it sound like Apple are being hostile.
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by Caerdwyn · 2011-06-06 09:42 · Score: 1

1) We get to claim 30% of your revenue
What percentage does a brick-and-mortal distributor take for boxed software? Okay, how about th next guy in line, the retailer? Betcha it adds up to a LOT more than 30%.

2) You have to live in a box and learn "our way" to stay there
3) We can change the rules at any time
This differs from Best Buy, MacWarehouse, etc. how? They have rules too. You break 'em, you're out.

It's almost dystopian, how the hell do they expect to attract developers with these kinds of restrictions?
By... paying them? And providing a reliable storefront? And discoverability? And stripping away the hassle, the 3% Visa Tithe, the losses due to chargebacks and the use of stolen credit card info, and potential security nightmares associated with having to deal with credit cards, etc. yourself? By freeing coders and content creators to code and create, instead of dealing with retail busywork?
The App Store sounds like a hell of a deal to me. 30%? As retail overheads go, that's a pittance.

--
Everybody gets what the majority deserves.
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by Caerdwyn · 2011-06-06 09:54 · Score: 1

Actually, you can get Silverlight for OS/X easily enough directly from Microsoft. Intel Mac, OS/X 10.4.11 or better, Safari 3+ or Firefox 3+.
I'm not surprised it's not in the App Store yet, but I suspect it will be, as will MS Office for Mac. There's money to be made, and Microsoft be wantin' some o' dat. It's a lot more likely that Microsoft products will show up in the App Store than anything from Adobe, though. That's a pissfight you need a rain slicker for, not just boots. Let's see, what was that big yellow rubberized rain coat called again...

--
Everybody gets what the majority deserves.
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by MogNuts · 2011-06-06 12:24 · Score: 1

Are they really making money off it? And even if they are--are they really making FAR more money off of it because of that? You might have companies making money if they provide a service, for example, say that Square company. Because the app is just a gateway to the true service, fee collection from payment processing. But for Apps just to buy? Doubt it nowadays. I would argue that of all the 500,000 apps, very few are truly making much money--it's probably even pretty rare now for them to break even. For every angry birds, there are 5000 others that make squat. And 30% cut? Read that article about that company who's margins wouldn't accept that? Look at Walmart. They make billions per year. Yet each retail store only has an average 3% margin (markup). If prices were to rise above that, the store would have to close.
And for someone with such a low UID, no offense, but you should know better. For the record, I do think app stores are great. But here's a perfect example: I'm switching carriers (to get better service and which happens 10,000's/day) and to an Android phone. So $100 worth of App Store purchases for my 3GS are up in smoke. Worthless. I don't mind too much because I'm fortunate enough for it to not to be a financial burden, but it's still an annoyance for me both in monetary amount and by principle.
I think what most people don't realize is that this is just the usual BS repeating itself. All the rage was the tech bubble. Yea some companies made some money. Most went under. Then look at the whole blogging thing. Make millions from working at home! Now most can barely afford Ramen noodles. Now it's the app thing. Angry Birds! Now unless you have a massive marketing budget no one knows your app exists and you make enough to support yourself if you're lucky. Don't believe the hype. They're pushing it because no one wants to do the real effort of actually making a well run, profitable business. They perpetuate it to the get rich crowd. Make an app and make millions! *Bleck.*
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by clifyt · 2011-06-06 15:17 · Score: 1

"Are they really making money off it?"
Yes. I don't really hang with people that make game rip offs...usually pretty serious apps. Me? My background is in music and psychology (did both professionally for years), and I have two apps I've been working on that won't really be useful for the masses, but would be for specific individuals (i.e., management / roster tool as well as translating a few psychological instruments to iOS...which ironically, one of mine I sold YEARS ago on Hypercard and it sold VERY well...and I am still legally the sole licensee of this test in electronic form).
The one friend I knew did medical instrumentation, and he wrote his in a flash translator...I thought it was strange the desktop version was in flash, but its what he knew. I think he used AIR to make it into a desktopable app...and a year ago, his app was pulled because of the flash background. He had the code and logic down, and rewriting in another language meant hiring someone, but if you have a working app...its far easier to rewrite because you now have a working prototype. Made his money back pretty quickly.
But yes, lots of people don't make squat. Just like in the real world. If you follow the leader instead of forging a new path yourself, you won't get noticed.
As for switching carriers...why does your carried mean anything? Get an ipad...or an itouch...you can STILL run those same apps without the phone.
BTW I don't think too many people are thinking about making millions...if they are smart. Idiots believe what they want to believe. I also know plenty of people putting food on the table with things like this...or suplimenting an already good income.
Oh yeah, and the apps I'm writing are actually crossplatform...
http://www.anscamobile.com/
Uses the Lua language...the Android side is a bit buggier, but they will get it sorted out soon enough. I don't have one of those devices, but I plan on getting one soon enough if this works out. Who knows...might actually make enough money to make it worth my while doing xplatform again (last time I did this was compiling code between the Mac and PC in the 80s...and that was a pain in the ass).
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by MogNuts · 2011-06-06 23:22 · Score: 1

It was an interesting and informative post. Though I do have to respond:

Yes. I don't really hang with people that make game rip offs...usually pretty serious apps. Me? My background is in music and psychology (did both professionally for years), and I have two apps I've been working on that won't really be useful for the masses, but would be for specific individuals (i.e., management / roster tool as well as translating a few psychological instruments to iOS...which ironically, one of mine I sold YEARS ago on Hypercard and it sold VERY well...and I am still legally the sole licensee of this test in electronic form).
The one friend I knew did medical instrumentation, and he wrote his in a flash translator...I thought it was strange the desktop version was in flash, but its what he knew. I think he used AIR to make it into a desktopable app...and a year ago, his app was pulled because of the flash background. He had the code and logic down, and rewriting in another language meant hiring someone, but if you have a working app...its far easier to rewrite because you now have a working prototype. Made his money back pretty quickly.
That was my point to begin with. You said it yourself and addressed my point with the Hypercard test. You sold a specific product that addressed a particular need that was an actual business revolving not around an app, but another product/service. You didn't make another fart app or even another crappy (but falling in the useful category) RSS app. Like I already said, you're in the 50 per every 10,000 people actually doing something. And very important: may I ask, with your apps, can you make a comfortable full time living with it, selling and supporting it? That's also part of my point. Most business consume 50-80+ hours per week. If you're only making $20k/year, that's NOT a successful app OR business.

As for switching carriers...why does your carried mean anything? Get an ipad...or an itouch...you can STILL run those same apps without the phone./quote?
Why would I spend *more* money on another, *separate* device to retain what I *already* purchased? That's the whole point. They lock you in to that app store, so when you want to move, most people don't because they don't want to lose their purchases. And they're smartphones: no one is going to carry around a smartphone AND a iTouch. It negates the whole point of having one device to do it all. Plus, I have no use for an iPad.
Either way, I commend you for being intelligent, running a good business, and contributing something useful to the iOS ecosystem. I hope your two apps sell well and are profitable. Best of luck to you. And Hypercard--wow, that brings back memories. Loved that sucker.
Re:Annnnnd it's a big nothing. by clifyt · 2011-06-07 00:49 · Score: 1

"And very important: may I ask, with your apps, can you make a comfortable full time living with it, selling and supporting it? That's also part of my point. Most business consume 50-80+ hours per week. If you're only making $20k/year, that's NOT a successful app OR business."
I think $20k for a single app a year is pretty good month. Its also why I'm looking into the Lua framework instead of learning objC -- I know C/C++ but I don't know the ins and outs of objC and the frameworks associated with it. It was also the reason I used Hypercard back in the day (and on the PC side of things, I believe I used Supercard or Livecard or something...it was a pretty good clone!)...I could compile externals / dlls for each of the platforms and do the heavy lifting there...without worrying about the interfacing (or someone looking at the code! I generally did OS the code after I made enough month though because I felt it helped the psychometric community to have functions that worked correctly...you would be amazed at how many psychological or even medical instruments are designed by either content specialists that have no clue about programming...or programmers that don't quite understand why certain things are done certain ways, and decide to take liberties that affect patient care simply because they realize no one is ever going to understand the nerdy side of things).
But using these scripting frameworks? I can actually build something in a few weeks from prototype to delivery and spend maybe an hour or two a week tweaking things.
I can actually hire someone overseas to do the maintenance and leave it at that until the next BIG update...
As for carrying separate devices...then carry an iPad. The iPhone really doesn't get that much use for me any more now that I have the pad...there are little things I use it for, but not like when I first got it. It is nice that I know that a lot of apps are universal and if I don't carry the big guy around, I have something that will work sorta as good.
Or even just hack your iPhone. I have my old 3GS hacked and I can still run things on it...I have a few midi apps that I use on it and pretty much keep solely in the studio. It is no longer a phone, but still useful.
And if I don't make money, I can still write grants and do conferences and get my name out in other ways (I am an academic these days!) Life isn't going to stop because I learned a skill that will be obsolete in 5 years!
BTW hypercard ROCKED...it was incredibly powerful if you knew how to do the right things with it. I used it first as a webserver (I had to build a TCPIP stack for it! C++ externals) and then as a CGI engine for WebStar...I ended up having the first web based testing application based around this product...and students have hated me ever since then! There was NOTHING I couldn't figure out how to do in hypercard...if you wanted to have a quick and painless GUI and then backend it with powerful code...that was the way to go. Hell, my first neural project ended up in this...others were able to do neural nets but it was so incredibly geeky that no one could figure it out. Using neural algs and a HC front end, my team was actually able to get a LOT of research done quicker than guys that had the backing of IBM / Microsoft and otherwise...
I really wish there was something like it today as easy to use and as clean to read...the web has promises that it can, but really...it never was as easy as this language...god I miss it!

Perhaps one of the biggest advances... by arcite · 2011-06-06 07:15 · Score: 1, Insightful

Untethered idevices! Apple just opened themselves up to a whole new segment of the market...those people who don't have an iMac or Macbook. This means that anyone who can afford the lowest level idevice is able to get access to the whole ecosystem to handle all of their media, user created content, documents, ect.... The iCloud makes all of this possible. The data is persistent and secure forever, for all present and future devices. It only gets better from here on out; we are finally in the 21st century baby!

Re:Perhaps one of the biggest advances... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:38 · Score: 0

Untethered idevices! Apple just opened themselves up to a whole new segment of the market...those people who don't have an iMac or Macbook. This means that anyone who can afford the lowest level idevice is able to get access to the whole ecosystem to handle all of their media, user created content, documents, ect.... The iCloud makes all of this possible. The data is persistent and secure forever, for all present and future devices. It only gets better from here on out; we are finally in the 21st century baby!
first 5 gigs is free, but then it's going to end up costing you $20+ a month or more for more space. The average american will probably accrue 3+ gigs every 6 months.
Re:Perhaps one of the biggest advances... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:48 · Score: 0

WTF are you talking about? Haven't you heard of iTunes for the PC? I've never owned a Mac and my iPod touch does just fine.
Re:Perhaps one of the biggest advances... by Yvan256 · 2011-06-06 08:06 · Score: 1

He's saying that someone who doesn't have a Mac or PC could buy an iPhone/iPod touch/iPad and use that as his/her only computing device.
Re:Perhaps one of the biggest advances... by cheeks5965 · 2011-06-06 08:46 · Score: 1

who is this average american? even the small 3g data caps ~250mb/month are good enough for 95% of people. and that's just throughput, not files worth saving. the average american will never ever fill up 5GB.

--
-- Flame me and I will happily flame you back. Bring it!
Re:Perhaps one of the biggest advances... by Bob+The+Cowboy · 2011-06-06 10:00 · Score: 2

The iCloud makes all of this possible. The data is persistent and secure forever, for all present and future devices.
Simply: Wow.
What color is the fucking sky on your world? How long do you measure forever? Five Years? How about twenty? Thirty? If Apple in 50 years even resembles Apple today, I'll eat my fucking flying car. Nevermind actually keeping this service running forever.
I won't even go into "persistent and secure" or "all present and future devices". You apparently don't read the news enough to realize that both of those statements aren't even possible, let alone likely.
Re:Perhaps one of the biggest advances... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 11:40 · Score: 0

funny :)
Re:Perhaps one of the biggest advances... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 12:38 · Score: 0

You can also have Windows all you need is iTunes
Re:Perhaps one of the biggest advances... by AmiMoJo · 2011-06-06 21:35 · Score: 1

Do you think people who set up Geocities sites in the 90s thought they would be preserved forever? They whole lot have been archived for posterity.
Okay, your music collection probably won't survive but I wouldn't be surprised if any personal web sites and maybe personal email did too. Kind of like how the private letters of many famous people are now public, although historians are interested in ordinary people's mail too as a record of what life was really like at the time.

--
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC

Huh? by arcite · 2011-06-06 07:16 · Score: 1

I have a Macbook and have used my superdrive like twice in the past year. I would rather devote that space to more battery.

Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:20 · Score: 0

You're not holding it right! If you're grabbing it at the sides it's no wonder you couldn't get the disks in!
Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:24 · Score: 0

Thanks for your input. Now hush a minute, the grown-ups are talking.
Re:Huh? by ColdWetDog · 2011-06-06 08:33 · Score: 1

Toss the drive and put another HD in the slot. Put the Superdrive in an external enclosure so you have it available for those walks through memory lane.

--
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Re:Huh? by Altus · 2011-06-06 09:35 · Score: 1

mine broke. I have no idea how long ago, but I didn't find out till I tried burning a disk. Its probably been out of commission for over a year.
I chose not to replace it in my 4 year old laptop... I just don't use it enough. I agree, I would be happy with eliminating them from portables and only having externals. Its amazing how quickly optical media is becoming fringe. Seems to be happening even faster than with floppies. (but then I already thought the floppy was worthless when the iMac came out)

--
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

Data center hardware? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:18 · Score: 0

http://photos.macrumorslive.com/p/2011-06-06/f1307387188.jpg Those look like HP servers.... does that mean they use Linux, or a custom version of OS X that allows non-apple hardware?

Re:Data center hardware? by NatasRevol · 2011-06-06 07:46 · Score: 1

OS X Server running in VMware.
Coming this fall for everyone with less than a $50M data center.
http://virtualization.info/en/news/2011/04/more-details-about-vsphere-5-appear-online.html

--
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Re:Data center hardware? by Steauengeglase · 2011-06-06 08:06 · Score: 1

If true it reminds me of something a friend of mine in the mortuary business use to say: We're stackin' 'em deep and burnin' 'em cheap.

Xcode ... by geniusj · 2011-06-06 07:20 · Score: 1

How about making it so I don't have re-download 3+GB every time a minor dot-release of Xcode is released?

Re:Xcode ... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:28 · Score: 0

Delta updates are coming to many things in iOS 5 and Lion. So, future Xcode updates may be less painful.
Re:Xcode ... by slimjim8094 · 2011-06-06 07:28 · Score: 4, Informative

They did. Delta updates in App Store. All the devs in the room applauded, for precisely the reason you mentioned.

--
I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
Re:Xcode ... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:42 · Score: 0

How about reading what they announced. App/iOS updates are done using *delta* updates (think diff).
Re:Xcode ... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:44 · Score: 0

http://www.apple.com/macosx/whats-new/features.html#macappstore
See: Efficient app updates
But what I'd rather see for Xcode is that they make it free again.
Re:Xcode ... by itsdapead · 2011-06-06 07:54 · Score: 3, Informative

How about making it so I don't have re-download 3+GB every time a minor dot-release of Xcode is released?
http://www.apple.com/macosx/whats-new/features.html - look for 'Efficient app updates'

--
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
Re:Xcode ... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 09:01 · Score: 0

Delta updates my friend. Yep, Delta is gonna be all over the place in Lion, likely in Time Machine, versions, etc. i.e. versions are stored in delta chunks not distinct copies. App Store updates will download updates via delta copies as will the over the air updates on iOS5.

SteveJobs swan song! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:23 · Score: 0

iCloud announcement just decimated many a startup business plan, leveled the wireless playing field and in a fashion SteveJobs made famous disrupted entrenched industry players today with Apple's (AAPL) free-wireless iCloud OS feature for its products. Simply...they have obliterated the need for an Operating System, file system logic in order to use devices. Apple have entered the post-PC device independence era of hardware commoditization with device agnostic-ation surely to be the last nail in the coffin keeping mfgrs guessing how to remain alive.

Summary commentary by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:24 · Score: 1

Lion is a good evolutionary upgrade and a no-brainer at $30. iOS 5 is playing catch-up to Android and still falling short. Apple proves its consistency in delivering mediocre online services.

Re:Summary commentary by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 15:56 · Score: 0

Anyone who thinks that iOS is playing catch up doesn't understand what makes iOS so successful to begin with. No one is close to delivering what Apple offer at the moment, not if you actually expect things to work properly.

Try Subsonic by psyclone · 2011-06-06 07:25 · Score: 1

Why store all your music in "the cloud" when you can serve it yourself to any browser and many devices (iphone, android, etc) from a PC you control using Subsonic?

Re:Try Subsonic by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:45 · Score: 0

Offload the server resources and network load to someone else? And if something goes down, you can actually blame someone else. And I'm also going to guess physically distributed servers? (Haven't yet seen the keynote myself.)
But as with any kind of computing service. If it doesn't suit your needs/interests, you're obviously not the target market.
Re:Try Subsonic by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:55 · Score: 0

Because syncing it in "the cloud" is easier and works just as well?
Re:Try Subsonic by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:56 · Score: 0

Why dedicate all that bandwidth, server CPU, and local disk space (which you probably aren't backing up properly, or building fault tolerance and high availability for) serving something yourself when you could just store it all in "the cloud" for a reasonable fee and make all the server management somebody else's headache?
Re:Try Subsonic by afidel · 2011-06-06 08:15 · Score: 1

Because if you don't already have a 24/7 PC it will cost you more in electricity than the iCloud service? I mean I have a squeezebox server and I still use Amazon's cloud player because it's more secure to let someone else host the files than it is to open up my home PC to all of Sprint's IP space. Oh and for people with data caps at home it only counts when you first upload them (or not at all for music matched songs!)

--
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.

Few surprises by fermion · 2011-06-06 07:27 · Score: 3, Interesting

$30 for the OS is the same price as the current OS. The only difference is there is no family pack. This is because device on an Apple account is considered the same device for licensing purposes. If you have 10 macs on you account, then all 10 macs can get the Appstore Software. This is a really attractive feature of Apple software, and I am glad that all Appstore software is going to follow this model. One of my biggest issues with MS is having to buy MS WIndows at $200 a pop for every machine I own.

We also expected the over the network OS upgrades, something I think will really separate Mac Os and iOS hardware form the MS crowd. Lack of installation media is a concern for some, but I put all my OS on HD partitions and install from the harddisk anyway. Haven't install from a DVD in years. Haven't bought a application DVD in years.

The dig about it just working is really apropos. I tried to use Amazon music service thingy. Bought the music, put it on the web, could not download it to my computer afterwards. So I set up Amazon to download to my computer, thinking I would upload back to Amazon. Bought the lady gaga for $1, never got it to download properly, Amazon will not aswer my requests to download it again. I think this is called theft. Really wondering if I am going to do business with them when they won't give me my purchases.

One thing I am concerned about is the transition from Mobileme to iCloud. They are not making it cheaper, 5gb for $20 is not better than the current deal. They are just giving away inexpensive services for free, just like they did with itools. Most people are not going to upload that many pictures in 30 days, and well over a decade of mail is not taking more than a few gb of space.

The versioning on iOS is going be a huge thing, since the iOS 'filesystem' is not versionable with any current tools. OTOH, semms iworks is stil imcompatable between Mac OS and iOS so I would have liked to see some work done on that front.

Apple is competing hard against Google and RIM, which is good, but they seem to have lost their way on some of the applications. This happened in the late 80's when they were trying to cut prices to compete with the PC. The software was spun off the claris and a lot of good applications were lost.

--
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black

Re:Few surprises by vux984 · 2011-06-06 07:47 · Score: 1

If you have 10 macs on you account, then all 10 macs can get the Appstore Software. This is a really attractive feature of Apple software, and I am glad that all Appstore software is going to follow this model. One of my biggest issues with MS is having to buy MS WIndows at $200 a pop for every machine I own.
Is there a limit to how many macs you can have on your account. I distinctly remember running into problems with itunes purchases due to the number of 'authorized computers' on my account, and it wasn't a lot... well under 10. I haven't used the app store yet so I'm genuinely curious.
One of my biggest issues with MS is having to buy MS WIndows at $200 a pop for every machine I own.
I agree completely... to a point. I think MS really needs to get on the family pack upgrades platform. A household with 4 or 5 computers running vista really shouldn't have to drop $1000 to get Windows 7.
However, seeing as you aren't buying the original pc from microsoft, and microsoft is discounting the OS to almsot nothing with major OEMs... its not likely you've paid Microsoft all that much for Windows in the first place. Apple raked in large margins on your original overpriced mac purchase so the inexpensive upgrades at least rebalances that scale a bit.
Lack of installation media is a concern for some, but I put all my OS on HD partitions and install from the harddisk anyway.
Lack of an installation media isn't a big deal, I'm a fan of digital distribution too... but OS installers should still be in bootable disc image formats (ISO or DMG) even if they don't give you a phsyical disk.
Seeing as the app store version of Lion is an in place upgrade from a previous version... you might have to install the previous version and then upgrade... which sucks if you ever want to clean reinstall.
Re:Few surprises by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:54 · Score: 0

$30 for the OS is the same price as the current OS. The only difference is there is no family pack. This is because device on an Apple account is considered the same device for licensing purposes. If you have 10 macs on you account, then all 10 macs can get the Appstore Software. This is a really attractive feature of Apple software, and I am glad that all Appstore software is going to follow this model. One of my biggest issues with MS is having to buy MS WIndows at $200 a pop for every machine I own.
$200??? Windows 7 Home update version can be found for anywhere between $50 and $90.
If you aren't updating and are buying a new machine, the OEM Windows 7 Home pricing is very competitive with a similar cost range.
If you are building your own machine, then you can get Windows 7 Home for $80-$90.
If you are a student, you can get Windows 7 Professional for $30
Re:Few surprises by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:55 · Score: 0

One of my biggest issues with MS is having to buy MS WIndows at $200 a pop for every machine I own.
One of my biggest issues with MS is having to buy MS WIndows at $200 a pop for every machine I own.
I agree completely... to a point. I think MS really needs to get on the family pack upgrades platform. A household with 4 or 5 computers running vista really shouldn't have to drop $1000 to get Windows 7.
Good News, everyone!
Microsoft "just" released family pack's for preorder on Windows 7, (like 2 and a half years ago). You can still get it from a couple of oddball shops like, oh, Amazon....
http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Windows-Premium-Upgrade-Family/dp/B002MV2MG0/ref=sr_1_1?s=software&ie=UTF8&qid=1307389935&sr=1-1
Re:Few surprises by catmistake · 2011-06-06 08:01 · Score: 1

5gb for $20 is not better than the current deal
plz pay attention, the 5GB is free.

--
The Admin and the Engineer
Re:Few surprises by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:07 · Score: 0

It's not theft, for theft to happen then someone has to dishonestly do something (or the intention). In England, to commit theft, you HAVE to satisfy ALL 5 of:
1. Dishonestly Appropriate
2. Property
3. Belonging to another Person
4. With the Intention
5. Of Depriving that person of that Property.
In the case of Amazon not allowing you to download music you've bought, it's not really theft, just shit service.
Re:Few surprises by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 10:05 · Score: 0

Paying to upgrade all my macs has sucked in the past. I love the way the app store works in this regard.
Re:Few surprises by Ixokai · 2011-06-06 10:20 · Score: 2

Its not 5gb for $20 -- its 5gb for free. Everyone gets 5gb ... and that 5gb ONLY counts your personal data-stuff. Not your music, apps and the like which is bought from Apple's servers. None of that counts towards your storage limits at all.
The only thing that costs anything with iCloud (which completely suprecedes MobileMe, IIUC) is the iTunes music match service. Everything else is completely free.
I'm not sure I get your comment on applications-- they seem to be spending as much time working on their apps as they do the core OS, but iWork's compatibility is a good point... But its also one I think will be addressed soon. It wasn't announced but it was implied that a future update will hook it up to the iCloud too. Other mac apps are going to be hooked in right away.
But since iWork for iPhone was just recently released, I think they were just busy doing that first -- as its the thing they'd want to be showy about at WWDC.
Re:Few surprises by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 13:06 · Score: 0

One of my biggest issues with MS is having to buy MS WIndows at $200 a pop for every machine I own.

That is because Microsoft does not sell you specialized hardware to run their OS. I have no idea why people complain about the cost of Windows considering the cost of Apple hardware and support. MacOS is the gateway to the hardware, where Apple makes its cash.
Re:Few surprises by hawk · 2011-06-06 17:02 · Score: 1

>Bought the lady gaga for $1, never got it to download properly, Amazon will not aswer my requests to download it again
What a deal. That's worth *at least* $20!
Can they do the same thing for Taylor Swift and Rascall Flatts? And if so can I protect all of my ma Hines for that. Twenty bucks, or is it per machine?
hawk
Re:Few surprises by MrAngryForNoReason · 2011-06-07 03:19 · Score: 1

A household with 4 or 5 computers running vista really shouldn't have to drop $1000 to get Windows 7.
They don't. They can buy the Windows 7 Family Pack which is 3 licenses for £149.99 including VAT.
They could also pick up a copy of Office Home and Student 2010 which can be used on up to 3 computers as well for £109.99 including VAT.
While Microsoft's licensing costs may not have been great in the past they have made massive changes in recent years to make things affordable for home users.
Re:Few surprises by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-07 04:41 · Score: 0

The dig about it just working is really apropos. I tried to use Amazon music service thingy. Bought the music, put it on the web, could not download it to my computer afterwards. So I set up Amazon to download to my computer, thinking I would upload back to Amazon. Bought the lady gaga for $1, never got it to download properly, Amazon will not aswer my requests to download it again. I think this is called theft. Really wondering if I am going to do business with them when they won't give me my purchases.
I have used Amazon's service extensively (as well as iTunes) and both are excellent services. The specific case you are referring to - Born This Way selling for $1.00 - is an edge case. Amazon (stupidly) did not predict the popularity of this particular deal and was not prepared to handle it. The did provide a way for everybody to download the album who purchased it that day (and still do, for that matter).
Re:Few surprises by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-07 11:05 · Score: 0

I agree completely... to a point. I think MS really needs to get on the family pack upgrades platform. A household with 4 or 5 computers running vista really shouldn't have to drop $1000 to get Windows 7.
You would have a point if Microsoft starts requiring specialized hardware, only available from them, to be able to use Windows. It amazes me that you folks have no problem dropping $1000 or more on a computer to run MacOS, then turn around and complain about the price of Windows. I have a computer I built for half what the cheapest Apple costs and I can run Windows on it. I woudl love to run MacOS on it but Apple refuses unless I pay the Apple tax.
Re:Few surprises by vux984 · 2011-06-10 05:56 · Score: 1

While Microsoft's licensing costs may not have been great in the past they have made massive changes in recent years to make things affordable for home users.
The trouble is that it rarely actually works out.
Windows 7 Family pack is great... but one of our laptops came with Vista Business. And my main desktop had Vista Ultimate. And even if we'd wanted to downgrade to Home Premium with 7 the family pack won't do that.
And we don't want really want home premium, we want at least win 7 professional, and there is no family pack for that.
And office home and student is a great deal, but not letting users have outlook is a dick move. (Not that I'm a fan of outlook, but a lot of people want to use the same thing at home and at work, or have 3rd party software that only integrates with outlook... hell even itunes/iphone/ipod contact/calendar sync only works with outlook last time i checked.

Pst. by earls · 2011-06-06 07:31 · Score: 1

Step into my office! *pops trunk*

Didn't you know? by SuperKendall · 2011-06-06 07:32 · Score: 2, Informative

Apple always does it last.

Then they do it best.

That's the MO that they have been repeating for years.

You just caught on?

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley

Re:Didn't you know? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 07:51 · Score: 0

In my experience, they do it best for 98% of the time, then you hit the 2% case where you need to set up something special and you're totally screwed.
Re:Didn't you know? by node+3 · 2011-06-06 12:24 · Score: 1, Informative

Like how they were the last company to make a PC, then the last company to make a GUI/WIMP PC, then the last company to make an MP3 player (well, that's one), then they were the last to make a touchscreen smartphone, then they were the last to make a tablet that isn't just a gimped PC...
They certainly aren't "always last". They are often first to do something in a major way, and often not. The only thing you can really say about this is that no matter when they do it, they are almost always the first to get it "right" (from the point of view of the consumer). Where that actually happens in the timeline of everything else is variable, although Apple does try to be earlier rather than later.
Re:Didn't you know? by Osgeld · 2011-06-06 12:55 · Score: 1

douchy mc nitpick here but that has only been true for a bit over a decade, historically Apple has done it first, then about 4 other times with compatibility issues, then they hit a dull spot for a while, then splash out the new shiny shit! That generally works for them outside of the flopper newton which helped give us the sad mac 90's (along with many other factors)
Re:Didn't you know? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 19:25 · Score: 1

The only thing they do best is marketing.
Re:Didn't you know? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-07 06:03 · Score: 0

The Mouse? UI (not last, but closer to first) which includes a bunch of individual functionalities? Fast forwarding... they abandon old technologies first and integrate their choice of new technologies first. Ditching Floppies? Ditching Serial Ports? Ditching crap that is so crappy (in comparison to other technologies that perhaps built upon "crappy")?Firewire? Displayport/Thunderbolt?
Take your best anything of any high-end Personal Computer maker, and I will show you how Apple kills it. Price comparisons are irrelevant when some people are playing checkers or Apple's checker board.
Not a Fanboy. Wintel IT, mostly... but Apple is not a last to the dinner table sort of company.

Does Dropbox upgrade quality? by SuperKendall · 2011-06-06 07:35 · Score: 1

Does Dropbox automatically upgrade a shitty 128kbs MP3 to a 256kb AAC DRM free file when you upload.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley

Re:Does Dropbox upgrade quality? by DrgnDancer · 2011-06-06 08:07 · Score: 1

That's a big key IMO. I have lots of shitty MP3's I recorded years ago before it became a relatively trivial operation. I've been putting off rerecording them for years just becasue of the sheer volume of them. If I can trade those in for professionally mastered 256kb AAC tracks, I'll part with $25 this minute.

--
I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
Re:Does Dropbox upgrade quality? by StuartHankins · 2011-06-06 11:17 · Score: 1

+1 Insightful. I feel the same way, why bother re-ripping music when I never finished ripping all my CD's in the first place? $25 a year is nothing.

How will a office get mac os 10.7 as iTunes max 5 by Joe_Dragon · 2011-06-06 07:35 · Score: 1

How will a office get mac os 10.7 as iTunes is a max of 5 systems? and will there be away so you just have to download it 1 time? How will I be able to do a clean install with a download only os? Will I have to use the apple store to install it on a new HDD?

For ONE YEAR by SuperKendall · 2011-06-06 07:38 · Score: 1

R$25 *per year*

And after you have taken a year to download the 256kb DRP free AAC files Match gives you, why would you pay for another year?

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley

Re:For ONE YEAR by mikael_j · 2011-06-06 07:44 · Score: 1

Because if I understood correctly you can stream/download them to your iDevices directly from Apple without being home, which means that if you have a large-ish library (larger than the available storage on your iDevice anyway) you can still access a very large portion of your music library. So instead of picking carefully what music you want to bring along you can just sync the music that isn't on the iTunes store and fetch the rest from Apple.
That's actually a decent service that I'd pay for, especially if it is as well-integrated as Apple services usually are.
And I've tried Spotify, it's neat but it's more of a "pure subscription" service, when music goes away it's pretty much gone. And that happens all the time.

--
Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
Re:For ONE YEAR by cheeks5965 · 2011-06-06 07:54 · Score: 1

umm.. not really. itunes match provides online music for the files you already have on your computer. so you're not going to be able to steal anything from the cloud that you haven't already stolen.

--
-- Flame me and I will happily flame you back. Bring it!
Re:For ONE YEAR by dOxxx · 2011-06-06 08:14 · Score: 1

The iCloud syncing part of iTunes will be free. It's only the service which matches ripped files in your library to the iTunes store which costs. So the GP's point still stands.
Re:For ONE YEAR by DJRumpy · 2011-06-06 08:17 · Score: 1

The bonus there being that you don't need to 'upload' your purchased content. If the service matches your ripped content, you can just download it to other devices and skip the upload.
Re:For ONE YEAR by mikael_j · 2011-06-06 08:25 · Score: 1

Ah, but if you have say, a 16 GB iPhone, and you also have a 90 GB library at home you can't sync the whole library. Now, it is highly likely that a good 50+% of your library is on iTunes, this means you have at least 45 GB of music that also exists in the iTunes store, that's more than twice the total space on your iPhone (and if you have other data on the phone, like movies and photos, those take up some of that valuable space). So now you can sync this directly to your iPhone from Apple. Thus the part in my post about not having to pick carefully what to sync with your phone, you can just grab it from Apple on the go as long as your phone is connected to the net.
This seems to be the part of the service that's supposed to make people keep paying for it.

--
Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
Re:For ONE YEAR by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 10:34 · Score: 0

I imagine you'd have to continue paying $24.99 to keep matched songs as part of the iCloud accessible library. If all you want to do is convert all the stuff you've collected to 256k AAC files, then paying it as a one-time fee will work. But when the year-long subscription expires, you better hope you've downloaded everything wherever it's needed, because you're no longer getting it from the free service. That's limited to stuff purchased from Apple, which means it really isn't free, you've just paid for it as part of the purchase price.
Re:For ONE YEAR by node+3 · 2011-06-06 11:00 · Score: 1

iCloud lets you upload the songs that aren't iTunes purchases. And the ones you get for $24.99 are the exact same DRM-free, 256k AAC files you get when you buy them in iTunes. They do not expire. The only thing that expires is your ability to download them again without first uploading them. You also don't have to transcode them or anything.
Re:For ONE YEAR by gordo3000 · 2011-06-06 21:28 · Score: 1

but you only get 5 gb of space. I have almost no music and I have more than 5 GB so it's pretty damn useless as a cloud service. it would have been much nicer if I could have sync'ed when I come home over my wireless network rather than having to get the recharging cable out of my bedroom when I want to.....
Re:For ONE YEAR by mab · 2011-06-06 22:23 · Score: 1

Music isn't included in the 5GB, after all, they have copies of the music in the store already.

Dear Apple by Enry · 2011-06-06 07:39 · Score: 3, Insightful

Welcome to last year.

Love and kisses,
Android

Really, though all these things are good, but Apple is going for the same thing IBM and Microsoft tried in the 80s and 90s by locking users into a static platform. There's better bells and whistles now, but when Facetime can't connect with anything other than an iOS or OS X device, you'll have to say forget it and go with something more cross platform like Google Voice. Many of the new features advertised already exist in one form or another and the ones that are unique are more 'Huh. Interesting, but not enough to make my buy one'.

Re:Dear Apple by jscotta44 · 2011-06-06 08:11 · Score: 2

You do realize that Apple released the code for FaceTime for others to build it into their clients. And you do realize that several important pieces of the new stuff are also made available to third party developers so they can participate, too? Exactly how is releasing code for others to use locking users into a static platform?
Re:Dear Apple by blahbooboo · 2011-06-06 08:17 · Score: 1, Insightful

You do realize that Apple released the code for FaceTime for others to build it into their clients. And you do realize that several important pieces of the new stuff are also made available to third party developers so they can participate, too? Exactly how is releasing code for others to use locking users into a static platform?
When did Apple release FaceTime? Did this happen today, as yesterday everyone was still waiting??
Re:Dear Apple by jscotta44 · 2011-06-06 08:25 · Score: 1

I stand corrected. Apparently, Apple is working with some standards body to get it approved, but nothing has been released into the wild yet. Until then, just vaporware – or is that vaporlicense.
Re:Dear Apple by Enry · 2011-06-06 08:27 · Score: 1

No, they built FaceTime on top of existing standards. Like Microsoft using existing standards to make the .doc format. It's using XML, but good luck writing an app that can use it correctly.
Re:Dear Apple by jscotta44 · 2011-06-06 08:32 · Score: 1

Right. But Jobs did say that they were going to work with a standards body to make it available to more devices. However, a year later that has not happened. Make me wonder if it will every happen.
(btwI mispoke and it was pointed out to meso I corrected my position).
Re:Dear Apple by makomk · 2011-06-06 08:35 · Score: 1

You do realize that Apple released the code for FaceTime for others to build it into their clients.
They said they were going to and got a lot of good PR about it, then did absolutely nothing. As far as anyone can tell it's not even really practical to reverse engineer...
Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:51 · Score: 1

Welcome to last year.
Love and kisses,
Android
Really, though all these things are good, but Apple is going for the same thing IBM and Microsoft tried in the 80s and 90s by locking users into a static platform. There's better bells and whistles now, but when Facetime can't connect with anything other than an iOS or OS X device, you'll have to say forget it and go with something more cross platform like Google Voice. Many of the new features advertised already exist in one form or another and the ones that are unique are more 'Huh. Interesting, but not enough to make my buy one'.
Yeah, it's pathetic how Apple keeps trying. I mean, remember how they came out with that lame-ass MP3 player years after Creative released the NOMAD? And how they shipped that me-too smartphone years after the Blackberry had burst on the scene? And how, ten years after the Tablet PC, Apple finally launched their own tablet?
You'd think they'd have learned that the first technology always wins, and that the market has not tolerance for a slick, shiny latecomer.
Re:Dear Apple by erotic_pie · 2011-06-06 09:01 · Score: 0

The front facing camera on my iPhone and iPad work just fine with Skype.
Re:Dear Apple by mblase · 2011-06-06 09:13 · Score: 1

Welcome to last year.
Love and kisses,
Android
Android may have more software features, but the hardware is a little behind. The only true Android OS for a tablet requires hardware that costs at least $100 more than a comparable iPad.
And that's not even looking at the differences in their app libraries.
Re:Dear Apple by Enry · 2011-06-06 09:26 · Score: 1

I see you haven't checked out the Acer or ASUS tablets. Large screen, multitouch, expandable memory, USB connections in and out, two major app stores, already does almost everything that Jobs seemed to promise with their cloud sync, and cost $50 less than the iPad.
Re:Dear Apple by theurge14 · 2011-06-06 09:54 · Score: 1

Didn't Android users *just* get Netflix?
Call it even?
Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 10:18 · Score: 0

No, they did not. They released a draft specification, which they have not updated in about 14 months, even though their own clients have been updated, and they have never released any source or up-to-date description of how the various components of the protocol interact.
Re:Dear Apple by pherthyl · 2011-06-06 10:48 · Score: 1

And they still don't have Skype video that works properly.
Re:Dear Apple by Enry · 2011-06-06 10:49 · Score: 1

Google Video chat works perfectly fine from my tablet.
Re:Dear Apple by Enry · 2011-06-06 10:51 · Score: 1

I'll give you netflix (grr), but I'm not sure that makes it even, otherwise I would have purchased a iPad by now. I can play all my MKV DVD rips on my Acer without having to re-encode them.
Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 11:04 · Score: 0

Facetime can't connect with anything other than an iOS or OS X device
This is paranoid blather... when has apple ever intentionally limited connectivity with other devices? They've always allowed exporting of files and conversions in other formats and my mac connects to Active Directory and over sshfs just fine (except when the music industry crippled them). The only time I've ever been frustrated with Apple's software being platform limited is that itunes still doesn't support flac.
Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 11:19 · Score: 0

You do realize that Apple released the code for FaceTime for others to build it into their clients. And you do realize that several important pieces of the new stuff are also made available to third party developers so they can participate, too? Exactly how is releasing code for others to use locking users into a static platform?
This is grossly untrue. Not only has Apple not released the code to Facetime, AFAIK it has not even released binaries for non-Apple platforms. For all practical purposes, you can only use Facetime to communicate between Apple devices.
Re:Dear Apple by anethema · 2011-06-06 11:28 · Score: 1

Should not have posted this anonymous. It is a bit tongue-in-cheek obviously but very relevant.

--

It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
Re:Dear Apple by Karlt1 · 2011-06-06 11:53 · Score: 1

can play all my MKV DVD rips on my Acer without having to re-encode them.
I can do the same on my iPad. You may not know this, but iOS devices have a few third party apps available for them.
Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 12:02 · Score: 0

So, maybe apple could use this fucking code to implement FaceTime into their fucking iChat ?
I mean, I made all members of my family buys macs and had them switch to iChat (from Skype, how stupid from me), and now FaceTime isn't compatible with that fucking apple standard ? Wtf ?
Re:Dear Apple by Wovel · 2011-06-06 12:37 · Score: 1

Funny part is you think anyone cares that Android had a few gestures first.. Android itself is a half baked copy o iOS with a dysfunctional app community. It is not like you cared when Android copied the webo notification system. That system was created by someone who once again works for Apple (he also worked there prior to his time at palm).
There is nothing original in Android, climb down from that high horse before you hurt yourself.
Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 12:47 · Score: 0

Welcome to last year.
Love and kisses,
Android
Yawn, Apple saw some good features in Android and implemented some in an iOS update. So?
And of course, Android itself is merely a version of the iPhone concept, two or three years after the original.
And by the way, the reason I won't buy Android is the very reason that you will: the completely open App store. I'll have vetted and tested apps thankyou, not trojans and rootkits. I want my phone to work when I dial 911. Apple's testing ain't perfect, but at least there is some.
Re:Dear Apple by MidnightBrewer · 2011-06-06 13:16 · Score: 1

Are you referring only to the central notification center, or the other six or so features that Android doesn't actually include?

--
"Give a man fire, and he'll be warm for a day; set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life
Re:Dear Apple by mjwx · 2011-06-06 13:49 · Score: 1

Welcome to last year.
Love and kisses,
Android
And as for the OS X notification system which has been blatantly copied from Android 1.0,

Welcome to 2008.

--
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Re:Dear Apple by Paul1969 · 2011-06-06 16:46 · Score: 1

Didn't Android users *just* get Netflix?
Not all of them. The Netflix app for Android has only been released for FIVE specific phone models.
Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 20:21 · Score: 0

Actually, no; these things were available on the iPhone last year too, some before that, if you were willing to jailbreak. To my eye, Android has always been a buggier imitation of a jailbroken Apple device, and excepting the higher-end handsets, running on pretty sorry hardware - you don't have to like it, but it's true. If the new OTA updates kill jailbreaking, then there might be something to brag about on the Google team.
Re:Dear Apple by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 21:10 · Score: 0

"You do realize that Apple said they would release the code for FaceTime for others to build it into their clients."
Fixed that for you.
Re:Dear Apple by sootman · 2011-06-07 03:03 · Score: 1

It's really funny to see Android fans get all snooty about borrowing/stealing/copying ideas, since Android was nothing but a warmed-over Blackberry up until January 2007.
Dear Android,
Thanks for notifications and OTA updates. You're welcome for EVERYTHING ELSE.
- Apple

--
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.

Music laundering by slimjim8094 · 2011-06-06 07:39 · Score: 1

Anyone else think the $25/yr "iTunes Match" service is Apple creating - and getting a piece of - a music laundering game? Pay 25/yr, take your "otherwise acquired" music, and legitimize it. Literally the first thing that came to mind when I read about it

--
I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.

Re:Music laundering by JoeCommodore · 2011-06-06 07:49 · Score: 1

$25 yr is the storage, you still have to buy replacement songs, else you can sync by wifi or wire. Those that have no matches in iTunes they will upload 'free'. So it'4 $25 yr + re-sales of your (possibly) legitimate CD rips.

--
"Enjoy what you're doing! If it becomes drudgery, you're doing it wrong!" - Jim Butterfield
Re:Music laundering by slimjim8094 · 2011-06-06 07:55 · Score: 1

I missed that you have to re-buy the songs that it finds.... my source didn't have that. Where did you read that?

--
I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
Re:Music laundering by mikael_j · 2011-06-06 08:08 · Score: 1

You don't have to re-buy them. You compare your library to the iTunes store library and any songs it has that you have you can replace in your library with Apple's 256 kbps DRM-free AAC copy, you can also access the music directly from Apple using your iDevice (I assume this is the part that will make people renew their service every year).
This service will apparently, if the transcripts I've read are correct, cost $24.99. If you want to also store music you have in your library that Apple doesn't have then that will cost you extra since you need to pay for the storage.

--
Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
Re:Music laundering by Ixokai · 2011-06-06 15:28 · Score: 1

What? Provide links. That's not at all what was said in the keynote, nor what I have read anywhere authoritative.
They are not charging for storage at all -- you get 5gb for your personal data (apps, music, and the like that they provide do NOT counted towards this*) for free, everyone, period.
The $25/year is NOT for storage, *explicitly*. It is for the matching service, and you do NOT have to 'buy replacement songs' because the premise (if not reality) is that you are uploading legally obtained music that you ripped yourself (or bought through other means).
Yeah, its music laundering. :P
* I'm not sure if a song you upload which is NOT a part of the iTunes Music Library, and thus does not successfully "match", counts against the 5GB or not.
Re:Music laundering by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · 2011-06-06 16:02 · Score: 1

Not really. Backing up everyone's non-iTunes music would not only be a huge burden in terms of storing and initial syncing, but Apple may not have had the means to do it legally, anyway.
Re:Music laundering by Ixokai · 2011-06-06 16:18 · Score: 1

That's mostly correct, but slightly off, I think.
Apple will basically keep a list of all songs you "own" online. All songs you bought from iTunes are obviously on that list, automatically. Any songs you own you can use on any iDevice attached to your account, free. If you add any song to this owned list, it gets synced automatically to all your iDevices.
Your iCloud system gets 5GB of personal storage -- but this is 'extra' storage, it does NOT count your music, apps, last 1000 photos in 30 days, and such.
This is all completely free.
You can also, for free, upload music that you have on your system manually to Apple -- by uploading it with your regular bandwidth. This is completely free: these songs are now "owned", and you can use them on all your devices. Now, it is not exactly clear if these songs count for your 'extra' storage or not. I could see them checking the song on upload, and if they already have it in their database, just mark you as having that and be done with it... and only count the storage for songs you upload that they don't already have. Or, they could count all 'uploaded' music -- perhaps as an incentive to get the match service. It could go either way, it wasn't clear to me how that'd work.
But all of this is still free. There are no limit to how many songs you can be marked as 'owned' under this service (unless storage gets to be a problem, see previous point of uncertainty).
Now, another option for getting that "owned" list updated is to pay $25/year for the match service. That will scan your harddrive, mark any music they already have as "owned", and upload any that they don't -- here it was pretty strongly implied that the music uploaded this way would NOT count towards your 5GB total, because they specifically for example pointed out unlimited-songs under this plan. (Specifically as an example they mentioned 20k, but pointed out they have a flat fee)
But only that last part of the process costs any money at all, and it only has to do with how you manage getting non-iTunes stuff to the server. Everything else is the same.
They also didn't mention anything at all about options for buying extra "personal" storage-- I'm sure they'll provide it, but this $25 isn't about storage at all.
Re:Music laundering by Lev_Arris · 2011-06-06 21:16 · Score: 1

So, all we need now is a way to trick the local client (iTunes) into thinking you have a file that you do not ... -> unlimited music for $24.99!
Re:Music laundering by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-08 02:45 · Score: 0

is DRM free mean that iTunes can't "de-load" your songs? I lost $50 worth of movies that I paid for, because I stupidly plugged my ipod into another computer...
Is 256kbps a lossy compressed MP3? Or is it the same as a CD? I read the entire 60+ page "EULA" from iTunes and got pretty confused. The general gist seems to be, "you don't have any rights. You don't own anything. Apple can and will from time to time take away what you paid for and you have no legal right to recovery." When I buy a pack of baseball cards for $1, I don't sign a 60+ page EULA. Something is very screwy with this.

Didn't they say ripped not downloaded? by perpenso · 2011-06-06 07:43 · Score: 1

I mean, for $25 I get legal versions of every single—ahem, questionably procured, shall we say— tracks in my gigantic iTunes library?

Didn't they say "ripped"? Perhaps they distinguish between things you ripped from a CD in iTunes from things you downloaded. Although if they did allow anything at all that would be an interesting attempt to monetize all the pirated music out there.

Re:Didn't they say ripped not downloaded? by Ixokai · 2011-06-06 15:22 · Score: 1

I'd be REALLY surprised -- no, shocked -- if it turned out that they only supported music that was specifically ripped by iTunes.
They said ripped, but its a marketing thing, I think. Apple's in the legal music selling business, and isn't going to really talk very loudly about details like that.
Its not like iTunes requires that it is what ripped a song to play a song -- you could have gotten it from Amazon, for example. Everything that the keynote said indicated that you're getting your whole library here, including everything not bought in iTunes.
But the reason the matching service even costs anything at all, I think, is just to appease the labels about the inevitable chunks of pirated content that would be in it.
Re:Didn't they say ripped not downloaded? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 18:24 · Score: 0

Something tells me they also sold this as a way to take people's MP3s and get them "converted" into an AAC format (which is less ubiquitous a format that most associate with iDevices) and I'm betting that it'll have an embedded digital identifier the account that downloads the AAC. Sort of a catch-and-release for tracking piracy for $25/yr with collections of 25,000 songs.
I also have serious questions about if they'll convert an mp3 that has the same hash as things found through piratebay or other release groups. Rather than a digital takedown notices maybe Apple steps in and blocks files joining people's iCloud library entirely.

Bootable media by SuperKendall · 2011-06-06 07:43 · Score: 1

You can use a number of programs to create a bootable copy of your current OS...

I would like to see some bootstrap solution that let you pull back a system from Time Machine though.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley

Re:Bootable media by fusiongyro · 2011-06-06 08:25 · Score: 1

All Macs on first boot now ask if you want to restore from Time Machine. I feel like I can get to that from Snow Leopard's installer disk too, but wouldn't swear to it.
Re:Bootable media by schnikies79 · 2011-06-06 08:31 · Score: 1

Yes, you can restore from Time Machine using a Snow Leopard disc.

--
Gone!
Re:Bootable media by BitZtream · 2011-06-06 08:39 · Score: 1

Boot off the Install CD ... say 'restore from time machine', pick when, come back in a day if you happen to be doing your restore over wifi which was obviously stupid on my part.
At least in 10.6, don't remember if it was in the 10.5 installer.

--
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager

It looks like this: by COMON$ · 2011-06-06 07:45 · Score: 1

1. Create an innovative online music service that increases sales for everyone.

2. Get sued into oblivion by Record Labels.

3. Create an non-innovative online music service that increases sales for 1 company.

4. ???

5. Get full support of Record Labels

6. Profit!

--
CS: It is all sink or swim...oh and did I mention there are sharks in that water?

Re:It looks like this: by cheeks5965 · 2011-06-06 08:19 · Score: 3, Insightful

i'm not going to argue the merits of your post, since we'd both be arguing with a distinct lack of facts. But the truth is that the record companies have the rights to the music, so if they don't like the online arrangement they're taking their ball and going home. mp3.com failed at the most important sales job -- getting the music companies on board. jobs extended his rds and convinced the record cos to buy in. and so you have this new service that's supported and works well.
As for #4, I believe it is "4. Pay the record companies a boat load of cash." which is all they really want. can you blame them?

--
-- Flame me and I will happily flame you back. Bring it!
Re:It looks like this: by The+Dawn+Of+Time · 2011-06-06 08:31 · Score: 2

Aside from oversimplifying (which is me being nice about calling you a liar) at steps 1 and 3, you're totally telling the truth.

For what? by SuperKendall · 2011-06-06 07:49 · Score: 1

first 5 gigs is free, but then it's going to end up costing you $20+ a month or more for more space. The average american will probably accrue 3+ gigs every 6 months.

3 gigs of what?

None of the purchased items count against that space. Nor does app storage. Nor do photos.

You basically get 5GB for documents and email and songs you upload that are not in the store. Perhaps for a handful that are too stubborn to upgrade or have really weird libraries that might be enough. For 90% of people it will be plenty.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley

OpenGL Driver update with Lion?????? by Cutting_Crew · 2011-06-06 07:49 · Score: 1

They are on the Architecture Review Board yet they are almost 2 years behind the current OpenGL 4.1 spec. OpenGL 3.0 was spec'd out and released at least 18 months ago, Apple helped lead the way in this effort yet they STILL dont have a 100% OpenGL 3.0 driver. I hope that with Lion they have moved to OpenGL 4.0. Please let me know if you hear anything. Personally this is one of the BIG items about Apple that I don't like. They want developers to develop but they don't give them all the tools. I want to continue writing this game app but i can't because I cannot access certain OpenGL functionality - not because the graphics card doesn't have the hardware - but because there is no driver update to support the hardware. Let that sink in: They helped write the OpenGL 3.0 spec over 18 months ago but they don't have their own driver for it.

Re:OpenGL Driver update with Lion?????? by tyrione · 2011-06-06 14:17 · Score: 1

They are on the Architecture Review Board yet they are almost 2 years behind the current OpenGL 4.1 spec. OpenGL 3.0 was spec'd out and released at least 18 months ago, Apple helped lead the way in this effort yet they STILL dont have a 100% OpenGL 3.0 driver. I hope that with Lion they have moved to OpenGL 4.0. Please let me know if you hear anything. Personally this is one of the BIG items about Apple that I don't like. They want developers to develop but they don't give them all the tools. I want to continue writing this game app but i can't because I cannot access certain OpenGL functionality - not because the graphics card doesn't have the hardware - but because there is no driver update to support the hardware. Let that sink in: They helped write the OpenGL 3.0 spec over 18 months ago but they don't have their own driver for it.
Let's get something straight. OS X is ahead of everyone's acclerated OpenGL stack for their Windowing Environment, period. When they have full 3.x stack it means all those primitives are accessible, system-wide. All drawing primitives will inherit OpenGL 3.x ready calls. Having a game utlize the OpenGL 4.x stack or an application leverage that stack is one matter. Having the entire Quartz Extreme Drawing system with the OpenGL 3.x/4.x stack sitting on top is an entirely different beast. KDE KWin is just now working not on getting the full OpenGL 2.x stack, but OpenGL ES 2.0 into it. Linux has 4.x drivers but it's Windowing environments for compositing is leveraging the 1.4 stack, currently.
Re:OpenGL Driver update with Lion?????? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 20:15 · Score: 0

Lion has OpenGL 3.2: http://netkas.org/?p=642

Oh really? by hellfire · 2011-06-06 07:49 · Score: 1

He gave us poor battery life, crashing over the air updates, a shitty interface, and the ability to infect the OS without doing anything? Sweet!

--

"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"

Re:Oh really? by cheeks5965 · 2011-06-06 08:08 · Score: 1

burn on android! hi five very nice.

--
-- Flame me and I will happily flame you back. Bring it!

MobileMe is actually rather good by DavidinAla · 2011-06-06 07:50 · Score: 1

I use MobileMe and like it quite a bit. When the transition happened from .mac to MobileMe, it was rocky in the beginning. There were times even before that when there were periodic short outages (minutes, not hours) of one service or another. But I've not seen one of those outages in a long, long time. The services work great and I've never lost anything. Maybe you have some specific experience to the contrary, but I support seven users on MobileMe (including myself) and I've found it to be an excellent product at this point (and for quite some time).

Re:MobileMe is actually rather good by cheeks5965 · 2011-06-06 07:58 · Score: 2

I agree, I've had a pretty good experience. I like that I know how much MobileMe costs. $99 per year. No ads, no scanning my emails to profile me to make more money off of me. How much does gmail cost? it is free in dollars, but the other costs are not known.
what I'm excited about in the new version is searching of message bodies, not just headers. They presented it in the context of the ipad mail app, but hopefully it will be present in the online version as well.

--
-- Flame me and I will happily flame you back. Bring it!
Re:MobileMe is actually rather good by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 09:58 · Score: 0

If you want a mail system without interference why not just get yourself a cheap VM and run Postfix + dovecot?
Re:MobileMe is actually rather good by cheeks5965 · 2011-06-06 13:18 · Score: 1

wtf is a vm/postfix/dovecot? that's why. and value of time. I'd pay $99 to avoid 10 hours of drudgery. And guaranteed uptime.

--
-- Flame me and I will happily flame you back. Bring it!

installs in place is not a good fit for all by Joe_Dragon · 2011-06-06 07:50 · Score: 1

installs in place is not a good fit for all. As it makes clean installs needed extra step of installing 10.6 then downloading and installing the app store os update and then downloading and installing 10.7 after that. now even at home I don't want have to download the same 4GB installer on each system. MS makes it so much easier with smaller windows updates, install disks and iso's , WSUS (can be set up Windows Home Server) and windows Service Pack can be downloaded 1 time and used on many systems.

Re:How will a office get mac os 10.7 as iTunes max by gnasher719 · 2011-06-06 07:51 · Score: 2

The rules for the Mac App Store are quite easy and quite clear. When you purchase an app, you can install it in one of three ways, your choice:

1. Install on any number of Macs that are under your control, for private use only.
2. Install on _one_ Mac that is used by any number of users, for commercial use.
3. Install on any number of Macs that are used by a single user only, for commercial use.

So if you have 10 Macs shared by 20 users in your company, you buy 10 copies, one for each Mac. And if you have another ten users, each owning two Macs exclusively, that is another ten copies for each of those ten users.

Protection racket by mangu · 2011-06-06 07:51 · Score: 1

So for a 25 dollar "insurance" fee I can match all the mp3s that I can find op my harddisk to songs in the itunes cloud and then those (legal) itunes songs will be downloaded to all my devices? That's an offer that I can't refuse.

You are paying those $25 so that they won't come after you? I thought there were laws against that.

Re:Protection racket by Lifyre · 2011-06-06 08:06 · Score: 1

Except I don't think it counts when they won't come after you for things you "stole"
Regardless of your views on piracy and downloading music RICO isn't going to be used to prevent someone from offering a $25/year amnesty for all the music you didn't buy.

--
I'll meet you at the intersection of "Should be" and "Reality"
Re:Protection racket by mangu · 2011-06-06 11:07 · Score: 1

Regardless of your views on piracy and downloading music RICO isn't going to be used to prevent someone from offering a $25/year amnesty for all the music you didn't buy.
How many times can they pull the same stunt? Napster already bought that amnesty for a total of $36 million, covering past and future violations.
The media industry reminds me of that scene in "Blazing Saddles" where the black sheriff is about to be lynched. He pulls his gun, points it at his own head, and says: "Hold it! The next man who makes a move the nigger gets it!".
They are moving fast in a suicidal route, I say let them do it. If they want to charge $15 for a movie that I'm willing to pay $1.50 to watch, that's their problem. I'm not paying that, no matter if I get that film by other means or not. If I can download a film I'll watch it, if I cannot I'll find other things to do. I will never pay ten times the price I consider fair.
Re:Protection racket by Kalriath · 2011-06-06 17:08 · Score: 1

Seriously, how the hell can they please you people? First, it was sell stuff on CD. You guys didn't like that - CDs are for dinosaurs, so they should sell them online. Then it was sell tracks individually online - no, because they were DRMed so screw that, make it DRM free then we'll talk. Then it was DRM free downloads - no, because they cost too much, make it cheap and then we'll talk. Now finally, it's $25 a year to download whatever you want and have it swapped out for legitimate high quality DRM free copies - you don't like that either, because that's a protection racket and they should be sued into oblivion.
One would think you'd be encouraging steps like this. Technically, if it works as advertised they've given you free reign to download whatever you want and for $25/year you get legit copies of whatever you download! And since they can't actually sue you for downloading, only uploading, this is a pirate's wet dream! Seriously, the only thing that you leeches will accept is free downloads of everything in lossless FLAC and a personalised apology for perceived injustices from the chairmen of each and every record company, isn't it?

--
For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
Re:Protection racket by Lifyre · 2011-06-07 06:42 · Score: 1

That was for violations BY Napster because they used centralized servers. It wasn't intended to provide amnesty for anyone who did the downloading or make music free to download into the future. Only an idiot would pervert the case and settlement to even vaguely resemble that.
The main difference is that this appears to cover ALL downloaded music regardless of source. I think there has to be a catch in there somewhere and we just haven't found it yet because I'm not sure the music labels would support $25/year to "own" all music everywhere from everywhen...
I agree with your entire point about movies and pricing.

--
I'll meet you at the intersection of "Should be" and "Reality"

Easy - Android User by Overzeetop · 2011-06-06 07:51 · Score: 1

He's an Android user, and he carries around a pouch with 250 4GB uSD cards. Actually, I'm pretty sure he's using the same Crown Royal pouch he used to use for his D&D dice.

--
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?

Re:Easy - Android User by cheeks5965 · 2011-06-06 08:41 · Score: 1

bahahahaha awesome. burrn on troll!

--
-- Flame me and I will happily flame you back. Bring it!

I've been able to find some pretty obscure stuff by Quila · 2011-06-06 07:51 · Score: 1

Albums I never expected to find.

But, yes, my red vinyl "official bootleg" from a Death in June concert is not likely to be on iTunes. At least I don't think so, haven't bothered looking.

Live near an Apple Store? by perpenso · 2011-06-06 07:52 · Score: 1

I'm sure they'd be happy to do it for you at the Apple Store.

Assuming you live near an Apple Store. Or did I miss the announcement about Starbuck's training all their baristas to also function as "Apple Store Geniuses"? "I'd like a coffee and a Mac OS X reinstall." ;-)

Re:Live near an Apple Store? by Kielistic · 2011-06-06 07:59 · Score: 1

I was being facetious implying that this is not really that far outside of Apple normal behaviour. Although I'm not convinced that they have said no install media. I didn't find any confirmation on that.
Re:Live near an Apple Store? by perpenso · 2011-06-06 08:19 · Score: 1

I was being facetious implying that this is not really that far outside of Apple normal behaviour. Although I'm not convinced that they have said no install media. I didn't find any confirmation on that.
Sorry, I couldn't resist the opportunity for an attempt at humor.

I would not be surprised if an upgrade media never appears. However I do expect that new Macs will ship with 10.7 Tiger reinstall media.
Re:Live near an Apple Store? by SimonTheSoundMan · 2011-06-06 12:41 · Score: 1

Don't you mean "Apple Store Genii".
Plural of genius being "genii" and all.
Re:Live near an Apple Store? by perpenso · 2011-06-06 15:10 · Score: 1

Don't you mean "Apple Store Genii". Plural of genius being "genii" and all.
Both geniuses and genii are correct. Besides if I used genii most folks would not know what I meant. :-)

So behind the times... by Civil_Disobedient · 2011-06-06 07:55 · Score: -1, Troll

iOS is getting a new "Notification Center" ... Like my Android phone.
Twitter is being integrated ... Like my Android phone. Facebook as well.
a split thumbable keyboard for iPads ... Like my Android phone.
wireless syncing ... Like my Android phone. Also, 3G syncing.
a native IM system for iOS devices ... Why would I want a "native" system when I can use an open one? (Like my An... oh, never mind)
iCloud will be free ... Like Google services are on my Android phone.
syncing apps (Mail, Calendar, Contacts and iWork apps) across devices ... Like my Android phone.
Photostream is iCloud for pictures ... And Picasa is iCloud for Android. So what?
iTunes iCloud will let you re-download your tracks at last ... Hahaha! By Grabthar's Hammer... what a feature!
and iTunes Match will let you match your ripped CDs to Apple's copies ... Unless Apple doesn't have a copy.

Apple is looking more and more pathetic by the day.

Re:So behind the times... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:51 · Score: 1

Replace 'Like my..." with "Though better than..." and you'll have it right.
"Tunes Match will let you match your ripped CDs to Apple's copies ... Unless Apple doesn't have a copy." is close, but it's more like they won't upgrade to a hi-rate non-DRM version for you if it's not in the iTunes store.
Re:So behind the times... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 09:07 · Score: 0

stfu, it doesn't come in a nice package like ios
Re:So behind the times... by pckl300 · 2011-06-06 09:32 · Score: 1

What about the people who rip their music at 320kbps? iCloud will downgrade my music for $25 a year?

--
In the beginning, there was null.
Re:So behind the times... by DJRumpy · 2011-06-06 09:42 · Score: 1

You can always just upload your content if you like. The 'matching' feature is pay to play. The iCloud basic services are free.
Re:So behind the times... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 09:49 · Score: 0

No. Android's syncing of just your gmail contacts is in no way comparable to the complete sync of everything, including music, videos, and the entire system backup, that the iPhone does. Google Docs are in no way comparable to iWork (I mean, just look at them). The lame Android Twitter SDK is in no way comparable to the single sign on Twitter integration in iOS 5. iCloud's automatic sync of files between all your devices, including your computers, as soon as they change (yes, it's actually integrated into the filesystem) is in no way comparable to...well, I can't even think of what Google has here.
The reason people get more excited about iOS features than Android features, even when they appear to be similar, is that the iOS features work a hell of a lot better. People expect great software from Apple and passable software from Google because that's what's been historically delivered. And incidentally, that's also why there's all these apps like K9 or doubleTwist that try to make Android better, because stock Android is not good. doubleTwist even advertises itself as "iTunes for Android." 'nuff said.
(Oh yeah, and you don't have to root an iPhone to get the update either.)
Re:So behind the times... by aristotle-dude · 2011-06-06 09:50 · Score: 1

So you are telling us the Android came up with this stuff themselves? Have you seen screenshots of what Android looked like before and after the first iPhone was released? Before the iPhone Android looked like a clone of RIM's BB OS and after it started to look and act like iPhone OS. Funny that. A lot of those features were already present in iOS but now have been more refined. This is an example of evolution of iOS rather than revolution. Really, what did you expect them to do? Ignore end user requests and trends and not bother implementing those features? Really?
I hope that you enjoy your Android phone as much as I enjoy my iOS devices with the plethora of third party application choices. If you feel comfortable giving up all of your privacy to an advertising company like Google then more power to you but not everyone wants to make a bargain with the devil.

--
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
Re:So behind the times... by exomondo · 2011-06-06 13:27 · Score: 1

You can always just upload your content if you like. The 'matching' feature is pay to play. The iCloud basic services are free.
But isn't that only for 5GB? I thought music was included in that 5GB unless you matched it to the iTunes store, at least that's what i understood from what i saw (admittedly haven't seen all of it yet). If you've ripped >256kbps tracks then you're likely going to need more than 5GB.
Re:So behind the times... by DJRumpy · 2011-06-06 13:44 · Score: 1

From what I saw and read, purchased music, apps, and books don't count against the 5GB. If you have ripped content and non-iTunes purchases, those would count towards it unless you opt for the iTunes iCould for $24 a month and that is limited by the number of songs (20,000 from what I've read), not the size of the songs. In that case, the only content that would count towards your 5 GB is if it's not in Apple's music library and they have millions of tracks in that library.
Re:So behind the times... by exomondo · 2011-06-06 13:54 · Score: 1

ah right, yeah that's what i was thinking, so if you want your higher bitrate tracks they will count towards your 5GB and you probably need to do the iCloud thing and pay the $24 per month.
Re:So behind the times... by DJRumpy · 2011-06-06 13:59 · Score: 1

If I go this route, I wont' have too much problem. I use HE-AAC at 80KBPS at a substantial size savings and the quality is more than acceptable for my needs.

So you don't know what you are talking about? by Brannon · 2011-06-06 07:55 · Score: 1

Just to be clear--you don't know how things work with Mac's right?

But you assume that you have to take your Mac to Apple to reinstall the OS. Do you have any idea how dumb that sounds?

Re:So you don't know what you are talking about? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:47 · Score: 0

Just to be clear--you don't know how things work with Mac's right?
I bet he knows how things work with apostrophes and plural nouns.

But you assume that you have to take your Mac to Apple to reinstall the OS. Do you have any idea how dumb that sounds?
Just as dumb as the announcement of "No Installation Media" Apple is the dumb one here, not the GP.

will there be way to stop ios OTA updates roaming by Joe_Dragon · 2011-06-06 07:55 · Score: 1

With atts 250mb data pack at the min a ios update + app updates can eat that up fast and don't even think about roaming to canada at $0.015/KB is about $15 per MEG

Free is cheaper by SuperKendall · 2011-06-06 07:56 · Score: 1

They are not making it cheaper, 5gb for $20 is not better than the current deal

The 5GB (and email and the other features) are now free.

The only thing that costs money is the yearly ability to convert all the music you own to DRM free AAC and let the iCloud know you own it.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley

Wow. Dumb. Wow. by Brannon · 2011-06-06 07:57 · Score: 1

You honestly think that you have to take your Mac back to the Apple Store to reinstall the OS?

I shouldn't pick on you, it's not your fault that you don't understand how computers work--I just wonder why you hang out at a nerd blog?

backup? by nairatinu · 2011-06-06 07:58 · Score: 1

What happens when you go "oops"? I'm a firm believer in cross-pollination, that is, having several versions of critical files laying about on several back up drives. Does this vaporize in the cloud?

Re:backup? by aristotle-dude · 2011-06-06 09:53 · Score: 1

What happens when you go "oops"? I'm a firm believer in cross-pollination, that is, having several versions of critical files laying about on several back up drives. Does this vaporize in the cloud?
Does it appear that they are removing your choices to do your own local backups? Does it look like they are removing the option to sync via cable? No to both of those questions. So, no it is your choice if you want to rely solely on their iCloud service.

--
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.

Is it just me? by FieryProphet · 2011-06-06 07:59 · Score: 1

Is it just me or are slashdotters loosing Slashdot Quotient (SQ)? The highest score on this thread is 4! Lots of 0s and 2s... Whatever happened to all the smart aleks out there? #just_saying

iTunes match isn't that mp3.com? by HockeyPuck · 2011-06-06 08:01 · Score: 1

Didn't mp3.com get sued into oblivion for something similar to this? You told mp3.com "I have xyz song.." and then they provided you with access to their copy of the mp3.

This is different from what amazon is doing which is giving you a place to upload your copy and if you buy a mp3 from amazon, they would point a link from your library to amazon's copy.

Re:iTunes match isn't that mp3.com? by mikael_j · 2011-06-06 08:14 · Score: 1

Didn't mp3.com get sued into oblivion for something similar to this? You told mp3.com "I have xyz song.." and then they provided you with access to their copy of the mp3.
I suspect the labels are on board with this, most likely getting a cut of that $24.99/year and figuring that getting that cut is better than not getting any music at all from the pirates. If that's the case then it's pretty clever, they'd be getting a little money from every pirate instead of no money at all (which is the current situation).

--
Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
Re:iTunes match isn't that mp3.com? by StuartHankins · 2011-06-06 11:26 · Score: 1

+1 Insightful. The labels saw how the mp3.com "win" worked out for them, and they've had some time to reflect on it. This is a huge offer for them... it's handing them a wad of cash to shut up and stay out of the way. Also huge with Apple because no one else has made a deal like this. Unless I'm missing something, $25 a year buys a big upgrade for people with large libraries.

Wait... win-win-win?? Now I'm suspicious...

Recovery partition by itsdapead · 2011-06-06 08:03 · Score: 1

According to the Apple website (look for "Internet Restore and Utilities") it uses a recovery partition.

Ugh.

--
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.

iApple iNeeds iNew iMarketing iTeam by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:03 · Score: 0

iTs iAbout iTime iThat iApple iChanges iThe iMarketing iArround iThere iProduct iNames.

Linux doesn't HAVE to reboot on kernel. by Kamiza+Ikioi · 2011-06-06 08:04 · Score: 2

http://www.ksplice.com/
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/08/04/24/1334234/Patch-the-Linux-Kernel-Without-Reboots - Apr 2008

When you install Windows 7 or a new Linux kernel, do you have to restart? Why? OS X Lion don't require that.

We haven't "had" to reboot linux for more than 3 years now, where have you been?

But I think what you say about Lion is incorrect. "Mac OS X Lion's new Resume feature lets users get back to where they left off after a shutdown or restart" - CNet

That is significant, but it's not the same as not having to rebooting. If you didn't reboot, then it's just sleep/hybernate, and Windows has done that for many years. So, where are you getting that info that it never has to reboot, even with new kernel? If you've run Snow Leopard, you will be familiar with restarting after updates, desktop AND server (I run both, btw, and I have a server asking for reboot right now, and it's not even a kernel update). Linux usually never needs a restart unless you specifically update the kernel. But even then, you don't have to. It will continue to run on the previous kernel until you decide to restart. With other tools like KSplice, we don't have to ever reboot. But, I highly doubt you can do all updates, including kernel, without restarting Lion.

The same goes for iPhone/iPad. If it updates the kernel, you're going to have to reboot the device. But, maybe they are changing this, just wanna know where you read it?

--
I8-D

Re:Linux doesn't HAVE to reboot on kernel. by gumbi+west · 2011-06-06 08:10 · Score: 1

I got it from appleinsider's (now removed) install instructions which stated that a Lion install does not require a reboot. Sadly, the removed the file and updated it.
Re:Linux doesn't HAVE to reboot on kernel. by makomk · 2011-06-06 08:24 · Score: 1

But I think what you say about Lion is incorrect. "Mac OS X Lion's new Resume feature lets users get back to where they left off after a shutdown or restart"
And based on how Apple's previous features have played out, I suspect they'll probably push all the hard work of actually implementing this onto the application developers...
Re:Linux doesn't HAVE to reboot on kernel. by Kamiza+Ikioi · 2011-06-06 08:28 · Score: 1

If the reboot speed is fast enough, and they have auto resume, might be a mute issue for them. It would be nice if they added this to the server side, though. I just wish they could get through an iTunes update without reboot.

--
I8-D
Re:Linux doesn't HAVE to reboot on kernel. by node+3 · 2011-06-06 12:16 · Score: 0

But I think what you say about Lion is incorrect. "Mac OS X Lion's new Resume feature lets users get back to where they left off after a shutdown or restart"
And based on how Apple's previous features have played out, I suspect they'll probably push all the hard work of actually implementing this onto the application developers...
Examples?
Apple tends to make these things so easy to use that the developer either has to do nothing except recompile to get these features, or at the very least just access/implement a few methods to tell the system how the app wants to work.
What you are describing is more generally true of Windows and Linux, etc.
Re:Linux doesn't HAVE to reboot on kernel. by makomk · 2011-06-07 00:36 · Score: 1

Examples?
Off hand, I seem to recall this is true of the equivalent iPhone feature (apparently it's a bit hairy to do in practice too), their new "faster shutdown" feature on Mac OS X (requires apps to do the hard work of tracking whether they can be killed safely without losing data, including within any libraries they use), Grand Central Dispatch (mostly just a fairly standard thread pool, and yet Apple get all the credit for faster third-party app responsiveness when the app developers did all the hard work), and probably more stuff I haven't looked into.
Re:Linux doesn't HAVE to reboot on kernel. by gumbi+west · 2011-06-07 05:17 · Score: 1

BTW, looks like Ksplice isn't in there out of the box, i.e. it is another thing you have to buy/maintain.

Gogobeans does it better by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:12 · Score: 0

Gogobeans (gogobeans.com) basically does the same things as the iCloud, without tying you down to Apple products. Much more versatile.

Google Music by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:14 · Score: 0

That's exactly what I was thinking as I was uploading ~40GB of music to Google Music. Except, no money changed hands between Google and the music companies, that we know about. Oughta be interesting to see how things play out over the next 12-24 months.

Apple Not Sharing Any Pie by bostonidealist · 2011-06-06 08:17 · Score: 1

Well, it looks like a lot of what I expected was announced. What's really impressive is how brazenly Apple has dictated terms and cut into other companies' business models.

The terrible notification system in iOS to this point has actually benefited Apple in 2 major ways: it appeased the iPhone wireless carriers by allowing archaic, expensive text messaging to still seem relevant (email alerts didn't appear on the lock screen, but text messages did), and it provided Apple with a future selling point.

Now that they're updating the notification and messaging systems, it's likely that text messaging volume will very, very gradually begin to dwindle for iPhone users. The carriers can't be too happy about this since texting services are their cash cows.

On the web browsing front, integrating Reader into iOS Safari is likely to frustrate a lot of advertisement-subsidized sites. The strength of its implementation will also push publishers into their News Stand platform (the choice will be: "no revenue for you through the web since we'll strip out all your ads or revenue with a commission to Apple through News Stand").

The iTunes Match service is going to trick lots of people into paying for access to music they already have. It'll be interesting to see how Apple authenticates music via Match: will it use some fingerprint analysis from the actual sound stream (à la Shazaam), or will it simply read through tags? Either way, it'll be easy for someone to log into Match once on a system with a huge library to get access to thousands of songs. I wonder if people with huge libraries will sell services to help you "unlock" lots of music on iTunes Match and/or if there will be frequently updated "master" iTunes databases with proper tags and placeholder files posted all over the internet? Apple's basically selling an all-you-can-eat music subscription service (comparable to Napster's) at a low annual rate and making its users jump through hoops or pay more to get access to the whole library. This is going to further kill CD sales and record stores; once Apple moves to Lossless audio, there'll be very little reason for Apple customers to access digital music any other way (perhaps unlimited access to the whole library and lossless quality will be available in a couple of years for a higher subscription price).

Finally, iCloud is going to hurt Dropbox and Google's bottom lines. Google's going to be implementing most of the same functionality once they get Chrome OS off the ground, but Apple's lead is formidable.

Barring any major technical or privacy failures and given the appetites of their fans/customers, it's hard to see Apple failing to pull all of this off. Apple's waving the stampede through their velvet rope and right into their club. Once inside, though, it's going to be awfully hard to get out.

Re:will there be way to stop ios OTA updates roami by xMrFishx · 2011-06-06 08:19 · Score: 1

There seemed to be a slide with updates on/off that I saw on engadget, so yes I do believe what you want is there.

"native IM system" by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-06-06 08:24 · Score: 2

How does an IM system becomes "native", and what would it be?

On one hand, I hope that - like iChat - it will support the One True Protocol (namely, XMPP).

On the other hand, what with FaceTime being a new thing entirely (instead of taking one of the existing open ones, such as Google's video chat XMPP extensions), and locked down tight so far despite all the promises, I have a bad feeling about this...

Re:"native IM system" by realxmp · 2011-06-06 10:56 · Score: 1

On the other hand, what with FaceTime being a new thing entirely (instead of taking one of the existing open ones, such as Google's video chat XMPP extensions), and locked down tight so far despite all the promises, I have a bad feeling about this...
Indeed they still haven't delivered on the "open standards" bit of Facetime by documenting what is in it, this is annoying but what is in Facetime is by no means a "new thing entirely". What a wee bit of packet sniffing has revealed is interesting, only the directory service is proprietary, the rest is a combination of SIP, STUN, MPEG4 AVC and several other firewall passing methods that are pretty well documented. I suspect what has happened is that it's all been ready to release, and then either someone has realised that the directory service can be spoofed or some silly person in sales thinks they can improve iThing sales by keeping it locked up.
Re:"native IM system" by petsounds · 2011-06-06 11:41 · Score: 1

Indeed, "native" is an odd choice of word for what it is. In fact, it is a closed messaging system, only working with other iDevices. (As far as I could tell from the keynote, it doesn't even work with iChat on Macs!) Most likely a closed protocol just like FaceTime. It does look quite slick for what it is, but if it can't hook up with other protocols it's a bit of a limited-use service.
Re:"native IM system" by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 12:44 · Score: 0

How does an IM system becomes "native", and what would it be?
On one hand, I hope that - like iChat - it will support the One True Protocol (namely, XMPP).
On the other hand, what with FaceTime being a new thing entirely (instead of taking one of the existing open ones, such as Google's video chat XMPP extensions), and locked down tight so far despite all the promises, I have a bad feeling about this...
uh.. where is Facetime locked down? Its being submitted to standards bodies to get it so others can integrate...
Re:"native IM system" by MidnightBrewer · 2011-06-06 13:19 · Score: 1

"Native" means "proprietary" and not dependent on the largess of the cell phone providers to realize (instead, it requires the largess of Apple, but they actually have a vested interest and, hey, they're making it free).
This will be like FaceTime, except useful, since I've never had the opportunity to use FaceTime even once.

--
"Give a man fire, and he'll be warm for a day; set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life
Re:"native IM system" by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-06-06 13:56 · Score: 1

uh.. where is Facetime locked down?
Right now, it only works on Apple devices. Nor can you write a third-party client without reverse engineering the protocol - it's not open.

Its being submitted to standards bodies to get it so others can integrate...
Yes, it's "being" submitted - and in the meantime, we don't even have a spec for what's currently there.
Re:"native IM system" by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-06-06 14:21 · Score: 1

"Native" means "proprietary" and not dependent on the largess of the cell phone providers to realize
Why would an IM system be dependent on cell phone providers? We already have several dozen which aren't...

This will be like FaceTime, except useful, since I've never had the opportunity to use FaceTime even once.
The killing thing about FaceTime - after the lack of 3G support - is the fact that it's restricted to Apple devices. You can only buy Apple yourself, but unless you can somehow ensure that everyone you communicate with also has Apple desktop, Apple notebook and Apple cellphone, it won't do you much good.
Hence why I wonder about this thing. If it'll be XMPP with federation enabled, that's great - it means instant interop with Google Talk, Facebook Chat, and many other services. That would be very useful; even more so if it lets me sign into my GTalk account, and not require to sign up for Apple's one.
But if it's yet another "Apple only" service, it's even more useless than FaceTime.
Re:"native IM system" by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · 2011-06-06 16:06 · Score: 1

I'd prefer this native IM over SMS from my carrier any day. The iPhone will still be able to send text messages, but now those with an iPhone can have a half-decent messaging service, because SMS is utter crap thanks to the carriers. If it becomes successful, Apple may open it up like they have with FaceTime.
Re:"native IM system" by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-06-06 16:45 · Score: 1

I'd prefer this native IM over SMS from my carrier any day.

The question isn't why you should prefer this over SMS. The question is, why you should prefer it over, say, Skype, which has client apps for all major phone and desktop platforms - so you can send text messages to people using Android phones, as well.
Re:"native IM system" by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 19:40 · Score: 0

Probably something similar to the blackberry messaging system, which sends directly between devices if you know their ID skipping the SMS system.
Re:"native IM system" by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 22:42 · Score: 0

I agree, would be perfect if the new IM is XMPP compatible, or at least publishes a full online API. Bridge the gap with Android users... Or perhaps that is what Apple is going towards; Making a closed as possible, but highly functional and reliable ecosystem, that works brilliantly inside itself.
Makes sense to me. As a current Google/windows/android ecosystem user, I am very interested in eliminated with windows part of that equation. And if i move to Mac for desktop, would probably (expecially due to the iCloud advantages) want to move to iOS for phone and tablet. Right now, 2 factors hold me back. 1) cost, especially here in Easter Europe, Apple solutions are very significantly more expensive. 2) Closed-ness of Apple. Probably would overlook 2 if 1 was taken care of. Since openness is a need if I have to use apps/services outside of the ecosystem.
Re:"native IM system" by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-07 04:43 · Score: 0

On one hand, I hope that - like iChat - it will support the One True Protocol (namely, XMPP). On the other hand, what with FaceTime being a new thing entirely (instead of taking one of the existing open ones, such as Google's video chat XMPP extensions), and locked down tight so far despite all the promises, I have a bad feeling about this...
Facetime is SSL encrypted XMPP combined with SIP and H.264 as well as some open standard network negotiation technologies. It's not really locked down except that you need a cert to connect to the Jabber server and Apple's implementation is set up to use their own rather than a user configured one.
Re:"native IM system" by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · 2011-06-07 17:42 · Score: 1

Maybe I don't like Skype's app. There's also the problem that it has to be installed and the user has to create an account. With iMessage, I'm guessing it's going to be right there, ready to use. If don't know if the person I'm contacting has iMessage, I probably won't know if they have Skype, either. I'd rather just send an SMS, because for all it's crappiness, it is supported on pretty much every cellphone.
Re:"native IM system" by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-06-07 18:57 · Score: 1

Skype was just an example. There are many existing IM systems there.
And the nice thing about them is that they're supported not just on cellphones.
Re:"native IM system" by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · 2011-06-07 19:19 · Score: 1

Yeah, and they all suffer from the same problem: User must know about it, install it (if possible), create an account, and know enough people with a compatible client to make it worth while. Many people just won't bother. If iMessage takes off, it will be in large part due to it working right out of the box with no set-up required, like SMS.
Re:"native IM system" by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-06-07 19:47 · Score: 1

Yeah, and they all suffer from the same problem: User must know about it, install it (if possible), create an account
Not Google Talk on Android phones, for example. It is there out of the box, and if you signed in using your Google account (which you need to do in order to buy apps in the market), there's nothing else to be configured.

and know enough people with a compatible client to make it worth while.
This is true of any system. In fact, it would be more of a problem for any new Apple's one, because they have to start from scratch.

Many people just won't bother. If iMessage takes off, it will be in large part due to it working right out of the box with no set-up required, like SMS.
It would only be zero-config on Apple devices, though
So, again, same as GTalk - except that GTalk has been out there for a while now and has considerable user base - and furthermore, it's XMPP, and so you can talk with people with e.g. Facebook Chat accounts.

Your critisims are Apple's problems how??? by arcite · 2011-06-06 08:32 · Score: 1

iDevices and their users are increasing exponentially and there is nothing to say that Apple won't allow their iDevices to play nice with others out there. Steve is a clever guy like that...

Uh but... by arcite · 2011-06-06 08:34 · Score: 1

Apple uses Magic.

will new macs with 10.7 shipwith restore disk? usb by Joe_Dragon · 2011-06-06 08:49 · Score: 1

will new macs with 10.7 preloaded ship with restore disk? usb key like the mac book air?

What happens to MobileMe? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:57 · Score: 0

Will my account change from .me to .iCloud?

Window resizing by Dog-Cow · 2011-06-06 09:01 · Score: 2

I can't believe no one else mentioned the best new feature of Lion:

Resize from any edge

You can now resize a window from any side or corner.

FINALLY: iPads without a PC by mblase · 2011-06-06 09:10 · Score: 1

Finally, it'll be possible to buy an iPad or iPod Touch and use (and upgrade) it without syncing it to a PC. This was a big issue, for instance, for people (like my wife) who want an iPad as a second computer but whose first computer is too old to run iTunes 10. (She solved that problem by taking it back to Best Buy and having them start it up.)

Won't work, won't find them by DCFusor · 2011-06-06 09:11 · Score: 1

iTunes only has deals with the 4 majors, not "all music" by a very very long shot. At least 1/3 of my music collection is not in there -- transcription discs from old live radio shows....for one. Indie music -- not gonna be there. And so forth. So you only get insurance on a match, and I'm not sure whether if there's not a match, you can have it in the cloud at all --

Like in electronics, the thing to look for is what's not on the data sheet, but is still important. When a vendor makes, say, an A/D that has wondrous features, but say, is noisy or has a weird drive requirement - that's what's not there, with them hoping you don't notice till you design it in. I'd bet that's the same thing here.

--
Why guess when you can know? Measure!

Re:Won't work, won't find them by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 10:39 · Score: 0

iTunes only has deals with the 4 majors, not "all music" by a very very long shot. At least 1/3 of my music collection is not in there -- transcription discs from old live radio shows....for one. Indie music -- not gonna be there. And so forth. So you only get insurance on a match, and I'm not sure whether if there's not a match, you can have it in the cloud at all --
Like in electronics, the thing to look for is what's not on the data sheet, but is still important. When a vendor makes, say, an A/D that has wondrous features, but say, is noisy or has a weird drive requirement - that's what's not there, with them hoping you don't notice till you design it in. I'd bet that's the same thing here.
Maybe you could, I dunno, try reading the 'data sheet' before deciding what's not in it? That makes sense, doesn't it??
http://www.apple.com/icloud/features/
Here’s how it works: iTunes determines which songs in your collection are available in the iTunes Store. Any music with a match is automatically added to your iCloud library for you to listen to anytime, on any device. Since there are more than 18 million songs in the iTunes Store, most of your music is probably already in iCloud. All you have to upload is what iTunes can’t match.
"All you have to upload is..." == You can in fact upload things that iTunes doesn't have.
Re:Won't work, won't find them by MrAngryForNoReason · 2011-06-07 03:10 · Score: 1

If it doesn't match then you can upload your local version.

Re:will there be way to stop ios OTA updates roami by Relayman · 2011-06-06 09:16 · Score: 1

There was talk that updates would be incremental for that very reason.

--
If I used a sig over again, would anyone notice?

How do you by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 09:17 · Score: 0

recover from a disk failure on Lion? You need a DVD to access the recovery menu. Can you burn it on DVD?

That's what I find stupid of these marketing conventions. They create more questions than they answer. When it comes out in July then I hope these simple questions may be answered until then this is all hype.

Only one question by Wagoo · 2011-06-06 09:32 · Score: 1

Where the hell is my 3840x2160 "cinema"/"retina" display? Not that I want the apple one (it's bound to have massive bezels) but it seems like Apple are one of the few companies that could drive production of these panels at the moment. :(

Re:Xcode ...bring it back for free! by bussdriver · 2011-06-06 09:37 · Score: 1

I won't pay $5 for their tools when I can use free ones that don't lock me in. I'm totally ok if they make you pay for iOS app tools because I am not interested but to build for a unix based OS they should bundle free dev tools. I never used xcode much anyhow; I was locked into a dead IDE before so I will use netbeans or something next time I use an IDE... although with all the scripting out there big IDE tools and compilers are something I've not had to use hardly at all for the last decade.

--
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news

catching up by t2t10 · 2011-06-06 09:55 · Score: 2

Wow, Apple is seriously behind the curve, as usual. Google and others have been offering "it just works" cloud-syncing for years now.

And we'll have to see whether their iCould service is even usable MobileMe really sucked (I used to subscribe to it and canceled after a few years).

Re:catching up by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · 2011-06-06 16:08 · Score: 1

I find it hard to believe that you ever had a MobileMe account.
Re:catching up by t2t10 · 2011-06-07 11:38 · Score: 1

I find it hard to believe that you ever had a MobileMe account.
Yeah, me too! I should have canceled right away and ask for a refund, but I kept hoping against hope that it would actually improve.
Heck, even Steve Jobs joked in his keynote about how bad MobileMe was. Looks like now they are copying Google and others they are finally getting it right.
Re:catching up by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · 2011-06-07 17:35 · Score: 1

Along with your collection of Macs and a unicorn?
Re:catching up by t2t10 · 2011-06-08 00:31 · Score: 1

It's not just people with too much money on their hands--like you--who buy Macs, some of us buy them for work even though we don't particularly like them.
(Acutally, I thought when OS X originally came out, it had promise, but the world is different now. The Mac is becoming ever more tightly controlled, while most of the innovation around Apple seems to be copying features that other platforms already offer.)
Re:catching up by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · 2011-06-08 00:52 · Score: 1

What kind of work is that?
Re:catching up by t2t10 · 2011-06-08 07:40 · Score: 1

Well, gosh, who might need multiple different platforms for their work, and might be forced to develop and test even on platforms they don't prefer? I leave it to you to try to figure that out.
Re:catching up by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · 2011-06-08 08:59 · Score: 1

No need to get all sarcastic. Although I'm still wondering why you needed MobileMe.
Re:catching up by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-09 05:32 · Score: 0

If Google and Windows Phone have such great "it just works" cloud syncing, where is it? iCloud will be the biggest cloud platform on Earth in a month after opening.

25 dollars a year, they say... by mbessey · 2011-06-06 10:11 · Score: 1

I wonder what happens to your ability to sync/listen to those songs if you stop paying? My guess is that all those legal copies will just disappear from all of your Apple devices at that point.

$30 total for all of your Macs by mbessey · 2011-06-06 10:13 · Score: 1

Works the same as other App Store purchases. Buy once, install on all your machines.

not really by t2t10 · 2011-06-06 10:29 · Score: 1

Why do you think it would be madness? When its "firmware" gets damaged, you can take it to the Apple Store to be "repaired". Also, they might have some way of letting you reinstall over the Internet. I doubt it makes a big difference in the market. When they need to reinstall, most people already seem to take their machines to the store or buy a new one.

If you are willing to give a company that much control, you might as well just switch to Google's and other cloud services: they do what Apple is trying to do for much less money and with much less hassle.

Deja vu from the Windows 8 demo by klui · 2011-06-06 10:43 · Score: 1

So who stole split keyboard and swiping full screen apps and traditional apps from whom? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p92QfWOw88I http://www.apple.com/apple-events/wwdc-2011/ More was shown in the Apple replay and seems more refined than Microsoft's brief sneak peek.

Re:Deja vu from the Windows 8 demo by exomondo · 2011-06-06 11:16 · Score: 1

Suppose it just goes to show these are not patentable and are pretty clearly obvious features if 2 rivals can develop them independently at around the same time.
Re:Deja vu from the Windows 8 demo by RyuuzakiTetsuya · 2011-06-06 12:00 · Score: 1

when that was announced I had the same flashback you did. The difference, in my mind, is that iOS 5 is shipping in a few months, whereas Windows 8 isn't slated for at least a year.

--
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.

The big news is between the lines by jbplou · 2011-06-06 11:04 · Score: 1

The big news is that iOS will no longer require a Windows or Mac PC. this means Apple is acknowledging at least tacitly what Microsoft never will, desktops and laptops to some extent are losing their place at home to the dual threat of smart phones and tablets.

Re:The big news is between the lines by exomondo · 2011-06-06 13:38 · Score: 1

this means Apple is acknowledging at least tacitly what Microsoft never will
how do you come to the conclusion that MS will not acknowledge that?
Re:The big news is between the lines by jbplou · 2011-06-06 13:49 · Score: 1

There chief architect said something to the effect of he is t convinced tablets will be around in a few years because there is no use case between smart phones and laptops.
I also meet with various Microsoft reps in different product lines and the company talking points cleary ae desktop OS oriented.
Finally their primary revenue stream comes from Desktop OS, desktop support server software, and Office. These products are heavy under assault by tablets. There smart phone offering is performing poorly in the market and they have a virtually non-existent tablet strategy.
Call it more conjecture than fact if you will
Re:The big news is between the lines by exomondo · 2011-06-06 14:00 · Score: 1

There chief architect said something to the effect of he is t convinced tablets will be around in a few years because there is no use case between smart phones and laptops.
I also meet with various Microsoft reps in different product lines and the company talking points cleary ae desktop OS oriented.
Finally their primary revenue stream comes from Desktop OS, desktop support server software, and Office. These products are heavy under assault by tablets. There smart phone offering is performing poorly in the market and they have a virtually non-existent tablet strategy.
Call it more conjecture than fact if you will
Have you had your head in the sand? They're pushing their mobile OS pretty damn hard at the moment (given their latest update announcement) and their revelation of the GUI of the new version of their flagship OS shows that they are targeting tablet computers even more than traditional desktops and laptops! They are even trumpeting their move to the ARM architecture, predominantly used in tablet/smartphone computers. Pretty much every announcement out of MS lately has shown a strong move in the direction of tablets, smartphones and the xbox - not so much happening on the desktop/laptop front.
Re:The big news is between the lines by jbplou · 2011-06-06 14:24 · Score: 1

They don't have a mobile OS they cleary have stated it is only for phones. Windows 8 is just windows 7 with tiles so far, a desktop OS on a "slate" as they call it. Windows on ARM is atleast a year away and won't be able to run x86 and AM64 except for purely .net and java apps. Tell me how many 100s of million tablets will be sold by competitors by then?
Re:The big news is between the lines by exomondo · 2011-06-06 14:42 · Score: 1

They don't have a mobile OS they cleary have stated it is only for phones.
They have announced - and even showed how - their next OS will be focussed towards the tablet form-factor (even showed prototype devices). Yes WP7 is only for phones, but the development effort they are throwing behind it proves they are serious about the market, contrary to your comments about them never acknowledging the decline of desktop/laptop relevance.

Windows 8 is just windows 7 with tiles so far, a desktop OS on a "slate" as they call it.
Well no it isn't, for example Windows 7 never ran on ARM and the entire desktop GUI is different and uses HTML5 for development of many types of applications.

Windows on ARM is atleast a year away and won't be able to run x86 and AM64 except for purely .net and java apps. Tell me how many 100s of million tablets will be sold by competitors by then?
How is that relevant? This is a response to your comment that MS will never acknowledge the declining relevance of desktops and laptops, which - as has clearly been demonstrated with the latest announcements, demos and actions by microsoft - is rubbish.

Twitter integration = antitrust violation? by petsounds · 2011-06-06 11:46 · Score: 1

One thing I haven't seen discussed is the deep integration of Twitter into iOS 5. There are Post To Twitter buttons everywhere. It seems to me that this is a pretty flagrant antitrust violation; a stifling of competition by raising the barrier of entry significantly for any Twitter competitor service. Considering that Microsoft went through the wringer for similar tactics, this seems a bold move. Apple can't claim that iOS is not a significant player in the market. God knows how much money Twitter paid Apple to clutter up the interface.

Re:Twitter integration = antitrust violation? by guruevi · 2011-06-06 16:12 · Score: 1

Microsoft went through the wringer because they were selling their OWN products through their interfaces, not facilitating access to a free 3rd party service.

--
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com

diversity by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 11:48 · Score: 0

Some features presented here are plain copy from Android and other platforms, but I say tank's to what ever deity you pray to we have such diverse mobile market.
Just imagine such thing with desktop OS on this scale...

Backing up to macmini over network? by HockeyPuck · 2011-06-06 11:55 · Score: 1

Anybody know if there's a mention of being able to backup using TimeMachine to a mac mini running Lion? I always found it silly to have to buy a mac mini for serving up files/music/video and then buy a timecapsule. I'd rather just hang a bunch of disk off of the mini.

Re:Backing up to macmini over network? by guruevi · 2011-06-06 16:16 · Score: 2

You can already do that you know.
Do in Terminal: defaults write com.apple.systempreferences TMShowUnsupportedNetworkVolumes 1
Then just share a disk or directory over AFP and point your TimeMachine to it.
And Lion will have Mac OS X Server built-in so you can just set up a share, enable it as a TimeMachine target and it will show up automatically.

--
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Re:Backing up to macmini over network? by sootman · 2011-06-07 03:10 · Score: 1

I'm not sure if this was changed late in 10.5 or somewhere in 10.6 (it wasn't in early builds of 10.5 for sure) but you can use pretty much any Mac to back up another, and you don't even need this hack. Just turn on file sharing: Apple Menu -> System Preferences -> Sharing -> [x] File Sharing
I have two machines at work: an old G5 with 10.5 and two hard drives and a MacBook pro with 10.6. The MBP connects to the G5's second hard drive with file sharing over the network for Time Machine.
Or you can also use Time Machine with any external USB or FireWire drive. A 500 GB USB Seagate costs $60 at NewEgg.

--
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.

Re: by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 12:12 · Score: 0

It's more like a subscription service. For $25/year you are leasing all that music from the music industry.

The music industry should be happy that they are getting something for the music that you stole.

Killing OSX86 by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 12:15 · Score: 0

So is this why they've made Lion only available in the App store? To stop anybody from using OS X on a PC? I can't think of any other reason.

Re:Killing OSX86 by indiechild · 2011-06-06 19:08 · Score: 1

Because digital distribution is the future.
Relax, pirates and hackintosh fans will still crack and install Lion, no doubt.

You don't understand what it does by SuperKendall · 2011-06-06 13:03 · Score: 1

Because before posting, I opened Safari on my MacBook, and did the zoom in and zoom out "pinch" gestures.

Yes, and they activated the text resizing feature.

What they did not do is zoom/expand the page contents.

That is what happens in Lion.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley

Re:You don't understand what it does by _xeno_ · 2011-06-06 13:48 · Score: 1

Yes, and they activated the text resizing feature.
What they did not do is zoom/expand the page contents.
I just tried it again. That's exactly what it does. It enlarges the entire page. Images become bigger. Everything on the page is made larger. It zooms in. The gestures literally map to the "Zoom In" and "Zoom Out" menu items.
Again, they may have refined the feature in some way, but it's not a new feature. It's a feature that just about every browser already has - including Safari.

--
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
Re:You don't understand what it does by SuperKendall · 2011-06-06 17:45 · Score: 1

I just tried it again. That's exactly what it does. It enlarges the entire page. Images become bigger. Everything on the page is made larger. It zooms in. The gestures literally map to the "Zoom In" and "Zoom Out" menu items.
Sorry, but though it gives a rough approximation of that it's not really zooming - on many pages you'll notice subtle layout differences.
When you see the video you'll understand. Also, it's not jumpy, it's an arbitrary level of zoom.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley

Dear Hare, by SuperKendall · 2011-06-06 13:13 · Score: 1

When you reach to the finish line, let us know. We're here having a party in my honor for Winning notifications.

Love, Tortoise (Apple).

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley

First was Apple by SuperKendall · 2011-06-06 13:16 · Score: 1

Since Apple has increased sales not just for labels, but indie labels too - not sure how Apple is anything but #1 on the list you posted. No-one has done as much for independent artists as Apple.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley

Re:First was Apple by COMON$ · 2011-06-10 08:19 · Score: 1

Im gonna call you out on that. There have been some amazing services out there.Apple is hardly the best, Amazon is one, they have probably done the most, they will publish and push any album for practically free. Several other services as well. All apple has ever done for indie artists was create the world's most accepted music player and allow yet another avenue to sell. Today, Facebook and youtube do the most for independent musicians.
Dont get me wrong I love apple products, but I really hate iTunes in it's current format, although iCloud is looking to change everything I hate about iTunes, so I am very excited.

--
CS: It is all sink or swim...oh and did I mention there are sharks in that water?

Your understanding is incorrect by bledri · 2011-06-06 15:46 · Score: 1

I'm sure they'd be happy to do it for you at the Apple Store. You're not supposed to be servicing the hard drive in the first place as I understand it.

Apple has explicit instructions on replacing RAM and hard drives.

--
Some privacy policy Slashdot.

iCloud sounds great by jonwil · 2011-06-06 16:13 · Score: 2

Any song you buy on iTunes is automatically available to download on your device.
Plus if you pay the 25 bucks a year fee,
any song you obtained elsewhere (ripped from CD, bought from amazon, bought from allofmp3, pirated, whatever) that can be matched to a song on iTunes, you get the iTunes copy to download to your device.
And if the song you have cant be matched to an iTunes song (e.g. songs from artists not willing to sign up to iTunes, songs from your mates band, that leaked copy of the new album that's not in stores yet etc) it gets uploaded to the cloud and can be downloaded to your device.

Re:iCloud sounds great by R3d+M3rcury · 2011-06-06 17:28 · Score: 1

Yeah! So you went a bought a song and now you get to pay Apple $25 a year just to put it on all the Apple devices that you bought!
Re:iCloud sounds great by exomondo · 2011-06-06 19:04 · Score: 1

any song you obtained elsewhere (ripped from CD, bought from amazon, bought from allofmp3, pirated, whatever) that can be matched to a song on iTunes, you get the iTunes copy to download to your device.
Sounds like a great way to launder your pirated music collection, surely the RIAA isn't going to be pleased about this.

No more "Mac OS X"? by walter_f · 2011-06-06 23:33 · Score: 2

On Apple's web pages, the 10.7 ("Lion") version seems no longer to be referred to as "Mac OS X".

Instead, it's called just "OS X" or "OS X Lion" in nearly all occurences.

This might be insignificant, but then again... remember when "Apple Computer, Inc." relabeled itself into just "Apple, Inc."?

Photostream by zevans · 2011-06-06 23:51 · Score: 1

Yeah, looking forward to having somewhere to keep all these RAW files and syncing it over GPRS...

--
"... and more and more now there are all kinds of electronic goodies available" -- Pink Floyd 1972

Apple tries to have it's cake and eat it too. by I'm+Not+There+(1956) · 2011-06-07 02:02 · Score: 1

The most strange point of yesterday for me was iCloud: cloud storage without native apps. Everybody talks about cloud with web apps and all (and that's why they call it cloud "computing"), but with new iCloud API Apple is trying to provide a cloud experience to it's users and keeping it's native apps at the same time.

Apple enjoys it's famous "app gap" when it comes to native app, and it also has a great income for them. More importantly: it locks users in.

I'm certainly interested in web apps, and really love developing and using them much more than native apps in most cases, but I should admit Apple's move is smart in keeping both cloud and it's native apps. Time will show how they will succeed in this.

--
"If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it's still a foolish thing."

What about admitting that iTunes store was hacked? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-07 02:52 · Score: 0

http://www.betanews.com/article/I-got-hacked-on-iTunes/1306964962

etc.

Even people with no i* devices report all their store credit drained and money charged to their linked credit cards. Even just updating an i* device's software at the store.

When this gets better known and it becomes better known that Apple has known about it for a while without admitting it or responding to direct questions, perhaps people will begin to see Apple for what it is. Apple is evil.

Didn't find credit or hack in the first 200 posts. Slashdot needs to refactor some code so that it is reasonable to load all comments.

haha fagz by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-07 05:57 · Score: 0

i will ruin you all like i've ruined osx for you, ultra genocide for all of lamer kind will come one day, wts.

love,
mr murder

Versions and AirDrop? by Rutulian · 2011-06-07 06:08 · Score: 1

Of course the two features that are truly innovative have been left off the list: Versions and AirDrop. Hmm....

FalconDildo the troll is at it again, trolling by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-07 06:35 · Score: 0

Take your meds "CaPTaiN-PaRaNoiD".

FalconDildo, quit trying to play authority here by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-07 06:40 · Score: 0

You're an unknown irrelevant nobody nerdowell, nobody to listen to in any way, shape, or form. What makes you the authority here FalconDildo? Nothing. You're a nobody who hasn't accomplished shit in computing, and you know it. You can stop trying to bolster your sagging ego and wasted life by trolling others here. You are a failure and waste of life.

Have you guys seen the new Apple HQ?! by peter09 · 2011-06-10 07:52 · Score: 1

Their new headquarters in Cupertino, CA will hold 12,000 people, 150 acre of land, has a coffee shop that supports 3,000 and looks like a spaceship.... Steve is always full of surprises... Wonder what will come next :-) Peter Forster, Senior Developer http://www.mobilepronto.org/

"WrYttiN-WuRDz" by Professor FalconDUMMY by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 14:03 · Score: 0

Or rather, a MURDER of the english language (lol, read on, this is hilarious - 5 yr. olds write better):

"It's enlessly amusing to see such incredible ignorance." - by Falconhell (1289630) on Monday June 13, @06:57PM (#36430124)

Look - we're not here to decipher your "hieroglyphics", and you're correct (especially about yourself, lol!).

"THE CONSOLIDATED ILLITERACY COLLECTION BY PROFESSOR FALCONDUMMY" (world reknowned master of illiteracy, lol!)

However, below?

I managed to do a translation of your "troll speak", and, with CONSIDERABLE effort, for the benefit of others here (and for their amusement at your expense trolling dolt) and, I have consolidated your single day 'fine effort' & attempts at writing properly (lol, not - 4 blunders in writing in a single day? Please... lol!) here:

---

FROM -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2235170&cid=36430760

Still havent made me angry at all by Falconhell (1289630) on Monday June 13, @08:07PM (#36430760)

Ahem - it's "haven't" (see the apostrophe? Good - we knew you could, lol!) and, we still haven't managed to teach you how to write or spell properly either, lol!

(Wait, wait... read on, it only gets BETTER, lol!)

---

FROM http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2235170&cid=36431020

its hillarious - by Professor FalconDUMMY (1289630) on Monday June 13, @08:07PM (#36430760)

LMAO! Hahahahahaha... Now that? That's HILARIOUS!

So you know?

The correct phrase, and spelling, is "it's hilarious" using the contraction for "it is" properly, and spelling hiliarious properly... apostrophes boy, learn about 'em!

(Not what you 'ScRiBBLeD' in your droolings on the printed page fool quoted above!)

---

FROM -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2235170&cid=36429940

Personal I find the "free market" does a fine job of slandering itself. by Falconhell (1289630) on Monday June 13, @06:37PM (#36429940)

Personally speaking, the correct word & turn of a phrase here is PERSONALLY, not "personal" as you wrote (incorrectly as per your "hieroglyphics usual", lol!).

---

FROM -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2222626&cid=36381748

Climate deniers have done a lot of damage to the credibilty of all scientists with their vile lies and obsufcation of the issue." by Falconhell (1289630) on Wednesday June 08, @07:27PM (#36381748)

LMAO - You've done CONSIDERABLE DAMAGE to the English lanuage Roman Maroni (see the film Johnny Dangerously, lol) and to your own attempts at "acting intelligent", because your spelling is HORRENDOUS!

(It's credibility and obfuscation, moron!)

---

FROM -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2222626&cid=36381748

its endless fun hoisting them with their own petard of scein tific corruption. " by Falconhell (1289630) on Wednesday June 08, @07:27PM (#36381748)

Well, what about YOUR CORRUPTION OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE THERE, "Roman Maroni"? LMAO!

---

This one take the cake:

FROM -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2231292&cid=36430236

Soemthing more complicated for me... Would have liked to arrive earlier but definately left on time! - by

"WrYttiN-WuRDz" by Professor FalconDUMMY by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-13 14:06 · Score: 0

Or rather, a MURDER of the english language (lol, read on, this is hilarious - 5 yr. olds write better):

"It's enlessly amusing to see such incredible ignorance." - by Falconhell (1289630) on Monday June 13, @06:57PM (#36430124)

Look - we're not here to decipher your "hieroglyphics", and you're correct (especially about yourself, lol!).

"THE CONSOLIDATED ILLITERACY COLLECTION BY PROFESSOR FALCONDUMMY" (world reknowned master of illiteracy, lol!)

However, below?

I managed to do a translation of your "troll speak", and, with CONSIDERABLE effort, for the benefit of others here (and for their amusement at your expense trolling dolt) and, I have consolidated your single day 'fine effort' & attempts at writing properly (lol, not - 4 blunders in writing in a single day? Please... lol!) here:

---

FROM -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2235170&cid=36430760

Still havent made me angry at all by Falconhell (1289630) on Monday June 13, @08:07PM (#36430760)

Ahem - it's "haven't" (see the apostrophe? Good - we knew you could, lol!) and, we still haven't managed to teach you how to write or spell properly either, lol!

(Wait, wait... read on, it only gets BETTER, lol!)

---

FROM http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2235170&cid=36431020

its hillarious - by Professor FalconDUMMY (1289630) on Monday June 13, @08:07PM (#36430760)

LMAO! Hahahahahaha... Now that? That's HILARIOUS!

So you know?

The correct phrase, and spelling, is "it's hilarious" using the contraction for "it is" properly, and spelling hiliarious properly... apostrophes boy, learn about 'em!

(Not what you 'ScRiBBLeD' in your droolings on the printed page fool quoted above!)

---

FROM -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2235170&cid=36429940

Personal I find the "free market" does a fine job of slandering itself. by Falconhell (1289630) on Monday June 13, @06:37PM (#36429940)

Personally speaking, the correct word & turn of a phrase here is PERSONALLY, not "personal" as you wrote (incorrectly as per your "hieroglyphics usual", lol!).

---

FROM -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2222626&cid=36381748

Climate deniers have done a lot of damage to the credibilty of all scientists with their vile lies and obsufcation of the issue." by Falconhell (1289630) on Wednesday June 08, @07:27PM (#36381748)

LMAO - You've done CONSIDERABLE DAMAGE to the English lanuage Roman Maroni (see the film Johnny Dangerously, lol) and to your own attempts at "acting intelligent", because your spelling is HORRENDOUS!

(It's credibility and obfuscation, moron!)

---

FROM -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2222626&cid=36381748

its endless fun hoisting them with their own petard of scein tific corruption. " by Falconhell (1289630) on Wednesday June 08, @07:27PM (#36381748)

Well, what about YOUR CORRUPTION OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE THERE, "Roman Maroni"? LMAO!

---

This one take the cake:

FROM -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2231292&cid=36430236

Soemthing more complicated for me... Would have liked to arrive earlier but definately left on time! - by

Slashdot Mirror

Apple WWDC: iOS 5, Lion, iCloud

662 comments