Sure, giving Microsoft a target gives them a goal, but it isn't like Microsoft has shown the ability to leap past a continually advancing target. There are plenty of examples where Microsoft is always behind the competition: vs Google in search vs Apple in MP3 players (now phones) vs Nintendo in consoles...
If Xbox 420 is anything like the Zune 2 or the reboot of the Live services it will be: A Wii, but black, slightly larger, and HD.
Meanwhile Nintendo will release, if the DS and Wii are any predictors of future design: Download only games; add-on optical drive for backwards compatibility HD (duh) Lightweight wireless heads up see through monocles Paired Wii-motes (one per hand) play, up to a total of 16 remotes (for 16 player games) The ability to hook up 4 LCDs (1 per 4 people) or the ability to network 4 consoles together with a single game Built in projector or projector add-on to reduce the necessity for 4 HD sets (perhaps limited to 720p)
You forget one crucial component: Nintendo will have the $249 next gen HD capable console (that will also be profitable) and compatible with the Wii and it's extensive install base. Nintendo will continue to have MORE ideas, and will poach the great ones from Microsoft as well.
You think Microsoft will win because they can copy Nintendo? That's like saying Microsoft's Zune will win because they copied the iPod... and then the iPod Touch gets released. Oops.
Re:Congratulations Microsoft...
on
ZOMG New Zunes
·
· Score: 1
You mean install apps that don't work 75% of the time because the user is not near a wireless AP? That sounds very un-Apple.
I wonder if this has to do with survival rates; shorter lifespan vs longer lifespan, more active vs passive animals, more energy vs less energy?
Re:Congratulations Microsoft...
on
ZOMG New Zunes
·
· Score: 1
Did you not notice that the weather and stock apps require constant updates (like what a cellular data plan would provide) and therefore be unsuitable for a mostly untethered device like an iPod?
The PDA features of notes, email, and calendar I'll give you, but I suspect they detract from the music and video focus of an iPod. Who knows why Apple couldn't have thrown them in for "free", but I suspect they will reappear in future firmware revisions (after the iPhone gets more powerful updates too).
You mean the fact that RockBox has ported mpeg1/mpeg2 support for the iPod, but not H.264 or MPEG4, which is what the iPod video natively supports. You are being misleading in your statements.
So what you are really trying to say is, "Why can't Apple support MPEG1 and MPEG2?"
Rockbox has backported nothing; they have just implemented a lower end feature that Apple never bothered to develop in the first place.
Apple didn't hack into and disable the iPhone. You, or the user, applied the firmware update that broke the iPhone.
It is irrelevant that the firmware update was provided by Apple or a third party; Apple will only provide warranty service for their firmware update. You can totally choose not to update the iPhone; no one was forced to install 1.1.1 in any form.
Excuse me? Final Fantasy 7 was released in 1997, ten years ago now.
Heck, don't you remember multiple CD games like "Under a Killing Moon" in 1994?
It's not restricted to JRPGs, and it's not even remotely new. This is something Microsoft should have anticipated, even if it meant going the HD-DVD route.
No, it isn't bleeding marketshare, but the reason I postulate Microsoft is interested in dominating Internet and Consumer Electronics is that they forsee the end of their multi-billion dollar industry.
When all PCs go for $129 (and Macs for $149), Microsoft will be getting less than $20 per PC; the equivalent, today, of the DVD licensing fees per DVD player. That means if as many PCs are sold in the future as DVD players today then Microsoft's Windows business will shrink from $3b to $1b, and the same for Office (who would pay $199 for an office suite when the PC is cheaper?).
So to recap: 1) Rivals grow faster 2) Markets rivals are in are growing faster than PCs 3) PC market will shrivel in revenue 4) Microsoft stuck between both forces
Its hard to find a single player with all those features. At least CNet reviewed distortion, strength, and signal to noise and found the iPod beat quite a few players, including Creative, Cowon, iRiver, Sansa, and even Samsung (http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-11297_7-6510133-2.html)
In the SnR test the iPod only managed fifth, but that does mean it beats Cowon, iRiver, and Sansa. If you look at distortion, you will find the iPod did quite well, at third and down to seventh when you look at frequency reproduction. The numbers improve if you count all iPods and not just the video.
I don't see how Apple can do this without cannibalizing their own sales.
Each copy of Vista costs roughly $50 per license. Apple may be able to get away with charging $80 per license.
Currently Apple gets something like 27% out of each Mac they sell. If the average Mac costs about $1k ($600 for the Mac mini but tempered with $1099 and $1299 MacBook sales), then that's $270 a Mac, or 3x more than selling straight copies.
If Dell can sell a $700 Mac or $800 Mac laptop, that would effectively gut most Mac sales. So the license of OS X must compensate for these lost sales, to be cost effective.
If Apple has 5% US market share right now, then with $700 Macs from Dell Apple would have to catapult to 15% marketshare just to stay even, and 20% to make it a profitable endeavor. You really think Apple could overnight support 20% market share?
At least in their current strategy, Apple has a very good chance of hitting 10% without losing any profit.
Slashdot Mirror
How is that Apple's fault?
It's your sister's fault the music industry is being destroyed, because she's loading her iPod with content from the library!
No, not meaningless.
Both are online ad-sponsored video streaming sites. The source of the video content differs, but the implementation and use case are similar.
If GM has a budget for online advertising, they must split it now between Google AdSense, YouTube videos, and Hulu videos.
Time spent watching one outlet is time not spent at the other.
Ad revenue for Hulu then lowers the ad-value of YouTube, and vice versa.
Every unlock attempt has exploited a hole in Apple's security, the same kind of hole a malicious website or program might use to hijack an iPhone.
In that sense, as an iPhone owner, I care that my system is not exposed to unwanted vulnerabilities just to appease a hacker subset.
That logic applies to all the consoles. PS1->PS2, for example, and the PS3 is a flop.
Of course Microsoft has never been on top...
Sure, giving Microsoft a target gives them a goal, but it isn't like Microsoft has shown the ability to leap past a continually advancing target. There are plenty of examples where Microsoft is always behind the competition:
vs Google in search
vs Apple in MP3 players (now phones)
vs Nintendo in consoles...
If Xbox 420 is anything like the Zune 2 or the reboot of the Live services it will be:
A Wii, but black, slightly larger, and HD.
Meanwhile Nintendo will release, if the DS and Wii are any predictors of future design:
Download only games; add-on optical drive for backwards compatibility
HD (duh)
Lightweight wireless heads up see through monocles
Paired Wii-motes (one per hand) play, up to a total of 16 remotes (for 16 player games)
The ability to hook up 4 LCDs (1 per 4 people) or the ability to network 4 consoles together with a single game
Built in projector or projector add-on to reduce the necessity for 4 HD sets (perhaps limited to 720p)
You forget one crucial component:
Nintendo will have the $249 next gen HD capable console (that will also be profitable) and compatible with the Wii and it's extensive install base.
Nintendo will continue to have MORE ideas, and will poach the great ones from Microsoft as well.
You think Microsoft will win because they can copy Nintendo?
That's like saying Microsoft's Zune will win because they copied the iPod... and then the iPod Touch gets released. Oops.
You mean install apps that don't work 75% of the time because the user is not near a wireless AP? That sounds very un-Apple.
I wonder if this has to do with survival rates; shorter lifespan vs longer lifespan, more active vs passive animals, more energy vs less energy?
Did you not notice that the weather and stock apps require constant updates (like what a cellular data plan would provide) and therefore be unsuitable for a mostly untethered device like an iPod?
The PDA features of notes, email, and calendar I'll give you, but I suspect they detract from the music and video focus of an iPod. Who knows why Apple couldn't have thrown them in for "free", but I suspect they will reappear in future firmware revisions (after the iPhone gets more powerful updates too).
You mean the fact that RockBox has ported mpeg1/mpeg2 support for the iPod, but not H.264 or MPEG4, which is what the iPod video natively supports. You are being misleading in your statements.
So what you are really trying to say is, "Why can't Apple support MPEG1 and MPEG2?"
Rockbox has backported nothing; they have just implemented a lower end feature that Apple never bothered to develop in the first place.
Except that nowhere was the customer forced to update their iPhone. Thus no forced exclusivity.
It asks; first if you should download, second if it should install.
No, iTunes only installs it if you tell it to install.
Apple didn't hack into and disable the iPhone. You, or the user, applied the firmware update that broke the iPhone.
It is irrelevant that the firmware update was provided by Apple or a third party; Apple will only provide warranty service for their firmware update. You can totally choose not to update the iPhone; no one was forced to install 1.1.1 in any form.
Excuse me? Final Fantasy 7 was released in 1997, ten years ago now.
Heck, don't you remember multiple CD games like "Under a Killing Moon" in 1994?
It's not restricted to JRPGs, and it's not even remotely new. This is something Microsoft should have anticipated, even if it meant going the HD-DVD route.
My misunderstanding, oops.
In the US, we pay for incoming calls.
In other words, our minutes are eaten in half if we make as many calls as we receive. That's probably one aspect right there.
No, it isn't bleeding marketshare, but the reason I postulate Microsoft is interested in dominating Internet and Consumer Electronics is that they forsee the end of their multi-billion dollar industry.
When all PCs go for $129 (and Macs for $149), Microsoft will be getting less than $20 per PC; the equivalent, today, of the DVD licensing fees per DVD player. That means if as many PCs are sold in the future as DVD players today then Microsoft's Windows business will shrink from $3b to $1b, and the same for Office (who would pay $199 for an office suite when the PC is cheaper?).
So to recap:
1) Rivals grow faster
2) Markets rivals are in are growing faster than PCs
3) PC market will shrivel in revenue
4) Microsoft stuck between both forces
Its hard to find a single player with all those features. At least CNet reviewed distortion, strength, and signal to noise and found the iPod beat quite a few players, including Creative, Cowon, iRiver, Sansa, and even Samsung (http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-11297_7-6510133-2.html)
In the SnR test the iPod only managed fifth, but that does mean it beats Cowon, iRiver, and Sansa. If you look at distortion, you will find the iPod did quite well, at third and down to seventh when you look at frequency reproduction. The numbers improve if you count all iPods and not just the video.
You're probably smarter than most people then. I know plenty of people who could not operate something much more complicated than an iPod.
Unfortunately for you the average IQ is 100, and is probably 80% of the population.
The Founders thought it was proof the system worked.
The politicians waste their time instead of ours; the courts exist as an oversight/check on their powers.
Without the courts the politicians would still exist and would still be causing trouble. I mean, they would be like Jack Thompson, right?
I don't see how Apple can do this without cannibalizing their own sales.
Each copy of Vista costs roughly $50 per license. Apple may be able to get away with charging $80 per license.
Currently Apple gets something like 27% out of each Mac they sell. If the average Mac costs about $1k ($600 for the Mac mini but tempered with $1099 and $1299 MacBook sales), then that's $270 a Mac, or 3x more than selling straight copies.
If Dell can sell a $700 Mac or $800 Mac laptop, that would effectively gut most Mac sales. So the license of OS X must compensate for these lost sales, to be cost effective.
If Apple has 5% US market share right now, then with $700 Macs from Dell Apple would have to catapult to 15% marketshare just to stay even, and 20% to make it a profitable endeavor. You really think Apple could overnight support 20% market share?
At least in their current strategy, Apple has a very good chance of hitting 10% without losing any profit.
Why do you consider the Google IPO overhyped? They were tremendously undervalued, then, considering they have an EPS of 11
And investors unaware of OS X are stupid investors. It powers the iPod, iPhone, and iMac. It is, after all, the secret sauce.
Yes, Apple does inform the consumer that iTunes is required, on their tech specs page:
http://www.apple.com/ipodclassic/specs.html
You have to consider that the iPod page on Apple's site is actually for iTunes:
http://www.apple.com/itunes/
Then the title is actually, "iTunes+iPod".
Then when you click on the iPod classic there is an iTunes tab:
http://www.apple.com/ipodclassic/itunes.html
They also describe exactly how iTunes+iPod works:
The moment you connect your iPod to a Mac or PC, iTunes syncs music and video automatically.