There's always a couple nay sayers. Everyone, including Apple, acknowledges this is the first critical baby step towards IPTV and TV on demand *for purchase.*
It is widley rumored that Apple will be releasing an Intel based "media" mac, perhaps the revamped Mini, at MWSF this year. Considering the new software and integration plans for this product, you can begin to see how additional features will come out.
And, come on... who the hell cares about Linux support for this? How many Linux users, who don't even want to pay for their Operating System, will want to pay for their video? I seriously doubt they'd get a lot of converts. As you so eleoquently point out, they'll fire up a P2P and illegally download it instead. This isn't a "Linux sucks" argument-- it's an argument about the small market share and even smaller likelihood for financial success on Linux given the content at hand.
To me, the PS3 is the console of choice. I admit I'm no fan of Microsoft, but if they had the better product I would buy it. They simply don't. I have a PS2, a PC, a Mac, and a PSP. The PSP has better games on it then many people give it credit for, the Mac has all the essential A-list games (albeit late), the PC is the pinnacle of computer gaming, and the PS2 has one hell of a long list of A-list games. Where are the Ratchet & Clank, Jack and Daxter, Sly Cooper, and God of War games on an XBOX? NOWHERE.
The XBOX only has Halo. That's it, folks! You know what? I have Halo on my Mac. It's great. But for the life of me I can't get into it on XBOX. The only game the XBOX does well is an FPS which is always superior with a mouse and keyboard.
XBOX 360? It uses an old DVD format and no games. The games it does have are copy-cat "me, too" games for the PS2 and PS3. The only real advantage XBOX has is XBOX live. I give it credit where it's due for that.
I will be buying a PS3 based on the games that will be coming out for it. I also have a 50" HDTV that I plan on using with it, which is 3/4 of the attraction of these new consoles. Blu-Ray HD Movies are going to be sweet. Plus, I don't believe the PS3 will ship with the bannana... but I do know it will be all wireless. It will also have HD. It will also have the most horsepower of all 3 consoles and a better SDK than the PS2. I also bet that the SINGLE VERSION (instead of XBOX's crippled one and regular one) will be around $400 at launch. Maybe $300.
The Revolution has a possibility of a good controller and some nice franchise games. It'll probably be cheap.... launch will prob. be $100 less than the other consoles. Might pick one up.
As an atheist, I hold no quam. So many good things have come as a result of level headed religious people that I could never damn an entire religion based on it's zealots.
Zealots are generally weak minded people who need a guiding force to find purpose in life. People who use religion as a tool to enrich an otherwise rational existence are doing themselves a service. I may not agree with the conclusion but I respect it. I just reach enrichment in different ways.
So thanks for all the soup kitchens, the homeless shelters, the beautiful architecture, the scholars, the scientists, the teachers, and so forth.
But, yeah, these Fundamentalist wackos leading the charge in Kansas give your religion a shiner...
I have to say, to an Atheist like myself, all religions pretty much sounds like a chorus of stupidity. At some point a person indocrinated many otherwise rational people with a crazy notion-- in every part of your life but ONE, you will use rational thought to critically think. Why? It's so unbelievably obvious that religion is a good way to be in tune with your fellow man, and a terrible way to describe the empirical world. Faith, in this context, is another word for "lazy."
The difference between Atheists and religious fundamentalists is that it's a rare day you find an athiest pushing their point of view on another person. I don't care what you think. I *want* you to think what you feel is right, and I want you to leave me the F alone. Fundamentalists (not speaking of level headed religious people) insist on making everyone else believe what they believe. They will lie, steal, and cheat their way at any cost under the belief they are working for a great good. This country was founded on freedom of speech, religion (or lack of), and diversity. Live and let live. Sadly, this mentality was driven into them in one of two ways: as a small child or in a time of weakness. In both cases these are times in people's lives when they are vulnerable to suggestion. Sounds abhorrent to me.
At it's core, Fundamentalists dig their heels in about Evolution because it challenges the single most important principal in their worlds-- humans are at the center. We're created in god's image, and "he" is the creator of us. (Yes not all religions, but let's go with this in the context of the Kansas situation.) So, if we're not all that special, where do fundamentalists find their purpose? Their entire worlds come crashing down. Nothing seems more "secular" to me than thinking you're the only unique speck of life in the universe. The sad twist is that people like myself, who believe in Science as a way to understand our conditions of existence, rarely think our place and the world around it is any less special. It's amazing! It's wonderful. We're wonderful. And we should damn well let our neighbor think what they want. That goes for anything shy of inflicting bodily harm on another. I don't think teaching the evolution of humans counts as bodily harm, do you? How about we keep Religion at home, where the Bible thumping Fundamentalists are supposed to be indoctrinating their children with creation myths.
So now we sit and watch Kansas, a state my Aunt and Uncle live in, become the laughing stock of the developed WORLD. I just sit back and think on all the other recent evangelical religion based events that have been so similar, and backfired so badly. Now we can add one more to that endless list. This is the new Monkey trial, folks. It will take some time, but this won't last for long. Reason will prevail.
And if you don't agree with me-- fine. I want you to think for yourself. Just keep Religion at home, please.
I bought every episode of LOST (seasons 1 and 2.) I save 17+ minutes of my life from commercials for $2 an episode. Assuming I could pare down my cable subscription this would be a great alternative for series like LOST. I'd never seen an episode until I downloaded off iTunes. I wish TiVo would get off their butt and do this instad of limping in like they have.
I then hooked up my PowerBook to my SONY 50" HDTV and I was astonished at how good most of it looked. It looked as good as any other SDTV broadcast (pretty much the same definition) but the SVideo made the colors pop. Obviously I'd love HDTV versions, but this really is a great start.
Some suggestions for Apple:
More shows. Music videos for $2 suck IMHO. An hour long episode sans-commercials doesn't suck so bad.
Discounts. I feel if you're comitting to N number of episodes you should get a little discount. Maybe 1 free episode for every 10?
Subscriptions. Very related to the second request but it makes purchase easier.
This finally made IPTV make sense. It's just a good start that you know is only going to get better. Now if I could just put these on my PSP...
Agreed. A PC running Windows is an expensive game machine and nothing more. I have a PC that I use for some *very* niche programs, and for games. Everything else is OS X.
But what these number DO show is consumer sentiment towards the AMD brand. Retail sales are great for showing what is going through a consumer's mind when browsing for a computer. If they are purchasing AMD in retail outlets, that means that the AMD vs. Intel FUD is relatively mute. I'm not arguing for either side, I'm simply happy to see AMD able to compete in what is usually the toughest sale-- the real sales floor.
I love my Nano. I have a black 4GB Nano, customized. The screen is fine. I have abused it just as much as any other reasonable person. I can assure you that the Nano is no more scratchable than any other 4G iPod. The Mini, which I also own, was impervious to costmetic destruction, though.
It boils down to this: minor scratches and imperfections are likely with any daily-use product. That's why there's an industry for iPod protectors. HOWEVER, I'd rather have a slighly scuffed Nano with it's nice sheen and sleek profile than to have a Nano with a huge clunky protector that makes it look like crap.
So if you want a Nano, perhaps you should consider that your expectations have been set too high if you think a scuff or scratch is unacceptible. You'r probably the kind of person who gets minor dents and dings on your car fixed the day they happen. Or better yet, are you the lamer that has a car bra? Let it go. Damage happens. The Nano is not at fault-- look in the mirror.
I'm not discrediting the people who had actual CRACKED screens-- that's B.S. It should be fixed. Scratches... get a life.
Is anyone actually surprised by this? Wikipedia is a nice resource and all, but it's anything but a defacto standard for information. I understand that institutional encyclopedias are subject to bias, but Wikipedia is subject to wild innaccuracy because of how easy it is to edit it's content in an arbitrary way. Which is worse?
In order to remove potential innacuracy you'd have to have restricted contribution. I'm assuming this is by an editorial staff used to review submissions by the public. So, in the end, how do these editioral people differ from the experts who edit traditional encyclopedias?
Okay, this is flame bait. I read the article when it was posted on another web site-- LAST WEEK. *ahem* And it turns out that they are using some software to publish their data that is a revision old. When they update it, it will work just fine in all major browsers. They suggested that they would lauch as IE only for *official* support, but would upgrade by the end fo the year.
So, really, this isn't an issue of USPTO deciding to design a web site that only works with IE-- it's a case of the USPTO choosing backend software that isn't up to date. And that, my friends, it's par for the governmental course. There's nothing sinister going on here.
Yes, Apple knows how to make the mundane usable. Let's not forget that the iPod is "just an mp3 player." Except it's the best one in existence because of the total package experience and usability.
I would love to know how many times you looked at your mouse to figure out where the buttons were prior to clicking. Zero? I'm guessing never. You put your hand on the mouse and the rest is done by memory. The buttons are in the same spot the buttons have been on every mouse that has every existed in modern computer use. They didn't MOVE the buttons.
This mouse is a major improvement in how mice are designed. It has form and function that I was supremely impressed by. At first, I thought: a two button mouse? Great. Who cares? Then I looked at how they approached and and realized the MAJOR design wins:
1) It's configurable per user. Not a new concept but done well.
2) It doesn't confuse one button use with two visible buttons-- one button use is the same as it always has, and so is two button use. In no other way would this be possible without electrostatic technology. Brilliant.
3) A 360 degree scrollwheel. Finally taking a trackball and making it useful for scrolling while keeping the precision most people enjoy about a mouse.
4) The 4th button requires a press on both sides of the mouse to ensure good ergonomics.
5) Wintel folks finally escaping Windows for OS X will have a familiar 2 button design done the Apple way.
Um, I'm pretty sure Microsoft doesn't ship computers. So Apple *is* the first computer manufacturer shipping their systems with it. Sadly, they may not have been the people to invent it... sheesh.
An open source desktop will never become dominant. This isn't a battle of Mac vs. Linux. This is Linux being more appealing ot it's limited crowd of enthusiasts.
Linux is nice. It's a great server OS. If you're a hobyist you'll consider it on the desktop. But I can't see how it'll ever be anything else.
That whooshing sound over your head was the point you missed about being a Mac user.
Mac users like being on their own hardware. Sure, there's always the people who don't mind-- but a LARGE and substatial portion of Apple's fan base literally hates Microsoft and Intel. I know people who only buy MS Office because they HAVE to. Really. And this is not abnormal at all (in context.)
There's a saying about hell freezing over and _something_ to do with Steve Jobs using Intel CPU's.... hmmmm.
I think these people misinterpreted the evidence for CPU's. Apple uses Intel chips in their computers NOW... just not CPU's. And for good reason:
1) Intel chips are NOT cheaper. Any difference is negligable. 2) They don't run faster (AMD keeps pace, but not Intel.) 3) They'd have to recompile every app made for one architecture to run on another. 4) They run hotter. 5) Steve doesn't like Intel CPU's. 6) Steve doesn't want to piss off Microsoft by being THAT agressive in their turf.
What unification talks? There's none needed. Sony's PS3 will have Blu-Ray and a Blue-Ray disc can hold 55% more per disc. Apple will also be using Blu-ray, which means Pixar will be releasing everything on Blu-ray. That's MAJOR industry support and I'm still trying to figure out what the HD-DVD guys are complaining about.
Intelligent Design (ID) is called pseudo-science for a reason. ID proponents do the same thing with Science that they do with the interpretation of religious texts- throw out certain parts. There are a thousand little reasons why ID is not to be taught in science classes. The first, and most obviously wrong concept is that ID proponents use a supreme and intelligent being to support a scientific process. There is not a single piece of scientific evidence to support the existence of a supreme being. And, yet, ID proponents START (problem one) with the grand assumption (problem two) that a supreme being (problem three) is the main driving force behind an otherwise perfectly scientific system (problem four.)
Intelligent Design proponents lack a fundamental understanding of the scientific process. They start with the conclusion and work backwards to the evidence. This is contradictory from the scientific process and, as such, is not scientific. You can't claim something is Science unless you follow it's basic principals. Hence the term Pseudo-Science.
Scientists came to the conclusion that evolution is the basis of all biological development by observation. These observations continue constantly and have strengthened the mountain of evidence for Evolution the same way we keep falling back to Earth in support of Gravity. (I use gravity because it's REALLY hard to deny that one.) While both theories get fine tuned and modified over time to support the evidence, there is not a single shred of evidence to refute either one.
Proponents of ID would argue that the evidence is so vast and complex that it could not have occured through natural means. Well, through scientific process we can say with certainty that evolution is as strong a theory as gravity. ID proponents will argue we can only say this as it applies to micro-evolution, which is a ID made up word to make evolution sound trivial on a grand scale. This attempt is to imply that the rules governing the evolution of fruit flies, pigeons (amongst hundreds of others observed within a couple human life times) can't evolve enough to be genetically incompatible. Except they do. And Scientists observe these effects all the time and add it to the pile of evidence that supports Evolution.
Also, let's not forget that the most simple answer is usually the correct one. Evolution is simple. Yes, the results are seemingly complex and varied (they are) but the basic principle of Evolution is as simple as it gets: you start with a soup of ingredients and the biology of living things that result from that soup will grow with complexity over time to better compete for resources (the soup.) Simple. Part of that process includes the basic idea that, if all living things were identical that they would be susceptible to the same evolutionary problems. Aside from things outside it's control (the end of the soup, Earth) evolution accounts for variety because it allows some living things to be diverse enough to survive events that will wipe out others. Again, this is pretty simple.
At the end of the day, people who irrationally hold an opinion dear will do irrational things to support it.
Let's not forget one of the MOST powerful parts of Spotlight: the ability to make smart folders. Now, if you have a business you're going to want to make sense of some hard folders. But, for everything else you can set up alias folders that are based on criteria that will grab anything associated to that criteria into a smart folder.
I have a feeling Apple did it right, but we'll find out soon enough. I suspect that, aside from Keith Richards impersonations, it should work as a navigation mechanism. For dictation-- well, I guess we'll see.
I agree man. This is insane. Here's a little note to the RIAA and the recording industry executives responsible for jacking up prices:
"I like the Apple store because it DOES have a simplistic, easy to understand pricing model. Because of it's ease of use, and because I dislike being butt raped by insane CD prices which offer no additional functionality or value to me, I BUY my music through iTMS.
"If you raise prices, you will loose people like myself from every BUYING music. It's up to you now. You're not going to sell legal copies at higher prices. If you try, you will loose revenue and loyal customers. That's the price point, and you should listen to your uncle Steve because he knows your industry better than you do.
I take major exception to the service and support side of things. First of all-- needing service on a Mac is not (usually) as common as on a PC. That's a major factor. Second, whenever I've had to deal with them they EXCEEDED my expectations.
You've had a bum experience and I don't challenge that. But a lot of people are happy with Apple's customer service. In fact, Apple ranks #1 in customer service and repair history. Take a look at Consumer Reports. Apple is ranked #1 in every customer support and repair category. For desktops they are far ahead and for laptops slightly ahead of EVERY OTHER competitor.
Let me give you my personal experience with an Apple warranty. Now, keep in mind in your case I feel both your complaints are subject to interpretatation on what is "broken." You really had wear and tear problems that you didn't like (rightfully so) but nothing was BROKEN. I had an iPod mini since day 1 basically. After about 9 months it wouldn't sync any more. That's covered by my warranty. So I submitted a repair request online and the next morning had a free box sent to place my iPod in. I sent it to Apple the next morning and had a brand new replacement iPod by the end of the week. Total turnaround time was 4 days. I couldn't have been happier.
Slashdot Mirror
There's always a couple nay sayers. Everyone, including Apple, acknowledges this is the first critical baby step towards IPTV and TV on demand *for purchase.*
... who the hell cares about Linux support for this? How many Linux users, who don't even want to pay for their Operating System, will want to pay for their video? I seriously doubt they'd get a lot of converts. As you so eleoquently point out, they'll fire up a P2P and illegally download it instead. This isn't a "Linux sucks" argument-- it's an argument about the small market share and even smaller likelihood for financial success on Linux given the content at hand.
It is widley rumored that Apple will be releasing an Intel based "media" mac, perhaps the revamped Mini, at MWSF this year. Considering the new software and integration plans for this product, you can begin to see how additional features will come out.
And, come on
To me, the PS3 is the console of choice. I admit I'm no fan of Microsoft, but if they had the better product I would buy it. They simply don't. I have a PS2, a PC, a Mac, and a PSP. The PSP has better games on it then many people give it credit for, the Mac has all the essential A-list games (albeit late), the PC is the pinnacle of computer gaming, and the PS2 has one hell of a long list of A-list games. Where are the Ratchet & Clank, Jack and Daxter, Sly Cooper, and God of War games on an XBOX? NOWHERE.
... but I do know it will be all wireless. It will also have HD. It will also have the most horsepower of all 3 consoles and a better SDK than the PS2. I also bet that the SINGLE VERSION (instead of XBOX's crippled one and regular one) will be around $400 at launch. Maybe $300.
The XBOX only has Halo. That's it, folks! You know what? I have Halo on my Mac. It's great. But for the life of me I can't get into it on XBOX. The only game the XBOX does well is an FPS which is always superior with a mouse and keyboard.
XBOX 360? It uses an old DVD format and no games. The games it does have are copy-cat "me, too" games for the PS2 and PS3. The only real advantage XBOX has is XBOX live. I give it credit where it's due for that.
I will be buying a PS3 based on the games that will be coming out for it. I also have a 50" HDTV that I plan on using with it, which is 3/4 of the attraction of these new consoles. Blu-Ray HD Movies are going to be sweet. Plus, I don't believe the PS3 will ship with the bannana
The Revolution has a possibility of a good controller and some nice franchise games. It'll probably be cheap.... launch will prob. be $100 less than the other consoles. Might pick one up.
As an atheist, I hold no quam. So many good things have come as a result of level headed religious people that I could never damn an entire religion based on it's zealots.
Zealots are generally weak minded people who need a guiding force to find purpose in life. People who use religion as a tool to enrich an otherwise rational existence are doing themselves a service. I may not agree with the conclusion but I respect it. I just reach enrichment in different ways.
So thanks for all the soup kitchens, the homeless shelters, the beautiful architecture, the scholars, the scientists, the teachers, and so forth.
But, yeah, these Fundamentalist wackos leading the charge in Kansas give your religion a shiner...
I have to say, to an Atheist like myself, all religions pretty much sounds like a chorus of stupidity. At some point a person indocrinated many otherwise rational people with a crazy notion-- in every part of your life but ONE, you will use rational thought to critically think. Why? It's so unbelievably obvious that religion is a good way to be in tune with your fellow man, and a terrible way to describe the empirical world. Faith, in this context, is another word for "lazy."
The difference between Atheists and religious fundamentalists is that it's a rare day you find an athiest pushing their point of view on another person. I don't care what you think. I *want* you to think what you feel is right, and I want you to leave me the F alone. Fundamentalists (not speaking of level headed religious people) insist on making everyone else believe what they believe. They will lie, steal, and cheat their way at any cost under the belief they are working for a great good. This country was founded on freedom of speech, religion (or lack of), and diversity. Live and let live. Sadly, this mentality was driven into them in one of two ways: as a small child or in a time of weakness. In both cases these are times in people's lives when they are vulnerable to suggestion. Sounds abhorrent to me.
At it's core, Fundamentalists dig their heels in about Evolution because it challenges the single most important principal in their worlds-- humans are at the center. We're created in god's image, and "he" is the creator of us. (Yes not all religions, but let's go with this in the context of the Kansas situation.) So, if we're not all that special, where do fundamentalists find their purpose? Their entire worlds come crashing down. Nothing seems more "secular" to me than thinking you're the only unique speck of life in the universe. The sad twist is that people like myself, who believe in Science as a way to understand our conditions of existence, rarely think our place and the world around it is any less special. It's amazing! It's wonderful. We're wonderful. And we should damn well let our neighbor think what they want. That goes for anything shy of inflicting bodily harm on another. I don't think teaching the evolution of humans counts as bodily harm, do you? How about we keep Religion at home, where the Bible thumping Fundamentalists are supposed to be indoctrinating their children with creation myths.
So now we sit and watch Kansas, a state my Aunt and Uncle live in, become the laughing stock of the developed WORLD. I just sit back and think on all the other recent evangelical religion based events that have been so similar, and backfired so badly. Now we can add one more to that endless list. This is the new Monkey trial, folks. It will take some time, but this won't last for long. Reason will prevail.
And if you don't agree with me-- fine. I want you to think for yourself. Just keep Religion at home, please.
I guess I'm a sucker.
I bought every episode of LOST (seasons 1 and 2.) I save 17+ minutes of my life from commercials for $2 an episode. Assuming I could pare down my cable subscription this would be a great alternative for series like LOST. I'd never seen an episode until I downloaded off iTunes. I wish TiVo would get off their butt and do this instad of limping in like they have.
I then hooked up my PowerBook to my SONY 50" HDTV and I was astonished at how good most of it looked. It looked as good as any other SDTV broadcast (pretty much the same definition) but the SVideo made the colors pop. Obviously I'd love HDTV versions, but this really is a great start.
Some suggestions for Apple:
- More shows. Music videos for $2 suck IMHO. An hour long episode sans-commercials doesn't suck so bad.
- Discounts. I feel if you're comitting to N number of episodes you should get a little discount. Maybe 1 free episode for every 10?
- Subscriptions. Very related to the second request but it makes purchase easier.
This finally made IPTV make sense. It's just a good start that you know is only going to get better. Now if I could just put these on my PSPAgreed. A PC running Windows is an expensive game machine and nothing more. I have a PC that I use for some *very* niche programs, and for games. Everything else is OS X.
But what these number DO show is consumer sentiment towards the AMD brand. Retail sales are great for showing what is going through a consumer's mind when browsing for a computer. If they are purchasing AMD in retail outlets, that means that the AMD vs. Intel FUD is relatively mute. I'm not arguing for either side, I'm simply happy to see AMD able to compete in what is usually the toughest sale-- the real sales floor.
I love my Nano. I have a black 4GB Nano, customized. The screen is fine. I have abused it just as much as any other reasonable person. I can assure you that the Nano is no more scratchable than any other 4G iPod. The Mini, which I also own, was impervious to costmetic destruction, though.
... get a life.
It boils down to this: minor scratches and imperfections are likely with any daily-use product. That's why there's an industry for iPod protectors. HOWEVER, I'd rather have a slighly scuffed Nano with it's nice sheen and sleek profile than to have a Nano with a huge clunky protector that makes it look like crap.
So if you want a Nano, perhaps you should consider that your expectations have been set too high if you think a scuff or scratch is unacceptible. You'r probably the kind of person who gets minor dents and dings on your car fixed the day they happen. Or better yet, are you the lamer that has a car bra? Let it go. Damage happens. The Nano is not at fault-- look in the mirror.
I'm not discrediting the people who had actual CRACKED screens-- that's B.S. It should be fixed. Scratches
Is anyone actually surprised by this? Wikipedia is a nice resource and all, but it's anything but a defacto standard for information. I understand that institutional encyclopedias are subject to bias, but Wikipedia is subject to wild innaccuracy because of how easy it is to edit it's content in an arbitrary way. Which is worse?
In order to remove potential innacuracy you'd have to have restricted contribution. I'm assuming this is by an editorial staff used to review submissions by the public. So, in the end, how do these editioral people differ from the experts who edit traditional encyclopedias?
Okay, this is flame bait. I read the article when it was posted on another web site-- LAST WEEK. *ahem* And it turns out that they are using some software to publish their data that is a revision old. When they update it, it will work just fine in all major browsers. They suggested that they would lauch as IE only for *official* support, but would upgrade by the end fo the year.
So, really, this isn't an issue of USPTO deciding to design a web site that only works with IE-- it's a case of the USPTO choosing backend software that isn't up to date. And that, my friends, it's par for the governmental course. There's nothing sinister going on here.
Yes, Apple knows how to make the mundane usable. Let's not forget that the iPod is "just an mp3 player." Except it's the best one in existence because of the total package experience and usability.
I would love to know how many times you looked at your mouse to figure out where the buttons were prior to clicking. Zero? I'm guessing never. You put your hand on the mouse and the rest is done by memory. The buttons are in the same spot the buttons have been on every mouse that has every existed in modern computer use. They didn't MOVE the buttons.
This mouse is a major improvement in how mice are designed. It has form and function that I was supremely impressed by. At first, I thought: a two button mouse? Great. Who cares? Then I looked at how they approached and and realized the MAJOR design wins:
1) It's configurable per user. Not a new concept but done well.
2) It doesn't confuse one button use with two visible buttons-- one button use is the same as it always has, and so is two button use. In no other way would this be possible without electrostatic technology. Brilliant.
3) A 360 degree scrollwheel. Finally taking a trackball and making it useful for scrolling while keeping the precision most people enjoy about a mouse.
4) The 4th button requires a press on both sides of the mouse to ensure good ergonomics.
5) Wintel folks finally escaping Windows for OS X will have a familiar 2 button design done the Apple way.
Yeah. The almight experts of consumer OS's-- Linspire, is calling Apple's move a bad one.
Call me crazy, but I think Apple may know what they're doing with their consumer OS and their hardware cash cow.
Um, I'm pretty sure Microsoft doesn't ship computers. So Apple *is* the first computer manufacturer shipping their systems with it. Sadly, they may not have been the people to invent it... sheesh.
Sorry.
Oh wait-- another instance of people fearing what they dont' understand. I am *so* shocked.
Wow.
I guess the next thing you'll hear is that a bunch of people in Kansas want to redifine the word "science" to be more creationist friendly.
Oh damn...
An open source desktop will never become dominant. This isn't a battle of Mac vs. Linux. This is Linux being more appealing ot it's limited crowd of enthusiasts.
Linux is nice. It's a great server OS. If you're a hobyist you'll consider it on the desktop. But I can't see how it'll ever be anything else.
That whooshing sound over your head was the point you missed about being a Mac user.
Mac users like being on their own hardware. Sure, there's always the people who don't mind-- but a LARGE and substatial portion of Apple's fan base literally hates Microsoft and Intel. I know people who only buy MS Office because they HAVE to. Really. And this is not abnormal at all (in context.)
Yikes. I wonder who will believe this one. There is no way. None. Let's drop it and move on.
*ahem* bullsh*t.
There's a saying about hell freezing over and _something_ to do with Steve Jobs using Intel CPU's.... hmmmm.
I think these people misinterpreted the evidence for CPU's. Apple uses Intel chips in their computers NOW... just not CPU's. And for good reason:
1) Intel chips are NOT cheaper. Any difference is negligable.
2) They don't run faster (AMD keeps pace, but not Intel.)
3) They'd have to recompile every app made for one architecture to run on another.
4) They run hotter.
5) Steve doesn't like Intel CPU's.
6) Steve doesn't want to piss off Microsoft by being THAT agressive in their turf.
It creeps me out to think that so many people are behind that guy. Honestly, it gives me the chills.
I "pray" for a day when ignorance is no longer bliss.
What unification talks? There's none needed. Sony's PS3 will have Blu-Ray and a Blue-Ray disc can hold 55% more per disc. Apple will also be using Blu-ray, which means Pixar will be releasing everything on Blu-ray. That's MAJOR industry support and I'm still trying to figure out what the HD-DVD guys are complaining about.
The battle is over. Blu-ray gets my vote.
Intelligent Design (ID) is called pseudo-science for a reason. ID proponents do the same thing with Science that they do with the interpretation of religious texts- throw out certain parts. There are a thousand little reasons why ID is not to be taught in science classes. The first, and most obviously wrong concept is that ID proponents use a supreme and intelligent being to support a scientific process. There is not a single piece of scientific evidence to support the existence of a supreme being. And, yet, ID proponents START (problem one) with the grand assumption (problem two) that a supreme being (problem three) is the main driving force behind an otherwise perfectly scientific system (problem four.)
Intelligent Design proponents lack a fundamental understanding of the scientific process. They start with the conclusion and work backwards to the evidence. This is contradictory from the scientific process and, as such, is not scientific. You can't claim something is Science unless you follow it's basic principals. Hence the term Pseudo-Science.
Scientists came to the conclusion that evolution is the basis of all biological development by observation. These observations continue constantly and have strengthened the mountain of evidence for Evolution the same way we keep falling back to Earth in support of Gravity. (I use gravity because it's REALLY hard to deny that one.) While both theories get fine tuned and modified over time to support the evidence, there is not a single shred of evidence to refute either one.
Proponents of ID would argue that the evidence is so vast and complex that it could not have occured through natural means. Well, through scientific process we can say with certainty that evolution is as strong a theory as gravity. ID proponents will argue we can only say this as it applies to micro-evolution, which is a ID made up word to make evolution sound trivial on a grand scale. This attempt is to imply that the rules governing the evolution of fruit flies, pigeons (amongst hundreds of others observed within a couple human life times) can't evolve enough to be genetically incompatible. Except they do. And Scientists observe these effects all the time and add it to the pile of evidence that supports Evolution.
Also, let's not forget that the most simple answer is usually the correct one. Evolution is simple. Yes, the results are seemingly complex and varied (they are) but the basic principle of Evolution is as simple as it gets: you start with a soup of ingredients and the biology of living things that result from that soup will grow with complexity over time to better compete for resources (the soup.) Simple. Part of that process includes the basic idea that, if all living things were identical that they would be susceptible to the same evolutionary problems. Aside from things outside it's control (the end of the soup, Earth) evolution accounts for variety because it allows some living things to be diverse enough to survive events that will wipe out others. Again, this is pretty simple.
At the end of the day, people who irrationally hold an opinion dear will do irrational things to support it.
Let's not forget one of the MOST powerful parts of Spotlight: the ability to make smart folders. Now, if you have a business you're going to want to make sense of some hard folders. But, for everything else you can set up alias folders that are based on criteria that will grab anything associated to that criteria into a smart folder.
That's the new hotness.
I have a feeling Apple did it right, but we'll find out soon enough. I suspect that, aside from Keith Richards impersonations, it should work as a navigation mechanism. For dictation-- well, I guess we'll see.
I agree man. This is insane. Here's a little note to the RIAA and the recording industry executives responsible for jacking up prices:
"I like the Apple store because it DOES have a simplistic, easy to understand pricing model. Because of it's ease of use, and because I dislike being butt raped by insane CD prices which offer no additional functionality or value to me, I BUY my music through iTMS.
"If you raise prices, you will loose people like myself from every BUYING music. It's up to you now. You're not going to sell legal copies at higher prices. If you try, you will loose revenue and loyal customers. That's the price point, and you should listen to your uncle Steve because he knows your industry better than you do.
I take major exception to the service and support side of things. First of all-- needing service on a Mac is not (usually) as common as on a PC. That's a major factor. Second, whenever I've had to deal with them they EXCEEDED my expectations.
You've had a bum experience and I don't challenge that. But a lot of people are happy with Apple's customer service. In fact, Apple ranks #1 in customer service and repair history. Take a look at Consumer Reports. Apple is ranked #1 in every customer support and repair category. For desktops they are far ahead and for laptops slightly ahead of EVERY OTHER competitor.
Let me give you my personal experience with an Apple warranty. Now, keep in mind in your case I feel both your complaints are subject to interpretatation on what is "broken." You really had wear and tear problems that you didn't like (rightfully so) but nothing was BROKEN. I had an iPod mini since day 1 basically. After about 9 months it wouldn't sync any more. That's covered by my warranty. So I submitted a repair request online and the next morning had a free box sent to place my iPod in. I sent it to Apple the next morning and had a brand new replacement iPod by the end of the week. Total turnaround time was 4 days. I couldn't have been happier.