seashellz
Sep 11, 01:56 PM
Macbook (with Leopard) in late Spring for me!
(thats when APPLE usually refresh their models)
(thats when APPLE usually refresh their models)
r00fus
May 4, 12:21 PM
Wow, the dual screen output is what could some day push me over the edge. A 27" display + 2 27" Apple screens either side sounds pretty nice. Still not enough to make me part with my 30" ACD right now though.
You do realize you can do almost the same thing (not sure about resolutions) with USB2 displaylink adapters?
My lowly 2007 Santa Rosa MBP can handle this fine with one 22" monitor using the old EVGA UVPlus... I even run it over a hub that also does keyboard, mouse and iphone cradle. Slight delay, no stutter, nothing. videos play fine (never tried full screen, but it's my work computer, so no need for that).
You do realize you can do almost the same thing (not sure about resolutions) with USB2 displaylink adapters?
My lowly 2007 Santa Rosa MBP can handle this fine with one 22" monitor using the old EVGA UVPlus... I even run it over a hub that also does keyboard, mouse and iphone cradle. Slight delay, no stutter, nothing. videos play fine (never tried full screen, but it's my work computer, so no need for that).
aeaglex07
Apr 20, 01:18 PM
Law abiding people have nothing to fear. I guess that makes Anne Frank, the subjects of McCarthy, etc. etc. criminals. It's a good thing they didn't have iPhones.
exactly. here in the US we have rights, whether people accept it or not.
exactly. here in the US we have rights, whether people accept it or not.
Evangelion
Sep 9, 11:05 AM
In the case of the Napa(32) chipset
There is no "Napa chipset". Like I said, Napa is a hardware-platfom, composed to CPU (Yonah), chipset (Intel Express 945) and WLAN ()Intel PRO/Wireless). The amount of RAM might be limited due to timing-issues and the like.
There is no "Napa chipset". Like I said, Napa is a hardware-platfom, composed to CPU (Yonah), chipset (Intel Express 945) and WLAN ()Intel PRO/Wireless). The amount of RAM might be limited due to timing-issues and the like.
Spagolli94
Sep 12, 03:46 PM
i'm sorry but the 30G iPod has a stupid price. If someone is that tight and has to get an iPod, they would probably buy used.
I will by the 30GB and am anything but tight. Why? Because I only have 15GB of music and have been adding music at a rate of about 1GB per year. I have no need to watch movies or look at photos on my iPod. If I'm traveling, I have a PowerBook on the plane with me. My iPod is used in the car and the gym, that's it.
That said, both the 30GB and 80GB have more than enough storage. So, I will make my decision based on physical dimensions - at the gym a smaller iPod is a big plus. The fact that the 30GB is cheaper is just icing on the cake. For my needs, I would have bought the 30GB, even it were the same price... even it the 30GB were more.
I agree with you though. If you currently have or anticipate needing over 30GB of space, the 80GB is a MUCH better value when it comes to GB per dollar.
I will by the 30GB and am anything but tight. Why? Because I only have 15GB of music and have been adding music at a rate of about 1GB per year. I have no need to watch movies or look at photos on my iPod. If I'm traveling, I have a PowerBook on the plane with me. My iPod is used in the car and the gym, that's it.
That said, both the 30GB and 80GB have more than enough storage. So, I will make my decision based on physical dimensions - at the gym a smaller iPod is a big plus. The fact that the 30GB is cheaper is just icing on the cake. For my needs, I would have bought the 30GB, even it were the same price... even it the 30GB were more.
I agree with you though. If you currently have or anticipate needing over 30GB of space, the 80GB is a MUCH better value when it comes to GB per dollar.
aristotle
Nov 14, 12:00 AM
Wow. That's quite a diatribe. Historically inaccurate, too. English common law descends from the Roman system of laws that predates christianity (and which was not based on judaism) and from Saxon law, which also has nothing to do with judeo-christian ethics.
And juries are given instructions to follow the letter of the law as explained to them by the judge. Further, in the U.S. system, only matters at law, not equity, are subject to jury trial, and, in many cases, only if the defendant demands a jury trial.
You say:
"You are either deliberately infringing on the rights of others or you are not."
Ok. So when your third grader copies a few quotes from a book for his book report, he is infringing the copyright statute. But, of course, you complain that it's not the letter of the law that matters - it's the spirit. That's why judges came up with the fair use defense (later codified into the statute).
But what if the third grader copies 10 quotes? Still okay? A chapter? How about now? Where's the dividing line? What if instead of a third grader, it's another author who copies a few of the best quotes and competes with the first author? How about then? Gets more complicated, huh?
And that's why the fair use defense has evolved into a complicated legal test involving multiple factors. Among the factors:
the purpose and character of your use
the nature of the copyrighted work
the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
the effect of the use upon the potential market.
Let's look at these.
1) the purpose and character of your use
This is often called the transformative test. Am I creating something new and different and worthwhile to society, involving my own creativity? Many people say that the use in this case was pretty creative and useful, but let's assume no. So this factor weighs against fair use.
2) the nature of the copyrighted work
Published works, such as these icons, are entitled to less protection than unpublished. Also, factual or representative works, such as icons, are entitled to less protection than creative works like novels. So this factor weighs for fair use.
3) the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
A handful of icons out of an entire operating system? Seems small to me. Weighs for fair use.
4) the effect of the use upon the potential market.
By using these icons, is the "infringer" somehow preventing Apple from selling this sort of software, or preventing Apple from selling these icons? No. Again, weighs for fair use.
You simultaneously argue that things are black and white (you either infringe or you don't) and then you argue that the spirit of the law matters, not the letter. You argue for a bright line test, then for shades of gray.
Well, the answer is a little of both, but men and women far smarter than you have come up with the best tests they can to figure out how to deal with these fuzzy situations.
You can go to church and pray instead of going to court, if you'd like, but for those of us that believe in the legal system, we take solace in the fact that things really aren't black and white, and yet there is a framework in place that let's us try and figure these things out.
LOL. Please tell us which law firm you work for. That was quite funny. Are you a historian now too? Would the real cmaier please stand up?
So the arbitration system comes from the roman law as well? Do tell.
I'm not interested in what revisionist historians have come up with the justify this perversion of justice that you call "law". The roman empire fell a long time ago and while Roman law may have influenced much of our legal proceedings, including the structure of civil cases, I was talking about how civil disputes are generally dealt with. Lawyers arguing a case are supposed to be the last resort, not the first.
This process is based on Judeo-christian principles on how you settle disputes over land or labour. It has nothing to do with criminal law.
Here is how disputes were supposed to be dealt with.
1. You go to the person in question and try to talk it out.
2. If that does not work, you meet in front a mediator such as as priest, local official, magistrate or arbitrator.
3. If that does not work, you hire an advocate and make your case in front of the community.
4. If that does not work, you take your case before the court which would usually have been a king back in the day.
The bible frames it slightly different but that is the gist of how it appears in the bible.
To put in a modern context:
1. Go for coffee.
2. Arbitration.
3. Public Hearing.
4. Court case.
And juries are given instructions to follow the letter of the law as explained to them by the judge. Further, in the U.S. system, only matters at law, not equity, are subject to jury trial, and, in many cases, only if the defendant demands a jury trial.
You say:
"You are either deliberately infringing on the rights of others or you are not."
Ok. So when your third grader copies a few quotes from a book for his book report, he is infringing the copyright statute. But, of course, you complain that it's not the letter of the law that matters - it's the spirit. That's why judges came up with the fair use defense (later codified into the statute).
But what if the third grader copies 10 quotes? Still okay? A chapter? How about now? Where's the dividing line? What if instead of a third grader, it's another author who copies a few of the best quotes and competes with the first author? How about then? Gets more complicated, huh?
And that's why the fair use defense has evolved into a complicated legal test involving multiple factors. Among the factors:
the purpose and character of your use
the nature of the copyrighted work
the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
the effect of the use upon the potential market.
Let's look at these.
1) the purpose and character of your use
This is often called the transformative test. Am I creating something new and different and worthwhile to society, involving my own creativity? Many people say that the use in this case was pretty creative and useful, but let's assume no. So this factor weighs against fair use.
2) the nature of the copyrighted work
Published works, such as these icons, are entitled to less protection than unpublished. Also, factual or representative works, such as icons, are entitled to less protection than creative works like novels. So this factor weighs for fair use.
3) the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
A handful of icons out of an entire operating system? Seems small to me. Weighs for fair use.
4) the effect of the use upon the potential market.
By using these icons, is the "infringer" somehow preventing Apple from selling this sort of software, or preventing Apple from selling these icons? No. Again, weighs for fair use.
You simultaneously argue that things are black and white (you either infringe or you don't) and then you argue that the spirit of the law matters, not the letter. You argue for a bright line test, then for shades of gray.
Well, the answer is a little of both, but men and women far smarter than you have come up with the best tests they can to figure out how to deal with these fuzzy situations.
You can go to church and pray instead of going to court, if you'd like, but for those of us that believe in the legal system, we take solace in the fact that things really aren't black and white, and yet there is a framework in place that let's us try and figure these things out.
LOL. Please tell us which law firm you work for. That was quite funny. Are you a historian now too? Would the real cmaier please stand up?
So the arbitration system comes from the roman law as well? Do tell.
I'm not interested in what revisionist historians have come up with the justify this perversion of justice that you call "law". The roman empire fell a long time ago and while Roman law may have influenced much of our legal proceedings, including the structure of civil cases, I was talking about how civil disputes are generally dealt with. Lawyers arguing a case are supposed to be the last resort, not the first.
This process is based on Judeo-christian principles on how you settle disputes over land or labour. It has nothing to do with criminal law.
Here is how disputes were supposed to be dealt with.
1. You go to the person in question and try to talk it out.
2. If that does not work, you meet in front a mediator such as as priest, local official, magistrate or arbitrator.
3. If that does not work, you hire an advocate and make your case in front of the community.
4. If that does not work, you take your case before the court which would usually have been a king back in the day.
The bible frames it slightly different but that is the gist of how it appears in the bible.
To put in a modern context:
1. Go for coffee.
2. Arbitration.
3. Public Hearing.
4. Court case.
heehee
Apr 25, 09:06 AM
I'm just wondering if anyone can help me reassure my mother that she'll get out of a parking ticket that we got tonight.
We were going out to dinner, and we parked in a handicap spot in downtown ann arbor (we were parallell parking). The sign wasn't clearly visible, so we didn't put up my grandmother's handicap sign in the windshield (she was with us). When we came back from dinner, my Mom found a nice $100 parking ticket on the windshield (her first in 24 years) because there was no handicap sign. So here's my question, she should get out of it if she goes down to the police station with my grandma and my grandma's handicap sign, right? She convinced that that won't work, but I think it will. Any opinions?
Thanks,
Don
Good luck with reporting my plates. I've done that to drunk drivers before, the 911 operator has told me "We're sorry sir, we cannot divert officers based on heresy." Also, see above: My uncle is the traffic court judge in the jurisdiction where I did this, good luck getting a ticket to stand.
EDIT: @mrsirs2009 - No I actually just felt like going fast.
-Don
Listen you're not going to beat me with legal antics. My mother is a senior partner at the largest law firm in Michigan. I've grown up in legal libraries and in courtrooms watching her. You're lie detector statement is total BS. Lie detectors are not admissible in a court of law; also a court can not compel someone to take a polygraph. My previous history would be easily disputed. There were no witnesses present (besides my mother) when I was highbeaming her and laying on my horn. There were however cars present when she brakechecked me. There was one car present when I brakechecked her, but not when I cut her off. The simple fact is that I plan these things out in order to reduce my legal exposure, and increase the other person's legal exposure, in case there were to be an accident/law suit.
Go ahead and call me twisted for giving people what they deserve. It amazes me how such little things tick people off.
-Don
I thought your mom is a senior partner at the largest law firm in Michigan and your uncle is the traffic court judge ? :D
We were going out to dinner, and we parked in a handicap spot in downtown ann arbor (we were parallell parking). The sign wasn't clearly visible, so we didn't put up my grandmother's handicap sign in the windshield (she was with us). When we came back from dinner, my Mom found a nice $100 parking ticket on the windshield (her first in 24 years) because there was no handicap sign. So here's my question, she should get out of it if she goes down to the police station with my grandma and my grandma's handicap sign, right? She convinced that that won't work, but I think it will. Any opinions?
Thanks,
Don
Good luck with reporting my plates. I've done that to drunk drivers before, the 911 operator has told me "We're sorry sir, we cannot divert officers based on heresy." Also, see above: My uncle is the traffic court judge in the jurisdiction where I did this, good luck getting a ticket to stand.
EDIT: @mrsirs2009 - No I actually just felt like going fast.
-Don
Listen you're not going to beat me with legal antics. My mother is a senior partner at the largest law firm in Michigan. I've grown up in legal libraries and in courtrooms watching her. You're lie detector statement is total BS. Lie detectors are not admissible in a court of law; also a court can not compel someone to take a polygraph. My previous history would be easily disputed. There were no witnesses present (besides my mother) when I was highbeaming her and laying on my horn. There were however cars present when she brakechecked me. There was one car present when I brakechecked her, but not when I cut her off. The simple fact is that I plan these things out in order to reduce my legal exposure, and increase the other person's legal exposure, in case there were to be an accident/law suit.
Go ahead and call me twisted for giving people what they deserve. It amazes me how such little things tick people off.
-Don
I thought your mom is a senior partner at the largest law firm in Michigan and your uncle is the traffic court judge ? :D
rikers_mailbox
Sep 19, 01:42 PM
I bought a movie (Good Will Hunting) to try out the whole shabang and see the quality for myself. The 1.5Gb download took 6+ hours on my crappy adelphia cable modem (it feels slower every day, what am I paying 50 bucks a month for again?). I was satisfied with the image quality on my 20" Dell widescreen, but sitting at my desk to watch a movie instead of my couch isn't the movie experience I'm going for. Sadly, I probably won't be buying another iTunes movie.
Not that anyone cares.
Not that anyone cares.
batistuta
Mar 22, 05:33 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
What is it with the 24"? I would like to see something larger than 27 (as I have 30" already). Mini refresh would be nice - then I'd keep my 30".
They need to do it soon or people will wait for Lion before upgrading their hardware.
What is it with the 24"? I would like to see something larger than 27 (as I have 30" already). Mini refresh would be nice - then I'd keep my 30".
They need to do it soon or people will wait for Lion before upgrading their hardware.
LegendKillerUK
Apr 19, 10:09 AM
Why can't Apple tell its own phones apart?
This is a 3G.
http://i.imgur.com/jCIUw.jpg
This is the 3GS.
http://i.imgur.com/0OkvS.jpg
How they confused the two in a legal battle is beyond me. If it's all about looks, surely getting the interface of the 3GS is somewhat important. No?
This is a 3G.
http://i.imgur.com/jCIUw.jpg
This is the 3GS.
http://i.imgur.com/0OkvS.jpg
How they confused the two in a legal battle is beyond me. If it's all about looks, surely getting the interface of the 3GS is somewhat important. No?
Multimedia
Sep 12, 06:05 PM
hmmm works fine for me :) Took a while longer to load on the iPod (had ablack screen for about 5 secs) but plays fine.OK Please play on computer and get info - Command i - while playing to know for certain it is 640x480 H.264. On the bottom it says Normal Size: What numbers are there? In Format: it will say H.264 if it was encoded that way. Also what is the FPS Number playing? Should be 30.
Thank you.
Thank you.
fetchmebeers
Sep 12, 02:36 PM
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE, someone reply to my post....
as a person who just purchased the last version of 5gen video ipod, this comes to me as quite a shock really.... i knew this was coming but actaully hoping that it was everything 'rumor' but turns out it's not.....
anyway, my point is:
WHY DIDN'T STEVE MENTION 30 GIG IPOD, WHILE MOST OF THE ATTENTION SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN FOCUSED ON 8O GIG SOLELY??
although 30 and 80 seem to share most of the new features which are obviously crap(game? who plays that? and search bar? i don't need that crap, too shabby, biatch)
but the thing is BATTERY, gosh
they've plugged about how their new 80 gen has total 20 hrs of battery life and 6.5 hrs of video play, but what about freaking 30???? I SERIOUSLY WANNA KNOW.
i've been to apple store and engadget for live broadcast, but there was no info whatsoever on 30's battery, other than its MAXIMUM battery was 14.... the thing i wanna know is its VIDEO MAXIMUM BATTERY.... is it, again 2 hours? i hope so!! cause i just bought this ol' **** at such higher price and now i feel totally duped. well it was my fault in the first place but i thought it was all RUMOR......................GAWD
as a person who just purchased the last version of 5gen video ipod, this comes to me as quite a shock really.... i knew this was coming but actaully hoping that it was everything 'rumor' but turns out it's not.....
anyway, my point is:
WHY DIDN'T STEVE MENTION 30 GIG IPOD, WHILE MOST OF THE ATTENTION SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN FOCUSED ON 8O GIG SOLELY??
although 30 and 80 seem to share most of the new features which are obviously crap(game? who plays that? and search bar? i don't need that crap, too shabby, biatch)
but the thing is BATTERY, gosh
they've plugged about how their new 80 gen has total 20 hrs of battery life and 6.5 hrs of video play, but what about freaking 30???? I SERIOUSLY WANNA KNOW.
i've been to apple store and engadget for live broadcast, but there was no info whatsoever on 30's battery, other than its MAXIMUM battery was 14.... the thing i wanna know is its VIDEO MAXIMUM BATTERY.... is it, again 2 hours? i hope so!! cause i just bought this ol' **** at such higher price and now i feel totally duped. well it was my fault in the first place but i thought it was all RUMOR......................GAWD
~Shard~
Sep 10, 10:22 AM
Great news that Kentsfield is coming early, however I am curious to see what Apple does with it (if anything). Since it is based on the Conroe chipset, and Apple has elected not to incorporate Conroe into any of the Mac line-up (yet), I wonder what Kentsfield's role will be (if any) in the Mac world.
Once again, all signs point towards that Conroe Mini-tower... :eek: ;) :D
Once again, all signs point towards that Conroe Mini-tower... :eek: ;) :D
harry20larry
Apr 11, 04:21 AM
Been wanting this for a while. I have a windows PC just doing nothing, if I can turn it into an Airport Express like device, can have music going throughout the house.
reallynotnick
Apr 25, 04:15 PM
Absolutely perfect design? Not even close.
Things apple needs to do to make a better MBP with a redesign:
MUST DO:
(1) IPS screen. I actually don't mind lower resolutions on small screens (1280x800 is fine for 13.3"), but please, please give me a real IPS panel.
(2) Sharp edges need to go. I don't care what people say, working on a macbook for any extended period of time leaves deep grooves in my wrists/palms.
(3) A better design for cooling. Even with light cpu usage, the fans go crazy on my MBP and it gets terribly loud. Awful experience. I'm hoping Ivy Bridge will help with this. Either way, the fans need to be quieter. Maybe larger, slower fans rather than small fast ones?
WOULD BE NICE:
(4) Ability to turn off the super bright glowing apple logo would be nice
(5) Change 13.3" macbook to 14" (they prob won't do this)
(6) Support some kind of docking station (maybe just with thunderbolt?)
I love this idea so I'll just add on
As for 6, I either would like it to be 14in in the same form factor (less bezel) or just make it a smaller 13in with less bezel.
7. Do a hybrid HDD/SSD drive, like Seagate has.
8. Remove optical drive (makes room for things I actually use, like processors/gpus/cooling)
9. Make a matte option on the 13in, (ideally ditch the glass in general for either regular glossy or matte screens)
10. Make the laptop slightly lighter, like .2-.5lbs lighter
11. Put a real GPU in the 13in
12. Also somehow fit a quad core in the 13in
13. Allow for 16GB of RAM
If they did all this by next summer, well gosh I would be the happiest guy in the world but even half of these things would be pretty nice.
Things apple needs to do to make a better MBP with a redesign:
MUST DO:
(1) IPS screen. I actually don't mind lower resolutions on small screens (1280x800 is fine for 13.3"), but please, please give me a real IPS panel.
(2) Sharp edges need to go. I don't care what people say, working on a macbook for any extended period of time leaves deep grooves in my wrists/palms.
(3) A better design for cooling. Even with light cpu usage, the fans go crazy on my MBP and it gets terribly loud. Awful experience. I'm hoping Ivy Bridge will help with this. Either way, the fans need to be quieter. Maybe larger, slower fans rather than small fast ones?
WOULD BE NICE:
(4) Ability to turn off the super bright glowing apple logo would be nice
(5) Change 13.3" macbook to 14" (they prob won't do this)
(6) Support some kind of docking station (maybe just with thunderbolt?)
I love this idea so I'll just add on
As for 6, I either would like it to be 14in in the same form factor (less bezel) or just make it a smaller 13in with less bezel.
7. Do a hybrid HDD/SSD drive, like Seagate has.
8. Remove optical drive (makes room for things I actually use, like processors/gpus/cooling)
9. Make a matte option on the 13in, (ideally ditch the glass in general for either regular glossy or matte screens)
10. Make the laptop slightly lighter, like .2-.5lbs lighter
11. Put a real GPU in the 13in
12. Also somehow fit a quad core in the 13in
13. Allow for 16GB of RAM
If they did all this by next summer, well gosh I would be the happiest guy in the world but even half of these things would be pretty nice.
HecubusPro
Sep 19, 04:20 PM
This is a great start for Apple and should help sway studios that are still on the fence. Doesnt mean I'm biting though, only thing that'll get me to seriously think of buying a movie would be nothing less than a 720 x 480 reso. I might get impulsive if there are more offerings. Maybe.
I think Apple should seriously consider offering rentals too. Its dumb not to try it out :)
While I think rentals would probably create a lot of headache for apple, I am in complete agreement with HD movies on iTMS. I have yet to even buy a single song from the itunes store, but you can be assured that as soon as HD movies and TV shows are available, coupled with the iTV device, I will be buying those right away. Offering at least 720p would make me very happy, and I would be a definite repeat customer.
I think Apple should seriously consider offering rentals too. Its dumb not to try it out :)
While I think rentals would probably create a lot of headache for apple, I am in complete agreement with HD movies on iTMS. I have yet to even buy a single song from the itunes store, but you can be assured that as soon as HD movies and TV shows are available, coupled with the iTV device, I will be buying those right away. Offering at least 720p would make me very happy, and I would be a definite repeat customer.
Manic Mouse
Sep 9, 07:13 AM
Until Leopard is out we wont see the true value of these babies. Also by then some of the apps will take advantage of the muti-cores and multi-cpus, and the changes to the OS will allow applications not written for more than 1 core to take some advantage also. So like I said Leopard will be the one showing the true potential of these babies. Can't wait!!!!!!!:cool:
The fact that the new iMacs can't address more than 3Gb of memory and are therefore operating on a 32bit logic-board makes me doubtful as to whether or not these systems are really 64-bit capable... It seems like some kind of hybrid 32/64bit system.
Will the C2D iMacs be able to run 64bit code, despite not having the 64bit address space (and being able to access over 4Gb or RAM)?
The fact that the new iMacs can't address more than 3Gb of memory and are therefore operating on a 32bit logic-board makes me doubtful as to whether or not these systems are really 64-bit capable... It seems like some kind of hybrid 32/64bit system.
Will the C2D iMacs be able to run 64bit code, despite not having the 64bit address space (and being able to access over 4Gb or RAM)?
Otaviano
Apr 22, 05:48 AM
How does streaming music to my iPhone help me, when O2 cap my Internet usage, and then charge when you use more.
A great point, it's kind of funny how consumers have let the media lead us into believing we need clouded services out of everything. I can understand streaming television and films, but what is so hard about syncing your music at home once or twice a week?
A great point, it's kind of funny how consumers have let the media lead us into believing we need clouded services out of everything. I can understand streaming television and films, but what is so hard about syncing your music at home once or twice a week?
vansouza
Sep 9, 05:41 PM
world peace... cool... an iMac on every desk and an iPhone in every pocket.:D
Ankit1088
Apr 25, 12:52 PM
Liquid-metal!!!
vitaboy
Aug 24, 12:01 PM
No, but they lost in every other sense that matters. I am really failing to understand why some people are having such a tough time comprehending this. Apple capitulated on the patent challenge, Apple paid a huge sum of money to Creative so Apple could continue business as usual. Apple lost. That's all, folks.
Sorry, but I think you are taking the settlement at face value and making just a surface interpretation.
There are already several industry analysts who have now gone on record saying this is a win for Apple.
$100 million may be a big load of money for you, me and Creative, but it's chump change when we're talking about the fact that iPod makes $6+ BILLION PER YEAR (and growing) for Apple.
It's like Creative accused Apple of stealing the goose that lays golden eggs. In return, Apple gives Creative one of the eggs and Creative goes, "Wow! Thanks! You can keep the goose!"
The face-value interpretation says that Creative won because it was a pauper who now has a golden egg that's worth a lot of money. The deep interpretation is that Apple still has the goose and Creative just gave up all claims of ownership over it.
What's so hard to understand about that?
BTW, some months ago, Research in Motion coughed up $450 million to settle a patent dispute with NTP over the popular Blackberry devices. RIM made a total of $2 billion in fiscal 2006. NTP basically had RIM by the throat with its patents and extracted a heavy licensing fee as a result.
You're telling me Creative supposedly had Apple by the throat, and extracted 1/4 the licensing for a product that generates 4X the revenue of Blackberry? Riiiiiight....
To put it another way, $450 million was about 25% of RIM's entire annual revenue. $100 million is less than 1% of Apple's, and in fact, is less money than Apple makes on interest each year on its cash horde.
Sorry, but I think you are taking the settlement at face value and making just a surface interpretation.
There are already several industry analysts who have now gone on record saying this is a win for Apple.
$100 million may be a big load of money for you, me and Creative, but it's chump change when we're talking about the fact that iPod makes $6+ BILLION PER YEAR (and growing) for Apple.
It's like Creative accused Apple of stealing the goose that lays golden eggs. In return, Apple gives Creative one of the eggs and Creative goes, "Wow! Thanks! You can keep the goose!"
The face-value interpretation says that Creative won because it was a pauper who now has a golden egg that's worth a lot of money. The deep interpretation is that Apple still has the goose and Creative just gave up all claims of ownership over it.
What's so hard to understand about that?
BTW, some months ago, Research in Motion coughed up $450 million to settle a patent dispute with NTP over the popular Blackberry devices. RIM made a total of $2 billion in fiscal 2006. NTP basically had RIM by the throat with its patents and extracted a heavy licensing fee as a result.
You're telling me Creative supposedly had Apple by the throat, and extracted 1/4 the licensing for a product that generates 4X the revenue of Blackberry? Riiiiiight....
To put it another way, $450 million was about 25% of RIM's entire annual revenue. $100 million is less than 1% of Apple's, and in fact, is less money than Apple makes on interest each year on its cash horde.
Eraserhead
Apr 11, 04:15 PM
wtf, my bike gets in the low 40s! and it weighs 4xxlbs!
Its a diesel ;). But I guess it also shows how crazy US emissions regulations are.
Its a diesel ;). But I guess it also shows how crazy US emissions regulations are.
Gasu E.
Apr 22, 08:27 AM
I hate this cloud crap. All just an excuse to take away the consumers control of what they buy or use.
We need a boycott.
I believe any new innovation is designed specifically to be a personal imposition on me, regardless of how fanciful my assumptions.
We need a boycott.
I believe any new innovation is designed specifically to be a personal imposition on me, regardless of how fanciful my assumptions.
joeboy_45101
Aug 23, 07:07 PM
Well, I guess we can be relieved that this lawsuit didn't become something worse.
As much as I think this is a BS patent and lawsuit at least Apple can continue to sell iPods. Just imagine if Apple lost the lawsuit and Creative denied them use of the patented technology.
BS as it all is, I'm just relieved that its over. :o
As much as I think this is a BS patent and lawsuit at least Apple can continue to sell iPods. Just imagine if Apple lost the lawsuit and Creative denied them use of the patented technology.
BS as it all is, I'm just relieved that its over. :o
0 comments:
Post a Comment