gnasher729
Apr 7, 11:55 AM
And just how could Apple be found to be absuing its position by buying what it needs to supply its customers whith product? Maybe if the iPad wasn't selling all that well but Apple can't keep up with demand as it is. Arguments like yours don't even make sense and I'll bet you some serious money that no one can produce a single instance of a company "found to be abusing its position" by buying what its needs to produce and sell its products. It would appear people like you are just angry that Apple is successful and want to take it down somehow. Stupid, just stupid.
The critical question would be: In the contract between Apple and the manufacturer, is there any clause that stops the manufacturer from selling to other companies? That would be anti-competitive. If a manufacturer says "RIM offered us $100 a piece for one million screens", and Apple says "We'll give you $110 for each" and RIM can't get the screens, that would be fine. If the manufacturer says "we can make 2 million screens a month" and Apple says "Ok, we'll buy 2 million screens a month", that is fine. If Apple says "Ok, we'll buy all you can build up to 3 million screens a month", that is fine. If Apple says "We'll buy 2 million screens a month, and you must not sell any screens to anyone else", that is anti-competitive.
I see people still don�t understand what a monopoly is. Apple would only be considered a monopoly if they used their power & influence to force the component supplier to cancel or move Apple�s orders ahead of RIM�s or any other.
You confuse "monopoly" and "anti-competitive". Being a monopoly is in itself just fine. It just means that you have to be more careful what you do than other companies, because what you do could be anti-competitive. For example, Microsoft has a monopoly in the operating system market. They can't refuse to sell Windows to Dell without getting into lots of trouble. Apple can refuse to sell MacOS X to Dell without getting any trouble. And people often confuse "competitive" and "anti-competitive". Being better than the competition is competitive. If company X makes a product that is a lot better than Y's product, and Y doesn't sell anything, that is competitive. "Anti-competitive" is when X does things so that Y couldn't sell their product even if it was better. For example, if the Windows license said that you are not allowed to use any word processor other than Microsoft Word, that would be anti-competitive, because even if I had a word processor that was better and cheaper than Microsoft Word, nobody would buy it.
The critical question would be: In the contract between Apple and the manufacturer, is there any clause that stops the manufacturer from selling to other companies? That would be anti-competitive. If a manufacturer says "RIM offered us $100 a piece for one million screens", and Apple says "We'll give you $110 for each" and RIM can't get the screens, that would be fine. If the manufacturer says "we can make 2 million screens a month" and Apple says "Ok, we'll buy 2 million screens a month", that is fine. If Apple says "Ok, we'll buy all you can build up to 3 million screens a month", that is fine. If Apple says "We'll buy 2 million screens a month, and you must not sell any screens to anyone else", that is anti-competitive.
I see people still don�t understand what a monopoly is. Apple would only be considered a monopoly if they used their power & influence to force the component supplier to cancel or move Apple�s orders ahead of RIM�s or any other.
You confuse "monopoly" and "anti-competitive". Being a monopoly is in itself just fine. It just means that you have to be more careful what you do than other companies, because what you do could be anti-competitive. For example, Microsoft has a monopoly in the operating system market. They can't refuse to sell Windows to Dell without getting into lots of trouble. Apple can refuse to sell MacOS X to Dell without getting any trouble. And people often confuse "competitive" and "anti-competitive". Being better than the competition is competitive. If company X makes a product that is a lot better than Y's product, and Y doesn't sell anything, that is competitive. "Anti-competitive" is when X does things so that Y couldn't sell their product even if it was better. For example, if the Windows license said that you are not allowed to use any word processor other than Microsoft Word, that would be anti-competitive, because even if I had a word processor that was better and cheaper than Microsoft Word, nobody would buy it.
AppleScruff1
Apr 25, 10:44 AM
How do you even know if this is true. Oh, I know, I'm a MacRumors reader. I sent an email to Steve Jobs and he said that Apple is storing all of this tracking information in their new data center, that is why it is such a large facility with a tremendous storage capacity.
tokevino
Aug 7, 03:46 PM
That's what I'm saying, $400x2=$800-$300=$500 profit for Apple, That's wonderful for Apple.
On the other hand, internal pricing from Intel can be VERY different. So don't let it get too much into your head.
Bottom line, these quads are truly wonderful machines to buy.
On the other hand, internal pricing from Intel can be VERY different. So don't let it get too much into your head.
Bottom line, these quads are truly wonderful machines to buy.
macdouche
May 6, 08:12 AM
So I just bought a new 4 core Sandy Bridge iMac tonight and now this news breaks. Is ARM actually building anything in any way shape or form that competes with the Intel X86 stuff right now or is this just vaporware at this point?
Yeap, your new iMac is now obsolete, and I'm sure you were planning on doing so much with it. LMAO:D
Yeap, your new iMac is now obsolete, and I'm sure you were planning on doing so much with it. LMAO:D
ucfgrad93
May 3, 05:43 PM
Clearly we need to explore the room we are currently in.
The Norman
Mar 28, 11:04 AM
I waited for the white iPhone 4. Then it was too late to switch to black but still fall within AT&T's 1 year policy if the 5 comes out on time. Apple and the phone companies need to figure out some sort of deal for these upgrade timeframes AND keep us all informed.
appleguy123
May 3, 10:49 PM
I don't know what you guys mean by leaders. We make our decisions individually in the thread, right?
Unspeaked
Aug 11, 03:35 PM
So what is there to expect before MWSF?
I think THAT'S when we might get the Core 2 Duo in the MacBook and Mac Mini.
Until then, it'll just be speed bumps of the existing chips.
And before then, we'll see the MacBook Pros and iMacs move to the Core 2 Duo.
I think THAT'S when we might get the Core 2 Duo in the MacBook and Mac Mini.
Until then, it'll just be speed bumps of the existing chips.
And before then, we'll see the MacBook Pros and iMacs move to the Core 2 Duo.
ehoui
Apr 7, 04:43 PM
Yes, the war just started and things are heating up. I would think the next few years will result in a tablet OS distribution that looks like this:
iOS - 35%
Android - 40%
WebOS - 20%
RIM - 5%
Apple - 35%
HP - 20%
RIM - 5%
Samsung - 15%
Moto - 10%
LG - 10%
HTC - 5%
Maybe Microsoft will wedge their way in, maybe the percentages will be shifted around a little. But the growth of the tablet market will stabilize or at least stop growing at the rapid pace that it currently enjoys.
This is the interesting point and I agree largely with your sentiment: the real losers here are not iOS and Android (via their competition with each other). It's the other vendors. WebOS has a chance to participate as a key alternative (with the right execution from HP), but Microsoft is in real jeopardy here of missing the boat (again). I'm not rooting for MS' demise -- far from it. But MS better get on the ball quickly.
iOS - 35%
Android - 40%
WebOS - 20%
RIM - 5%
Apple - 35%
HP - 20%
RIM - 5%
Samsung - 15%
Moto - 10%
LG - 10%
HTC - 5%
Maybe Microsoft will wedge their way in, maybe the percentages will be shifted around a little. But the growth of the tablet market will stabilize or at least stop growing at the rapid pace that it currently enjoys.
This is the interesting point and I agree largely with your sentiment: the real losers here are not iOS and Android (via their competition with each other). It's the other vendors. WebOS has a chance to participate as a key alternative (with the right execution from HP), but Microsoft is in real jeopardy here of missing the boat (again). I'm not rooting for MS' demise -- far from it. But MS better get on the ball quickly.
mrdice87
Sep 16, 10:47 AM
So...
Why is there no 12" mbp? It seems the 12" pb was a great seller...
Why is there no 12" mbp? It seems the 12" pb was a great seller...
.jpg "slice of artichoke pizza.")
BlizzardBomb
Aug 11, 10:27 AM
Quad Xeons in the MacBook Pro, pretty please. After all, it is Apple's professional notebook line.
Hehe, that's the funniest thing I've read this week :p :D
Hopefully we'll see the MBP hit 2.33 GHz and the iMac get the 2.4 GHz Conroe.
Hehe, that's the funniest thing I've read this week :p :D
Hopefully we'll see the MBP hit 2.33 GHz and the iMac get the 2.4 GHz Conroe.
ehoui
May 5, 09:45 PM
I don't know that it does.... I was merely rebutting the point that learning the Imperial measures gave US kids a competitive edge.
I don't think it matters. If you are in an Science or Engineering, unit conversions are the least of your worries. That was my point. Metric or not-metric in our daily lives have little bearing on those in rigorous math-oriented disciplines. I might be wrong, but I'd like to hear why.
I don't think it matters. If you are in an Science or Engineering, unit conversions are the least of your worries. That was my point. Metric or not-metric in our daily lives have little bearing on those in rigorous math-oriented disciplines. I might be wrong, but I'd like to hear why.
huntson
Apr 21, 04:36 PM
Image (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/21/apple-developing-narrower-rackmountable-mac-pro-prototypes/)
Image (http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/21/152122-mac_pro_2010_inside.jpg)
Inside Apple's current Mac Pro
According to 9 to 5 Mac, Apple is "toying with" a redesigned prototype (http://www.9to5mac.com/63107/prototype-next-gen-mac-pro-detailed-redesigned-rackable-stackable/) for its Mac Pro line, narrowing the design from its current 8.1-inch width to something slightly over 5 inches wide. Combined with a slight reduction in height to around 19 inches, the redesign would apparently allow the Mac Pro to be rackmountable in server cabinets as a 3U component.Apple of course used to offer its dedicated Xserve product line offering a thinner 1U component for rackmountable use, but the company discontinued the line (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/11/05/apple-discontinues-xserve-only-available-until-january-31st/) as of January 31st of this year. The company has since introduced a new "server" configuration (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/11/05/apple-releases-new-server-configuration-of-mac-pro-to-replace-xserve/) of the Mac Pro, but a redesign to accommodate both standard upright orientation and a sideways rackmounted one would likely be a welcome move for server fans despite the significant increase in rack space required.
The report claims that Apple has developed a "stacked" drive configuration utilizing sleds capable of handling two conventional or solid state hard drives apiece, increasing the density of drives in an attempt to squeeze all of the existing components into the smaller form factor while still preserving space for expandability.
Apple's Mac Pro was last updated (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/07/27/apple-announces-new-mac-pros-with-up-to-12-cores-ssd-options/) in late July, meaning that the line could be due for an update (http://www.macrumors.com/buyersguide/#Mac_Pro), although the company has been stretching out its Mac Pro product cycles over the past few years.
Article Link: Apple Developing Narrower, Rackmountable Mac Pro Prototypes? (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/21/apple-developing-narrower-rackmountable-mac-pro-prototypes/)
So rude - server "Fans" - there are server users too - not just a fanclub like your base of readers, but actual people who use the stuff.
Image (http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/21/152122-mac_pro_2010_inside.jpg)
Inside Apple's current Mac Pro
According to 9 to 5 Mac, Apple is "toying with" a redesigned prototype (http://www.9to5mac.com/63107/prototype-next-gen-mac-pro-detailed-redesigned-rackable-stackable/) for its Mac Pro line, narrowing the design from its current 8.1-inch width to something slightly over 5 inches wide. Combined with a slight reduction in height to around 19 inches, the redesign would apparently allow the Mac Pro to be rackmountable in server cabinets as a 3U component.Apple of course used to offer its dedicated Xserve product line offering a thinner 1U component for rackmountable use, but the company discontinued the line (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/11/05/apple-discontinues-xserve-only-available-until-january-31st/) as of January 31st of this year. The company has since introduced a new "server" configuration (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/11/05/apple-releases-new-server-configuration-of-mac-pro-to-replace-xserve/) of the Mac Pro, but a redesign to accommodate both standard upright orientation and a sideways rackmounted one would likely be a welcome move for server fans despite the significant increase in rack space required.
The report claims that Apple has developed a "stacked" drive configuration utilizing sleds capable of handling two conventional or solid state hard drives apiece, increasing the density of drives in an attempt to squeeze all of the existing components into the smaller form factor while still preserving space for expandability.
Apple's Mac Pro was last updated (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/07/27/apple-announces-new-mac-pros-with-up-to-12-cores-ssd-options/) in late July, meaning that the line could be due for an update (http://www.macrumors.com/buyersguide/#Mac_Pro), although the company has been stretching out its Mac Pro product cycles over the past few years.
Article Link: Apple Developing Narrower, Rackmountable Mac Pro Prototypes? (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/21/apple-developing-narrower-rackmountable-mac-pro-prototypes/)
So rude - server "Fans" - there are server users too - not just a fanclub like your base of readers, but actual people who use the stuff.
M. Malone
Aug 11, 09:50 AM
Would I be able to drop a Conroe processor in my Core Duo iMac?
ChrisNM
Apr 25, 09:56 AM
But keep in mind that the data might be wrong. I typed in my real name and it came up with me . . . but with details oddly wrong. Multiple accounts that could be me, but in each case with wrong data. I clearly have messed up some databases along the way (good).
I did the same thing. The site said I lived in a $1MM+ home. I wish!
I did the same thing. The site said I lived in a $1MM+ home. I wish!
puuukeey
Jul 30, 12:28 PM
If apple can make it so that cellphones don't suck the user into a void where s/he unaware that they are pissing the living ***** out of everyone around them, well then they are TRUE gods
mcmlxix
Mar 29, 05:13 PM
No, "best wishes" for our Japanese friends.
"Prayers" to the flying spaghetti monster are a waste of time - put the people of Japan into your thoughts, don't involve some ficticious deity.
Why couldn�t you let it slide? Assuming you don�t like people �imposing� their beliefs on you, why would you impose yours on others? I think there�s a word for that.
"Prayers" to the flying spaghetti monster are a waste of time - put the people of Japan into your thoughts, don't involve some ficticious deity.
Why couldn�t you let it slide? Assuming you don�t like people �imposing� their beliefs on you, why would you impose yours on others? I think there�s a word for that.
dmw007
Nov 26, 11:13 AM
i don't think it would appeal to that many people, to have an apple tablet.
i mean, the PC/Win versions aren't great sellers...
No, probably not...but maybe with some Apple magic the Tablet PC industry could finally take off. :o :)
i mean, the PC/Win versions aren't great sellers...
No, probably not...but maybe with some Apple magic the Tablet PC industry could finally take off. :o :)
DTphonehome
Jul 30, 09:20 AM
Even so, the USA is in dire need of a decent cell phone. The fact that the Razr is so popular says it all. The Razr is a terrible phone (along with most other Motorolas for that matter). And the rest of the selection available is pretty sad too!
It's true...but I don't see it changing anytime soon. Americans are used to getting free or cheap phones when they sign up for a carrier contract. The carriers subsidize the cost so that expensive phones can be had for <$200. They RARELY pay full retail price ($300-$700) on a phone...mainly only when they break theirs and still have time on their contract. The way I understand it, the rest of the world pays full retail everytime they want a new phone. Is this right?
It's true...but I don't see it changing anytime soon. Americans are used to getting free or cheap phones when they sign up for a carrier contract. The carriers subsidize the cost so that expensive phones can be had for <$200. They RARELY pay full retail price ($300-$700) on a phone...mainly only when they break theirs and still have time on their contract. The way I understand it, the rest of the world pays full retail everytime they want a new phone. Is this right?
kirk26
Apr 20, 07:50 AM
You are so right. I'm thrilled with Apple's brainwashed minions, and even happier that I began loading up on Apple stock over a decade ago.
Little did I realize they would bring us shareholders so much wealth. To think that I bought a load of shares when it was under $20 per, then kept adding each year since, brings a huge grin.
At this point everything I buy is nearly free. And when they screw up the masses still buy it. Nothing could be sweeter.
Ahh, I see that you just joined this site just to troll, huh?
Little did I realize they would bring us shareholders so much wealth. To think that I bought a load of shares when it was under $20 per, then kept adding each year since, brings a huge grin.
At this point everything I buy is nearly free. And when they screw up the masses still buy it. Nothing could be sweeter.
Ahh, I see that you just joined this site just to troll, huh?
Daveoc64
May 4, 03:08 PM
Is everyone missing the "Preferred" in the headline of this thread? Preferred does not me "only" or "required" or "mandatory."
We're not yet at the point where digitial distribution is a feasible option for everyone, but Apple needs to take the steps towards it now before the rest of the industry passes by.
My opposition to this isn't because I think Digital Distribution is bad (the copy of Windows 7 I'm writing this on was downloaded, legally I might add, from Microsoft), it's because of how Apple is offering it.
I was able to download a .iso of Windows and install it how I wanted to. I was able to back up the .iso to an external hard drive and also to burn a copy of it.
The App Store (unless they change things) wouldn't allow that. I would have no problem with this if Apple included a way to create a DVD or USB installer from the download.
We're not yet at the point where digitial distribution is a feasible option for everyone, but Apple needs to take the steps towards it now before the rest of the industry passes by.
My opposition to this isn't because I think Digital Distribution is bad (the copy of Windows 7 I'm writing this on was downloaded, legally I might add, from Microsoft), it's because of how Apple is offering it.
I was able to download a .iso of Windows and install it how I wanted to. I was able to back up the .iso to an external hard drive and also to burn a copy of it.
The App Store (unless they change things) wouldn't allow that. I would have no problem with this if Apple included a way to create a DVD or USB installer from the download.
hyperpasta
Aug 2, 11:42 AM
If you 'can't have cameras' dont use them. It doesnt matter if they are built in. And for people with dual monitors they will have... er... oh yeh two cameras :D
Well, I disagree with the first part of your post. However, I'm sure Apple won't care and go ahead anyway! :D
As for the two-camera thing... wasn't there a rumor sometime back about how Leopard could handle dual-camera chatting? It would use the monitor/camera that the chat window was on... move the chat window to the other display, and the other camera picks up the chat!
Well, I disagree with the first part of your post. However, I'm sure Apple won't care and go ahead anyway! :D
As for the two-camera thing... wasn't there a rumor sometime back about how Leopard could handle dual-camera chatting? It would use the monitor/camera that the chat window was on... move the chat window to the other display, and the other camera picks up the chat!
ssk2
Apr 18, 03:40 PM
Show me something that works as well BEFORE Apple demoed the iPhone.
Technology =/= usability.
If you hate Apple then why are you doing here?
You can't protect (or indeed measure) 'usability'.
People come here because we use, have problems with, or are considering buying Apple products. Not all of us are absolutely crazy in love for for anything that Jobs has touched.
Technology =/= usability.
If you hate Apple then why are you doing here?
You can't protect (or indeed measure) 'usability'.
People come here because we use, have problems with, or are considering buying Apple products. Not all of us are absolutely crazy in love for for anything that Jobs has touched.
-aggie-
May 4, 12:35 PM
What happens when mscriv and a hooker spend the night together? In the morning each of them says: "120 dollars, please."