aafuss1
Sep 6, 06:06 PM
Bet the combo and Superdrives are all unchanged-the suppliers the same as February's model. And all Core Duo makes sense.
No HDMI or Blu-Ray though (but could jack the price up-so best left for 24" iMac's first revision in 2007)
No HDMI or Blu-Ray though (but could jack the price up-so best left for 24" iMac's first revision in 2007)
DrFrankTM
Sep 1, 01:45 PM
No way would I pay an extra $500 for an 8% faster machine and a slighly larger display, when for that money I can go with the 20" and buy a second widescreen 20" display and have a HUGE viewable area.
The 23" is going to have to be a LOT closer to the 20" in order for it to sell. I'm thinking $1899 or $1999, or else it will have to be decked out with extra RAM, HD space, or CPU speed.
I don't really know about the ideal price difference, but for some people, it wouldn't matter much. If you want a system with a lot of screen space, then you can get two 1920x1200 monitors. Sure, it will cost you, but if you need the space, then you'll go for the 23-inch. Also, to watch movies, a big screen is better than two small ones. It all depends on what you need the computer for...
The 23" is going to have to be a LOT closer to the 20" in order for it to sell. I'm thinking $1899 or $1999, or else it will have to be decked out with extra RAM, HD space, or CPU speed.
I don't really know about the ideal price difference, but for some people, it wouldn't matter much. If you want a system with a lot of screen space, then you can get two 1920x1200 monitors. Sure, it will cost you, but if you need the space, then you'll go for the 23-inch. Also, to watch movies, a big screen is better than two small ones. It all depends on what you need the computer for...
Mike84
Apr 26, 02:29 PM
You make it sound as though this is such an obvious distinction that Apple could never get a trademark for "app store". But apparently this argument is not so strong in trademark law as Apple actually has the trademark already. If that were not the case how could they sue another entity for trademark infringement?
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
It was.
Can you please show me the trademark that was granted to Apple for App Store by the USPTO? You won't be able to find it because their trademark has not been approved. An opposition to their application was filed, if you didn't catch that from the text.
Trademark is having property rights in a trade name. Apple, or any other company, can file to protect a trademark they have been using and the USPTO decides if it is too generic to be an actual trademark. I suggest you learn about the process of how trademarks.
"How does a mark qualify for federal registration?
To register a trademark with the PTO, the mark's owner first must put it into use " in commerce that Congress may regulate." This means the mark must be used on a product or service that crosses state, national or territorial lines or that affects commerce crossing such lines--for example, a catalog business or a restaurant or motel that caters to interstate or international customers. Even if the owner files an intent-to-use (ITU) trademark application (ITU applications are discussed in the previous set of questions), the mark will not actually be registered until it is used in commerce."
Source: http://www.inc.com/articles/1999/10/14646.html
Also, take a look at the Lanham Act, which is pretty important when it comes to trademark law ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanham_Act <-- particularly Subchapters I and II.
Just because you use a mark does not mean you have been granted the trademark rights in it.
So, as you can see Apple does not have the trademark to App Store. Therefore, your argument fails on that premise alone.
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
It was.
Can you please show me the trademark that was granted to Apple for App Store by the USPTO? You won't be able to find it because their trademark has not been approved. An opposition to their application was filed, if you didn't catch that from the text.
Trademark is having property rights in a trade name. Apple, or any other company, can file to protect a trademark they have been using and the USPTO decides if it is too generic to be an actual trademark. I suggest you learn about the process of how trademarks.
"How does a mark qualify for federal registration?
To register a trademark with the PTO, the mark's owner first must put it into use " in commerce that Congress may regulate." This means the mark must be used on a product or service that crosses state, national or territorial lines or that affects commerce crossing such lines--for example, a catalog business or a restaurant or motel that caters to interstate or international customers. Even if the owner files an intent-to-use (ITU) trademark application (ITU applications are discussed in the previous set of questions), the mark will not actually be registered until it is used in commerce."
Source: http://www.inc.com/articles/1999/10/14646.html
Also, take a look at the Lanham Act, which is pretty important when it comes to trademark law ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanham_Act <-- particularly Subchapters I and II.
Just because you use a mark does not mean you have been granted the trademark rights in it.
So, as you can see Apple does not have the trademark to App Store. Therefore, your argument fails on that premise alone.
xlii
May 5, 04:10 PM
My neighbor has a 68 Camaro that's in great shape. Hard to believe but this was his first car and he bought it new in... 1968. He's had it ever since.
mkrishnan
Jan 1, 05:53 PM
Whatever happend to the thin macbook? That is all I wanted this year.
I don't think there's been any compelling evidence to support that, sadly. At least, several very seemingly viable component technologies, such as ULV C2D's, are not available yet.
For the iSight, too, no really compelling evidence of what the revised product would be, should there be one.
I don't think there's been any compelling evidence to support that, sadly. At least, several very seemingly viable component technologies, such as ULV C2D's, are not available yet.
For the iSight, too, no really compelling evidence of what the revised product would be, should there be one.
slffl
Nov 29, 03:30 PM
To me the iTV is going to be Apples take on the Slingbox, and I can't wait to see it!!!
toddybody
Apr 26, 01:02 PM
App Store [TM]
My Bad :P
My Bad :P
skidudeoz
Sep 14, 03:36 PM
Well if the US had a decent 3G network, then there would be no problem, like the REST OF THE WORLD!!!! No issues here in OZ!!
Cat-toy
Sep 24, 12:33 AM
glad to hear it. hopefully it'll be ready for pickup by monday. though the 99 cent hong kong cases are really starting to grow on me. i have like 7 of them. lol.
Me too...
As much as Belkins and the Incipio (I own dermaSHOT) cases are considered "quality" the little 99 cent cases have a place in my small world. two words - Color choices.
As it seems, we are all "covered" :)
Me too...
As much as Belkins and the Incipio (I own dermaSHOT) cases are considered "quality" the little 99 cent cases have a place in my small world. two words - Color choices.
As it seems, we are all "covered" :)
0815
Apr 19, 11:43 AM
Just in time - I just decided yesterday that it is time to replace my first generation Intel iMac. I hope they have a 500GB SSD option for the update (the current option of 256 GB SSD is too small and you cant even order them with two 256GB SSDs). Thunderbold would also be nice (no need for it right away, but I guess in a year or two I will be happy to have one)
lordonuthin
Apr 30, 02:51 PM
Congrats to 4JNA for 6 million points!
sandro21
Nov 5, 04:05 AM
They are just doing it for publicity I bet...
I've only had one dropped call with my iPhone 4
I've only had one dropped call with my iPhone 4
clientsiman
Mar 31, 12:56 PM
iCal looks really awful. I hope to change it again int he next developer preview.
milo
Sep 7, 07:27 AM
It's a nice idea, but WAY too pricey. I don't know what makes them think people will be willing to pay these prices when the DVD is available for just a little bit more (in some cases the same or less) and includes special features, probably better quality, and no DRM.
If the studios insist on this kind of pricing for all download services, it will just drive people to bittorrent and netflix. It's just silly to insist that pricing be as much as DVD when you don't get as much for your money.
The rumors also haven't addressed picture quality. I assume it will be an improvement, and it DEFINITELY won't be HD...but will it be even DVD quality? I'd say that's the bare minimum for something like this to even be considered by most consumers.
I don't think rental is that big a deal. It would be nice (and may be added later), but it's a completely separate market from sales. I think people are going overboard saying lack of rentals would kill it.
If the studios insist on this kind of pricing for all download services, it will just drive people to bittorrent and netflix. It's just silly to insist that pricing be as much as DVD when you don't get as much for your money.
The rumors also haven't addressed picture quality. I assume it will be an improvement, and it DEFINITELY won't be HD...but will it be even DVD quality? I'd say that's the bare minimum for something like this to even be considered by most consumers.
I don't think rental is that big a deal. It would be nice (and may be added later), but it's a completely separate market from sales. I think people are going overboard saying lack of rentals would kill it.
lilcosco08
Mar 25, 09:58 PM
Welp, that GPU will be able to power the rumored better display of the iPad 3 :D
socamx
Jan 12, 10:46 AM
Take a look at this:
http://flickr.com/photos/peteryan/2187596838/
Personaly i think it's fake, because of the non-capital letter on the begining of the second sentence... but who knows it could be true the disposition of the this so called macbook air is quite original and not in the tradicional way laptop upside down opened a little...
It looks exactly like the 15 inch Macbook Pro. You can clearly make out the cd drive, the IR port for the remote and the button to release the screen.
http://flickr.com/photos/peteryan/2187596838/
Personaly i think it's fake, because of the non-capital letter on the begining of the second sentence... but who knows it could be true the disposition of the this so called macbook air is quite original and not in the tradicional way laptop upside down opened a little...
It looks exactly like the 15 inch Macbook Pro. You can clearly make out the cd drive, the IR port for the remote and the button to release the screen.
matticus008
Nov 27, 06:46 PM
If Apple can squeeze extra money out of some egotists who like to think of themselves as prosumers, fine, but the overwhelming majority of users aren't going to get anal about some supposed color-accuracy issues: they want a good-quality, good-looking reliable monitor and if Apple can't provide that at a decent price, Apple loses them to someone who can.
Certainly, but that's not the question. The question is, 'does Apple care?' And I think the answer is probably a resounding "no." If people don't care about sophistication and refinement, then all of the effort Apple puts into making its Cinema Displays is a waste on those customers--they'd never buy them anyway. Why go after customers whose only loyalty is to the best price? They're a finicky and transient group.
It's better to sell to a smaller market which will be loyal over time in Apple's view, and that's a perfectly legitimate strategy to have.
Certainly, but that's not the question. The question is, 'does Apple care?' And I think the answer is probably a resounding "no." If people don't care about sophistication and refinement, then all of the effort Apple puts into making its Cinema Displays is a waste on those customers--they'd never buy them anyway. Why go after customers whose only loyalty is to the best price? They're a finicky and transient group.
It's better to sell to a smaller market which will be loyal over time in Apple's view, and that's a perfectly legitimate strategy to have.
suzerain
Jul 21, 02:22 AM
Then you can't know that many people, I think you're forgetting there are still people outside of the US, and over here there still is a huge unexplored market for movie rentals. There are no companies that provide services like Netflix, and stores rule the market. If Apple uses the iTunes name for Movie Rentals, it will be a succes in Europe, either way.
Does Apple even offer TV downloads in Europe yet?
Does Apple even offer TV downloads in Europe yet?
.jpg/480px-Weapons_of_MW2_(Secondary).jpg "call of duty 4 guns list.")
MusicMacPro
Aug 6, 10:54 PM
Notice in the banner picture how the PowerMac G5 Tower is showing only it's side?!
Anyone think it's maybe actually a MacPro's side...therefore they wouldn't show its front or back (dual optical drives, reconfigured back)?
Anyone think it's maybe actually a MacPro's side...therefore they wouldn't show its front or back (dual optical drives, reconfigured back)?
ajhill
Jan 12, 11:55 AM
Maybe Apple's poster actually says more but we can't see the bottom?
Something like: "There's something in the air... blow it out your ass Microsoft" :p
Ya gotta love that Aussi sense of humor! Bravo!
Something like: "There's something in the air... blow it out your ass Microsoft" :p
Ya gotta love that Aussi sense of humor! Bravo!
Cue
Aug 7, 04:09 AM
Why does the counter on MR homepage say it starts today?
Is that the official opening time with the main event i.e. Keynote Tuesday?
Excuse my ignorance but right up till now I thought it started Tuesday. I even saw a page on Apples site that had the week planner on it for WWDC. :confused: Maybe I was too excited and missed Monday?
Steve Jobs Headlines Keynote Address and Leopard Preview (http://developer.apple.com/wwdc/schedules/monday_am.html)
Is that the official opening time with the main event i.e. Keynote Tuesday?
Excuse my ignorance but right up till now I thought it started Tuesday. I even saw a page on Apples site that had the week planner on it for WWDC. :confused: Maybe I was too excited and missed Monday?
Steve Jobs Headlines Keynote Address and Leopard Preview (http://developer.apple.com/wwdc/schedules/monday_am.html)
macmax77
Nov 29, 09:08 PM
They own a good portion of apple if I'm not wrong....
leftbanke7
Mar 19, 10:57 AM
People have been hollering for a cheaper Mac every since there has been Macintosh. You must realize that Apple, unlike most computer companies, is in the business of creating quality products. Were Apple to release a cheap Mac it would shatter Apple's reputation of making slick quality products that are a joy to own. If you want a cheap pile of crap computer that you'll have to throw away in a year, go buy Dell of whatever. That's not Apple's target market.
I don't necessarity agree with that one. While bargain Wintel PCs can be huge piles of garbage, I think Apple could successfully market a bargain desktop that wouldn't be junk in a year. Most people would agree that an eMac is a quality machine (minus the lack of base RAM issue). You take the low end model, subtract the cost for the monitor and you have a computer that is sitting in the $500.00 - $600.00 range. Many people already have monitors and if not, you can find a decent one for relatively low cost. Apple is very much capable of putting those components in a sleek case, giving it a decent name and perhaps the abilty to be expanable and there you go. The low cost Mac that won't be your foot stool next year.
Would this take some sales from the PowerMacs? Very little if any at all. Most people who buy PowerMacs are people who need the power. I don't think a whole lot of people buy a PowerMac and use it only for word processing, internet/e-mail and iTunes. The people who use Macs for the above reasons are buying the iMacs and eMacs. The "headless iMac/eMac" would just be one more quality option in the lower-end/consumer priced area.
And in my humble opinion, I think a large reason that many bargain PCs only last a year is because Intel has brainwashed society into believing the Megahertz Myth and Bargain PC dealers go along with it as it generates new sales. I don't know how many times I had to explain this to my PC friends who said they'd never own a Mac b/c they were too slow.
I don't necessarity agree with that one. While bargain Wintel PCs can be huge piles of garbage, I think Apple could successfully market a bargain desktop that wouldn't be junk in a year. Most people would agree that an eMac is a quality machine (minus the lack of base RAM issue). You take the low end model, subtract the cost for the monitor and you have a computer that is sitting in the $500.00 - $600.00 range. Many people already have monitors and if not, you can find a decent one for relatively low cost. Apple is very much capable of putting those components in a sleek case, giving it a decent name and perhaps the abilty to be expanable and there you go. The low cost Mac that won't be your foot stool next year.
Would this take some sales from the PowerMacs? Very little if any at all. Most people who buy PowerMacs are people who need the power. I don't think a whole lot of people buy a PowerMac and use it only for word processing, internet/e-mail and iTunes. The people who use Macs for the above reasons are buying the iMacs and eMacs. The "headless iMac/eMac" would just be one more quality option in the lower-end/consumer priced area.
And in my humble opinion, I think a large reason that many bargain PCs only last a year is because Intel has brainwashed society into believing the Megahertz Myth and Bargain PC dealers go along with it as it generates new sales. I don't know how many times I had to explain this to my PC friends who said they'd never own a Mac b/c they were too slow.
MacinDoc
Oct 23, 09:08 PM
AppleInsider (http://appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2165) is posting new part numbers, presumably for new 15" MBPs...