Di9it8
Nov 23, 04:53 PM
Would a US .Mac code bought now work in the UK in February? ;-)
Should work anywhere from date of first use/registration:rolleyes:
Should work anywhere from date of first use/registration:rolleyes:
marksman
May 3, 02:34 PM
Shocking that carriers would take steps to stop people from stealing service from them.
I don't really get this... You already pay fees for the data - why do they care for how you use it?
You did not pay for tethering data. That is a separate charge. By circumventing the system you are stealing. There are no ifs, ands or buts about it.
It is not a gray area.. it is black and white. The contracts specifically say the data you pay for does not include tethering. Tethering costs extra.
I don't really get this... You already pay fees for the data - why do they care for how you use it?
You did not pay for tethering data. That is a separate charge. By circumventing the system you are stealing. There are no ifs, ands or buts about it.
It is not a gray area.. it is black and white. The contracts specifically say the data you pay for does not include tethering. Tethering costs extra.
johndallas999
Apr 25, 01:00 PM
What is the hole above the ear piece?
iangreen
Apr 29, 02:34 PM
Yeah, same reaction here.
when you start using Safari in Lion like you can in iPad (zooming in on paragraphs) and the new gestures (like back/forward), and having text autocorrected like on iOS, you'll never be able to go back
when you start using Safari in Lion like you can in iPad (zooming in on paragraphs) and the new gestures (like back/forward), and having text autocorrected like on iOS, you'll never be able to go back
Ryeno
May 3, 05:15 PM
You are paying to use data on your mobile device. If you want to use it to link up other devices, there is a separate service for that.
This is not exactly brain surgery here.
thank god you are not a brain surgeon. This is no different then paying for internet @ home and getting a modem (cell phone) that only allows connection to one PC (cell phone). Then being forced to pay an extra fee just to split the signal to another PC (use a router in this example).
This is not exactly brain surgery here.
thank god you are not a brain surgeon. This is no different then paying for internet @ home and getting a modem (cell phone) that only allows connection to one PC (cell phone). Then being forced to pay an extra fee just to split the signal to another PC (use a router in this example).
mmcc
Mar 29, 08:46 AM
Yes, the App Store can give you exposure, but you still have to market and sell your solution for people to find you or want you. Plus, the AppStore is one outlet and your other outlets should never be abandoned.
Yes, but you can't have it both ways. A successful Mac App Store from your perspective means more Apple customers use it to find apps. In my experience to date, this means those other "outlets" become less and less profitable. Marketing is a numbers game and a major disruption like the Mac App Store can quickly shift those numbers to the negative. In my case it is no longer profitable to maintain some of those "other outlets".
Here's a specific example: Google AdWords. Before the Mac App Store opened, many customers gravitated first to Google search to find an app. I would pay for AdWords placement and if I got a click-through I could be assured that my website exclusively captured the attention. Yes, my app still had to be good enough to capture a sale but at least there were no other competitors there -- and no freebie alternatives (except for demos/trials).
The same strategy no longer works with the Mac App Store. First, the traffic in Google search is reduced as more Apple customers gravitate to the Mac App Store first. My conversions costs showed a clear trend upward as soon as the Mac App Store opened (other competitors in my app space have also dropped away from AdWords indicating similar escalating conversion costs). Furthermore, if I try to drive customers to the Mac App Store to buy, to increase my exposure therein, I incur the AdWord conversion costs, plus the 30% to Apple and a reduced price in the Mac App Store to compete in the race to the bottom. Clearly AdWords is a losing strategy in this case.
However... you're point on price is one to be considered. If you want to get impulse buys, you have to be impulsed priced.
That's fine if the volume was worthwhile. What I am saying is that impulse buy volume is NOT there at any price to even approach what I was making in my market space before. I've been in the #1 spot for my category and it was not a windfall.
I say again, the Mac App Store has depressed the sales volume and gross in my category for everyone. This is not a success in the sense of encouraging a vibrant and growing Mac software market. I felt that before the Mac App Store opened that the Mac software market was reaching a critical mass and that developers found it increasingly attractive. The Mac App Store has crushed that IMO and I am not sure it will return unless Apple makes huge percentage gains in the traditional PC market (and recent trends show it is leveling off).
Please don't take me wrong... I'm not saying you're wrong... just pointing out that the AppStore does not guarantee anything if you don't have good sales and marketing behind it. Also, you have to have software people want.
How exactly would you suggest to market in the Mac App Store? I can't buy ad placement. Lowering my price to 99 cents hasn't given me exposure. I need some (ethical) ideas. :p
Yes, but you can't have it both ways. A successful Mac App Store from your perspective means more Apple customers use it to find apps. In my experience to date, this means those other "outlets" become less and less profitable. Marketing is a numbers game and a major disruption like the Mac App Store can quickly shift those numbers to the negative. In my case it is no longer profitable to maintain some of those "other outlets".
Here's a specific example: Google AdWords. Before the Mac App Store opened, many customers gravitated first to Google search to find an app. I would pay for AdWords placement and if I got a click-through I could be assured that my website exclusively captured the attention. Yes, my app still had to be good enough to capture a sale but at least there were no other competitors there -- and no freebie alternatives (except for demos/trials).
The same strategy no longer works with the Mac App Store. First, the traffic in Google search is reduced as more Apple customers gravitate to the Mac App Store first. My conversions costs showed a clear trend upward as soon as the Mac App Store opened (other competitors in my app space have also dropped away from AdWords indicating similar escalating conversion costs). Furthermore, if I try to drive customers to the Mac App Store to buy, to increase my exposure therein, I incur the AdWord conversion costs, plus the 30% to Apple and a reduced price in the Mac App Store to compete in the race to the bottom. Clearly AdWords is a losing strategy in this case.
However... you're point on price is one to be considered. If you want to get impulse buys, you have to be impulsed priced.
That's fine if the volume was worthwhile. What I am saying is that impulse buy volume is NOT there at any price to even approach what I was making in my market space before. I've been in the #1 spot for my category and it was not a windfall.
I say again, the Mac App Store has depressed the sales volume and gross in my category for everyone. This is not a success in the sense of encouraging a vibrant and growing Mac software market. I felt that before the Mac App Store opened that the Mac software market was reaching a critical mass and that developers found it increasingly attractive. The Mac App Store has crushed that IMO and I am not sure it will return unless Apple makes huge percentage gains in the traditional PC market (and recent trends show it is leveling off).
Please don't take me wrong... I'm not saying you're wrong... just pointing out that the AppStore does not guarantee anything if you don't have good sales and marketing behind it. Also, you have to have software people want.
How exactly would you suggest to market in the Mac App Store? I can't buy ad placement. Lowering my price to 99 cents hasn't given me exposure. I need some (ethical) ideas. :p
Savor
Mar 17, 07:10 PM
I don't have the same story or friends like you do, so no. In Los Angeles/Orange County, Apple Stores are abundant and within a 20 miles from each other it seems. I do have some people glance at my phone from time to time especially when I am at MetroPCS paying my dad's phone bill. LOL. I don't really care for the attention and keep it incognito most of the time next to my waist.
But your story doesn't surprise especially if you can come from the UK. iPhone did slip out of the TOP 5 in sales last year. I believe the HTC Desire was the most popular one. One of my favorite reviewers from the UK is James Whatley. He reminds me of Brandon Flowers from The Killers. He despises Apple with a passion. He works for Nokia now, so call him one of those diehard Nokians.
I think most of the hatred isn't at the iPhone at all but at Apple. No different than hating the Lakers or Yankees. It is too damn popular and people just end up getting sick of it altogether. Not everybody wants to follow the iSheep. People yearn for their own individuality and don't always want something everybody and their grandma has. Think different, remember? In a few years, people will get sick of Android and WP7 too once they start to decline in popularity. All cycles. There was a time when people laughed at Nintendo and are now hip for the casual masses. Every company has their ups and downs. I see the cell phone market similar to the video game market. You build a platform and try to see to sell it fast to attract software developers. Eventually, it declines and you either rest on your laurels for it to become played out or you take the next jump and hope it doesn't alienate your core audience. Sometimes it does just like it does for many popular rock bands. They change it up too much with their music that people can't accept the change anymore. Or you rest on your laurels and become what Nokia and RIM have been the last couple years.
By 2020, who knows if any of them will still exist or be the most popular OS out there? Every product line can die out eventually. And if they did still exist, it won't be how we see them now.
But your story doesn't surprise especially if you can come from the UK. iPhone did slip out of the TOP 5 in sales last year. I believe the HTC Desire was the most popular one. One of my favorite reviewers from the UK is James Whatley. He reminds me of Brandon Flowers from The Killers. He despises Apple with a passion. He works for Nokia now, so call him one of those diehard Nokians.
I think most of the hatred isn't at the iPhone at all but at Apple. No different than hating the Lakers or Yankees. It is too damn popular and people just end up getting sick of it altogether. Not everybody wants to follow the iSheep. People yearn for their own individuality and don't always want something everybody and their grandma has. Think different, remember? In a few years, people will get sick of Android and WP7 too once they start to decline in popularity. All cycles. There was a time when people laughed at Nintendo and are now hip for the casual masses. Every company has their ups and downs. I see the cell phone market similar to the video game market. You build a platform and try to see to sell it fast to attract software developers. Eventually, it declines and you either rest on your laurels for it to become played out or you take the next jump and hope it doesn't alienate your core audience. Sometimes it does just like it does for many popular rock bands. They change it up too much with their music that people can't accept the change anymore. Or you rest on your laurels and become what Nokia and RIM have been the last couple years.
By 2020, who knows if any of them will still exist or be the most popular OS out there? Every product line can die out eventually. And if they did still exist, it won't be how we see them now.
kresh
Oct 28, 05:08 PM
Folks, I think you are misinterpreting what the OSx86 project is doing (at least in this case)...
The OSx86 project is taking the Darwin and XNU source that Apple releases and making them so they can run on any x86 hardware. Basically, they are bringing back the functionality that Darwin and XNU had BEFORE Apple ported OSX to Intel, as the x86 versions of Darwin used to run on any x86 hardware until Apple started including a lot of EFI-specific commands (as well as some other things). If you download and compile the OSx86 source, you won't be able to get a full-fledged OSX user experience, because they have not circumvented Apple's TPM protections for the GUI. In order to get Aqua, you need to have the Aqua resource files (which you'd have to get from a OSX install CD), and you'd have to get the TPM keys, which would be illegal.
Also remember, Darwin and XNU does NOT EQUAL the full OSX user experience. Darwin/XNU is just a command-line operating system, as that is the only part that is open-source.
Oh no, we get what they are doing (from the blog at OSx86):
"I had to remove a key which you need to reinsert if you want to run it GUI, due to legal issues. I called it the "magicpoem" maybe you got the point now. The hex for it is around so don't mail me about it, I want spread anything illegal.
I hope Steve, you enjoy this release, read my poem and think about it. The community was victorius again. Thanks to everyone who supported me and/or worked this out with me. Special thanks go to (in no special order):"
The whole point of them "running the rat-race for 2 days" was to make the kernel work with the express intent of running the Aqua GUI.
How much plainer does it need to be, their whole intent is to enable people to steal the GUI and enjoy the Apple OS X experience for free.
The whole OSx86 project is a warez project hiding behind OSS. It just re-enforces the negative OSS image.
edit: They even have screenshots of Aqua running on an unknown Pentium 4 processor. If that's not promoting warez, what is it? And you know where this path eventually leads to? WGA!! I rue the day when Apple has to try and lock down OSX like MS is forced to attempt with Vista!
The OSx86 project is taking the Darwin and XNU source that Apple releases and making them so they can run on any x86 hardware. Basically, they are bringing back the functionality that Darwin and XNU had BEFORE Apple ported OSX to Intel, as the x86 versions of Darwin used to run on any x86 hardware until Apple started including a lot of EFI-specific commands (as well as some other things). If you download and compile the OSx86 source, you won't be able to get a full-fledged OSX user experience, because they have not circumvented Apple's TPM protections for the GUI. In order to get Aqua, you need to have the Aqua resource files (which you'd have to get from a OSX install CD), and you'd have to get the TPM keys, which would be illegal.
Also remember, Darwin and XNU does NOT EQUAL the full OSX user experience. Darwin/XNU is just a command-line operating system, as that is the only part that is open-source.
Oh no, we get what they are doing (from the blog at OSx86):
"I had to remove a key which you need to reinsert if you want to run it GUI, due to legal issues. I called it the "magicpoem" maybe you got the point now. The hex for it is around so don't mail me about it, I want spread anything illegal.
I hope Steve, you enjoy this release, read my poem and think about it. The community was victorius again. Thanks to everyone who supported me and/or worked this out with me. Special thanks go to (in no special order):"
The whole point of them "running the rat-race for 2 days" was to make the kernel work with the express intent of running the Aqua GUI.
How much plainer does it need to be, their whole intent is to enable people to steal the GUI and enjoy the Apple OS X experience for free.
The whole OSx86 project is a warez project hiding behind OSS. It just re-enforces the negative OSS image.
edit: They even have screenshots of Aqua running on an unknown Pentium 4 processor. If that's not promoting warez, what is it? And you know where this path eventually leads to? WGA!! I rue the day when Apple has to try and lock down OSX like MS is forced to attempt with Vista!
AppliedVisual
Oct 17, 01:22 PM
$4,000 for a TV? Quoting an commercial for Circuit City or Best Buy(?) when asking people about "HD", one of the answers was "Wicked expensive...."
Just about any major electronics purchase at CC or BB is "wicked expensive". They're both known for listing large ticket items higher than MSRP. I paid $3600 for a new 71" Samsung from an authorized deal with white-glove delivery, they even called me a week later to see if I was still happy with it or if I wanted to swap it for something else. BestBuy wanted over $5K for a two year old 73" Mitsubishi or nearly $6200 for the same Samsung set I bought (price included delivery - ooooooh). :rolleyes: MSRP on that 71" Samsung is $4,499. Where does BB (or rather the Magnolia Center in BB) get off charging a $1,200 premium over MSRP? ...Should be a law against that.
...But then again, other than the occasional DVD or small purchase I never shop there. It just gives me that sick to the stomach feeling knowing I'm buying something from a place that charges $100 for a $5 cable on a daily basis.
But the general consumer is oblivious to most of this. They don't understand the products, let alone whether or not they're getting a fair deal. ...Sad, really.
Just about any major electronics purchase at CC or BB is "wicked expensive". They're both known for listing large ticket items higher than MSRP. I paid $3600 for a new 71" Samsung from an authorized deal with white-glove delivery, they even called me a week later to see if I was still happy with it or if I wanted to swap it for something else. BestBuy wanted over $5K for a two year old 73" Mitsubishi or nearly $6200 for the same Samsung set I bought (price included delivery - ooooooh). :rolleyes: MSRP on that 71" Samsung is $4,499. Where does BB (or rather the Magnolia Center in BB) get off charging a $1,200 premium over MSRP? ...Should be a law against that.
...But then again, other than the occasional DVD or small purchase I never shop there. It just gives me that sick to the stomach feeling knowing I'm buying something from a place that charges $100 for a $5 cable on a daily basis.
But the general consumer is oblivious to most of this. They don't understand the products, let alone whether or not they're getting a fair deal. ...Sad, really.
iphone3gs16gb
Apr 26, 08:59 AM
This guy was more than capable of defending himself...
aafuss1
Sep 12, 07:46 AM
Aus store is up for me...
Nearly up for me
Nearly up for me
Chundles
Sep 12, 07:50 AM
i thought the event started at 7est
10am San Francisco time. So 1pm East Coast, 6pm London, 3am Wednesday in Sydney.
10am San Francisco time. So 1pm East Coast, 6pm London, 3am Wednesday in Sydney.
KnightWRX
Apr 8, 01:55 PM
We are all to blame here for jumping.
Who's this we ? My first post in that other thread was questionning the source of the rumor and asking why everyone was taking it as fact without any proof. :D
Use "I" if you must, don't include all of us in your over-reaction.
Who's this we ? My first post in that other thread was questionning the source of the rumor and asking why everyone was taking it as fact without any proof. :D
Use "I" if you must, don't include all of us in your over-reaction.
maclaptop
Apr 16, 10:56 PM
And different browsers didn't appear for a long while I thought.
True. This is due to Apples desire to confine users to Safari.
Their dictatorial approach worked for quite some time. Finally user push back was too much, and Apple caved.
True. This is due to Apples desire to confine users to Safari.
Their dictatorial approach worked for quite some time. Finally user push back was too much, and Apple caved.
Zadillo
Oct 10, 09:19 PM
While I don't know about Engadget's "reliable" Apple sources, their reliable Microsoft sources gave em everything about the Zune, even a PICTURE.
So don't dismiss this, it's Page 1 worthy, but it's also not more than 50% likely, as it would be if this was AppleInsider we were talking about.
Well, the difference there is that Microsoft used Engadget and others as part of their marketing campaign - "leaking" product information and photos to them to try and drum up interest. They did the same thing before with their "leaks" of Origami to try and build up hype. Of course, Zune seems to have gained more traction than UMPC (perhaps because the Zune is basically using a model that has been proven successful by the iPod).
Apple on the other hand just doesn't seem to leak product information ahead of time any more, and they also don't seem to need to do that kind of thing to generate hype and excitement for their products.
-Zadillo
So don't dismiss this, it's Page 1 worthy, but it's also not more than 50% likely, as it would be if this was AppleInsider we were talking about.
Well, the difference there is that Microsoft used Engadget and others as part of their marketing campaign - "leaking" product information and photos to them to try and drum up interest. They did the same thing before with their "leaks" of Origami to try and build up hype. Of course, Zune seems to have gained more traction than UMPC (perhaps because the Zune is basically using a model that has been proven successful by the iPod).
Apple on the other hand just doesn't seem to leak product information ahead of time any more, and they also don't seem to need to do that kind of thing to generate hype and excitement for their products.
-Zadillo
conditionals
Sep 12, 04:42 AM
I was going to receive a (female) friend tonight, but she postponed for tomorrow...
Friends aren't post.
Friends aren't post.
NT1440
Mar 4, 02:12 PM
Oh- incredible, isn't it? Because as we've seen in the past, big business will indeed do the opposite of what he claims.
Not only that, the "hand up vs. hand out" crap is truly mesmerizing. How can anyone that even utters that phrase take themselves seriously? :confused:
Not only that, the "hand up vs. hand out" crap is truly mesmerizing. How can anyone that even utters that phrase take themselves seriously? :confused:
Corrosive vinyl
Mar 26, 05:21 PM
sometimes its not the amount that was stolen but what was stolen. I had an iPod stolen from me and it was awful because of what it was. I still havent replaced it because I dont see that getting another one is worth the hastle of the first one.
gnasher729
May 4, 08:14 AM
Those that use the analogy of their home internet connection not restricting use...well...that's just it... your T&C there does not restrict devices and use. Not the same thing. As for you gas analogy, again not the same thing. You have no contract with Exxon on how you use your gas. If Exxon made a contract with you to use the gas only in the car that purchased it..it would be the same. You could then decide to buy it or find another source (carrier).
Since you mention fuel, you can use the same fuel to heat your home or to drive a car with Diesel engine. In Europe, there will be a _huge_ difference in tax. In some European countries, farmers can get tax free or low tax diesel fuel for use in their tractors and other farming machines. You can safe a lot of money by using this low tax fuel to run your car. You will also get into an awful lot of trouble if you get caught doing it.
In my opinion, and that of Websters dictionary, I have an unlimited data plan, therefor I already do pay for it.
Oh if only I had the dough, I would sue AT&T into the ground. A decent lawyer and fair judge would find against AT&T for the use of the word unlimited and their unfair anti-consumer practices that have followed.
AT&T can do whatever it wants, but it NEVER should have used the word unlimited, because theyve opened themselves up for failure in a future lawsuit. Someone will do it.
Whatever plan you have, AT&T will calculate the average cost of users on that plan, add some profit, and that is what they will charge. People on "unlimited without tethering" use less data and cost less money on average than people on "unlimited with tethering", and therefore are charged less. You basically want to get rid of the two different plans, only one plan "unlimited with tethering" would exist. The average data usage would be higher than for those on the plan without tethering, the average cost is higher, so the charge will go higher. In other words, cost goes up for people who don't tether.
I don't give a damn. If I pay for a chunk of data, it isn't up to the provider to dictate how I use my data. If I want to syphon fuel out of my vehicle for use in another, that is my decision not Exxon's.
If you go to an "all you can eat" buffet, you can't take food for your wife and six hungry children.
Since you mention fuel, you can use the same fuel to heat your home or to drive a car with Diesel engine. In Europe, there will be a _huge_ difference in tax. In some European countries, farmers can get tax free or low tax diesel fuel for use in their tractors and other farming machines. You can safe a lot of money by using this low tax fuel to run your car. You will also get into an awful lot of trouble if you get caught doing it.
In my opinion, and that of Websters dictionary, I have an unlimited data plan, therefor I already do pay for it.
Oh if only I had the dough, I would sue AT&T into the ground. A decent lawyer and fair judge would find against AT&T for the use of the word unlimited and their unfair anti-consumer practices that have followed.
AT&T can do whatever it wants, but it NEVER should have used the word unlimited, because theyve opened themselves up for failure in a future lawsuit. Someone will do it.
Whatever plan you have, AT&T will calculate the average cost of users on that plan, add some profit, and that is what they will charge. People on "unlimited without tethering" use less data and cost less money on average than people on "unlimited with tethering", and therefore are charged less. You basically want to get rid of the two different plans, only one plan "unlimited with tethering" would exist. The average data usage would be higher than for those on the plan without tethering, the average cost is higher, so the charge will go higher. In other words, cost goes up for people who don't tether.
I don't give a damn. If I pay for a chunk of data, it isn't up to the provider to dictate how I use my data. If I want to syphon fuel out of my vehicle for use in another, that is my decision not Exxon's.
If you go to an "all you can eat" buffet, you can't take food for your wife and six hungry children.
nosen
Sep 25, 11:25 AM
That is good to know, because 1.1.2 runs like crap on a Quad with a 6800GT and 8GB of RAM. Unacceptable, really.
I think something might be wrong with your install. I run Aperture on my MBP and it runs really well. It's definitely an easier workflow than my previous, which was iView --> ACR --> Photoshop.
I think something might be wrong with your install. I run Aperture on my MBP and it runs really well. It's definitely an easier workflow than my previous, which was iView --> ACR --> Photoshop.
MacBoobsPro
Sep 12, 07:23 AM
can we confim the what countrys itunes stores are down ?
usa/uk ...
UK is down
usa/uk ...
UK is down
tk421
Oct 19, 10:23 AM
Woohoo!! This is the first time I can remember that Apple has had over 5% market share! :D
leekohler
Apr 25, 04:44 PM
I won't watch the video because i'm faint of heart, i even had to close my eyes for half of American History X (everyone should watch that movie btw). But this is really messed up that the employees not only did nothing but encouraged it. I would have punched one of those nasty little teenage bitches in the face.
I kind of wish I hadn't watched it. It's horrible.
That's not fair. It's not the company's fault. It's called individual responsibilities and these employees should be fired.
Oh hell yes, they should.
I kind of wish I hadn't watched it. It's horrible.
That's not fair. It's not the company's fault. It's called individual responsibilities and these employees should be fired.
Oh hell yes, they should.
iGary
Sep 25, 06:39 PM
nothing strange happend
http://img57.imageshack.us/img57/9180/picture2jz1.th.png (http://img57.imageshack.us/my.php?image=picture2jz1.png)
Macbook Pro 2.0 - 2 GB Ram
That's prolly why.
I think the UB version is running much better on Intel.
I tried it out on a MBP and a Mac Pro and a new Imac and had much better performance that with my own machine.
http://img57.imageshack.us/img57/9180/picture2jz1.th.png (http://img57.imageshack.us/my.php?image=picture2jz1.png)
Macbook Pro 2.0 - 2 GB Ram
That's prolly why.
I think the UB version is running much better on Intel.
I tried it out on a MBP and a Mac Pro and a new Imac and had much better performance that with my own machine.
