gnasher729
Apr 19, 03:36 PM
Does anyone think that a normal person would actually confuse a Samsung Galaxy (especially with that huge "Samsung" on it) with an Apple iPhone when they're buying it?
I mean, is Apple going to claim that they're losing sales because the Galaxy is so close to the iPhone that people can't tell the difference? If so, that sure doesn't say much for the iPhone. Or it says a lot for the Galaxy.
You made up your mind and you argue accordingly. Consider this: Many people know the name "iPhone" and the way it looks, they may even know the name "Macintosh", but not the name "Apple". They might have talked to someone who used an iPhone and was very happy with it, were convinced to buy one, and go to a shop and pick up the phone that looks exactly like the one they wanted to buy. And end up with a Samsung phone when they actually wanted an iPhone.
Your second argument doesn't really make much sense. Samsung knew what the iPhone looks like, so if the Galaxy looks the same, it is because Samsung decided that it should look that way. Confusion surely goes both ways, so there would be a danger for Samsung that someone wanting to buy a Galaxy ends up buying an iPhone. Samsung had to know and accept this. So obviously Samsung is of the opinion that if people who want an iPhone buy a Galaxy by mistake, and people who want a Galaxy buy an iPhone by mistake, then Samsung will overall benefit. Doesn't seem to say much for the Galaxy, if they try to create this confusion.
I mean, is Apple going to claim that they're losing sales because the Galaxy is so close to the iPhone that people can't tell the difference? If so, that sure doesn't say much for the iPhone. Or it says a lot for the Galaxy.
You made up your mind and you argue accordingly. Consider this: Many people know the name "iPhone" and the way it looks, they may even know the name "Macintosh", but not the name "Apple". They might have talked to someone who used an iPhone and was very happy with it, were convinced to buy one, and go to a shop and pick up the phone that looks exactly like the one they wanted to buy. And end up with a Samsung phone when they actually wanted an iPhone.
Your second argument doesn't really make much sense. Samsung knew what the iPhone looks like, so if the Galaxy looks the same, it is because Samsung decided that it should look that way. Confusion surely goes both ways, so there would be a danger for Samsung that someone wanting to buy a Galaxy ends up buying an iPhone. Samsung had to know and accept this. So obviously Samsung is of the opinion that if people who want an iPhone buy a Galaxy by mistake, and people who want a Galaxy buy an iPhone by mistake, then Samsung will overall benefit. Doesn't seem to say much for the Galaxy, if they try to create this confusion.
Tones2
Apr 19, 01:37 PM
You failed to read the blog. Wanna try again?
What, that ONE GUY thinks Apple has a solid case? Yeah, I got that part. :rolleyes:
The point being that almost EVERY smart phone even before the iPhone has a black, rectangular shape with square application icons on the Home Screen and a button or three at the bottom. Some closer than others to the iPhone and to EACH OTHER. Jeez...
What, that ONE GUY thinks Apple has a solid case? Yeah, I got that part. :rolleyes:
The point being that almost EVERY smart phone even before the iPhone has a black, rectangular shape with square application icons on the Home Screen and a button or three at the bottom. Some closer than others to the iPhone and to EACH OTHER. Jeez...
clientsiman
Apr 11, 12:55 PM
No problem for my as I am happy with my 3 years old Sony Ericsson damp phone. I can wait few more months to see if iPhone 5 can make me buy a new phone.
Mattie Num Nums
Apr 19, 02:21 PM
Sigh, you're entirely missing the point of this case. No one's arguing that there's been a grid of icons before, it's just that Samsung went the extra step. See, Android itself doesn't have a near-identical desktop, but TouchWiz does. TouchWiz is what you see here, the icons have been made into squares (like the iPhone), there's now a Dock with frequently used apps with a grey background to distinguish it (like the iPhone), it has a black background (meh) but it uses white dots to note the page it's on (like the iPhone). They went the extra mile to provide an iPhone-like experience for their Android devices.
It appears from the F700's standpoint though the natural progression became TouchWiz.
It appears from the F700's standpoint though the natural progression became TouchWiz.
SuperCachetes
Mar 23, 06:42 PM
That's what it might look like from your shores. Fortunately, the world and life isn't so black and white.
I don't know what shores you think I live on, or what is fortunate about being subjective in terms of intervening into security concerns or human tragedy.
I don't know what shores you think I live on, or what is fortunate about being subjective in terms of intervening into security concerns or human tragedy.
littleman23408
Dec 14, 06:26 AM
Lookin good SevenInchScrew:cool:
Yamcha
Apr 19, 02:01 PM
What annoys me even more is that Apple always seems to make these claims that they made such and such first, and that Windows is copying Mac OS.. What annoys me is if you know a bit of the history you'll find that Apple copied Xerox interface, with permission of course, but it's not like they came up with it first..
Now they are making another claim that Samsung is copying..
Now they are making another claim that Samsung is copying..
dejo
Aug 7, 06:51 PM
Would Dashcode be considered part of the "Enhanced Dashboard" choice?
jaw04005
Nov 28, 10:00 PM
Actually, in the United States we don't pay a "music tax" for blank CD or DVD media. That proposal failed in Congress primarily because CD and DVDs can be used for other purposes (like backing up data). However, the RIAA managed to get a tax on DAT tapes.
I believe that UK also struck down a similar music tax on CD and DVD media.
Many of the major CD and DVD manufacturers introduced the specially-labeled "audio cd" which costs more, and a percentage of those sales go to the recording industry. However, there are no differences between the two types of media.
Why should we care? Because if taxes (or royalties) are imposed, common sense will tell you that Apple will adjust their prices (or price drops) to reflect those additional costs. Simple economics.
I believe that UK also struck down a similar music tax on CD and DVD media.
Many of the major CD and DVD manufacturers introduced the specially-labeled "audio cd" which costs more, and a percentage of those sales go to the recording industry. However, there are no differences between the two types of media.
Why should we care? Because if taxes (or royalties) are imposed, common sense will tell you that Apple will adjust their prices (or price drops) to reflect those additional costs. Simple economics.
ProwlingTiger
Mar 31, 08:44 PM
I like everyone bashing on the Apple "fanboys." It's comical. Somehow telling it like it is hangs a sign around your neck saying "i'm a fanboy, flame me."
People defending Google here by saying Google is still open are simply delusional. Now, if you defend Google by saying, "hey, Google was wrong these past few years, they're going in the right direction now," I'll give you credit.
But, somehow, Google changing its policies that were clearly not in the best interest of consumers gives people a reason to bash Apple customers.
Google is practically admitting what Apple "fanboys" have been saying all along.
"You can't handle the truth!"
SactoGuy18: Good idea. I've been wondering why Google never did this originally.
People defending Google here by saying Google is still open are simply delusional. Now, if you defend Google by saying, "hey, Google was wrong these past few years, they're going in the right direction now," I'll give you credit.
But, somehow, Google changing its policies that were clearly not in the best interest of consumers gives people a reason to bash Apple customers.
Google is practically admitting what Apple "fanboys" have been saying all along.
"You can't handle the truth!"
SactoGuy18: Good idea. I've been wondering why Google never did this originally.
Warbrain
Apr 25, 04:47 PM
Except secured
It's not secured. Just purged correctly.
It's not secured. Just purged correctly.
Cartaphilus
Apr 25, 04:26 PM
Despite the fact that were I the judge I'd levy Rule 11 sanctions against these lawyers, I can't agree that it makes any difference that the file is only available with access to the user's computer which can be password protected. In a civil matter, like a divorce case in a jurisdiction where it matters, the court can compel the user to divulge the password, to not delete or modify the file, and to deliver the computer to an expert to extract subpoenaed information. I haven't kept up with all the Patriot Act era provisions, but it wouldn't be surprising if law enforcement could obtain a warrant effectively forcing similar disclosures despite the Fifth Amendment.
Even had Apple super-encrypted the file, users and providers (like Apple, ISPs, and Telcos) would nonetheless be vulnerable to legal compulsion to cooperate in providing information deemed by the courts to be material and relevant to some lawsuit or prosecution. Accordingly, it isn't entirely harmless if such information is recorded without the knowledge--actual or constructive--of the user. Even so, these plaintiffs are unlikely to plead that they are terrorists, serial bank robbers, or adulterers who were duped into recording their whereabouts, however imprecisely, and whose highly-developed sense of ethics prevents them from simply smashing the telltale devices instead of bringing a lawsuit.
Even had Apple super-encrypted the file, users and providers (like Apple, ISPs, and Telcos) would nonetheless be vulnerable to legal compulsion to cooperate in providing information deemed by the courts to be material and relevant to some lawsuit or prosecution. Accordingly, it isn't entirely harmless if such information is recorded without the knowledge--actual or constructive--of the user. Even so, these plaintiffs are unlikely to plead that they are terrorists, serial bank robbers, or adulterers who were duped into recording their whereabouts, however imprecisely, and whose highly-developed sense of ethics prevents them from simply smashing the telltale devices instead of bringing a lawsuit.
hcuar
Sep 19, 11:58 AM
http://playstation3.joystiq.com/2005/07/29/kutaragi-on-ps3-itll-be-expensive/
Robin Thicke, Paula Patton
she and hubby Robin Thicke
Robin Thicke has revealed the
bio paula
Robin Thicke and Paula Patton
Robin Thicke Calls Wife Sex
misterniall
Nov 29, 07:10 AM
Perhaps we should all get a rebate for every crappy album ever released by Universal. I really want some of the stuff that these record execs are smoking, on top law suits and strong arm tactics now they expect to get money from every iPod not because the have provided any service or contributed in anyway to the product. Rather, they just want it. Hell, who doesn't ... I would also like to get in on this deal. Please Apple/Microsoft/SanDisk I would like to get $0.50 for every unit you sell. Sign me up. I think it is time that artists really evaluated the balance of power. I think it is time that artists should reevaluate the distrubution of wealth in the recording industry. Perhaps that lost money isn't due to pirating like the execs want you to think.
Free money always welcome.
Free money always welcome.
Carlson-online
Jul 20, 11:47 AM
I remember hearing about how it is possible to make multiple cores act like one (Idon't remember where I heard this). Anyways, whether 8 cores acting separately or together like 1 big processor has an advantage depends on the program you use. If the program is multi-threaded, then the cores acting separately might have the advantage while single threaded apps will have an advantage if the cores are acting like one. However, many apps today won't see that much improvement either way (like a simple calculator, or solitare and word processing).
yes, its known as reverse hyper threading. AMD are working on it
http://www.dvhardware.net/article10901.html
yes, its known as reverse hyper threading. AMD are working on it
http://www.dvhardware.net/article10901.html
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 11:19 AM
Probably, But I think Christmass season would be better for sales. maybe they will launch end of October to take advantage of that.
I just hope it's true, I am so tired of my Verizon service and their crap phones.
I think europe might be the best place to introduce, considering europe is slightly ahead (at least in comparison to US) when it comes to cellphones. Moreover, I have gotten the impression that people over here change phones much more often than in US. Mot people I know get a phone at least once a year. A standard contract over here is for 12 months, but many people arent tied up by contracts.
Agreed. I can't imagine anyone getting "all excited" about a product that's a year or more off.
I wouldnt be surprised if the iPhone will be the one-more-thing at the Paris expo. In fact, I actually expect it considering the competion getting harder. mp3 cellphones at 4Gb and the upcoming MS iTMS/player should force Apple to act sooner than later.
I just hope it's true, I am so tired of my Verizon service and their crap phones.
I think europe might be the best place to introduce, considering europe is slightly ahead (at least in comparison to US) when it comes to cellphones. Moreover, I have gotten the impression that people over here change phones much more often than in US. Mot people I know get a phone at least once a year. A standard contract over here is for 12 months, but many people arent tied up by contracts.
Agreed. I can't imagine anyone getting "all excited" about a product that's a year or more off.
I wouldnt be surprised if the iPhone will be the one-more-thing at the Paris expo. In fact, I actually expect it considering the competion getting harder. mp3 cellphones at 4Gb and the upcoming MS iTMS/player should force Apple to act sooner than later.
ChazUK
Apr 20, 11:18 AM
The Galaxy S phone with the closest and most striking resemblance to the iPhone is easily the international i9000 version.
camelsnot
Apr 8, 03:59 AM
You know that no one thinks that way right? I never understood all of these "fanboy" posts saying things that these mysterious "fanyboys" that I've never seen supposedly say.
You must not frequent Apple forums. There are quite a few people who think Apple can do no wrong and twist their own morals and thoughts to justify things that Apple does in these forums. They think they are Apple's personal crusaders. It's sad really, that some people can't think for themselves and they're so blinded by a tech company who could give two craps about them at the end of the day. While Apple does some good things for customers, it's not because they care. It's because they know by doing that, these customers will return. It's simple business, and $teve Job$ is a business and marketing god.
Good on Apple for keeping people so mentally invested in their company. It's a testament to the power of perception and lack of mental clarity from some of its consumers.
Charge on, Apple. :apple:
You must not frequent Apple forums. There are quite a few people who think Apple can do no wrong and twist their own morals and thoughts to justify things that Apple does in these forums. They think they are Apple's personal crusaders. It's sad really, that some people can't think for themselves and they're so blinded by a tech company who could give two craps about them at the end of the day. While Apple does some good things for customers, it's not because they care. It's because they know by doing that, these customers will return. It's simple business, and $teve Job$ is a business and marketing god.
Good on Apple for keeping people so mentally invested in their company. It's a testament to the power of perception and lack of mental clarity from some of its consumers.
Charge on, Apple. :apple:
jaxstate
Jul 15, 08:53 AM
I'm really wondering how low the low end will be. I have no need for a new intel MacPro, but I do wonder how this will affect the prices of the G5s that will be left in inventory. Wonder will we see a big price drop. Didn't happen with the notebooks, but one can dream.
Has there been any news on new displays?
Has there been any news on new displays?
notabadname
Mar 22, 04:06 PM
It's simple: Apple is always behind hardware-wise because they like to priorize esthetics and appearance
Android phones are selling more than iPhone.
I've only bought the first iPad because there were no competitors at that time (and I hate netbooks), but now things are different. To be honest, A LOT different.
1st point: It's factually inaccurate to make your first statement, as evidenced by your last statement. Kind of funny, don't you think?
In your second statement, you are comparing all Android software-running phones to a single model/product line, the iPhone. The iPhone (each generation) has out sold any single phone model (generation) over it's life than that of any offered by any other hardware manufacturer.
Your comparison is like saying Toyota has sold more cars than Ford has sold F-150s. That may be true, but the F-150 is still the number one selling truck in the US, even though it does not outsell the sum total of all other trucks by all other manufacturers.
You should compare a single phone model, say Motorola Droid or HTC Incredible. You are simply talking software. Apple is primarily a hardware company that happens to make the software for its hardware. (yes, I know about FCP and other software) They do not license the iOS software to other manufacturers, so comparison to Google's OS and number of DIFFERENT phones it runs on is really irrelevant to whether any hardware manufacturer has had a more successful phone than the iPhone.
Android phones are selling more than iPhone.
I've only bought the first iPad because there were no competitors at that time (and I hate netbooks), but now things are different. To be honest, A LOT different.
1st point: It's factually inaccurate to make your first statement, as evidenced by your last statement. Kind of funny, don't you think?
In your second statement, you are comparing all Android software-running phones to a single model/product line, the iPhone. The iPhone (each generation) has out sold any single phone model (generation) over it's life than that of any offered by any other hardware manufacturer.
Your comparison is like saying Toyota has sold more cars than Ford has sold F-150s. That may be true, but the F-150 is still the number one selling truck in the US, even though it does not outsell the sum total of all other trucks by all other manufacturers.
You should compare a single phone model, say Motorola Droid or HTC Incredible. You are simply talking software. Apple is primarily a hardware company that happens to make the software for its hardware. (yes, I know about FCP and other software) They do not license the iOS software to other manufacturers, so comparison to Google's OS and number of DIFFERENT phones it runs on is really irrelevant to whether any hardware manufacturer has had a more successful phone than the iPhone.
Digital Skunk
Apr 12, 03:54 PM
Here's what I am hearing:
http://applecritictv.blogspot.com/2011/04/new-final-cut-pro.html
The truly sad part about this is going to be when Apple doesn't deliver on our rumored promises.
I REALLY HOPE that Apple does what that article says, and does it WELL, with no bugs or issues that render the entire system useless, within a price point that's reasonable ($1500 --> $2500 for what's described).
Otherwise, it's going to make whatever update we do get for FCP moot.
http://applecritictv.blogspot.com/2011/04/new-final-cut-pro.html
The truly sad part about this is going to be when Apple doesn't deliver on our rumored promises.
I REALLY HOPE that Apple does what that article says, and does it WELL, with no bugs or issues that render the entire system useless, within a price point that's reasonable ($1500 --> $2500 for what's described).
Otherwise, it's going to make whatever update we do get for FCP moot.
DocNo
Apr 11, 09:55 AM
FCUG could have said no to Apple, but why would they? It's not a Canon Group, it's a FCU Group...
Thank you!
Thank you!
JAT
Apr 19, 04:31 PM
honestly i don't understand Company Obsession.
Its fine to love gadgets, regardless of company, but to be blindly following a multinational corporation whose only motivation is $$$ for its shareholders, its kinda retarded.
EVERYONE. BE A GADGET FAN. DON'T OBSESS OVER A COMPANY.
Obsession can be positive or negative. Loving or hating a company is irrational.
Its fine to love gadgets, regardless of company, but to be blindly following a multinational corporation whose only motivation is $$$ for its shareholders, its kinda retarded.
EVERYONE. BE A GADGET FAN. DON'T OBSESS OVER A COMPANY.
Obsession can be positive or negative. Loving or hating a company is irrational.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 02:26 PM
That is totally reasonable and understandable, although I do disagree. I can't with good heart support sending my neighbors son/daughter overseas to fight for another people.
Well, we have allies, don't we? I simply consider the UN an attempt to permanently ally the world's nations to the extent that these sort of situations can be dealt with based on broader consensus. We are far from the ideal, but we must keep working towards it and an imperfect UN is better than no UN at all.
I just find it pretty disgusting when we have the VP going on the record talking out his arse about "Unless we are attacked or unless there is proof we are about to be attacked", then a couple years later nary a peep when we start bombing a foreign country that is not even close to a threat to us. Did Biden qualify it with a " we should be able to intervene in a nation's affairs if it is thought necessary to either 1) protect other nations from harm or 2) protect a nation's own people from its government, or in the case of a civil war, one or more factions." NOPE!
I'm not going to defend Biden, he puts his foot in his mouth quite a bit - though he is FAR from the only politician in Washingotn with that problem. Besides, unlike Cheney, he is very much playing second fiddle in the administration (actually he's so far down the pecking order only fiddles when someone lends him one, if I can stretch that saying to the breaking point).
It is worth remembering that the Bush Administration sent that clown Bolton as our representative to the UN - a man who opposes that organization's very existence. Incredibly counterproductive. No, I expect hypocrisy from both Democrats and Republicans.
I think it all boils down to whether you buy into the notion that the UN is a global representative body. If you do, then sending troops to enforce UN resolutions is not just fighting for "other people" but fighting for ouselves. If member nations took the concept of the UN more seriously, UN resolutions alone might be enough to stabilize situations like this without the need for major military intervention.
Well, we have allies, don't we? I simply consider the UN an attempt to permanently ally the world's nations to the extent that these sort of situations can be dealt with based on broader consensus. We are far from the ideal, but we must keep working towards it and an imperfect UN is better than no UN at all.
I just find it pretty disgusting when we have the VP going on the record talking out his arse about "Unless we are attacked or unless there is proof we are about to be attacked", then a couple years later nary a peep when we start bombing a foreign country that is not even close to a threat to us. Did Biden qualify it with a " we should be able to intervene in a nation's affairs if it is thought necessary to either 1) protect other nations from harm or 2) protect a nation's own people from its government, or in the case of a civil war, one or more factions." NOPE!
I'm not going to defend Biden, he puts his foot in his mouth quite a bit - though he is FAR from the only politician in Washingotn with that problem. Besides, unlike Cheney, he is very much playing second fiddle in the administration (actually he's so far down the pecking order only fiddles when someone lends him one, if I can stretch that saying to the breaking point).
It is worth remembering that the Bush Administration sent that clown Bolton as our representative to the UN - a man who opposes that organization's very existence. Incredibly counterproductive. No, I expect hypocrisy from both Democrats and Republicans.
I think it all boils down to whether you buy into the notion that the UN is a global representative body. If you do, then sending troops to enforce UN resolutions is not just fighting for "other people" but fighting for ouselves. If member nations took the concept of the UN more seriously, UN resolutions alone might be enough to stabilize situations like this without the need for major military intervention.
No comments:
Post a Comment