Cameront9
Aug 24, 12:35 AM
Not Hierarchial File System! Hierarchial MENU System!
Now, we can freely discuss the "merits" of this patent, but fact is that Apple lost, fair 'n square. If Apple thought that Creatives patent was bogus, they would have NOT paid. 100 million dollars is a lot of cash, no matter how you slice it. If the patent was bogus, and they still paid, Apple would be sending other companies a message that said "Want some cash? Sue us with bogus patents, we'll gladly pay!". No, Apple paid because they felt that they were really infringing and that if they had proceedd with the lawsuit, they would have lost a lot more than 100 million.
If it's a BS patent, why did Apple pay? Clearly, it was NOT a BS patent. True, the patent-system might be screwed up, but that is not the point of this discussion.
Alright, Menu system. But it's the same thing. You select songs (files) through groups of albums/artists/etc (folders/directories).
Of COURSE Apple was infringing on the patent if you assume it was a valid patent. I'm saying the patent never should have been granted because it's not something you can patent. I have a feeling that Apple possibly could have won this lawsuit, but it would have taken years of red tape, legal fees, etc, and they would be taking a gamble. Apple's taken gambles in the legal process before and lost (see: Microsoft GUI case). Steve doesn't want to go through that again, so he pays off Creative. Then, being Steve, he somehow uses his RDF to get Creative to join the licensing program, which has the potential to MAKE APPLE MONEY off of this deal.
Did Apple "win" this? Of course not. They're still out 100 million. But they also came out with some interesting deals that make this not a total loss.
And finally, to answer your statement in the first paragraph: This is EXACTLY why the patent system IS messed up. Because it DOES send a message of "hey we filed this patent for something blatantly obvious, give us some money" In most cases, it will be cheaper to settle. Thus companies end up using Patents, rather than products, as a money-maker.
Now, we can freely discuss the "merits" of this patent, but fact is that Apple lost, fair 'n square. If Apple thought that Creatives patent was bogus, they would have NOT paid. 100 million dollars is a lot of cash, no matter how you slice it. If the patent was bogus, and they still paid, Apple would be sending other companies a message that said "Want some cash? Sue us with bogus patents, we'll gladly pay!". No, Apple paid because they felt that they were really infringing and that if they had proceedd with the lawsuit, they would have lost a lot more than 100 million.
If it's a BS patent, why did Apple pay? Clearly, it was NOT a BS patent. True, the patent-system might be screwed up, but that is not the point of this discussion.
Alright, Menu system. But it's the same thing. You select songs (files) through groups of albums/artists/etc (folders/directories).
Of COURSE Apple was infringing on the patent if you assume it was a valid patent. I'm saying the patent never should have been granted because it's not something you can patent. I have a feeling that Apple possibly could have won this lawsuit, but it would have taken years of red tape, legal fees, etc, and they would be taking a gamble. Apple's taken gambles in the legal process before and lost (see: Microsoft GUI case). Steve doesn't want to go through that again, so he pays off Creative. Then, being Steve, he somehow uses his RDF to get Creative to join the licensing program, which has the potential to MAKE APPLE MONEY off of this deal.
Did Apple "win" this? Of course not. They're still out 100 million. But they also came out with some interesting deals that make this not a total loss.
And finally, to answer your statement in the first paragraph: This is EXACTLY why the patent system IS messed up. Because it DOES send a message of "hey we filed this patent for something blatantly obvious, give us some money" In most cases, it will be cheaper to settle. Thus companies end up using Patents, rather than products, as a money-maker.
Silentwave
Sep 18, 06:44 PM
A 10megapixel phone will record more clearly the low quality picture that comes from these tiny lenses.
It will be a much larger file, and won't look much better than a 3MP. Still, as the lenses improve this will change.
There IS a limit as to what can be done at a given price point. Eventually the cost of a good lens for it will outweigh the benefits.
Sticking a 10mp sensor in a phone to me is ridiculous. Very few people ever need 10mp, and if they do they get a real camera instead. Not only does the phone have a very limited set of potential lens features, but the lens will generally be low quality and poorly corrected unless you spend a significant amount of money for a good one. Even then size will become an issue.
All a 10mp phone will do is be unusable in anything but superb light. It'll probably have even worse dynamic range than existing phones, record murky detail, and have the poorest signal to noise ratio on the planet.
It will be a much larger file, and won't look much better than a 3MP. Still, as the lenses improve this will change.
There IS a limit as to what can be done at a given price point. Eventually the cost of a good lens for it will outweigh the benefits.
Sticking a 10mp sensor in a phone to me is ridiculous. Very few people ever need 10mp, and if they do they get a real camera instead. Not only does the phone have a very limited set of potential lens features, but the lens will generally be low quality and poorly corrected unless you spend a significant amount of money for a good one. Even then size will become an issue.
All a 10mp phone will do is be unusable in anything but superb light. It'll probably have even worse dynamic range than existing phones, record murky detail, and have the poorest signal to noise ratio on the planet.
ipedro
Apr 22, 02:41 AM
I have no idea how this would be useful. Buffer times, connection loss, no WiFi around, these are all problems that will prevent this from working.
What's wrong with storing music on hard drives locally?
Buffer times and connection loss could be eliminated as problems very easily:
When you load a playlist, your iPhone begins to download all the songs immediately in the background. Since a song is only a few megabytes, several songs could be downloaded in the span of one song during playback. These songs are then cached in a pre-determined sized local library and kept there until needed to make room for new incoming songs. A smart system could be employed to determine songs that should be prioritized to be kept in cache based on playcount and other listening patterns.
In an iPhone with 32GB of flash, a few GB of music could be cached without taking much room yet storing massive amounts of songs without the risk of interruption from slow or loss of connection.
What I'm looking forward to the most is how this service will work with video. I love Apple's move to a streaming format for tv because downloading and storing movies and tv shows is unsustainable in the long term. Laptops and iOS devices have limited HDD/flash space and it's a complex chore to maintain a video library on an external HDD separate from your iTunes music library. Backing up is also a problem for libraries that can exceed a TB or more.
Buying the rights to a movie or TV episode is preferable. You can then stream that video to any iTunes enabled device including in a mobile device like an iPad which would otherwise not be able to hold much video because of its limited storage capacity.
Finally, one important thing to note is that this cloud locker will free one more of the chains that is preventing iPad from becoming autonomous from a computer. With mobileMe taking care of syncing email, address book, iCal, and bookmarks, and now this music locker taking care of granting you access to your entire iTunes library, you won't need to sync an iPad/iPod/iPhone to a Mac or PC again. Poof! There's your wireless syncing that everybody's been clamouring for.
What's wrong with storing music on hard drives locally?
Buffer times and connection loss could be eliminated as problems very easily:
When you load a playlist, your iPhone begins to download all the songs immediately in the background. Since a song is only a few megabytes, several songs could be downloaded in the span of one song during playback. These songs are then cached in a pre-determined sized local library and kept there until needed to make room for new incoming songs. A smart system could be employed to determine songs that should be prioritized to be kept in cache based on playcount and other listening patterns.
In an iPhone with 32GB of flash, a few GB of music could be cached without taking much room yet storing massive amounts of songs without the risk of interruption from slow or loss of connection.
What I'm looking forward to the most is how this service will work with video. I love Apple's move to a streaming format for tv because downloading and storing movies and tv shows is unsustainable in the long term. Laptops and iOS devices have limited HDD/flash space and it's a complex chore to maintain a video library on an external HDD separate from your iTunes music library. Backing up is also a problem for libraries that can exceed a TB or more.
Buying the rights to a movie or TV episode is preferable. You can then stream that video to any iTunes enabled device including in a mobile device like an iPad which would otherwise not be able to hold much video because of its limited storage capacity.
Finally, one important thing to note is that this cloud locker will free one more of the chains that is preventing iPad from becoming autonomous from a computer. With mobileMe taking care of syncing email, address book, iCal, and bookmarks, and now this music locker taking care of granting you access to your entire iTunes library, you won't need to sync an iPad/iPod/iPhone to a Mac or PC again. Poof! There's your wireless syncing that everybody's been clamouring for.
mrkramer
Apr 25, 01:13 AM
Good luck with reporting my plates. I've done that to drunk drivers before, the 911 operator has told me "We're sorry sir, we cannot divert officers based on heresy." Also, see above: My uncle is the traffic court judge in the jurisdiction where I did this, good luck getting a ticket to stand.
If your uncle lets you off for something like that I hope he gets caught and thrown in jail for corruption like he would deserve. And in most places cops do go after people who are reported as drunk, or unsafe drivers.
The simple fact is that I should not have to obey a 70mph speed limit if I don't want to. Why would I even bother driving a car that can hit 186mph (with the speed governor removed, with the governor top speed is 155mph) at 70 mph? A Ford Fiesta can hit those speeds, what's the point of fast cars if you're going to follow the speed limit in them?
And at your age you probably shouldn't be driving a car with that much power, you don't know how to handle it.
If your uncle lets you off for something like that I hope he gets caught and thrown in jail for corruption like he would deserve. And in most places cops do go after people who are reported as drunk, or unsafe drivers.
The simple fact is that I should not have to obey a 70mph speed limit if I don't want to. Why would I even bother driving a car that can hit 186mph (with the speed governor removed, with the governor top speed is 155mph) at 70 mph? A Ford Fiesta can hit those speeds, what's the point of fast cars if you're going to follow the speed limit in them?
And at your age you probably shouldn't be driving a car with that much power, you don't know how to handle it.
BLUELION
Mar 23, 05:50 PM
Its plain to see what is happening here. But I agree with you I will not concede my rights for any reason what so ever.
I stop listening to anyone who ever utters the words "Constitutional or not..."
Our basic freedoms as Americans aren't worth conceding for any reason whatsoever, no matter how noble the goal may seem from a distance.
I stop listening to anyone who ever utters the words "Constitutional or not..."
Our basic freedoms as Americans aren't worth conceding for any reason whatsoever, no matter how noble the goal may seem from a distance.
ctachme
Sep 26, 08:30 AM
Agrhhh... why does Apple have to be so stupid? Do they not know that there are vast areas here in the US where Cingular doesn't support?
Why the hell can't they just sell an unlocked phone and just let us choose providers that actually have service where we live? I really hope someone finds a way to hack these phones and make them carrier-independant! :mad:
Why the hell can't they just sell an unlocked phone and just let us choose providers that actually have service where we live? I really hope someone finds a way to hack these phones and make them carrier-independant! :mad:
joel8x
Oct 12, 04:02 PM
This site is so wierd - 10 people actually clicked on the negative rating to this story like there is anything negative about it.
kas23
Apr 4, 12:09 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2 like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C134 Safari/6533.18.5)
No loss to society here. Go Mall Cop.
No loss to society here. Go Mall Cop.
Henri Gaudier
Oct 28, 03:45 AM
..Green Peace. Is this another manifestation of "End Time" thinking? Unbelievable. From what does it stem from?
What can be offensive about being "green"?
There's exploitation, war and hate mongering everywhere you look and you come to a Mac community forum and you find out you hate your neighbours. Neo-liberal capitalist scum. Amazing. Mightilly pissed off with a lot of you.
What can be offensive about being "green"?
There's exploitation, war and hate mongering everywhere you look and you come to a Mac community forum and you find out you hate your neighbours. Neo-liberal capitalist scum. Amazing. Mightilly pissed off with a lot of you.
jason221
Apr 25, 05:28 PM
I wish they would release it before September 28... I'd rather wait for the new design but college starts this fall so that's not an option. Oh well.
jimmyjoemccrow
Jan 2, 11:58 AM
I accessed a site a couple of days ago and it said "You have a problem with your Mac please click OK to fix the problem." I was on my iPhone at the time but it does show that someone took the trouble to write a program that identified I was on an Apple operating system.
Blakjack
Apr 4, 12:15 PM
Me neither. I wonder if the suspects were armed...or at least how smashing glass doors escalated into gunfire.
Obviously u didnt read the article. I have no sympathy for people who do stupid stuff like this. At the end of the day, u deserve what u get and the only people who really get *****ed at the end of the day is the family of the criminal who decided to do something stupid and got killed in the process. Its hard times for everybody right now, but thats no excuse.
Obviously u didnt read the article. I have no sympathy for people who do stupid stuff like this. At the end of the day, u deserve what u get and the only people who really get *****ed at the end of the day is the family of the criminal who decided to do something stupid and got killed in the process. Its hard times for everybody right now, but thats no excuse.
topmounter
Apr 4, 12:15 PM
Maybe you're right, maybe not... I mean, I doubt the guys went in in Kevlar suit saying "we take the loot, not matter what. If someones try to stop us, we kill him". In a bank robbery maybe they would but I doubt they were ready to kill somebody only for a few iPads...
But that's just me.
Feel free to sympathize with the crooks, but this does not sound like a case of "Han shot first".
But that's just me.
Feel free to sympathize with the crooks, but this does not sound like a case of "Han shot first".
Benjy91
Mar 22, 01:34 PM
Like Squirrels you must store these "Mac" rumor articles, for the cold, iOS rumor months to follow. ;)
monaarts
Apr 4, 12:30 PM
Apple needs to start paying it's employees better... Seriously, it seems like there is a robbery at an Apple Store every other day. Maybe TLC will make a movie about it soon, "The Deadliest Retail Job" HAHA
- Joe
- Joe
Dr.Gargoyle
Sep 10, 12:38 PM
Gotcha! That would get old quick, at least the old apps would work. It is kind of cool now that a G3 can still run Tiger. Oh well, can't have everything! :)
I doubt that 10.6 will run on G4. CS4 will probably run very sluggish on a Quad G5.
I doubt that 10.6 will run on G4. CS4 will probably run very sluggish on a Quad G5.
chuckles:)
Oct 12, 10:27 PM
i think it looks cool.
cheunghy
Sep 5, 08:44 AM
Apple Store Hong Kong is still up...
milo
Sep 5, 01:53 PM
Do you know a Tivo is a computer? It has a microprocessor and runs Linux. However, they don't try to make it a computer. That is why their idea has caught on.
That, and they keep the cost low by subsidizing it with subscriptions. A box for sale has to be cheap, and a device that just streams video, no hard drive at all, could be even cheaper than a tivo.
Is a streaming box really what you want? I mean, it's one thing to connect my airport express to my bose stereo system and let it play a playlist from my computer in my office, but if we have a streaming video, we still have to go to our office and start the video from the other room. If that's the case, I might as well move my computer to my living room.
They will have to have something that allows you to access your audio and video files with a remote. Maybe an aiport express with a remote control and user interface similar, but better than frontrow.
Right now a mac mini can do all of the things you need it to. You can stream video from another computer on the network, you can connect it to your T.V. and stereo. What would be the point of a new airport extreme if for $200 more you can get an entire compuer.
just some random thoughts...
A streaming box is DEFINITELY what I want. I assume they will have a remote available for this, not having one would be a deal breaker and I doubt they'd release this half baked.
A mini can do this, but starting at $599, it's going to be more than $200 more than an airport video. And I'd much rather have my mini somewhere else in the house so I don't have to try and read the menus on my NTSC TV, or have a monitor next to my TV.
That, and they keep the cost low by subsidizing it with subscriptions. A box for sale has to be cheap, and a device that just streams video, no hard drive at all, could be even cheaper than a tivo.
Is a streaming box really what you want? I mean, it's one thing to connect my airport express to my bose stereo system and let it play a playlist from my computer in my office, but if we have a streaming video, we still have to go to our office and start the video from the other room. If that's the case, I might as well move my computer to my living room.
They will have to have something that allows you to access your audio and video files with a remote. Maybe an aiport express with a remote control and user interface similar, but better than frontrow.
Right now a mac mini can do all of the things you need it to. You can stream video from another computer on the network, you can connect it to your T.V. and stereo. What would be the point of a new airport extreme if for $200 more you can get an entire compuer.
just some random thoughts...
A streaming box is DEFINITELY what I want. I assume they will have a remote available for this, not having one would be a deal breaker and I doubt they'd release this half baked.
A mini can do this, but starting at $599, it's going to be more than $200 more than an airport video. And I'd much rather have my mini somewhere else in the house so I don't have to try and read the menus on my NTSC TV, or have a monitor next to my TV.
chrmjenkins
Apr 14, 11:48 AM
Now that it's part of the platform Apple has no excuse for not including it. However, it wouldn't surprise me to see a MBP with this platform that still only has 2.0 connectors.
AidenShaw
Mar 22, 09:29 PM
And a 4 Link one at that compared to the Expresscard slot which is only 1 link PCIe or a USB2 port.
The term is "4 lane" for PCIe x4 - not "link".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCI_Express#Lane
The term is "4 lane" for PCIe x4 - not "link".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCI_Express#Lane
AppleScruff1
Apr 29, 01:48 AM
They did. And boy, does it show! Part of the reason Apple has done so remarkably well for years now.
Apple has done extremely well with mobile devices, but I don't know what Microsoft has to do with that. As far as I know, Windows still has about 90% of the market, and Apple still has a very small share. It looks to me like Apple isn't a huge player in the pc market, but they are the dominant one in the mobile market. Let's not forget that 50% of that $5.99 billion profit came from the iPhone and iPad.
Part of the reason Apple has done so remarkably well for years now? Sure. However it is also mostly the reason Apple still only had 5% of that market.
Very true.
Apple has done extremely well with mobile devices, but I don't know what Microsoft has to do with that. As far as I know, Windows still has about 90% of the market, and Apple still has a very small share. It looks to me like Apple isn't a huge player in the pc market, but they are the dominant one in the mobile market. Let's not forget that 50% of that $5.99 billion profit came from the iPhone and iPad.
Part of the reason Apple has done so remarkably well for years now? Sure. However it is also mostly the reason Apple still only had 5% of that market.
Very true.
Popeye206
Apr 20, 01:55 PM
I fall into the "who cares" category.
If someone wants to waste their time figuring out where I've been... have a ball! I might be concerned if I was a drug lord, or cereal murderer (Die! Captain Crunch, die!). :) But since I'm just a software guy... again, who cares?
P.S. Snap, Crackle and Pop... you're next!
If someone wants to waste their time figuring out where I've been... have a ball! I might be concerned if I was a drug lord, or cereal murderer (Die! Captain Crunch, die!). :) But since I'm just a software guy... again, who cares?
P.S. Snap, Crackle and Pop... you're next!
macfan881
Sep 12, 03:29 PM
With The New Get Album artwork is it possible now to update the Artwork to the ipod now? :confused: cause i dont see any of the artwork that i have gotten on my ipod
