The Verge reports: "Orchards of apples, apricots, plums, and cherries also play a key part of the design..."
26 posts • joined 22 Aug 2007
Why is it that Luddites like you never get the facts (or spelling) correct? First of all the correct spelling IS 'iPod', 'iPad', and 'iPhone'. [Don't believe me? Ask poet e.e. cummings or writer bell hooks]
Secondly, while the iPod Touch and the iPad share some commonality their form and functions are very different. Sort of like the difference between a Vespa scooter and a Porché...they both have wheels, and engines, and run on gasoline (petrol to you Brits), but aside from that they're very different. So it is with the iPod Touch and the iPad.
Perhaps a bit of education about the subject would be in order:
About the iPod Touch - http://www.apple.com/ipodtouch/
About the iPad - http://www.apple.com/ipad
First of all the iPad's touchscreen display is a 25 cm (9.7 in) liquid crystal display (1024 × 768 pixels) at 132 pixels per inch (ppi) with fingerprint-resistant and scratch-resistant glass, not a 4" x 3" screen. According to Apple there are thousands of apps made specifically for the iPad...many of which are free.
Certainly not the 3 million who've already purchased an iPad. Nor, I suspect, the 1 million a month who continue to purchase iPads.
While techogeeks and the Reg's abundant supply of 'we-hate-anything-apple fanboys' will muse and bemoan the fact that everyone who buys an iPad is an idiot, the fact of the matter is, is that the iPad is well on its way to becoming the gold standard that other less tablet computers aspire to become.
At some point, the 'my-specs-are-better-than-your specs' crowd will realize that people who purchase Apple products don't base their purchase based solely on specifications or on price (for that matter). Many Apple customers base their buying decision on the basis of benefits (perceived or otherwise). Does the iPad give me more benefits than another product? If the answer is 'yes', they buy an iPad. If the answer is 'no', they don't.
It's not that the iTunes Music Store refuses to do business with most Asian countries, it's that most Asian countries refuse to do business with the iTunes Music Store. Something to do with those pesky copyright laws.
I'm sure you know that Apple has to negotiate with each and every county's copyright authority for the ability to open an iTunes store in their jurisdiction. Most do, some (like Asian counties) don't.
Talk to any business - 1 million sales of ANYTHING in a scant 28 days is fantastic. 3 million sales in 89 days with a 35% profit margin is something that any other manufacturers would sell the family jewels for (and as an Apple stockholder, I'm loving). 3 million sales in 89 days is approximately 12 million sales per year, and that's just U.S. sales.
Find me one, just one, other tablet (slate) computer with those numbers and I'll buy it. Heck, I'll buy one for you, too.
In the meantime, all of you who are laughing at the millions of satisfied iPad buyers for being sheep, or Mactards, or whatever just remember the words of the song:
"They all laughed at Christopher Columbus,
When he said the world was round
They all laughed when Edison recorded sound,
They all laughed at Wilbur and his brother
When they said that man could fly
They told Marconi
Wireless was a phony
It's the same old cry
They all laughed at Rockefeller Center
Now they're fighting to get in
They all laughed at Whitney and his cotton gin
They all laughed Fulton and his steamboat
Hershey and his chocolate bar
Ford and his Lizzie
Kept the laughers busy
That's how people are
For ho, ho, ho!
Who's got the last laugh?
Hee, hee, hee!
Let's at the past laugh
Ha, ha, ha!
Who's got the last laugh now?"
Apple announces that they sold 1 million iPads (in the US) in 28 days. Apple announces that it sold 1 million iPads in 31 days. So in 2 months they sold 2 million iPads. And while Apples usually doesn't comment on such things, they probably do include the 2 days of international sales. [Which, of course, is irrelevant. Because a sale is a sale is a sale regardless of where that sale is made.]
No matter how you slice and dice it, when a company (any company) sells 1 million units of their product in a month that demonstrates a desire for that product. But is that sustainable? Maybe, maybe not. But as of June 1, Apple has sold 2 million iPads in 2 months and without any current competition from other manufacturers, Apple is poised to keep selling iPads at a 1 million unit per month rate for some time.
You just keep thinking that way Coward. I know that the fact that Apple sells 1 million desktops per month doesn't interest you. Just like the fact that PCs outsell Macs 9-to-1 doesn't interest me. [My reply is, of course, 'it's the profits silly.' Apple is significantly more profitable than just about anyone]
But you go ahead a trumpet the virtues of buggy whips. Support the best damned buggy whip manufacturer in the world. As for the rest of us, we're hitching our wagons with Mr. Ford's Tin Lizzie.
I was going to post something pithy but then I remembered which site I was on.
What is about you Brits? Too much inbreeding? Maybe stupid is hard wired into your DNA...
To set the record straight - The iPad IS NOT A LAPTOP/NETBOOK REPLACEMENT. It is primarily a 'content consumption' device, not a 'content creation' device.
The iPad really is a game changer. Not because it has changed the way we interface with a computer (finger vs mouse) but because it has changed the fundamental concept of computing, and some people can’t deal with this at all. Up until now computers have been primarily designed to create content. Whether it is writing a document, creating a spread sheet or designing graphics, most computers have been built with creation in mind. The very layout of the keyboard, mouse trackpad, usb ports etc all stem from a need to create (or modify content). The thing is though, over the last few years, people have spent more time on their computers consuming content rather than creating it.
Since the advent of internet video and social networking, people have been consuming media more than they have been creating it. People are using their computers more for browsing the web, getting e-mail, going on Facebook, downloading music and watching videos. Some manufacturers recognised this early and though the answer was to make cheaper laptops (i.e. Netbooks) but they are still devices designed primarily for creating content.
The iPad on the other hand flips the whole equation around. The tools you don’t need to consume content get out of the way. The keyboard gets out of the way when you don’t need it, which in the consumption first view of computing the keyboard is less important than the information you are consuming. Even being able to rotate the screen makes a huge difference. You’re no longer confined to reading information in the less comfortable landscape format, and instead can use the more natural feeling portrait orientation. This alone is something that you would never do sticking to traditional metaphors.
While you certainly can create on the iPad, Apple has designed the device around the consumption model. It’s what many people want. Other manufacturers have seemingly failed to grasp that simple concept. People making competing tablets, such as the HP's Slate (now discontinued until it gets a new OS) will think that this is a limitation of the iPad and try and shoehorn the existing “create first” metaphor of traditional computing into a device designed for consuming media. That’s why it will fail. That’s what’s so big about the iPad. IT has changed the whole paradigm of computing.
The nay-sayers are concerned that the iPad will replace laptops and desktops and the future of computing will be closed. But traditional computers won’t go away any time soon, nor should they. For years we’ve been promised the future in science fiction of digital versions of everything from books to newspapers. In these visions of the future the devices were always designed as readers and viewers. Never did you see ports, cameras and mice hanging off them. You can’t tinker with a book or a magazine. You can’t programme a dvd player so why then is it a big deal that you can’t develop on a device that fulfils the age long sci-fi dream of bringing traditional consumption into the digital realm.
My compliments to the hundreds of thousands of developers who are currently creating software for the iPod, iPhone, and the iPad without ever using Flash. With over 4 billion downloads of your products, it seams that the buying public is voicing their opinion about the need for Flash in a mobile environment.
And my compliments to the hundreds of thousands of developers who are currently creating software in the Flash environment and are, it seems, more than willing to forgo a market of 100 million users instead of rising to the call of learning how to properly develop an application for Apple's products. My friends, you have stones of steel and more power to you.
I know I would have a difficult time walking away from that size of a market (and one that is growing every quarter). But these diehard individualists, these buggy whip manufacturers in a time of automobile supremacy, these Greyhound Bus travelers in a time of wide-bodies super jet, in a time of Manchester United they stand for Birmingham, these mavericks are toeing the line and sticking to their principles of holding the flame of antiquity and proclaiming loudly, "WE WILL NOT CHANGE. THEY REST OF YOU CAN SOD OFF!"
"A company spokesman says that Mac hardware acceleration will arrive with an incarnation of the Flash Player due "shortly after" version 10.1, which is now on its second release candidate."
Just a brief reminder here - There is currently NO reliable Flash application for ANY mobile phone currently on the market. [read again]
Adobe has be promising for over 10 years to get Flash working correctly on the Mac. We're still waiting. Flash 10.x is still vaporware. Flash for mobile phones is still a long ways off...even with Google's Android help.
@Greg J Preece said: 'Their attitude regarding the app store, which in itself isn't nearly as open as other platforms' software sources, sucks. As a techie boy, I would not want to have my software choices dictated to me, even in part.'
Somehow I don't think most rational people would find the 185,000 programs offered at the Apple app store as anyway 'limiting'
Can we hop inside the Wayback® Machine and go back to January of 2007? Go read all the initial post from pundits, nitwits, and folks just like you, who belched that there was no way, no possible way, that Apple was ever going to make it in the smartphone business. Go back a few years earlier and read how Apple was going to crash and be burnt to a crisp upon entering the MP3 player market.
You might not have noticed but Apple is a major player in the MP3 player and smartphone business. They sell more music than any retailer in the US. Their smartphone app store, with over 140,000 apps, has sold/downloaded over 3 Billion apps. This product is built on the shoulder of those two outstanding products [Yes, we already know how you feel about Apple, it's products, and it's methods of conducting business. But the public has spoken, loudly, about which company it wants to buy it's electronics from.]
The price point is right. The form factor is right. The applications are in place as of today. Apple is going to sell millions of these things—even if you think they're trash. My advise: You may not buy the iPad, but I would scamper down to my stockbroker and buy as much Apple stock as possible. This is yet another opportunity for Apple to print money.
You make it sound as if if you can't run Snow Leopard, your laptop is useless. Far from it! Even the oldest 12" G4 is capable of running Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard). It can run most contemporary software programs including iWork, Microsoft Office, games, productivity software, and thousands of others.
I don't know how people in the UK feel about assets, but here in the US a 12" G4 laptop could be worth up to $300 (£185, €213.50)
Overpriced compared to what? It’s that same old, tired rant that Macs are too expensive. I know, lets compare the MacBook Pro to a Toshiba X305-Q706 (catchy name) -
Newegg has the Toshiba for $1999. It’s has very similar specifications to the MacBook Pro. But we’ll have to add an addition $309 to upgrade the Windows software to Windows Ultimate 64 Bit from Windows Home Premium to make it comparable to Mac OS X 10.5.6.
This software is included with the MacBook Pro - Mac OS X v10.5 Leopard (includes iTunes, Time Machine, Quick Look, Spaces, Spotlight, Dashboard, Mail, iChat, Safari, Address Book, QuickTime, iCal, DVD Player, Photo Booth, Front Row, Xcode Developer Tools); iLife ’09 (includes iPhoto, iMovie, iDVD, iWeb, GarageBand) - The retail price of iLife is $80. I don’t know if the Toshiba comes with any software and I’m doubtful if you could get this amount of software, of similar quality, for $80 in the Windows environment, but I’ll assume someone can for the same $80.
So the differential as of now is a mere $411. Let’s continue -
The MacBook Pro size and weight:
Height: 0.98 inch (2.50 cm)
Width: 15.47 inches (39.3 cm)
Depth: 10.51 inches (26.7 cm)
Weight: 6.6 pounds (2.99 kg)
The Toshiba X305-Q706 size and weight:
Height: 1.7 - 2.5 inches (4.31 cm - 6.35cm)
Width: 16.2 inches (41.14 cm)
Depth: 12 inches (30.48 cm)
Weight: 9.3 pounds (but 12.2 including power brick!) (4.21 kg/5.53 kg)
They both have 17″ displays, but the Toshiba’s maximum resolution is 1680 x 1050. The Mac’s maximum resolution is 1920 x 1200.
MacBook Pro RAM memory is expandable to 8GB. Toshiba’s is maxed out at 4 GB.
The Toshiba is made of plastic. The Mac is made of aluminum and glass.
I could go on, but I think anyone with the IQ of a plant would realize that the cost between the Toshiba 17″ laptop and the MacBook Pro is minimal. That is, of course, unless you don’t object to carrying a 12.2 pound, low-resolution display, unexpandable behemoth (bedecked with flames no less) like the Toshiba.
I'm always amazed that the Do-It-Yourselfers spend enormous amounts of time in trying to circumvent certain manufacturers and build, in this case, a Hackintosh.
Perhaps I'm just strange. My time has value! At my current billing rate to my clients (USD $87.50, €64.78, £50.03), if I were to spend, say, 15 hours assembling, building, installing a pirated copy of Mac OS X, testing, having the install blow up, re-installing Mac OS X, having the install blow up again, doing more research, re-installing Mac OS X, testing, etc., etc., etc, and then having a System that still doesn't work 100% - it'd be well worth my time to just purchase a Mac from the get-go. [A Mac can be had for less than £400, €513]
You said: '...monopoly control Apple' -When did a 28% market share become a monopoly? And you speak of a monopoly as if it's a bad thing or illegal. In most countries monopolies aren't illegal. What IS illegal is if you use that monopoly position to prevent competition (a lá Microsoft).
You said: 'Applications can only be sold, or supplied, through iTunes' - Incorrect! Developers can sell their applications anywhere. However, if they want Apple to provide the marketing, micro-processing of payments, have the opportunity to 'be in front of millions of iPhone/iPod Touch users', and be a part of a business model that has successfully sold over 4 billion songs, they'll sell through Apple's App Store.
You said: 'It seems hard to believe that operators will hand over their application sales revenue...' Who's sales revenue? The DEVELOPERS, not the operators. The operators are a pipeline, a conduit, nothing more. They provide a service.
You said: '...or that customers will be happy to only buy applications that meet the taste and brand approval of Apple...' Developers are free to develop ANY type of application they want. Customers are free to purchase ANY type of application they want. If you want to purchase on the Apps Store, you need to abide by Apple's guidelines. Most companies have guidelines as to what they will and what they won't be associated with. The Reg. may be the exception.
You said: '...Apple has proved that pretty colours...' And a better OS. And a better User interface. And better Application integration. And, and, and.
I just gotta love the Reg and the vast majority of their Mac-hating readers. So many readers, so much misinformation.
Where to start - Macs are the only PCs available that run both Windows and Mac OS X natively. So that means that all of your Mac programs, all of your Windows programs, oh, and all of your Linux programs will ALL run on your Mac.
Macs use many of the same components as PCs. Like Intel CPUs and FSB (front side buses), ATI video cards, nVidia video cards, same RAM, same hard drives, same monitors, same peripherals. Doesn't seem all that closed to me.
Similarly configured Macs and PCs from major manufacturers usually cost within £10 of each other. Go here for more info - http://systemshootouts.org
Let’s see who supports what:
Apple iPod -
Audio formats supported: AAC (16 to 320 Kbps), Protected AAC (from iTunes Store), MP3 (16 to 320 Kbps), MP3 VBR, Audible (formats 2, 3, and 4), Apple Lossless, WAV, and AIFF
User-configurable maximum volume limit
H.264 video, up to 1.5 Mbps, 640 by 480 pixels, 30 frames per second, Low-Complexity version of the H.264 Baseline Profile with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps, 48kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats; H.264 video, up to 2.5 Mbps, 640 by 480 pixels, 30 frames per second, Baseline Profile up to Level 3.0 with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps, 48kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats; MPEG-4 video, up to 2.5 Mbps, 640 by 480 pixels, 30 frames per second, Simple Profile with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps, 48kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats
Microsoft Zune 2.0 -
AUDIO SUPPORT- Windows Media® Audio Standard (WMA) (.wma): Up to 320 Kbps; constant bit rate (CBR) and variable bit rate (VBR) up to 48-kHz sample rate. WMA Pro 2-channel up to 384 Kbps; CBR and VBR up to 48-kHz
Advanced Audio Coding (AAC) (.mp4, .m4a, .m4b, .mov) - .m4a and .m4b files without FairPlay DRM up to 320 Kbps; CBR and VBR up to 48-kHz
MP3 (.mp3) – Up to 320 Kbps; CBR and VBR up to 48-kHz
JPEG – (.jpg)
Windows Media Video (WMV) (.wmv) – Main and Simple Profile, CBR or VBR, up to 3.0 Mbps peak video bit rate; 720 pixels x 480 pixels up to 30 frames per second (or 720 pixels x 576 pixels up to 25 frames per second). Zune software will transcode HD WMV files at device sync
MPEG-4 (MP4/M4V) (.mp4) Part 2 video – Simple Profile up to 2.5 Mbps peak video bit rate; 720 pixels x 480 pixels up to 30 frames per second (or 720 pixels x 576 pixels up to 25 frames per second). Zune software will transcode HD MPEG-4 files at device sync
H.264 video – Baseline Profile up to 2.5 Mbps peak video bit rate; 720 pixels x 480 pixels up to 30 frames per second (or 720 pixels x 576 pixels up to 25 frames per second). Zune software will transcode HD H.264 files at device sync
DVR-MS – Zune software will transcode at time of sync
From the looks of it, with the exception of the DRM’ed files, they pretty much play the same formats.
Just more Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt from the Reg. Same old arguments...
"Macs are too expensive" - Compared to what? When you compare similarly configured computers from major manufacturers to the Mac, the prices are within $25. See here for more info - http://systemshootouts.org
"Security through obscurity" - There are 30,000,000 (that's 30 million) Macs out there. Hmmm, let's see...30 million is about half the population of the UK. Seems to be a fairly substantial number to me. Yet there aren't any viruses, trojan horses, malware, etc. on the Mac.
"No Software" - Really?!? There are about 18,000 pieces of software available on the Mac platform. And since you can run Windows natively on the Mac, that'll add an additional 22,000 programs. And since Macs are based on Unix, all of those applications will also run on a Mac. So what applications are unavailable?
I suspect, despite the carping we'll find on the Reg, that the iPhone will be as wildly successful in the EU as it is in the US. Apple is on target to sell over 800,000 iPhones this quarter in the US. And every one of them is sold with a 2 year contract, through a single service provider (AT&T), and with no subsidy.
There will be some that will complain that the iPhone costs too much. True it costs more than some (like the Razr), but it costs less than others (like the N95 and the La Prada). And my mini costs less than your Rolls. Your point? Buy what you can afford, and what meets your needs.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019