scaredpoet
Dec 27, 11:06 PM
There are more iPhones, Macs, etc. sold here than anywhere in the world.
Where are your figures to back this up?
I don't care. I'm an iPhone owner. I don't have to prove affection for Apple products to anyone.
I didn't ask you to prove your affection, nor do I care what your affections are. I'm pointing out that your argument has no validity, irrespective of where your "affections" may lie.
Again you are not getting it. Maybe you never been around thieves but they will after anything they can sell. It is not like if they can't get the iPhone they will pick up their ball and go home.
Of course not, but it deters thieves from using the online system for easy pickins to commit fraud. So it's not as easy to steal an iPhone online anymore, and other smartphones aren't hot sellers, so they'll go find some other scam that affects someone else.
Yes they are linking to the same site. Have you got proof that The Consumerist is an unreliable website?
The burden of proof lies with you, who is to trying to make a point with thin, if any, actual evidence. I'm not using nor relying on the Consumerist to make my point, so I don't have to prove its validity or lack thereof.
On the other hand, you are using ONLY the Consumerist (and a couple blogs that are blindly parroting the Consumerist without doing any research of their own), and just telling me I HAVE to beleive the consumerist because YOU say it's "well-respected." Well, *I* never really respected the Consumerist, because it has a history of blindly following sensationalist leads and has a marked anti-corporate leaning. I'm more inclined to respect sources that are objective and don't have a mission that blatantly compromises that objectivity. So sorry, you'll have to find additional evidence. And I'm not going to do your homework for you.
What in the hell does this have to do with zip codes. They are blocking NYC. Period.
They are blocking sales online, by zip code. that makes it the cornerstone of this issue, and has everything to do with it.
Now you're getting me pissed.
Why, because you can't effectively prove your case because it relies on a single, un-corroborated source? Then you're taking this too personally. Why you have so much invested in convincing people that AT&T is blocking iPhone sales - and only online - for network resource control, is beyond me. Especially when such a tactic would have no effect on the problem this alleged conspiracy would supposedly solve. And the fact that you need to sell it so hard that it "pisses [you] off" that someone would challenge your thin and faulty argument kinda confirms you don't really have a leg to stand on.
Where are your figures to back this up?
I don't care. I'm an iPhone owner. I don't have to prove affection for Apple products to anyone.
I didn't ask you to prove your affection, nor do I care what your affections are. I'm pointing out that your argument has no validity, irrespective of where your "affections" may lie.
Again you are not getting it. Maybe you never been around thieves but they will after anything they can sell. It is not like if they can't get the iPhone they will pick up their ball and go home.
Of course not, but it deters thieves from using the online system for easy pickins to commit fraud. So it's not as easy to steal an iPhone online anymore, and other smartphones aren't hot sellers, so they'll go find some other scam that affects someone else.
Yes they are linking to the same site. Have you got proof that The Consumerist is an unreliable website?
The burden of proof lies with you, who is to trying to make a point with thin, if any, actual evidence. I'm not using nor relying on the Consumerist to make my point, so I don't have to prove its validity or lack thereof.
On the other hand, you are using ONLY the Consumerist (and a couple blogs that are blindly parroting the Consumerist without doing any research of their own), and just telling me I HAVE to beleive the consumerist because YOU say it's "well-respected." Well, *I* never really respected the Consumerist, because it has a history of blindly following sensationalist leads and has a marked anti-corporate leaning. I'm more inclined to respect sources that are objective and don't have a mission that blatantly compromises that objectivity. So sorry, you'll have to find additional evidence. And I'm not going to do your homework for you.
What in the hell does this have to do with zip codes. They are blocking NYC. Period.
They are blocking sales online, by zip code. that makes it the cornerstone of this issue, and has everything to do with it.
Now you're getting me pissed.
Why, because you can't effectively prove your case because it relies on a single, un-corroborated source? Then you're taking this too personally. Why you have so much invested in convincing people that AT&T is blocking iPhone sales - and only online - for network resource control, is beyond me. Especially when such a tactic would have no effect on the problem this alleged conspiracy would supposedly solve. And the fact that you need to sell it so hard that it "pisses [you] off" that someone would challenge your thin and faulty argument kinda confirms you don't really have a leg to stand on.
peterja
Feb 18, 12:46 PM
Certainly hope it is not the last supper, Steve Jobs would be Jesus though.
Doctor Q
Oct 16, 04:38 PM
It will be a surprise if they don't name a phone iPhone after getting all those trademarks. They certainly wouldn't save it for another future product while coming out with an Apple-branded phone.
Is there any chance they have another name in mind for their product but got the patents in order to lock up the name to prevent competitors from using it? Personally, I doubt it.
Is there any chance they have another name in mind for their product but got the patents in order to lock up the name to prevent competitors from using it? Personally, I doubt it.
sbrhwkp3
Nov 11, 02:05 AM
Hahah entertaining. That stinks that Justin Long is done though. He was a good fit for these ads.
more...
Mac-Addict
Oct 24, 05:47 PM
going to get there at about 1730; coming to london from uni by train, lectures finish at 4ish, just want to get a tshirt; already ordered lepoard online.
doubt there's going to be a massive queue, and its closed between 4 and 6pm, so 5:30 sounds like a sensible time to me.
how about meet by the computer with macrumors up on the screen?? preferably on the dual 30" ones.
That is actually a good idea make sure people can see the screen :P Somewhere near the top of the stairs.
doubt there's going to be a massive queue, and its closed between 4 and 6pm, so 5:30 sounds like a sensible time to me.
how about meet by the computer with macrumors up on the screen?? preferably on the dual 30" ones.
That is actually a good idea make sure people can see the screen :P Somewhere near the top of the stairs.
void
Sep 15, 10:37 PM
Originally posted by jefhatfield
i hope by the time pentium 5 hits the shelves, there will be a G5 on the shelves
Doubtfully. It would be more likely a Power4. the G naming scheme is getting old really fast. It never takes this long to make a processor. Apple must really have something big up their sleves.
i hope by the time pentium 5 hits the shelves, there will be a G5 on the shelves
Doubtfully. It would be more likely a Power4. the G naming scheme is getting old really fast. It never takes this long to make a processor. Apple must really have something big up their sleves.
more...
iJohnHenry
May 2, 08:58 PM
The problem is, is that your government is saying things, then going back on it. Nothing is making much sense.
The woman killed in the incident turned out not to be bin Laden's wife.
Not my government, and in the spirit of action, details of someone's status in life can sometimes be miss-reported.
So what?
The woman killed in the incident turned out not to be bin Laden's wife.
Not my government, and in the spirit of action, details of someone's status in life can sometimes be miss-reported.
So what?
FX120
May 6, 08:07 PM
Eh.
I use Windows 7 at work and recently just built myself a new workstation. Total price including shipping with licenses for Windows 7 Business and Office 2010 was under $850 for a very good performing machine that does everything I need it to do (from Photoshop to AutoCAD) with ease. Right now I've got it totally loaded down and am using 7GB out of 8GB of RAM, and it's ticking along just happily.
I can't honestly say that I would be any more productive by using OS X, and I certainly don't go about my day missing anything in the OS.
Frankly I think it's all fine and good if you want to buy a Mac, but don't fool yourself into thinking that there aren't perfectly good and equally functional options out there for less money. I think the comparison of computers to cars is a stupid one. The difference between a Audi S4 and a Civic is a measurable, but I don't think that is a fair comparison. A more accurate example would be two Civics with equivalent engines and transmissions, only one has upgraded paint, rims, headlamps and leather upholstery while the other is base trim.
Apple serves a growing niche market of high end computers and without a doubt bests nearly every competitor with their excellent industrial design, and a price that reflects the engineering, materials, and slave labor craftsmanship.
But not everyone with a home stereo needs or wants to spend thousands of dollars on Krell mono block amplifiers when what ever comes in their home theater in a box is sufficient for their needs, and they don't want the cool design and minute performance increases.
I use Windows 7 at work and recently just built myself a new workstation. Total price including shipping with licenses for Windows 7 Business and Office 2010 was under $850 for a very good performing machine that does everything I need it to do (from Photoshop to AutoCAD) with ease. Right now I've got it totally loaded down and am using 7GB out of 8GB of RAM, and it's ticking along just happily.
I can't honestly say that I would be any more productive by using OS X, and I certainly don't go about my day missing anything in the OS.
Frankly I think it's all fine and good if you want to buy a Mac, but don't fool yourself into thinking that there aren't perfectly good and equally functional options out there for less money. I think the comparison of computers to cars is a stupid one. The difference between a Audi S4 and a Civic is a measurable, but I don't think that is a fair comparison. A more accurate example would be two Civics with equivalent engines and transmissions, only one has upgraded paint, rims, headlamps and leather upholstery while the other is base trim.
Apple serves a growing niche market of high end computers and without a doubt bests nearly every competitor with their excellent industrial design, and a price that reflects the engineering, materials, and slave labor craftsmanship.
But not everyone with a home stereo needs or wants to spend thousands of dollars on Krell mono block amplifiers when what ever comes in their home theater in a box is sufficient for their needs, and they don't want the cool design and minute performance increases.
more...
-766978.jpg "Hd Wallpapers For Nokia 5800.")
room237
Jan 6, 05:13 PM
I have the Push working for Facebook but I cant hear anything... The notifications just come up... How do I set the sound?
Should be in:
Settings > Notifications > Facebook
Although I still get NO notifications no matter what, so I can't guarantee that'll work :(
Should be in:
Settings > Notifications > Facebook
Although I still get NO notifications no matter what, so I can't guarantee that'll work :(
coumerelli
Sep 1, 07:38 AM
...unless you have a dynamic IP
...Which your ISP has kept a record of that YOU had that dynamic IP at a specific date and time. Your ISP knows when and for how long they hand out each IP address. It's called record keeping. I know which user on my LAN at my business has which DHCP given IP. It's simple historical data.
Think RIAA and all the John/Jane Doe lawsuits
...Which your ISP has kept a record of that YOU had that dynamic IP at a specific date and time. Your ISP knows when and for how long they hand out each IP address. It's called record keeping. I know which user on my LAN at my business has which DHCP given IP. It's simple historical data.
Think RIAA and all the John/Jane Doe lawsuits
more...
foneschlomo
Aug 14, 03:37 PM
These brands do not have to overtly say that they are superior to a Kia, because that is accepted by most people. The average person invests more time thinking about cars, houses and clothing than they do about computers- face it, we're geeks. Apple is attempting to create, for themselves, a premium image that goes beyond people who are invested heavily in this kind of decision. Similar to when premium beers started hitting the market, or premium mens skin care products. Many people will tell you they prefer sam adams, though if pressed to tell you why it is better, many couldnt come up with good reasons (maybe taste). Same with Skin Care. I dont use the store brand stuff anymore, but I coudlnt tell you why the brand I use is really better- I know little about that stuff, so I have to go based on product claims. Most people arent that sensitive that they are going to cry when a commercial implies their purchase isnt as cool as someone elses.
Beer commercials do frequently point out that their competitors beers are crap- in a crowded market, you have to give customers hueristics. Computers are something that people put research into, but generally do not even understand what all of those things mean- trust me, I've been involved in many computer purchases for relatives and friends.
Beer commercials do frequently point out that their competitors beers are crap- in a crowded market, you have to give customers hueristics. Computers are something that people put research into, but generally do not even understand what all of those things mean- trust me, I've been involved in many computer purchases for relatives and friends.
swiftaw
Apr 7, 07:01 PM
50 billion out of a budget of what? A trillion and a bit? What's really ridiculous is all the petty bitching coming out of DC over what amounts to less than 5% of the total. The Titanic is hit and two engineers are fighting over whether or not to turn on one pump.
I think the issue is that included in that 50 billion is money that forms 100% of certain program budgets (e.g. planned parenthood). If it was a horizontal cur (5% off every program budget) then it wouldn't be as huge of an issue.
If the government "shuts down", not much will change. Life will continue.
Unless you're a federal employee, in which case get used to not having a paycheck for a while. Or, like me, are someone who is waiting for the federal government to process some very important paperwork.
I think the issue is that included in that 50 billion is money that forms 100% of certain program budgets (e.g. planned parenthood). If it was a horizontal cur (5% off every program budget) then it wouldn't be as huge of an issue.
If the government "shuts down", not much will change. Life will continue.
Unless you're a federal employee, in which case get used to not having a paycheck for a while. Or, like me, are someone who is waiting for the federal government to process some very important paperwork.
more...
MikeTheC
Nov 3, 01:19 AM
I'd like to tackle a few points in the discussion here.
Dirt-Cheap vs. Reasonable Economy (a.k.a. "The Wal-Martization of America"):
Apple has always had the philosophy that their name needs to mean a superior product. They have tended to shy away from producing bargain-basement products because it tends to take away from the "high-quality" reputation they are otherwise known for and desire to continue cultivating.
At direct odds with this is the pervasive and continually-perpetuated attitude in the U.S. (and elsewhere, perhaps) that the universe revolves exclusively around the mantra of "faster, cheaper, better", with emphasis on the latter two: cheaper and better. What I have noticed in my own 34 years on this planet is a considerable change in attitude, most easily summed up as people in general having their tastes almost "anti-cultured". It isn't "... cheaper, better" for them, but rather "cheaper = better". You can see this at all levels. Businesses, despite their claims to the contrary, tend to prioritize the executives specifically and the company generally making money over any other possible consideration. They try and drive their workforce from well-paid, highly competent full-time people, to part-time, no-medical or retirement-benefits-earning, low-experience, low-paid domestic help; and the second prong of their pincer movement is to outsource the rest.
Or, in short, "let's make a lot of money, but don't spend any in the process."
My goal here is not to get into the lengthy and well-trod discussion of corporate exploitation of the masses; rather it is to show the Wal-Mart effect at all levels.
More and more over the years I find that people have no taste. Steve Jobs accuses Microsoft of having no taste (a point I am not trying to argue against); I think however that he's hit a little low of the mark. The attitude out there seems to be one of total self-focus -- and not merely "me first", but rather "me first, me last, and ******* everybody else". They're the "I don't want to know anything", "all I want to do is get out of having to do anything I can, including not using my brain except for pleasure-seeking tasks," and "For God's sake, I surely don't want to have to spend more than the minimum on a computer" bunch.
Now, clearly, not everyone in the U.S. is like this; obviously, if they were, Apple would have no customers at all. But this is a real and fairly large group. Short of Apple practically giving away their computers, it's hard to imagine them being all that specifically attractive to that demographic. Moreover, those people are not merely non-enthusiasts; they want all of the benefits of having this trendy computer thing, but wish to be encumbered by none of the responsibilities.
To my way of thinking, frankly however large this group of people is, I would encourage Apple to avoid appealing to them whenever and wherever possible. If this means continuing the perception mentioned above of being a computer "for yuppies", then so be it.
Market Share Percentage and it's Perception:
Clearly, there is something to be gained by having the perception that "everyone's doing it". It's part of the reason why smoking, drinking, under-age sex, and drugs are so amazingly popular with us human beings the world over. It's part of the reason (maybe even a significant part) that iPods are so incredibly successful. Now, before someone here puts forth the argument that, "Well, you know, Apple's got a better design, and that's what attracts people to it," -- and that's quite true in it's own right -- let's break things down a bit.
Many animals develop and learn through a process called "patterning", and through imitation. Humans are not psychologically exempt from this; we do it all the time, and particularly so when we're younger. It's the fundamental force behind fashion, fads, and trends. There are definitely positive benefits to this. Kids, as they develop their social skills, learn from others the socially approved ways of behaving and interacting. Please note I did not use the term "correct" nor "right", but merely the "approved" (or, one might call it the "accepted") way. We also learn and learn from such things as casualty (actions have consequences), and other factors too numerous to pursue here.
Anyhow, all of these factors are in operation when it comes to buying technology (which is the boiled-down essence of what we're talking about here). Microsoft has learned this game, and has played it well for many years. Regardless of the "technically, we know it's bulls**t" truth, the reality of it is (and has been) when an unsavvy person walks into a store to buy a computer, and they see ten Windows-running computers on the shelf, and only one or two Mac OS-running computers there, they get the prima-facia notion that most computers are Windows computers, and by extension that statistically most people must be running Windows; therefore they should buy a Windows computer, too. There's a whole other subject here about how the ignorant sales people in electronics stores essentially use the same process to unwittingly deceive themselves into thinking the same thing. This is one of the factors which helped catapult Microsoft into the major, successful company they became. In truth, this specific scenario is a bit more 1994 than but it helps to explain why most people today who own a computer have only known life in a Microsoft world. As enough people attained this status, it became the dominant developmental factor in the world at large, which sort of helped to self-perpetuate the effect.
Let's also not lose sight of the fact that these statistics of percentage of platform used by definition leave out one particular group of people -- those who don't use a computer at all. After all, if you don't own a computer, you can't browse the web, send or receive email, or have your computer platform of choice tabulated in any kind of statistical data sample. One might be tempted to think that such a notion is silly, but it isn't. True, once we get to the point that only a statistically insignificant number of people on this planet don't own a computer (which is still far from the reality of today), counting their numbers won't matter for statistical purposes, it does matter. Why? Well, the statistics as presented make it seem like Macs (or Linux, or anything else) are only used by a subset of people on this planet. Not true! They're only used by a subset of a subset, the latter being the number of people on this planet who have a computer to be counted in such statistics in the first place.
Also, statistics vary depending on a variety of factors. It's also easy to write them off as a business or let them drop "below the radar" by various statistical gathering or reporting agencies; or merely through the informal process on the part of business owners of anecdotal evidence. Here's a perfect example of that very factor.
When the Macintosh came on the scene in 1984, and as it continued through it's early incarnations in the mid 1980s, it entered the fray of lots of non-defacto computer platforms. Or, to put it another way, it "came late to the party". So, you had all these computer dealers who were already trying to sell Apple ][s, TRS-80s, Commodore 64s (and later, C128s), Timex Sinclairs, an assortment of other PCs running proprietary OSs, amongst which were those which ran this thing called MS-DOS, and so forth and so on. Also, people who wound up buying Macs didn't exactly fit the same profile as those who had bought the other computers. You had artists -- literary, graphic, musical, etc. -- buying these things. While they didn't mind being technologically self-sufficent, they were not people who were interested in such things as tearing their computer apart and having a go at it's various electronic innards. Anyhow, they formed their own communities, and for various reasons didn't get a lot of support initially from local dealers and computer software stores. However, Apple did get quite a number of companies to write software or build hardware for their Mac platform. These companies started using mail-order as a significant portion of their sales strategy. Consequently, Mac owners used it as their more-and-more-primary computer-stuff purchasing regimen.
Ultimately, fewer and fewer Mac owners were going locally to buy stuff, due to availability and pricing. What then happened largely was this "perception" on the part of shop owners (and later their suppliers, etc.) that nobody out there used a Mac. As a result of their mis-perception, companies began to simply ignore us Mac users (I was around back then), acting as if we didn't exist; or at the least there weren't enough of us to bother supporting us or even trying to make money from us.
Now, at this point there's no denying there's more Windows boxen out there than Mac boxen, but this is still a valid factor and should not be discounted.
Besides, what number you hear quoted still, as it has for many, many years, depends on what your source is. I've heard numbers within the past month that range from 4.1 percent to 6 percent. Which one is correct? Does anyone even really know?
Since we can run Windows, why run Mac OS? (paranoia of market erosion):
I've been hearing this since before Apple ever disclosed their plans to switch to x86. It was actually one of the topics frequently -- and rather hotly, as I recall -- debated in these forums. However, I think the fear is greatly unjustified, and here's why.
First, let's look at it from an economic standpoint: Buying a Mac to run Windows is hardly the most cost-effective approach.
Second, let's look at it from a socio-economic standpoint: People don't buy a Mac to run Windows so much as they buy it to either try something different, or to escape Windows and the onslaught of problems that, in more recent years, it has brought to them.
Third, and while this really applies more to tech-savvy people: Windows represents a security and stability liability which most other operating systems do not.
In other words, by and large, people out there who are switching to a Mac are doing more than merely switching hardware: they're switching OS platforms. The fact that they can run Windows on a Mac is only slightly more of interest to them than is running an x86-based distro of GNU/Linux.
Bottom Line: Apple will appeal to and convert those that they can, and those are the hearts and minds which are the most vital and important anyhow. Let's not forget the relative merits of dummy-dropping. Sometimes, Darwin's theories of Evolution are more satisfyingly applied sociologically than biologically.
Dirt-Cheap vs. Reasonable Economy (a.k.a. "The Wal-Martization of America"):
Apple has always had the philosophy that their name needs to mean a superior product. They have tended to shy away from producing bargain-basement products because it tends to take away from the "high-quality" reputation they are otherwise known for and desire to continue cultivating.
At direct odds with this is the pervasive and continually-perpetuated attitude in the U.S. (and elsewhere, perhaps) that the universe revolves exclusively around the mantra of "faster, cheaper, better", with emphasis on the latter two: cheaper and better. What I have noticed in my own 34 years on this planet is a considerable change in attitude, most easily summed up as people in general having their tastes almost "anti-cultured". It isn't "... cheaper, better" for them, but rather "cheaper = better". You can see this at all levels. Businesses, despite their claims to the contrary, tend to prioritize the executives specifically and the company generally making money over any other possible consideration. They try and drive their workforce from well-paid, highly competent full-time people, to part-time, no-medical or retirement-benefits-earning, low-experience, low-paid domestic help; and the second prong of their pincer movement is to outsource the rest.
Or, in short, "let's make a lot of money, but don't spend any in the process."
My goal here is not to get into the lengthy and well-trod discussion of corporate exploitation of the masses; rather it is to show the Wal-Mart effect at all levels.
More and more over the years I find that people have no taste. Steve Jobs accuses Microsoft of having no taste (a point I am not trying to argue against); I think however that he's hit a little low of the mark. The attitude out there seems to be one of total self-focus -- and not merely "me first", but rather "me first, me last, and ******* everybody else". They're the "I don't want to know anything", "all I want to do is get out of having to do anything I can, including not using my brain except for pleasure-seeking tasks," and "For God's sake, I surely don't want to have to spend more than the minimum on a computer" bunch.
Now, clearly, not everyone in the U.S. is like this; obviously, if they were, Apple would have no customers at all. But this is a real and fairly large group. Short of Apple practically giving away their computers, it's hard to imagine them being all that specifically attractive to that demographic. Moreover, those people are not merely non-enthusiasts; they want all of the benefits of having this trendy computer thing, but wish to be encumbered by none of the responsibilities.
To my way of thinking, frankly however large this group of people is, I would encourage Apple to avoid appealing to them whenever and wherever possible. If this means continuing the perception mentioned above of being a computer "for yuppies", then so be it.
Market Share Percentage and it's Perception:
Clearly, there is something to be gained by having the perception that "everyone's doing it". It's part of the reason why smoking, drinking, under-age sex, and drugs are so amazingly popular with us human beings the world over. It's part of the reason (maybe even a significant part) that iPods are so incredibly successful. Now, before someone here puts forth the argument that, "Well, you know, Apple's got a better design, and that's what attracts people to it," -- and that's quite true in it's own right -- let's break things down a bit.
Many animals develop and learn through a process called "patterning", and through imitation. Humans are not psychologically exempt from this; we do it all the time, and particularly so when we're younger. It's the fundamental force behind fashion, fads, and trends. There are definitely positive benefits to this. Kids, as they develop their social skills, learn from others the socially approved ways of behaving and interacting. Please note I did not use the term "correct" nor "right", but merely the "approved" (or, one might call it the "accepted") way. We also learn and learn from such things as casualty (actions have consequences), and other factors too numerous to pursue here.
Anyhow, all of these factors are in operation when it comes to buying technology (which is the boiled-down essence of what we're talking about here). Microsoft has learned this game, and has played it well for many years. Regardless of the "technically, we know it's bulls**t" truth, the reality of it is (and has been) when an unsavvy person walks into a store to buy a computer, and they see ten Windows-running computers on the shelf, and only one or two Mac OS-running computers there, they get the prima-facia notion that most computers are Windows computers, and by extension that statistically most people must be running Windows; therefore they should buy a Windows computer, too. There's a whole other subject here about how the ignorant sales people in electronics stores essentially use the same process to unwittingly deceive themselves into thinking the same thing. This is one of the factors which helped catapult Microsoft into the major, successful company they became. In truth, this specific scenario is a bit more 1994 than but it helps to explain why most people today who own a computer have only known life in a Microsoft world. As enough people attained this status, it became the dominant developmental factor in the world at large, which sort of helped to self-perpetuate the effect.
Let's also not lose sight of the fact that these statistics of percentage of platform used by definition leave out one particular group of people -- those who don't use a computer at all. After all, if you don't own a computer, you can't browse the web, send or receive email, or have your computer platform of choice tabulated in any kind of statistical data sample. One might be tempted to think that such a notion is silly, but it isn't. True, once we get to the point that only a statistically insignificant number of people on this planet don't own a computer (which is still far from the reality of today), counting their numbers won't matter for statistical purposes, it does matter. Why? Well, the statistics as presented make it seem like Macs (or Linux, or anything else) are only used by a subset of people on this planet. Not true! They're only used by a subset of a subset, the latter being the number of people on this planet who have a computer to be counted in such statistics in the first place.
Also, statistics vary depending on a variety of factors. It's also easy to write them off as a business or let them drop "below the radar" by various statistical gathering or reporting agencies; or merely through the informal process on the part of business owners of anecdotal evidence. Here's a perfect example of that very factor.
When the Macintosh came on the scene in 1984, and as it continued through it's early incarnations in the mid 1980s, it entered the fray of lots of non-defacto computer platforms. Or, to put it another way, it "came late to the party". So, you had all these computer dealers who were already trying to sell Apple ][s, TRS-80s, Commodore 64s (and later, C128s), Timex Sinclairs, an assortment of other PCs running proprietary OSs, amongst which were those which ran this thing called MS-DOS, and so forth and so on. Also, people who wound up buying Macs didn't exactly fit the same profile as those who had bought the other computers. You had artists -- literary, graphic, musical, etc. -- buying these things. While they didn't mind being technologically self-sufficent, they were not people who were interested in such things as tearing their computer apart and having a go at it's various electronic innards. Anyhow, they formed their own communities, and for various reasons didn't get a lot of support initially from local dealers and computer software stores. However, Apple did get quite a number of companies to write software or build hardware for their Mac platform. These companies started using mail-order as a significant portion of their sales strategy. Consequently, Mac owners used it as their more-and-more-primary computer-stuff purchasing regimen.
Ultimately, fewer and fewer Mac owners were going locally to buy stuff, due to availability and pricing. What then happened largely was this "perception" on the part of shop owners (and later their suppliers, etc.) that nobody out there used a Mac. As a result of their mis-perception, companies began to simply ignore us Mac users (I was around back then), acting as if we didn't exist; or at the least there weren't enough of us to bother supporting us or even trying to make money from us.
Now, at this point there's no denying there's more Windows boxen out there than Mac boxen, but this is still a valid factor and should not be discounted.
Besides, what number you hear quoted still, as it has for many, many years, depends on what your source is. I've heard numbers within the past month that range from 4.1 percent to 6 percent. Which one is correct? Does anyone even really know?
Since we can run Windows, why run Mac OS? (paranoia of market erosion):
I've been hearing this since before Apple ever disclosed their plans to switch to x86. It was actually one of the topics frequently -- and rather hotly, as I recall -- debated in these forums. However, I think the fear is greatly unjustified, and here's why.
First, let's look at it from an economic standpoint: Buying a Mac to run Windows is hardly the most cost-effective approach.
Second, let's look at it from a socio-economic standpoint: People don't buy a Mac to run Windows so much as they buy it to either try something different, or to escape Windows and the onslaught of problems that, in more recent years, it has brought to them.
Third, and while this really applies more to tech-savvy people: Windows represents a security and stability liability which most other operating systems do not.
In other words, by and large, people out there who are switching to a Mac are doing more than merely switching hardware: they're switching OS platforms. The fact that they can run Windows on a Mac is only slightly more of interest to them than is running an x86-based distro of GNU/Linux.
Bottom Line: Apple will appeal to and convert those that they can, and those are the hearts and minds which are the most vital and important anyhow. Let's not forget the relative merits of dummy-dropping. Sometimes, Darwin's theories of Evolution are more satisfyingly applied sociologically than biologically.
john123
Mar 26, 06:07 PM
I believe this is a side street, not University. Looks like a cafe on Bryant.
Also, Steve wears the same close because he has better things to think about in the morning than what to wear. That's my understanding. Hell, I wear the same thing for the same reason.
I agree that it's a side street, but don't think it's Bryant. My CA office is just off Bryant, so I've walked it up and down and can't place it. The reflection is what suggests a side street to me.
Also, Steve wears the same close because he has better things to think about in the morning than what to wear. That's my understanding. Hell, I wear the same thing for the same reason.
I agree that it's a side street, but don't think it's Bryant. My CA office is just off Bryant, so I've walked it up and down and can't place it. The reflection is what suggests a side street to me.
more...
Liquorpuki
May 3, 07:09 PM
In history, war is the driver of innovation...from the measly dart, to the nuclear warhead.
Yeah Somalia has been at war for years and their technology has utterly skyrocketed.
Fun fact: LED TV's were invented during wartime because our soldiers in Afghanistan were tired of hauling their 50 inch tube tv's through the desert.
Advanced in bomb detection leads to better sensors for medical diagnosis.
Advances in robots leads to better prosthetics and automating.
Advances in field portable displays leads to large LED screens for remote surgery.
Advances in nanotech will potentially change everything we know of as "technology" today.
Those are all blanket statements that could be wrong depending on what example you use. IE the best Medical sensor out there is the MRI and it wasn't invented to detect bombs. Actually if you try to use an MRI to detect a bomb, there's a good chance you'll blow yourself up.
Many of the above will assist the "cure for cancer", or whatever it is that scares you to death. If you think that during "peacetime", everyone and their mom will devote their lives to "finding the cure", you are sadly mistaken. Humans are lazy...until their life is immediately threatened. War is why we evolved so far past the next "animal".
Doesn't cancer immediately threaten lives?
Yeah Somalia has been at war for years and their technology has utterly skyrocketed.
Fun fact: LED TV's were invented during wartime because our soldiers in Afghanistan were tired of hauling their 50 inch tube tv's through the desert.
Advanced in bomb detection leads to better sensors for medical diagnosis.
Advances in robots leads to better prosthetics and automating.
Advances in field portable displays leads to large LED screens for remote surgery.
Advances in nanotech will potentially change everything we know of as "technology" today.
Those are all blanket statements that could be wrong depending on what example you use. IE the best Medical sensor out there is the MRI and it wasn't invented to detect bombs. Actually if you try to use an MRI to detect a bomb, there's a good chance you'll blow yourself up.
Many of the above will assist the "cure for cancer", or whatever it is that scares you to death. If you think that during "peacetime", everyone and their mom will devote their lives to "finding the cure", you are sadly mistaken. Humans are lazy...until their life is immediately threatened. War is why we evolved so far past the next "animal".
Doesn't cancer immediately threaten lives?
logandzwon
Mar 1, 06:53 AM
From the talks I've had with people from the Apple Professional Services group Apple feels that real world use of OS X server is very limited. Most of their work is integrating Active Directory with Open Directory. They see most of their customers using OS X Server as the authentication, group policy, and file servers for the mac units in their customer's businesses.
more...
ipoppy
Nov 6, 07:09 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2009/11/05/why-an-rfid-enabled-iphone/)
Multiple reports have come in that Apple is researching (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/11/05/apple-experimenting-with-rfid-enabled-iphone-prototypes/) RFID (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/07/09/new-apple-iphone-patent-applications-surface-object-and-facial-recognition-messaging-voice-modulation/) integration (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/07/02/haptic-feedback-fingerprint-identification-and-rfid-tag-readers-in-future-iphones/) into the iPhone, but some may still be wondering what such functionality would bring to the table for consumers.
Firstly, we should note that RFID is a catch-all term that describes a vast array of technologies and standards. RFID tags can be relatively large and battery-powered, such as ones used in toll collection, to small "passive" tags that can be embedded into credit cards, drivers licenses (called "Enhanced Drivers Licenses" in the U.S.), passports, or stuck onto a piece of merchandise.
Currently, cell-phone usage of RFID technology is centered around Near Field Communication (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_Field_Communication) (NFC). NFC has three main usage scenarios: a phone acting as an RFID tag; a phone acting as an RFID reader; and peer to peer communication (P2P).
In RFID tag mode, a phone could be used as a payment device (like a credit card), an identity card, or act as a car key. In RFID reader mode the phone would be able to interact with tags in its vicinity. This article and video (http://www.nearfield.org/2009/04/iphone-rfid-nfc) demonstrates how an iPhone with RFID could use physical objects to control media playback. And in P2P mode, Bluetooth pairing can be streamlined.
These are just a few ways that RFID could be used in an iPhone. When or if it becomes a reality isn't clear, but hopefully now you have a better idea of what the potential is for Apple's research in this area.
Article Link: Why an RFID-enabled iPhone? (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2009/11/05/why-an-rfid-enabled-iphone/)
I must say its a great respond from Macrumors team. Many people, including me:D, where wondering what that technology is about. Now I am getting picture.
I think RFID is step forward and good approach from Apple. I understand people's distrust for this technology but if its done properly it can be timesaver in daily tasks.
Multiple reports have come in that Apple is researching (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/11/05/apple-experimenting-with-rfid-enabled-iphone-prototypes/) RFID (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/07/09/new-apple-iphone-patent-applications-surface-object-and-facial-recognition-messaging-voice-modulation/) integration (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/07/02/haptic-feedback-fingerprint-identification-and-rfid-tag-readers-in-future-iphones/) into the iPhone, but some may still be wondering what such functionality would bring to the table for consumers.
Firstly, we should note that RFID is a catch-all term that describes a vast array of technologies and standards. RFID tags can be relatively large and battery-powered, such as ones used in toll collection, to small "passive" tags that can be embedded into credit cards, drivers licenses (called "Enhanced Drivers Licenses" in the U.S.), passports, or stuck onto a piece of merchandise.
Currently, cell-phone usage of RFID technology is centered around Near Field Communication (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_Field_Communication) (NFC). NFC has three main usage scenarios: a phone acting as an RFID tag; a phone acting as an RFID reader; and peer to peer communication (P2P).
In RFID tag mode, a phone could be used as a payment device (like a credit card), an identity card, or act as a car key. In RFID reader mode the phone would be able to interact with tags in its vicinity. This article and video (http://www.nearfield.org/2009/04/iphone-rfid-nfc) demonstrates how an iPhone with RFID could use physical objects to control media playback. And in P2P mode, Bluetooth pairing can be streamlined.
These are just a few ways that RFID could be used in an iPhone. When or if it becomes a reality isn't clear, but hopefully now you have a better idea of what the potential is for Apple's research in this area.
Article Link: Why an RFID-enabled iPhone? (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2009/11/05/why-an-rfid-enabled-iphone/)
I must say its a great respond from Macrumors team. Many people, including me:D, where wondering what that technology is about. Now I am getting picture.
I think RFID is step forward and good approach from Apple. I understand people's distrust for this technology but if its done properly it can be timesaver in daily tasks.
tmoerel
Apr 21, 06:25 AM
1) Soliataire
2) Minesweaper
3) Disk Defrag
4) A CD Burner
5) Spelling Checker!!!! (see 1 & 2)
2) Minesweaper
3) Disk Defrag
4) A CD Burner
5) Spelling Checker!!!! (see 1 & 2)
Mattie Num Nums
Apr 13, 03:31 PM
Does anybody know what happened to nadyne the Microsoft rep that used to hang around MacRumors and had good tips on how to solve certain issues with Office?
I urgently need to get the template support in PowerPoint working correctly...
It seems that her last post to the forum happened in October 2010...
She probably left this place. Why would anyone want to do business here when all people do is trash Microsoft.
I urgently need to get the template support in PowerPoint working correctly...
It seems that her last post to the forum happened in October 2010...
She probably left this place. Why would anyone want to do business here when all people do is trash Microsoft.
mac1984user
Apr 12, 03:43 PM
Does anyone know if this update fixes the issue of Office depositing some 'recovered files' in the trash upon every boot? That was sooo annoying. Every time I booted, I'd have to empty the trash. Other people had the same issue, but there wasn't a proper solution. One Microsoft employee just said, 'it's safe to empty your trash.' That's not the solution we're looking for! Why are random files being generated in the trash in the first place?! Sorry. =)
aafuss1
Nov 11, 02:45 AM
The ads are even more funnier in Japanese.
munkees
Mar 19, 12:37 AM
it took 10,000 pictures (99%) in auto setting, on my Canon T1i, to learn that my pictures sucks, and now I using Av, and have learned lots about f/stops, and lenses, photos are now starting to look better, learning buy seeing other pictures and how they did it.
Learned that iPhoto has nothing magical about it.
I am not big on post processing unless I want HDR or tilt-shift. I do very little modification.
Learned that iPhoto has nothing magical about it.
I am not big on post processing unless I want HDR or tilt-shift. I do very little modification.
SactoGuy18
Apr 5, 07:23 AM
Here's the gist of the problem: too generous state worker union pensions. I wouldn't be surprised that these pensions are extensively re-done to drastically cut its cost in order to reduce state budget deficits.
twoodcc
May 14, 06:22 PM
Very much agree, we have had great new participation for new users, even 100-200 ppd from a user is great and still will help the team out.
Since begining again and having lower points, I have now 2 dangerous enemies that are trying to take me out, stay away daygokid619 and Oculus, I have to admit it really is fun and I will make sure that none of you overtake me so I have recruited my iBook and old P4 to give me an extra 200ppd :eek::p
I might build a system soon as well as my main is getting really old, should be able to afford it in 3-6 months, what do you guys recommend, I am on a thight budget. Thinking an AMD Phenom with 4gb of ram and a Nvidea gtx260?
agreed. and i've seen other very active forums where they have give-aways and stuff for the "folder of the month" and such. i've even seen some members give other members video cards or computers, as long as they agree to use it for folding.
as far as a new system on a budget - what is your budget, and when do you plan on buying? both of those factors play a part
Since begining again and having lower points, I have now 2 dangerous enemies that are trying to take me out, stay away daygokid619 and Oculus, I have to admit it really is fun and I will make sure that none of you overtake me so I have recruited my iBook and old P4 to give me an extra 200ppd :eek::p
I might build a system soon as well as my main is getting really old, should be able to afford it in 3-6 months, what do you guys recommend, I am on a thight budget. Thinking an AMD Phenom with 4gb of ram and a Nvidea gtx260?
agreed. and i've seen other very active forums where they have give-aways and stuff for the "folder of the month" and such. i've even seen some members give other members video cards or computers, as long as they agree to use it for folding.
as far as a new system on a budget - what is your budget, and when do you plan on buying? both of those factors play a part
No comments:
Post a Comment