lsvtecjohn3
Apr 19, 02:57 PM
So the interesting fact is:
Verizon iPhone release didn't help Apple to stop losing marketshare although everyone said the deal will quadruple iPhone sales. :rolleyes:
iPhone Q1/11: 19 million (+ 2.5 million)
Android Q1/11: 38 million (+8 million)
Ouch. No wonder they are now sueing HTC and Samsung. If you can't beat them in the market, beat them in court. Apple must have learned that from Nokia (like they learned the choppy animations when you start third party apps in iOS 4.3.2 from Symbian).
iPhone: 4% of market, 50% of profit
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/10/30/iphone-4-of-market-50-of-profit/
So whats the point of market share if you're not making any money?
Verizon iPhone release didn't help Apple to stop losing marketshare although everyone said the deal will quadruple iPhone sales. :rolleyes:
iPhone Q1/11: 19 million (+ 2.5 million)
Android Q1/11: 38 million (+8 million)
Ouch. No wonder they are now sueing HTC and Samsung. If you can't beat them in the market, beat them in court. Apple must have learned that from Nokia (like they learned the choppy animations when you start third party apps in iOS 4.3.2 from Symbian).
iPhone: 4% of market, 50% of profit
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/10/30/iphone-4-of-market-50-of-profit/
So whats the point of market share if you're not making any money?
iWonderwhy
Mar 22, 07:25 PM
D.O.A.
iOS 5 will only further put these wannabes back in their place.
iOS 5 will only further put these wannabes back in their place.
11thIndian
Apr 11, 11:14 PM
So you really think it's just a handful of people on Macrumors?
Oh, and people I know.
So, how many do you think? Less than 10? Less than 100? What is your definition of "a lot"? Also please note I never said it was any kind of majority of FCP users or anything like that. I never said it was an industry-wide pandemic, although you'd like to put those words into my mouth as well. You'd also like to paint my claim that "a lot of pros are leaving FCP" as "combative", even though it's not. It's just an observation. I don't know why you're taking it so personally.
I'd say 25% of the current user base would be a lot.
Oh, and people I know.
So, how many do you think? Less than 10? Less than 100? What is your definition of "a lot"? Also please note I never said it was any kind of majority of FCP users or anything like that. I never said it was an industry-wide pandemic, although you'd like to put those words into my mouth as well. You'd also like to paint my claim that "a lot of pros are leaving FCP" as "combative", even though it's not. It's just an observation. I don't know why you're taking it so personally.
I'd say 25% of the current user base would be a lot.
Silentwave
Jul 14, 11:06 PM
get perpendicular (http://www.hitachigst.com/hdd/research/recording_head/pr/PerpendicularAnimation.html)
AARGH MY EARS!
Whoever came up with that abomination should be SHOT! UGH! they could have put together a nice little slideshow or whatever...but no, they had to make some stupid video with a horrible song i'll NEVER be able to get out of my head!
AARGH MY EARS!
Whoever came up with that abomination should be SHOT! UGH! they could have put together a nice little slideshow or whatever...but no, they had to make some stupid video with a horrible song i'll NEVER be able to get out of my head!
dethmaShine
Apr 19, 02:37 PM
WRONG! They weren't invented at Apple's Cupertino HQ, they were invented back in Palo Alto (Xerox PARC).
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes, which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
Who said Apple created the first GUI.
Jobs himself credits Xerox for their GUI. :rolleyes:
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes, which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
Who said Apple created the first GUI.
Jobs himself credits Xerox for their GUI. :rolleyes:
Tom359
Apr 25, 04:14 PM
This is why we need a "loser pays" system.
This would get rid if the "I'm going to sue you so you pay money to go away becuase it's cheaper than paying the legal bills." Our system has been corrupted by these nuisance law suits.
This would get rid if the "I'm going to sue you so you pay money to go away becuase it's cheaper than paying the legal bills." Our system has been corrupted by these nuisance law suits.
lilo777
Apr 19, 09:29 PM
Motorola wasn't the first company to create an iProduct and using an Apple may have infringed on The Beatles' production company's logo (not The Beatles' logo) but it was not a US company. Do you really think that Jobs got the idea for using the Apple name from The Beatles?
It does not matter that it was not US company as long as they were registered in US. Remember Apple suing Australian supermarket chain company for using as their log letter W which slightly resembled an apple?
It does not matter that it was not US company as long as they were registered in US. Remember Apple suing Australian supermarket chain company for using as their log letter W which slightly resembled an apple?
jmbear
Nov 29, 12:39 PM
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
Beaverman3001
Apr 6, 01:17 PM
Won't purchase any Mac with intel graphics.
ryanlaing
Apr 10, 01:41 AM
A bit of selective hearing on the part of MacRumors with the quotes they chose to use. At first the video sounds great, dude is hyping what he saw from Apple. But later he gets called out from another speculating Apple is making a very significant change and distancing Final Cut from the real 'pro' users, dumbing it down, etc, and the guy who has seen it gets real quiet.. He is asked if he will update his editing studio's workflow to the new Final Cut, and he basically danced around the question, pleaded the 5th, and made it pretty clear that he is holding back some reservations about how the industry will adapt to the changes.
Personally I'm very interested to see what they do, I'm sure it will have huge improvements on real time rendering and performance, sounds like the whole thing is being rewritten. But it does worry me that the program could become more for mass audience and no longer the pro application it has been for the past decade.
Personally I'm very interested to see what they do, I'm sure it will have huge improvements on real time rendering and performance, sounds like the whole thing is being rewritten. But it does worry me that the program could become more for mass audience and no longer the pro application it has been for the past decade.
farmboy
Apr 27, 09:02 AM
This is a lie
Just curious, do you use Reynolds Wrap or a store brand?
Just curious, do you use Reynolds Wrap or a store brand?
Rt&Dzine
Apr 27, 12:32 PM
So what would be good enough to convince you?
Nothing. These Birthers aren't going to give up their religion.
Nothing. These Birthers aren't going to give up their religion.
generik
Sep 19, 02:45 AM
Check out the surveys of tens of thousands of computer users at Consumer Reports. Apple's laptop reliability is within 1% of the best in the industry, and in the desktop department, Apple is by far the most reliable; some PCs are nearly twice as likely to need repairs as Macs. Rumor sites are hardly the best place to look for computer reliability data...
Ok... I suppose you like to put that much stock into Consumer Reports published by unbiased organisations! Now please excuse me, I need to place my order for some Snake Oil to take advantage of this "Buy 1 get 1 free" promotion on TV :rolleyes:
I don't really believe in all those reports, to date I have owned countless PCs (actually a lot of Thinkpads) and never once have I gotten a DOA, but yet there was actually one champion who got 5 DOAs in a row. Sure it can be argued that forums are hardly the best place to draw your sample, but how can it possibly be SO bad?! When I hardly ever got a single bad PC?
Edit: Oh and by the way, I have dealt with Applecare twice at various times for the last 4 Macs I owned (1 PBG4, 2 Minis, 1 Macbook), I have to say I am not WOWed by Apple's service at all. Likewise if you ask around here you will find that Dell actually gives pretty no quibble service. Perhaps they know what they are selling is crap and hence are not surprised when it goes bad.. who knows... but I'd rather deal with a humble organisation than a "Think different" know-it-all turd.
Ok... I suppose you like to put that much stock into Consumer Reports published by unbiased organisations! Now please excuse me, I need to place my order for some Snake Oil to take advantage of this "Buy 1 get 1 free" promotion on TV :rolleyes:
I don't really believe in all those reports, to date I have owned countless PCs (actually a lot of Thinkpads) and never once have I gotten a DOA, but yet there was actually one champion who got 5 DOAs in a row. Sure it can be argued that forums are hardly the best place to draw your sample, but how can it possibly be SO bad?! When I hardly ever got a single bad PC?
Edit: Oh and by the way, I have dealt with Applecare twice at various times for the last 4 Macs I owned (1 PBG4, 2 Minis, 1 Macbook), I have to say I am not WOWed by Apple's service at all. Likewise if you ask around here you will find that Dell actually gives pretty no quibble service. Perhaps they know what they are selling is crap and hence are not surprised when it goes bad.. who knows... but I'd rather deal with a humble organisation than a "Think different" know-it-all turd.
MacinDoc
Sep 19, 01:14 PM
I'm finding it hilarious that you can put yourself into Stevie's reality distortion field even after the Intel switch. Maybe while Apple had PPC, you could have said that. But now that direct hardware comparisons can be made, don't you think it's stupid that sub-$1000 PC notebooks have better processors than the best Apple has to offer?
And yes, the MBP is a top-of-the-line laptop. Apart from 2'' thick behemoths, it was one of the fastest portables around, and it was priced accordingly. Now it's still priced as such, but times are moving, technology is advancing, and if you compare pound for pound, the MBP is behind.
Sorry, but you're in an Intel RDF if you think that a 1.66 GHz C2D is a better processor than a 2.33 GHz CD. For practical purposes, the only differences at this time between CD and C2D are SSE3 instructions and slightly better power management. Nonetheless, you can rest assured that C2D MBPs will be SHIPPING by Sept. 25.
And yes, the MBP is a top-of-the-line laptop. Apart from 2'' thick behemoths, it was one of the fastest portables around, and it was priced accordingly. Now it's still priced as such, but times are moving, technology is advancing, and if you compare pound for pound, the MBP is behind.
Sorry, but you're in an Intel RDF if you think that a 1.66 GHz C2D is a better processor than a 2.33 GHz CD. For practical purposes, the only differences at this time between CD and C2D are SSE3 instructions and slightly better power management. Nonetheless, you can rest assured that C2D MBPs will be SHIPPING by Sept. 25.
shelterpaw
Jul 20, 11:11 AM
I think Logic can only use two cores/processors with a cludge to use the other two on a quad (by pretending it's a remote machine). Someone told me this though so I'm not 100% on that.I'm not sure either and I shouldn't have made the assumption. I know Ableton and Cubase do as I've used both and I'm now an avid Ableton user. I'd imagine Logic will take full advantage sometime soon since it's now one of Apple's pro applications. It certainly makes sense considering how bogged down your system gets once you load enough virtual instruments and effects.
shartypants
Apr 25, 02:05 PM
Those two people just want their "15 minutes of fame", be interesting to see how this plays out.
Tomaz
Aug 7, 04:34 PM
Good lord. Whatever happened to simplicity? It looked like a three ring circus up there today.
Now come on. Time machine? With a picture of outer space and stars? This looks so gimmicky. They are getting to be like Microsoft and just adding new features instead of making things easier and streamlined. Why not just improve the Backup program that comes with .Mac or include it for free? Do we really need another interface? To me it looks like form over function.
Exactly my thoughts!! Looks like a Trekie (how do you write that??) was let loose :D
Now come on. Time machine? With a picture of outer space and stars? This looks so gimmicky. They are getting to be like Microsoft and just adding new features instead of making things easier and streamlined. Why not just improve the Backup program that comes with .Mac or include it for free? Do we really need another interface? To me it looks like form over function.
Exactly my thoughts!! Looks like a Trekie (how do you write that??) was let loose :D
appleguy123
Feb 28, 06:32 PM
Where did I say he could not have an opinion? All I said was that his opinion should have no bearing on my life.
Agreed, but when you air your opinions in public, others have the right to challenge them.
I acknowledge that I misspoke. Opinions like this should be checked. Carry on.
Agreed, but when you air your opinions in public, others have the right to challenge them.
I acknowledge that I misspoke. Opinions like this should be checked. Carry on.
littleman23408
Nov 23, 12:53 PM
My copy shipped from Amazon, Can't wait for tomorrow!:D:D:D
Rafterman
Apr 27, 08:12 AM
Since I'm neither a criminal nor paranoid, I thought it was kind of cool/interesting too.
Its not about being a criminal or paranoid. This data is for the sole purpose of marketers to sell us crap.
Well, I'm tired of seeing ads everywhere I turn. You can't go to the bathroom now without seeing a ad shoved in your face and its becoming tiresome.
It reminds me of a line from Futurama:
Leela: Didn't you have ads in the 21st century?"
Fry: Well sure, but not in our dreams. Only on TV and radio, and in magazines, and movies, and at ball games... and on buses and milk cartons and t-shirts, and bananas and written on the sky. But not in dreams, no siree.
Well, Fry could have added our iPads and our phones too. Its disgusting already how much advertising has infiltrated our lives. You can't even read a news story on the internet without an ad being being intrusively shoved in your face.
Its not about being a criminal or paranoid. This data is for the sole purpose of marketers to sell us crap.
Well, I'm tired of seeing ads everywhere I turn. You can't go to the bathroom now without seeing a ad shoved in your face and its becoming tiresome.
It reminds me of a line from Futurama:
Leela: Didn't you have ads in the 21st century?"
Fry: Well sure, but not in our dreams. Only on TV and radio, and in magazines, and movies, and at ball games... and on buses and milk cartons and t-shirts, and bananas and written on the sky. But not in dreams, no siree.
Well, Fry could have added our iPads and our phones too. Its disgusting already how much advertising has infiltrated our lives. You can't even read a news story on the internet without an ad being being intrusively shoved in your face.
Dr.Gargoyle
Sep 13, 11:05 AM
and this got negative votes because...??????????
All the people that just coughed up $3k for a quad core MacPro.
All the people that just coughed up $3k for a quad core MacPro.
LagunaSol
Mar 23, 09:33 AM
Exactly. What people don't understand is that the iPad market is more comparable to the iPod Touch then the iPhone for which there still isn't any competition.
They're in denial.
They're also waiting for the "inevitable" buy-one-Android-tablet-get-one-free deals that are sure to happen (just like with smartphones). Right? ;)
They're in denial.
They're also waiting for the "inevitable" buy-one-Android-tablet-get-one-free deals that are sure to happen (just like with smartphones). Right? ;)
Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 12:13 PM
Funny also that we heard a DAMN THING from the media regarding the fact that ONLY CONGRESS can declare war.
What was your beloved Reagan up to in Grenada then? :rolleyes:
What was your beloved Reagan up to in Grenada then? :rolleyes:
blahblah100
Apr 6, 02:52 PM
:apple:
That's all I have to say.
Really? Are sales numbers what dictates one product is better than the other?
I'm not saying the Xoom is better (I haven't used one) but a reading of the posts on this thread would suggest that sales number indicate that one product is better than the other.
That's all I have to say.
Really? Are sales numbers what dictates one product is better than the other?
I'm not saying the Xoom is better (I haven't used one) but a reading of the posts on this thread would suggest that sales number indicate that one product is better than the other.
No comments:
Post a Comment