.jpg%3FpropertyName%3DCallaway%2BVillas%26constrainWidth%3D400%26constrainHeight%3D460%26format%3Djpeg%26compression%3D0.9%26cornerRadius%3D30%26shadow.enabled%3Dtrue%26shadow.color%3DFF000000%26shadow.direction%3D0.0%26shadow.blur%3D10%26source.0%3D%252FResources%252FThemes%252FMaroon%2BTan%252Fimages%252Fmain-top-bg-header.png%26source.0.bounds%3D-506.-22.0.0 "Blinn College | Callaway")
Banjhiyi
Mar 26, 04:49 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
This might explain the shambles that is 10.6.7.
Last release before Lion - semi-brick your machine to force an upgrade.
iOS 4.3, last release before iPhone 5 - murder your battery to force an upgrade.
You've guessed it, I'm not very happy with Apple at the moment. So which is it; underhand tactics, sloppy Q&A or declining standards?
This might explain the shambles that is 10.6.7.
Last release before Lion - semi-brick your machine to force an upgrade.
iOS 4.3, last release before iPhone 5 - murder your battery to force an upgrade.
You've guessed it, I'm not very happy with Apple at the moment. So which is it; underhand tactics, sloppy Q&A or declining standards?
KnightWRX
Mar 26, 07:58 AM
2) $129 is too much. This one cracks me up. Apple is bundling a $500 product into the OS (and other OS based servers are far more expensive) and people think $129 is too much?
Apple is bundling a bunch of GUI management tools, akin to Webmin. Was that worth 500$ before ? Nope. Is it more expensive elsewhere ? No. Let's face it, OS X Server was always a toy Unix compared to other big-Iron Unix systems and even to Linux as far as enterprise support goes. Volume management, hello Cupertino ?
Their old archaic way of managing storage is atrocious and no, I don't necessarily want to hook up with a huge array and run Xsan, I just want to intelligently manage my local storage. No, just RAID1 volumes is not enough, I want my volumes logical and independant of my physical volumes. I want to be able to move logical extents to new physical extents without having to take down anything on the box.
And what about those GUI tools ? I can't even just do X11 tunneling over SSH to my desktop to run them, I have either run their Remote Desktop stuff or use a 3rd party solution like VNC... What good are they ? At least make them web based (HP Systems Management Homepage type stuff) and join in to what the rest of the industry got clued into years ago if you don't want to code GUI stuff over X11.
And other OS based servers are not more expensive. Solaris is free (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/downloads/index.html). I won't even bother linking to all the free distributions of Linux that are ready for the server (Fedora, OpenSuSE, Arch, Ubuntu). The BSDs. Unix server product vendors make their money off of support contracts, not the actual software itself, an arena Apple obviously wants no part of.
All the bits and pieces of server software is mostly re-packaged open source components nowadays anyhow. Most every vendor out there is using Apache and Tomcat in their web-based products, Postfix on the mail side, I've seen a lot of MySQL and PostgreSQL based products (HP uses both, MySQL I've seen in their Output Manager product, PostgreSQL in their System Fault Management, Symantec uses MySQL for Brightmail), and let's not even get into OpenSSL and OpenSSH...
Heck, even Apple does this. OS X server is just a bunch of open source components packaged up together. Apache, OpenLDAP, OpenSSH, ClamAV...
So please, pretty please, with a cherry on top, let's not call OS X Server something worth 500$ and compare it to "others that are more expensive but in actuality are free to download and run and only expensive to get vendor support for".
This rant was longer than it should have been. I love OS X as a desktop OS. I'd pay 129$ for a Lion upgrade with my eyes closed. Best of both worlds. Unix underpinnings and powerful command-line (everything is there!) with integration for all my server products yet fast and easy to setup GUI that is mostly consistent so as to attract a large user base that makes it a good proposition for commercial software vendors to port their packages to. Apple just never got really serious about the server side of it (and lets face it, it's not their business and they obviously want no part of the entreprise market) and I'm not faulting them for that. Let's not be as disingenious as to claim their selling you a 500$ product for 129$ though.
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Snow Leopard offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
See how this little change in your comment still makes it apply very much to the MacRumors crowd ? ;) The fact is, you're not really dealing with technical people on MacRumors, no matter how much some of them pretend they are. Heck, some of them still believe that HTML is a programming language and that they are web developers because their tools of choice are PhotoShop and Dreamweaver.
Apple is bundling a bunch of GUI management tools, akin to Webmin. Was that worth 500$ before ? Nope. Is it more expensive elsewhere ? No. Let's face it, OS X Server was always a toy Unix compared to other big-Iron Unix systems and even to Linux as far as enterprise support goes. Volume management, hello Cupertino ?
Their old archaic way of managing storage is atrocious and no, I don't necessarily want to hook up with a huge array and run Xsan, I just want to intelligently manage my local storage. No, just RAID1 volumes is not enough, I want my volumes logical and independant of my physical volumes. I want to be able to move logical extents to new physical extents without having to take down anything on the box.
And what about those GUI tools ? I can't even just do X11 tunneling over SSH to my desktop to run them, I have either run their Remote Desktop stuff or use a 3rd party solution like VNC... What good are they ? At least make them web based (HP Systems Management Homepage type stuff) and join in to what the rest of the industry got clued into years ago if you don't want to code GUI stuff over X11.
And other OS based servers are not more expensive. Solaris is free (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/downloads/index.html). I won't even bother linking to all the free distributions of Linux that are ready for the server (Fedora, OpenSuSE, Arch, Ubuntu). The BSDs. Unix server product vendors make their money off of support contracts, not the actual software itself, an arena Apple obviously wants no part of.
All the bits and pieces of server software is mostly re-packaged open source components nowadays anyhow. Most every vendor out there is using Apache and Tomcat in their web-based products, Postfix on the mail side, I've seen a lot of MySQL and PostgreSQL based products (HP uses both, MySQL I've seen in their Output Manager product, PostgreSQL in their System Fault Management, Symantec uses MySQL for Brightmail), and let's not even get into OpenSSL and OpenSSH...
Heck, even Apple does this. OS X server is just a bunch of open source components packaged up together. Apache, OpenLDAP, OpenSSH, ClamAV...
So please, pretty please, with a cherry on top, let's not call OS X Server something worth 500$ and compare it to "others that are more expensive but in actuality are free to download and run and only expensive to get vendor support for".
This rant was longer than it should have been. I love OS X as a desktop OS. I'd pay 129$ for a Lion upgrade with my eyes closed. Best of both worlds. Unix underpinnings and powerful command-line (everything is there!) with integration for all my server products yet fast and easy to setup GUI that is mostly consistent so as to attract a large user base that makes it a good proposition for commercial software vendors to port their packages to. Apple just never got really serious about the server side of it (and lets face it, it's not their business and they obviously want no part of the entreprise market) and I'm not faulting them for that. Let's not be as disingenious as to claim their selling you a 500$ product for 129$ though.
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Snow Leopard offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
See how this little change in your comment still makes it apply very much to the MacRumors crowd ? ;) The fact is, you're not really dealing with technical people on MacRumors, no matter how much some of them pretend they are. Heck, some of them still believe that HTML is a programming language and that they are web developers because their tools of choice are PhotoShop and Dreamweaver.
bokdol
Aug 18, 09:05 AM
what i dont get sometimes is how people get so excited over how these intel machines are better the the powerpc. and most of these are from recently converted mac users. screaming about how much better intel is. but i hope some people out there realize of couse these machine will be fast. it's called technology. it advances as time goes by. a newer topend machine SHOULD be better.
now the question is really how much better should new technology be compared to 2 3 year old tech? was it a big enough jump. yeah the case design is friken awesome. but sheesh all this pro intel babble is foolish. it's like saying my 486 is better then my comodore 64.
or maybe i am just sad that my 1.8 g5 single just went to the stone age...........
and if you guys have old powermac g5 dualcore sitting around because you got a new mac pro. i'll help you dispose of it no problem. i'll even do it for free. ;)
now the question is really how much better should new technology be compared to 2 3 year old tech? was it a big enough jump. yeah the case design is friken awesome. but sheesh all this pro intel babble is foolish. it's like saying my 486 is better then my comodore 64.
or maybe i am just sad that my 1.8 g5 single just went to the stone age...........
and if you guys have old powermac g5 dualcore sitting around because you got a new mac pro. i'll help you dispose of it no problem. i'll even do it for free. ;)
Malligator
Mar 31, 04:27 PM
what is this bash apple competitors day?
What is this, "let's go on an Apple fansite and act surpised that it's full of Apple fans" day?
What is this, "let's go on an Apple fansite and act surpised that it's full of Apple fans" day?
Dagless
Aug 9, 09:06 AM
If sales are the judge of a games greatness, then Mario Kart on the Wii is the greatest racing game of all time. No doubt about it. The number of copies sold backs that up. Sorry GT.
Can't tell if you're joking or not. But the Mario Kart series has almost always been very highly rated.
Can't tell if you're joking or not. But the Mario Kart series has almost always been very highly rated.
jholzner
Jul 27, 11:28 AM
I read the link, and it give no mention of the speeds of the notebook chips. It only gives a range for the desktop chips. Maybe you didn't read it.
When did Apple have pentium-era chips in their machines?
They didn't. Where is this Mhz myth you are talking about? They are downplaying the use of Mhz was the point I was making.
When did Apple have pentium-era chips in their machines?
They didn't. Where is this Mhz myth you are talking about? They are downplaying the use of Mhz was the point I was making.
cbronfman
Apr 11, 06:35 PM
I'm with the other 3GS posters who hoped to be able to upgrade in June when our phones will be 2 years old (and showing their age for a tech product). I can wait until September (well, I'll have to as I don't want an iP4 which will be a year old by then). If something goes awry with my 3GS I'll have a problem as I don't want to be locked into a contract with AT&T buying a iP4 a year after it was released, and my iPhone 2G (original) has no GPS so some of the functionality I rely on will be gone). Maybe I'll schedule a genius bar check-up for my 3GS before my Apple Care expires. I don't expect LTE although it woudl be nice. I do hope for 3G+, dual core processor, improved antenna (although the signal strength on the IP4 is much stronger than on the 3GS) and thinner would be nice. I'd also really like it to be like the iPad2 with the GSM version able to work on other GSM networks by a quick change in SIM card and not locked to AT&T for those that travel a lot abroad or to Canada.
Scarpad
Apr 7, 02:20 PM
I'm happy with my Current Gen Maxed 13" but I'm interested in an 11" so I'll be keeping my eyes open for what they do there.
�algiris
Apr 6, 03:53 PM
What you and every other non-informed are missing is the Xoom lack of apps is a not really a con for 2 reason.
1. Unlike iOS, ALL APPS, in the android market scale to fit the 1280x800 screen. No x1 or x2 crap. So I can still ENJOY my facebooke app on a larger screen. Nothing is lost. "optimized for tablets" gives me the same information just with a different interface. So long has my twitter app or facebooke or squeezebox app scale so i can see all. I am a happy camper.
2. Unlike iOS i would argue that the xoom needs LESS apps to do functions that take iOS 3 or 4 apps to do. I dont need goodreader or the like because I have a native file system. I dont need skyfire because i have flash. I dont need to open in here, open in there. Every app can have access to each other...
1. Have you seen how those apps "scale" on XOOM? That doesn't make them optimized for tablets, just fit more screen space and even that doesn't work that well.
2. Bull.
1. Unlike iOS, ALL APPS, in the android market scale to fit the 1280x800 screen. No x1 or x2 crap. So I can still ENJOY my facebooke app on a larger screen. Nothing is lost. "optimized for tablets" gives me the same information just with a different interface. So long has my twitter app or facebooke or squeezebox app scale so i can see all. I am a happy camper.
2. Unlike iOS i would argue that the xoom needs LESS apps to do functions that take iOS 3 or 4 apps to do. I dont need goodreader or the like because I have a native file system. I dont need skyfire because i have flash. I dont need to open in here, open in there. Every app can have access to each other...
1. Have you seen how those apps "scale" on XOOM? That doesn't make them optimized for tablets, just fit more screen space and even that doesn't work that well.
2. Bull.
rovex
Mar 22, 01:40 PM
Yeah a 50% smaller screen for the same price and less battery life is certainly going to crush the iPad2.
The screen is not 50% smaller. Nice way of making yourself look stupid.
Playbook has that elusive flash support out of the box which every apple fanboy wants to hide under the rug.
OS is more eloquent than iOS.
The screen is not 50% smaller. Nice way of making yourself look stupid.
Playbook has that elusive flash support out of the box which every apple fanboy wants to hide under the rug.
OS is more eloquent than iOS.
dmkidd
Mar 26, 12:05 AM
Yes come on summer! Daddy is waiting!!
padr�
Sep 19, 10:18 AM
so... after reading here for a while i got a question, its kinda stupid, i'm good at that,
first off, i was doubting between the 24" and the macpro so i disided that for my needs i should realy go with a macpro, but know that i'm hearing things about this 8 core macpro, i'm realy doubting about ordering my quad macpro this month,
has anybody got an idea of how long it would be before apple launches " a macpro octo " :confused:
thx for your time :)
first off, i was doubting between the 24" and the macpro so i disided that for my needs i should realy go with a macpro, but know that i'm hearing things about this 8 core macpro, i'm realy doubting about ordering my quad macpro this month,
has anybody got an idea of how long it would be before apple launches " a macpro octo " :confused:
thx for your time :)
epitaphic
Aug 18, 11:46 PM
So you think they put an extra processor in across the line just to be able to say they had a quad? Even the AnandTech article you used as a source showed here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=18) that PS took advantage of quad cores in Rosetta
Yes under some specific results the quad was a bit faster than the dual. Though with the combo of Rosetta+Photoshop its unclear what is causing the difference. However, if you compare the vast majority of the benchmarks, there's negligible difference.
Concerning Photoshop specifically, as can be experienced on a quad G5, the performance increase is 15-20%. A future jump to 8-core would theoretically be in the 8% increase mark. Photoshop (CS2) simply cannot scale adequately beyond 2 cores, maybe that'll change in Spring 2007. Fingers crossed it does.
Your points about latency and FSB are not separate negatives as you have made them. They are redundant theoretical concerns with implications of unclear practical significance.
I beg to differ. If an app or game is memory intensive, faster memory access does matter. Barefeats (http://barefeats.com/quad09.html) has some benchmarks on dual channel vs quad channel on the Mac Pro. I'd personally like to see that benchmark with an added Conroe system. If dual to quad channel gave 16-25% improvement, imagine what 75% increase in actual bandwidth will do. Besides, I was merely addressing your statements that Woodcrest is faster because of its higher speed FSB and higher memory bus bandwidth.
I am not worried. Everything anyone has come up with on this issue are taken from that same AnandTech article. Until I see more real-world testing, I will not be convinced. Also, I expect that more pro apps such as PS will be able to utilize quad cores in the near future, if they aren't already doing so. Finally, even if Conroe is faster, Woodcrest is fast enough for me ;).
Anandtech, at the moment, is the only place with a quad xeon vs dual xeon benchmark. And yes, dual Woodcrest is fast enough, but is it cost effective compared to a single Woodcrest/Conroe? It seems that for the most part, Mac Pro users are paying for an extra chip but only really utilizing it when running several CPU intensive apps at the same time.
I think you misread that. They were comparing Core 2 Extreme (not Woodcrest) and Conroe to see whether the increased FSB of the former would make much difference.
You're absolutely right about that, its only measuring the improvement over increased FSB. If you take into account FB-DIMM's appalling efficiency, there should be no increase at all (if not decrease) for memory intensive apps.
One question I'd like to put out there, if Apple has had a quad core mac shipping for the past 8 months, why would it wait til intel quads to optimize the code for FCP? Surely they must have known for some time before that that they would release a quad core G5 so either optimizing FCP for quads is a real bastard or they've been sitting on it for no reason.
Yes under some specific results the quad was a bit faster than the dual. Though with the combo of Rosetta+Photoshop its unclear what is causing the difference. However, if you compare the vast majority of the benchmarks, there's negligible difference.
Concerning Photoshop specifically, as can be experienced on a quad G5, the performance increase is 15-20%. A future jump to 8-core would theoretically be in the 8% increase mark. Photoshop (CS2) simply cannot scale adequately beyond 2 cores, maybe that'll change in Spring 2007. Fingers crossed it does.
Your points about latency and FSB are not separate negatives as you have made them. They are redundant theoretical concerns with implications of unclear practical significance.
I beg to differ. If an app or game is memory intensive, faster memory access does matter. Barefeats (http://barefeats.com/quad09.html) has some benchmarks on dual channel vs quad channel on the Mac Pro. I'd personally like to see that benchmark with an added Conroe system. If dual to quad channel gave 16-25% improvement, imagine what 75% increase in actual bandwidth will do. Besides, I was merely addressing your statements that Woodcrest is faster because of its higher speed FSB and higher memory bus bandwidth.
I am not worried. Everything anyone has come up with on this issue are taken from that same AnandTech article. Until I see more real-world testing, I will not be convinced. Also, I expect that more pro apps such as PS will be able to utilize quad cores in the near future, if they aren't already doing so. Finally, even if Conroe is faster, Woodcrest is fast enough for me ;).
Anandtech, at the moment, is the only place with a quad xeon vs dual xeon benchmark. And yes, dual Woodcrest is fast enough, but is it cost effective compared to a single Woodcrest/Conroe? It seems that for the most part, Mac Pro users are paying for an extra chip but only really utilizing it when running several CPU intensive apps at the same time.
I think you misread that. They were comparing Core 2 Extreme (not Woodcrest) and Conroe to see whether the increased FSB of the former would make much difference.
You're absolutely right about that, its only measuring the improvement over increased FSB. If you take into account FB-DIMM's appalling efficiency, there should be no increase at all (if not decrease) for memory intensive apps.
One question I'd like to put out there, if Apple has had a quad core mac shipping for the past 8 months, why would it wait til intel quads to optimize the code for FCP? Surely they must have known for some time before that that they would release a quad core G5 so either optimizing FCP for quads is a real bastard or they've been sitting on it for no reason.
xPismo
Jul 14, 07:47 PM
WWDC ... it's getting closer ... can't wait to see what's announced. Oh yeah ... we'll see the preview of Leopard too.
Bring it on Steve :D
Yeah. I don't believe a word. No powercord at the top, no tweaked G5 case, no way. Those bits throw the rest into dispute. I think we will all be shocked at what The Steve has for us at wwdc.
OTOH, its been great to finally read the benchmark figures for the new apple processors. It hit me that the mac community will finally have overclocking hardware readily available! Wow!
But this rumor just dosn't look or smell right.
Bring it on Steve :D
Yeah. I don't believe a word. No powercord at the top, no tweaked G5 case, no way. Those bits throw the rest into dispute. I think we will all be shocked at what The Steve has for us at wwdc.
OTOH, its been great to finally read the benchmark figures for the new apple processors. It hit me that the mac community will finally have overclocking hardware readily available! Wow!
But this rumor just dosn't look or smell right.
ChazUK
Apr 6, 03:08 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.3; en-gb; Nexus S Build/GRI40) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)
Not bad for a $800 dollar device, available for one carrier. I wonder what the numbers will look like after the late march wifi-only.
At least 100k people know what its like to have a really FUNCTIONAL Tablet.
please tell me! what defines a functional tablet
I'd assume that that would be user specific for their needs. Different strokes for different folks and all.
Honeycomb, iOS, QNX, WEBOS. They'll cater to all types.
Not bad for a $800 dollar device, available for one carrier. I wonder what the numbers will look like after the late march wifi-only.
At least 100k people know what its like to have a really FUNCTIONAL Tablet.
please tell me! what defines a functional tablet
I'd assume that that would be user specific for their needs. Different strokes for different folks and all.
Honeycomb, iOS, QNX, WEBOS. They'll cater to all types.
benthewraith
Nov 28, 07:48 PM
If we're already paying a royalty on blank CD-Rs because they say we are using Limewire, then aren't those of who aren't using Limewire essentially paying to use a service which we are not using?
By my logic, if we are already compensating the music industry through our purchases, we should then be entitled to use the services I just found out from these posts that we are paying for!
They'd have us go back to CD-format if they could, and impose whatever restrictions necessary to control whatever we do.
By my logic, if we are already compensating the music industry through our purchases, we should then be entitled to use the services I just found out from these posts that we are paying for!
They'd have us go back to CD-format if they could, and impose whatever restrictions necessary to control whatever we do.
milatchi
Mar 22, 07:00 PM
When will RIM realize that nothing they can create, have created, or ever will create can be as good as something created by Apple? Some companies: Google, Microsoft, and RIM will just never learn.
Steve Jobs = Genius
Steve Jobs = Genius
zacman
Apr 19, 03:18 PM
HA I knew you were going to say that. developer prefer to develop for iOS. iOS user spend more money on Apps than Android user. Plus iPod Touch user can use the same apps as the iPhone. There won't be a Windows for the smartphones theres already too many players in the game.
Well Rovio (Angry Birds) thinks otherwise:
http://www.insidemobileapps.com/2011/03/13/angry-birds-android-ios/
"The company said in December that it expected to make $1 million per month from Android by the end of 2010. (...) Now that the app has seen about 100 million installs across all platforms, Rovio is not getting the same initial bump in paid download revenue from Apple�s app store. On Android, the company doesn�t offer paid Angry Birds apps, but sees recurring revenue from advertising."
So they make more money with their free Android version than they do with the paid iOS version.
Well Rovio (Angry Birds) thinks otherwise:
http://www.insidemobileapps.com/2011/03/13/angry-birds-android-ios/
"The company said in December that it expected to make $1 million per month from Android by the end of 2010. (...) Now that the app has seen about 100 million installs across all platforms, Rovio is not getting the same initial bump in paid download revenue from Apple�s app store. On Android, the company doesn�t offer paid Angry Birds apps, but sees recurring revenue from advertising."
So they make more money with their free Android version than they do with the paid iOS version.
zedsdead
Apr 12, 05:10 AM
http://www.avid.com/US/specialoffers/fcppromotion?intcmp=AV-HP-S3
Avid is holding a great promotion to switch over to Media Composer if you are an FCP user. I am considering it based on what Apple shows us today.
Avid is holding a great promotion to switch over to Media Composer if you are an FCP user. I am considering it based on what Apple shows us today.
Tomaz
Aug 7, 04:38 PM
I'll have to ask my firendly IT guy, but how does the end user access shadow copies?
B
As far as I know he can't, that's the difference. IT has to restore the file for you.
Still, nothing fundamentally new, and definitely not Vista 2.0... ;)
B
As far as I know he can't, that's the difference. IT has to restore the file for you.
Still, nothing fundamentally new, and definitely not Vista 2.0... ;)
EagerDragon
Aug 27, 03:08 PM
That is interesting because I ordered a Macbook on Tuesday (the 22nd) and mine is also scheduled to ship on the 31st. It is suspiciously strange and hopefully it means that we'll get Meroms because I was waiting for the Merom MBP when I decided to just order a Yonah MB.
Maybe, but remember that they are having a hard time filling the orders due to the large number of people buying the systems.
Apple needs to is not likely to upgrade the MacBooks before Jan. The MacBook pro likely Monday or Mid Sept.
Maybe, but remember that they are having a hard time filling the orders due to the large number of people buying the systems.
Apple needs to is not likely to upgrade the MacBooks before Jan. The MacBook pro likely Monday or Mid Sept.
Beaverman3001
Apr 6, 01:17 PM
Won't purchase any Mac with intel graphics.
NoNothing
Apr 7, 10:24 PM
Obviously you know little about retail and accounting.
Well fill me in. Our family used to run a small local (and successful) computer store in the 80's and if we had it, we sold it.
With cost of inventory being fairly high, why would you stop if you met a "quota"?
Well fill me in. Our family used to run a small local (and successful) computer store in the 80's and if we had it, we sold it.
With cost of inventory being fairly high, why would you stop if you met a "quota"?
bigmc6000
Aug 12, 12:11 AM
Is Europe not a way bigger mobile phone market than the US anyway. I don't see why any technology company would alienate a huge sector of its market in this way. It will definitely be released in Europe too.
It will not be a flip phone, or a slide phone or any of those stupid ass gimmicky phones you use over there. It will be just a nano derivative I would say. It will be GSM, it will be quad band.
Signed,
Stevie J ;)
Well if it's only going to be GSM, not a flip or slide phone you might as well not even release it in the US. Just ask Cingular how amazing the Slvr has done.
Another thing you are assuming is that Apple considers Europe a major player of it's market. It's a chunk that's for sure but how many TV shows does Europe have on their iTunes?
If it's a candy-bar phone I won't buy it. If I have to sacrifice coverage in the US just so I can use it on the very very very rare occasion I head to Europe (along with changing my plan to allow for overseas calls) I won't buy it either. I really think it'd be a bad idea to do all of that. But than again they did make the newton...
It will not be a flip phone, or a slide phone or any of those stupid ass gimmicky phones you use over there. It will be just a nano derivative I would say. It will be GSM, it will be quad band.
Signed,
Stevie J ;)
Well if it's only going to be GSM, not a flip or slide phone you might as well not even release it in the US. Just ask Cingular how amazing the Slvr has done.
Another thing you are assuming is that Apple considers Europe a major player of it's market. It's a chunk that's for sure but how many TV shows does Europe have on their iTunes?
If it's a candy-bar phone I won't buy it. If I have to sacrifice coverage in the US just so I can use it on the very very very rare occasion I head to Europe (along with changing my plan to allow for overseas calls) I won't buy it either. I really think it'd be a bad idea to do all of that. But than again they did make the newton...