cube
Mar 24, 03:19 PM
No, I don't like Apple to force me to buy Intel.
bobbleheadbob
Apr 2, 07:53 PM
Of the 4 in my family, none of these issues exists. Try again?
No problems here either. I love my new iPad 2. (black, 64 gb, ATT.)
No problems here either. I love my new iPad 2. (black, 64 gb, ATT.)
tny
Jul 18, 07:20 AM
This does play into the news published about the industry allowing people to burn movies to DVDs but can someone do the math? What would the file size be for 2 hour movie at present? What about if it were compressed into a zip or tz file? What would it be if the quality were improved? How long would it take to download these files with dialup, on dsl, on cable. I would think that most people would not be downloading using their offices T1 connection ;)
How long would you wait or tie up your computer's internet connection to download an old movie from Disney?
Here is another issue to think about. With large files being downloaded to your HD and then errasing them you will have to defragment your HD quite often or you will suffer. Is there rumor of improved Disk Utility or other method of handling this?
Zip, Tar, and GZip are all but irrelevant here, as the compression used in MPEG2 and MP4 leave little room for Zip to optimize (I just zipped an 850 MB MP4 video, and picked up 12 MB in the compression).
I have a 2.5 hour movie in EyeTV right now; in MPEG2 format (CD quality), it's 7.5 GB. The MP4 re-coding I did is I think 1.4 GB (that's on another computer). This is 29.97 FPS/640x480 video; your mileage may vary, as both MPEG2 and MP4 compression vary depending upon the nature of the content.
Where I live, Cable gives 6 Mbps down, burstable to 12 Mbps for the first 50 or so MB, a lot higher than T1's 1.5 Mbps down (though of course a T1 also has 1.5 Mbps up, and Cable around here does maybe 512 kbps). Obviously the cable speed is dependent to some extent on the traffic at surrounding homes, though I think they have significantly reduced the pool size for cable (somebody else may know a lot more about this than I do), which would give you a lot closer to that ideal 6 Mbps (assuming that the server can maintain that speed, which few can).
I suspect that you can count on the videos being 320x240, not 640x480. It looks about as good as VHS, and will cost Apple less in infrastructure costs (which they will have to be a lot more careful with than they have been with music).
This is a very bad idea. Given how well sales of DVDs do, I'd think that the movie industry would realize that the ownership model will be very successful for them. It's bad for Apple, too, as they have to have pretty much the same infrastructure for rental that they would have for an ownership model, but smaller margins (unless the movie industry is stupid enough to think we'll rent for $9.99).
How long would you wait or tie up your computer's internet connection to download an old movie from Disney?
Here is another issue to think about. With large files being downloaded to your HD and then errasing them you will have to defragment your HD quite often or you will suffer. Is there rumor of improved Disk Utility or other method of handling this?
Zip, Tar, and GZip are all but irrelevant here, as the compression used in MPEG2 and MP4 leave little room for Zip to optimize (I just zipped an 850 MB MP4 video, and picked up 12 MB in the compression).
I have a 2.5 hour movie in EyeTV right now; in MPEG2 format (CD quality), it's 7.5 GB. The MP4 re-coding I did is I think 1.4 GB (that's on another computer). This is 29.97 FPS/640x480 video; your mileage may vary, as both MPEG2 and MP4 compression vary depending upon the nature of the content.
Where I live, Cable gives 6 Mbps down, burstable to 12 Mbps for the first 50 or so MB, a lot higher than T1's 1.5 Mbps down (though of course a T1 also has 1.5 Mbps up, and Cable around here does maybe 512 kbps). Obviously the cable speed is dependent to some extent on the traffic at surrounding homes, though I think they have significantly reduced the pool size for cable (somebody else may know a lot more about this than I do), which would give you a lot closer to that ideal 6 Mbps (assuming that the server can maintain that speed, which few can).
I suspect that you can count on the videos being 320x240, not 640x480. It looks about as good as VHS, and will cost Apple less in infrastructure costs (which they will have to be a lot more careful with than they have been with music).
This is a very bad idea. Given how well sales of DVDs do, I'd think that the movie industry would realize that the ownership model will be very successful for them. It's bad for Apple, too, as they have to have pretty much the same infrastructure for rental that they would have for an ownership model, but smaller margins (unless the movie industry is stupid enough to think we'll rent for $9.99).
Rt&Dzine
Mar 22, 12:42 PM
I see apps like DVDs. There are DVDs made for all age groups, from preschool cartoons to the raunchiest sex and violence that one could stand.
In order to purchase an adult DVD there is some degree of age confirmation. But once that DVD is purchased, any person of any age can pop it in a player to view it. It's up to the parent to secure those DVDs against the curious eyes of minors. Likewise apps should not be censored.
Apple may not want to sell them through their store, just like Blockbuster may not want to sell triple X-rated movies, but if a developer can create an app for the iPhone then I'd prefer to see Apple or Apple's competitors let the market decide what is successful and what is not.
If I understand correctly, the Windows Marketplace doesn't even allow sex/nudity in their app store, so they should be forced to do so?
In order to purchase an adult DVD there is some degree of age confirmation. But once that DVD is purchased, any person of any age can pop it in a player to view it. It's up to the parent to secure those DVDs against the curious eyes of minors. Likewise apps should not be censored.
Apple may not want to sell them through their store, just like Blockbuster may not want to sell triple X-rated movies, but if a developer can create an app for the iPhone then I'd prefer to see Apple or Apple's competitors let the market decide what is successful and what is not.
If I understand correctly, the Windows Marketplace doesn't even allow sex/nudity in their app store, so they should be forced to do so?
cmaier
Apr 2, 07:36 PM
this commercial makes ipad seemed like it's only for kids.
A lot of kids you know looking at CAT scans?
A lot of kids you know looking at CAT scans?
Lord Blackadder
Mar 7, 06:20 PM
Because there is not enough of it, and it will increase our need of foreign oil not lessen it.
There is twice as much gasoline refined from a barrel of sweet crude than diesel.
Can you quote a source on that? As far as I'm aware, that is not necessarily true (http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2174). It all depends on what is in highest demand. Diesel can be refined into gasoline, and gasoline is what people in the US want at the moment. I will try to find some more citeable links than this (http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/26624/Maximum-gallons-of-diesel-from-a-barrel-of-crude-oil), but my impression is that a single barrel of crude always potentially contains more diesel fuel than gasoline. This is a very market-driven process. Refineries make what people want to buy.
It's also worth pointing out that a lot of gasoline has ethanol and other compounds in it that diesel does not have, and that stuff had to be refined before being added - increasing the engery cost of refining gasoline. Regular unleaded gasoline also has more sulphur in it than the now mandatory-for-passenger-cars ULSD fuel.
For a long time, and in many places people that drove diesel vehicles did so because of the tax advantages. The taxes were kept lower in order to make commercial usage cheaper.
Diesel may be cheaper in Europe due to tax structures, but the same could be said about gasoline here. It doesn't have to be that way in either case. On a purely technical level, gasoline should actually cost more because it takes more energy to refine.
It is not greener to go diesel. It takes that resource from other parts of the economy and puts it into cars. Cars do just fine with gasoline. They are relatively clean and there is twice as much of the stuff in a gallon of oil. They don't get better mileage except in volume of stuff. Which is not the correct measurement. If cars became more diesel, then diesel would become dramatically more expensive, affecting the overall livelihood of everyone, dramatically increase the cost of oil and bring about energy devastation much faster than anyone could imagine.
Diesel takes less energy to refine, contains more energy per unit of volume, emits less CO2, you get potentially more of it out of a barrel of crude and diesel engines are always more fuel efficient than equivalent gasoline engines. Where's the problem?
I can't see how you are going to argue that it is necessary for us to drive gasoline-engined cars in order to prevent "energy devastation". Most other countries already use a much larger proportion of diesel and they seem just fine. We could make a lot more diesel with the crude we are currently extracting, and the market for gasoline will never go away.
By moving to hybrids and electrics, we actually decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and make our cars greener per mile driven. This is why it is the answer and diesel isn't.
I am not advocating that we all switch to diesel. Nor do I want to get rid of the gasoline engine (especially in performance cars!). But the USA has an unecessary obsession with the gasoline-engined car. We need diesel serial hybrids for starters, and more hybrids and diesel-engined cars of all types. There is no one solution. If tens of thousands of people in the US started buying diesel Cruzes, it would not destroy the world's energy infrastructure.
But come on - "energy devastation"?
the argument for that silent agreement ? they don't want "a horsepower arms race"... look how well that has turned out
Indeed. Same with the Japanese and their 280hp/180 km/h limit. Some of the cars made under this "agreement" were considerably faster/more powerful than was officially admitted, and anyway they did away with that a number of years ago.
There is twice as much gasoline refined from a barrel of sweet crude than diesel.
Can you quote a source on that? As far as I'm aware, that is not necessarily true (http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2174). It all depends on what is in highest demand. Diesel can be refined into gasoline, and gasoline is what people in the US want at the moment. I will try to find some more citeable links than this (http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/26624/Maximum-gallons-of-diesel-from-a-barrel-of-crude-oil), but my impression is that a single barrel of crude always potentially contains more diesel fuel than gasoline. This is a very market-driven process. Refineries make what people want to buy.
It's also worth pointing out that a lot of gasoline has ethanol and other compounds in it that diesel does not have, and that stuff had to be refined before being added - increasing the engery cost of refining gasoline. Regular unleaded gasoline also has more sulphur in it than the now mandatory-for-passenger-cars ULSD fuel.
For a long time, and in many places people that drove diesel vehicles did so because of the tax advantages. The taxes were kept lower in order to make commercial usage cheaper.
Diesel may be cheaper in Europe due to tax structures, but the same could be said about gasoline here. It doesn't have to be that way in either case. On a purely technical level, gasoline should actually cost more because it takes more energy to refine.
It is not greener to go diesel. It takes that resource from other parts of the economy and puts it into cars. Cars do just fine with gasoline. They are relatively clean and there is twice as much of the stuff in a gallon of oil. They don't get better mileage except in volume of stuff. Which is not the correct measurement. If cars became more diesel, then diesel would become dramatically more expensive, affecting the overall livelihood of everyone, dramatically increase the cost of oil and bring about energy devastation much faster than anyone could imagine.
Diesel takes less energy to refine, contains more energy per unit of volume, emits less CO2, you get potentially more of it out of a barrel of crude and diesel engines are always more fuel efficient than equivalent gasoline engines. Where's the problem?
I can't see how you are going to argue that it is necessary for us to drive gasoline-engined cars in order to prevent "energy devastation". Most other countries already use a much larger proportion of diesel and they seem just fine. We could make a lot more diesel with the crude we are currently extracting, and the market for gasoline will never go away.
By moving to hybrids and electrics, we actually decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and make our cars greener per mile driven. This is why it is the answer and diesel isn't.
I am not advocating that we all switch to diesel. Nor do I want to get rid of the gasoline engine (especially in performance cars!). But the USA has an unecessary obsession with the gasoline-engined car. We need diesel serial hybrids for starters, and more hybrids and diesel-engined cars of all types. There is no one solution. If tens of thousands of people in the US started buying diesel Cruzes, it would not destroy the world's energy infrastructure.
But come on - "energy devastation"?
the argument for that silent agreement ? they don't want "a horsepower arms race"... look how well that has turned out
Indeed. Same with the Japanese and their 280hp/180 km/h limit. Some of the cars made under this "agreement" were considerably faster/more powerful than was officially admitted, and anyway they did away with that a number of years ago.
Epsilon88
Oct 23, 10:32 PM
Just subscribed online w/ Consumer Reports. I've always trusted their advice, and it's led me well.
AFPoster
Mar 22, 11:37 AM
I love how "gays" freak out when non-homosexual people do something. But yet when "gays" want to do something extreme it's because we don't accept them, so when they get in trouble it's a huge ordeal.
To me this is like the people that don't support war. If a veteran was killed in action and a funeral is happening they can picket the funeral all day long (talk about bull ****!) But yet if we don't let them picket they freak out scream free rights free rights. Well guess what those veterans (me included since I serve) gave them that freedom to stand there in picket.
Gays are the same way. I have no issue with gays, I don't agree with it but if your gay, be gay. Just don't expect the world to conform to your way of life, especially a country (United States) founded on Christianity. If anything go to a foreign country and complain then see how bad it really is to come out, unless it's Amsterdam, Iraq or Afghan they'll love your butt over there.
To me this is like the people that don't support war. If a veteran was killed in action and a funeral is happening they can picket the funeral all day long (talk about bull ****!) But yet if we don't let them picket they freak out scream free rights free rights. Well guess what those veterans (me included since I serve) gave them that freedom to stand there in picket.
Gays are the same way. I have no issue with gays, I don't agree with it but if your gay, be gay. Just don't expect the world to conform to your way of life, especially a country (United States) founded on Christianity. If anything go to a foreign country and complain then see how bad it really is to come out, unless it's Amsterdam, Iraq or Afghan they'll love your butt over there.
RayLancer
Sep 24, 11:41 AM
I've been reading some reviews on the iPad Belkin Grip Vue Clear and a few reporting the cases started yellowing after a few weeks... I might get the tint black version instead now.
Alan-in-NC
Mar 23, 08:03 PM
I cracked open my 5th gen 80GB last year and replaced it with a 220GB kit from Apricorn, so I'm not sure why this drive has been described as "new".
Regardless, like many people here, my library is huge (over 12K songs, plus videos, podcasts, etc), so a flash-based iPod wasn't a solution for me. I'm glad they'll keep the Classic going for awhile longer.
Regardless, like many people here, my library is huge (over 12K songs, plus videos, podcasts, etc), so a flash-based iPod wasn't a solution for me. I'm glad they'll keep the Classic going for awhile longer.
Edge100
Sep 1, 12:28 PM
I'm not sure about this one. It will depend on how agressively Apple prices these.
I have a 20" iMac, and with my edu discount (at the time), I paid about $2500 (Canadian) for it with 2GB RAM (from Apple...was cheaper than anywhere else, believe it or not!), 256MB VRAM, and a 250GB HD.
For about $350-450, I can get a decent (not great, but decent) 20" widescreen display and hook it up to my iMac, giving me 3360 x 1050 resolution, which is plenty wide enough to display 36+ faders in Logic, plus some other apps (Live, Reason) that I use with it. A 23" display would only give me 1920 x 1200.
The point is: depending on how Apple prices it, I can get the 20" plus an external monitor and get more space for less money.
I can see this working if (a) the 23" isn't substantially more expensive than the 20" AND (b) there are a few other things (i.e. bigger HD, more RAM, faster/better vid card) to distinguish the machines. This is the precise reason I didn't get the 500GB drive in my iMac...I went up to 250, but I could make up the additional 250GB over Firewire for a lot less.
Either way, these should be sweet. I love my iMac (it does EVERYTHING I need today) and I don't anticipate upgrading for a number of years (well, maybe I'll slap in a Merom after the Applecare expires!)
Anyway, just my two cents.
I have a 20" iMac, and with my edu discount (at the time), I paid about $2500 (Canadian) for it with 2GB RAM (from Apple...was cheaper than anywhere else, believe it or not!), 256MB VRAM, and a 250GB HD.
For about $350-450, I can get a decent (not great, but decent) 20" widescreen display and hook it up to my iMac, giving me 3360 x 1050 resolution, which is plenty wide enough to display 36+ faders in Logic, plus some other apps (Live, Reason) that I use with it. A 23" display would only give me 1920 x 1200.
The point is: depending on how Apple prices it, I can get the 20" plus an external monitor and get more space for less money.
I can see this working if (a) the 23" isn't substantially more expensive than the 20" AND (b) there are a few other things (i.e. bigger HD, more RAM, faster/better vid card) to distinguish the machines. This is the precise reason I didn't get the 500GB drive in my iMac...I went up to 250, but I could make up the additional 250GB over Firewire for a lot less.
Either way, these should be sweet. I love my iMac (it does EVERYTHING I need today) and I don't anticipate upgrading for a number of years (well, maybe I'll slap in a Merom after the Applecare expires!)
Anyway, just my two cents.
dornoforpyros
Nov 29, 08:15 AM
you know, I'm trying to figure out why the Zune is so universally hated, and I can't.
I mean, yes it's Microsoft, but given the success of the xBox I would have thought some faith had been restored in them. I mean no one has even used the damn thing yet and their panning it as if it's the worse mp3 ever released. Yes, it's meant to go head to head with the iPod, and yes, it will probably fail, but why are we not giving credit where it's due?
The 3 days/3 plays thing is kinda bunk, but the wifi sharing in the first place is a pretty neat idea. How many of you use iTunes sharing at work or in the dorm? Wouldn't it be nice if your iPods could do the same?
And what's wrong with a larger screen that works in both landscape and portrait? I have a feeling that were the iPod to have gotten this functionality first everyone would be tripping over their credit cards to order one.
I dunno, just seems like everyone is getting overly excited on joining the "trash the zune" bandwagon that they aren't willing to give any credit where it's due.
I mean, yes it's Microsoft, but given the success of the xBox I would have thought some faith had been restored in them. I mean no one has even used the damn thing yet and their panning it as if it's the worse mp3 ever released. Yes, it's meant to go head to head with the iPod, and yes, it will probably fail, but why are we not giving credit where it's due?
The 3 days/3 plays thing is kinda bunk, but the wifi sharing in the first place is a pretty neat idea. How many of you use iTunes sharing at work or in the dorm? Wouldn't it be nice if your iPods could do the same?
And what's wrong with a larger screen that works in both landscape and portrait? I have a feeling that were the iPod to have gotten this functionality first everyone would be tripping over their credit cards to order one.
I dunno, just seems like everyone is getting overly excited on joining the "trash the zune" bandwagon that they aren't willing to give any credit where it's due.
dpaanlka
Aug 7, 06:13 AM
This should help..
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/guide/appleevents/
wow how did i miss that??
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/guide/appleevents/
wow how did i miss that??
~Shard~
Nov 29, 01:34 PM
Can't wait for MWSF to get some more details from Steve! Between this, the iPhone, an iTablet and the new widescreen video iPod there will be plenty for him to reveal - along with our iLife 07 and Leopard previews as well. ;) :cool:
AppliedVisual
Oct 24, 02:44 AM
they have another promo that runs from 10/17 - 1/22/07... i sure hope they dont wait for this to expire... although that is right around MWSF
shortly it is... only 9 more hours
Yeah, the restarted the printer offer last week and it goes through January. The other promo is the .Mac one, also thru January.
The ones I was referring to that expire on 10/24 are the mail-in rebates offered through large retailers like Amazon. They still have to get Apple approval for those rebate programs as Apple sets prices.
Either way, we find out soon enough... Or at least I hope we do.
shortly it is... only 9 more hours
Yeah, the restarted the printer offer last week and it goes through January. The other promo is the .Mac one, also thru January.
The ones I was referring to that expire on 10/24 are the mail-in rebates offered through large retailers like Amazon. They still have to get Apple approval for those rebate programs as Apple sets prices.
Either way, we find out soon enough... Or at least I hope we do.
stcanard
Nov 30, 10:47 AM
Another way to ask this question: If Apple decided to compete head-to-head with this feature, what should they do differently?
Here's the funny thing, I can tell you a feature is poorly thought out, even if I can't necessarily tell you how to solve it :) The fact that we don't have an answer is probably a good start on why the iPod doesn't already do it.
First thing I can say is this: Dump the idea of restrictions on non-DRM'd songs. If "the guy with guitar" wants to beam you his own song he should be allowed to decide that you can keep it as long as you want and send it to as many people as you want.
This goes back to the root of the problem with these devices and online stores: The record labels aren't worried about piracy, they're worried about all the guys on the street being able to bypass them by advertising virally then selling their own burned CDs. Sure it's only one or two now people now, but then it starts to grow, and some band ends up hitting it big and getting radio play, then everybody starts doing it, and then gradually the RIAA loses their money train.
Here's the funny thing, I can tell you a feature is poorly thought out, even if I can't necessarily tell you how to solve it :) The fact that we don't have an answer is probably a good start on why the iPod doesn't already do it.
First thing I can say is this: Dump the idea of restrictions on non-DRM'd songs. If "the guy with guitar" wants to beam you his own song he should be allowed to decide that you can keep it as long as you want and send it to as many people as you want.
This goes back to the root of the problem with these devices and online stores: The record labels aren't worried about piracy, they're worried about all the guys on the street being able to bypass them by advertising virally then selling their own burned CDs. Sure it's only one or two now people now, but then it starts to grow, and some band ends up hitting it big and getting radio play, then everybody starts doing it, and then gradually the RIAA loses their money train.
Rustus Maximus
Apr 21, 11:38 AM
It doesn't take long for crap politics to enter a thread....
I think that happened at post 1 in this particular case. Just sit back with some popcorn and enjoy the show...it's always fun! :)
I think that happened at post 1 in this particular case. Just sit back with some popcorn and enjoy the show...it's always fun! :)
BlizzardBomb
Sep 1, 01:01 PM
No way would I pay an extra $500 for an 8% faster machine and a slighly larger display, when for that money I can go with the 20" and buy a second widescreen 20" display and have a HUGE viewable area.
The 23" is going to have to be a LOT closer to the 20" in order for it to sell. I'm thinking $1899 or $1999, or else it will have to be decked out with extra RAM, HD space, or CPU speed.
There are of course disadvantages to dual displays...
sony ericsson xperia x10 price
The 23" is going to have to be a LOT closer to the 20" in order for it to sell. I'm thinking $1899 or $1999, or else it will have to be decked out with extra RAM, HD space, or CPU speed.
There are of course disadvantages to dual displays...
apb3
Aug 16, 03:14 PM
You know, I'd love a Sirius receiver on my iPod. I have the car and home hookup back home and love their line-up. Stern is just a bonus as I bought it before he came over.
The 1st Wave and AltNation channels are some of the biggest drivers for my iTunes purchases actually. "Oh, yeah! I remember that song back in college! [writes note on hand while swerving through traffic]"
Not much good to me where I am now (although I can verify that I can get the Sirius online stream cuz I have a US acct) but I wouldn't be able to buy a new one here anyway... Maybe trade some porn with donkeys for one "liberated" from Saudi or something with the locals, but that seems less than ethical and would get me in some trouble most likely.
The 1st Wave and AltNation channels are some of the biggest drivers for my iTunes purchases actually. "Oh, yeah! I remember that song back in college! [writes note on hand while swerving through traffic]"
Not much good to me where I am now (although I can verify that I can get the Sirius online stream cuz I have a US acct) but I wouldn't be able to buy a new one here anyway... Maybe trade some porn with donkeys for one "liberated" from Saudi or something with the locals, but that seems less than ethical and would get me in some trouble most likely.
GregA
Dec 31, 11:08 PM
.. they could just use a similar setup as their Podcast listings... Apple lists em, for free so far, but the podcasters host the files.True, as long as there is a payment model that works too (for stuff like HBO On Demand). I would prefer to have a single bill for all subscriptions, but if I'm only watching a couple then I could pay them directly.
Of course, if I'm downloading direct from the provider, then someone still has to pay to provide shows (there's a specific cost for each show downloaded). Till now, the purchase model has ensured people pay a larger price per show, and only download once - while a subscription model would be a smaller price per show and it's feasible that some subscribers will watch the same thing again a week later. The download fee becomes a larger portion of the cost.
If Apple released a bittorrent model, it would move the upload cost to subscribers, who often pay nothing for uploads. TWiT reckons it costs Apple 25c/song for a download ... if they're right this would be a significant saving to Apple. If iTunes goes Bittorrent it might fundamentally change usage patterns of the net.
On another note, this would allow Apple to offer a 'backup' of everyone's purchased music and shows - which just means you can re-download them anytime you want rather than store them locally.
Of course, if I'm downloading direct from the provider, then someone still has to pay to provide shows (there's a specific cost for each show downloaded). Till now, the purchase model has ensured people pay a larger price per show, and only download once - while a subscription model would be a smaller price per show and it's feasible that some subscribers will watch the same thing again a week later. The download fee becomes a larger portion of the cost.
If Apple released a bittorrent model, it would move the upload cost to subscribers, who often pay nothing for uploads. TWiT reckons it costs Apple 25c/song for a download ... if they're right this would be a significant saving to Apple. If iTunes goes Bittorrent it might fundamentally change usage patterns of the net.
On another note, this would allow Apple to offer a 'backup' of everyone's purchased music and shows - which just means you can re-download them anytime you want rather than store them locally.
GregAndonian
Mar 25, 08:24 PM
Where's the Flash support? Now they have no excuse... ;)
Benjy91
Mar 28, 11:05 AM
you think? I suspect we'll see an announcement next year and a release in 2013 actually for the 360, the PS4 will probably be 2015. The 'WIIHD" or whatever it' called might be announced this year.........
Microsoft announced the Kinect would extend the life of the 360 by 5 years, and PS3 launched with the intention of a 10 year life span.
Microsoft announced the Kinect would extend the life of the 360 by 5 years, and PS3 launched with the intention of a 10 year life span.
bmustaf
Sep 14, 04:07 PM
You must be very unfamiliar with how an auto recall works. Besides, the analogy is flawed.
They cannot reasonably service your car in your household for anything but the easiest of repairs (e.g. fill your tires up to the right pressure, but even then, what if there's a flat and they have to patch it? balance it?).
Besides, no one is asking Apple to go to everyone's home.
Finally, every auto owner involved in a recall gets notified. If they can't or don't feel safe bringing it in, most recalls cover some alternate method (e.g. if you didn't want to drive your Prius in in the most recent recall, Toyota offered to have their dealer send out a flatbed or a tech to drive it in for you in many cases).
No one has offered to have an Apple Rep come out to my house to pick up my iPhone 4 to fit the case, because that's unreasonable.
I guess you don't read my posts carefully. I said what you said, that Toyota issues a recall, but the onus is on the owner to bring in the vehicle for servicing. Exactly as Apple has now done: if you experience a problem, let them know and you can get a free bumper.
To Consumer Reports this is an unacceptable way to deal with a design flaw. If it's Apple. For Toyota, it's fine and considered the normal way to handle a design flaw.
They cannot reasonably service your car in your household for anything but the easiest of repairs (e.g. fill your tires up to the right pressure, but even then, what if there's a flat and they have to patch it? balance it?).
Besides, no one is asking Apple to go to everyone's home.
Finally, every auto owner involved in a recall gets notified. If they can't or don't feel safe bringing it in, most recalls cover some alternate method (e.g. if you didn't want to drive your Prius in in the most recent recall, Toyota offered to have their dealer send out a flatbed or a tech to drive it in for you in many cases).
No one has offered to have an Apple Rep come out to my house to pick up my iPhone 4 to fit the case, because that's unreasonable.
I guess you don't read my posts carefully. I said what you said, that Toyota issues a recall, but the onus is on the owner to bring in the vehicle for servicing. Exactly as Apple has now done: if you experience a problem, let them know and you can get a free bumper.
To Consumer Reports this is an unacceptable way to deal with a design flaw. If it's Apple. For Toyota, it's fine and considered the normal way to handle a design flaw.
Evangelion
Aug 29, 11:16 AM
Nonono, Merom costs the same as Yonah's June price
points which are still here even with Merom out in the wild.
intel will sell yonahs for quite some time besides merom. why sell them when merom is better? answer: because they will sell them for lower price
points which are still here even with Merom out in the wild.
intel will sell yonahs for quite some time besides merom. why sell them when merom is better? answer: because they will sell them for lower price
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment