davidgrimm
Apr 26, 04:32 PM
Is anybody truly surprised by this? Droid phones are on almost every single carrier and come in every price point (including free). There is essentially one iPhone that comes at a premium price. Its like figuring out that there are far more chevy's on the road than Mercedes. Not a surprise at all.
It would be nice to see the numbers broken out by phone and carrier costs. Those would be meaningful market share numbers.
It would be nice to see the numbers broken out by phone and carrier costs. Those would be meaningful market share numbers.
Eye4Desyn
Mar 28, 10:29 AM
Think about it...
Appl introduced a new Verizon iPhone 4 in January of this year and it only launched last month (February).
Apple is also expected to release a white version of the iPhone 4 next month.
These two iPhone 4 upgrades seem to allow Apple to push back the launch of their next-generation handset. Afterall, how could they release updated iPhone 4s in February and April then a whole new device in June?
+1. My thoughts exactly. September = iPhone 4S/5 release.
Appl introduced a new Verizon iPhone 4 in January of this year and it only launched last month (February).
Apple is also expected to release a white version of the iPhone 4 next month.
These two iPhone 4 upgrades seem to allow Apple to push back the launch of their next-generation handset. Afterall, how could they release updated iPhone 4s in February and April then a whole new device in June?
+1. My thoughts exactly. September = iPhone 4S/5 release.
aafuss1
Aug 7, 10:04 PM
http://search.info.apple.com/?q=mac+pro&lr=lang_en&search=Go&type=- DIY parts instructions.
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 10:46 PM
All this talk about Palm needing to modernize their OS, or it is outdated, or needing to re-write is absolutely hilarious.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
carmenodie
May 6, 05:40 AM
People need to know that chip making is effing hard!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Unless ARM can best intel at what intel does best and that is making chips then Apple ain't(remember that this is a rumor) switching to ARM for their pcs and laptops. Hell no!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Unless ARM can best intel at what intel does best and that is making chips then Apple ain't(remember that this is a rumor) switching to ARM for their pcs and laptops. Hell no!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Tilpots
May 8, 02:14 PM
Best link i've found is
http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20100222/that�s-apple�s-new-data-center-where�s-the-giant-glass-cube/
&
http://www.cultofmac.com/interview-apples-gigantic-new-data-center-hints-at-cloud-computing/14680
salient quote from Rich Miller of Data Center Knowledge
Exciting stuff!
Exciting indeed! Appreciate the linkage.:)
http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20100222/that�s-apple�s-new-data-center-where�s-the-giant-glass-cube/
&
http://www.cultofmac.com/interview-apples-gigantic-new-data-center-hints-at-cloud-computing/14680
salient quote from Rich Miller of Data Center Knowledge
Exciting stuff!
Exciting indeed! Appreciate the linkage.:)
Cougarcat
Apr 23, 04:43 PM
I'm not impressed if this is where the iMac display is potentially going , the current GPUs can barely drive the resolutions they have now in anything other than simple desktop apps . , can you imagine what video card you would need to drive a game (say portal 2 which has low to modest requirements) at 30fps + on a screen with 3200 or higher resloution ?
I think Apple is simply futureproofing here, and we won't see Retina displays for 3+ years, when it would be more feasible.
I agree with you, though, it would be nice if Apple was more serious about their GPUs. Maybe the switch to retina will force them to be.
I think Apple is simply futureproofing here, and we won't see Retina displays for 3+ years, when it would be more feasible.
I agree with you, though, it would be nice if Apple was more serious about their GPUs. Maybe the switch to retina will force them to be.
Tommyg117
Jul 29, 11:45 PM
If this had Verizon support, I'd be really pumped. My plan is up in 2 months!
bloodycape
Apr 18, 05:10 PM
No it's not. It's not that obvious. Phones sucked so bad before the iphone. Smart phones sucked even worse. Treo's, Q's omg. horrible pieces of equipment.
I can't say they sucked, they were just more spartan compare to what we have now. Sure the touch screen aspect of it was crap, but the browser was acceptable, battery life was good, and they keyboard, least on the 650, and 700w where good all the years I used them. From time to time I miss my 700w and WM as it had this nerdy charm to it.
This could out like the RIM v Handspring(Palm bought them later) lawsuit were RIM sued Handspring for copying their keyboard, and something related to emailing on a mobile device. They settled out of court in the end.
I can't say they sucked, they were just more spartan compare to what we have now. Sure the touch screen aspect of it was crap, but the browser was acceptable, battery life was good, and they keyboard, least on the 650, and 700w where good all the years I used them. From time to time I miss my 700w and WM as it had this nerdy charm to it.
This could out like the RIM v Handspring(Palm bought them later) lawsuit were RIM sued Handspring for copying their keyboard, and something related to emailing on a mobile device. They settled out of court in the end.
nastebu
Mar 29, 04:07 PM
Sorry, there is no comparison. US agriculture does not have anywhere near the level of protectionism as Japanese agriculture. Nor does any US industry, with the exception of defense contractors.
And what makes you think a small farmer is somehow superior to DelMonte?
As for who subsidizes agriculture more, I'm unsure, but it's probably close. From the wikipedia article: "A Canadian report claimed that for every dollar U.S. farmers earn, 62 cents comes from some form of government, with total aid in 2009 from all levels of government adding up to $180.8 billion." What's the comparative level in Japan?
The small farmer vs. delMonte is an interesting question. It's a question of values. DelMonte produces cheaper, lower quality food. Small farmers produce more expensive, generally higher quality food. So which you subsidize is a question of social policy.
In Japan, there are lots of small farmers who have kept their farms, and a very strong bias to eat locally. This means that food is of better quality and supports local communities. In the US, massive supermarket chains have tended to dominate food retail, and since they rely on national distribution, food tends to be very processed and have an enormous carbon footprint. It also means lots of mcJobs instead of local businesses.
I prefer the small farmer.
And what makes you think a small farmer is somehow superior to DelMonte?
As for who subsidizes agriculture more, I'm unsure, but it's probably close. From the wikipedia article: "A Canadian report claimed that for every dollar U.S. farmers earn, 62 cents comes from some form of government, with total aid in 2009 from all levels of government adding up to $180.8 billion." What's the comparative level in Japan?
The small farmer vs. delMonte is an interesting question. It's a question of values. DelMonte produces cheaper, lower quality food. Small farmers produce more expensive, generally higher quality food. So which you subsidize is a question of social policy.
In Japan, there are lots of small farmers who have kept their farms, and a very strong bias to eat locally. This means that food is of better quality and supports local communities. In the US, massive supermarket chains have tended to dominate food retail, and since they rely on national distribution, food tends to be very processed and have an enormous carbon footprint. It also means lots of mcJobs instead of local businesses.
I prefer the small farmer.
apolloa
Apr 21, 06:53 PM
You know, you would have to say 'About friggin time APPLE!!'
Interesting idea for design though, tower case and rack mountable, can see that being very popular :)
Interesting idea for design though, tower case and rack mountable, can see that being very popular :)
-aggie-
May 6, 06:42 PM
I don't understand how it would be quicker either.
How about stick with me and we lose the clod you have for a husband? :)
How about stick with me and we lose the clod you have for a husband? :)
tstreete
Nov 9, 02:21 PM
So far I think the phone calls sound fine for the person on the other end, and OK on my end; at freeway speeds my car is loud so I have to listen carefully.
I think the mount's GPS chip signal is actually routed through the dock connection. Just phone (and app voice, if necessary) connect through bluetooth. Maybe this is because Apple doesn't let non-audio devices of any sort to connect through bluetooth; if they did, then we'd all have been using external bluetooth gps receivers long ago.
Thanks...I was hoping this was true! I do not like my phone calls booming through my car speakers as its too big a sound. I wondered about this connection as the GPS chip is connected by bluetooth I believe, so I wasn't sure what else might be.
Have you found the bluetooth speakerphone to be working well enough for you and the person on the other end?
Thanks for all your help.
I think the mount's GPS chip signal is actually routed through the dock connection. Just phone (and app voice, if necessary) connect through bluetooth. Maybe this is because Apple doesn't let non-audio devices of any sort to connect through bluetooth; if they did, then we'd all have been using external bluetooth gps receivers long ago.
Thanks...I was hoping this was true! I do not like my phone calls booming through my car speakers as its too big a sound. I wondered about this connection as the GPS chip is connected by bluetooth I believe, so I wasn't sure what else might be.
Have you found the bluetooth speakerphone to be working well enough for you and the person on the other end?
Thanks for all your help.
wordoflife
Apr 9, 06:29 PM
Official Google answer.
280546
You can do that?!??!
Damn, Google can do everything.
280546
You can do that?!??!
Damn, Google can do everything.
Bonte
Aug 7, 05:39 PM
Are these specific Mac GPU's with Mac roms or can we finally use a selection of PC GPU's? If so then the base GPU isn't an issue, just use it for the second screen.
what will happen if I use bootcamp and put in a PC grafic card?
Interesting, if we get Windows to work with PC GPU cards then Apple has no other option than to support these cards also or at least try to. If these are normal PC cards then the MacPro wil be the coolest machine on earth in the hard core gaming community. :cool:
what will happen if I use bootcamp and put in a PC grafic card?
Interesting, if we get Windows to work with PC GPU cards then Apple has no other option than to support these cards also or at least try to. If these are normal PC cards then the MacPro wil be the coolest machine on earth in the hard core gaming community. :cool:
rmwebs
Apr 21, 05:05 PM
I think the next Mac Pro refresh will be a huge milestone. Not only will it be the first case redesign in nearly a decade and add all the latest tech (USB3, sata III, thunderbolt, etc) but I believe Apple will take this opportunity to finally revise the pricing structure. Over the past few years, Apple has been making a clear shift towards the consumer market. Part of that is arguably negative ("dumbing things down") but the positive is more reasonable prices. The Mac Pro is the only computer left that hasn't been revised. My hope is that Apple will create a few models of the new Mac Pro, at least one of which is an affordable mid-range consumer tower starting under the the $2,000 mark.
Unfortunately, they will probably wait to use the new performance desktop/server sandy bridge CPUs which Intel won't have ready until Q4 2011 (or later). If that's true then we won't see these new beauties until 1H 2012. :(
If anything the pro will increase in price as its very much close to the price of the 27" iMac, which is hampering its sales. Also, don't hold your breath for USB3 - as far as Apple's concerned, USB3 is a dead technology.
Unfortunately, they will probably wait to use the new performance desktop/server sandy bridge CPUs which Intel won't have ready until Q4 2011 (or later). If that's true then we won't see these new beauties until 1H 2012. :(
If anything the pro will increase in price as its very much close to the price of the 27" iMac, which is hampering its sales. Also, don't hold your breath for USB3 - as far as Apple's concerned, USB3 is a dead technology.
bella92108
Apr 5, 02:22 PM
It's: "Do not buy iPhone. Go with Android." That's how I see it. Companies like Toyota will have no choice but to double their efforts in serving Android users.
They pushed me away, I'm Android on my phone, iPad 2 on my tablet. If I can't jailbreak my iPad 2 in the next week, HELLO ANDROID XOOM :-)
They pushed me away, I'm Android on my phone, iPad 2 on my tablet. If I can't jailbreak my iPad 2 in the next week, HELLO ANDROID XOOM :-)
spazzcat
May 4, 07:14 PM
I think I still prefer a hard copy. If I download then I still have to burn a DVD for backup and emergency boot. I'd rather have a professionally burned copy that is going to be reliable long term.
Also I don't have a big pipe to quickly download a 3GB package. I'm living in the slow lane here w/ 2mbps DSL.
The betas make a recovery disk on the HD
Also I don't have a big pipe to quickly download a 3GB package. I'm living in the slow lane here w/ 2mbps DSL.
The betas make a recovery disk on the HD
Eidorian
Jul 22, 09:56 PM
Does this current set of chips include some very low power consumption chips for use in the Apple ultra-portable I want so badly?:confused:No
spriter
Jul 21, 03:15 PM
G5 PowerBooks on Tuesday!
:eek: :D
I think MacBooks will get Merom in their second revision. Either way, I'm liking Intel's relentless surge.
:eek: :D
I think MacBooks will get Merom in their second revision. Either way, I'm liking Intel's relentless surge.
bedifferent
Mar 31, 03:58 AM
Sure, I know. It's just plain stupid default-settings if you ask me.
I can't imagine this is a better default setting for new users.
One aspect that always bothered me since Leopard: having a silver dock with light indicators. It makes determining running apps in the dock very difficult. One of the first things I do is change my dock to black glass and add stack overlays:
http://s3.amazonaws.com/ember/4xfOeej6P9j8aNcXnJUt9sTOnXbNNk8l_l.png
I can't imagine this is a better default setting for new users.
One aspect that always bothered me since Leopard: having a silver dock with light indicators. It makes determining running apps in the dock very difficult. One of the first things I do is change my dock to black glass and add stack overlays:
http://s3.amazonaws.com/ember/4xfOeej6P9j8aNcXnJUt9sTOnXbNNk8l_l.png
infidel69
Mar 29, 05:37 PM
Are you willing to pay more for your Mac gadgets so they can be made here?
You're god damn right I am and not just for Mac gadgets either.
You're god damn right I am and not just for Mac gadgets either.
kiljoy616
Apr 7, 03:24 PM
Shame - a bit of competition couldn't hurt iPad development.
How is the iPad going bad, the new one is incredible, the first gen still rocks for most things. Retina is coming we all can assume that the next jump will be even bigger and Retina as well as way better cameras are in the works. :cool:
Competition is good, but considering what I have seen there is no competition just companies throwing money behind half baked scheme hoping something will stick. :confused:
Sure I like a bit more control with the UI but you can't have it all. :rolleyes:
How is the iPad going bad, the new one is incredible, the first gen still rocks for most things. Retina is coming we all can assume that the next jump will be even bigger and Retina as well as way better cameras are in the works. :cool:
Competition is good, but considering what I have seen there is no competition just companies throwing money behind half baked scheme hoping something will stick. :confused:
Sure I like a bit more control with the UI but you can't have it all. :rolleyes:
Simiber
Apr 26, 02:22 PM
So one manufacturer Vs the rest, I think there would be something wrong with apple having more dominance than every other (notable) smartphone maker put together..!
Plus, like many have already said, competition is good..!
Now please let iOS five be good..! I get tingly thinking about it..!:D
Plus, like many have already said, competition is good..!
Now please let iOS five be good..! I get tingly thinking about it..!:D
No comments:
Post a Comment