PghLondon
Apr 28, 12:06 PM
Question should be, why does it matter how many android devices there are? There is still a one to one relationship, one customer buys-one device. Its android smartphones vs Apple Smartphones.
No. No. No.
Comparing Android vs. iOS : fine
But why the arbitrary distinction of "phones". It's an OS that can be run on multiple devices. Do you compare Mac laptop share vs. Windows laptop share? (In any meaningful context, that is)?
No. No. No.
Comparing Android vs. iOS : fine
But why the arbitrary distinction of "phones". It's an OS that can be run on multiple devices. Do you compare Mac laptop share vs. Windows laptop share? (In any meaningful context, that is)?
redchannel
Apr 22, 04:15 PM
That is one ugly mock-up :eek:
chris975d
Apr 28, 03:57 PM
That actually isn't surprising. I've noticed that all of the aftermarket "OEM" white based replacement backplates (any using the white housing for colored glass...yellow, all the whites, green) are always just slightly thicker and can prevent tighter fitting cases from going on the phone. I always just chalked it up to aftermarket parts not being as exact as genuine Apple parts, but now it seems like it's actually a legitimate difference.
CalZephyr
Apr 23, 08:20 PM
I wish I could hear even a rumor of the iPhone coming to Sprint. :(
more...
Aduntu
May 2, 03:28 AM
Will you keep Apple outta this? :d
That's impossible. She's the Apple laday. :D
That's impossible. She's the Apple laday. :D
BryanBensing
Apr 26, 12:20 PM
No thank you. Rather have my music locally.....
more...
shawnce
Jul 21, 12:31 PM
Although Apple is behind Gateway in market share, Apple's earnings (not revenue, earnings) last quarter (not year, quarter) is pretty close to Gateway's market capitalization!
Not surprising given that Gateway's market share numbers come directly from the extremely low margin, low end systems they are dumping on the market. In other words they have higher volumes but they are making next to nothing (for some nearly selling at a loss) in order to get those volumes.
...basically the stock market knows that Gateway is not a very safe bet...
Not surprising given that Gateway's market share numbers come directly from the extremely low margin, low end systems they are dumping on the market. In other words they have higher volumes but they are making next to nothing (for some nearly selling at a loss) in order to get those volumes.
...basically the stock market knows that Gateway is not a very safe bet...
burningbright
Mar 31, 11:47 AM
I think those torn-off pages will make several people with OCD explode with rage...:eek:
more...
chrono1081
Apr 28, 10:10 AM
So the iPhone went from being pummeled by Android to now just being badly beaten.
That is Awesome.
No even if Android marketshare is bigger iPhone is STILL the winner. Two handsets verses 90+ Android handsets and Apple still holds its own. That should tell you something but I'm sure it doesn't.
Why I reply to you I'll never know since everyone knows what you are.
That is Awesome.
No even if Android marketshare is bigger iPhone is STILL the winner. Two handsets verses 90+ Android handsets and Apple still holds its own. That should tell you something but I'm sure it doesn't.
Why I reply to you I'll never know since everyone knows what you are.
VanillaBean
Mar 13, 04:00 PM
Anyone have any inventory updates for stores in the area?
http://ocunwired.ocregister.com/2011/03/13/ipad-2-sold-out-at-apple-store/6179/
Sold out at all Apple stores according to the OC Register.
http://ocunwired.ocregister.com/2011/03/13/ipad-2-sold-out-at-apple-store/6179/
Sold out at all Apple stores according to the OC Register.
more...
Glass
Jul 11, 03:48 PM
They will. Microsoft doing this will definitely cause Apple to be less stingy with the R&D and get some great small products to market.
God, I really hope that Leopard is more of an upgrade than Tiger was.
You don't think tiger was a significant upgrade? wtf?? lol.. it was packed with new features.
God, I really hope that Leopard is more of an upgrade than Tiger was.
You don't think tiger was a significant upgrade? wtf?? lol.. it was packed with new features.
neutrino23
Dec 1, 03:32 PM
Which makes it even MORE odd that it's enabled by default in MacTels, which don't run Classic. :confused:
Hmm. I'm running a 17" MacBook Pro with 10.4.8 and when I checked under both Ethernet and Airport Appletalk was not enabled. On this machine I have never set it one way or the other.
Hmm. I'm running a 17" MacBook Pro with 10.4.8 and when I checked under both Ethernet and Airport Appletalk was not enabled. On this machine I have never set it one way or the other.
more...
stormj
Jan 28, 02:25 PM
Not quite. Q1 exceeded everyone expectations financially. But it was the appearance of slowing iPod sales that scared everyone. The reason that Apple made its numbers is because Mac sales were extremely strong and covered the slowing iPod growth.
That and the very weak guidance for Q2 would scare a lot of investors who thought that Apple was a safe haven.
Hickman
The slowing iPod sales are the CW reason why the stock has gone down. But anytime you read what the reason for a market action is, you should be skeptical.
My view is that Apple's stock was simply overheated due to all of its publicity this year, and the Street was looking for a reason to cool it off, given the prevailing market conditions.
I don't think in another time the iPod numbers alone would have done that. Margins are higher on macs and mac sales are up -- and that didn't move the number up.
The market is bad, people are still shy of tech stocks in a bad market (rightly so), Apple has been on a long winning streak and people are starting to wonder. i also think there's a lot of "amateur" demand for Apple that was moving the stock up on all of their hype, without much of a look at the fundamentals. Those people aren't buying stocks right now.
But, as I said, be skeptical because what I'm saying probably is just another view that gets lost in the noise of the market movements.
That and the very weak guidance for Q2 would scare a lot of investors who thought that Apple was a safe haven.
Hickman
The slowing iPod sales are the CW reason why the stock has gone down. But anytime you read what the reason for a market action is, you should be skeptical.
My view is that Apple's stock was simply overheated due to all of its publicity this year, and the Street was looking for a reason to cool it off, given the prevailing market conditions.
I don't think in another time the iPod numbers alone would have done that. Margins are higher on macs and mac sales are up -- and that didn't move the number up.
The market is bad, people are still shy of tech stocks in a bad market (rightly so), Apple has been on a long winning streak and people are starting to wonder. i also think there's a lot of "amateur" demand for Apple that was moving the stock up on all of their hype, without much of a look at the fundamentals. Those people aren't buying stocks right now.
But, as I said, be skeptical because what I'm saying probably is just another view that gets lost in the noise of the market movements.
lilo777
Apr 22, 02:42 PM
Make up your mind. Either they are using the chips now, or they aren't. People were clamoring for mobile quad cores and now they have them. What CPU are they not using now that users want in mobile computers?
Now they are. The problem is it took them a couple of years. They waited until Intel produced mobile chips that "suit" them instead of producing a Mac that could use available quad core mobile chips. And we are not even talking about minor details like Apple never using the most powerful versions of CPUs (for example, there is no MBPs with SandyBridge/2920XM).
Now they are. The problem is it took them a couple of years. They waited until Intel produced mobile chips that "suit" them instead of producing a Mac that could use available quad core mobile chips. And we are not even talking about minor details like Apple never using the most powerful versions of CPUs (for example, there is no MBPs with SandyBridge/2920XM).
more...
twoodcc
Oct 30, 06:17 PM
cool thats probably it then, the -16.
the processor trick is with the dev tools. there's a prefpane where u can turn off individual cores, and turn off hyperthreading. too bad there's not a dev tool for overclocking ;)
alright. let us know how the -16 works. i've read on the folding forums about some people having more success with -15, you might even give that a try also
We might take team Lituania today ;)
i hope so
the processor trick is with the dev tools. there's a prefpane where u can turn off individual cores, and turn off hyperthreading. too bad there's not a dev tool for overclocking ;)
alright. let us know how the -16 works. i've read on the folding forums about some people having more success with -15, you might even give that a try also
We might take team Lituania today ;)
i hope so
liquidsnake621
Sep 30, 03:14 AM
well then maybe i'll pay 30% of my bill... =P
more...
PghLondon
Apr 28, 11:26 AM
This is fun.
Yes, the iPhone does compete against Android. The last time I went into a AT&T or Verizon store, this was obvious. To say that the iPhone does not compete against Android is silly.
WRONG. iPhone = hardware. Android = software.
iOS competes against Android.
Because there is only two hardware choices, the iPhone 4 or iPhone 3GS. Making this argument is so empty, in that it does not take into account the reasons behind it.
WRONG. The choice is iPhone OR any Android phone OR any Win7 Phone OR any RIM phone, etc.
Hello Mr. Straw man. The article was about iPhone; if you read it it states "covering U.S. mobile phone sales". Now, if by mobile OS, you are also adding in the iPad, that is debatable. I've been a iPad 3G owner since April 30th and I can tell you that I do not consider the iPad a mobile device. Sure, its easy to carry, but to lump in its sales with phone handset sales is a stretch. If you are making that stretch, how about adding netbooks into the mix as well?
If those netbooks ran Android, I'd count them. But they don't. And YOU'RE bringing up straw men? Phone versus non-phone makes no difference if they're running the same OS and same apps.
When your sales numbers for phones are ~50% of that of your competitor; whereas a few years ago they were barely a blip, then yes that means they are getting kicked in the teeth in handset OS sales.
In your mind maybe. But only in your mind.
PS: Handset OS sales? What the hell does that mean?
Yes, the iPhone does compete against Android. The last time I went into a AT&T or Verizon store, this was obvious. To say that the iPhone does not compete against Android is silly.
WRONG. iPhone = hardware. Android = software.
iOS competes against Android.
Because there is only two hardware choices, the iPhone 4 or iPhone 3GS. Making this argument is so empty, in that it does not take into account the reasons behind it.
WRONG. The choice is iPhone OR any Android phone OR any Win7 Phone OR any RIM phone, etc.
Hello Mr. Straw man. The article was about iPhone; if you read it it states "covering U.S. mobile phone sales". Now, if by mobile OS, you are also adding in the iPad, that is debatable. I've been a iPad 3G owner since April 30th and I can tell you that I do not consider the iPad a mobile device. Sure, its easy to carry, but to lump in its sales with phone handset sales is a stretch. If you are making that stretch, how about adding netbooks into the mix as well?
If those netbooks ran Android, I'd count them. But they don't. And YOU'RE bringing up straw men? Phone versus non-phone makes no difference if they're running the same OS and same apps.
When your sales numbers for phones are ~50% of that of your competitor; whereas a few years ago they were barely a blip, then yes that means they are getting kicked in the teeth in handset OS sales.
In your mind maybe. But only in your mind.
PS: Handset OS sales? What the hell does that mean?
Ichneumon
Apr 28, 04:00 PM
First, the volume switch issue, then this. I feel sorry for case manufacturers. What a nightmare.
Volume switch issue? Please enlighten me, I don't know what you refer to.
Volume switch issue? Please enlighten me, I don't know what you refer to.
doobs22
Apr 25, 10:58 AM
I am sure any plans to launch it have been scrapped and this is just a left over prototype. You know Apple has a history of planning for every contingency, I am sure there are Sprint iPhones ready to go also. If Apple decides to release them they would be ready to go.
I very much hope Apple will have a Sprint phone -- I'll buy one that works on Sprint.
I very much hope Apple will have a Sprint phone -- I'll buy one that works on Sprint.
Intell
Apr 29, 07:51 PM
Can we vote Appleguy out of the afterlife if he starts annoying me?
Yes...
Yes...
FloatingBones
Nov 20, 01:03 AM
I don't need to do squat guy.
If you don't address those very good reasons, your argument won't be very convincing. We do not want the CPU suck, the identity leaking, the UI inconsistencies, and the very real risk of "zero day" Adobe bugs.
WTF do I care about your reasons for wanting to take away my choice to use Flash? I don't.
In other words, you are not competent to carry on a rational discussion. You're just here to vent.
It's not about "propping up" flash, it's about being able to access TODAY'S Internet, not hoping some day that we won't need Flash.
Users of those 120M+ devices don't have to hope. They are already free of Flash!
We just want to use the Internet unfettered by Steve Jobs playing the part of a Communist Dictator.
The analogy makes no sense. Nobody is forcing you to use any Apple product.
If you really want the "full web experience" of zero-day Adobe bugs, get an Android phone. Note: Android phones were vulnerable to the last zero-day Adobe bug. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
The only reasons I see from you are excuses to praise Steve.
The fact that I can't catch zero-day Adobe attacks on my iPhone is a great reason to praise Apple's decision.
which does NOTHING to make other Flash functions work, BTW, leaving many sites useless even so
Do tell: what exact sites are you talking about? What exact legacy flash applications are running on those sites to which you can find no substitute?
It's a drop in the ocean compared to the world at large nor should they have to be held hostage by Steve Jobs whose sole goal in life is to get you to pay him for every little thing you do in this world.
Nobody is holding a gun to your head. Nobody is holding you hostage.
If you don't like the choices that Apple made, then ditch your iOS device and get an Android. Simple.
He wants to push his warped agendas and ring every last cent out of you no matter how inconvenient it might be to you.
This is the first little lie in your rant. The iOS users don't find it inconvenient. If Flash were so damn important to them, they would have bought some device that could run Flash.
The people who bought those 120M+ devices disagree with you.
He wants to force the destruction of flash by denying his customers access to a large percentage of the world's web sites all the time while lying about iOS devices being able to access the 'real' or 'full' Internet.
This is the second little lie. Apple did provide a choice: they approved the SkyFire App. They didn't have to do that.
Apple has also announced they will approve Flash Apps using Adobe's cross-compiler for iOS. If there actually are crucial Flash apps -- you haven't named a single specific one so far -- the owners of those apps should be able to easily cross-compile their apps for the iOS App Store.
if you don't have Flash, you don't have the full Internet.
And that is the third little lie. Flash is a proprietary and legacy platform. It's on the way down now.
Even Adobe has acknowledged that a Flash-only choice is a bankrupt strategy (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999). After websites start offering their content with an open standard, you've gotta ask: what exactly is the value in continuing to prop up Flash?
I just want innovative products. That is what Steve is good at. That doesn't mean I want his arrogant ego side pushing those products with restrictions that have nothing to do with the technology and only to do with Steve's need to be a control freak.
And this is number four. If those words were true, you would be able to explain why my four huge concerns for running Flash in iOS Safari are not valid. But you can't do that!
If the flash experience is so great, please tell us what exact Flash sites are you talking about? What exact legacy flash applications are running on those sites to which you can find no substitute on your iOS device?
If you don't address those very good reasons, your argument won't be very convincing. We do not want the CPU suck, the identity leaking, the UI inconsistencies, and the very real risk of "zero day" Adobe bugs.
WTF do I care about your reasons for wanting to take away my choice to use Flash? I don't.
In other words, you are not competent to carry on a rational discussion. You're just here to vent.
It's not about "propping up" flash, it's about being able to access TODAY'S Internet, not hoping some day that we won't need Flash.
Users of those 120M+ devices don't have to hope. They are already free of Flash!
We just want to use the Internet unfettered by Steve Jobs playing the part of a Communist Dictator.
The analogy makes no sense. Nobody is forcing you to use any Apple product.
If you really want the "full web experience" of zero-day Adobe bugs, get an Android phone. Note: Android phones were vulnerable to the last zero-day Adobe bug. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
The only reasons I see from you are excuses to praise Steve.
The fact that I can't catch zero-day Adobe attacks on my iPhone is a great reason to praise Apple's decision.
which does NOTHING to make other Flash functions work, BTW, leaving many sites useless even so
Do tell: what exact sites are you talking about? What exact legacy flash applications are running on those sites to which you can find no substitute?
It's a drop in the ocean compared to the world at large nor should they have to be held hostage by Steve Jobs whose sole goal in life is to get you to pay him for every little thing you do in this world.
Nobody is holding a gun to your head. Nobody is holding you hostage.
If you don't like the choices that Apple made, then ditch your iOS device and get an Android. Simple.
He wants to push his warped agendas and ring every last cent out of you no matter how inconvenient it might be to you.
This is the first little lie in your rant. The iOS users don't find it inconvenient. If Flash were so damn important to them, they would have bought some device that could run Flash.
The people who bought those 120M+ devices disagree with you.
He wants to force the destruction of flash by denying his customers access to a large percentage of the world's web sites all the time while lying about iOS devices being able to access the 'real' or 'full' Internet.
This is the second little lie. Apple did provide a choice: they approved the SkyFire App. They didn't have to do that.
Apple has also announced they will approve Flash Apps using Adobe's cross-compiler for iOS. If there actually are crucial Flash apps -- you haven't named a single specific one so far -- the owners of those apps should be able to easily cross-compile their apps for the iOS App Store.
if you don't have Flash, you don't have the full Internet.
And that is the third little lie. Flash is a proprietary and legacy platform. It's on the way down now.
Even Adobe has acknowledged that a Flash-only choice is a bankrupt strategy (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999). After websites start offering their content with an open standard, you've gotta ask: what exactly is the value in continuing to prop up Flash?
I just want innovative products. That is what Steve is good at. That doesn't mean I want his arrogant ego side pushing those products with restrictions that have nothing to do with the technology and only to do with Steve's need to be a control freak.
And this is number four. If those words were true, you would be able to explain why my four huge concerns for running Flash in iOS Safari are not valid. But you can't do that!
If the flash experience is so great, please tell us what exact Flash sites are you talking about? What exact legacy flash applications are running on those sites to which you can find no substitute on your iOS device?
Arsenal09
May 2, 10:56 AM
I hope so! :D
But there aren't so many rumors yet like with the new MBP this year..
But there aren't so many rumors yet like with the new MBP this year..
ghostlyorb
Apr 24, 10:58 AM
It says it used different frequencies... but then how can people jailbreak/unlock their iPhones and use it on T-mobile?
ChazUK
May 1, 05:48 AM
Yup, and that's irrelevant to the discussion. Phones that aren't granted access to that market are still counted as Android devices.
"Smartphone OS" is a totally meaningless metric. It's as useful as "laptop OS" versus "desktop OS". Yes, you can report on it, but it begs the question "why?". And the answer is (9 times out of 10) "to make us look good, even though we're losing the battle that really counts".
I'll agree with you that phones that don't include Android Market are included in total figures but the big players in Android are the likes of HTC, Motorola, LG, Samsung e.t.c who all include access to Android Market, not to mention Google's 350,000 activations a day that all have access google services and in turn include the Market.
If people can't wake up to the fact that with regards to smartphone os market share, this is the way it's always been then that is their issue. Of course total iOS penetration can be counted in a different metric and there is nothing that anyone who wants to bash Apple can say to the massive success they've had. iOS is an unrivalled juggernaut as it stands today.
Where did you pluck your "This whole "smartphone OS" is something dreamed up in the last few weeks by Android apologists" Conspiracy from anyway? You must have had some basis to make that judgememt?
"Smartphone OS" is a totally meaningless metric. It's as useful as "laptop OS" versus "desktop OS". Yes, you can report on it, but it begs the question "why?". And the answer is (9 times out of 10) "to make us look good, even though we're losing the battle that really counts".
I'll agree with you that phones that don't include Android Market are included in total figures but the big players in Android are the likes of HTC, Motorola, LG, Samsung e.t.c who all include access to Android Market, not to mention Google's 350,000 activations a day that all have access google services and in turn include the Market.
If people can't wake up to the fact that with regards to smartphone os market share, this is the way it's always been then that is their issue. Of course total iOS penetration can be counted in a different metric and there is nothing that anyone who wants to bash Apple can say to the massive success they've had. iOS is an unrivalled juggernaut as it stands today.
Where did you pluck your "This whole "smartphone OS" is something dreamed up in the last few weeks by Android apologists" Conspiracy from anyway? You must have had some basis to make that judgememt?
No comments:
Post a Comment