arcite
Apr 7, 02:04 PM
They only need like ~100,000.
:p
:p
*LTD*
Apr 5, 07:13 PM
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) Mobile/8G4)
Who the hell at Toyota thought this was a good idea?? It was remarkably unprofessional of them to begin with.
You don't establish business relationships by breaking the other's EULA. This is frankly, shocking from a company such as Toyota.
Who the hell at Toyota thought this was a good idea?? It was remarkably unprofessional of them to begin with.
You don't establish business relationships by breaking the other's EULA. This is frankly, shocking from a company such as Toyota.
alent1234
Mar 28, 09:58 AM
They also will start having 3GS users come off of AppleCare contracts.
Nobody will buy a new iPhone if their's breaks after AC is up ...knowing that maybe in the Fall we will see an iPhone5.
Again, leaves to much of an 'open window' for defections based on frustration, etc.
...and as pointed out already by others... I agree, iPhone4 is already a dated design. delaying will just erode Apple's lead in the ever growing mobile hardware market.
Everyday another competitors comes along... it is no longer 2007... their lead is not what it use to be.
us 3GS users have been eligible for upgrades since last month
i was going to wait for the iphone 5 but my 3GS had water damage so i went over to android
Nobody will buy a new iPhone if their's breaks after AC is up ...knowing that maybe in the Fall we will see an iPhone5.
Again, leaves to much of an 'open window' for defections based on frustration, etc.
...and as pointed out already by others... I agree, iPhone4 is already a dated design. delaying will just erode Apple's lead in the ever growing mobile hardware market.
Everyday another competitors comes along... it is no longer 2007... their lead is not what it use to be.
us 3GS users have been eligible for upgrades since last month
i was going to wait for the iphone 5 but my 3GS had water damage so i went over to android
Popeye206
Apr 25, 09:35 AM
You do realize everything you said is untrue, right?
He does not care. Anything to slam Apple he will. See he never mentioned Google who does a similar thing!
He does not care. Anything to slam Apple he will. See he never mentioned Google who does a similar thing!
Tilpots
May 7, 01:25 PM
The problem with this idea is that it's based on the assumption that Apple wants to be like Google and suddenly become an advertiser.
They purchased Quattro and developed iAds because it represents a mutually beneficial deal for developers on the app store and Apple. Apple designs the ads and runs them on their servers and developers get to deliver free or .$99 apps that can actually be profitable. Quid pro quo...Apple gets more apps hopefully that don't suck and the developer gets to reap the rewards of the success of the app store.
That same play doesn't come into effect with Mobileme. It's not dependent on 3rd party developers delivering content so thusly you will not see iAds in Mobileme.
It's no assumption at all that Apple's getting into the advertising game. They announced iAd loud and clear as part of the iPhone's new OS. Your assuming these ads won't make it into any thing other than apps and I'm saying you're mistaken.
Why would they limit a massive profit opportunity and a chance to deliver a huge financial blow to their new arch enemy? They wouldn't. Google's laid the groundwork for how these free services work. Apple's may just put their spin on it.
I do think that a paid, ad free version would exist. They'll continue their current service uninterrupted. But to offer it free, well, "Ain't nothin' free, baby." They'll generate revenue off it with their new ad system. It wouldn't make any sense not to. It's just the world in which we live.
They purchased Quattro and developed iAds because it represents a mutually beneficial deal for developers on the app store and Apple. Apple designs the ads and runs them on their servers and developers get to deliver free or .$99 apps that can actually be profitable. Quid pro quo...Apple gets more apps hopefully that don't suck and the developer gets to reap the rewards of the success of the app store.
That same play doesn't come into effect with Mobileme. It's not dependent on 3rd party developers delivering content so thusly you will not see iAds in Mobileme.
It's no assumption at all that Apple's getting into the advertising game. They announced iAd loud and clear as part of the iPhone's new OS. Your assuming these ads won't make it into any thing other than apps and I'm saying you're mistaken.
Why would they limit a massive profit opportunity and a chance to deliver a huge financial blow to their new arch enemy? They wouldn't. Google's laid the groundwork for how these free services work. Apple's may just put their spin on it.
I do think that a paid, ad free version would exist. They'll continue their current service uninterrupted. But to offer it free, well, "Ain't nothin' free, baby." They'll generate revenue off it with their new ad system. It wouldn't make any sense not to. It's just the world in which we live.
caspersoong
May 6, 01:08 AM
This seems great. Hope ARM comes with a super-fast APU for computers before long.
yodaxl7
Apr 18, 04:07 PM
shame really that Apple is resorting to Microsoft-esque tactics. If you can't beat em, just sue em, mentality.
Thats like saying that Coca-Cola should sue Pepsi
Xerox PARC should have aggressively sued Apple when the GUI was becoming commercialized.
NO, Apple did not invent the first GUI Operating System. Xerox made the first GUI in their Alto systems. Xerox only sued (late for that matter) when Apple sued Microsoft for their GUI OS (Windows).
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8b/Xerox_Alto.jpg/240px-Xerox_Alto.jpg
Let's say we had a science test and I sit next to you. I made an A and you made an A. I didn't study and you did. Will u tell on me?
Thats like saying that Coca-Cola should sue Pepsi
Xerox PARC should have aggressively sued Apple when the GUI was becoming commercialized.
NO, Apple did not invent the first GUI Operating System. Xerox made the first GUI in their Alto systems. Xerox only sued (late for that matter) when Apple sued Microsoft for their GUI OS (Windows).
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8b/Xerox_Alto.jpg/240px-Xerox_Alto.jpg
Let's say we had a science test and I sit next to you. I made an A and you made an A. I didn't study and you did. Will u tell on me?
shompa
Aug 7, 04:18 PM
Nice!!! Most likely you made a wise decision to purchase your addional RAM and HD from a third party. Apple requires arms and legs for their optional upgrades. ;)
FB Dimms ECC are really expensive.
Anyone knows where to get them cheaper?
I plan to use 4 gig FBdimm 4x1024
and 4 750 gig disks.
Then Bittorrent wont be slow!
FB Dimms ECC are really expensive.
Anyone knows where to get them cheaper?
I plan to use 4 gig FBdimm 4x1024
and 4 750 gig disks.
Then Bittorrent wont be slow!
mdntcallr
Aug 11, 11:11 AM
apple needs to introduce a computer which is between the mac mini and the mac pro tower.
I want a mini tower, with 2 pci slots. you know something in the price range of $899-999 usd.
where i can upgrade the graphics card or order it with a better graphics card.
Some of us do not want to be tied to the imac screen/body. I love to be able to upgrade my own computer's graphics card.
Cmon apple. give us a mid tier system we can upgrade ourselves. The Macmini just doesnt cut it. virtually the only thing in that we can chance is the CPU, Memory or hard drive.
I want a mini tower, with 2 pci slots. you know something in the price range of $899-999 usd.
where i can upgrade the graphics card or order it with a better graphics card.
Some of us do not want to be tied to the imac screen/body. I love to be able to upgrade my own computer's graphics card.
Cmon apple. give us a mid tier system we can upgrade ourselves. The Macmini just doesnt cut it. virtually the only thing in that we can chance is the CPU, Memory or hard drive.
dmw007
Nov 26, 11:08 AM
An Apple iTablet would be a cool computer- bring it on Apple! :D :) :cool:
myca
Apr 5, 02:42 PM
Much of it is the automatic association that "jailbreak = pirated apps" which for many of us is not the case. I have spent $52 on apps in the last 3 weeks of having iPad... they're making a killing off me. Even with all of the apps I have, I can't stand looking at the device's home screen with an inch of space between each app, and it drives me nuts that I am limited to how many icons i can put in each folder. IF I can't jailbreak this thing in the next week, it's going back to the store, and I'll buy the Xoom. It solves all the issues. Would rather stay with Apple because the hardware is so much better than android, but I have to be realistic, software is what makes any device (hence why I like my Mac so much)
I tip my hat to you that you still buy your software when Jailbroken phones can easily use pirated software.
This is one of the reasons that Apple (and the console manufacturers to name a few) are so careful with creating these closed systems. It's been pretty much statistically proven with the PSP that the ease of hacking the device made software sales suffer dramatically: a 2.95 tie ratio, compared to the DS 4.5 ratio which itself has been plagued by piracy. Whereas the wii, 360 and PS3 all have a tie ratio of over 7. So it's understandable that when a company relies on revenues from software through things like the app store, or licensing fees in the case of the console makers, they want a closed system that they can control to avoid the problems sony had with the PSP.
The more Apple go down the road as selling their ios devices as media/gaming consumption devices the more they will want a solid closed system. Which I'm fine with, as my iPhone is a phone, with a few apps on it and it plays my music, if apple ever tried this on their actual computer OS I'd have to brush up on my Windows skills pretty darn quickly.
Of note the PSP has sold over 60 million but is still deemed a failure, in part due the terrible tie ratio.
I tip my hat to you that you still buy your software when Jailbroken phones can easily use pirated software.
This is one of the reasons that Apple (and the console manufacturers to name a few) are so careful with creating these closed systems. It's been pretty much statistically proven with the PSP that the ease of hacking the device made software sales suffer dramatically: a 2.95 tie ratio, compared to the DS 4.5 ratio which itself has been plagued by piracy. Whereas the wii, 360 and PS3 all have a tie ratio of over 7. So it's understandable that when a company relies on revenues from software through things like the app store, or licensing fees in the case of the console makers, they want a closed system that they can control to avoid the problems sony had with the PSP.
The more Apple go down the road as selling their ios devices as media/gaming consumption devices the more they will want a solid closed system. Which I'm fine with, as my iPhone is a phone, with a few apps on it and it plays my music, if apple ever tried this on their actual computer OS I'd have to brush up on my Windows skills pretty darn quickly.
Of note the PSP has sold over 60 million but is still deemed a failure, in part due the terrible tie ratio.
Lesser Evets
Mar 28, 10:16 AM
Good RUMOR. Maybe it should be called a lie, but we won't know until June.
About time Apple released a new iMac, btw.
About time Apple released a new iMac, btw.
p0intblank
Sep 11, 08:47 AM
It's funny to see that people have completely forgotten about the Apple Expo in Paris, also tomorrow :D.
To me it is kinda strange that the expo starts 7 hours prior to the media event. Are they going to keep those black curtains (assuming there are some) during the complete 1st day of the event?
Are there any guarded stands whatsoever in the expo? Is anyone going there tomorrow to report? :)
I believe the Sept. 12th event is being streamed to the Apple Paris Expo. Also Steve isn't giving a keynote at that event, only the media one. Anything that is announced by Apple tomorrow will be at the special event.
To me it is kinda strange that the expo starts 7 hours prior to the media event. Are they going to keep those black curtains (assuming there are some) during the complete 1st day of the event?
Are there any guarded stands whatsoever in the expo? Is anyone going there tomorrow to report? :)
I believe the Sept. 12th event is being streamed to the Apple Paris Expo. Also Steve isn't giving a keynote at that event, only the media one. Anything that is announced by Apple tomorrow will be at the special event.
Popeye206
Apr 5, 02:17 PM
Could care less either way. Although I'd love Apple to give us more ways to customize our screens for iOS devices, Apple has always protected their UI... it's that consistency that makes Apple devices so clean and easy.
However, maybe they are going to give us some more tools in iOS5 to customize without a jail break and don't want to see a trend get started before they release a better way.
Either way... I don't really care. I love what I have.
However, maybe they are going to give us some more tools in iOS5 to customize without a jail break and don't want to see a trend get started before they release a better way.
Either way... I don't really care. I love what I have.
clank72
Mar 29, 04:20 PM
Hard for me, even as an Apple fan, to weep too much for a company that chooses to do business overseas isntead of here in America, employing Americans.
No way. With the cost of employment here in America these Apple products would not be possible. We should be thankful.
No way. With the cost of employment here in America these Apple products would not be possible. We should be thankful.
Shasterball
Apr 26, 02:18 PM
iOS needs to evolve. It is old and stale...
How terrible is the notification system? And it's been around for almost 4 years!
How terrible is the notification system? And it's been around for almost 4 years!
antmarobel
Mar 30, 06:57 PM
...waiting...waiting...waiting...I know I'm in Brasilia, but the download "waiting" is ridiculous!!!:mad:
Makosuke
May 6, 05:10 AM
I'm not so much joining in the discussion as publicly recording what I think is going to happen in a few years based not really on this prediction, but the way things are going in general, so that I can point to this post in a few years and either say "I told you so" or "look how clueless I was."
I think this prediction is right, at least in general terms, and while to hardcore geeks it may sound like a terrible idea, I doubt it is, and it makes a great deal of sense to Apple. That said, I expect Apple will continue to sell "pro" systems of some sort based on Intel chips for the foreseeable future, to cover the developer/Photoshop-jockey/video-editor market. They're just not going to sell all that many of them.
This is why the ARM transition will not be like the Intel transition (and remember we're not talking about something happening tomorrow):
For one thing, two years is a lot of time at the rate the ARM architecture has been advancing. Predicting anything about how fast the chips will be in 2013 (or how much Intel will have advanced by then) is difficult.
In the quarter the G5 Power Mac first shipped, back in Apple earned $44M on $1.7B in sales, and shipped 787K Macs. In the quarter the first Intel iMacs shipped, in Apple earned $410M on $4.36B, and sold 1.1M Macs.
In the most recent quarter, Apple's profit was $6B--more than their gross in and almost as much as the entire company's gross for all of 2003--on gross income of close to $25B. They sold 3.76M Macs, and more notably 4.69M iPads and well over 20M small-screen iOS devices. They also have something like $65 billion sitting in the bank, which is ridiculous.
Contrast this with Intel, which in the last quarter was doing extremely well, with gross of $12.8B and net of $3.16B. Or, for that matter, IBM, which had revenue of $24B and earnings of $2.9B.
In Apple was a relatively small-time player that got IBM to design a wicked-fast custom desktop CPU. In 2006 they were a somewhat larger company mostly on account of selling a lot of iPods, and weren't in a strong enough position to get IBM to do what they needed with the PPC architecture to the point it could compete with Intel's upcoming Core architecture. Today their Mac business alone is three times what it was then, it's the only segment of the PC industry actually expanding, and the company is HUGE--twice the size of Intel, in terms of financials. Heck, they could buy a controlling stake in Intel based purely on that company's market cap with cash on hand.
Further, of all those 25M+ iOS devices last quarter, every single one was running an ARM processor. While nearly 4 million Macs is nothing to sneeze at, Apple's bread and butter is iOS and ARM-based systems. They know them, they control the whole package, and they have an in-house CPU team for the architecture. One that, based on performance comparisons with the Xoom, is doing its job quite well. They've also managed to sell these devices at prices so low other companies are having serious trouble matching them, while maintaing very healthy profit margins.
As far as Apple is concerned--and with good reason--iOS on ARM is their future. There's no reason to stop selling Macs, but the market for console-style computers is not likely limited to handhelds and tablets--there's almost certainly a lot of demand in the bigger-laptop-with-a-keyboard space as well as large-screen desktops. With the rate of CPU power increase in ARM chips, within a couple of years they're likely to be powerful enough to comfortably handle desktop tasks, particularly considering that the average user really doesn't have any use for anything more than a basic dual-core system--everything else is for pros and bragging rights.
So, by way of prediction, I'd assume that Apple will continue to beef up its in-house ARM team, and once the desktop-grade chips are in place leverage that to replace what we currently think of as consumer Macs with beefier, larger-screen iOS based devices (or perhaps some iOS/MacOS hybrid thing to better handle indirect input, since pointing at a 27" touchscreen is ridiculous for more than a few minutes).
After all, Apple could--and very will might--dump a few billion dollars of their hoard into advancing the ARM architecture in some way that competitors can't match, and/or building out chip fab capabilities to keep prices low and availability high. Intel's entire R&D budget for 2010 was in the range of $6B, AMD's wasn't much over $1B, and Apple likes to control their own destiny, so it's not out of the question if they can hire good enough people.
I also bet that they will keep some "pro" machines--perhaps even those that'll keep the "Mac" moniker--in the lineup, for people who want more traditional workstation software, since there's still a lucrative market for that. These will presumably use Intel chips, but then who knows--even Microsoft is working on a version of Windows for ARM.
And outside the gamer market or the relatively small number of people who need or want a virtualized Windows environment, I seriously doubt most people will care. After all, it hasn't stopped them from lining up to buy iPads, and I have NEVER heard even the most ardent Windows fanboy rant about Windows with the same fervor as a half-dozen non-technical people I know personally who love their iPad.
Geeks and old-school Macheads like myself will wail and moan, and Apple won't care. If they did, the iPad would have run the MacOS.
In related news, Microsoft is in trouble.
I think this prediction is right, at least in general terms, and while to hardcore geeks it may sound like a terrible idea, I doubt it is, and it makes a great deal of sense to Apple. That said, I expect Apple will continue to sell "pro" systems of some sort based on Intel chips for the foreseeable future, to cover the developer/Photoshop-jockey/video-editor market. They're just not going to sell all that many of them.
This is why the ARM transition will not be like the Intel transition (and remember we're not talking about something happening tomorrow):
For one thing, two years is a lot of time at the rate the ARM architecture has been advancing. Predicting anything about how fast the chips will be in 2013 (or how much Intel will have advanced by then) is difficult.
In the quarter the G5 Power Mac first shipped, back in Apple earned $44M on $1.7B in sales, and shipped 787K Macs. In the quarter the first Intel iMacs shipped, in Apple earned $410M on $4.36B, and sold 1.1M Macs.
In the most recent quarter, Apple's profit was $6B--more than their gross in and almost as much as the entire company's gross for all of 2003--on gross income of close to $25B. They sold 3.76M Macs, and more notably 4.69M iPads and well over 20M small-screen iOS devices. They also have something like $65 billion sitting in the bank, which is ridiculous.
Contrast this with Intel, which in the last quarter was doing extremely well, with gross of $12.8B and net of $3.16B. Or, for that matter, IBM, which had revenue of $24B and earnings of $2.9B.
In Apple was a relatively small-time player that got IBM to design a wicked-fast custom desktop CPU. In 2006 they were a somewhat larger company mostly on account of selling a lot of iPods, and weren't in a strong enough position to get IBM to do what they needed with the PPC architecture to the point it could compete with Intel's upcoming Core architecture. Today their Mac business alone is three times what it was then, it's the only segment of the PC industry actually expanding, and the company is HUGE--twice the size of Intel, in terms of financials. Heck, they could buy a controlling stake in Intel based purely on that company's market cap with cash on hand.
Further, of all those 25M+ iOS devices last quarter, every single one was running an ARM processor. While nearly 4 million Macs is nothing to sneeze at, Apple's bread and butter is iOS and ARM-based systems. They know them, they control the whole package, and they have an in-house CPU team for the architecture. One that, based on performance comparisons with the Xoom, is doing its job quite well. They've also managed to sell these devices at prices so low other companies are having serious trouble matching them, while maintaing very healthy profit margins.
As far as Apple is concerned--and with good reason--iOS on ARM is their future. There's no reason to stop selling Macs, but the market for console-style computers is not likely limited to handhelds and tablets--there's almost certainly a lot of demand in the bigger-laptop-with-a-keyboard space as well as large-screen desktops. With the rate of CPU power increase in ARM chips, within a couple of years they're likely to be powerful enough to comfortably handle desktop tasks, particularly considering that the average user really doesn't have any use for anything more than a basic dual-core system--everything else is for pros and bragging rights.
So, by way of prediction, I'd assume that Apple will continue to beef up its in-house ARM team, and once the desktop-grade chips are in place leverage that to replace what we currently think of as consumer Macs with beefier, larger-screen iOS based devices (or perhaps some iOS/MacOS hybrid thing to better handle indirect input, since pointing at a 27" touchscreen is ridiculous for more than a few minutes).
After all, Apple could--and very will might--dump a few billion dollars of their hoard into advancing the ARM architecture in some way that competitors can't match, and/or building out chip fab capabilities to keep prices low and availability high. Intel's entire R&D budget for 2010 was in the range of $6B, AMD's wasn't much over $1B, and Apple likes to control their own destiny, so it's not out of the question if they can hire good enough people.
I also bet that they will keep some "pro" machines--perhaps even those that'll keep the "Mac" moniker--in the lineup, for people who want more traditional workstation software, since there's still a lucrative market for that. These will presumably use Intel chips, but then who knows--even Microsoft is working on a version of Windows for ARM.
And outside the gamer market or the relatively small number of people who need or want a virtualized Windows environment, I seriously doubt most people will care. After all, it hasn't stopped them from lining up to buy iPads, and I have NEVER heard even the most ardent Windows fanboy rant about Windows with the same fervor as a half-dozen non-technical people I know personally who love their iPad.
Geeks and old-school Macheads like myself will wail and moan, and Apple won't care. If they did, the iPad would have run the MacOS.
In related news, Microsoft is in trouble.
gnasher729
Aug 4, 02:20 PM
Duh, I mean what advantage would 64-bit processors & software over 32-bit?
Usually there wouldn't be much advantage, except for applications that really need more than 4 GB of memory. In the case of x86 processors (both Intel and AMD), they have twice as many registers available in 64 bit mode; that is good for ten percent more performance.
Usually there wouldn't be much advantage, except for applications that really need more than 4 GB of memory. In the case of x86 processors (both Intel and AMD), they have twice as many registers available in 64 bit mode; that is good for ten percent more performance.
pmz
May 4, 03:14 PM
As long as you can burn a DVD or USB key from it, it should be a good way of distribution. It seem a bit reckless, however, not to have a offline backup around. Sometimes even Time Machine screws up.
The entire idea of restoring from a Time Machine backup has always been illogical to me.
If Time Machine backs up everything, then it backs up whatever problems you had that resulted in your need for restore.
Time Machine has limited real use, and its basically limited to accidentally deleting things.
The entire idea of restoring from a Time Machine backup has always been illogical to me.
If Time Machine backs up everything, then it backs up whatever problems you had that resulted in your need for restore.
Time Machine has limited real use, and its basically limited to accidentally deleting things.
appleguy123
May 4, 08:38 PM
It's all good, I guess. I don't think I would have ever understood the mechanics of this game anyway.
If we keep playing this format, I don't think it should go under the WW moniker because I don't see any similarities at all, and would like to play WW games while (and if) this format goes on in the future.
If we keep playing this format, I don't think it should go under the WW moniker because I don't see any similarities at all, and would like to play WW games while (and if) this format goes on in the future.
danerh
May 7, 06:12 PM
What seems to be the standard with most services is that you get the basics for free, and pay extra for additional storage... If apple were to make anything free it would follow this same concept in some way.
Apple however is in the business of selling hardware as has been mentioned many times in this topic, and if the basic version is free, I envisage them handing out additional storage with hardware purchases.
Buy an iPhone, plug in the serial code and you get an additional 10GB of storage... Also have a mac at home, you get another 30GB, get yourself an iPad too and theres another 20GB. Pay an additional subscription and get even more as you need it. (the gb amounts aren't important in this discussion).
That way there's an additional incentive to go and stay in the apple hardware ecosystem when you're looking to buy your next gadget. Most people here no doubt already have a mac and iPhone, but there are a lot of people with one or the other and any proverbial carrot (or apple) dangling apple can do to get people to buy something with their logo on the back in this way makes sense.
And we'd all get loads of free storage!
Apple however is in the business of selling hardware as has been mentioned many times in this topic, and if the basic version is free, I envisage them handing out additional storage with hardware purchases.
Buy an iPhone, plug in the serial code and you get an additional 10GB of storage... Also have a mac at home, you get another 30GB, get yourself an iPad too and theres another 20GB. Pay an additional subscription and get even more as you need it. (the gb amounts aren't important in this discussion).
That way there's an additional incentive to go and stay in the apple hardware ecosystem when you're looking to buy your next gadget. Most people here no doubt already have a mac and iPhone, but there are a lot of people with one or the other and any proverbial carrot (or apple) dangling apple can do to get people to buy something with their logo on the back in this way makes sense.
And we'd all get loads of free storage!
eenu
Aug 11, 12:51 PM
Apple will not keep Yonah in the MacBooks. Such a marketing differentiation tactic would be idiocy. All PC manufacturers are moving to Merom when it's available. The cost is the same. Yonah is dead. I expect a simultaneous transition of MBP, MB, and iMac very soon, moving all Macs to 64 bit.
I suggest you read up about Intels supply numbers! There will be no simultaneous transition as Intel cannot supply the demand this would create
I suggest you read up about Intels supply numbers! There will be no simultaneous transition as Intel cannot supply the demand this would create
ChickenSwartz
Aug 2, 12:39 PM
You got it wrong. If you can't have cameras.. you CAN'T HAVE CAMERAS even if they're NOT being used. I work at a place where you can't have cellphones with cameras on the premises (i.e., the parking lot) let alone inside. Many companies with such policies will not buy displays because of such.
I think this is an oversight (we can call it oSight) by Apple. If you want to gain market share, especially for people who want high powered equipment. I worked in a small research for a while, like the above poster, there were NO cameras allowed including camera phones. This was a blanket policy for the whole facillity even if you had no security clearence. In this case it was required becasue they did a lot DoD research.
So, right off these new computers (iMac, MB, MBP) are not options for a facility like this to use. Additionally, anyone who works there and ever wants to bring his/her personal laptop to work is sunk too.
If was still working there I probably would have to opt for a differnt laptop.
Compared to other computer brands Macs give their customers fewer add-on options. I don't know why. I guess it makes it easier for them. But, in this case I think not making the built in iSight an option (even if it is free, like the glossy screen in the MBP) is a mistake.
I think this is an oversight (we can call it oSight) by Apple. If you want to gain market share, especially for people who want high powered equipment. I worked in a small research for a while, like the above poster, there were NO cameras allowed including camera phones. This was a blanket policy for the whole facillity even if you had no security clearence. In this case it was required becasue they did a lot DoD research.
So, right off these new computers (iMac, MB, MBP) are not options for a facility like this to use. Additionally, anyone who works there and ever wants to bring his/her personal laptop to work is sunk too.
If was still working there I probably would have to opt for a differnt laptop.
Compared to other computer brands Macs give their customers fewer add-on options. I don't know why. I guess it makes it easier for them. But, in this case I think not making the built in iSight an option (even if it is free, like the glossy screen in the MBP) is a mistake.
No comments:
Post a Comment