claus1225
Apr 2, 07:35 PM
this commercial makes ipad seemed like it's only for kids.
KnightWRX
Apr 11, 12:47 PM
I'd be interested in a more complete explanation. CVT is what the particular manufacturer I'm considering calls their transmission. And, yes, you can get paddle shifters if you want.
A CVT is simply a transmission with no fixed gear ratios. It can have any gear ratio between a set minimum and maximum, it has no "steps" like "1st gear, 2nd gear". In other words, it's a transmission type where you could theoretically have the engine spin where it produces the most power (let's say at 5000 rpm) all the time while accelerating. In reality, car CVTs do still have gears, like the Honda Fit which is a 7 gear automatic CVT transmission.
CVT, DSG or the traditional fluid type are all automatics. They just differ in their inner workings. What you're talking about has nothing to do with the inner-working, the paddle like shifters or + - gates on the shifter is simply an interface that lets you override any of the automatic transmissions and select your own gear.
A distinction to make. You could technically have a CVT transmission that you put in "drive" and drive off and you could have a traditional automatic with paddle shifters. Both are unrelated in their function.
A CVT is simply a transmission with no fixed gear ratios. It can have any gear ratio between a set minimum and maximum, it has no "steps" like "1st gear, 2nd gear". In other words, it's a transmission type where you could theoretically have the engine spin where it produces the most power (let's say at 5000 rpm) all the time while accelerating. In reality, car CVTs do still have gears, like the Honda Fit which is a 7 gear automatic CVT transmission.
CVT, DSG or the traditional fluid type are all automatics. They just differ in their inner workings. What you're talking about has nothing to do with the inner-working, the paddle like shifters or + - gates on the shifter is simply an interface that lets you override any of the automatic transmissions and select your own gear.
A distinction to make. You could technically have a CVT transmission that you put in "drive" and drive off and you could have a traditional automatic with paddle shifters. Both are unrelated in their function.
maxinc
Mar 24, 01:07 PM
Good. The new iMacs must be getting pretty close now. Can't wait!!!
thefourthpope
May 2, 07:38 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
As I'm sure others have noted, this jus seems less efficient than CMD-delete. I suppose more options are good, and I get this is a transition towards a more pervasive touch interface, but for computers with physical keyboards, this leaves me cold.
I always wanted a CMD-delete action for Dashboard; this seems like a step back.
As I'm sure others have noted, this jus seems less efficient than CMD-delete. I suppose more options are good, and I get this is a transition towards a more pervasive touch interface, but for computers with physical keyboards, this leaves me cold.
I always wanted a CMD-delete action for Dashboard; this seems like a step back.
Dicx
Apr 12, 10:10 PM
$299... but this isn't studio
I am guessing it will be like iLife, buy the box with all, or purchase individual FCP in App store. Can't imagine FCS with all the media for Motion and LiveType being on the app store, approx. 32GB of data. Some people would blow a few months data cap on that.
I am guessing it will be like iLife, buy the box with all, or purchase individual FCP in App store. Can't imagine FCS with all the media for Motion and LiveType being on the app store, approx. 32GB of data. Some people would blow a few months data cap on that.
macgeek18
Feb 17, 10:31 PM
here's my current setup. I finally got a Intel Mac and it will become to main machine soon. In the Pic is everything in the sig but the IIc and Performa.
Tommy Wasabi
Jan 1, 08:34 PM
Jobs receives a call during keynote and reaches into his pocket...
...audience errupts with joyful tears...
...pulls out iTunes compatible motorola phone....
...audience sighs....and cries....
....Steve gets another call 5 mintues later...
...pulls out iPhone
...geeks bumrush the stage and carry Steve off on their shoulders
Looks to me like another post by Fake Steve
(http://www.fakesteve.blogspot.com)
...audience errupts with joyful tears...
...pulls out iTunes compatible motorola phone....
...audience sighs....and cries....
....Steve gets another call 5 mintues later...
...pulls out iPhone
...geeks bumrush the stage and carry Steve off on their shoulders
Looks to me like another post by Fake Steve
(http://www.fakesteve.blogspot.com)
Hellhammer
Apr 21, 03:50 PM
I'd welcome HellHammer's thoughts on this as he generally has a well informed perspective on these things.
I have made my predictions and I still stand behind them. I don't really follow this thread though so if someone has me a question, you may be better off PMing me.
1199$ 21.5" iMac
Intel Core i3-2100 (3.1GHz)
AMD 6490M with 256MB GDDR5
500GB HD
2x2GB RAM; option for 4x2GB
1499$ 21.5" iMac
Intel Core i5-2400S (2.5/3.3GHz); option for Core i5-2500S (2.7/3.7GHz)
AMD 6750M with 512MB GDDR5
1TB HD; option for 2TB
2x2GB RAM: option for 4x2GB
1699$ 27" iMac
Intel Core i5-2400 (3.1/3.4GHz)
AMD 6750M with 512MB GDDR5; option for AMD 6950M with 1024MB GDDR5
1TB HD; option for 2TB
2x2GB RAM; options for 4x2GB, 2x4GB and 4x4GB
1999$ 27" iMac
Intel Core i7-2600 (3.4/3.8GHz)
AMD 6950M with 1024MB GDDR5
1TB HD; option for 2TB
2x4GB RAM; option for 4x4GB
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=11688279&postcount=26
I'm sure it's been done to death, but I spent some time actually thinking about realistic-ish speculations of what the new line could look like. I think they're going to get rid of one SKU ( the step up 27" without the quad i7), because it's kind of redundant, and for the $100 price difference, I can't imagine anyone NOT spending the extra modey to get the quad core). The only spec that is more of a wishful thinking piece is the inclusion of the HD6800M 1GB card in the 27" quad i7. THAT would be a beast!
Common Upgrades
1. Thunderbolt port
2. HDMI out
3. Sandybridge
Now, here's the model breakdown:
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.2 GHz i3 processor
4 GB RAM
500 GB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1199.99
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.5 GHz i3 processor
8 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1499.99
27" (2560x1440) display
2.8 GHz i5 processor
4 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 5870 (512MB)
HDMI out
$1699.99
27" (2560x1440) display
3.2 GHz quad i7 processor
8 GB RAM
2 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 6970 (1 GB)
HDMI out
$1999.99
ATI 4870M has TDP of 65W, there is no way it is going to fit in 21.5". Also, it makes absolutely no sense to use three different generations as that, if something, would confuse consumers a big time. The only possibility I see is that the low-end gets ATI 5670 (aka 5730M) like Apple did in previous update. Other models will very likely feature AMD 6000M-series graphics.
I also doubt that Apple will use i3 in other than the low-end iMac. All MBPs have i5 or better, even the 1199$ one. Using i3 in 1499$ iMac sounds stupid because in the end, the consumer thinks that i5 is better because 5 is greater than 3, even though that doesn't really mean that when comparing desktop and mobile CPUs. Moreover, there is no 3.5GHz i3 either.
HDMI doesn't sound too likely, seeing that only Mac Mini has it. Thunderbolt or mDP can provide the same functionality and much more.
I have made my predictions and I still stand behind them. I don't really follow this thread though so if someone has me a question, you may be better off PMing me.
1199$ 21.5" iMac
Intel Core i3-2100 (3.1GHz)
AMD 6490M with 256MB GDDR5
500GB HD
2x2GB RAM; option for 4x2GB
1499$ 21.5" iMac
Intel Core i5-2400S (2.5/3.3GHz); option for Core i5-2500S (2.7/3.7GHz)
AMD 6750M with 512MB GDDR5
1TB HD; option for 2TB
2x2GB RAM: option for 4x2GB
1699$ 27" iMac
Intel Core i5-2400 (3.1/3.4GHz)
AMD 6750M with 512MB GDDR5; option for AMD 6950M with 1024MB GDDR5
1TB HD; option for 2TB
2x2GB RAM; options for 4x2GB, 2x4GB and 4x4GB
1999$ 27" iMac
Intel Core i7-2600 (3.4/3.8GHz)
AMD 6950M with 1024MB GDDR5
1TB HD; option for 2TB
2x4GB RAM; option for 4x4GB
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=11688279&postcount=26
I'm sure it's been done to death, but I spent some time actually thinking about realistic-ish speculations of what the new line could look like. I think they're going to get rid of one SKU ( the step up 27" without the quad i7), because it's kind of redundant, and for the $100 price difference, I can't imagine anyone NOT spending the extra modey to get the quad core). The only spec that is more of a wishful thinking piece is the inclusion of the HD6800M 1GB card in the 27" quad i7. THAT would be a beast!
Common Upgrades
1. Thunderbolt port
2. HDMI out
3. Sandybridge
Now, here's the model breakdown:
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.2 GHz i3 processor
4 GB RAM
500 GB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1199.99
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.5 GHz i3 processor
8 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1499.99
27" (2560x1440) display
2.8 GHz i5 processor
4 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 5870 (512MB)
HDMI out
$1699.99
27" (2560x1440) display
3.2 GHz quad i7 processor
8 GB RAM
2 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 6970 (1 GB)
HDMI out
$1999.99
ATI 4870M has TDP of 65W, there is no way it is going to fit in 21.5". Also, it makes absolutely no sense to use three different generations as that, if something, would confuse consumers a big time. The only possibility I see is that the low-end gets ATI 5670 (aka 5730M) like Apple did in previous update. Other models will very likely feature AMD 6000M-series graphics.
I also doubt that Apple will use i3 in other than the low-end iMac. All MBPs have i5 or better, even the 1199$ one. Using i3 in 1499$ iMac sounds stupid because in the end, the consumer thinks that i5 is better because 5 is greater than 3, even though that doesn't really mean that when comparing desktop and mobile CPUs. Moreover, there is no 3.5GHz i3 either.
HDMI doesn't sound too likely, seeing that only Mac Mini has it. Thunderbolt or mDP can provide the same functionality and much more.
archer75
Sep 6, 10:16 AM
I'm going to buy the basic Mini... the size makes the difference, since it's going to be used at different locations (every few months in a different country ;) ). A superdrive would be nice, but not neccessary.
You can add in your own super drive for cheaper. Newegg sells a nice Pioneer DVD burner that works in the mini for $72
You can add in your own super drive for cheaper. Newegg sells a nice Pioneer DVD burner that works in the mini for $72
4God
Sep 6, 12:19 PM
You are mistaken. MBP was introduced January 10. It will go all new design and Core 2 Duo next Tuesday for sure.
I'm betting that it will be more of an iPod, Moviestore, MacBook event.
I'm betting that it will be more of an iPod, Moviestore, MacBook event.
generik
Jul 19, 05:24 PM
- 2nd highest quarterly sales and earnings in Apple's history
Made possible by paying 10c for each Mac constructed with a high quality and proficient workforce.
Made possible by paying 10c for each Mac constructed with a high quality and proficient workforce.
janstett
Mar 23, 09:31 AM
The chance that the iPod Classic is updated to 220GB is zero. Apple has no plans to ever update a hard drive based non-touch portable device (they would not waste their time), and they've shown even less interest in increasing the capacity of any device beyond even 64GB flash.
Tony
Wasn't there a decrease from 160 to 120? But I see now it's back to 160.
I'd like to see Apple take it to the next level -- 500gb - 1TB. I have a 500gb Archos (as well as two 240gb iPods) and none of them makes it past an altitude of 33,000 songs.
Tony
Wasn't there a decrease from 160 to 120? But I see now it's back to 160.
I'd like to see Apple take it to the next level -- 500gb - 1TB. I have a 500gb Archos (as well as two 240gb iPods) and none of them makes it past an altitude of 33,000 songs.
twoodcc
Apr 1, 10:55 PM
Ok, I think the panics were caused by something I did, not the update, that is what I get for making too many changes at once, I'll have to test the configurations to see what caused them. All is well at the moment.
Definitely the 12 core ;)
I moved the 2 GPU machines to the basement where it is much cooler (I know the dust and spiders might kill them, but... hopefully no snakes...) and it is almost quiet upstairs now! The mac pro is soooo quiet! No other Mac that I remember having has been so quiet. I had to run the KVM and network cables between an air duct and the floor, it's kinda goofy but better than a new hole in the floor. Oh, and I accidentally created a network loop, not a good thing as it took me a while to fix. Downtime was only about 2 1/2 hrs, should have been less but I wasn't very well prepared; it was getting way too hot upstairs already.
Oh. Well good luck with the configs.
Good! 12 cores would be awesome! (24 logical cores).
As long as you have a case on your machines. The spiders and dust shouldn't be too bad, just clean them once a month or so
Definitely the 12 core ;)
I moved the 2 GPU machines to the basement where it is much cooler (I know the dust and spiders might kill them, but... hopefully no snakes...) and it is almost quiet upstairs now! The mac pro is soooo quiet! No other Mac that I remember having has been so quiet. I had to run the KVM and network cables between an air duct and the floor, it's kinda goofy but better than a new hole in the floor. Oh, and I accidentally created a network loop, not a good thing as it took me a while to fix. Downtime was only about 2 1/2 hrs, should have been less but I wasn't very well prepared; it was getting way too hot upstairs already.
Oh. Well good luck with the configs.
Good! 12 cores would be awesome! (24 logical cores).
As long as you have a case on your machines. The spiders and dust shouldn't be too bad, just clean them once a month or so
Demoman
Jul 20, 01:09 AM
When the "real" machines are out, Vista will be out as well. Unless Leopard has revolutionary improvements, the difference between Windows and OSX+iLife would be much less than that it is today. I would still appreciate the UNIX under the hood, but I doubt most consumers care. If Mac sales or market share starts to come down a bit due to fewer switchers, the share price could easily crash.
You are probably nursing those MS shares you bought at $90, hoping for a better day. It is not coming anytime soon sorry to say. Buying is about momentum. Apple has it and MS does not. Vista already has a great deal of bad press and it has not even hit the street. eWeek and other journals are already writing about Vista security vulnerabilities. That is not a good sign. Vista features and functionality has been scaled back numerous times. That too is not a good sign.
Who would have imagined that the common view. amongst the informed computer community, was MS was trying desperately to draw close to even-up with Apple? About the time MS established Windows 2000, they were at the top of the computer world in just about every SW market there was.
They finally had a very stable desktop, server platform, mail server, yellow pages, browser, office suite, SQL engine, and so on. But once they reached this pinnacle, two things happened (or at least two I want to talk about). One, they became way too greedy with their predatory licensing. It just went through the roof. If you have never purchased SW at the enterprise level, you do not understand how expensive this has become. SW can cost (at least) as much HW at the enterprise level.
The second thing that happened at MS is best described in a quote "When Alexander looked at his empire, he wept for there was nothing more to conquer." Instead of continuing on the path of R&D, they tried to find "new worlds to conquer", secure in the knowledge they had indeed subdued all competitors who could challenge them. Sun had tried to mount a charge in the early-mid 90's. Fortunately for MS, Sun's CEO lacked the wherewithal to do more than file lawsuits. Linux suffers from the exact problems that have plagued the Unix community; they cannot unify because they have no leadership.
Apple has been the sleeping giant. They have made their mistakes, taken their lumps and paid their dues. After 20 years, I finally bought a Mac. That was mainly because my boss gave me ~ $15K to buy any personal technology I wanted (bonus type of deal). I was learning video production/editing and using the cheap PC stuff. To make a long story short, I can now boast the purchase of:
Black amp; White Five Photo
lack with white Border
a lack or white border on
Cat (Black and White),
The lack and white photo was
You are probably nursing those MS shares you bought at $90, hoping for a better day. It is not coming anytime soon sorry to say. Buying is about momentum. Apple has it and MS does not. Vista already has a great deal of bad press and it has not even hit the street. eWeek and other journals are already writing about Vista security vulnerabilities. That is not a good sign. Vista features and functionality has been scaled back numerous times. That too is not a good sign.
Who would have imagined that the common view. amongst the informed computer community, was MS was trying desperately to draw close to even-up with Apple? About the time MS established Windows 2000, they were at the top of the computer world in just about every SW market there was.
They finally had a very stable desktop, server platform, mail server, yellow pages, browser, office suite, SQL engine, and so on. But once they reached this pinnacle, two things happened (or at least two I want to talk about). One, they became way too greedy with their predatory licensing. It just went through the roof. If you have never purchased SW at the enterprise level, you do not understand how expensive this has become. SW can cost (at least) as much HW at the enterprise level.
The second thing that happened at MS is best described in a quote "When Alexander looked at his empire, he wept for there was nothing more to conquer." Instead of continuing on the path of R&D, they tried to find "new worlds to conquer", secure in the knowledge they had indeed subdued all competitors who could challenge them. Sun had tried to mount a charge in the early-mid 90's. Fortunately for MS, Sun's CEO lacked the wherewithal to do more than file lawsuits. Linux suffers from the exact problems that have plagued the Unix community; they cannot unify because they have no leadership.
Apple has been the sleeping giant. They have made their mistakes, taken their lumps and paid their dues. After 20 years, I finally bought a Mac. That was mainly because my boss gave me ~ $15K to buy any personal technology I wanted (bonus type of deal). I was learning video production/editing and using the cheap PC stuff. To make a long story short, I can now boast the purchase of:
vand0576
Sep 1, 01:09 PM
Hmm... the problem with that line-up is that when consumers see the shiny new advert saying "Meet the new iMacs" they'll look at the clock speeds and say "What new iMacs?". I think it would be reasonable for Apple to offer...
17" iMac - $1,199 - 2 GHz, X1650 Pro 128 MB
20" iMac - $1,699 - 2.16 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
23" iMac - $2,199 - 2.33 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
I think EVERYONE's suggested prices are way too high, even for a chip upgrade. They'll want to do a cost comparison for these new machines the same way they did the Mac Pro. iMacs are still quite overpriced compared to similar desktops from other companies, even with monitors. Bring those prices down Apple, and you'll have a TON of "switchers" with these machines.
17" iMac - $1,199 - 2 GHz, X1650 Pro 128 MB
20" iMac - $1,699 - 2.16 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
23" iMac - $2,199 - 2.33 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
I think EVERYONE's suggested prices are way too high, even for a chip upgrade. They'll want to do a cost comparison for these new machines the same way they did the Mac Pro. iMacs are still quite overpriced compared to similar desktops from other companies, even with monitors. Bring those prices down Apple, and you'll have a TON of "switchers" with these machines.
twoodcc
Feb 20, 11:58 PM
congrats to sparky76 for 3 million points!
gugy
Nov 27, 02:37 PM
Because a 30" cinema display is too small? Because you want to consolidate your TV and computer displays? :confused:
bring the 40" plus size.
I'll buy one.
For a designer large screens are great. The 30" now seems small!:eek:
bring the 40" plus size.
I'll buy one.
For a designer large screens are great. The 30" now seems small!:eek:
Lollypop
Aug 7, 05:40 AM
Finish work at 5.30pm - 1 hour of 5-a-side footy (6.00 - 7.00pm) - drive home, eat & shower by 7.30pm - turn on Mac, log into MacRumors (hopefully it'll be running!) - and laugh at all you silly bugger's who have to spend �1000's on a new Mac and display :p
It is funny reading about how people all of a sudden HAVE to get something, or are upset about how their investment is now worthless or if apple will let them exchange their recently bouth XXX for the new model. :rolleyes:
I would love to be able to see some of the demos of leopard, I expect a lot of it, and screenshots wont work this time!
It is funny reading about how people all of a sudden HAVE to get something, or are upset about how their investment is now worthless or if apple will let them exchange their recently bouth XXX for the new model. :rolleyes:
I would love to be able to see some of the demos of leopard, I expect a lot of it, and screenshots wont work this time!
bketchum
Sep 1, 01:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caitlyn
It needs:
Glossy Screen (Even if it's only an option)
Up to 3GB RAM (at least; 4GB would be nice)
Merom (Obviously)
Why Merom (Obviously). Honestly, Apple have been using a laptop processor in all their machines since January (until the Mac Pro). because only the Yonah was available.
Would you honestly be happy spend a shed load of money on a 23" Imac that STILL has a laptop processor? Come on, Conroe will be in the new iMacs
Gawd, I hope so.
Originally Posted by Caitlyn
It needs:
Glossy Screen (Even if it's only an option)
Up to 3GB RAM (at least; 4GB would be nice)
Merom (Obviously)
Why Merom (Obviously). Honestly, Apple have been using a laptop processor in all their machines since January (until the Mac Pro). because only the Yonah was available.
Would you honestly be happy spend a shed load of money on a 23" Imac that STILL has a laptop processor? Come on, Conroe will be in the new iMacs
Gawd, I hope so.
Rodimus Prime
Mar 22, 12:14 PM
And their reasoning for picketing has nothing to do with opposition to the war.
I don't think you'll find any anti-war groups protesting at funerals.
I want to say I remember a few anti-war group protest at a funeral but did not make any real national head lines because it was not like the webro group protest.
It was a more tasteful one so to speak saying we have dead soldiers because of the war but was not full of the hate and directly linked to the war.
I am working off memory here but that sort of remember it.
I don't think you'll find any anti-war groups protesting at funerals.
I want to say I remember a few anti-war group protest at a funeral but did not make any real national head lines because it was not like the webro group protest.
It was a more tasteful one so to speak saying we have dead soldiers because of the war but was not full of the hate and directly linked to the war.
I am working off memory here but that sort of remember it.
kalsta
Apr 3, 05:06 AM
A bit schmaltzy to be sure, but much, much better than the recent 'you don't have an iPhone' ads. This one is positive, and tries to get to the heart of Apple's design philosophy. Notice how the device itself is hardly even seen � just subtle hints of its outline. All the focus is on the display's content and the fingers interacting with it. It's the principle of 'less is more', or minimalist design � approaching the ideal of a user interface that provides the illusion of direct manipulation of virtual objects as much as possible, without getting in your way.
T'hain Esh Kelch
Oct 23, 01:57 PM
When does anyone think Apple will throw in the rumored Flash mem?
When they get Intels Santa Rosa chipset, since it is going to implement it.
When they get Intels Santa Rosa chipset, since it is going to implement it.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 26, 02:25 PM
I think you are missing the point:
"What are some other reasons for refusing registration?
Registration may be refused if the mark is:
• Descriptive for the goods/services;
• A geographic term;
• A surname;
• Ornamental as applied to the goods"
Source: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/BasicFacts_with_correct_links.pdf
App Store is descriptive of what it does. In other words, it sells apps or applications. Therefore, it cannot be trademarked. Apple can use it if they want, but so can anyone else doing the same thing.
This is pretty much saying that Microsoft is going to trademark Operating System. Both Microsoft and Apple make operating systems. What Windows is is a type of operating system. Windows does not describe the product.
You make it sound as though this is such an obvious distinction that Apple could never get a trademark for "app store". But apparently this argument is not so strong in trademark law as Apple actually has the trademark already. If that were not the case how could they sue another entity for trademark infringement?
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
Therefore, it cannot be trademarked
It was.
"What are some other reasons for refusing registration?
Registration may be refused if the mark is:
• Descriptive for the goods/services;
• A geographic term;
• A surname;
• Ornamental as applied to the goods"
Source: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/BasicFacts_with_correct_links.pdf
App Store is descriptive of what it does. In other words, it sells apps or applications. Therefore, it cannot be trademarked. Apple can use it if they want, but so can anyone else doing the same thing.
This is pretty much saying that Microsoft is going to trademark Operating System. Both Microsoft and Apple make operating systems. What Windows is is a type of operating system. Windows does not describe the product.
You make it sound as though this is such an obvious distinction that Apple could never get a trademark for "app store". But apparently this argument is not so strong in trademark law as Apple actually has the trademark already. If that were not the case how could they sue another entity for trademark infringement?
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
Therefore, it cannot be trademarked
It was.
Horrortaxi
Mar 19, 01:39 AM
What people don't understand is that Apple is dying....
Everyone is buying IBMs and if Apple doesn't do something then they are dead. I love my Macintoshes but Apple needs market share to grow !
Apple needs customers, Apple needs to start thinking out of their little 5% market share. The Ipod was a good example but you can't keep on counting on people to buy it. For example, Apple had to make Safari due to Microsoft pulling out of the mac - this is just one example where Apple is starting to make software because companies are leaving the platform.
We need a cheap Mac to bring in new Customers. Maybe its their first Mac experience.
This sounds like a conversation straight out of 1990. Apple vs. IBM--come on!
Apple is not going anywhere anytime soon. Whether their market share is 5%, 2%, or 15% is irrelevant. They make a profit. That will keep them around. Who says you have to oppressively dominate the field to stay in business? Okay, who besides Bill Gates?
You have the software thing backward. Safari and Final Cut Pro existed (and did dominate on the Mac platform) before Microsoft and Adobe pulled the plugs in thier products.
We do not need a cheap Mac. One of the things I love about the Mac is that you don't have the option to buy a piece of crap.
WOMBAT indeed!
Everyone is buying IBMs and if Apple doesn't do something then they are dead. I love my Macintoshes but Apple needs market share to grow !
Apple needs customers, Apple needs to start thinking out of their little 5% market share. The Ipod was a good example but you can't keep on counting on people to buy it. For example, Apple had to make Safari due to Microsoft pulling out of the mac - this is just one example where Apple is starting to make software because companies are leaving the platform.
We need a cheap Mac to bring in new Customers. Maybe its their first Mac experience.
This sounds like a conversation straight out of 1990. Apple vs. IBM--come on!
Apple is not going anywhere anytime soon. Whether their market share is 5%, 2%, or 15% is irrelevant. They make a profit. That will keep them around. Who says you have to oppressively dominate the field to stay in business? Okay, who besides Bill Gates?
You have the software thing backward. Safari and Final Cut Pro existed (and did dominate on the Mac platform) before Microsoft and Adobe pulled the plugs in thier products.
We do not need a cheap Mac. One of the things I love about the Mac is that you don't have the option to buy a piece of crap.
WOMBAT indeed!
No comments:
Post a Comment