CQd44
Apr 16, 06:41 PM
Ahhhh.... dude... the only Apps that don't really get approved are ones that do things that can cause security risks or just plain trying to steal your information.
Yeah, I know... there are also Apps that break the rules and get axed, but for the most part, my first point is true. Any legitimate application can get approved.
If you keep up with Android apps, security is one of the their problems. Open? Yes... risky? Yes.
Didn't that lady's iAd gallery app get rejected?
also, the Google Voice had problems getting out. And different browsers didn't appear for a long while I thought.
Yeah, I know... there are also Apps that break the rules and get axed, but for the most part, my first point is true. Any legitimate application can get approved.
If you keep up with Android apps, security is one of the their problems. Open? Yes... risky? Yes.
Didn't that lady's iAd gallery app get rejected?
also, the Google Voice had problems getting out. And different browsers didn't appear for a long while I thought.
MattInOz
Apr 6, 08:38 PM
Product is designed to help people realize value.
I mean it's taken them this long to work that out.
I mean it's taken them this long to work that out.
todd2000
Oct 2, 03:06 PM
So Apple will figure out a way to block it, and just Sue him
Mitthrawnuruodo
Aug 1, 10:41 AM
How can a Norwegian law affect Denmark like this?:confused:Gjennom EØS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Economic_Area)-avtalen... :(
twoodcc
Dec 11, 06:01 PM
well i moved the cpu fan on the other side of the cooler, and now the highest core has been 81 C. still hot considering it's only running at 3.7 ghz. hmm
well i reapplied the thermal paste, and the temps went down to the mid 60's C. so i then decided to push it up to just over 4.0 ghz, but i had to raise the voltage to just under 1.4, so the temps are back around 80 C
well i reapplied the thermal paste, and the temps went down to the mid 60's C. so i then decided to push it up to just over 4.0 ghz, but i had to raise the voltage to just under 1.4, so the temps are back around 80 C
goober1223
Apr 6, 11:21 AM
With respect, you clearly don't work in advertising. You pay to put ads in front of the right people, not just anyone. Especially not competing advertisers and agencies. Why do you think Google (a) makes so much advertising revenue and (b) collects so much data about its users? Coincidence?
Secondly individuals are just as greedy as corporations, and generally get to operate outside of the spotlight. Apple has a lot to lose if its iAd platform is seen to be poorly targeting users, but an App developer has a lot to gain from indiscriminate iAd spamming. So in this case, yes, for the sake of self interest I'd expect Apple to reimburse advertisers for clicks inside their iAd app, and I'd expect an independent developer of a similar app to laugh all the way to the bank.
I never said btw I'd expect Apple to reimburse developers for their time on rejected apps. Or if I did I didn't mean it.
I know you didn't say that. I was just explaining my original statement that said that they should.
And no, I don't work in advertising (electrical engineer), so you certainly bring a different view, which I appreciate.
As far as a comparison between corporations and individuals, and in this case Apple, I still see no proof that they aren't charging advertisers for displaying these ads. Certainly, they are more capable than a 3rd party in reimbursing such money, but I also see no proof that there is an exorbitant amount of money to be made here. It's a cool gimmick that will not spend much time in actual use, especially if the ads don't change very often, and if there is no additional content to the application.
Besides, pertaining to your best point, how well are iAds targeted at this point? Considering how few big advertising partners there are, I have a hard time understanding how well they are able to advertise when these ads also aren't included in general browsing, but specifically-purposed apps.
Certainly, Apple wants to get there with iAds, but the first step seems to be to take the premium off of the price. The infrastructure may cost a lot, but they have tons of cash to drain on this project if they want to make it a true competition with google and operate similarly. For instance, if I'm playing "Doodle Bowling", the odds that I will get an iAd for anything relevant to bowling is zero. I also associate bowling with greasy bowling alley food, too, but the odds of having any food advertised (on purpose) appears to be zero, as well. The odds of getting an advertisement for a local bowling alley? Again, zero. If I go online and search "doodle bowling" they have tons of options to select from in targeting my search: past search history (and whatever else they know about me), they know that my search is related to bowling, mobile applications, cartoonish games, etc.
The point is, the differences are innumerous. iAds is absolutely primitive in its targeting capability simply by virtue of how many advertising partners it has, and it should not be any different (at this point) how those ad impressions are received.
Secondly individuals are just as greedy as corporations, and generally get to operate outside of the spotlight. Apple has a lot to lose if its iAd platform is seen to be poorly targeting users, but an App developer has a lot to gain from indiscriminate iAd spamming. So in this case, yes, for the sake of self interest I'd expect Apple to reimburse advertisers for clicks inside their iAd app, and I'd expect an independent developer of a similar app to laugh all the way to the bank.
I never said btw I'd expect Apple to reimburse developers for their time on rejected apps. Or if I did I didn't mean it.
I know you didn't say that. I was just explaining my original statement that said that they should.
And no, I don't work in advertising (electrical engineer), so you certainly bring a different view, which I appreciate.
As far as a comparison between corporations and individuals, and in this case Apple, I still see no proof that they aren't charging advertisers for displaying these ads. Certainly, they are more capable than a 3rd party in reimbursing such money, but I also see no proof that there is an exorbitant amount of money to be made here. It's a cool gimmick that will not spend much time in actual use, especially if the ads don't change very often, and if there is no additional content to the application.
Besides, pertaining to your best point, how well are iAds targeted at this point? Considering how few big advertising partners there are, I have a hard time understanding how well they are able to advertise when these ads also aren't included in general browsing, but specifically-purposed apps.
Certainly, Apple wants to get there with iAds, but the first step seems to be to take the premium off of the price. The infrastructure may cost a lot, but they have tons of cash to drain on this project if they want to make it a true competition with google and operate similarly. For instance, if I'm playing "Doodle Bowling", the odds that I will get an iAd for anything relevant to bowling is zero. I also associate bowling with greasy bowling alley food, too, but the odds of having any food advertised (on purpose) appears to be zero, as well. The odds of getting an advertisement for a local bowling alley? Again, zero. If I go online and search "doodle bowling" they have tons of options to select from in targeting my search: past search history (and whatever else they know about me), they know that my search is related to bowling, mobile applications, cartoonish games, etc.
The point is, the differences are innumerous. iAds is absolutely primitive in its targeting capability simply by virtue of how many advertising partners it has, and it should not be any different (at this point) how those ad impressions are received.
Belly-laughs
Oct 3, 04:26 PM
Hmm...interesting. Adding wireless capability directly to the iPod would make it more similar to the Zune. I wonder if they could add Bonjour technology to really go head-to-head. Except instead of the stupid (play 3 times) thing that the Zune has, you could actually browse and play shared playlists from other people's iPods (work exactly the same as shared playlists from iTunes now do...).
I believe the scope of a wireless iPod, or any other mass distributed wireless product, will go further than music and playlists. It�s already implemented in museums, etc. as downloadable tour guides; when you enter a town you can get your hands on local maps, local news, history; we might soon see ad boards that will allow you to download more info on products and services – there are endless possibilities.
Closer to the living room I feel iTV needs wireless communication with other Apple products; the iPod or iPhone to control it, even provide media; iPod Hi-Fi to deliver the groove.
I believe the scope of a wireless iPod, or any other mass distributed wireless product, will go further than music and playlists. It�s already implemented in museums, etc. as downloadable tour guides; when you enter a town you can get your hands on local maps, local news, history; we might soon see ad boards that will allow you to download more info on products and services – there are endless possibilities.
Closer to the living room I feel iTV needs wireless communication with other Apple products; the iPod or iPhone to control it, even provide media; iPod Hi-Fi to deliver the groove.
wovel
May 4, 02:18 AM
I don't really see why Apple will never do that. When Jobs said styluses are crap, obviously he didn't mean styluses as writing devices, he meant styluses as the way to interact with OS.
Education applications seem to be of some importance to Apple, and stylus support is pretty much required to make iPad useful for students, for example.
IMO, until the ipad gets this, which is entirely possible, it will remain more of a toy than a tool, and all these commercials will be nothing but fodder for the haters.
there's nothing wrong with toys, and this is a nice one, but these lines about doctors, CEOs, etc., are just plain ridiculous.
natalie portman star wars
Star Wars: Episode II – Attack
Star Wars Episode II: Attack
Star Wars
natalie portman star wars
Natalie Portman#39;s be-shredded
natalie portman star wars
24 May 2011 - Star Wars and
natalie portman pregnant and
(Natalie Portman on ffffound)
Star Wars Episode I: The
Education applications seem to be of some importance to Apple, and stylus support is pretty much required to make iPad useful for students, for example.
IMO, until the ipad gets this, which is entirely possible, it will remain more of a toy than a tool, and all these commercials will be nothing but fodder for the haters.
there's nothing wrong with toys, and this is a nice one, but these lines about doctors, CEOs, etc., are just plain ridiculous.
IJ Reilly
Oct 19, 01:42 PM
What these guys forget, and everyone else who proposes this, is the fact that OS X solely exists to sell Apple's hardware and not the other way around.
iLife, iWork, OS X, Pro Apps all have the single purpose of selling hardware. Apple is a hardware company by choice, it's what they want to do.
They are not a software house and I can't see them trading away their hardware business to gain OS X marketshare. It's not not what Apple is all about.
I think this is a bit of an over-simplification. Apple is a computer company. A computer = hardware + an operating system + software. This was always the way it was until IBM made their terrible strategic errors with the PC. Now we think companies like Dell make computers. They really don't -- they are Microsoft remarketers.
iLife, iWork, OS X, Pro Apps all have the single purpose of selling hardware. Apple is a hardware company by choice, it's what they want to do.
They are not a software house and I can't see them trading away their hardware business to gain OS X marketshare. It's not not what Apple is all about.
I think this is a bit of an over-simplification. Apple is a computer company. A computer = hardware + an operating system + software. This was always the way it was until IBM made their terrible strategic errors with the PC. Now we think companies like Dell make computers. They really don't -- they are Microsoft remarketers.
maflynn
Apr 12, 05:53 AM
Functionality? You can't do absolutely anything with Windows out of the box without downloading extra software.
What can you do with your newly bought Windows PC?
Scan for viruses with a 30 day trial of Norton.
Notepad, Paint.
What can you do with your newly bought Mac?
iPhoto, iMovie, Garageband, iDVD, iWeb.
That's not entirely true. When you buy a new mac you get iLife, with a new PC, you get office, windows live suite (ilife competitor), other apps including anti-virus. So you can't say that "ou can't do absolutely anything with Windows out of the box without downloading extra software."
You get the same or similar level of functionality when buying a new computer. Apple gives you iLife, PCs you get office, and other stuff.
What can you do with your newly bought Windows PC?
Scan for viruses with a 30 day trial of Norton.
Notepad, Paint.
What can you do with your newly bought Mac?
iPhoto, iMovie, Garageband, iDVD, iWeb.
That's not entirely true. When you buy a new mac you get iLife, with a new PC, you get office, windows live suite (ilife competitor), other apps including anti-virus. So you can't say that "ou can't do absolutely anything with Windows out of the box without downloading extra software."
You get the same or similar level of functionality when buying a new computer. Apple gives you iLife, PCs you get office, and other stuff.
Mr. Gates
Mar 25, 04:32 AM
10 years old ?!
So its the same age at its target users now ! :)
Ha ha
So its the same age at its target users now ! :)
Ha ha
Matthew Yohe
Mar 28, 03:23 PM
The Mac App store updating mechanism is flawed, at least in my experience. For example, a few days ago the Mac App Store did not detect that I had the app Awaken 4 on my mac, even thought they host Awaken 5 on the store. I had to go to the developers website and download Awaken 5 and then update it the old fashioned way.
Basically the problem here is that Apple adds the "Installed" tag inside the App Store to apps that you have in your Applications directory of which is also on the store. They shouldn't do this, because as you discovered, the Mac App Store will not update anything that it didn't install itself. That hasn't gotten across to customers, and really it shouldn't have to, it should just do the right thing. (ie. Not tell users it is installed when the Mac App Store can't do any updating to it.)
I'll bet it will work a bit better by the time Lion roars.
Basically the problem here is that Apple adds the "Installed" tag inside the App Store to apps that you have in your Applications directory of which is also on the store. They shouldn't do this, because as you discovered, the Mac App Store will not update anything that it didn't install itself. That hasn't gotten across to customers, and really it shouldn't have to, it should just do the right thing. (ie. Not tell users it is installed when the Mac App Store can't do any updating to it.)
I'll bet it will work a bit better by the time Lion roars.
darkplanets
Apr 17, 04:18 PM
What security problem?
You know what kills more Americans than terrorism every year? Peanut allergies. Swimming pools. Deer running in front of cars.
Pat downs, body scanners, and TSA in generally are about "security theater." The government puts on a big show so the poor little sheep who are afraid of the big bad muslim wolves feel better.
So how about we all stop letting politicians play on our fears, stop feeding money to the contractors who design useless crap like body scanners and stop giving up constitutional rights all in the name of preventing a "danger" that's significantly less likely to kill you than a lightning strike.
That's exactly my point -- if you profile, not only do you not need all that equipment, but security could arguable be better than the current system which has well documented relapses and issues associated with it.
You know what kills more Americans than terrorism every year? Peanut allergies. Swimming pools. Deer running in front of cars.
Pat downs, body scanners, and TSA in generally are about "security theater." The government puts on a big show so the poor little sheep who are afraid of the big bad muslim wolves feel better.
So how about we all stop letting politicians play on our fears, stop feeding money to the contractors who design useless crap like body scanners and stop giving up constitutional rights all in the name of preventing a "danger" that's significantly less likely to kill you than a lightning strike.
That's exactly my point -- if you profile, not only do you not need all that equipment, but security could arguable be better than the current system which has well documented relapses and issues associated with it.
Yakuza
Apr 16, 07:34 AM
This shell may be fake, in terms of design I also think it looks a bit archaic, "squared", but looking back at this last iMac and the iPad (with the aluminum back cover) i guess that's the way Apple will go with the next iphone.
It'll look DAMN sexy :D
Way to go Malim :). Can it be a first prototype?
It'll look DAMN sexy :D
Way to go Malim :). Can it be a first prototype?
prady16
Oct 11, 09:45 AM
I am leaning towards a new iPod product before the end of the year for two reasons:
1) Zune is being release, Apple needs to steal the limelight here.
2) The last iPod update was a huge deal for the Nano and a non-event for the 5G iPod.
Thats a good call!
1) Zune is being release, Apple needs to steal the limelight here.
2) The last iPod update was a huge deal for the Nano and a non-event for the 5G iPod.
Thats a good call!
spencecb
Aug 1, 01:57 PM
I like how the Norwegians are saying that the music purchased from the iTMS can only be plaid on an iPod. Um, am I missing something, or what about the millions and millions of computerts around the world that can play iTMS content just fine? That seems to me like that would qualify for more than one type of device that can play the content.
AbyssImpact
May 3, 11:25 PM
If I could only find a personal use beyond web browsing.
The reason why I didn't buy an Ipad yet. I would only browse on Safari and play games. Something that is available on my Macbook Pro.
The reason why I didn't buy an Ipad yet. I would only browse on Safari and play games. Something that is available on my Macbook Pro.
nasty devil
May 2, 12:46 PM
I sure hope this improves battery life :rolleyes:
Metatron
Jan 5, 04:19 PM
If I recall correctly (prob. not) Apple use to have the keynote live on TV that people could pick up with old c-band sat. recievers. What ever happend to that?
ehoui
Apr 18, 07:50 AM
I am not too sure Tim Cook or anyone of his pay grade is as tough as Steve is when it comes to these label execs.
That's why you hire someone who has those skills, has contacts in the industry, and get these deals done. You still have to find the "right person," but it doesn't seem impossible.
The future is WIN7, iOS, and RIMM.
Did Android steal your lunch money one day?
But maybe I'm just bitter since I own a 40" google tv that is virtually incapable of doing anything worth doing on a tv.
Yikes. I love Google (and MS and Apple for that matter), but they do have a dabbler quality about them which doesn't always work out. Now GMail is awesome, even if it will never be "finished" (which it shouldn't).
The more competition there is the better products get for the end user! :mad:
Everyone here got the memo. Thanks.
Google (http://opendotdotdot.blogspot.com/2011/04/why-google-should-buy-music-industry.html), Apple and Amazon could just freaking buy the music industry.
Why, it's a messy business which people love to hate. It's better to be a smart channel in this case and let the music industry figure itself out.
And by that what do you mean. iPhones had little impact on phones like the BB Curve
It had a huge impact on the company who designs and sells the BB Curve. I think that counts.
Don't confuse approval control with a guarantee of either security or quality.
Who said anything about guarantee? I think this is about improving the overall quality of the apps. You may not agree with Apple's rules, but it seems to work for them. Fortunately, consumers have choice and can go with Android or other systems which allow them to install whatever they want without Apple having reviewed, tested and "approved" the App. Enjoy.
I just want to sync my music. **** itunes **** what ever. I love bit torrent. I refuse to pay for music or movies.
You are confusing open with thieving. I wouldn't be proud about being a thief... most people don't trust thieves and reject their opinions as a matter of course. Also, it is not considered smart for a thief to brag about being a thief especially in public.
Your music? Ha!
That's why you hire someone who has those skills, has contacts in the industry, and get these deals done. You still have to find the "right person," but it doesn't seem impossible.
The future is WIN7, iOS, and RIMM.
Did Android steal your lunch money one day?
But maybe I'm just bitter since I own a 40" google tv that is virtually incapable of doing anything worth doing on a tv.
Yikes. I love Google (and MS and Apple for that matter), but they do have a dabbler quality about them which doesn't always work out. Now GMail is awesome, even if it will never be "finished" (which it shouldn't).
The more competition there is the better products get for the end user! :mad:
Everyone here got the memo. Thanks.
Google (http://opendotdotdot.blogspot.com/2011/04/why-google-should-buy-music-industry.html), Apple and Amazon could just freaking buy the music industry.
Why, it's a messy business which people love to hate. It's better to be a smart channel in this case and let the music industry figure itself out.
And by that what do you mean. iPhones had little impact on phones like the BB Curve
It had a huge impact on the company who designs and sells the BB Curve. I think that counts.
Don't confuse approval control with a guarantee of either security or quality.
Who said anything about guarantee? I think this is about improving the overall quality of the apps. You may not agree with Apple's rules, but it seems to work for them. Fortunately, consumers have choice and can go with Android or other systems which allow them to install whatever they want without Apple having reviewed, tested and "approved" the App. Enjoy.
I just want to sync my music. **** itunes **** what ever. I love bit torrent. I refuse to pay for music or movies.
You are confusing open with thieving. I wouldn't be proud about being a thief... most people don't trust thieves and reject their opinions as a matter of course. Also, it is not considered smart for a thief to brag about being a thief especially in public.
Your music? Ha!
snberk103
Apr 15, 10:35 PM
Whoa, is this a contest for the longest post?
Count me absent.
No, why? :)
Count me absent.
No, why? :)
amin
Oct 11, 10:37 AM
Don't get your hopes up too high, since the iPod's screen is the same resolution as the Zune, it has better battery than the Zune and its thinner than the Zune.
A bigger screen than the iPod's would be preferable, even without an increase in pixel count. A 320x240 video on my iMac display is far easier on the eyes than a 320x240 video on my iPod when both are set to the same brightness. Why? Because the iPod display is too damn small for long-term comfortable viewing.
A bigger screen than the iPod's would be preferable, even without an increase in pixel count. A 320x240 video on my iMac display is far easier on the eyes than a 320x240 video on my iPod when both are set to the same brightness. Why? Because the iPod display is too damn small for long-term comfortable viewing.
Edge100
Oct 23, 12:26 PM
New investments in technologies and products would be by far the best use of the money. With Apple's cash, they could set up a research arm similar to Xerox PARC or the old Bell Labs and place themselves in the forefront of new technology for a long time. Instead, they seem to be notably stingy with their R&D dollars. Purchasing technologies by buying out smaller companies could also be advantageous, and Apple does do some of this, but not much -- not enough to make even a dent in their cash hoard.
I'm not so sure that Apple needs to re-invent the wheel all the time. It seems to me that Apple is (historically) pretty good at introducing new features, long before other PC manufacturers.
While I agree that a dedicated research arm could, in the long term, create a lot of great, innovative products and technologies, I think they have the possibility, if not properly run, to become cash cows that produce little or nothing of any profit-making value. Researchers have a way of remaining focused on research, not profits.
I still think that buying up other small, but influential companies such as Digidesign would be a great thing for Apple. Think of all the products that Apple currently sells that were bought, rather than developed in-house:
iTunes
Final Cut Pro
Shake
Logic (and, by extension, Garageband)
LiveType
Heck, even MacOS X was, in many ways, 'bought' rather than developed by Apple.
I'm not so sure that Apple needs to re-invent the wheel all the time. It seems to me that Apple is (historically) pretty good at introducing new features, long before other PC manufacturers.
While I agree that a dedicated research arm could, in the long term, create a lot of great, innovative products and technologies, I think they have the possibility, if not properly run, to become cash cows that produce little or nothing of any profit-making value. Researchers have a way of remaining focused on research, not profits.
I still think that buying up other small, but influential companies such as Digidesign would be a great thing for Apple. Think of all the products that Apple currently sells that were bought, rather than developed in-house:
iTunes
Final Cut Pro
Shake
Logic (and, by extension, Garageband)
LiveType
Heck, even MacOS X was, in many ways, 'bought' rather than developed by Apple.
PeterQVenkman
Apr 15, 09:58 PM
It's probably a grainy render from Next Limit's Maxwell render.
No comments:
Post a Comment