-Ryan-
Mar 30, 07:54 PM
WOW. In my years of OS X development and beta releases, this is the first time I believe Apple has released a developer preview with little to no beta releases, and pushed right into a half arsed possible GM build without the numerous beta's for 10.X refinements. For developers and companies who have been accustomed to Apple pushing bi-weekly beta's as the GM release approaches. This may not bold well for developers and companies transitioning their products/applications in time and with little "bumps" in the road.
This also makes me believe Apple has certainly, finally, officially drawn a line with regard to their main focus: iOS. It truly is about mobile devices for Cupertino, with iPhones and iPads and numerous iOS beta releases that have pushed OS X off center stage since Leopard. Gone are the excellent days of a dedicated LCD display line with three size variants, gone are the days when desktop PowerPC towers were affordable, and soon the professionals who spent thousands of dollars and hours investing in Mac products for their work will be pushed out the door for the general mass consumer. This is a sad sign for us, for those that supported a struggling yet profitable Apple dedicated to professionals, consumers, quality products and improved operating systems.
Given that Apple sold over 4 million Macs last quarter, that must equate to around $7 billion in revenue. Macs still make up around a quarter of Apples revenue, so while iPhones might be where the most money is coming in, Apple can't ignore $7 billion per quarter...
This also makes me believe Apple has certainly, finally, officially drawn a line with regard to their main focus: iOS. It truly is about mobile devices for Cupertino, with iPhones and iPads and numerous iOS beta releases that have pushed OS X off center stage since Leopard. Gone are the excellent days of a dedicated LCD display line with three size variants, gone are the days when desktop PowerPC towers were affordable, and soon the professionals who spent thousands of dollars and hours investing in Mac products for their work will be pushed out the door for the general mass consumer. This is a sad sign for us, for those that supported a struggling yet profitable Apple dedicated to professionals, consumers, quality products and improved operating systems.
Given that Apple sold over 4 million Macs last quarter, that must equate to around $7 billion in revenue. Macs still make up around a quarter of Apples revenue, so while iPhones might be where the most money is coming in, Apple can't ignore $7 billion per quarter...
Linito
Dec 4, 01:30 PM
it's a ******** phone! why does palm ceo opinion count?:confused:
they suck at inovating they're PDA's are crap...
they suck at inovating they're PDA's are crap...
milbournosphere
Mar 29, 12:06 PM
I don't trust corporate clouds, especially with a service that Sony is clearly gunning for legally.
I suggest Subsonic. It streams music from your Mac or PC to your iPhone, Android phone, or Win7 phone. It also allows you to stream from another computer via a web browser. And it's free! Own your data, create your own cloud.
http://www.subsonic.org/pages/index.jsp
I suggest Subsonic. It streams music from your Mac or PC to your iPhone, Android phone, or Win7 phone. It also allows you to stream from another computer via a web browser. And it's free! Own your data, create your own cloud.
http://www.subsonic.org/pages/index.jsp
Plutonius
May 3, 05:26 PM
methinks we need someone with some perspective in charge here, so before the crazy wizard gets us all killed for his king's secret quests, whatever they are, I propose we follow the wisdom of my brother Jorah
I would rather that you started leading us since you seem to be much more versed in the rules guiding us :).
I would rather that you started leading us since you seem to be much more versed in the rules guiding us :).
Jeevs bost
Jul 31, 06:12 AM
Sorry to be a killjoy but I know for a fact that if this photographer did do any work for Apple he would of had to of signed a non disclosure agreement and as such would of been 100% bound to it, (unless of course he never wanted to work again and get his ass sued off). I know because I am a digital illustrator ( http://www.anthony-robinson.com ) sorry couldn't resist! :D and if I ever do any ad work this is standard practice.
I'm not denying that Apple might be developing a phone but for sure, this guy knows nothing about it.
I'm not denying that Apple might be developing a phone but for sure, this guy knows nothing about it.
cppguy
May 4, 07:14 PM
Why put it in the App Store if it isn't an App?
Like Xcode, it isn't an app, it's an installer. When you download the app, it puts the installer under Applications, which you have to run to actually install the product. Apple violates the basic App Store rules by distributing applications that require installation and kernel extensions.
Like Xcode, it isn't an app, it's an installer. When you download the app, it puts the installer under Applications, which you have to run to actually install the product. Apple violates the basic App Store rules by distributing applications that require installation and kernel extensions.
newcronos
Apr 8, 09:07 AM
Stay classy, Steve :p
emotion
Nov 25, 05:11 AM
I am positive that Apple will bring a twist into the mobile telephony market, something revolutionary nobody could think that it will work.
And in 2 years from now everybody will state: Yes, Apple did it again.
I bet they do the following:
- Follow the KISS (Keep it stupit simple) concept and build on there current iPOD success!
The new iPhone will be a WIFI iPOD with Skype (or something alike) build in. A high quality camera and Bluetooth Stereo Wireless will complete the hardware.
The software will allow "on the go" chat, blogging, videocasts, RSS and a mobile safari browser.
Strategy: Replace the need for an iPOD�s and provide the best personal communication tool
- Eliminate traditional phone contracts with MobilePhone operators.
Apple will aquire "FON" and build the largest hotspot community in the world where every iPhone user can communicate for free.
Y'know as far fetched as some might say a lot of that is there's something that makes a lot of sense there too.
If so I'm not surprised Steve keeps seaying that he has something cool coming soon in interviews!
And in 2 years from now everybody will state: Yes, Apple did it again.
I bet they do the following:
- Follow the KISS (Keep it stupit simple) concept and build on there current iPOD success!
The new iPhone will be a WIFI iPOD with Skype (or something alike) build in. A high quality camera and Bluetooth Stereo Wireless will complete the hardware.
The software will allow "on the go" chat, blogging, videocasts, RSS and a mobile safari browser.
Strategy: Replace the need for an iPOD�s and provide the best personal communication tool
- Eliminate traditional phone contracts with MobilePhone operators.
Apple will aquire "FON" and build the largest hotspot community in the world where every iPhone user can communicate for free.
Y'know as far fetched as some might say a lot of that is there's something that makes a lot of sense there too.
If so I'm not surprised Steve keeps seaying that he has something cool coming soon in interviews!
mcrain
Apr 18, 11:59 AM
Firstly, your perspective would change completely if you ever decide to invest or trade. I don't want hedge funds going for more risk. That is what contributed to the housing bust and mortgage backed securities. I am completely self taught as a trader and investor. In fact, I don't know a single other person who does what I do. And when I do meet someone who works in finance, they are usually just a cog, and I have nothing in common with them.
Of course people don't "want" risk. But, again, you MISSED THE POINT. Let's try again. People want to take their savings and invest it in the safest investment with the return they desire. If US treasuries beat the stock market, no one would trade stocks If trading in established fortune 500 companies beat out riskier investments, would anyone trade riskier stocks? The answer is probably someone foolish would, but the majority will invest in the safest investment that will provide the rate of return desired. If taxes reduce the rate of return of the safer investments, people naturally begin investing in riskier propositions that have the potential to generate higher rates of return.
Have you ever represented a company so that it can sell its ownership interests to the public, or have you ever represented the investors in an IPO? Your perspective would change if you ever had. Your assumption that I don't invest is pretty silly considering just about anyone can do it.
Secondly, and more importantly, I don't think a person should have to give a good reason to be able to do anything. Unless you can prove that a person's actions causes harm to others, why attack it? How is taxing something at the same rate as other income an attack? Oh no, you're treating my capital gains income the same as everyone elses income! I'm under attack! Poor me! The government is no longer going to subsidize my gambling on the success or failure of someone else's established business. Boo hoo.
Our legal system works that way; the burden of proof is always on the accuser not the accused. Really? That's not true. What about administrative hearings where the burden is on the accused to overcome a prima facie case? (FYI, for a good example of this concept, look at the situation with the proposed rules regarding copyright owners and the presumption that you are pirating if you receive a letter from them accusing you).
Of course people don't "want" risk. But, again, you MISSED THE POINT. Let's try again. People want to take their savings and invest it in the safest investment with the return they desire. If US treasuries beat the stock market, no one would trade stocks If trading in established fortune 500 companies beat out riskier investments, would anyone trade riskier stocks? The answer is probably someone foolish would, but the majority will invest in the safest investment that will provide the rate of return desired. If taxes reduce the rate of return of the safer investments, people naturally begin investing in riskier propositions that have the potential to generate higher rates of return.
Have you ever represented a company so that it can sell its ownership interests to the public, or have you ever represented the investors in an IPO? Your perspective would change if you ever had. Your assumption that I don't invest is pretty silly considering just about anyone can do it.
Secondly, and more importantly, I don't think a person should have to give a good reason to be able to do anything. Unless you can prove that a person's actions causes harm to others, why attack it? How is taxing something at the same rate as other income an attack? Oh no, you're treating my capital gains income the same as everyone elses income! I'm under attack! Poor me! The government is no longer going to subsidize my gambling on the success or failure of someone else's established business. Boo hoo.
Our legal system works that way; the burden of proof is always on the accuser not the accused. Really? That's not true. What about administrative hearings where the burden is on the accused to overcome a prima facie case? (FYI, for a good example of this concept, look at the situation with the proposed rules regarding copyright owners and the presumption that you are pirating if you receive a letter from them accusing you).
Moyank24
May 3, 08:53 PM
i second this motion. we could also split and move to and search two rooms, but it's probably best to wait for at least one up-level before we split.
which room is irrelevant.
another option, since from the GM's words the first round seems to be safe, would be to split in three groups: one goes to each of the adjacent rooms and then we all explore the thre next rooms. the next round we can converge back to the start room, explore it and be a single group again
the positive is that we find any treasure in the first 3 rooms, we expand the map, we also give less hint on where we can go next to mscriv.
the negative is that any treasure only applies to some of the people, and that we have to come back here to rejoin.
simple-wallpaper by ~Neivan-IV
wallpaper simple fashion
Simple+boy+wallpaper
Simple amp; Clean CG wallpapers
Live wallpaper simple,
Cute Design Wallpaper ,Simple
I#39;ve tried 3 simple wallpapers
wallpaper simple girls. motif
hd wallpaper simple.
which room is irrelevant.
another option, since from the GM's words the first round seems to be safe, would be to split in three groups: one goes to each of the adjacent rooms and then we all explore the thre next rooms. the next round we can converge back to the start room, explore it and be a single group again
the positive is that we find any treasure in the first 3 rooms, we expand the map, we also give less hint on where we can go next to mscriv.
the negative is that any treasure only applies to some of the people, and that we have to come back here to rejoin.
Omniblast
Apr 7, 09:50 AM
I have an invite to a launch party for the Playbook. I just chuckled.
You should bring your iPad.
You should bring your iPad.
gigidey
May 7, 06:37 PM
You do not pay Google but advertisers on your splash pages pay Google. You help them make far more money than you would pay for the service and you do that for them for free. And spread the word.
On behalf of all Google stockholders worldwide, thank you for being one of our minions.
Rocketman
You make it sound like Google making money is a bad thing. The reason so many people use Google is because they don't mind advertisements. Also, people who use Google's services are no more "minions" than Apple users, they just use what they feel is best.
On behalf of all Google stockholders worldwide, thank you for being one of our minions.
Rocketman
You make it sound like Google making money is a bad thing. The reason so many people use Google is because they don't mind advertisements. Also, people who use Google's services are no more "minions" than Apple users, they just use what they feel is best.
birch25
Mar 31, 07:07 AM
Sure, I know. It's just plain stupid default-settings if you ask me.
I can't imagine this is a better default setting for new users.
I've been using the inverted scrolling for a few weeks. At first, it was very weird and found myself scrolling the wrong way often. However, after a few day, I started to "get" the metaphor and it became natural. Now when I go to work and use their computers, I feel the scrolling on XP is the opposite of what feels natural.
If it only took me a few days to reverse over a decade of training and muscle memory, then maybe it's not that a stupid setting.
I can't imagine this is a better default setting for new users.
I've been using the inverted scrolling for a few weeks. At first, it was very weird and found myself scrolling the wrong way often. However, after a few day, I started to "get" the metaphor and it became natural. Now when I go to work and use their computers, I feel the scrolling on XP is the opposite of what feels natural.
If it only took me a few days to reverse over a decade of training and muscle memory, then maybe it's not that a stupid setting.
Small White Car
Apr 5, 01:31 PM
But Toyota wasn't jailbreaking. Didn't the courts rule that Apple couldn't stop the jailbreak community?
Yes, but the ruling was based on the fact that it's all for 'personal use.'
Once they start taking $$$ from multinational corporations it sure seem less like 'personal use,' doesn't it?
I'm not a lawyer so I can't say for sure, but I sure thought Cydia was opening up a can of worms when I read about this yesterday. It's probably good for them that Toyota pulled out. I could see the jailbreak community getting less leeway with courts in the future if they start raking in millions of dollars. Then they suddenly start looking like a competing company trying to steal Apple's business, don't they?
It may be legal for Cydia to do this, but I was quite worried that it would make their lives very unpleasent in the future if they kept it up. I like how all the jailbreakers in this thread are acting like this was a good thing. It honestly could have ended up being the thing that caused the most damage to jailbreaking!
Yes, but the ruling was based on the fact that it's all for 'personal use.'
Once they start taking $$$ from multinational corporations it sure seem less like 'personal use,' doesn't it?
I'm not a lawyer so I can't say for sure, but I sure thought Cydia was opening up a can of worms when I read about this yesterday. It's probably good for them that Toyota pulled out. I could see the jailbreak community getting less leeway with courts in the future if they start raking in millions of dollars. Then they suddenly start looking like a competing company trying to steal Apple's business, don't they?
It may be legal for Cydia to do this, but I was quite worried that it would make their lives very unpleasent in the future if they kept it up. I like how all the jailbreakers in this thread are acting like this was a good thing. It honestly could have ended up being the thing that caused the most damage to jailbreaking!
MrNomNoms
Mar 31, 04:13 AM
I really hope they deploy some form of full screen iTunes in this build. Would be nice to see.
Given how iTunes straddles Windows and Mac OS X I wonder what they will be doing given that a fair chunk that iTunes relies on will have to be portable to Windows. From what I understand AV Foundation has pretty much replaced the parts that QTKit doesn't provide which leaves me wondering whether they'll throw in the towel in the case of iTunes/QuickTime in favour of moving to AV Foundation for the long run.
I lol'd. No matter what people will complain. When Snow Leopard was released people wanted more UI changes and more features. Now when Lion is released all people want is under the hood improvements. SMH
People are never satisfied or they confuse the terms; when people want more 'under the hood' changes and you ask what they mean by that they'll say something that seems to contradict that very idea. For example, they'll demand a Finder feature but wouldn't that feature be classified as 'visible' rather than 'under the hood'? Oh well, I read through the comments and my emotions go from excitement to rage then to indifference - the clueless commenters will remain clueless and me getting into a tizzy isn't really going to change anything in the long run so instead I sit back, chill out and listen to some music.
Always been confused as to why the menu bar across the top is slightly transparent but window title bars are grey. Doesn't really match, but I guess I'm just knit-picking...
Then don't have a transparent menu then (I have it disabled) - I've always seen the whole idea of a transparent menu as something that is pointless and could never quite get my head around as to why it was enabled by default in the first place.
Given that Apple sold over 4 million Macs last quarter, that must equate to around $7 billion in revenue. Macs still make up around a quarter of Apples revenue, so while iPhones might be where the most money is coming in, Apple can't ignore $7 billion per quarter...
Of course but people keep ignoring that this 'focus' on smart phones isn't something driven by Apple but something that is driven by the media; Microsoft is getting a heap of focus on its Windows Phone 7 but the lack of talk regarding Windows 8 suddenly means that Microsoft has given up on the desktop? RIM has released the PlayBook - with all the marketing buzz around the PlayBook does it suddenly mean that they've stopped caring about the BlackBerry?
Apple has always been focusing on Mac OS X - the problem is that the lack of communication via some sort of regular videos or blogs in the case of Microsoft does with Channel 9/MSDN has led people to fill in this void with idiotic speculation by claiming that Apple has given up on the desktop. As far as I am aware there has been only one time when Mac OS X shipment was delayed with the rest being released ontime.
As for people whining about their applications and Mac OS X 10.6 - I read through Macsurfer and it is amazing the number of idiots who complain about problems but never actually spend the time to find out that Adobe has articles explaining for example that in the case of Mac OS X 10.6 you no longer use the PDF printer but instead create PDF's through the drop down menu found in the printer dialogue or that the issue relating to fonts in 10.6.7 has nothing to do with 10.6.7 and everything to do with having to clear ones font cache then rebooting. All these problems that people point to as Apple neglecting is ignorance.
Oh and spacemanspifff, please, use Google, the solution has already been provided - talking about ancient problems hardly bolsters your case. Yes, a solution posted 12 or so hours ago is ancient - keep up with the play.
You (and others) are aware that "Developer Previews", when available, have always predated the Beta releases? It's not even a beta.
Apple says they will release Lion in summer, only Dev Previews have appeared so far, and suddenly people think it plausible for Apple to release a GM build in March?
And btw, I'm really disappointed in the reporting of the ludicrous "GM" rumour as it's pretty obviously wrong - usually MacRumors curates their news better than this.
The summer in the US is from June to September so it can be released anywhere from June through to September. I'd say that at the earliest we'll see a GM build (or at least very much a build very-very-very close to GM) appear at June (WWDC will probably be the place where it will be shown off in all its glory) with the shipping probably August thus leaving a month to manufacture and distribute internationally plus any extra training required for staff (although staff training is probably happening right now).
Given how iTunes straddles Windows and Mac OS X I wonder what they will be doing given that a fair chunk that iTunes relies on will have to be portable to Windows. From what I understand AV Foundation has pretty much replaced the parts that QTKit doesn't provide which leaves me wondering whether they'll throw in the towel in the case of iTunes/QuickTime in favour of moving to AV Foundation for the long run.
I lol'd. No matter what people will complain. When Snow Leopard was released people wanted more UI changes and more features. Now when Lion is released all people want is under the hood improvements. SMH
People are never satisfied or they confuse the terms; when people want more 'under the hood' changes and you ask what they mean by that they'll say something that seems to contradict that very idea. For example, they'll demand a Finder feature but wouldn't that feature be classified as 'visible' rather than 'under the hood'? Oh well, I read through the comments and my emotions go from excitement to rage then to indifference - the clueless commenters will remain clueless and me getting into a tizzy isn't really going to change anything in the long run so instead I sit back, chill out and listen to some music.
Always been confused as to why the menu bar across the top is slightly transparent but window title bars are grey. Doesn't really match, but I guess I'm just knit-picking...
Then don't have a transparent menu then (I have it disabled) - I've always seen the whole idea of a transparent menu as something that is pointless and could never quite get my head around as to why it was enabled by default in the first place.
Given that Apple sold over 4 million Macs last quarter, that must equate to around $7 billion in revenue. Macs still make up around a quarter of Apples revenue, so while iPhones might be where the most money is coming in, Apple can't ignore $7 billion per quarter...
Of course but people keep ignoring that this 'focus' on smart phones isn't something driven by Apple but something that is driven by the media; Microsoft is getting a heap of focus on its Windows Phone 7 but the lack of talk regarding Windows 8 suddenly means that Microsoft has given up on the desktop? RIM has released the PlayBook - with all the marketing buzz around the PlayBook does it suddenly mean that they've stopped caring about the BlackBerry?
Apple has always been focusing on Mac OS X - the problem is that the lack of communication via some sort of regular videos or blogs in the case of Microsoft does with Channel 9/MSDN has led people to fill in this void with idiotic speculation by claiming that Apple has given up on the desktop. As far as I am aware there has been only one time when Mac OS X shipment was delayed with the rest being released ontime.
As for people whining about their applications and Mac OS X 10.6 - I read through Macsurfer and it is amazing the number of idiots who complain about problems but never actually spend the time to find out that Adobe has articles explaining for example that in the case of Mac OS X 10.6 you no longer use the PDF printer but instead create PDF's through the drop down menu found in the printer dialogue or that the issue relating to fonts in 10.6.7 has nothing to do with 10.6.7 and everything to do with having to clear ones font cache then rebooting. All these problems that people point to as Apple neglecting is ignorance.
Oh and spacemanspifff, please, use Google, the solution has already been provided - talking about ancient problems hardly bolsters your case. Yes, a solution posted 12 or so hours ago is ancient - keep up with the play.
You (and others) are aware that "Developer Previews", when available, have always predated the Beta releases? It's not even a beta.
Apple says they will release Lion in summer, only Dev Previews have appeared so far, and suddenly people think it plausible for Apple to release a GM build in March?
And btw, I'm really disappointed in the reporting of the ludicrous "GM" rumour as it's pretty obviously wrong - usually MacRumors curates their news better than this.
The summer in the US is from June to September so it can be released anywhere from June through to September. I'd say that at the earliest we'll see a GM build (or at least very much a build very-very-very close to GM) appear at June (WWDC will probably be the place where it will be shown off in all its glory) with the shipping probably August thus leaving a month to manufacture and distribute internationally plus any extra training required for staff (although staff training is probably happening right now).
gavers
Mar 31, 09:51 AM
You are mixing up badly. That example shows that humans who can read, are trained to rely on what they read almost blindly rather than identifying a color. This means, Apples choice of making the icons grey makes it indeed easier to recognize as there is one less distraction. An even stronger conclusion would be: Leave the icons away completely, because reading is much faster.
Icons were useful in the 1990s, when the number of pixels on the screen was small. Nowadays, just use text, it is way better. Look at websites, icons are used very sparsely. Text is the way to go.
I think you're on to something here. Personally I prefer colour icons, they're quite easy for me to recognise when I'm not using my glasses.
But for the non-icon approach just take a look at Gmail for example -- no icons, just text links and it's easy to use. Hotmail recently switched to a mostly icon-free interface and I find it easier to use than the previous icon-ladened design. Then look at the usability nightmare that is Yahoo mail with its icon infested UI.
Reading reviews for the Color app it seems that labelless icons are very unwelcome. And I agree, Color's cryptic unlabeled icons defy logic.
As far as Mac OS X 10.7 goes I think they should either have colour icons or no icons at all. The gray icons are a waste of space. By the time I can make out what the icon is, I've already read the text next to it.
Waht isn't monetined is taht plepoe raed msltoy by rcensignoig seaphs. Which is why you were able to read that sentence without much struggle, if any. So well defined icons with unique shapes would be good, or colours that stand out. But colourless, shapeless icons (such as in Mail.app) are all but useless.
Icons were useful in the 1990s, when the number of pixels on the screen was small. Nowadays, just use text, it is way better. Look at websites, icons are used very sparsely. Text is the way to go.
I think you're on to something here. Personally I prefer colour icons, they're quite easy for me to recognise when I'm not using my glasses.
But for the non-icon approach just take a look at Gmail for example -- no icons, just text links and it's easy to use. Hotmail recently switched to a mostly icon-free interface and I find it easier to use than the previous icon-ladened design. Then look at the usability nightmare that is Yahoo mail with its icon infested UI.
Reading reviews for the Color app it seems that labelless icons are very unwelcome. And I agree, Color's cryptic unlabeled icons defy logic.
As far as Mac OS X 10.7 goes I think they should either have colour icons or no icons at all. The gray icons are a waste of space. By the time I can make out what the icon is, I've already read the text next to it.
Waht isn't monetined is taht plepoe raed msltoy by rcensignoig seaphs. Which is why you were able to read that sentence without much struggle, if any. So well defined icons with unique shapes would be good, or colours that stand out. But colourless, shapeless icons (such as in Mail.app) are all but useless.
chadley_chad
May 6, 08:12 AM
... Arm haven't got a leg to stand on!
righttime
Apr 26, 02:27 PM
Wow. A platform that is available on all four major carriers and has dozens of phones, passed the iPhone (which *just* became available on its second carrier) in overall usage. So I guess Google should be patting themselves on the back for this historic achievement.
mrelwood
Mar 29, 03:37 PM
Nanobots in the bloodstream!
Ooh... iBot Nano! I want to line up for one of THOSE!
I suppose we'll have to sync via IV drip?
Nah, Jobs has been working on WiFi sync for atleast a year now. It'll be ready by then. In WHITE!
Ooh... iBot Nano! I want to line up for one of THOSE!
I suppose we'll have to sync via IV drip?
Nah, Jobs has been working on WiFi sync for atleast a year now. It'll be ready by then. In WHITE!
CalBoy
Apr 15, 10:22 AM
Sorry to break it to you but it's not me with the false premise. Money is like water, it flows to where there is least resistance. Money can be invested in anything and anywhere around the world. You can invest on Asian exchanges. Why not create a company in Hong Kong and invest through that? You can even invest in American companies because many of them list on several international exchanges. If you were a billionaire, would you invest with an individual account in the U.S. and be subject to a 35% tax, or invest through a corporation in Hong Kong and pay no taxes. In reality, they probably have many investments spread out. Some in the U.S., some internationally. Such a change in tax rules will simply cause them to make the appropriate changes to maximize how much they make.
The real problem is a lack of growth. There's only so much Silicon Valley can offer in location. If we really start taxing at 35% and eliminated a lot of deductions, then what reason is there to start a business in the U.S. over Shanghai or Hong Kong?
It's a sad state but we are already testing the waters for capital controls, trying to keep money in the U.S. It's a big mistake we're progressing towards. No one will want to put money into a country that makes it hard to take money out.
I'll only add to what mcrain wrote by saying that what you're describing is a race to the bottom. If capital gains taxes were so corrosive, every government should logically keep them at 0%. Is that really the logical conclusion you'd like to make with this line of reasoning?
Investors have already been investing in Asian markets for decades, and it has nothing to do with taxes; it has everything to do with how rapidly those markets have been growing over the past 40 years.
The real problem is a lack of growth. There's only so much Silicon Valley can offer in location. If we really start taxing at 35% and eliminated a lot of deductions, then what reason is there to start a business in the U.S. over Shanghai or Hong Kong?
It's a sad state but we are already testing the waters for capital controls, trying to keep money in the U.S. It's a big mistake we're progressing towards. No one will want to put money into a country that makes it hard to take money out.
I'll only add to what mcrain wrote by saying that what you're describing is a race to the bottom. If capital gains taxes were so corrosive, every government should logically keep them at 0%. Is that really the logical conclusion you'd like to make with this line of reasoning?
Investors have already been investing in Asian markets for decades, and it has nothing to do with taxes; it has everything to do with how rapidly those markets have been growing over the past 40 years.
Glideslope
Apr 20, 01:24 PM
Not a summer update? Surprising.
Not surprising at all. The new launch date brings the manufacturing lines in step for both GSM and CDMA phones. It was easy to see this coming when the CDMA phone went into production in 8-10.
iPhone 6 will be back to a July shipment as there will be one phone for both GSM and CDMA. Dual Band Antenna, receiver, and 4G.
Most will come from Brazil in Foxconn's new 12 Billion dollar Apple Plant.:apple:
Not surprising at all. The new launch date brings the manufacturing lines in step for both GSM and CDMA phones. It was easy to see this coming when the CDMA phone went into production in 8-10.
iPhone 6 will be back to a July shipment as there will be one phone for both GSM and CDMA. Dual Band Antenna, receiver, and 4G.
Most will come from Brazil in Foxconn's new 12 Billion dollar Apple Plant.:apple:
fruitpunch.ben
Mar 29, 04:31 PM
The plant with mass rates of suicide is in China.
wired had an article about this a couple months back. The suicide rate at the Foxconn plant is lower than the suicide rate in the rest of the Chinese population (possibly lower even than in the US, I can't remember the article exactly).
So basically, as sad as the suicides are that happened, the "mass rates of suicide" is/was a media beat-up. As is, quite possibly, this whole article come to think of it. Someone looking to bring down the price of Apple shares, a so-called shortage of some obscure component that of course can only be manufactured in Japan is a good way to do it
wired had an article about this a couple months back. The suicide rate at the Foxconn plant is lower than the suicide rate in the rest of the Chinese population (possibly lower even than in the US, I can't remember the article exactly).
So basically, as sad as the suicides are that happened, the "mass rates of suicide" is/was a media beat-up. As is, quite possibly, this whole article come to think of it. Someone looking to bring down the price of Apple shares, a so-called shortage of some obscure component that of course can only be manufactured in Japan is a good way to do it
adbe
Mar 26, 10:28 PM
What crack-addled mind seriously thinks it'd be sensible or probable that Apple would come out with a new iPad 5 months after... coming out with a new iPad?
Perhaps one who thinks Apple are going to be far more aggressive with the iPad than they were with the phone. They watched Android steamroll over their early lead. Maybe they don't want to see that happen again. Add one more month to that figure and you have a twice yearly refresh. Not that insane, if the refresh is small.
Upgrade the screen and/or add NFC, and you have a legitimate iPad 3 that is not so far away from the iPad 2 as to:
a) require significant re-engineering.
b) cause the stupids to freak out that their perfectly decent iPad 1/2 just got made obsolete by the sheer existence of this modestly improved V3.
The pay-off is that new buzz is created going into the holiday season, and crucially keeps the impression of Apple being just out of reach of the competition.
Or perhaps you thinks that Asus and the like wont flood the market with just good enough devices at a cheap enough price point to make consumers question whether the $500+ device is really so much better than the ~$300 device on the shelves at WalMart?
Also, the cloud is only as good as your connection, which is usually less than wonderful, especially with every frickin app in the appstore trying to stream everything it does over wifi, not to mention, god forbid, you actually have other computers in the house trying to send data over your network too. Open that physical USB bus up already! ...or better yet light peak connectivity...
You really don't seem to do shades of grey well. My iPad continues to show my calendar just fine when away from my WiFi. When it's in range of my WiFi however, it just has the ability to auto sync changes. Given that, what exactly are you ranting about here?
Perhaps one who thinks Apple are going to be far more aggressive with the iPad than they were with the phone. They watched Android steamroll over their early lead. Maybe they don't want to see that happen again. Add one more month to that figure and you have a twice yearly refresh. Not that insane, if the refresh is small.
Upgrade the screen and/or add NFC, and you have a legitimate iPad 3 that is not so far away from the iPad 2 as to:
a) require significant re-engineering.
b) cause the stupids to freak out that their perfectly decent iPad 1/2 just got made obsolete by the sheer existence of this modestly improved V3.
The pay-off is that new buzz is created going into the holiday season, and crucially keeps the impression of Apple being just out of reach of the competition.
Or perhaps you thinks that Asus and the like wont flood the market with just good enough devices at a cheap enough price point to make consumers question whether the $500+ device is really so much better than the ~$300 device on the shelves at WalMart?
Also, the cloud is only as good as your connection, which is usually less than wonderful, especially with every frickin app in the appstore trying to stream everything it does over wifi, not to mention, god forbid, you actually have other computers in the house trying to send data over your network too. Open that physical USB bus up already! ...or better yet light peak connectivity...
You really don't seem to do shades of grey well. My iPad continues to show my calendar just fine when away from my WiFi. When it's in range of my WiFi however, it just has the ability to auto sync changes. Given that, what exactly are you ranting about here?
tipdrill407
Aug 7, 10:03 PM
Uh, that's the point: you shouldn't have to 'pay more' - it should be standard, and shouldn't raise the price-point, if other manufacturers can do it.
I don't get the apologists who defend every questionable component from Apple by saying 'well, I don't want to pay extra in the base price' (for a reasonable amount of RAM or for a decent videocard) - demand more from Apple.
Ask why you can't have a $2500 flagship desktop with a graphics card that didn't cost Apple $40, why Apple can't eat the extra $45 to offer their consumer items with a usable amount of RAM standard.
The base model offers more than enough features for a pro to work blazingly fast. The graphics card is adequate for A LOT of things, except maybe hardcore gaming. But again Apple never intended the Mac Pro to be used for shooting ppl.
I don't get the apologists who defend every questionable component from Apple by saying 'well, I don't want to pay extra in the base price' (for a reasonable amount of RAM or for a decent videocard) - demand more from Apple.
Ask why you can't have a $2500 flagship desktop with a graphics card that didn't cost Apple $40, why Apple can't eat the extra $45 to offer their consumer items with a usable amount of RAM standard.
The base model offers more than enough features for a pro to work blazingly fast. The graphics card is adequate for A LOT of things, except maybe hardcore gaming. But again Apple never intended the Mac Pro to be used for shooting ppl.
