vitaboy
Aug 24, 05:43 PM
This is really little more than a bookkeeping trick. The books will now report that Apple bought something for $100 million, something they thought they already owned. It's still the same dollar figure, no matter where the accountants put it in the books. The way I understand it, in theory at least, Apple could generate some revenue from this "asset" if Creative obtains more licenses. I'll believe it when I see it. I'm betting we never do see it.
It may be a bookkeeping trick, but it's considered part of Generally Accepted Accounting Procedures (GAAP). The IRS and the SEC certainly doesn't have problem with it and ammorization is actually encouraged. Apple used the same method to record the $250 million cash investment in flash memory plants last year, as well as the $400 million it is setting aside for the new Cupertino campus. Neither of those big cash outlays really affected their profit recording.
The Microsoft Zune possibilities are interesting. We haven't seen the Zune interface yet, but you can be sure Creative is going to be taking a good, hard look at the device when it finally surfaces (sometime during this decade, almost without a doubt). We'll just have to wait and see. We'll also have to wait and see if Creative dumps their DMP business. If any of these events occur, I'm prepared to change my opinion about this settlement.
Well, despite my strong opinions, I have to again agree with you that only time will tell who was the real winner here.
My predictions are
1) Microsoft gets hit with a patent infringement lawsuit and settles rather quickly and
2) Creative exits the player business because it will be squeezed by the iPod and Zune from above, and Sandisk and iRiver from below. The field will just be too crowded with Zune. Because no matter how much money Zune will lose in the first few years, Microsoft will no doubt keep it afloat rather than cede defeat in this space. That might help Zune to take away some share away from the iPod eventually, but not before Zune eats the bulk of Creative's and Sandisk's share first. Creative has to be thinking about whether continuing to pour R&D and marketing into players is worth it with Microsoft competing directly against them. My guess it they'll bail as soon as they are able.
But again, only time will tell. :)
It may be a bookkeeping trick, but it's considered part of Generally Accepted Accounting Procedures (GAAP). The IRS and the SEC certainly doesn't have problem with it and ammorization is actually encouraged. Apple used the same method to record the $250 million cash investment in flash memory plants last year, as well as the $400 million it is setting aside for the new Cupertino campus. Neither of those big cash outlays really affected their profit recording.
The Microsoft Zune possibilities are interesting. We haven't seen the Zune interface yet, but you can be sure Creative is going to be taking a good, hard look at the device when it finally surfaces (sometime during this decade, almost without a doubt). We'll just have to wait and see. We'll also have to wait and see if Creative dumps their DMP business. If any of these events occur, I'm prepared to change my opinion about this settlement.
Well, despite my strong opinions, I have to again agree with you that only time will tell who was the real winner here.
My predictions are
1) Microsoft gets hit with a patent infringement lawsuit and settles rather quickly and
2) Creative exits the player business because it will be squeezed by the iPod and Zune from above, and Sandisk and iRiver from below. The field will just be too crowded with Zune. Because no matter how much money Zune will lose in the first few years, Microsoft will no doubt keep it afloat rather than cede defeat in this space. That might help Zune to take away some share away from the iPod eventually, but not before Zune eats the bulk of Creative's and Sandisk's share first. Creative has to be thinking about whether continuing to pour R&D and marketing into players is worth it with Microsoft competing directly against them. My guess it they'll bail as soon as they are able.
But again, only time will tell. :)
Multimedia
Sep 9, 01:30 PM
That's because the second pass only uses one core.No. it's still using more than one core. More likely because of the speed limitation of the hard drive writing the mp4 file.
Mac Fly (film)
Sep 13, 09:56 PM
Here's the real iPhone!!
http://static.flickr.com/85/241579656_a9c34f6679_o.jpg
http://static.flickr.com/85/241579656_a9c34f6679_o.jpg
LaDirection
Mar 29, 02:06 PM
Bookmark this and pull it up in 4 years...
cmaier
Nov 14, 12:14 AM
LOL. Please tell us which law firm you work for. That was quite funny. Are you a historian now too? Would the real cmaier please stand up?
So the arbitration system comes from the roman law as well? Do tell.
I'm not interested in what revisionist historians have come up with the justify this perversion of justice that you call "law". The roman empire fell a long time ago and while Roman law may have influenced much of our legal proceedings, including the structure of civil cases, I was talking about how civil disputes are generally dealt with. Lawyers arguing a case are supposed to be the last resort, not the first.
This process is based on Judeo-christian principles on how you settle disputes over land or labour. It has nothing to do with criminal law.
Here is how disputes were supposed to be dealt with.
1. You go to the person in question and try to talk it out.
2. If that does not work, you meet in front a mediator such as as priest, local official, magistrate or arbitrator.
3. If that does not work, you hire an advocate and make your case in front of the community.
4. If that does not work, you take your case before the court which would usually have been a king back in the day.
Now you are just making things up. And are you even aware of the difference between law and equity, and the role of the chancellor in old English common law? There were no "arbitrators." What on earth are you even talking about?
I hate to rely on wikipedia, but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law might be a good place for you to start. You'll note the section on the influence of Roman law. You'll also see quotes like this:
"Well into the 19th century, ancient maxims played a large role in common law adjudication. Many of these maxims had originated in Roman Law, migrated to England before the introduction of Christianity to the British Isles, and were typically stated in Latin even in English decisions."
You'll also note that "arbitrator" and "arbitration" doesn't appear anywhere in that article because these are not principles of English common law. The word "Christian" appears only in the above quote.
And I'm not a historian, but lawyers are actually taught about the history of common law, since we rely on precedent dating all the way back, and we still have distinctions and rules that come from the 1400's.
You are just making stuff up.
p.s.: and where in the bible does this come from:
To put in a modern context:
1. Go for coffee.
2. Arbitration.
3. Public Hearing.
4. Court case.
So the arbitration system comes from the roman law as well? Do tell.
I'm not interested in what revisionist historians have come up with the justify this perversion of justice that you call "law". The roman empire fell a long time ago and while Roman law may have influenced much of our legal proceedings, including the structure of civil cases, I was talking about how civil disputes are generally dealt with. Lawyers arguing a case are supposed to be the last resort, not the first.
This process is based on Judeo-christian principles on how you settle disputes over land or labour. It has nothing to do with criminal law.
Here is how disputes were supposed to be dealt with.
1. You go to the person in question and try to talk it out.
2. If that does not work, you meet in front a mediator such as as priest, local official, magistrate or arbitrator.
3. If that does not work, you hire an advocate and make your case in front of the community.
4. If that does not work, you take your case before the court which would usually have been a king back in the day.
Now you are just making things up. And are you even aware of the difference between law and equity, and the role of the chancellor in old English common law? There were no "arbitrators." What on earth are you even talking about?
I hate to rely on wikipedia, but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law might be a good place for you to start. You'll note the section on the influence of Roman law. You'll also see quotes like this:
"Well into the 19th century, ancient maxims played a large role in common law adjudication. Many of these maxims had originated in Roman Law, migrated to England before the introduction of Christianity to the British Isles, and were typically stated in Latin even in English decisions."
You'll also note that "arbitrator" and "arbitration" doesn't appear anywhere in that article because these are not principles of English common law. The word "Christian" appears only in the above quote.
And I'm not a historian, but lawyers are actually taught about the history of common law, since we rely on precedent dating all the way back, and we still have distinctions and rules that come from the 1400's.
You are just making stuff up.
p.s.: and where in the bible does this come from:
To put in a modern context:
1. Go for coffee.
2. Arbitration.
3. Public Hearing.
4. Court case.
Tonewheel
Apr 20, 10:18 AM
So how would I go about encrypting this backup file on my Mac?
Plug in your iPhone, open iTunes, and in the SUMMARY window check the box related to backup encryption.
Plug in your iPhone, open iTunes, and in the SUMMARY window check the box related to backup encryption.
nomad01
Sep 5, 04:08 PM
Who also owns the trademark "Mighty Mouse", which Apple licensed. I think he might be onto something. More then likely, the product is called "Showtime".
Or... the iSHow? :D
My money's on a new iPod Hi-fi. How cool would that be? Huh? Huh?? :rolleyes:
I am quite excited though. It doesn't seem like a new video iPod is on the cards just yet but maybe some other new gadgets are about to make thei debut.
I do like the idea of the metal nano too.
I'll be hooked to Macrumors next week anyway!
Or... the iSHow? :D
My money's on a new iPod Hi-fi. How cool would that be? Huh? Huh?? :rolleyes:
I am quite excited though. It doesn't seem like a new video iPod is on the cards just yet but maybe some other new gadgets are about to make thei debut.
I do like the idea of the metal nano too.
I'll be hooked to Macrumors next week anyway!
halhiker
Sep 5, 01:31 AM
I don't really get the point of wireless video unless you can somehow incorporate a pause feature into it. What am I going to do with the video if I have to answer the door or phone or go to the can or get a snack? Do I have to go to my computer and reset the video and hope that when it streams to the TV or whatever it's at the right spot? For me it would be much easier to just move the movie to my iPod, put the iPod in a dock with a remote and watch it that way. Unless maybe the new airport device has it's own remote! Now that might be interesting. :D
Hal
Hal
Some_Big_Spoon
Sep 10, 09:18 PM
Flame me if you must, but what is the sense in having multiple cores if the software running on it doesn't take advantage of it? Same thing with advertising the new chips as being 64 bit. That's great, but I don't have anything (not in beta) that can use it.
Apple themselves have never been great at making use of multiple processors (in tandem), so I'm not getting how 4, 8, 32 cores makes much difference?
Apple themselves have never been great at making use of multiple processors (in tandem), so I'm not getting how 4, 8, 32 cores makes much difference?
AidenShaw
Sep 9, 10:01 AM
Good - now we won't have to wade through any arguments with fanbois who claim that the iMac is the "most powerful desktop on the planet"....
:D
:D
10layers
Sep 4, 07:49 PM
This is exactly what we have been predicting in the article Apple movie downloads soon, what about the TV?. (http://10layers.com/2006/09/apple-movie-downloads-soon-what-about-the-tv/)
Apple has been driving iPod sales with music sales. We think that they will be driving some new device sales with movie sales. In addition, we do not think that movie downloads will go mainstream until it is convenient to view them on the best device: your home entertainment system. This is what Apple has been redying before launching movie downloads. Apple want the picture to be complete.
Apple has been driving iPod sales with music sales. We think that they will be driving some new device sales with movie sales. In addition, we do not think that movie downloads will go mainstream until it is convenient to view them on the best device: your home entertainment system. This is what Apple has been redying before launching movie downloads. Apple want the picture to be complete.
Chef Medeski
Sep 12, 05:11 PM
Kind of a huge gap, don'cha think? For an extra $100 I can nearly TRIPLE the capacity? Why would I even consider a 30 GB model?
Or you could purchase a 8GB Nano for the same price which is less than 1/3 the capacity.
Or you could purchase a 8GB Nano for the same price which is less than 1/3 the capacity.
W1MRK
Mar 23, 06:27 PM
The beautiful thing is that this is great advertisement for the app. I bet more people have downloaded this than ever before. I didn't know about this app until today, so thanks for that senator dumbfukz...
Its how I found about it. Thank you Elected Dweebs
Its how I found about it. Thank you Elected Dweebs
IJ Reilly
Aug 23, 04:40 PM
$100 million? Yikes. :eek:
ucfgrad93
Apr 25, 01:45 AM
I'm sorry, but if you're the guy that goes 70mph in the fast lane and refuses to move, you are at fault for what ever I chose to dish out to you, for not having the common courtesy to move your car.
-Don
You are going to kill someone or be killed with an attitude like that. It is sad that you think you can do whatever you want, and it is always someone else's fault.
-Don
You are going to kill someone or be killed with an attitude like that. It is sad that you think you can do whatever you want, and it is always someone else's fault.
LSS
Apr 20, 10:36 AM
Oh cool! With iPhoneTracker.app I can see where I've been on my travels! :)
linux2mac
Apr 29, 09:56 AM
I still don't understand why nobody has managed to make a viable alternative to Microsoft Office, esp. Microsoft Excel. Apple's iWork is fine, but clearly not enough and of course there is no Windows version. Google is too obsessed with the cloud and ad thing and didn't make Google Docs a local app for Windows / Mac / Smartphones with Dropbox like cloud capabilities. :(
So Microsoft can continue to be fed with its Windows / Office monopolies for the foreseeable future.
I have clients that I have saved thousands of dollars by ridding their office of MS Office and replaced with OpenOffice and NeoOffice. And because some of my clients run Linux and OSX, they have also saved even more by not needing Anti Virus software for each of their computers.
I also have clients that still wish to remain on Windows. I don't mind because that is easy money as I can always count on Windows to screw up and give me more billable time. ;)
So Microsoft can continue to be fed with its Windows / Office monopolies for the foreseeable future.
I have clients that I have saved thousands of dollars by ridding their office of MS Office and replaced with OpenOffice and NeoOffice. And because some of my clients run Linux and OSX, they have also saved even more by not needing Anti Virus software for each of their computers.
I also have clients that still wish to remain on Windows. I don't mind because that is easy money as I can always count on Windows to screw up and give me more billable time. ;)
Manic Mouse
Sep 9, 07:13 AM
Until Leopard is out we wont see the true value of these babies. Also by then some of the apps will take advantage of the muti-cores and multi-cpus, and the changes to the OS will allow applications not written for more than 1 core to take some advantage also. So like I said Leopard will be the one showing the true potential of these babies. Can't wait!!!!!!!:cool:
The fact that the new iMacs can't address more than 3Gb of memory and are therefore operating on a 32bit logic-board makes me doubtful as to whether or not these systems are really 64-bit capable... It seems like some kind of hybrid 32/64bit system.
Will the C2D iMacs be able to run 64bit code, despite not having the 64bit address space (and being able to access over 4Gb or RAM)?
The fact that the new iMacs can't address more than 3Gb of memory and are therefore operating on a 32bit logic-board makes me doubtful as to whether or not these systems are really 64-bit capable... It seems like some kind of hybrid 32/64bit system.
Will the C2D iMacs be able to run 64bit code, despite not having the 64bit address space (and being able to access over 4Gb or RAM)?
Renverse
Apr 17, 01:05 PM
McAfee is irrelevant, even for Windows users. They call themselves experts but their software just brings ANY computer to a grinding halt.
Anyone remember this: http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-20003074-83.html ?
Yeah.
Anyone remember this: http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-20003074-83.html ?
Yeah.
shawnce
Aug 23, 07:43 PM
Yes!
What if at this point Creative can sue Microsoft and others for infringing on "their" patents with the backing of Apple!?
In essence Creative can stay alive selling a few MP3 players, sound cards, and iPod accessories. But they can also sue on demand anybody who tries to use a similar interface (read: everybody). Then Apple jumps in and says: "Hey, we paid. So-and-so should too."
It would also force future and current competitors to try to find another interface, which Apple believes won't work as well.
Apple plays chess very well. This may end up being a very slick move!
Exactly. Apple is playing this to their advantage and not giving others the ability to stick it to them (license with Creative lending weight to Creative's claim) while they fought this thing.
wow.....$100 million. yikes :eek:
Apple has over 9 billion in cash currently... this really is a non-issue in terms of cash outlay.
If you compare it to the risk it removes from a product that makes them billions in a year and the fact it makes it harder for others to duplicate the UI (can use Creative against them) you quickly see it really is a win for Apple.
What if at this point Creative can sue Microsoft and others for infringing on "their" patents with the backing of Apple!?
In essence Creative can stay alive selling a few MP3 players, sound cards, and iPod accessories. But they can also sue on demand anybody who tries to use a similar interface (read: everybody). Then Apple jumps in and says: "Hey, we paid. So-and-so should too."
It would also force future and current competitors to try to find another interface, which Apple believes won't work as well.
Apple plays chess very well. This may end up being a very slick move!
Exactly. Apple is playing this to their advantage and not giving others the ability to stick it to them (license with Creative lending weight to Creative's claim) while they fought this thing.
wow.....$100 million. yikes :eek:
Apple has over 9 billion in cash currently... this really is a non-issue in terms of cash outlay.
If you compare it to the risk it removes from a product that makes them billions in a year and the fact it makes it harder for others to duplicate the UI (can use Creative against them) you quickly see it really is a win for Apple.
alphaod
Apr 4, 12:37 PM
Good aim.
Point-and-shoot.
Point-and-shoot.
GQB
Mar 23, 05:03 PM
I'm simultaneously amused and saddened by the number of people who believe that drunk driving is a constitutionally protected right.
Hope you never have to see the results of the 'patriots' who would have a use for this and then kill innocent people.
This app enables murder. Rationalize all you want.
Hope you never have to see the results of the 'patriots' who would have a use for this and then kill innocent people.
This app enables murder. Rationalize all you want.
Eidorian
May 3, 11:40 AM
but i thought half the point of TB was that you would only need one output from the computer, and since we don't have any TB displays (or anything for that matter) how do we know that the ports are limited to one display?Displays are at the end of the chain. I believe there is a passthrough for additional displays as well.
You do want additional outputs to avoid the annoyance of unplugging displays. This will be more of an issue on the Mac mini and Mac Pro. I can imagine instances where the displays might not come back at all.
You do want additional outputs to avoid the annoyance of unplugging displays. This will be more of an issue on the Mac mini and Mac Pro. I can imagine instances where the displays might not come back at all.
Vegasman
Apr 19, 09:11 AM
This doesn't look like an iPhone 3GS? :confused:
http://www.parallelimported.co.nz/media/catalog/product/cache/1/thumbnail/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/s/a/samsung_galaxy_tab_white_back.jpg
Mmmm... It looks like a Galaxy Tab. Look at the big logo in the middle. ;)
http://www.parallelimported.co.nz/media/catalog/product/cache/1/thumbnail/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/s/a/samsung_galaxy_tab_white_back.jpg
Mmmm... It looks like a Galaxy Tab. Look at the big logo in the middle. ;)
No comments:
Post a Comment