Westside guy
Sep 14, 10:59 AM
Why do people seem convinced Apple won't release something like an SLR or video camera?
If you'd followed the dSLR world at all over the past two years, you wouldn't ask this question. :) Canon and Nikon are doing well; most everyone else is dropping like flies. Sony is trying to pick up the pieces that were Konica-Minolta's dSLR business, but at best they're going to be a distant third behind the Big Two. Pentax and Olympus are holding on as far as I know, but they are not doing well.
It would be a very poor move for Apple, and I have no doubt they realize this. You might think Apple has a rabid fan base to draw on - go read any "Nikon vs. Canon" thread on any photo discussion board sometime to see REAL rabidity. :D
If you'd followed the dSLR world at all over the past two years, you wouldn't ask this question. :) Canon and Nikon are doing well; most everyone else is dropping like flies. Sony is trying to pick up the pieces that were Konica-Minolta's dSLR business, but at best they're going to be a distant third behind the Big Two. Pentax and Olympus are holding on as far as I know, but they are not doing well.
It would be a very poor move for Apple, and I have no doubt they realize this. You might think Apple has a rabid fan base to draw on - go read any "Nikon vs. Canon" thread on any photo discussion board sometime to see REAL rabidity. :D
afd
Apr 11, 08:02 AM
Well, you CAN send the same audio to every device in your house, as long as the audio originates on your Mac (which includes simply plugging in any iOS device or iPod into your Mac).
How? Not unless I buy airfoil?
How? Not unless I buy airfoil?
sjo
Sep 26, 02:28 PM
Yeah, I am in the same boat.
For me Cingular is the worst because I can't get it to work at my home and work. I have Verizon, is OK. but at least work. The truth is every carrier has a problem. I am still waiting to find somebody that says their carrier is 100% great and they are satisfied.
I hope iphone will work on other carriers. If not I'll wait until it comes with Verizon or any other carrier other than Cingular.
What good is to have an amazing phone if you can talk or get coverage?
Hey I'm satisfied with my carrier. I think the last time I had any problems with coverage was back in the 20th century. I've got coverage even in the freaking underground. I'd have coverage in the middle of wilderness if I chose to go there. It's cheap as well, I never pay incoming calls, my phone has never been locked and it works pretty much all over the world, my operator has had packet data connection most of this century as well and 3g for several years. What more could I wish?
For me Cingular is the worst because I can't get it to work at my home and work. I have Verizon, is OK. but at least work. The truth is every carrier has a problem. I am still waiting to find somebody that says their carrier is 100% great and they are satisfied.
I hope iphone will work on other carriers. If not I'll wait until it comes with Verizon or any other carrier other than Cingular.
What good is to have an amazing phone if you can talk or get coverage?
Hey I'm satisfied with my carrier. I think the last time I had any problems with coverage was back in the 20th century. I've got coverage even in the freaking underground. I'd have coverage in the middle of wilderness if I chose to go there. It's cheap as well, I never pay incoming calls, my phone has never been locked and it works pretty much all over the world, my operator has had packet data connection most of this century as well and 3g for several years. What more could I wish?
bearcatrp
Apr 20, 01:02 PM
Section 4b of the software license agreement explains it all:
http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iphone.pdf
Interesting read. Except it only mentions the iPhone. Doesn't say anything about the iPad.
Apple isn't the only one doing this though. If you have a cell phone, your tracked. But everyone should know this anyway. I peaked at some of the data on my backup (listed earlier). According to the agreement about, states as long as your device is not identifiably, they can do this. Am pretty sure somewhere in all that data your device is identified. Example: plug your iPhone, iPod or iPad in another Mac, you get the warning your device IS synced with another computer.
Will be interesting how this plays out.
http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iphone.pdf
Interesting read. Except it only mentions the iPhone. Doesn't say anything about the iPad.
Apple isn't the only one doing this though. If you have a cell phone, your tracked. But everyone should know this anyway. I peaked at some of the data on my backup (listed earlier). According to the agreement about, states as long as your device is not identifiably, they can do this. Am pretty sure somewhere in all that data your device is identified. Example: plug your iPhone, iPod or iPad in another Mac, you get the warning your device IS synced with another computer.
Will be interesting how this plays out.
Multimedia
Sep 10, 05:01 PM
You might just get your wish; I saw this article/link while surfing over the MacNN website a couple of days ago (I'm still waiting for new MBPs myself, though! :( ):
Ultra compact computer arrangement Apple Patent Filing - Looks Like Cube II (http://www.electronista.com/articles/06/09/08/new.apple.cube.patent/)
Hope this isn't old news for everyone; this is my first post, although I've been following the forums ever since I started thinking about replacing my old Powerbook (should finally have the money by next month!).Excellent find and an award worthy first post. Thank you very much and welcome to the forums.What about the patent designs that were just shown of the Cube 2?
From Unwired View - Apple Cube reborn (http://www.unwiredview.com/2006/09/07/apple-cube-ii-computer/)This is very encouraging. Perhaps this is what Steve has to talk about on Tuesday. I am a Cube lover - still own two.
Ultra compact computer arrangement Apple Patent Filing - Looks Like Cube II (http://www.electronista.com/articles/06/09/08/new.apple.cube.patent/)
Hope this isn't old news for everyone; this is my first post, although I've been following the forums ever since I started thinking about replacing my old Powerbook (should finally have the money by next month!).Excellent find and an award worthy first post. Thank you very much and welcome to the forums.What about the patent designs that were just shown of the Cube 2?
From Unwired View - Apple Cube reborn (http://www.unwiredview.com/2006/09/07/apple-cube-ii-computer/)This is very encouraging. Perhaps this is what Steve has to talk about on Tuesday. I am a Cube lover - still own two.
AppleScruff1
Apr 22, 11:29 AM
Great news! I'm sure it will be a nice upgrade. You know that Apple will do a nice job with it.
dethmaShine
Apr 28, 03:24 PM
Well MS has two games to play on:
1. Tablet/Phone
The tablet/phone is going to be a big deal. If they do well, they are going to generate good profits.
2. Operating System/ Office
Unless and until MS does something new under operating systems, throwing windows 8 is not going to make a big difference. Also, till the time Windows 8 comes out MS's profits are going to decrease.
Kinect is out/ Windows 7 is out - This side is gonna go down.
So till the time Windows 8 is ready MS has to count on the mobile business.
1. Tablet/Phone
The tablet/phone is going to be a big deal. If they do well, they are going to generate good profits.
2. Operating System/ Office
Unless and until MS does something new under operating systems, throwing windows 8 is not going to make a big difference. Also, till the time Windows 8 comes out MS's profits are going to decrease.
Kinect is out/ Windows 7 is out - This side is gonna go down.
So till the time Windows 8 is ready MS has to count on the mobile business.
DHagan4755
Sep 14, 03:29 PM
You guys are forgetting that last year, at a photography-related event, Apple bumped the PowerBooks. That was the event where they introduced Aperture. If it happened before, it could happen again!
kfscoll
Apr 25, 06:06 PM
...which is still a bottleneck.
So what's your point? You like moderetly better bottlenecks?
I'd rather eliminate them altogether.
You're a silly man. Almost any standard SATA-II 2.5" form-factor SSD is faster than a standard MBA blade SSD. And a SATA-III 6Gbps SSD vs. the MBA SSD? Forget it.
So what's your point? You like moderetly better bottlenecks?
I'd rather eliminate them altogether.
You're a silly man. Almost any standard SATA-II 2.5" form-factor SSD is faster than a standard MBA blade SSD. And a SATA-III 6Gbps SSD vs. the MBA SSD? Forget it.
BlizzardBomb
Jul 14, 01:58 PM
After looking at a chart of all the Core 2 Duo's, it seems like the most reasonable implementation would be to but the 2MB L2 cache Allendale cores into the iMacs (1.86ghz for the 17" and 2.16ghz for the 20") and the 4MB L2cache Conroe cores into the 3 Mac Pros (2.33ghz @ $1999, 2.66ghz @ $2499, and 2.93ghz @ $2999), with possibly and ultra-high end Dual 3.0ghz Woodcrest offering @ $3499 (I don't think economy of scale effects that likleyhood as Apple will already be purchasing them for their entire X-Serve line).
That's probably how I would roll it out if it were up to me.
If it were up to me, I would make the product line look like this before November (I doubt Apple would make a Mini-Tower, but think it would be great):
Mac Mini (Combo) - $549/£399
Core 2 Duo T5500 (Merom) -> 1.66GHz, 2MB, 667MHz FSB
GMA X3000
Mac Mini (SuperDrive) - $749/£499
Core 2 Duo T5600 (Merom) -> 1.83GHz, 2MB, 667MHz FSB
GMA X3000
Mac Plus (Mini-Tower) - $1,049/£699 + iMac 17" - $1,299/£849
Core 2 Duo E6400 (Conroe/Allendale) -> 2.13GHz, 2MB, 1066MHz FSB
Radeon X1600 Pro (128MB)
Mac Plus (Mini-Tower) - $1,299/£849 + iMac 20" - $1,699/£1,099
Core 2 Duo E6600 (Conroe) -> 2.4GHz, 4MB, 1066MHz FSB
Radeon X1600 XT (256MB)
Mac Pro - $2,699/£1,999
Dual Xeon 5150s (Woodcrest) -> 2.66GHz, 4MB, 1333MHz FSB
Radeon X1900 GT (256MB)
Mac Pro - $3,699/£2,699
Dual Xeon 5160s (Woodcrest) -> 3GHz, 4MB, 1333MHz FSB
Radeon X1900 XT (512MB)
That's probably how I would roll it out if it were up to me.
If it were up to me, I would make the product line look like this before November (I doubt Apple would make a Mini-Tower, but think it would be great):
Mac Mini (Combo) - $549/£399
Core 2 Duo T5500 (Merom) -> 1.66GHz, 2MB, 667MHz FSB
GMA X3000
Mac Mini (SuperDrive) - $749/£499
Core 2 Duo T5600 (Merom) -> 1.83GHz, 2MB, 667MHz FSB
GMA X3000
Mac Plus (Mini-Tower) - $1,049/£699 + iMac 17" - $1,299/£849
Core 2 Duo E6400 (Conroe/Allendale) -> 2.13GHz, 2MB, 1066MHz FSB
Radeon X1600 Pro (128MB)
Mac Plus (Mini-Tower) - $1,299/£849 + iMac 20" - $1,699/£1,099
Core 2 Duo E6600 (Conroe) -> 2.4GHz, 4MB, 1066MHz FSB
Radeon X1600 XT (256MB)
Mac Pro - $2,699/£1,999
Dual Xeon 5150s (Woodcrest) -> 2.66GHz, 4MB, 1333MHz FSB
Radeon X1900 GT (256MB)
Mac Pro - $3,699/£2,699
Dual Xeon 5160s (Woodcrest) -> 3GHz, 4MB, 1333MHz FSB
Radeon X1900 XT (512MB)
Ktulu
Sep 4, 08:00 PM
Hmm...I think Belkin calls this 802.11n. This isn't new. Gimme a break. People are really scrounging around deep now.
Look Apple has been keeping secrets it wants to be secret very secret for over a year now. The rumor sites have been so off this year, except for the obvious, that they'd need a power plant to get them back to being on. I'm not buying any of it. I'll be sorely disapponted if all we get is a Disney movie store, a 80GB iPod, a 23" iMac, and an array of colorful nanos. Zzzzz. Put me to sleep.
The nano was the last buzzworthy product Apple has put out in a year (I'll spare you the MPB jokes). Apple is due with something cool; something to compete with PS3 dollars this Xmas.
Are you insinuating that Apple should put out a gaming system to compete for PS3 dollars, or just the holiday dollars in general and right now the PS3 is the "Hot Ticket" this coming Holiday season?
Just wondering.....:confused:
Look Apple has been keeping secrets it wants to be secret very secret for over a year now. The rumor sites have been so off this year, except for the obvious, that they'd need a power plant to get them back to being on. I'm not buying any of it. I'll be sorely disapponted if all we get is a Disney movie store, a 80GB iPod, a 23" iMac, and an array of colorful nanos. Zzzzz. Put me to sleep.
The nano was the last buzzworthy product Apple has put out in a year (I'll spare you the MPB jokes). Apple is due with something cool; something to compete with PS3 dollars this Xmas.
Are you insinuating that Apple should put out a gaming system to compete for PS3 dollars, or just the holiday dollars in general and right now the PS3 is the "Hot Ticket" this coming Holiday season?
Just wondering.....:confused:
rtkane
Apr 4, 12:23 PM
This is a silly debate here. Having known trained officers and military people and being related to some I can tell you one thing: they are taught to neutralize the threat. They certainly don't want to but if you hesitate you die. Chest shots are preferable because it's easier to target but head shots sometimes happen. People should be thinking about the guard who will undoubtedly need time to work through this ordeal.
As a former police officer, I can verify what you're saying--police are trained to "shoot to stop" not shoot to kill and always shoot for center-mass--the largest part of the body (the torso) which provides you the greatest likelihood of hitting your target and stopping the threat. I can almost guarantee that this guy did not fire off a purposeful headshot and everyone playing Monday morning quarterback judging this guy's actions has NEVER been in a situation like it. You don't understand it until you're in it and unfortunately the milliseconds you have to make your decision affect you for the rest of your life.
As a former police officer, I can verify what you're saying--police are trained to "shoot to stop" not shoot to kill and always shoot for center-mass--the largest part of the body (the torso) which provides you the greatest likelihood of hitting your target and stopping the threat. I can almost guarantee that this guy did not fire off a purposeful headshot and everyone playing Monday morning quarterback judging this guy's actions has NEVER been in a situation like it. You don't understand it until you're in it and unfortunately the milliseconds you have to make your decision affect you for the rest of your life.
afd
Apr 11, 08:02 AM
Well, you CAN send the same audio to every device in your house, as long as the audio originates on your Mac (which includes simply plugging in any iOS device or iPod into your Mac).
How? Not unless I buy airfoil?
How? Not unless I buy airfoil?
MattInOz
Jan 2, 06:11 PM
Targeting is one thing. Successfully attacking is a completely different animal. They've been targeting OS X since it came out a decade ago. Successful attacks range from barely a blip on the radar to nonexistent, depending on how you define success. There's no reason to believe that attacks on IOS will be half as successful as the pitiful attacks on OS X.
Targeting isn't ever going to work if the users are aware of what an attack looks like. It's good that the system makes an attack as obvious as possible. Mac OS helps a lot in that regard but some users just never learn (blondes it's always the blondes who try and open attachments).
Not that anti virus helps after all it can't do anything unless they know of the attack as well. Having it installed just gives the user a reason to be complacent which is worse. It all comes down to training users.
Targeting isn't ever going to work if the users are aware of what an attack looks like. It's good that the system makes an attack as obvious as possible. Mac OS helps a lot in that regard but some users just never learn (blondes it's always the blondes who try and open attachments).
Not that anti virus helps after all it can't do anything unless they know of the attack as well. Having it installed just gives the user a reason to be complacent which is worse. It all comes down to training users.
ComputersaysNo
Apr 19, 08:01 AM
Here's another lawsuit. I had no idea where to post it, so here it is:
Apple requesting to drop a lawsuit: (poor google translation)
Published: April 19, 2011 2:17 p.m.
Last updated: April 19, 2011 2:17 p.m.
LONDON - Apple has asked a judge to dismiss the lawsuit around iTunes. The case has dragged on since 2004.
� AP
A ruling on the application is expected next month.
The case dates from 2004. The company RealNetworks, owner of the then popular RealPlayer, sued Apple because the iPod can only sync music from iTunes.
Earlier, the company succeeded at an iPod 'crack' so that all music formats were playable. Apple reacted furiously.
Steve Jobs
Recently a judge is that Steve Jobs, Apple's CEO, to appear in court because it already protracted process. Jobs is on sick leave for months and had previously agreed that he therefore was not required to testify.
The court held that Jobs considers the information required, however. The CEO then appeared at the beginning of this month, two hours in court for questioning. About his situation is nothing published.
Quality
Apple's request to suspend the lawsuit claiming that iPods only raised a certain music format support for the quality.
Apple requesting to drop a lawsuit: (poor google translation)
Published: April 19, 2011 2:17 p.m.
Last updated: April 19, 2011 2:17 p.m.
LONDON - Apple has asked a judge to dismiss the lawsuit around iTunes. The case has dragged on since 2004.
� AP
A ruling on the application is expected next month.
The case dates from 2004. The company RealNetworks, owner of the then popular RealPlayer, sued Apple because the iPod can only sync music from iTunes.
Earlier, the company succeeded at an iPod 'crack' so that all music formats were playable. Apple reacted furiously.
Steve Jobs
Recently a judge is that Steve Jobs, Apple's CEO, to appear in court because it already protracted process. Jobs is on sick leave for months and had previously agreed that he therefore was not required to testify.
The court held that Jobs considers the information required, however. The CEO then appeared at the beginning of this month, two hours in court for questioning. About his situation is nothing published.
Quality
Apple's request to suspend the lawsuit claiming that iPods only raised a certain music format support for the quality.
Durendal
Sep 26, 11:24 AM
I hate to say this folks, but even an iPhone wouldn't be worth having to deal with Cingular's godawful service. Reception is poor in areas where it's supposed to be good and even when you have good reception, you get dropped calls due to network error/rejected/dropped. I've had Cingular for a while now, and I am preparing to drop it with eagerness, even if that means a $200 contract termination fee. I want to slug that twat who says Cingular has the least dropped calls, because it's a ********* LIE.
cube
May 3, 12:25 PM
That is still one display per output though.
If the monitors cannot daisy chain, you need a hub for the port(s) to which you connect multiple such displays.
If the monitors cannot daisy chain, you need a hub for the port(s) to which you connect multiple such displays.
milo
Sep 5, 05:55 PM
Tell ya what..If I want to watch a full length movie I'm gonna do it in my living room in front of my TV NOT wherever the computer is.
Wow, you really don't get it.
Watching on the tv is exactly what this is about. The whole point is that you don't need to have a *computer* or even a *hard drive* next to the TV since you can just stream the video from a computer ANYWHERE in your house.
Seriously, did you even look at the picture you responded to?
Wow, you really don't get it.
Watching on the tv is exactly what this is about. The whole point is that you don't need to have a *computer* or even a *hard drive* next to the TV since you can just stream the video from a computer ANYWHERE in your house.
Seriously, did you even look at the picture you responded to?
Azrel
Sep 9, 07:24 AM
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)?
Yes of course it can, you obviously don't understand what x86_64 is.
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)?
Yes of course it can, you obviously don't understand what x86_64 is.
Gasu E.
Apr 19, 09:27 AM
So what? They're already getting sued by Apple, so what's another lawsuit? Point is, contract breach or not, Samsung could cripple Apple's whole ecosystem within days by halting all processor shipments. Apple makes the vast majority on iDevices and this would kill Apple's whole economic model. And this doesn't even account for Samsungs components that go into their Macs. As a result, Apple would have no hardware to sell. They would dip into their treasure chest. It could be devastating to Apple.
If Samsung breached the supply contract, they would be sued again. The difference is that in the infringement suit, Apple has a moderate case and the remedy if they win will be $100M-$2B range. In a contract infringment, Apple would have an ironclad case, and the remedy would be $100B-$300B-- in other words, Samsung would become a division of Apple.
If Samsung breached the supply contract, they would be sued again. The difference is that in the infringement suit, Apple has a moderate case and the remedy if they win will be $100M-$2B range. In a contract infringment, Apple would have an ironclad case, and the remedy would be $100B-$300B-- in other words, Samsung would become a division of Apple.
Mac-Addict
Aug 31, 07:00 PM
Yes i think i will sell my smelly PSP :) This post has been edited over 24 times due to smelling pistakes
**Spelling mistakes
**Spelling mistakes
vitaboy
Aug 24, 03:49 AM
There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding about just exactly what the settlement means. But I would like to remind people not to take things at face value - Apple is smarter than that.
I suspect that it was Apple who proposed the settlement to Creative. More than that, I suspect it was Apple who dictated the actual terms. Creative had no choice but to accept, which was just as well because at first appearance, they look like the winner.
However, I believe Apple is playing corporate jujitsu here. The settlement is a strategic move that greatly benefits Apple in the long term even as Apple is willing to suffer an apparent loss of face.
Why?
Because the settlement gives Creative much needed ammunition (in both cash and legal standing) to go after every one of the iPod's competitors. You can be sure Creative is getting ready to send out letters to Sandisk, which has raced past them in the music player space this year. You can be sure Creative will be sending letters to iRiver.
And most certainly, you can be certain that Creative will be sending letters to Microsoft with regards to Zune.
Really, Apple was not playing from a weak position. There's no other way to say it, but that's a simplistic and naive interpretation. Patent battles are very, very expensive, lasting years and thousands of man-months of time. Creative not only had to fight Apple over its original patents, but simultaneously defends itself against Apple's countersuit (which were filed in a different state, just to make life more difficult for Creative's legal team).
Without any effort at all, Apple could drag the case through the courts for 5+ years and force Creative to cough up tens of millions of dollars in legal expenses. Creative simply does not have that kind of money, after blowing through $100 million in cash to write of unsold inventory last year. The company's cash position is very weak and the company was undoubtedly sweating blood trying to determine if it would have enough cash to see things through the end - an end which was far from guaranteed. Even if Creative won its original patent suit, they would have lost the countersuit for the same reasons.
The prospect of blowing $50 million over 5 years to pay lawyers for a net gain of nothing was weighing heavily on their minds, I'm sure.
I think what really motivated the settlement is the sudden appearance of Zune. That basically gave Apple the ace it needed to give it a four-of-a-kind. Why? Because while Creative might have been able to tough it out before Zune, the existence of Zune would basically kill the company before the case could wind through the court system.
I mean, we saw Creative's share of the music player market dive from 8% to just 4% in about a year. Sandisk, which was a virtually unknown brand in the music player space, went from nothing to 8% in a short time.
Even if Zune is far from being an "iPod killer", with Microsoft's marketing machine backing it up, I think any reasonable person could see that it is quite likely that Creative's marketshare would be dropping to nothing a year from now.
So Apple basically gave Creative an offer it couldn't refuse.
Settle with us now and forget this silly patent threat of yours. We'll give you $100 million to license your patents, if only because you got them first. And now that we're all family, why don't you go after some of our competitors. You'll probably be able to get just as much, if not more, which is a lot better than what you were getting trying to fight us with that Zen thing.
And if you want to let your pride get in the way, I don't think we need to remind you that Zune is just a few months away from demolishing what little is left of your company. A year from now, it will be iPod, Sandisk, Zune....everyone will have forgotten about Creative because frankly, you don't have any loyal customers like we do.
In fact, we'll be nice and help you gain some loyal customers, too. By making great iPod accessories, you'll be truly a welcome part of the family and more importantly, you'll have products that people actually buy. How about that!
Just remember, the $100 million is a kind of loan, of sorts. When you talk to that Microsoft fella, remember to share some of the payments you extract with us. We're all family, right?
Given that the writing was on the wall, I figure Creative realized that if you can't beat 'em, it was far, far better to join Apple.
I suspect that it was Apple who proposed the settlement to Creative. More than that, I suspect it was Apple who dictated the actual terms. Creative had no choice but to accept, which was just as well because at first appearance, they look like the winner.
However, I believe Apple is playing corporate jujitsu here. The settlement is a strategic move that greatly benefits Apple in the long term even as Apple is willing to suffer an apparent loss of face.
Why?
Because the settlement gives Creative much needed ammunition (in both cash and legal standing) to go after every one of the iPod's competitors. You can be sure Creative is getting ready to send out letters to Sandisk, which has raced past them in the music player space this year. You can be sure Creative will be sending letters to iRiver.
And most certainly, you can be certain that Creative will be sending letters to Microsoft with regards to Zune.
Really, Apple was not playing from a weak position. There's no other way to say it, but that's a simplistic and naive interpretation. Patent battles are very, very expensive, lasting years and thousands of man-months of time. Creative not only had to fight Apple over its original patents, but simultaneously defends itself against Apple's countersuit (which were filed in a different state, just to make life more difficult for Creative's legal team).
Without any effort at all, Apple could drag the case through the courts for 5+ years and force Creative to cough up tens of millions of dollars in legal expenses. Creative simply does not have that kind of money, after blowing through $100 million in cash to write of unsold inventory last year. The company's cash position is very weak and the company was undoubtedly sweating blood trying to determine if it would have enough cash to see things through the end - an end which was far from guaranteed. Even if Creative won its original patent suit, they would have lost the countersuit for the same reasons.
The prospect of blowing $50 million over 5 years to pay lawyers for a net gain of nothing was weighing heavily on their minds, I'm sure.
I think what really motivated the settlement is the sudden appearance of Zune. That basically gave Apple the ace it needed to give it a four-of-a-kind. Why? Because while Creative might have been able to tough it out before Zune, the existence of Zune would basically kill the company before the case could wind through the court system.
I mean, we saw Creative's share of the music player market dive from 8% to just 4% in about a year. Sandisk, which was a virtually unknown brand in the music player space, went from nothing to 8% in a short time.
Even if Zune is far from being an "iPod killer", with Microsoft's marketing machine backing it up, I think any reasonable person could see that it is quite likely that Creative's marketshare would be dropping to nothing a year from now.
So Apple basically gave Creative an offer it couldn't refuse.
Settle with us now and forget this silly patent threat of yours. We'll give you $100 million to license your patents, if only because you got them first. And now that we're all family, why don't you go after some of our competitors. You'll probably be able to get just as much, if not more, which is a lot better than what you were getting trying to fight us with that Zen thing.
And if you want to let your pride get in the way, I don't think we need to remind you that Zune is just a few months away from demolishing what little is left of your company. A year from now, it will be iPod, Sandisk, Zune....everyone will have forgotten about Creative because frankly, you don't have any loyal customers like we do.
In fact, we'll be nice and help you gain some loyal customers, too. By making great iPod accessories, you'll be truly a welcome part of the family and more importantly, you'll have products that people actually buy. How about that!
Just remember, the $100 million is a kind of loan, of sorts. When you talk to that Microsoft fella, remember to share some of the payments you extract with us. We're all family, right?
Given that the writing was on the wall, I figure Creative realized that if you can't beat 'em, it was far, far better to join Apple.
monaarts
Apr 4, 12:30 PM
Apple needs to start paying it's employees better... Seriously, it seems like there is a robbery at an Apple Store every other day. Maybe TLC will make a movie about it soon, "The Deadliest Retail Job" HAHA
- Joe
- Joe
iGary
Sep 19, 03:00 PM
I downloaded Enemy of the State for the heck of it. Sound and video quality were very good, and the $9.99 price is right, too, especially since I do not have to have a DVD box taking up shelf space. Looking forward to the set-top box, whatever it ends up being called.
