Blue Fox
Jan 1, 03:22 AM
Wasn't there supposedly a "virus" going around for the Mac on Facebook a couple months ago? And it was supposed to be all doom and gloom for the Mac (so I've read in the forums from doom-sayers)......but, I haven't heard anything about it since, because nothing happened......this is pretty much the same thing.
twoodcc
Sep 4, 04:03 PM
can't wait til the 12th!!
SiliconAddict
Sep 13, 10:39 PM
I sure hope the headset is on the back. can you imagine the grease from it being pressed up against your head all day long. Shiny black really isn't the way to go with e device that is going to be a phone. Granted that is an artist's rendition so there is still some hope. But I think this may end up being another case of design over practicality. I could only imagine what something like that would look like at the end of a day of use.
Which would warrant putting it in a case which ends up defeating the purpose of the beauty of the device.
Which would warrant putting it in a case which ends up defeating the purpose of the beauty of the device.
sord
Sep 10, 09:11 PM
Well here at work I could replace 4 PC draughting workstations with a Conroe based system. We already have 23" monitors so we are not going to purchase iMacs, and while Mac Pro's are nice they are too expensive for us... A $1500 headless system would do wonders! (and yes the mini is too little).
If Apple cannot release such a system we will have to continue purchasing PCs... :(
Depending on the applications you are going to use, you could cluster some minis.
If Apple cannot release such a system we will have to continue purchasing PCs... :(
Depending on the applications you are going to use, you could cluster some minis.
iJohnHenry
Apr 20, 08:09 AM
I'm still finding it hard not to believe this is a parody.
You can live a long time without heat, electricity, oil.
You can live for about 2 weeks without food.
You can live 3 days without water. ;)
A "North American Union" is a strategic planning balloon, or worse, and hardly a joke to Canadians.
You can live a long time without heat, electricity, oil.
You can live for about 2 weeks without food.
You can live 3 days without water. ;)
A "North American Union" is a strategic planning balloon, or worse, and hardly a joke to Canadians.
Drew n macs
Mar 23, 10:41 PM
Dont forget you'll need an SSD too inside the iMac to achieve the Thunderbolt speeds!!
And it must be a very good and expensive SSD, with more than 700MB/s.
Thunderbolt not worth it right now because its TOO expensive. I'll wait 2 years, when SSDs are much MUCH more cheaper.
thats what I have been saying. Wait till they see the price of the new TB drives people will choke... some will have moved on from 2011 model to 2012 models without even owning a Thunderbolt drive.
And it must be a very good and expensive SSD, with more than 700MB/s.
Thunderbolt not worth it right now because its TOO expensive. I'll wait 2 years, when SSDs are much MUCH more cheaper.
thats what I have been saying. Wait till they see the price of the new TB drives people will choke... some will have moved on from 2011 model to 2012 models without even owning a Thunderbolt drive.
THX1139
Jul 20, 01:49 PM
...Since Intel announced that their four core chips would be available in the last quarter there is another possibility now for Mac Pros: Just Conroe chips for the "low end" replacing the dual core G5s, and the quad core G5 remains the last PowerPC until it is replaced in the last quarter with a much cheaper quad core system based on Intel's Kentsfield quad core desktop chip. Depends on how urgent it is for Apple to finish the transition.
Better be careful. I posted a similar idea in another thread and got flamed by a couple antagonistic people who have limited vision and are knashing for Woodcrest. I'm in agreement with you. I think having Conroes in the middle and lowend to replace the currently shipping Powermacs is feasible for Apple. Keep the G5 Quad until Kentsfield and maybe introduce a 3.0 Quad Woodcrest on the high-end workstation model to start a new professional line?
I can see why folks are clamoring for Woodcrest, but to me it seems a bit weird for Apple to adopt a chipset for 6 months or less. With Kentsfield shipping at the end of the year, why bother with Woodcrest now? If they would have begun selling last month when they first came out it would have made more sense. Now I'm thinking Apple is going to hold off simply because they haven't announced anything. Woodcrest has been out for around a month now, if Apple is/was going to use them, what's the hold up? I think they have been waiting for Conroe, not WWDC.
Better be careful. I posted a similar idea in another thread and got flamed by a couple antagonistic people who have limited vision and are knashing for Woodcrest. I'm in agreement with you. I think having Conroes in the middle and lowend to replace the currently shipping Powermacs is feasible for Apple. Keep the G5 Quad until Kentsfield and maybe introduce a 3.0 Quad Woodcrest on the high-end workstation model to start a new professional line?
I can see why folks are clamoring for Woodcrest, but to me it seems a bit weird for Apple to adopt a chipset for 6 months or less. With Kentsfield shipping at the end of the year, why bother with Woodcrest now? If they would have begun selling last month when they first came out it would have made more sense. Now I'm thinking Apple is going to hold off simply because they haven't announced anything. Woodcrest has been out for around a month now, if Apple is/was going to use them, what's the hold up? I think they have been waiting for Conroe, not WWDC.
iJawn108
Sep 10, 10:35 PM
I predict the following:
iTunes Movie Store with... 1080 HD movie downloads.
Updated Cinema Displays.
New Airport Extreme with 802.11n (for streaming the said Movies wirelessly)
iPod updates, either slightly modified nano(new cases+more compacity) and/or updated video iPods with higher compacity for said HD movies.
;)
I really do think theywill be available in 1080, and that will be a very big deal.
blueray? hd dvd? who cares i can just get them on itunes.
iTunes Movie Store with... 1080 HD movie downloads.
Updated Cinema Displays.
New Airport Extreme with 802.11n (for streaming the said Movies wirelessly)
iPod updates, either slightly modified nano(new cases+more compacity) and/or updated video iPods with higher compacity for said HD movies.
;)
I really do think theywill be available in 1080, and that will be a very big deal.
blueray? hd dvd? who cares i can just get them on itunes.
cere
Apr 14, 02:02 PM
Yeah, it is. USB 3.0 is not that big of a step up from USB 2.0 so those that really need the extra bandwidth will not bother with it and go straight to Thunderbolt. Simple as that. Leave your rinky dink Toys R Us low bandwidth peripherals to USB and leave the big boy peripherals to Thunderbolt.
Sure you have, you've completely ignored my other post then changed the subject to reading comprehension to smokescreen the topic at hand. Oh and give me a break with your non-insult ********. You have been making jabs about short buses and taking comprehension classes over a Thunderbolt and USB discussion. If anything you are the one that needs to take some classes, maybe not on comprehension but I'm sure you get the idea.
Actually let's do a real recap:
You agree with a claim that Thunderbolt will be Mac only
I respond with an article that simply states it won't be
You respond with the reason it won't take off as manufacturers will have to add it separately
Econgeek tells you it's a completely different scenario because they don't need a license through Apple
I tell you Intel will be supporting both
You then start with your strawman argument and ignore a portion of what I stated
You also follow that up with some insults
I respond with video proof of why Thunderbolt will be popular with many devices
You ignore then respond with more insults
Honestly, can you try to post without arguing against claims I never made? That is at least 3 times now and it shows a lack of honesty or reading ability. I am not sure which.
I never said it was going to Mac only (though you have accused me of that twice). I agreed with the insinuation that it could be. I never said manufacturers would have to add it separately. I did say that the article you posted said only that it would be available to all and that it didn't say all would add it. Mainly, I said that, because you know, the article doesn't actually say that.
I think we are done. No point in debating someone that doesn't understand what he is reading and also makes up things to reply to. Arguing against someone that uses strawman arguments or misses common subtleties in language is bad enough. Arguing against someone that is making up things to argue against is pointless.
Sure you have, you've completely ignored my other post then changed the subject to reading comprehension to smokescreen the topic at hand. Oh and give me a break with your non-insult ********. You have been making jabs about short buses and taking comprehension classes over a Thunderbolt and USB discussion. If anything you are the one that needs to take some classes, maybe not on comprehension but I'm sure you get the idea.
Actually let's do a real recap:
You agree with a claim that Thunderbolt will be Mac only
I respond with an article that simply states it won't be
You respond with the reason it won't take off as manufacturers will have to add it separately
Econgeek tells you it's a completely different scenario because they don't need a license through Apple
I tell you Intel will be supporting both
You then start with your strawman argument and ignore a portion of what I stated
You also follow that up with some insults
I respond with video proof of why Thunderbolt will be popular with many devices
You ignore then respond with more insults
Honestly, can you try to post without arguing against claims I never made? That is at least 3 times now and it shows a lack of honesty or reading ability. I am not sure which.
I never said it was going to Mac only (though you have accused me of that twice). I agreed with the insinuation that it could be. I never said manufacturers would have to add it separately. I did say that the article you posted said only that it would be available to all and that it didn't say all would add it. Mainly, I said that, because you know, the article doesn't actually say that.
I think we are done. No point in debating someone that doesn't understand what he is reading and also makes up things to reply to. Arguing against someone that uses strawman arguments or misses common subtleties in language is bad enough. Arguing against someone that is making up things to argue against is pointless.
iwannabeaninja
Sep 26, 07:17 AM
Been saying it on the forums forever.
2007 Apple pulls iTunes from Motorola
2008 Apple launches iPhone with Cingular
2007 Apple pulls iTunes from Motorola
2008 Apple launches iPhone with Cingular
strike1555
Nov 15, 08:58 AM
Aristotle has absolutely no clue as to what he's talking about, LOL.
EagerDragon
Sep 10, 06:49 PM
Face it the Conroe Mac is coming.
iMac 24" - $1999
Mac Pro (downgraded to 2.0 Ghz) + 23" - 3198
That is a $1k price gap.
A high quality midtower would fit perfectly. They have another chip to differentiate the product matrix. It is coming!
Mac Mini - Core Duo (yonah) - base entry machine. 2 RAM slots
iMac - Core 2 Duo (Merom) - All in one basic to prosumer models, quiet operation and powerful. 2 RAM Slots
"Mac" - Core 2 Duo (Conroe) - mini tower 1 optical, 2 drives, 2 PCIe, 4 RAM Slots - prosumer to low end workstation.
Mac Pro - Xeon (Woodcrest) - Full tower 2 processors, 8 RAM slots, 4 PCIe, 2 optical, 4 drive bays. - Mid to high end workstation.
Face it Apple left the biggest gap between the iMac and the Pro machine ever! There was no crippled tower to span the distance between the two. Apple wants to expand market share. They have a power processor that will not step on the toes of the machine above or below. Why wouldn't they use it. Before all the desktops ran the G5. It was difficult to provide product differentiation without gobbling sales up internally. Here the highest end Conroe cannot match the lowest end dual Woodcrest at highly threaded apps. This is a win-win situation. It will either come out on Tuesday or another special event in early october.
It will be headless and upgradable to attract the Windows gamers. They already have monitors, keyboards and mice. A little BootCamp goes a long way.
iMac 24" - $1999
Mac Pro (downgraded to 2.0 Ghz) + 23" - 3198
That is a $1k price gap.
A high quality midtower would fit perfectly. They have another chip to differentiate the product matrix. It is coming!
Mac Mini - Core Duo (yonah) - base entry machine. 2 RAM slots
iMac - Core 2 Duo (Merom) - All in one basic to prosumer models, quiet operation and powerful. 2 RAM Slots
"Mac" - Core 2 Duo (Conroe) - mini tower 1 optical, 2 drives, 2 PCIe, 4 RAM Slots - prosumer to low end workstation.
Mac Pro - Xeon (Woodcrest) - Full tower 2 processors, 8 RAM slots, 4 PCIe, 2 optical, 4 drive bays. - Mid to high end workstation.
Face it Apple left the biggest gap between the iMac and the Pro machine ever! There was no crippled tower to span the distance between the two. Apple wants to expand market share. They have a power processor that will not step on the toes of the machine above or below. Why wouldn't they use it. Before all the desktops ran the G5. It was difficult to provide product differentiation without gobbling sales up internally. Here the highest end Conroe cannot match the lowest end dual Woodcrest at highly threaded apps. This is a win-win situation. It will either come out on Tuesday or another special event in early october.
It will be headless and upgradable to attract the Windows gamers. They already have monitors, keyboards and mice. A little BootCamp goes a long way.
Rodimus Prime
Apr 25, 01:23 AM
Well I'm sorry to hear that happened to your father. My mother was in a similar situation a few years back. She cut off an idiot doing 20 under the speed limit, slammed on the brakes, and there was a wreck. The guy she cut off was found to be at fault for not maintaining a proper distance, my mother was not found at fault. She openly told the cops that she had just passed the guy, and after she passed she thought she saw a squirrel enter the road, so she slammed on the breaks. On top of doing $15,000 grand worth of damage to the guys car (which he had to pay for due to not having broadform insurance) she then sued him for her $2,000 deductible, and won. Sucks to be him, maybe he does the speed limit now.
EDIT: @ EricNau - what do you guys not understand about "she was doing 65mph is a 70mph zone" which she then lowered to 55mph after brakechecking me????????
-Don
wow clearly no one in your family should not be hind the wheel of a car.
You all do road rage.
One day someone will pull a gun on you.
Sadly the cop was a crappy investigatory because your mom did an illegally lane changed. plus road rage and really there was a lot of room to prove it but you had a lazy cop and then a mother who lies and teachers her son to lie and pull the same crap.
EDIT: @ EricNau - what do you guys not understand about "she was doing 65mph is a 70mph zone" which she then lowered to 55mph after brakechecking me????????
-Don
wow clearly no one in your family should not be hind the wheel of a car.
You all do road rage.
One day someone will pull a gun on you.
Sadly the cop was a crappy investigatory because your mom did an illegally lane changed. plus road rage and really there was a lot of room to prove it but you had a lazy cop and then a mother who lies and teachers her son to lie and pull the same crap.
LaMerVipere
Oct 12, 01:25 PM
This would definitely be the iPod nano I'd be buying for Christmas, if true. What a great cause! As long as it doesn't have any Bono or Oprah-related crap engraved on it, we're golden.
KnightWRX
Apr 25, 06:58 AM
For 99% of the market, the integrated graphics are fine. The majority of consumers don't read tech sites and are happy with the performance. The typical pc buyer doesn't know what a benchmark is. In almost every Apple vs Winodws pc argument on this and every other Mac site, the Mac fans without fail say specs don't matter. If you're a gamer, you'll notice the performance hit. To the million plus people who will buy the next model it won't make any difference.
Yes, that is the Apple mentality. No more is it about making the best machine, but about making it "good enough". That speech in 2008 with the intro of the Unibody MacBook with the then nVidia 9400m where Apple realises "graphics are important and boy did we pack this thing with graphics power!" is gone.
You're right. I should just eat my pill and accept the lesser GPU. :rolleyes:
The only thing holding me back from a Mac before 2008 was the Intel GPU. The only thing that will hold me back from purchasing a new one after this is Air is... Intel graphics.
Yes, that is the Apple mentality. No more is it about making the best machine, but about making it "good enough". That speech in 2008 with the intro of the Unibody MacBook with the then nVidia 9400m where Apple realises "graphics are important and boy did we pack this thing with graphics power!" is gone.
You're right. I should just eat my pill and accept the lesser GPU. :rolleyes:
The only thing holding me back from a Mac before 2008 was the Intel GPU. The only thing that will hold me back from purchasing a new one after this is Air is... Intel graphics.
Macginger
Mar 22, 01:24 PM
I want to know where to get a list of products that hook onto Thunderbolt.
Rocketman
google thunderbolt and you'll find it, or at least what people are planning on bringing out but it's out there :cool:
ok did it for you :)
http://www.lacie.com/us/index.htm
Rocketman
google thunderbolt and you'll find it, or at least what people are planning on bringing out but it's out there :cool:
ok did it for you :)
http://www.lacie.com/us/index.htm
840quadra
Oct 12, 02:01 PM
Those look Burgundy to me, I was hoping for a more proper red, but alas those are Mock ups!
firestarter
Apr 11, 07:32 AM
blackNBUK - thanks for the correction!
Lightivity
Oct 5, 03:16 AM
Being 16x9 encoded is not the same thing as being anaporphically encoded.
Being 16x9 encoded just means that the video is meant to be viewed at a 16x9 ratio. Yes, the movies (that I have bought, anyway,) are 16x9. Specifically, Good Will Hunting is 640x344.
Anamorphically encoded refers to the act of 'stretching' 16x9 source to the height of 4x3; so that you effectively get 33% more 'vertical' data than horizontal. The TV is then supposed to 'squish' the video back to 16x9. So, for example, if you tell your DVD player that you have a '16x9 anamorphic' TV, it will output the widescreen video to fill the entire 720x480 resolution. If you tell it you have a '16x9 non-anamorphic', it will still be outputting 720x480, but will add black bars on the top and bottom, to achive a 'video' resolution of 720x405.
My TV, for example, has a special '16x9 anamorphic' mode where it actually re-aims its electron beam so that it's only drawing in the 16x9 area, but at a higher vertical density than it normally would. Meaning that I no longer have square pixels. Instead, I have pixels that are 1.33 times wider than tall. (More data packed in height-wise.)
If iTunes movies were sold as anamorphic, then Good Will Hunting would be 640x372, and rely on the TV to 'squish' the 372 high into the height that 344 should be. Thereby displaying more vertical information in the same space.
I know exactly what 'anamorphic' means, and it was precisely what I meant when saying "16x9-encoded", with the exception that 'anamorphic' is a totally confusing and natively incorrect term.
Why? Because nothing is ever stretched or squashed in digital video. The anamorphic concept has unfortunately been transfered from the celluloid world where light truly is pressed together on a 35-mm film frame only to be expanded in the theater. Now, maybe I should have added the word "enhanced for widescreen" after "16x9-encoded" but it doesn't matter: All 16x9-videomaterial is encoded so that all 720x480 pixels carry the approximate dimension of 16x9 with the aim of fitting a television that holds a display with 1.78:1 proportions. That is the very definition of 16x9. It is not anamorphical. It is not sqeezed. It is just 16x9 pixels spread across a compatible display.
Ehurtley, what I think you thought I meant, was aspect ratio. But that is something completely else. The aspect ratio is the proportions of the frame the director intended the action to be shown in, and there are several. One is 2.35:1, but the most common is 1.85:1, which most closely resembles the 1.78:1 frame that 16x9-encoded video fits right into. The only ones using the 1:78:1 aspect ratio is tv-productions. Film productions rarely use it (they stick to conventional 2.35:1 and 1.85:1).
Don't confuse the 1.78:1 aspect ratio which -- together with 1.85:1 and 2.35:1 -- is the artistic concept of framing action, with 16x9-encoding which is the technical solution of using a standard pixel resolution in a widescreen setup.
So, my question remains: is there any 16x9-encoded film content on iTunes Store?
Being 16x9 encoded just means that the video is meant to be viewed at a 16x9 ratio. Yes, the movies (that I have bought, anyway,) are 16x9. Specifically, Good Will Hunting is 640x344.
Anamorphically encoded refers to the act of 'stretching' 16x9 source to the height of 4x3; so that you effectively get 33% more 'vertical' data than horizontal. The TV is then supposed to 'squish' the video back to 16x9. So, for example, if you tell your DVD player that you have a '16x9 anamorphic' TV, it will output the widescreen video to fill the entire 720x480 resolution. If you tell it you have a '16x9 non-anamorphic', it will still be outputting 720x480, but will add black bars on the top and bottom, to achive a 'video' resolution of 720x405.
My TV, for example, has a special '16x9 anamorphic' mode where it actually re-aims its electron beam so that it's only drawing in the 16x9 area, but at a higher vertical density than it normally would. Meaning that I no longer have square pixels. Instead, I have pixels that are 1.33 times wider than tall. (More data packed in height-wise.)
If iTunes movies were sold as anamorphic, then Good Will Hunting would be 640x372, and rely on the TV to 'squish' the 372 high into the height that 344 should be. Thereby displaying more vertical information in the same space.
I know exactly what 'anamorphic' means, and it was precisely what I meant when saying "16x9-encoded", with the exception that 'anamorphic' is a totally confusing and natively incorrect term.
Why? Because nothing is ever stretched or squashed in digital video. The anamorphic concept has unfortunately been transfered from the celluloid world where light truly is pressed together on a 35-mm film frame only to be expanded in the theater. Now, maybe I should have added the word "enhanced for widescreen" after "16x9-encoded" but it doesn't matter: All 16x9-videomaterial is encoded so that all 720x480 pixels carry the approximate dimension of 16x9 with the aim of fitting a television that holds a display with 1.78:1 proportions. That is the very definition of 16x9. It is not anamorphical. It is not sqeezed. It is just 16x9 pixels spread across a compatible display.
Ehurtley, what I think you thought I meant, was aspect ratio. But that is something completely else. The aspect ratio is the proportions of the frame the director intended the action to be shown in, and there are several. One is 2.35:1, but the most common is 1.85:1, which most closely resembles the 1.78:1 frame that 16x9-encoded video fits right into. The only ones using the 1:78:1 aspect ratio is tv-productions. Film productions rarely use it (they stick to conventional 2.35:1 and 1.85:1).
Don't confuse the 1.78:1 aspect ratio which -- together with 1.85:1 and 2.35:1 -- is the artistic concept of framing action, with 16x9-encoding which is the technical solution of using a standard pixel resolution in a widescreen setup.
So, my question remains: is there any 16x9-encoded film content on iTunes Store?
Porco
Oct 28, 04:55 AM
I am very concerned about the environment, but I think it sounds like Greenpeace did go too far. I am actually dubious of the methodology used to say that Apple is ranked so poorly in terms of the environment, because as others have said, I think Mac users tend to hang on to their machines more, or else they do seem to have a better time being resold on e-bay etc, they hold their value well. So even if an individual Mac contained, say 10% more dangerous stuff (guesstimate - ) in it than a Dell or something, if it has two owners or is used for twice as long then does that really still make them so bad?
That said, I do wish Apple would improve upon meeting their environmental responsibilities, there's no good reason for them not to. Their name and company logo is a piece of fruit that grows on trees, so the tree-hugging comments aren't quite so irrelevant, are they? :p
Edit: Apple can you also put a spell check into Safari please :)
If you're running Tiger, it does already - system-wide actually, just choose Edit>Spelling>Check Spelling as You Type whilst using anything you can enter text in (a forum reply box would work for example) :)
That said, I do wish Apple would improve upon meeting their environmental responsibilities, there's no good reason for them not to. Their name and company logo is a piece of fruit that grows on trees, so the tree-hugging comments aren't quite so irrelevant, are they? :p
Edit: Apple can you also put a spell check into Safari please :)
If you're running Tiger, it does already - system-wide actually, just choose Edit>Spelling>Check Spelling as You Type whilst using anything you can enter text in (a forum reply box would work for example) :)
blondepianist
Mar 29, 01:52 PM
I always assumed, probably wrongly, that there was some file size limit or that it could affect performance when using it for large files (I mostly work with huge ProRes files.)
Just FYI...
File size wouldn't affect performance at all, as long as you're copying between locations on the same drive. The "file" that you see in the GUI is actually a link to a location on disk where your data is; all the OS has to move is the link, which is very tiny.
Just FYI...
File size wouldn't affect performance at all, as long as you're copying between locations on the same drive. The "file" that you see in the GUI is actually a link to a location on disk where your data is; all the OS has to move is the link, which is very tiny.
Skika
Mar 30, 12:05 PM
As i recall apple was the first to call applications apllications. Windows uses programs. So why dont they use program store? Or prog store? They never used apps or applications nor they didnt complain before, they just hatin couse they want to profit from the name apple made famous and everyone thinks of apple's app store when the term is being thrown around.
They want to copy again thats the bottom line, and becouse they cant they want to play childish games.
They want to copy again thats the bottom line, and becouse they cant they want to play childish games.
iStudentUK
Mar 30, 12:33 PM
While my gut wants to side with MS on this one, there's a simple test of whether App Store is generic or not.
Before apple created the App Store within iTunes, was the term in use (and specifically "app store", not just "app")? Possibly more importantly, before they applied for the trademark was any company selling apps and calling it by that term?
It probably comes down to prior art - if it truly is a generic term, then someone should be able to provide the example of X used the term in 19XX, before the trademark was filed. Anyone here able to provide an example of the term being used before Apple filed for it?
Yay! Somebody who understands the question!
It's so funny watching people write "well windows/office/word is generic" (although nobody does that with Apple/pages/numbers/keynote). Clueless! :rolleyes:
Before apple created the App Store within iTunes, was the term in use (and specifically "app store", not just "app")? Possibly more importantly, before they applied for the trademark was any company selling apps and calling it by that term?
It probably comes down to prior art - if it truly is a generic term, then someone should be able to provide the example of X used the term in 19XX, before the trademark was filed. Anyone here able to provide an example of the term being used before Apple filed for it?
Yay! Somebody who understands the question!
It's so funny watching people write "well windows/office/word is generic" (although nobody does that with Apple/pages/numbers/keynote). Clueless! :rolleyes:
davelanger
Mar 30, 11:36 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/30/microsoft-hires-linguist-to-oppose-apples-app-store-trademark/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/01/135003-app_store_icon.jpg
CNET reports (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-20048486-37.html) that Microsoft has filed yet another document (PDF) (http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/ttabvue-91195582-OPP-26.pdf) in its case opposing Apple's application for a trademark on the term "App Store", moving beyond its earlier effort involving complaining about Apple's font size (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/09/microsofts-latest-legal-tactic-complaining-about-apples-font-size/) to bring in a linguist to counter Apple's own expert in debating the genericness of the term.The filing also points to Amazon's just-introduced Appstore for Android (http://www.amazon.com/mobile-apps/b?ie=UTF8&node=2350149011) as yet another example of the term being generic. Apple noted (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/01/apple-defends-against-microsoft-in-app-store-trademark-dispute/) in a prior filing that it had moved to protect its trademark by reaching out to companies it believed was using the "App Store" name improperly, but Microsoft argues that the simple fact that those companies were using the term in the first place indicates that the term is generic.
Article Link: Microsoft Hires Linguist to Oppose Apple's 'App Store' Trademark (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/30/microsoft-hires-linguist-to-oppose-apples-app-store-trademark/)
That is great coming from a company who has Windows trade marked.
Cant they MS just call it the MSAPP Store or WinAPP store.
Do they really need to just call it the APP STORE?
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/01/135003-app_store_icon.jpg
CNET reports (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-20048486-37.html) that Microsoft has filed yet another document (PDF) (http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/ttabvue-91195582-OPP-26.pdf) in its case opposing Apple's application for a trademark on the term "App Store", moving beyond its earlier effort involving complaining about Apple's font size (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/09/microsofts-latest-legal-tactic-complaining-about-apples-font-size/) to bring in a linguist to counter Apple's own expert in debating the genericness of the term.The filing also points to Amazon's just-introduced Appstore for Android (http://www.amazon.com/mobile-apps/b?ie=UTF8&node=2350149011) as yet another example of the term being generic. Apple noted (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/01/apple-defends-against-microsoft-in-app-store-trademark-dispute/) in a prior filing that it had moved to protect its trademark by reaching out to companies it believed was using the "App Store" name improperly, but Microsoft argues that the simple fact that those companies were using the term in the first place indicates that the term is generic.
Article Link: Microsoft Hires Linguist to Oppose Apple's 'App Store' Trademark (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/30/microsoft-hires-linguist-to-oppose-apples-app-store-trademark/)
That is great coming from a company who has Windows trade marked.
Cant they MS just call it the MSAPP Store or WinAPP store.
Do they really need to just call it the APP STORE?
