SwiftLives
Mar 28, 10:01 AM
At face value, it would make more sense for Apple to announce the new iPhone in the fall along with the iPods. The iPod Touch and the iPhone are both iOS devices. And keep in mind there's all sorts of chatter about either a third generation iPad or an additional iPad model. So why not roll them all into one announcement in September?
Of course, by keeping the announcements separate, Apple extends their publicity.
I still expect an iPhone 5 announcement to be made at WWDC. Going longer than a year between updates gives competitors an advantage. And frankly, smartphone competitors are catching up.
Of course, by keeping the announcements separate, Apple extends their publicity.
I still expect an iPhone 5 announcement to be made at WWDC. Going longer than a year between updates gives competitors an advantage. And frankly, smartphone competitors are catching up.
itcheroni
Apr 21, 12:50 AM
I'd love it if you could point out where you addressed this, because as a tax accountant, I'm having a hard time thinking of a time when a realized capital gain isn't income - if you have a realized net gain (ie amount realized is greater than your basis in the capital asset), you certainly have income. Certainly you could reinvest that net gain, but that doesn't mean you don't have income, that just means you realized a gain and reinvested the old basis and the gain (income). You're only taxed on realized gains that are recognized by the code (and you can net against realized losses) - sure, I could have an unrealized capital gain that isn't income, but I wouldn't be taxed on it either. Not that I don't agree with some of your points, but I'd really love the same clarification on this that most other posters have been asking for.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
canolapop
Jul 31, 03:20 AM
couldn't they just release it as an UNLOCKED phone, sell it on their site and allow us to use it with who ever?
orthorim
Apr 25, 07:26 AM
It was inevitable that this would come as soon as the iPhone 4 was released. That screen looks sooooo much better than my computer's. At desktop size it's going to be mind-blowing.
The only question is when, and I assume it's primarily a matter of getting the hardware made. No one makes retina 13, 15, and 17" displays and Apple is going to need huge quantities.
Making OS X resolution independent is a pretty big task so doing the prepwork now could still mean it's years away. I hope not of course. If they come out with a retina MBP, I am going to be the first in line to get one.
The only question is when, and I assume it's primarily a matter of getting the hardware made. No one makes retina 13, 15, and 17" displays and Apple is going to need huge quantities.
Making OS X resolution independent is a pretty big task so doing the prepwork now could still mean it's years away. I hope not of course. If they come out with a retina MBP, I am going to be the first in line to get one.
Phil A.
Apr 18, 02:51 PM
Ridiculous. Nothing is at all similar, aside from the bezel. But then if that's an "infringement" then all those digital picture frame makers can sue Apple for copying their "user interface". Honeycomb itself, the actual aspect ratio, none of that is similar. Get a grip Apple.
Have you looked at the TouchWiz UI? It's almost identical to iOS - dock at the bottom, pages of icons in a grid and you even remove applications in the same way as you do on the iPhone. I've nothing at all against competition for iOS, but they shouldn't just rip the design off
http://www.sizzledcore.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Galaxy-S-24-375x500.jpg
Have you looked at the TouchWiz UI? It's almost identical to iOS - dock at the bottom, pages of icons in a grid and you even remove applications in the same way as you do on the iPhone. I've nothing at all against competition for iOS, but they shouldn't just rip the design off
http://www.sizzledcore.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Galaxy-S-24-375x500.jpg
BlizzardBomb
Aug 11, 02:38 PM
Could "Conroe" ever make its way into a Mac Mini? Or would it just cause the mini to melt into a metalic puddle on the desk?
If they made it a little taller it should be easy-peasy for Apple to fit the necessary cooling. Hey, if they're making it taller, they could add a 3.5" Hard Drive which is much cheaper than laptop hard drives and we could finally get a 500GB Mini.
If they made it a little taller it should be easy-peasy for Apple to fit the necessary cooling. Hey, if they're making it taller, they could add a 3.5" Hard Drive which is much cheaper than laptop hard drives and we could finally get a 500GB Mini.
zephonic
Apr 23, 03:19 AM
Apple had/has its prime time with the ipod, iphone, ipad but now the innovation chip has changed it seems.
This has been my feeling as well. Unless Apple pulls some new magic out of the hat. I love OSX, but I'm not sure how much longer I can stay on board.
This has been my feeling as well. Unless Apple pulls some new magic out of the hat. I love OSX, but I'm not sure how much longer I can stay on board.
jaw04005
May 7, 10:34 AM
If true, this is good news.
However, it would make sense Apple would limit the free service to iPod touch, iPhone, Mac and iPad owners. Maybe then it’ll remain ad free.
Their next step should be to purchase DropBox and replace iDisk or at least implement a faster WebDAV solution. iDisk is dog slow even on fast connections compared to other services.
Then they should up the storage limit from 20GB to 50GB and finally implement LaLa-like iTunes Web streaming.
However, it would make sense Apple would limit the free service to iPod touch, iPhone, Mac and iPad owners. Maybe then it’ll remain ad free.
Their next step should be to purchase DropBox and replace iDisk or at least implement a faster WebDAV solution. iDisk is dog slow even on fast connections compared to other services.
Then they should up the storage limit from 20GB to 50GB and finally implement LaLa-like iTunes Web streaming.
MarcelV
Sep 11, 10:30 AM
Actually, how about vPod instead? I believe it's easier to say that than Video iPod.
And the logic here is..... iPod = iPod with iusic? If Apple had that logic, we would have seen an mPod, right? Or pPod for the iPod Photo. But I have seen them doing thinks that would throw real logic out of the door, before, so yeah, why not vPod for the video one.
And the logic here is..... iPod = iPod with iusic? If Apple had that logic, we would have seen an mPod, right? Or pPod for the iPod Photo. But I have seen them doing thinks that would throw real logic out of the door, before, so yeah, why not vPod for the video one.
Creative One
Apr 9, 09:29 PM
The answer is 288. Anyone who think's it is two doesn't know math.
0815
Apr 5, 01:16 PM
lol.. That's funny but it's the inevitable of how the iPhone is being used. If it's deemed legal, Apple shouldn't get involved in Toyota's marketing scheme. Maybe Jobs shouldn't have made a mockery of that CEO (I forget his name) in the unveil party of the iPad 2.
I agree. While I thought it was an, lets say 'interesting' move by Toyota to do this - it is absolutely their decision to do so, since jailbreaking is not illegal.
Disclaimer: My iPhone is not jailbroken, did it a long time ago, toyed with it, didn't see the value for me and restored - but it is everyones decision to do what they want since it is not illegal. Of course there are apps that you could argue enable illegal stuff, but that is a different story.
I agree. While I thought it was an, lets say 'interesting' move by Toyota to do this - it is absolutely their decision to do so, since jailbreaking is not illegal.
Disclaimer: My iPhone is not jailbroken, did it a long time ago, toyed with it, didn't see the value for me and restored - but it is everyones decision to do what they want since it is not illegal. Of course there are apps that you could argue enable illegal stuff, but that is a different story.
nagromme
Aug 7, 04:01 PM
Here's other point of view: I want to use OSX in everyday use (Safari, Mail, iTunes, graphic design, Dreamweaver etc... and OSX overall). But sometimes I want to play games too, and it's awesome that nowadays it's possible to boot into Windows and play games there and then boot back into OSX. Are you saying that Apple should totally forget all users who would like to use OSX but occasionally play games on Windows, and let them buy PCs? Most of the gamers do not use their computer ONLY to play games. Consumer tower would be good for Apple to get new switchers and get more marketshare.
I agree 100%. And I'll go one further: not only do I want to have ONE machine for work and play--a Mac--but I don't want to have to reboot, NOR buy a license for Windows :)
I've been buying Mac games and will continue to--and games are a big motivator for me to buy new Macs.
I don't think Apple will ignore the sub-Mac-Pro headless market forever. I think something is coming to fill the gap. I just don't know when :)
I agree 100%. And I'll go one further: not only do I want to have ONE machine for work and play--a Mac--but I don't want to have to reboot, NOR buy a license for Windows :)
I've been buying Mac games and will continue to--and games are a big motivator for me to buy new Macs.
I don't think Apple will ignore the sub-Mac-Pro headless market forever. I think something is coming to fill the gap. I just don't know when :)
Stridder44
Aug 7, 05:43 PM
Basic graphics card is kinda weak.
need to have a midground option which is a bit better, but not as much as the ATI x1900
also, where is the option of getting Blu-Ray Drive?
We need high def drives. and why have to buy them elsewhere. want a full HDMI compliant system, that can interface with LCD monitors/tv's made by apple also with speakers.
cmon apple!!!
At the price, you could buy a new car.
need to have a midground option which is a bit better, but not as much as the ATI x1900
also, where is the option of getting Blu-Ray Drive?
We need high def drives. and why have to buy them elsewhere. want a full HDMI compliant system, that can interface with LCD monitors/tv's made by apple also with speakers.
cmon apple!!!
At the price, you could buy a new car.
Jaro65
Mar 29, 08:46 AM
I'm glad Amazon rolled this out before Apple in the sense that I hope it pushes Apple to roll out a cloud subscription that handily beats Amazon's offering.
Exactly. Competition is a good thing.
Exactly. Competition is a good thing.
modul8tr
Mar 27, 03:10 AM
Also, Gruber later clarified that his guess was not the "iPad 3" per se, but an additional iPad model of some kind, such as possibly a retina display.
I get Gruber's line of reason here, but in the long term it doesn't make sense to me. If we get an additional iPad this September with a Retina Display, what happens to the 2012 iPad? Will it simply receive a bump in resolution, but lack Retina?
All (newer) iOS devices other than the iPad have some form of Retina Display. All iOS devices have an A4 chip (which will become A5 this year). iOS 4.2 unified the iPad, iPhone, iPod Touch lines. Clearly Retina is the one missing feature that's coming to iPad. All iPads.
To me, it makes more sense that Apple would wait until they can build these in bulk, and sell them at the same price point, than to introduce a new top tier $800-$900 iPad (assuming that's what it is) with a Retina Display. Will it have 3 tiers of memory as well and two flavors of 3G? With those options we'll easily see it surpassing the price of a Macbook or Macbook Air. Not quite sure a device that expensive will spur Holiday sales. If we lived in that reality, people would be receiving Macbook Airs like they were stocking stuffers. But Apple's Q1 numbers show us devices that expensive don't move in the numbers that iPods, (subsidised) iPhones, and iPads do.
The only way this makes sense is if this "additional" September 2011 iPad, has other super features that warrant it's "special" release. An iPad Pro for example, with more memory, even more power, and Thunderbolt. Or if Apple decides to move the iPad introductions to Q1 and do away iPod special events. If iPods are intro'd at this new event, it would be in passing.
New yearly lineup :
iOS event - late March / mid April
iPhone event - June
iPad event - September
iPod / AppleTV (quiet release) - September
I get Gruber's line of reason here, but in the long term it doesn't make sense to me. If we get an additional iPad this September with a Retina Display, what happens to the 2012 iPad? Will it simply receive a bump in resolution, but lack Retina?
All (newer) iOS devices other than the iPad have some form of Retina Display. All iOS devices have an A4 chip (which will become A5 this year). iOS 4.2 unified the iPad, iPhone, iPod Touch lines. Clearly Retina is the one missing feature that's coming to iPad. All iPads.
To me, it makes more sense that Apple would wait until they can build these in bulk, and sell them at the same price point, than to introduce a new top tier $800-$900 iPad (assuming that's what it is) with a Retina Display. Will it have 3 tiers of memory as well and two flavors of 3G? With those options we'll easily see it surpassing the price of a Macbook or Macbook Air. Not quite sure a device that expensive will spur Holiday sales. If we lived in that reality, people would be receiving Macbook Airs like they were stocking stuffers. But Apple's Q1 numbers show us devices that expensive don't move in the numbers that iPods, (subsidised) iPhones, and iPads do.
The only way this makes sense is if this "additional" September 2011 iPad, has other super features that warrant it's "special" release. An iPad Pro for example, with more memory, even more power, and Thunderbolt. Or if Apple decides to move the iPad introductions to Q1 and do away iPod special events. If iPods are intro'd at this new event, it would be in passing.
New yearly lineup :
iOS event - late March / mid April
iPhone event - June
iPad event - September
iPod / AppleTV (quiet release) - September
coal
Sep 15, 04:49 PM
I just cannot imagine that they would hold an event (of any magnitude) centered on the replacement of one processor for another with no other mentionable updates.
The iMac was held until the Showtime event and that was a very important announcement.
Although, I can't tell if I'm mistaking my own hopes for a major update for logical reasoning.
The iMac was held until the Showtime event and that was a very important announcement.
Although, I can't tell if I'm mistaking my own hopes for a major update for logical reasoning.
Piggie
Apr 18, 02:59 PM
Can only be 1 reason, Apple are worried.
If they felt totally confident in their product then they would not feel any threat from others and need to try something like this on.
If they felt totally confident in their product then they would not feel any threat from others and need to try something like this on.
Glideslope
Mar 28, 10:57 AM
If there is no new iphone in June/July I am getting a Thunderbolt.
Buy it now. :apple:
Buy it now. :apple:
tstreete
Jan 6, 04:04 PM
Thanks for the info. I seem to have a bit of play in the part of the dock that rotates. Just holding the car kit in my hands there is play in this part of the mechanism so when I'm on the road its rattling all the time. You don't have this issue? Everything else seems to work so I'm hesitant to send it back as I might get one that's worse!
I've had mine since November, generally use it in the horizontal position, and haven't had problems with it rattling (and I've got a car with a not-very-smooth-ride). That would suggest that the mechanism is not always loose. I am nervous about it wearing loose over time, because it is surprisingly easy to move by hand, and seems kind of delicate.
I find the speakerphone fine when driving around town, but at freeway speeds my car's pretty loud, particularly with snow tires, so then I find phone calls hard to hear.
I've had mine since November, generally use it in the horizontal position, and haven't had problems with it rattling (and I've got a car with a not-very-smooth-ride). That would suggest that the mechanism is not always loose. I am nervous about it wearing loose over time, because it is surprisingly easy to move by hand, and seems kind of delicate.
I find the speakerphone fine when driving around town, but at freeway speeds my car's pretty loud, particularly with snow tires, so then I find phone calls hard to hear.
infidel69
Apr 23, 02:29 PM
I need:
8 Internal Bays.
More PCIe Slots.
Thunderbolt.
Keep Dual Optical Bays.
More Ram Slots.
Built in Fibre Channel (This is a stretch)
That should be a MacPro. What you guys want is that magic headless iMac. I want more, not less.
Working in Video I need the most horsepower possible. 32 Cores would be nice.
At home I can live with my iMac, but editing on it is a pain. A MiniMacPro might work there, but it will still cost 2k and people will bitch.
For work I can justify spending $8,000 on a high powered PRO machine.
Exacly, these are workstations if you want something small with limited expandability buy an imac.
8 Internal Bays.
More PCIe Slots.
Thunderbolt.
Keep Dual Optical Bays.
More Ram Slots.
Built in Fibre Channel (This is a stretch)
That should be a MacPro. What you guys want is that magic headless iMac. I want more, not less.
Working in Video I need the most horsepower possible. 32 Cores would be nice.
At home I can live with my iMac, but editing on it is a pain. A MiniMacPro might work there, but it will still cost 2k and people will bitch.
For work I can justify spending $8,000 on a high powered PRO machine.
Exacly, these are workstations if you want something small with limited expandability buy an imac.
SilianRail
Apr 21, 07:20 PM
Agreed. The Mac Pro case has been perfected over years and doesn't look at all dated. The more Apple has to pour R&D into a small new case with almost certain version 1 cooling issues, the more likely prices will continue to rise.It would save money with the need for less raw materials.
doubleusn
Mar 28, 09:45 AM
Maybe not at WWDC, but I don't see them waiting till Fall to put out new iPhone hardware, hold iOS5 till then, maybe, but not new hardware.
They risk losing people to Android, WebOS, etc... as the remaining iPhone3GS people all start coming off of contract, and nobody will go iPhone4 knowing 5 is just months away.
This waiting around also gives 3GS users a few months to check out other products (new Pre w/WebOS, etc). Apple does not want people looking around during that break time.
They risk losing people to Android, WebOS, etc... as the remaining iPhone3GS people all start coming off of contract, and nobody will go iPhone4 knowing 5 is just months away.
This waiting around also gives 3GS users a few months to check out other products (new Pre w/WebOS, etc). Apple does not want people looking around during that break time.
Multimedia
Sep 15, 10:24 PM
I can't see Blu-Ray at all.
If it were, I'd figure it'd be an option due to the cost of the drives. Sony offer a laptop in with and without forms and the "with" model costs an extra $1700... but right now I just don't think there's demand.
Based on that, it doesn't seem likely to me.
Then again, I can't see them making the case any thicker than the last-gen PowerBooks, either.
We'll find out soon enough.Internal Sony 5.25" ATAPI EIDE Blu-ray Drives Cost $750 At Fry's. So an internal mobile Blue-ray probably cost over $1,000. Plus I agree with all of the above. It's too soon. Blu-ray blank media is incredibly expensive - Prohibitively so - almost $1/GB - IE about $50 per 50GB and $25 per 25GB Blu-ray blank.
Conventional Single Sided DVD blanks are down to about 5�/GB. I'd say that's a fairly large MEDIA COST GAP that only time will reduce. Until then, we've got quite a wait until the professionals drive up demand to the point where prosumers can rationalize a higher price of <20�/GB or so - IE where the $1.50 price of 8.5GB Dual Layer DVDs is now - about $10 per 50GB and $5 per 25GB Blu-ray blank. Make sense? Or do any of you see it another way?
If it were, I'd figure it'd be an option due to the cost of the drives. Sony offer a laptop in with and without forms and the "with" model costs an extra $1700... but right now I just don't think there's demand.
Based on that, it doesn't seem likely to me.
Then again, I can't see them making the case any thicker than the last-gen PowerBooks, either.
We'll find out soon enough.Internal Sony 5.25" ATAPI EIDE Blu-ray Drives Cost $750 At Fry's. So an internal mobile Blue-ray probably cost over $1,000. Plus I agree with all of the above. It's too soon. Blu-ray blank media is incredibly expensive - Prohibitively so - almost $1/GB - IE about $50 per 50GB and $25 per 25GB Blu-ray blank.
Conventional Single Sided DVD blanks are down to about 5�/GB. I'd say that's a fairly large MEDIA COST GAP that only time will reduce. Until then, we've got quite a wait until the professionals drive up demand to the point where prosumers can rationalize a higher price of <20�/GB or so - IE where the $1.50 price of 8.5GB Dual Layer DVDs is now - about $10 per 50GB and $5 per 25GB Blu-ray blank. Make sense? Or do any of you see it another way?
Ommid
Apr 25, 08:08 AM
Bit harsh, but true.
Probably because there is no need for it in that range? Plus most Mac Pro users won't use Apple displays IMO
Probably because there is no need for it in that range? Plus most Mac Pro users won't use Apple displays IMO
0 comments:
Post a Comment