Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Just seen that one. Gets annoying after about 1 minute!

I want this! I want this!  

Fashionably over a barrel at least.....  

It will most likely get announced on Feb 9th.


What really sux most on the iPad is the reflective screen. Almost impossible to use outside (other then as a poor quality mirror). Of course Apple fans will disagree, but I look at the device from a users point and not as a collector and certainly not as piece of worship.


Another annoying thing, more general though, is iTunes. That I can't get Apps from other iTunes stores. I wanted to get the free Aldi-Süd App from iTunes Germany to keep me informed about discounts, but can't get it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally Posted By: Kraut_in_HongKong
Of course Apple fans will disagree, but I look at the device from a users point and not as a collector and certainly not as piece of worship.


Comments like this crack me up.

It's like the mirror opposite of the geek fan boy stance.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I see Apple seem to be enforcing this 30% charge on all things sold now.


If Amazon want to keep their app on the store, they will need to increase their prices to account for that 30% cut Apple want. Which means a 40%+ increase. And they need to offer as good as or better prices within the App. So they can't offer an Apple only price that includes this cash.


30% for everything? WTF? That just seem



With Apple's announcement yesterday of new App Store subscription offerings and policies requiring all content providers to offer at least the option of in-app subscriptions at the same prices as external options, questions have been raised about how providers will respond to the likelihood that significant numbers of customers will likely choose options that require them to hand over 30% of their revenue to Apple.


The Wall Street Journal explores possible antitrust issues, with experts noting that any such case would hinge on the definition of the market, as that would determine how dominant Apple's position is in it.

"My inclination is to be suspect" about Apple's new service, said Shubha Ghosh, an antitrust professor at the University of Wisconsin Law School. Two key questions in Mr. Ghosh's mind: Whether Apple owns enough of a dominant position in the market to keep competitors out, and whether it is exerting "anticompetitive pressures on price."


Experts note that publishers might be able to argue that tablet devices constitute the market for their offerings, and Apple's dominance in that market could subject it to antitrust investigation. But a broader market encompassing the entire App Store ecosystem and thus smartphones and tablets in their entirety would likely not raise red flags due to Apple's much smaller share of that larger market.

"Millions will be spent litigating how broad the market is," said Herbert Hovenkamp, an antitrust professor at the University of Iowa College of Law.


Mr. Hovenkamp said digital media is the most plausible market. He said he doubted that Apple, currently, has a sufficiently dominant position in that market to warrant antitrust scrutiny.


All eyes are of course also on the content providers themselves, who would have to raise prices by 43% in order to provide Apple with a 30% cut and still maintain their existing income, should all transactions shift to in-app subscriptions.


While many content providers have yet to respond publicly to Apple's announcement as they weigh their options, music streaming service Rhapsody spoke out yesterday, noting that it will be talking with other companies in its same position in "determining an appropriate legal and business response to this latest development."

Our philosophy is simple too - an Apple-imposed arrangement that requires us to pay 30 percent of our revenue to Apple, in addition to content fees that we pay to the music labels, publishers and artists, is economically untenable. The bottom line is we would not be able to offer our service through the iTunes store if subjected to Apple's 30 percent monthly fee vs. a typical 2.5 percent credit card fee.


Publishers of existing App Store applications have until June 30th to comply with Apple's new policies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Look! Look! Look!


Here's where the event will take place:




See how there are more blobs on the right hand side than the left hand side. That proves it will have a higher res screen.



Link to post
Share on other sites

Rumour has it that Steve Jobs is 'definitely considering' ( lol ) being at the launch.


Other rumours have him to appear on the iPad screen introducing Face Time. A bit like this:




The future is here, as predicted by Futurama.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Mr Jobs himself turned up.


Not retina display. doh


Does looks sexier, but not enough for an update.


Rumour has it that it still only has 256 of RAM. That would be wild, but if the thing moves sleek and fast enough then I suppose that's all that matters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You've got to hand it to Apple the way they do things.

Pretty much give minimal updates in terms of specs but wrap it all up into something that actually is something that will sell masses.

I suppose it just isn't all about 'raw specs' is it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Create New...