bmorris
Apr 10, 07:54 PM
Only specific Radio Shack's are selling them, and fast.
Most of them can take your number and call you when they are placing more orders.
They will call you and ask for you to either come to the store now and pay or pay at the store when the iPad comes in. If you pay in advance they will ship the iPad to your door. It would take 2-3 days for delivery, faster than Apple's website.
Most of them can take your number and call you when they are placing more orders.
They will call you and ask for you to either come to the store now and pay or pay at the store when the iPad comes in. If you pay in advance they will ship the iPad to your door. It would take 2-3 days for delivery, faster than Apple's website.
marksman
Apr 17, 05:32 PM
I'm confused. Are iPad 2s in short supply or not? If they cannot be found at multiple Apple stores, why is Apple broadening distribution to Toys R us?
As someone else mentioned it broadens their supply chain and availablity when they are able to fill the channels with product. The iPad2 is selling faster than anticipated and faster than they can make them. They likely had a contract from the get go to bring Toys R Us into the supply chain at this time long before the iPad 2 was launched. They expected more supply at that time and wanted to broaden their exposure. Since they are partnering with Toys R Us, they don't just say, "Ah tough luck. We are selling them too fast, so we know we agreed to have you be able to sell them, but whatcha going to do." That is not how you treat business partners.
So they open up the channels and let it go. It is not like a national retailer puts a new product on the shelf, especially one like this, with 3 days notice. It takes time for them to get them into their system and their own distribution channels. Not to mention advertising and promotion and the rest.
Broadening distribution -- whether new territories or new outlets in established territories -- usually follows a slow down in sales growth.
Exactly, but you have to plan ahead for such things. Apple figured by now they would have enough excess supply to fill those channels. Sales have been better than anticipated.
As someone else mentioned it broadens their supply chain and availablity when they are able to fill the channels with product. The iPad2 is selling faster than anticipated and faster than they can make them. They likely had a contract from the get go to bring Toys R Us into the supply chain at this time long before the iPad 2 was launched. They expected more supply at that time and wanted to broaden their exposure. Since they are partnering with Toys R Us, they don't just say, "Ah tough luck. We are selling them too fast, so we know we agreed to have you be able to sell them, but whatcha going to do." That is not how you treat business partners.
So they open up the channels and let it go. It is not like a national retailer puts a new product on the shelf, especially one like this, with 3 days notice. It takes time for them to get them into their system and their own distribution channels. Not to mention advertising and promotion and the rest.
Broadening distribution -- whether new territories or new outlets in established territories -- usually follows a slow down in sales growth.
Exactly, but you have to plan ahead for such things. Apple figured by now they would have enough excess supply to fill those channels. Sales have been better than anticipated.
thworple
Aug 24, 02:38 PM
Thanks to all you guys who have put up the relevant info. Couldn't log onto the aforementioned Apple support site, so you've been very helpful.
Fortunately I haven't been affected, but I do offer the best of luck to those that are. Not in the sense that you might catch fire, just in the waiting game sense!;)
Fortunately I haven't been affected, but I do offer the best of luck to those that are. Not in the sense that you might catch fire, just in the waiting game sense!;)
iMeowbot
Nov 27, 10:13 AM
Lets hope they remaster them - the stereo effects on the original versions can be really painful on a pair of headphones.
Apple Corps did say (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=aFXMHi1sm_p8&refer=us) that the Beatles tracks would be cleaned up before download releases were made.
The cheesy stereo on some of the early tracks may seem odd to current-day listeners, but on the other hand, mashup hobbyists must love it :)
Apple Corps did say (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=aFXMHi1sm_p8&refer=us) that the Beatles tracks would be cleaned up before download releases were made.
The cheesy stereo on some of the early tracks may seem odd to current-day listeners, but on the other hand, mashup hobbyists must love it :)
ee99ee
Sep 12, 01:56 PM
Time to give it the ultimate seemless playback test, Pink Floyd "Dark Side Of The Moon":)
Make sure you're smokin' a doobie while you're at it... haha :P
-Chris
Make sure you're smokin' a doobie while you're at it... haha :P
-Chris
acslater017
May 4, 10:50 PM
Why are you guys all against 3D? I think its great, BUT I think its a given that you will be able to turn off the 3D.. And if that is the case then there is no problem really :P
I reaaally don't think Apple will implement this. It goes against everything they stand for.
-Apple likes ergonomic, comfortable experiences. 3D gives people headaches
-Apple hates styluses and other mandatory accessories. In most implementations of 3D, you have to wear glasses
-Apple is moving toward high-resolution displays. In many implementations, 3D halves the effective resolution
-Apple is all about content - high quality software, UI, etc. 3D encourages gimmicks
-Apple's mobiles have standard-setting battery life. 3D will likely drain batteries - by doubling the rendering requirement, increasing the required backlighting, or by keeping a camera active to track your head.
"3D" screams of unnecessary spec. There are so many drawbacks and so few benefits. If Apple has yet to implement Blu-ray, it will definitely be awhile before we see 3D.
I reaaally don't think Apple will implement this. It goes against everything they stand for.
-Apple likes ergonomic, comfortable experiences. 3D gives people headaches
-Apple hates styluses and other mandatory accessories. In most implementations of 3D, you have to wear glasses
-Apple is moving toward high-resolution displays. In many implementations, 3D halves the effective resolution
-Apple is all about content - high quality software, UI, etc. 3D encourages gimmicks
-Apple's mobiles have standard-setting battery life. 3D will likely drain batteries - by doubling the rendering requirement, increasing the required backlighting, or by keeping a camera active to track your head.
"3D" screams of unnecessary spec. There are so many drawbacks and so few benefits. If Apple has yet to implement Blu-ray, it will definitely be awhile before we see 3D.
twoodcc
Aug 3, 02:14 PM
i can't wait!! all this excitement is killing me!!!!
let's just hope something is true at least
let's just hope something is true at least
macridah
Sep 22, 01:19 PM
Is wal-mart doing a microsoft ...
What happened to healthy competition? Boo for wal-mart ... if this is true.
What happened to healthy competition? Boo for wal-mart ... if this is true.
willeekinz
Aug 24, 01:32 PM
FINALLY got through on the phone to APPLECARE and talked to Brett after being on hold for 25 minutes, he said the site and their phone lines are getting hit HARD right now, and that the site will be back up in one hour.
So until then lets be patient and think about those BRAND NEW BATTERIES we'll be getting at Sony's expense (of course, keep a fire extinguisher and a bottle of vodka in your backpack just in case.)
Take Care macheads :)
So until then lets be patient and think about those BRAND NEW BATTERIES we'll be getting at Sony's expense (of course, keep a fire extinguisher and a bottle of vodka in your backpack just in case.)
Take Care macheads :)
MatthewConnelly
Nov 8, 06:17 AM
US store is down!
faroZ06
May 4, 11:10 PM
What? Blu Ray failed? When?:rolleyes:
Are you kidding? Netflix destroyed it with streaming. Disney and Sony aren't even advertising for it anymore. The Blu Ray players are being sold dirt cheap at clearance sales because it's a dying/dead format. I haven't heard a word about it on TV ads to further seal the deal.
And I never liked it anyway, the 25 GB disc wasn't filled all the way because of the stupidly lossy compression, and it was expensive. We unplugged our Blu Ray player and replaced it with a TiVo box with Netflix streaming, which happens to be a lot cheaper than Blu Ray and much easier.
And Apple never used it :)
Are you kidding? Netflix destroyed it with streaming. Disney and Sony aren't even advertising for it anymore. The Blu Ray players are being sold dirt cheap at clearance sales because it's a dying/dead format. I haven't heard a word about it on TV ads to further seal the deal.
And I never liked it anyway, the 25 GB disc wasn't filled all the way because of the stupidly lossy compression, and it was expensive. We unplugged our Blu Ray player and replaced it with a TiVo box with Netflix streaming, which happens to be a lot cheaper than Blu Ray and much easier.
And Apple never used it :)
Mammoth
Oct 15, 05:15 PM
Yes, that is a very nerdy/geeky thing to do. "Zune"-ing music wirelessly is only something geeks can come up with, whereas Steve's suggestion of sharing earbuds is so much cooler and, dare I say it, sexually suggestive! ;)
As much as I would like that feature for file transfer, it is too geeky and I'm sure it will be too cumbersome for your average consumer to use.
As much as I would like that feature for file transfer, it is too geeky and I'm sure it will be too cumbersome for your average consumer to use.
uruseiranma
Apr 17, 07:42 PM
It's interesting that in a previous post, an Apple Store employee mentions the Best Buy ads having been set in place before the Japan Earthquake.
The Target I stopped at on my way to my Flash Animation course last Tuesday had a note in the iPad case saying that stock was delayed due to the Earthquake as well.
The Target I stopped at on my way to my Flash Animation course last Tuesday had a note in the iPad case saying that stock was delayed due to the Earthquake as well.
SPEEDwithJJ
Oct 10, 10:56 PM
This is the small headquarters of Japan-Saikou.com :)
IMHO, it looks good. :) Nice, neat, & clean! :)
IMHO, it looks good. :) Nice, neat, & clean! :)
SactoGuy18
Mar 25, 09:43 PM
650 MB download to update my 4G iPod touch.
607 MB download to update my iPad 2.
THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE, in my humble opinion. http://www.en.kolobok.us/smiles/standart/negative.gif
Why can't Apple design their updates so you no longer need to essentially download the whole iOS code? Even Microsoft in their Service Packs for Windows XP/Vista/7 "polls" the system to determine the actual Service Pack download size, so in many cases the download is actually quite small. Of course, I'd like to see Apple allow for incremental updates like how Google does it with the Chrome web browser--done in the background and unobtrusively.
607 MB download to update my iPad 2.
THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE, in my humble opinion. http://www.en.kolobok.us/smiles/standart/negative.gif
Why can't Apple design their updates so you no longer need to essentially download the whole iOS code? Even Microsoft in their Service Packs for Windows XP/Vista/7 "polls" the system to determine the actual Service Pack download size, so in many cases the download is actually quite small. Of course, I'd like to see Apple allow for incremental updates like how Google does it with the Chrome web browser--done in the background and unobtrusively.
�algiris
May 5, 01:23 AM
OP was hoping to be freed from being tied to one iTunes,
That won't happen we all know that.
That won't happen we all know that.
Tommyg117
Aug 2, 09:25 PM
bad news. I better tell my girlfriend. How many macbooks does this affect? All of them?
Mr. F
Mar 29, 12:42 PM
They had only one which they were trying to see if the customer was going to pick up (bought at another store), but while the clerk was calling to check on it's status they did say that i'd have to by an accessory and apple care if it became available.
These guys are dirty. I didn't feel all that good about going there to get one anyhow, I've never been a fan of their over priced stuff. This was the icing on the cake.
This blatant greed really turns me off, I wont be back ... for one of these or anything else.
These guys are dirty. I didn't feel all that good about going there to get one anyhow, I've never been a fan of their over priced stuff. This was the icing on the cake.
This blatant greed really turns me off, I wont be back ... for one of these or anything else.
rlreif
Nov 27, 07:09 PM
idiots... could have had my moey years ago... but now its too late!!! pirated it a long time ago... greed loses
mmmcheese
Sep 12, 03:12 PM
:confused: Here's a possibly dumb question, but per Apple's support site, the following video play back specs are given for iPod (5G) playback:
iPod can play the following video formats:
H.264
File formats: .m4v, .mp4, and .mov
Video: Up to 768 kbits/sec, 320 x 240, 30 frames per second (fps), Baseline Profile up to Level 1.3.
Audio: AAC-LC up to 160 kbits/sec, 48 Khz, and stereo audio.
MPEG-4
File formats: .m4v, .mp4, and .mov
Video: Up to 2.5 Mbits/sec, 480 x 480, 30 fps, Simple Profile.
Audio: AAC-LC up to 160 kbits/sec, 48 Khz, stereo audio.
How will the new, higher resolution video play back on the current iPods? Do they currently have higher resolution capability that Apple was just holding back through software?:confused:
The MPEG4 standard (which includes h.264) is scalable, so lower resolution devices will only decode to the lower resolution and not spend the extra time/power to decode to full resolution. There's a lot of complex details, but that's the quick gist of it.
iPod can play the following video formats:
H.264
File formats: .m4v, .mp4, and .mov
Video: Up to 768 kbits/sec, 320 x 240, 30 frames per second (fps), Baseline Profile up to Level 1.3.
Audio: AAC-LC up to 160 kbits/sec, 48 Khz, and stereo audio.
MPEG-4
File formats: .m4v, .mp4, and .mov
Video: Up to 2.5 Mbits/sec, 480 x 480, 30 fps, Simple Profile.
Audio: AAC-LC up to 160 kbits/sec, 48 Khz, stereo audio.
How will the new, higher resolution video play back on the current iPods? Do they currently have higher resolution capability that Apple was just holding back through software?:confused:
The MPEG4 standard (which includes h.264) is scalable, so lower resolution devices will only decode to the lower resolution and not spend the extra time/power to decode to full resolution. There's a lot of complex details, but that's the quick gist of it.
wvuwhat
Oct 25, 10:43 PM
Wow nice! That's a slick screen clock you have. What's it called?
I really hope you're being funny. You're a much more active member than I, but it's "fliquo.". Someone even has a sig stating something like, "the screensaver is fliquo, the answer is always fliquo."
I really hope you're being funny. You're a much more active member than I, but it's "fliquo.". Someone even has a sig stating something like, "the screensaver is fliquo, the answer is always fliquo."
jodders
Sep 6, 10:05 AM
This is fantastic, fantastic news! It is so so so cool, and its really made my day. I have been waiting for the imac update and glad that it came around this time. I have been waiting since March and it has been agonising.
Congratulations for those who have been waiting for one. The time has come. Im sure all apple revisions will come in due course,perhaps in time for leopard when it comes out.
Bring on the ipods next week.
Macrumours have been spot on!
Congratulations for those who have been waiting for one. The time has come. Im sure all apple revisions will come in due course,perhaps in time for leopard when it comes out.
Bring on the ipods next week.
Macrumours have been spot on!
gkarris
Apr 4, 01:59 PM
Already make them?
http://www.amazon.com/Philosophy-Dummies-Tom-Morris/dp/0764551531/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1301943545&sr=8-1
LOL....
http://www.amazon.com/Philosophy-Dummies-Tom-Morris/dp/0764551531/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1301943545&sr=8-1
LOL....
Sydde
Apr 11, 03:31 PM
For those that do not believe in a higher power or absolute truth, man, in and of himself, is the highest order of existence/being/evolution, etc.. etc.
Here, you are developing a misconception based on a religious perspective. Some unbelievers may see the human race as the "highest order", but this mostly arises from exposure to religious types who expound man as the last step shy of god (or perhaps just under the angelic host or whatever). Take theology away and humans are just one more species of animal. I think a great many unbelievers view humans as part of nature, not at the top of it, a "quintessence of dust" rather than a "paragon of animals".
Man's capacity for altruism, self sacrifice, and compassion are seen as proof of his independence from God. "See what we can accomplish on our own... we don't need God." In this manner all of man's action is an act of self glorification and self reliance.
"... we don't need God" is a statement that makes no sense. I can understand how you see it, that not accepting the existence of the deity represents a failure of character, because to you its existence and presence is obvious, self-evident and overpowering. Yet, without that view, "self glorification" is not meaningful, because we do not consider the "glorification of god" to have any relevance to what we do. We do what needs or wants to be done and we look at the world from ground-level, not through the lens of "cloud-dwellers". It is what it is.
However, on a spiritual level, I must recognize that scripture teaches us that our "good deeds" are worthless if our heart is not right with God...The Bible does not teach a theology of works. It's not about what you do, it's about your relationship with Christ.
Again, as I always say, this is ultimately an issue of faith and I completely understand that it can be hard to comprehend for some. And it is a subtle nuance to understand the difference between doing something because you adhere to a set of principles (right vs. wrong) and doing it because it is an outflow of your relationship with God.
No, I have been there, and I clearly understand, by remembering what it was like. I can honestly say, from experience, that what you are describing is indistinguishable from being delusional.
I'm very familiar with projection. I can assure you that is not what's happening here. I'm merely presenting what God has communicated to us through the Bible. Could it be that your skepticism and cynicism is a projection of something within you? Why don't you come over he and lie on this couch and tell me about your mother... ;)
I am not skeptical, that implies doubt. Road apples have a distinct smell, my lack of belief is the opposite of a shortcoming. My "cynicism" is based on observation and experience. I know what to expect from most religious people, as far as the context of their theology pertains to me or my interactions with them. These are not personal issues that require any kind of therapy.
This is why we have a problem. Both of us think the other's view is faulty. The unbeliever, however, would be ok with leaving the believer alone, except, in too many cases, the believer feels a need (or is directed by doctrine) to change the unbeliever's mind.
Well, first of all, "clerics" are not required for us to interpret scripture or have a relationship with God... Scripture stands alone as authoritative regardless of how I "feel" about it or what I "want" it to say. If I'm seeking to find an "exception" in scripture to justify my own position then my heart is not in the right place.
What you see in the text is what you believe to be there. What you have been taught is there. Yet, other sects, variants and opportunists find alternate meanings that serve their needs. This is history, past and present, for many centuries and over many belief sets (not just christian) and some of it has been extraordinarily ugly.
Unbelief, by contrast, does not get employed for justifying anything. How can it? There is no canon to point to, no heartfelt agnostic tenets to stir up, no sacred things to defend.
Here, you are developing a misconception based on a religious perspective. Some unbelievers may see the human race as the "highest order", but this mostly arises from exposure to religious types who expound man as the last step shy of god (or perhaps just under the angelic host or whatever). Take theology away and humans are just one more species of animal. I think a great many unbelievers view humans as part of nature, not at the top of it, a "quintessence of dust" rather than a "paragon of animals".
Man's capacity for altruism, self sacrifice, and compassion are seen as proof of his independence from God. "See what we can accomplish on our own... we don't need God." In this manner all of man's action is an act of self glorification and self reliance.
"... we don't need God" is a statement that makes no sense. I can understand how you see it, that not accepting the existence of the deity represents a failure of character, because to you its existence and presence is obvious, self-evident and overpowering. Yet, without that view, "self glorification" is not meaningful, because we do not consider the "glorification of god" to have any relevance to what we do. We do what needs or wants to be done and we look at the world from ground-level, not through the lens of "cloud-dwellers". It is what it is.
However, on a spiritual level, I must recognize that scripture teaches us that our "good deeds" are worthless if our heart is not right with God...The Bible does not teach a theology of works. It's not about what you do, it's about your relationship with Christ.
Again, as I always say, this is ultimately an issue of faith and I completely understand that it can be hard to comprehend for some. And it is a subtle nuance to understand the difference between doing something because you adhere to a set of principles (right vs. wrong) and doing it because it is an outflow of your relationship with God.
No, I have been there, and I clearly understand, by remembering what it was like. I can honestly say, from experience, that what you are describing is indistinguishable from being delusional.
I'm very familiar with projection. I can assure you that is not what's happening here. I'm merely presenting what God has communicated to us through the Bible. Could it be that your skepticism and cynicism is a projection of something within you? Why don't you come over he and lie on this couch and tell me about your mother... ;)
I am not skeptical, that implies doubt. Road apples have a distinct smell, my lack of belief is the opposite of a shortcoming. My "cynicism" is based on observation and experience. I know what to expect from most religious people, as far as the context of their theology pertains to me or my interactions with them. These are not personal issues that require any kind of therapy.
This is why we have a problem. Both of us think the other's view is faulty. The unbeliever, however, would be ok with leaving the believer alone, except, in too many cases, the believer feels a need (or is directed by doctrine) to change the unbeliever's mind.
Well, first of all, "clerics" are not required for us to interpret scripture or have a relationship with God... Scripture stands alone as authoritative regardless of how I "feel" about it or what I "want" it to say. If I'm seeking to find an "exception" in scripture to justify my own position then my heart is not in the right place.
What you see in the text is what you believe to be there. What you have been taught is there. Yet, other sects, variants and opportunists find alternate meanings that serve their needs. This is history, past and present, for many centuries and over many belief sets (not just christian) and some of it has been extraordinarily ugly.
Unbelief, by contrast, does not get employed for justifying anything. How can it? There is no canon to point to, no heartfelt agnostic tenets to stir up, no sacred things to defend.
Niciun comentariu:
Trimiteți un comentariu