# Apple WWDC Conference (formerly iCloud)



## klang (Oct 14, 2003)

Apple announced yesterday the Lion upgrade will be $29.99, available in July. I will upgrade our systems at some point but I don't see much compelling to me in Lion.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

klang said:


> Apple announced yesterday the Lion upgrade will be $29.99, available in July. I will upgrade out systems at some point but I don't see much compelling to me in Lion.


Apparently it's $29 for the whole household, so no need to buy 5-user "value packs" like the previous upgrade. Makes me wonder what Microsoft is going to charge for Win 8 upgrades.


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

"Steve" said:


> Apparently it's $29 for the whole household, ...... Makes me wonder what Microsoft is going to charge for Win 8 upgrades.


So was Snow Leopard when it came right down to it. Buy it and there was no way to track how many computers you installed it on.

Apple can do this because they make money selling hardware as well. I figure there are lots of people waiting to purchase hardware with Lion preinstalled. So they don't really need to stick it to the customer with high upgrade fees.


----------



## klang (Oct 14, 2003)

Steve said:


> Apparently it's $29 for the whole household, so no need to buy 5-user "value packs" like the previous upgrade. Makes me wonder what Microsoft is going to charge for Win 8 upgrades.


Is it actually household? I thought it was tied to the Apple Id since it comes from the app store.

Can't remember for sure how many copies of Snow Leopard I bought but I think it was one per machine.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Herdfan said:


> So was Snow Leopard when it came right down to it. Buy it and there was no way to track how many computers you installed it on.


Didn't know that. There was _technically _a "family pack" 5-user version of Snow Leopard available for $199, tho.

I guess Apple didn't sell too many of those, because they're apparently not even attempting to ask folks to abide by an "honor system" this time around.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

klang said:


> Is it actually household?


That's what Betanews is reporting:



> In a startling price cut, Lion will cost simply $29.99. Pay once and download for all your personal Macs. However, those Mac users running older OS X versions will need to upgrade to Snow Leopard first, making their upgrade cost about $59 -- and that's still considerable savings.


----------



## klang (Oct 14, 2003)

What I read yesterday was this.



> The download will let you install Lion on all Macs authorized with your Apple ID.


Makes sense if they are requiring you to use the app store which is tied into your Apple ID.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

klang said:


> What I read yesterday was this.
> 
> Makes sense if they are requiring you to use the app store which is tied into your Apple ID.


Their new philosophy appears to be that anything you buy once on iTunes or the App store is usable on all applicable devices registered to your account.


----------



## Lucavex (Apr 26, 2011)

I love it when Apple/Microsoft charge folks for a software patch.


----------



## Greg Alsobrook (Apr 2, 2007)

Lucavex said:


> I love it when Apple/Microsoft charge folks for a software patch.


This isn't a "patch". It's an updated operating system. New features, new design, etc.


----------



## klang (Oct 14, 2003)

Steve said:


> Their new philosophy appears to be that anything you buy once on iTunes or the App store is usable on all applicable devices registered to your account.


Yep, I have bought several items from the app store from my iMac, when I open up the app store from my MacBook, using my Apple ID, those items are shown as already purchased and ready to install. My wife has her own Apple ID so we will pay twice for Lion.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

klang said:


> My wife has her own Apple ID so we will pay twice for Lion.


Not being a Mac owner, I wonder, can't you just log onto your account from her PC and see your purchased items for re-download?


----------



## klang (Oct 14, 2003)

Steve said:


> Not being a Mac owner, I wonder, can't you just log onto your account from her PC and see your purchased items for re-download?


Not really sure. There is a limit of 5 authorized computers per Apple ID that would come into play. It might be possible to go back and forth but I don't know if the software or other protected content (songs for instance) would remain authorized if you switched back. I suspect not.

For me it's not worth trying to game the system for the $ involved.


----------



## Lucavex (Apr 26, 2011)

Greg Alsobrook said:


> This isn't a "patch". It's an updated operating system. New features, new design, etc.


Isn't an update a patch? Granted, MS charges a LOT more for their updates. I don't consider anything beyond XP to be a new OS. And before that, everything beyond DOS was just a graphical and feature patch for DOS. The only reason I call XP a new OS is because that's the OS that finally didn't run FROM DOS.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

Lucavex said:


> Isn't an update a patch? Granted, MS charges a LOT more for their updates. I don't consider anything beyond XP to be a new OS. And before that, everything beyond DOS was just a graphical and feature patch for DOS. The only reason I call XP a new OS is because that's the OS that finally didn't run FROM DOS.


I use the term "update" to be basically a patch. With Apple, they have all been free, and very easy to install for 7-8 years now. An "upgrade", though, is a paid for new OS. How new? No, not "all new" as our TV content providers will say, but includes major new features, as well as lots of minor ones.

You can, of course, make your own definitions, but above works for me.


----------



## RasputinAXP (Jan 23, 2008)

Lucavex said:


> Isn't an update a patch? Granted, MS charges a LOT more for their updates. I don't consider anything beyond XP to be a new OS. And before that, everything beyond DOS was just a graphical and feature patch for DOS. The only reason I call XP a new OS is because that's the OS that finally didn't run FROM DOS.


No.

Win95 was the first integrated no-longer-DOS OS. Win 98 was an update to 95 (thus the versioning from 4.0 to 4.1).

XP was 5.0 and a merge of the home OS into the NT family; new OS as it's a different kernel than 9x.

You can make somewhat of an argument that Vista and 7 are 'updates' to XP, but there were a lot of changes from XP to Vista, too.


----------



## SPACEMAKER (Dec 11, 2007)

So I've been reading about this iCloud stuff but I don't really understand it all that well.

My iTunes library is currently 165GB and all but about 1% is in Apple lossless format.

Will iCloud be something I will be able to use?


----------



## SPACEMAKER (Dec 11, 2007)

Nevermind. It appears that the bit rate will be capped at 256. Not going to work for me.

Linky


----------



## Kevin F (May 9, 2010)

Icloud is more than for music though. It will be replacing MobileMe for email, calendar, photos, and documents. And it's free. In your posts. You were referring to iTunes Match. A $25/year service. I can't wait for iOS 5, icloud and Mac os x 10.7 Lion. I've heard it purrs like a kitten 

Kevin


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

The nice thing is that you don't have to upload ripped CDs, it will take it directly from Apple's collection.

Parts of iCloud is already live, you can see any apps you've bought that aren't on your device. I haven't figured out how to remove it from the list though. I also redownloaded some songs I'd bought that were for some reason not in my library.

One thing to keep in mind, XP users need not apply.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

> It will be replacing MobileMe for email, calendar, photos, and documents.


Hmmm, lemme see, how many big companies have been hacked or otherwise compromised recently? Sony, Google, various defense contractors, major network security companies, FBI affiliates, ...................... Seems like there's a new victim nearly every day.

Yet people want to store their personal stuff 'out there'.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

As one article of many notes:


> If you want all the benefits of iTunes in the Cloud for music you haven't purchased from iTunes, iTunes Match is the perfect solution. It lets you store your entire collection, including music you've ripped from CDs or purchased somewhere other than iTunes. For just $24.99 a year.
> 
> Here's how it works: iTunes determines which songs in your collection are available in the iTunes Store. Any music with a match is automatically added to your iCloud library for you to listen to anytime, on any device. Since there are more than 18 million songs in the iTunes Store, most of your music is probably already in iCloud. All you have to upload is what iTunes can't match. Which is much faster than starting from scratch.
> 
> As I wrote a couple of weeks ago when the first rumors of this feature were circulating, this is potentially rather important. That's because iTunes Match doesn't seem to care how you obtained those non-iTunes tracks, and it will happily include those obtained through ripping CDs or even piracy. Since Apple will presumably be paying the recording companies for every track that it syncs for you in this way, this means that the latter will receive some remuneration for unauthorized copies of music tracks - something that has not been possible before.


This could be very interesting. My wife has near 50,000 tracks, all legally purchased, many in vinyl dating before ...well... before. So we'll be able to easily reach the limit of 20,000 songs. So what are they going to pay? A penny a piece or $200 in our case?

And of course, it is the perfect solution to end up in a hassle with the labels over old CD's that we can't find and can't prove they were purchased 23 years ago.

But if it's ok with the music companies, why would we care if some hacker can download all 20,000 for free? We'll still have them on my wife's computer and an external hard drive. Only the labels will be victims.

(Just in case it isn't clear, I think this whole idea is truly dumb, on a par with exposing your life on Facebook. But what do I know? Facebook hit 500,000,000 subscribers worldwide last year and at least half are sharing personal health, financial, and location "now" information. :nono2: )


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

RSA finally comes clean: SecurID is compromised

iTunes hacked!

73 Percent of Organizations Have Been Hacked At Least Once In The Last 24 Months

Nintendo Latest Victim of LulzSec Hacker Group‎


----------



## SPACEMAKER (Dec 11, 2007)

Yeah, I think I'll just stay out of the clouds and keep my stuff on my own personal hardware.


----------



## klang (Oct 14, 2003)

I have no interest in the music and photo aspects of iCloud. I do use MobileMe to sync some things between my Macs, iPhone and iPad and it works fine. As long as that process continues to work in iCloud I will be pleased. I do not have anything in the MobileMe cloud that I would worry about being hacked.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Now, if you could encrypt everything before it left your system, that would pretty much solve that issue.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

klang said:


> I have no interest in the music and photo aspects of iCloud. I do use MobileMe to sync some things between my Macs, iPhone and iPad and it works fine. As long as that process continues to work in iCloud I will be pleased. I do not have anything in the MobileMe cloud that I would worry about being hacked.


Wouldn't a contact database be information that should have more privacy concerns than a music database?

As always, it boils down go convenience vs. security. Most people will opt for the convenience. Hopefully Apple maintains the security.


----------



## klang (Oct 14, 2003)

Doug Brott said:


> Wouldn't a contact database be information that should have more privacy concerns than a music database?
> 
> As always, it boils down go convenience vs. security. Most people will opt for the convenience. Hopefully Apple maintains the security.


I think it is likely a bigger risk just leaving the house and potentially losing or misplacing my phone. 

I assume, given all the stuff going on these days, they are going to have to give the user the option to encrypt some of this stuff. The option is already there to encrypt backups in iTunes.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

Don't get me wrong .. I'll be using the cloud. IMHO, the benefits far out weigh the risks. It's not like I'm putting my entire personal record up there.


----------



## dmspen (Dec 1, 2006)

Having a cloud bit of storage is nice, but I would rather triple the amount of direct storage on my device. I think we'll see increased data usage on iphones (more cost with AT&T and Verizon), more internet usage at home (ISPs and data cap issues?). 

SO I get a whole 5gb... I currently have almost 10gb of music on my iphone - more than I can listen to in a week or two. Why do I need it to go to the cloud?

The true value of th ecloud is not music, but keeping all your devices syn'ed with things like calendar data.


----------



## klang (Oct 14, 2003)

dmspen said:


> SO I get a whole 5gb... I currently have almost 10gb of music on my iphone - more than I can listen to in a week or two. Why do I need it to go to the cloud?


The music isn't really going to the cloud unless Apple doesn't have it in the store already. All that will store in your piece of the cloud is a pointer to the master copy of the song. That is my understanding anyway.


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

dmspen said:


> SO I get a whole 5gb... I currently have almost 10gb of music on my iphone - more than I can listen to in a week or two. Why do I need it to go to the cloud?
> 
> The true value of th ecloud is not music, but keeping all your devices syn'ed with things like calendar data.


I think that many aspects of this cloud thing are misunderstood. Your music is not going to be stored on the cloud. A database of your music is going to be stored on the cloud. If you are like me, 90% of my music in iTunes was purchased from iTunes and Apple already has that info, so its not like they are going to have any new info.

The music sync is cool. Played with it the other night. As it is now, my wife and I each have "our" music on our respective computers. If she buys a song on her iPhone that I also want, then she has to sync to her computer, then I have to copy that song over to my computer, import it into iTunes and then sync my phone. Kind of a PITA. But with the new iCloud, I can just D/L it straight to my iPhone. This is the same thing you could do with Apps from day 1, just now you can do it with music.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

dmspen said:


> Having a cloud bit of storage is nice, but I would rather triple the amount of direct storage on my device. I think we'll see increased data usage on iphones (more cost with AT&T and Verizon), more internet usage at home (ISPs and data cap issues?).
> 
> SO I get a whole 5gb... I currently have almost 10gb of music on my iphone - more than I can listen to in a week or two. Why do I need it to go to the cloud?
> 
> *The true value of th ecloud is not music, but keeping all your devices syn'ed with things like calendar data.*


I agree that sync'ing via the cloud is the killer app here.

That said, that 5GB per user should go a long way. As *klang* and *Herdfan *point out, and according to this report: _"Users are given up to 5GB of free storage for mail, documents and backup, and *all purchased music, apps, books and Photo Stream do not count towards the storage limit."*_ My assumption is any music you refresh by paying the $25 RIAA tax will be considered purchased as well.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Herdfan said:


> The music sync is cool. Played with it the other night. As it is now, my wife and I each have "our" music on our respective computers. If she buys a song on her iPhone that I also want, then she has to sync to her computer, then I have to copy that song over to my computer, import it into iTunes and then sync my phone. Kind of a PITA. But with the new iCloud, I can just D/L it straight to my iPhone. This is the same thing you could do with Apps from day 1, just now you can do it with music.


Sounds like you and Mrs. Herdfan share the *same* iTunes account.

Otherwise, this article may be of interest to multiple iTunes account households: *What happens when you download iTunes past purchases with a different account?*


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

Steve said:


> Sounds like you and Mrs. Herdfan share the *same* iTunes account.


We do.  And with our daughter. :eek2:

The one cool thing I like about this is I have not really added most of my old CD's since I didn't want them clogging up my iTunes Library. But by paying the $25 RIAA Tax (nice term BTW) I can wait until the Mini refresh and use my wife's old Mini as a server. Put all the music on it and it will be available anytime we want and on any device.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Finally, you can delete Exchange email without a data connection. That drove me nuts!


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Herdfan said:


> I think that many aspects of this cloud thing are misunderstood. Your music is not going to be stored on the cloud. A database of your music is going to be stored on the cloud. If you are like me, 90% of my music in iTunes was purchased from iTunes and Apple already has that info, so its not like they are going to have any new info.


That's true about the Apple "expanded streaming service."

While Amazon and Google are measuring your space available in GB, Apple will be storing a database file full of information about your music collection that if properly designed could be measured in kb's. Essentially Apple is creating off your computer's hard drives a more convenient playlist service like Pandora, not really a cloud storage system for music like the other two.

What you will be doing with Apple is allowing them to create and save the map for a pathway directly into your music files, which will be associated with your cloud database. And, as noted here:


> While it's not widely known, MP3 and other music files often contain personal information.... TechCrunch published an article last year quoting a "music-industry insider" made clear that the encoding of such metadata was a direct result of pressure from certain record labels, which "have aspirations to use this hidden data to control future access to music."
> 
> So will Apple be gathering such "metadata" when users who buy in to the cloud scheme allow the company to scan their hard drives, looking at all the music they bought?....
> 
> Metadata ownership information about users' music collections would be mighty interesting to copyright owners, even if they didn't have any interest in filing a lawsuit over it. Imagine the sort of "See! We told you so!" we'll be hearing if content owners are able to establish, for instance, that a high proportion of music files sent to the cloud were transferred illegally-in other words, that they have a username or email embedded in them that's different than the cloud customer.


IMHO Steve Jobs has absolutely no sympathy for, and an aggressive attitude towards, folks who don't pay for something. In fact, his recognition of your rights is associated with you making a payment to his company. His instinctive businessman loyalty lies totally with the media companies.

If as you say "90% of my music in iTunes was purchased from iTunes" and you choose to use this service, you are risking nearly nothing.

On the other hand, of our nearly 50,000 tracks, maybe

2% are WMA downloads converted to MP3's purchased from defunct services like MusicMatch (which became part of the defunct Yahoo Music);
1% tracks are m4a downloads converted to MP3's purchased from iTunes;
3% are MP3 downloads purchased from Amazon; and
94% that are ripped from purchased CD's and old purchased vinyl.
Am I paranoid? Maybe, but that doesn't mean I have no reason. For instance, MusicMatch (founded in 1997 with funding from the likes of Intel Capital) offered the Musicmatch Music Store ([strike]destroyed[/strike] acquired by Yahoo in 2004) with more than 800,000 tracks. Yahoo tossed the purchaser rights records.

I've been using "the cloud" for years without knowing it when I store a few encrypted files on various ISP servers because they give us free space and I needed an alternative backup location for critical information I already backed up on a physical external hard drive, CD, or DVD.

On the other hand, I'm puzzled over the enthusiasm people have for turning over huge amounts of data to private companies. Many of these people distrust government but seem to have few trust concerns about private enterprises which are, by virtue of definition, only interested in maintaining your account so long as they are actively making money off you and your information.


----------



## klang (Oct 14, 2003)

phrelin said:


> Am I paranoid?


Probably.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

> On the other hand, I'm puzzled over the enthusiasm people have for turning over huge amounts of data to private companies.


Some people CHOOSE to be victims.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

SayWhat? said:


> Some people CHOOSE to be victims.


But is being a victim those USING the cloud or those PARANOID of the cloud? That's the real question.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

I feel the same way about sharing private data. Sharing my iTunes playlist... I'm not so worried.


----------



## pfueri (Jan 22, 2007)

klang said:


> Apple announced yesterday the Lion upgrade will be $29.99, available in July. I will upgrade our systems at some point but I don't see much compelling to me in Lion.


Apple is great ! Unlike Microsoft crap ! They over charge for windows they skin you for multi. Versions anywhere from $100 to $300 per pc ! Always has problems . Microsoft have always been greedy ! Apple and Steve Jobs come up with great ideas , hardware and software . Everything they make is first class and is well worth the price ! Like Lion only $29.99 for all your computers not just one ! And icloud for free ! It's a great time to have Apple products ! Microsoft has turned into a joke the don't
come up with anything on there own . The only thing is the kinect ! Big deal !


----------



## Yoda-DBSguy (Nov 4, 2006)

pfueri said:


> Apple is great ! Unlike Microsoft crap ! They over charge for windows they skin you for multi. Versions anywhere from $100 to $300 per pc ! Always has problems . Microsoft have always been greedy ! Apple and Steve Jobs come up with great ideas , hardware and software . Everything they make is first class and is well worth the price ! Like Lion only $29.99 for all your computers not just one ! And icloud for free ! It's a great time to have Apple products ! Microsoft has turned into a joke the don't
> come up with anything on there own . The only thing is the kinect ! Big deal !


Don't get me wrong, as I'm a huge apple fan myself with iphone(s) and ipad being held by everyone in my household; HOWEVER.......

Don't be so quick to kick microsoft when you want them to be down. They may change moe for OS(s) but they don't gouge you for hardware unlike Apple. You can't find a netbook or laptop from apple anywhere near the low price point you can for a PC version. Although Apple is a visionary for cosmetics; their hardware is the same (hard drive, video card, audio chipsets, etc.....)

To each his/her own.

As for you stating the Kenetic is the only thign microsoft has to offer; that simply is NOT true. Forget the failed mobile me from apple or the pending iCloud; what about what microsoft has offered with msn & hotmail for free for many many 'o year.

Can you find another company that offers a free game system (worth $200+) with the purchase of a $699 or above computer? Hell, wait a minute....Apple doesn't even sell a computer for less then 600 (the basic stripped out "mini" and they don't even consider giving you anything free (other then online "personal engraving").

Just FYI I mentioned I and my household use iPhones. They are great products which are super simply to operate; however the service track record leaves much to be desired. Lets use my personal phone experience. I started out with the origional iPhone (edge version) which ended up getting replaced 3 timed during the 1 year warranty for thoings like the batetry not holding a charge, pixels being out on the replacement unit, home button sticking, etc. then I moved to the iPhone 3G which I had replaced 7 times for simular problems.

The iPhone 4 has been swapped out 4 times thus far and it will be a year form it's release later this month. Low mic input, burnt out pixels, low volume, bad camera---all things considered they have a bad reputation for "refurbished" units which is what they replace warrantied items with.

I treat all my units with care. I have NEVER dropped dinged or scrapped any of my products. They all have zagg invisible shields installed on them as well as are in protective leather dockable cases. Looking back at years past I have had motorola phones that lasted longer then my willingness to stay with the carrier (5+ years at a time) without issue.

So in short; all companies have their failures NOT just microsoft. If you have any doubt, google Apple's Newton for starters....


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

Yoda-DBSguy said:


> ..the service track record leaves much to be desired. Lets use my personal phone experience. I started out with the origional iPhone (edge version) which ended up getting replaced 3 timed during the 1 year warranty for thoings like the batetry not holding a charge, pixels being out on the replacement unit, home button sticking, etc. then I moved to the iPhone 3G...replaced 7 times for simular problems.
> 
> The iPhone 4 has been swapped out 4 times thus far and it will be a year form it's release later this month. Low mic input, burnt out pixels, low volume, bad camera---all things considered they have a bad reputation for "refurbished" units which is what they replace warrantied items with....


Why do you put up with that...so much for the Apple _mystique_ of making superior products.

WWJD -- If Steve Jobs were not the Oracle of Apple and if he suffered the same experience with Apple products you just described above, what do you think he would do?

Apple gets a premium for their products, not because they are better, but because they know they can.


----------



## Lucavex (Apr 26, 2011)

Nick said:


> So much for the Apple _mystique_ of making superior products.
> 
> WWJD -- If Steve Jobs were not the Oracle of Apple and if he suffered the same experience with Apple products you just described above, what do you think he would do?
> 
> Apple gets a premium for their products, not because they are better, but because they know they can.


I'll be the last guy on the planet to ever own an apple device of any kind. They're just not right for me.

But I have to give credit where credit is due:

When apple does something right, it's a wild success. Equally due to the ingenious marketing of Apple, and to Apple's signature "It just works." ease of use and simplicity.

They also have a great way of sweeping their failures under the rug, or gussying them up to be more presentable. Hence iCloud. MobileMe was a failure almost universally, so they've transformed it into "iCloud". Catchy name, easy to use, and free for most users. What baffles me about that last part is the "free" thing. Jobs was never one to give something away where a decent nickel could be made. I don't understand his strategy, but perhaps he knows he's got to provide it free since Amazon has already done the same with their service.


----------



## Chris Blount (Jun 22, 2001)

Nick said:


> Why do you put up with that...so much for the Apple _mystique_ of making superior products.
> 
> WWJD -- If Steve Jobs were not the Oracle of Apple and if he suffered the same experience with Apple products you just described above, what do you think he would do?
> 
> Apple gets a premium for their products, not because they are better, but because they know they can.


I have owned all the iPhones and only had to replace one of them because of a screen issue. That sort of thing is an exception, not a rule.



Lucavex said:


> MobileMe was a failure almost universally, so they've transformed it into "iCloud".


MobileMe was not a failure, at least for me. It served me well for years. No complaints here. During the WWDC, Jobs admitted that it wasn't their finest hour with the launch of MobileMe, but I certainly wouldn't call it a failure.

Honestly guys, I really hate threads like this. Those who own Apple products end up sounding like fanboys (including myself) while those who have never owned them think they know more than they actually do. It's a lose-lose for everyone.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

pfueri said:


> Apple is great ! Unlike Microsoft crap ! They over charge for windows they skin you for multi. Versions anywhere from $100 to $300 per pc ! Always has problems . Microsoft have always been greedy ! Apple and Steve Jobs come up with great ideas , hardware and software . Everything they make is first class and is well worth the price ! Like Lion only $29.99 for all your computers not just one ! And icloud for free ! It's a great time to have Apple products ! Microsoft has turned into a joke the don't
> come up with anything on there own . The only thing is the kinect ! Big deal !


Apple doesn't necessarily come up with stuff on their own either. A lot of the biggest features in iOS5 aren't exactly revolutionary, and stuff that Android (and even Blackberry) already has.

As for price, personally, I think the MacBook Air is overpriced. Apple certainly does not have a perfect track record. Granted, the closest thing to a failure they've had recently is MobileMe, but in the past they've had the puck mouse, the Lisa, the G4 Cube, the Pippin, the 20th Anniversary Mac.

Personally, when I had my original Touch, I thought Apple was being greedy. The first Touch didn't include the Mail, Weather, or Stocks apps. That came out later, $20 I believe. Then 2.0 came out, was cheaper and included those. 3.0 was cheaper still I believe. Now, they finally don't charge but that was very annoying, especially at the beginning when you'd pay $10-$20.

I think part of Microsoft's "Problem" (it also is a big source of revenue) is all the corporate stuff. Most of Apple's products are consumer driven. Microsoft has a major business presence. But it certainly was possible to get Windows 7 cheap. No, it wasn't $30 for up to 5 systems, but I had no problem paying $50 a system. I would like Home Premium to move more towards the Apple model, though I'd want to be sure I could put it on a disk.

Also, to note, we're a family with PCs, but also two iPads, an iPod Touch and an iPhone.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

Chris Blount said:


> MobileMe was not a failure, at least for me. It served me well for years. No complaints here. During the WWDC, Jobs admitted that it wasn't their finest hour with the launch of MobileMe, but I certainly wouldn't call it a failure.


I'm pretty sure that Jobs himself has admitted MobileMe was a failure and did not deliver on what it was suppose to do.

"Can anyone tell me what MobileMe is supposed to do?" When one foolhardy exec explained the aim of the service, Jobs shot back: "So why the **** doesn't it do that."


----------



## Lucavex (Apr 26, 2011)

Chris Blount said:


> I have owned all the iPhones and only had to replace one of them because of a screen issue. That sort of thing is an exception, not a rule.
> 
> MobileMe was not a failure, at least for me. It served me well for years. No complaints here. During the WWDC, Jobs admitted that it wasn't their finest hour with the launch of MobileMe, but I certainly wouldn't call it a failure.
> 
> Honestly guys, I really hate threads like this. Those who own Apple products end up sounding like fanboys (including myself) while those who have never owned them think they know more than they actually do. It's a lose-lose for everyone.


Well that's why I qualified my statement with "almost" universally.

I liken it's failure to like the failure of Google Buzz. It was a great concept, and for some people it was great, but it just wasn't for "everyone". Where Apple and Google differ on this, obviously, is that they turned it into what looks like is going to be a great success after some soul-searching.

And hey, I defended Apple here! I gave 'em credit where it was due. And honestly, it was kinda smart of them to roll mobileme into the iCloud umbrella. How is that transition going to work, anyway? I haven't heard specific details, only that it was happening.


----------



## klang (Oct 14, 2003)

Chris Blount said:


> I have owned all the iPhones and only had to replace one of them because of a screen issue. That sort of thing is an exception, not a rule.
> 
> MobileMe was not a failure, at least for me. It served me well for years. No complaints here. During the WWDC, Jobs admitted that it wasn't their finest hour with the launch of MobileMe, but I certainly wouldn't call it a failure.
> 
> Honestly guys, I really hate threads like this. Those who own Apple products end up sounding like fanboys (including myself) while those who have never owned them think they know more than they actually do. It's a lose-lose for everyone.


My wife and I have had iPhone 3GS and 4 since they were available, never any problems as long as the wife doesn't leave hers in a rental car. :hurah:. Same with MobileMe, use it every day, works fine. I think iCloud is mostly just a different name with the iTunes stuff added in.


----------



## RasputinAXP (Jan 23, 2008)

dpeters11 said:


> the G4 Cube


technically that was "my" first Mac.

Ugh, what a piece of garbage.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

Chris Blount said:


> Honestly guys, I really hate threads like this. Those who own Apple products end up sounding like fanboys (including myself) while those who have never owned them think they know more than they actually do. It's a lose-lose for everyone.


The only thing I've ever used apples for are pies and sauce, sometimes baked with raisins and brown sugar in the core.

I avoided the tech company due to the prices, limited third party products and their general over all uppitiness.


----------



## Chris Blount (Jun 22, 2001)

SayWhat? said:


> I avoided the tech company due to the prices, limited third party products and their general over all uppitiness.


Yep, that's how I was until I actually bought something and realized what I was missing.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Chris Blount said:


> Honestly guys, I really hate threads like this. Those who own Apple products end up sounding like fanboys (including myself) while those who have never owned them think they know more than they actually do. It's a lose-lose for everyone.


I'll preface this by saying when it comes to desktops and laptops, I'm a Windows user myself, but an iPod/iPad owner as well, primarily for use by my non-technical wife.

The way I see it, Apple's mission statement is to produce products that "just work" for non-technical users. To achieve this goal, they tightly control the hardware and peripherals that can be used, and limit what can and can't be done with application software and OS. Otherwise, too many things can spiral out of control from a support standpoint.

This philosophy leads to higher h/w prices due to fewer suppliers, and requires users to interact with software and services in a prescribed way, which many technically savvy and adventurous folks resent and perceive as arrogance. It is arrogance, but in pursuit of a specific goal that folks either buy into or they don't, hence the two somewhat passionate camps. Just my .02.


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

Chris Blount said:


> Yep, that's how I was until I actually bought something and realized what I was missing.


Same here. The day I started up the Mac I bought for my wife and daughter and it found the network printer (and installed the drivers) that Windows seemed to lose every couple of weeks, I was hooked.

And there is not one piece of software that it can not run.


----------



## pfueri (Jan 22, 2007)

Chris Blount said:


> Yep, that's how I was until I actually bought something and realized what I was missing.


I agree 100% ! I have used Windows and built Windows based pcs since Windows 3,0 and DOS 4.1 . And if you don't mind reinstalling your entire system every year to fix all the little clichés and speed problems then Windows is for you ! Now with how much is on your pc these days and how big hard drives are now it might take days to get it all back on ! When I turn on my computer I just want it to work every time . From day one to years later ! When I bought my first thing from Apple it work like Apple said it would ! I have a 27 iMac ,MacBookAir 2 iPads ,2 iPhone 4 ,s and iPod touch . And have yet to have a problem . And I have alot of friends and relatives that have yet to have a problem and we were all Windows users before ! And we all say why did we use Windows for so long ? We should have listened to all the Apple users long ago ! We could have saved so much time then wasting it on all the problems with Windows based pc's ! One thing you can't ever get back is time ! You can't buy time ! So when you have a company like Apple that makes hardware and software for there products it works when they sell it ! That's why it's like buying time and worth the money !


----------



## billsharpe (Jan 25, 2007)

I wouldn't buy a Mac computer -- way too pricey!

But Jobs seems to have hit the right price point for the iPad.

Apple stores are something else -- busy but with lots and lots of knowledgeable clerks.


----------



## klang (Oct 14, 2003)

billsharpe said:


> I wouldn't buy a Mac computer -- way too pricey!


I don't think that is the case if you compare similar hardware. We bought a pair of iMacs in December 2009. At the time I was about to order a pair of Dell XPS desktops with similar CPU's, disk, memory etc. The cost of the Dell systems were pretty close to the iMacs but the Dell didn't come with this glorious 27" display. I don't recall the exact numbers but they were pretty similar.

Sent from my iMac via Comcast


----------



## Greg Alsobrook (Apr 2, 2007)

Steve said:


> The way I see it, Apple's mission statement is to produce products that "just work" for non-technical users.


I actually see it the opposite way. In my experience, Apple users seem to be _more_ techie. Here's an interesting article from a couple months back... http://articles.cnn.com/2011-04-22/tech/mac.pc.users_1_mac-users-pc-fans-pc-people?_s=PM:TECH


----------



## Chris Blount (Jun 22, 2001)

Greg Alsobrook said:


> I actually see it the opposite way. In my experience, Apple users seem to be _more_ techie. Here's an interesting article from a couple months back... http://articles.cnn.com/2011-04-22/tech/mac.pc.users_1_mac-users-pc-fans-pc-people?_s=PM:TECH


Interesting article. I guess I don't fit the mold.


----------



## Greg Alsobrook (Apr 2, 2007)

Chris Blount said:


> Interesting article. I guess I don't fit the mold.


Maybe not. But I think it's safe to say that you're more techie than the average person.


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

Greg Alsobrook said:


> I actually see it the opposite way. In my experience, Apple users seem to be _more_ techie.


Yes they are.



Chris Blount said:


> Interesting article. I guess I don't fit the mold.


I'm not even close.


----------

