MaenXe
Apr 26, 01:33 PM
trademarking app store. How pompous. What's next, trademarking computer store, book store, pet store? LOL.
App is shorthand for Application, it's been in use for almost 20 years: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=app
App Store is a descriptive term for a shop selling a specific product. Such as Pet Store rather than Domestic Animal Store, or PC Store rather than Computer Store. By Apple's reasoning, the first person who used the term Pet Store should have Trademarked it and cornered the market. But since several companies started selling Pets at their Pet Stores without a Trademark, then the term was considered common place.
Personally, I think that the terms iPhone App Store, iTunes App Store, and Mac App Store should be trademarked and would be respected by the general industry.
Also, in Amazon's defense, there usage is Amazon "AppStore", not Amazon "App Store". So, splitting hairs, it's not the same.
M@
App is shorthand for Application, it's been in use for almost 20 years: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=app
App Store is a descriptive term for a shop selling a specific product. Such as Pet Store rather than Domestic Animal Store, or PC Store rather than Computer Store. By Apple's reasoning, the first person who used the term Pet Store should have Trademarked it and cornered the market. But since several companies started selling Pets at their Pet Stores without a Trademark, then the term was considered common place.
Personally, I think that the terms iPhone App Store, iTunes App Store, and Mac App Store should be trademarked and would be respected by the general industry.
Also, in Amazon's defense, there usage is Amazon "AppStore", not Amazon "App Store". So, splitting hairs, it's not the same.
M@
zombierunner
Apr 19, 02:51 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-gb) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
True dat ... This is going to be my first iMac ... I have never owned an apple computer before .. Bought my first iPhone last year
... iPhone 4 ... That was such a wonderful day ... Can't wait
True dat ... This is going to be my first iMac ... I have never owned an apple computer before .. Bought my first iPhone last year
... iPhone 4 ... That was such a wonderful day ... Can't wait
PBF
Apr 2, 01:39 PM
Is anyone able to video chat with other Yahoo users via iChat?
Mine's kept saying "video unavailable" on both ends since DP1. I thought DP2 would have this fixed by now. Bummer.
Mine's kept saying "video unavailable" on both ends since DP1. I thought DP2 would have this fixed by now. Bummer.
Capt T
Mar 25, 03:55 PM
iPad 1 does not support HDMI out, so I'm assuming no, it doesn't work.
The iPad 1 does support HDMI out. I have the adaptor and checked it out with a movie. It doesn't support mirroring but it does support the output.
The iPad 1 does support HDMI out. I have the adaptor and checked it out with a movie. It doesn't support mirroring but it does support the output.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 26, 02:25 PM
I think you are missing the point:
"What are some other reasons for refusing registration?
Registration may be refused if the mark is:
• Descriptive for the goods/services;
• A geographic term;
• A surname;
• Ornamental as applied to the goods"
Source: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/BasicFacts_with_correct_links.pdf
App Store is descriptive of what it does. In other words, it sells apps or applications. Therefore, it cannot be trademarked. Apple can use it if they want, but so can anyone else doing the same thing.
This is pretty much saying that Microsoft is going to trademark Operating System. Both Microsoft and Apple make operating systems. What Windows is is a type of operating system. Windows does not describe the product.
You make it sound as though this is such an obvious distinction that Apple could never get a trademark for "app store". But apparently this argument is not so strong in trademark law as Apple actually has the trademark already. If that were not the case how could they sue another entity for trademark infringement?
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
Therefore, it cannot be trademarked
It was.
"What are some other reasons for refusing registration?
Registration may be refused if the mark is:
• Descriptive for the goods/services;
• A geographic term;
• A surname;
• Ornamental as applied to the goods"
Source: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/BasicFacts_with_correct_links.pdf
App Store is descriptive of what it does. In other words, it sells apps or applications. Therefore, it cannot be trademarked. Apple can use it if they want, but so can anyone else doing the same thing.
This is pretty much saying that Microsoft is going to trademark Operating System. Both Microsoft and Apple make operating systems. What Windows is is a type of operating system. Windows does not describe the product.
You make it sound as though this is such an obvious distinction that Apple could never get a trademark for "app store". But apparently this argument is not so strong in trademark law as Apple actually has the trademark already. If that were not the case how could they sue another entity for trademark infringement?
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
Therefore, it cannot be trademarked
It was.
Dont Hurt Me
Mar 20, 09:37 PM
apple doesnt aim their market at people who shop for those computers, simple as that.
iJonand since Apple is missing the market so bad its sales have sunk to the lowest % in its history. there will come a point that it wont matter how much money is in their bank because no one will be buying the stuff. Look at iJon even he uses a PC for gaming. most people dont have a pc and a Mac so what do they buy? a PC.
iJonand since Apple is missing the market so bad its sales have sunk to the lowest % in its history. there will come a point that it wont matter how much money is in their bank because no one will be buying the stuff. Look at iJon even he uses a PC for gaming. most people dont have a pc and a Mac so what do they buy? a PC.
Mr-Stabby
Apr 12, 09:10 PM
Is there anybody actually filming this? From what the tweets are describing, the audience are loving it, i'd like to see this keynote.
Evangelion
Jul 14, 08:13 AM
I agree. I would be surprised if Apple even offers it before next year. Blu-Ray DVRs are still about $1k and the blank media is also very expensive. Apple will have enough challenges keeping the Intel Quad under $4k without including Blu-Ray yet. But by this time next year, I would expect it to be a BTO option for the desktops at least.
Currently, prices of Xeons seem to hover between $500 and $1000. And note: these are RETAIL PRICES for consumers! Apple's prices for those CPU's would be considerably less. So I don't see Apple having any problems offering quad-Woodcrest for under $4000. I wouldn't be one bit surprised if we saw quad-Woodcrest for under $3000!
Currently, prices of Xeons seem to hover between $500 and $1000. And note: these are RETAIL PRICES for consumers! Apple's prices for those CPU's would be considerably less. So I don't see Apple having any problems offering quad-Woodcrest for under $4000. I wouldn't be one bit surprised if we saw quad-Woodcrest for under $3000!
Mac'Mo
Jan 1, 10:46 PM
i thought the iPhone rumor was laid to rest?
hyperpasta
Sep 1, 02:32 PM
I, for one, think the iMac and Mac Mini will get Merom due to their form factors, and a yet to be announced minitower will get Conroe (just ask AidenShaw).
But that's not true! If Apple puts in Merom, I want to see it even thinner... the very same case held a G5, much more demanding than Conroe, as of last October.
But that's not true! If Apple puts in Merom, I want to see it even thinner... the very same case held a G5, much more demanding than Conroe, as of last October.
MagnusVonMagnum
Sep 17, 03:34 PM
so the iphone 4 is their highest rated phone ever, based on their tests and they do not recommend it. Doesn't that mean they need to fix their rating system?
No, it means the product has an intermittent defect unrelated to the otherwise stellar performance.
Point is that it IS their best phone. So Apple set out to make the best phone and CR's own testing validates that!
You don't seem to know the difference between a terminal defect and a high performing product. If a Toyota vehicle tests better than anything else out there in every normal category yet has a defect that while rare could kill you (i.e. no brakes or massive unintended acceleration), some readers JUST MIGHT want to know about that defect. And a magazine could in no good conscience recommend a vehicle that has a potentially fatal flaw even if in every other area it's wonderful. While the iPhone is not a "fatal" flaw, it is a potentially terminal one. If the thing is constantly dropping calls simply because you naturally tend to cover the antenna with your hand (for whatever reason), you should probably be aware of this. Given all previous iPhones did not have this problem, it SHOULD be pointed out so consumers can make an INFORMED DECISION.
But you and the other apologists on here (and that's being nice) seem to think they should ignore massive defects or that their tests are somehow flawed even though this is not a normal "testable" function. It's an intermittent DEFECT that Apple admits exists yet they do not seem to want to fix. If Toyota came out and said "we know some of our cars will potentially accelerate out of control, but we've decided we won't fix it but instead will wait for you to call us after you've discovered YOUR car has that problem" (assuming you survive it when it happens to you), I think there would be a more than a bit of uproar.... Oh wait. THAT is EXACTLY what they did and that's exactly what happened. :rolleyes:
Don't worry. I don't expect you or any of the other Apple apologists to "get" it. You're too in love with Steve and Apple to think logically at this point. All you know is that people are ragging on the love of your life and you want it to stop!
You like others who have bought into the google backed media campaign are totally dismissive of the top rating the phone actually got from CR and only focusing on the cannot recommend aspect. If CR cannot recommend their best product, then their rating system is flawed. End of story. Why should apple recall the top rated product in history!
So now there's a Google conspiracy as well? LOL. :D
All it comes down to is that defective products should be fixed by the companies that make them. Apple doesn't want to do it because they are greedy. They don't want to support their computers for more than two years these days for the same reason. They are greedy. They want you to keep buying more products more often. They don't care about long-term customers anymore because they want repeat short-term customers instead. Just wait for iPhone 5. That one will fix it. iTunes 10 is buggy as heck and crashes your computer all the time? Just wait for iTunes 11 to fix it, but be prepared to buy a new computer to use it because it won't work on anything older than Snow Leopard. Sorry, but that's not good business and it's starting to alienate some of us big time.
so what you are saying is that if you want to buy the best smart phone according to consumer reports it would be the iphone 4.
so you are agreeing that the iphone 4 is the best smart phone out there.
because if you don't believe it is the best smart phone, then it means you don't agree with consumer reports. So you are in the same boat with those who do not agree with consumer reports...
so you either defend consumer reports and also agree the iphone 4 is the best phone ever or disagree with them, which puts you in the same boat as those who you accuse of being less than you are.
apple set out to make the best phone....according to consumer reports they succeeded. accept that fact and move on.
Ok, based on your double post and complete illogic I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess your age is rather, shall we say, very young because what you are saying makes about as much sense as saying someone who is against drunk driving is against alcohol as well because they're so obviously mutually exclusive. :rolleyes:
No, it means the product has an intermittent defect unrelated to the otherwise stellar performance.
Point is that it IS their best phone. So Apple set out to make the best phone and CR's own testing validates that!
You don't seem to know the difference between a terminal defect and a high performing product. If a Toyota vehicle tests better than anything else out there in every normal category yet has a defect that while rare could kill you (i.e. no brakes or massive unintended acceleration), some readers JUST MIGHT want to know about that defect. And a magazine could in no good conscience recommend a vehicle that has a potentially fatal flaw even if in every other area it's wonderful. While the iPhone is not a "fatal" flaw, it is a potentially terminal one. If the thing is constantly dropping calls simply because you naturally tend to cover the antenna with your hand (for whatever reason), you should probably be aware of this. Given all previous iPhones did not have this problem, it SHOULD be pointed out so consumers can make an INFORMED DECISION.
But you and the other apologists on here (and that's being nice) seem to think they should ignore massive defects or that their tests are somehow flawed even though this is not a normal "testable" function. It's an intermittent DEFECT that Apple admits exists yet they do not seem to want to fix. If Toyota came out and said "we know some of our cars will potentially accelerate out of control, but we've decided we won't fix it but instead will wait for you to call us after you've discovered YOUR car has that problem" (assuming you survive it when it happens to you), I think there would be a more than a bit of uproar.... Oh wait. THAT is EXACTLY what they did and that's exactly what happened. :rolleyes:
Don't worry. I don't expect you or any of the other Apple apologists to "get" it. You're too in love with Steve and Apple to think logically at this point. All you know is that people are ragging on the love of your life and you want it to stop!
You like others who have bought into the google backed media campaign are totally dismissive of the top rating the phone actually got from CR and only focusing on the cannot recommend aspect. If CR cannot recommend their best product, then their rating system is flawed. End of story. Why should apple recall the top rated product in history!
So now there's a Google conspiracy as well? LOL. :D
All it comes down to is that defective products should be fixed by the companies that make them. Apple doesn't want to do it because they are greedy. They don't want to support their computers for more than two years these days for the same reason. They are greedy. They want you to keep buying more products more often. They don't care about long-term customers anymore because they want repeat short-term customers instead. Just wait for iPhone 5. That one will fix it. iTunes 10 is buggy as heck and crashes your computer all the time? Just wait for iTunes 11 to fix it, but be prepared to buy a new computer to use it because it won't work on anything older than Snow Leopard. Sorry, but that's not good business and it's starting to alienate some of us big time.
so what you are saying is that if you want to buy the best smart phone according to consumer reports it would be the iphone 4.
so you are agreeing that the iphone 4 is the best smart phone out there.
because if you don't believe it is the best smart phone, then it means you don't agree with consumer reports. So you are in the same boat with those who do not agree with consumer reports...
so you either defend consumer reports and also agree the iphone 4 is the best phone ever or disagree with them, which puts you in the same boat as those who you accuse of being less than you are.
apple set out to make the best phone....according to consumer reports they succeeded. accept that fact and move on.
Ok, based on your double post and complete illogic I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess your age is rather, shall we say, very young because what you are saying makes about as much sense as saying someone who is against drunk driving is against alcohol as well because they're so obviously mutually exclusive. :rolleyes:
Blakeco123
Apr 12, 08:25 PM
I really hope this update is as good as they say. If it is I'll switch from FCE to FCP
BLUELION
Apr 3, 01:46 PM
Apple is Apple and the king of the hill with respect to the tablet sector. Android is attempting to catch up, and therefore not on top.
The reason this ad works so well is because it is not in your face, trying to give you a spec list of what it can do. People already know what is under the hood and what its hardware can do, the point of the ad is to entice, to get those who are on other platforms to come on over.
This ad is about subtle confidence and that is why it is a home-run. Android, well they can keep trying with their used car salesman approach.
:apple:
This ad will never work. People want ads that make them feel like teenage boys. I know this from Android ads. Steel and lasers, Apple. Steel and lasers!
The reason this ad works so well is because it is not in your face, trying to give you a spec list of what it can do. People already know what is under the hood and what its hardware can do, the point of the ad is to entice, to get those who are on other platforms to come on over.
This ad is about subtle confidence and that is why it is a home-run. Android, well they can keep trying with their used car salesman approach.
:apple:
This ad will never work. People want ads that make them feel like teenage boys. I know this from Android ads. Steel and lasers, Apple. Steel and lasers!
aznguyen316
Sep 14, 06:29 AM
^ cool thanks for the green pics. I like that color. I couldn't find those cases at either of my nearest BB's although online showed in stock.. hmm.
Lord Blackadder
Feb 25, 12:56 PM
Like what you've said though, there's a compelling argument to be made that a diesel-electric hybrid (like VW's XL1 Concept), with energy recovery would probably be the best arrangement (particularly for an urban car), in this instance the diesel engine is isolated from the actually drivetrain (reducing NVH etc) and the electric motors counter the age old argument of petrol>diesel refinement.
I do think that smaller capacity, fewer cylinder engines are the way to go, but only if the absolutely most important factor is addressed first, and that is one of weight, until then...
Agree on all points. A diesel serial hybrid could potentially blow any current production car out of the water in terms of fuel efficiency - triple digit mileage is possible under favorable conditions, and even more "real-world" driving mileage will be a substantial improvement over current cars.
When I look around my city and see everyone tooling around in 6.0L V8 pickups, I feel like we have a lot of convincing to do though.
Keeping weight down is all-important. Which is why I remain in love with the Lotus Elise. It proves that less weight fixes everything - better handling, acceleration, braking, fuel economy...of course in a hybrid, the battery pack is always the vexed question. Even the best batteries are still expensive and relatively heavy.
I do think that smaller capacity, fewer cylinder engines are the way to go, but only if the absolutely most important factor is addressed first, and that is one of weight, until then...
Agree on all points. A diesel serial hybrid could potentially blow any current production car out of the water in terms of fuel efficiency - triple digit mileage is possible under favorable conditions, and even more "real-world" driving mileage will be a substantial improvement over current cars.
When I look around my city and see everyone tooling around in 6.0L V8 pickups, I feel like we have a lot of convincing to do though.
Keeping weight down is all-important. Which is why I remain in love with the Lotus Elise. It proves that less weight fixes everything - better handling, acceleration, braking, fuel economy...of course in a hybrid, the battery pack is always the vexed question. Even the best batteries are still expensive and relatively heavy.
Apple OC
Apr 21, 09:32 PM
I read the police in Michigan were downloading info from people's iPhones on traffic stops ... only a matter of time before some innocent people get trumped up on bogus charges ... police have been known to have tunnel vision. (example ... sir, what were you doing at Avenue and Main street at 3pm this afternoon?)
Citizens do not need this kind of technology sneaking into their day to day lives.
This is a serious breach of people's right to privacy.
Citizens do not need this kind of technology sneaking into their day to day lives.
This is a serious breach of people's right to privacy.
paddy
Aug 24, 07:07 PM
Obviously???
the Mac Pro is one thing, but you wont see dual optical drives in an iMac much less a Mini, there's no point 4 the standard consumer market.
I gather that he was joking because of that smiley at the end of the post.
the Mac Pro is one thing, but you wont see dual optical drives in an iMac much less a Mini, there's no point 4 the standard consumer market.
I gather that he was joking because of that smiley at the end of the post.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 21, 02:13 PM
The picture remains confused. We know that coalition military units are lobbing precision guided munitions at Gaddafi's air defense network as well as attacking targets of opportunity. But the rebels are not in contact with the rest of the world through any official channels, and media access is poor.
Gaddafi is looking for a stalemate in the short term.
Meanwhile, the BBC struggles with the concept of area versus length.
Gaddafi is looking for a stalemate in the short term.
Meanwhile, the BBC struggles with the concept of area versus length.
CorvusCamenarum
Mar 21, 11:36 PM
I think that allowing Gaddafi to remain in power at this point is not an option for anything but the immediate short-term. But it is the Libyan people who ultimately must remove him. The rebels' policy is ending the Gaddafi regime, and they have refused to negotiate on that point. Currently they have a strong hand - as long as they can keep Gaddafi at bay (effectively with coalition help) he will go nowhere. At best he can try to hold on to Tripoli and the remaining loyalist towns. Any attempt to re-take rebel-held territory will be opposed by both the rebels and the UN-mandated coalition.
The smart thing to have done would have been to sit this one out, then make nicey-nice with the victors. Why we think the Arab common masses will suddenly love us once we go in with bombs flying and reduce a sizable portion of their country to parking lot status is beyond me.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the end result of all this is not at all dissimilar to the goings-on in Iraq.
The smart thing to have done would have been to sit this one out, then make nicey-nice with the victors. Why we think the Arab common masses will suddenly love us once we go in with bombs flying and reduce a sizable portion of their country to parking lot status is beyond me.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the end result of all this is not at all dissimilar to the goings-on in Iraq.
mscriv
Mar 23, 01:06 PM
Here's one of my favorite quotes...
Lighthouses are more useful than churches -Benjamin Franklin
According to Wikipedia this is not an accurate quote.
"Lighthouses are more useful than churches."
Also quoted as �Lighthouses are more helpful than churches� or �A lighthouse is more useful than a church.� Although not by Franklin in this form, it may be intended as a paraphrase of something he wrote to his wife on 17 July 1757, given in a footnote on page 133 of Memoirs of the Life and Writings of Benjamin Franklin (1818). After describing a narrow escape from shipwreck he added:
"The bell ringing for church, we went thither immediately, and with hearts full of gratitude, returned sincere thanks to God for the mercies we had received: were I a Roman Catholic, perhaps I should on this occasion vow to build a chapel to some saint, but as I am not, if I were to vow at all, it should be to build a light-house."
I agree with your point though that the majority of founding fathers were not Christian and that America is not a Christian nation.
Lighthouses are more useful than churches -Benjamin Franklin
According to Wikipedia this is not an accurate quote.
"Lighthouses are more useful than churches."
Also quoted as �Lighthouses are more helpful than churches� or �A lighthouse is more useful than a church.� Although not by Franklin in this form, it may be intended as a paraphrase of something he wrote to his wife on 17 July 1757, given in a footnote on page 133 of Memoirs of the Life and Writings of Benjamin Franklin (1818). After describing a narrow escape from shipwreck he added:
"The bell ringing for church, we went thither immediately, and with hearts full of gratitude, returned sincere thanks to God for the mercies we had received: were I a Roman Catholic, perhaps I should on this occasion vow to build a chapel to some saint, but as I am not, if I were to vow at all, it should be to build a light-house."
I agree with your point though that the majority of founding fathers were not Christian and that America is not a Christian nation.
innominato5090
Mar 31, 04:27 AM
Talking about new "features": have you noticed the Fuji wallpaper is different?
The new one has clouds at the base...
can you upload that, please :)
The new one has clouds at the base...
can you upload that, please :)
hunkaburningluv
Mar 28, 05:24 PM
I never said it was. You must have me confused with somebody else.
But since you bring it up... What excites me about Apple's current products is where they could be in five years. I've been talking about it since the iPhone was introduced.
Imagine having a device that fits in your pocket yet is powerful enough to handle most people's computing needs. I go to the office and drop it in a dock and my LCD screens light up with my environment. I then go home and again I have access to everything again by simply plugging it in. When I'm on the train I can still use it to do email and what not.
Motorola is partially there with the Atrix but the hardware isn't quite up to the task yet. Give it five years and I think things will be really different.
Now that doesn't mean that a pocket device will replace every PC, console and server out there. It just represents shift in general usage. While I see this as feasible in the next few years I don't see a major migration away from desktops for at least a decade. This is due more to social constraints rather than technological.
More back on the original subject:
So what's to stop somebody making a $20 game pad for iOS? The iPad takes input from the controller and displays info on dual screens.
Or even a controller that an iPhone or iPod slides into to allow use of the accelerometers in addition to the buttons.
I don't see iOS ever replacing the consoles just like PCs didn't destroy that market. I can see a lot of overlap in the markets.
Even so, the number of people that come to these forums just to piss and moan that their OS/phone/PC/console/tablet is better than the iOS device du jour is rather tiring. There is actually an interesting article in the March 2011 issue of Scientific American that talks about this very subject. I highly recommend it.
Totally agree on most fronts mate. I believe my comments were aimed at another that was quoted my post. I am 100% behind the overlap idea - it'll be used by loads for gaming, but IMO it won't be the only method of game playing, especially for the typical 'core' console gamer.
I'd gladly pay $20 for starcraft on an iPad, without doubt, that's where I feel touch gaming can really add to the experience - RTS and Turn Basesd strategy game. BUT I feel that in the wake of the few dollar price point for idevice games and their (relative) simplicity I just don't think that it will do well. That may change over the next few years though.
But since you bring it up... What excites me about Apple's current products is where they could be in five years. I've been talking about it since the iPhone was introduced.
Imagine having a device that fits in your pocket yet is powerful enough to handle most people's computing needs. I go to the office and drop it in a dock and my LCD screens light up with my environment. I then go home and again I have access to everything again by simply plugging it in. When I'm on the train I can still use it to do email and what not.
Motorola is partially there with the Atrix but the hardware isn't quite up to the task yet. Give it five years and I think things will be really different.
Now that doesn't mean that a pocket device will replace every PC, console and server out there. It just represents shift in general usage. While I see this as feasible in the next few years I don't see a major migration away from desktops for at least a decade. This is due more to social constraints rather than technological.
More back on the original subject:
So what's to stop somebody making a $20 game pad for iOS? The iPad takes input from the controller and displays info on dual screens.
Or even a controller that an iPhone or iPod slides into to allow use of the accelerometers in addition to the buttons.
I don't see iOS ever replacing the consoles just like PCs didn't destroy that market. I can see a lot of overlap in the markets.
Even so, the number of people that come to these forums just to piss and moan that their OS/phone/PC/console/tablet is better than the iOS device du jour is rather tiring. There is actually an interesting article in the March 2011 issue of Scientific American that talks about this very subject. I highly recommend it.
Totally agree on most fronts mate. I believe my comments were aimed at another that was quoted my post. I am 100% behind the overlap idea - it'll be used by loads for gaming, but IMO it won't be the only method of game playing, especially for the typical 'core' console gamer.
I'd gladly pay $20 for starcraft on an iPad, without doubt, that's where I feel touch gaming can really add to the experience - RTS and Turn Basesd strategy game. BUT I feel that in the wake of the few dollar price point for idevice games and their (relative) simplicity I just don't think that it will do well. That may change over the next few years though.
baryon
Mar 31, 11:57 AM
Ok folks!!! Now try to manage your favorites in "Favorites Bar"!!! Try to change their places and see what happen!!! Pure madness!!!:D:D
I'm not a developer, what happens?
I'm not a developer, what happens?
longsilver
Sep 5, 08:56 AM
As i said earlier
9AM Eastern is the most obvious time to do it, I guess. (But, to be pedantic, did you mean 2pm GMT or BST? ;) :) )
9AM Eastern is the most obvious time to do it, I guess. (But, to be pedantic, did you mean 2pm GMT or BST? ;) :) )
No comments:
Post a Comment