ghostlyorb
Mar 26, 07:48 AM
I can't wait to get my hands on Lion! It looks pretty cool!
Androidpwns
Mar 22, 02:55 PM
Sorry, completely forgot about that.
iOS rocks in apps, but it does suck *** in terms of notifications and true multitasking.
Apple should've been the ones to buy Palm.
Spot on post :D
iOS rocks in apps, but it does suck *** in terms of notifications and true multitasking.
Apple should've been the ones to buy Palm.
Spot on post :D
ThunderSkunk
Mar 26, 10:26 PM
I have a question.
I don't expect we'll be able to use iOS apps in OS X as early as Lion, and I understand based on the different chip architecture, it shouldn't be able to run at all...
buuuuut,
I distinctly remember watching that first keynote when they made their dev program available, and walked us through the iPhone dev tools, and seeing an OS X On-screen emulator, that would let you code and test your apps as you wrote them right there in OS X, with a big clumsy dot for a "fingertip"...
If they'll run in that emulator, isn't it conceivable that in some way, your iOS apps would find a way, using that emulator layer, to look something like dashboard, to run in both environments?
I'm thinking, syncing the data between both mobile and desktop iOS apps would be simple enough to be done automatically, like dropbox for instance, or a basic itunes information sync... Then on your desktop or MBP, you'd have access to content you've created on your mobile device, for a seamless user experience. None of this "sent to itunes, download from itunes" nonsense, with verions all over the place to keep track of.
I imagine a macbook pro will come someday, with a standard vertical screen and basically an ipad for the horizontal keyboard area. Imagine the possibilities there, of integrating the two ecosystems... how could they NOT give that a try?
We're not there yet, obviously, but Lion seems like something of a step in that direction.
I don't expect we'll be able to use iOS apps in OS X as early as Lion, and I understand based on the different chip architecture, it shouldn't be able to run at all...
buuuuut,
I distinctly remember watching that first keynote when they made their dev program available, and walked us through the iPhone dev tools, and seeing an OS X On-screen emulator, that would let you code and test your apps as you wrote them right there in OS X, with a big clumsy dot for a "fingertip"...
If they'll run in that emulator, isn't it conceivable that in some way, your iOS apps would find a way, using that emulator layer, to look something like dashboard, to run in both environments?
I'm thinking, syncing the data between both mobile and desktop iOS apps would be simple enough to be done automatically, like dropbox for instance, or a basic itunes information sync... Then on your desktop or MBP, you'd have access to content you've created on your mobile device, for a seamless user experience. None of this "sent to itunes, download from itunes" nonsense, with verions all over the place to keep track of.
I imagine a macbook pro will come someday, with a standard vertical screen and basically an ipad for the horizontal keyboard area. Imagine the possibilities there, of integrating the two ecosystems... how could they NOT give that a try?
We're not there yet, obviously, but Lion seems like something of a step in that direction.
shamino
Jul 14, 03:55 PM
So why use woodcrest WITHOUT dual processor configuration? Makes no sense, any single proc models should be conroe.
4M of L2 cache is another good reason. According to recent reports, only the "extreme edition" of the Core 2 (aka Conroe) chip will have 4M. And it will cost more than Woodcrest.
Macs have ALREADY had two optical bays (including twin CD drives). And none of these configs include two drives, you'd only have a second one if you wanted it.
Where have you been shopping recently? Only one model PowerMac has ever had two optical drive bay.
The MDD G4 PowerMac towers (August 2002-June 2004) have two optical drive bays. The G4 PowerMacs that came before only have one (the lower bay is only big enough for floppy-size devices, like zip drives.) The G5 PowerMacs only have one externally-accessible bay of any size.
I would love the ability to install two optical drives, but your claim that Apple is currently shipping this somewhere is simply not true.
4M of L2 cache is another good reason. According to recent reports, only the "extreme edition" of the Core 2 (aka Conroe) chip will have 4M. And it will cost more than Woodcrest.
Macs have ALREADY had two optical bays (including twin CD drives). And none of these configs include two drives, you'd only have a second one if you wanted it.
Where have you been shopping recently? Only one model PowerMac has ever had two optical drive bay.
The MDD G4 PowerMac towers (August 2002-June 2004) have two optical drive bays. The G4 PowerMacs that came before only have one (the lower bay is only big enough for floppy-size devices, like zip drives.) The G5 PowerMacs only have one externally-accessible bay of any size.
I would love the ability to install two optical drives, but your claim that Apple is currently shipping this somewhere is simply not true.
NJPitcher
Aug 27, 01:44 AM
Also Soon:
MacBook Pro 17"
Easy Access HD Bay
2.33 GHz Merom
1 GB DDR2 RAM + 1 or 2 GB Third Party Stick
Black Anodized Aluminum
$2799 + 30" Dell on 20% off Sale $1520 = My ultimate Core 2 Duo Starter Kit for only $4319 + $346 CA sales tax = $4665 . :p
How do you get black aluminum? Or is this just a wish? Cause that'd be pretty ill.
And what is the easy access HD bay?
MacBook Pro 17"
Easy Access HD Bay
2.33 GHz Merom
1 GB DDR2 RAM + 1 or 2 GB Third Party Stick
Black Anodized Aluminum
$2799 + 30" Dell on 20% off Sale $1520 = My ultimate Core 2 Duo Starter Kit for only $4319 + $346 CA sales tax = $4665 . :p
How do you get black aluminum? Or is this just a wish? Cause that'd be pretty ill.
And what is the easy access HD bay?
smiddlehurst
Mar 31, 03:15 PM
Emphasis on the important bit for those who didn't bother to actually read the article. If you want to wait a bit, you can get the code and do whatever you want. Well that's my reading of it anyway, but please, don't let get in the way of giving the new enemy number one a good kicking.
Except Google have made it very clear with Honeycomb that they're not willing to release the source code for the foreseeable future so 'a bit' could be a lot longer than you'd think. More to the point that does manufacturers very little good. If, f'instance, Google decide to only release a version of Android as open source when they release the next version any manufacturer wanting to use it is going to have to grab the open version, make whatever tweaks they want, get it on a device, get it built in bulk and launch it into the relevant sales channel(s). By the time they do that Google is likely to have released another version of Android and they'll be hopelessly out of date.
Make no mistake about this, Google tightening up on the Android T&C's like this makes it almost impossible for anyone outside of Google's control to launch a device that really competes with the manufacturers who are on the inside track, at least from an OS point of view.
Except Google have made it very clear with Honeycomb that they're not willing to release the source code for the foreseeable future so 'a bit' could be a lot longer than you'd think. More to the point that does manufacturers very little good. If, f'instance, Google decide to only release a version of Android as open source when they release the next version any manufacturer wanting to use it is going to have to grab the open version, make whatever tweaks they want, get it on a device, get it built in bulk and launch it into the relevant sales channel(s). By the time they do that Google is likely to have released another version of Android and they'll be hopelessly out of date.
Make no mistake about this, Google tightening up on the Android T&C's like this makes it almost impossible for anyone outside of Google's control to launch a device that really competes with the manufacturers who are on the inside track, at least from an OS point of view.
matticus008
Nov 29, 06:13 AM
One wonders why it hasn't been used in a Court of Law.
Not really, though. There are countless ways of maneuvering around any such royalties, from framing it as an access toll to a deposit or anything in between. This added cost doesn't actually get you anywhere in litigation, most importantly because it in no way stipulates between you, the customer, and the label.
What's also interesting is that if this fee is added they have now unwittingly legimized the stolen music.
Far from it. Each tax payer contributes to fund their local DMV, and yet their services aren't free. The state collects a tax on car sales, which goes in most cases to road improvement, police departments, and the DMV (along with a truly bizarre array of other causes), but it's only part of the cost. You also pay taxes to a general fund, which is distributed to agencies and services you may never use (or even be aware of). Contributing some money cannot be construed as contributing sufficient money here.
You also pay for car insurance which protects you in the event of an accident; intentionally putting yourself in an accident is insurance fraud. There's no such thing as "music fraud" (at least in this construction), but the result is a sort of piracy insurance policy for the label. Naturally, though, the labels claim such exorbitant losses and damages from piracy that even $1 per iPod would hardly dent that figure.
If this went into effect, I would have a defense in court when I downloaded the entire Universal Label Catalog (All Their Music) off the net.
If only it worked that way...
Just to be clear, this whole idea of collecting on music players is nothing short of outrageous. But it doesn't have the legal implications or weight that have been popularized here. They CAN have their cake and eat it, too, and they know it. That's why it's important for me to ensure that these false notions don't become ingrained as part of the Internet groupthink--when you step back into the real world, you'll be equally screwed, with or without this fee.
Not really, though. There are countless ways of maneuvering around any such royalties, from framing it as an access toll to a deposit or anything in between. This added cost doesn't actually get you anywhere in litigation, most importantly because it in no way stipulates between you, the customer, and the label.
What's also interesting is that if this fee is added they have now unwittingly legimized the stolen music.
Far from it. Each tax payer contributes to fund their local DMV, and yet their services aren't free. The state collects a tax on car sales, which goes in most cases to road improvement, police departments, and the DMV (along with a truly bizarre array of other causes), but it's only part of the cost. You also pay taxes to a general fund, which is distributed to agencies and services you may never use (or even be aware of). Contributing some money cannot be construed as contributing sufficient money here.
You also pay for car insurance which protects you in the event of an accident; intentionally putting yourself in an accident is insurance fraud. There's no such thing as "music fraud" (at least in this construction), but the result is a sort of piracy insurance policy for the label. Naturally, though, the labels claim such exorbitant losses and damages from piracy that even $1 per iPod would hardly dent that figure.
If this went into effect, I would have a defense in court when I downloaded the entire Universal Label Catalog (All Their Music) off the net.
If only it worked that way...
Just to be clear, this whole idea of collecting on music players is nothing short of outrageous. But it doesn't have the legal implications or weight that have been popularized here. They CAN have their cake and eat it, too, and they know it. That's why it's important for me to ensure that these false notions don't become ingrained as part of the Internet groupthink--when you step back into the real world, you'll be equally screwed, with or without this fee.
mustangs
Sep 19, 12:00 AM
I purchased my 1.83GHz Mac Book with 1GHz of RAM on Sep 07, and apple sent me an email that it was going to be shipped on the 18th. Today I got this email from Apple "
Fine Art Black and White
Not only is the photo black
Pregnancy photography in lack
Black and White Photography
new york art photography
Black and White Art,
lack and white art
Wonderful Black amp; White
Fine Art Photography, Black
lack and white art
Art Print Black and White
Gatesbasher
Mar 31, 03:34 PM
Oh, Lordy! The Fandroids were always delusional, but reading some of these comments�this seems to have pushed them over the line into some sort of clinical psychosis.
samcraig
Apr 25, 04:06 PM
1. the lawsuit may have merit HOWEVER - the restitution being sought is silly because I am sure that the two people suing could have or still could return their devices for a refund or store credit.
2. If this was a suit brought up against Google for the same thing - those defending Apple would be ripping Google (or anyone else) a new one. But clearly because it's Apple being targeted it's a witch hunt?
3.the iPhone 4 had an antenna issue. Steve flat out said so. He said that ALL phones have an issue. That doesn't negate the iPhone having one. Oh - but this was LONG after his email to me (and others) that there was NO issue. Backpeddled on that one only after Consumer Reports refused to give the iPhone a good review. Suddenly there was a press conference and finger pointing (poorly) at every other phone manufacturer
I suspect the same will happen here. Apple will be in the cross hairs. Justifiably or not. And when push comes to shove - they will throw anyone and everyone under the bus (ATT, Google, etc) for doing the same thing.
2. If this was a suit brought up against Google for the same thing - those defending Apple would be ripping Google (or anyone else) a new one. But clearly because it's Apple being targeted it's a witch hunt?
3.the iPhone 4 had an antenna issue. Steve flat out said so. He said that ALL phones have an issue. That doesn't negate the iPhone having one. Oh - but this was LONG after his email to me (and others) that there was NO issue. Backpeddled on that one only after Consumer Reports refused to give the iPhone a good review. Suddenly there was a press conference and finger pointing (poorly) at every other phone manufacturer
I suspect the same will happen here. Apple will be in the cross hairs. Justifiably or not. And when push comes to shove - they will throw anyone and everyone under the bus (ATT, Google, etc) for doing the same thing.
alpacojohn
Aug 25, 05:42 PM
Funny how I just came across this thread, as I'm in the middle of an Apple support nightmare as well (I have one of those MacBooks that just turns itself off for no reason - completely unacceptable). I have been routed through 12 people over 3 calls, with several promises of "expedited resolution"s but no tangible result.
Although it's possible (and likely) that the prevalence of the MacBook defects have been overblown, I do know that Apple's support process puts you through a lot of hoops to get any major issue resolved (e.g., replacing a clearly defective product). Each person I've talked to has been courteous, but in the end I still have no faith in their ability to actually solve my problem in a timely manner.
Frustrated Apple User
Although it's possible (and likely) that the prevalence of the MacBook defects have been overblown, I do know that Apple's support process puts you through a lot of hoops to get any major issue resolved (e.g., replacing a clearly defective product). Each person I've talked to has been courteous, but in the end I still have no faith in their ability to actually solve my problem in a timely manner.
Frustrated Apple User
AidenShaw
Aug 27, 08:17 AM
I believe Intel has been having trouble getting the required chipsets out on time to the desktop market.
You can get the chips themselves without much trouble- the retail versions are available at Newegg for the 1.86, 2.13, 2.66, and 2.93 Extreme Core 2 Duo chips, with the sole out of stock chip being the 2.4GHz chip, with an estimated time of arrival being Sept. 1st at 2:30PM.
I was at a local DIY store Saturday, and they had stacks of Core 2 Duo (Conroe) chips in all speeds, and lots of mobos with 965 and 975 chipsets.
It would be unusual for that store to have all that kit if there's a supply problem.
http://www.centralcomputer.com/products.asp?pline=HCPUI
You can get the chips themselves without much trouble- the retail versions are available at Newegg for the 1.86, 2.13, 2.66, and 2.93 Extreme Core 2 Duo chips, with the sole out of stock chip being the 2.4GHz chip, with an estimated time of arrival being Sept. 1st at 2:30PM.
I was at a local DIY store Saturday, and they had stacks of Core 2 Duo (Conroe) chips in all speeds, and lots of mobos with 965 and 975 chipsets.
It would be unusual for that store to have all that kit if there's a supply problem.
http://www.centralcomputer.com/products.asp?pline=HCPUI
Moyank24
Mar 2, 10:01 PM
Hes a quack.
http://holybulliesandheadlessmonsters.blogspot.com/2009/02/more-on-phony-expert-john-r.html
Heres a nicely done documenting of the doctors distortions too: http://www.freewebs.com/palmettoumoja/John%20R.%20Diggs's%20lies.pdf
And here is what the Southern Poverty Law Center has to say about him:
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2010/winter/under-attack-gays-remain-minority-mos
I figured the research and findings were a little skewed when they found that lesbians had more heterosexual sex than heterosexual women did. :rolleyes:
http://holybulliesandheadlessmonsters.blogspot.com/2009/02/more-on-phony-expert-john-r.html
Heres a nicely done documenting of the doctors distortions too: http://www.freewebs.com/palmettoumoja/John%20R.%20Diggs's%20lies.pdf
And here is what the Southern Poverty Law Center has to say about him:
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2010/winter/under-attack-gays-remain-minority-mos
I figured the research and findings were a little skewed when they found that lesbians had more heterosexual sex than heterosexual women did. :rolleyes:
Yamcha
Apr 19, 01:58 PM
Alright, I was originally going to take Apple's side on this, since I could clearly see it looks a lot like iOS, but having looked at Samsung's F700, I don' think Apple has any right to sue..
Although the Samsung F700 has very simple icons, Apple clearly has the same placement of icons, even looking at the bottom you find the four dock like icons..
http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/9559/samsungf700cellular.jpg
I'd say that Apple copied Samsung :P.. Honestly I'm not one to take sides just because I like Apple Products, I just think its wrong to sue since Samsung clearly had this type of UI first.. Apple has no right to sue..
Although the Samsung F700 has very simple icons, Apple clearly has the same placement of icons, even looking at the bottom you find the four dock like icons..
http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/9559/samsungf700cellular.jpg
I'd say that Apple copied Samsung :P.. Honestly I'm not one to take sides just because I like Apple Products, I just think its wrong to sue since Samsung clearly had this type of UI first.. Apple has no right to sue..
onemorething
Aug 5, 08:50 PM
I did a little digging and the most amount of time between any given ipod release is 10 months. I did more research and apple has released a new ipod on average every 9-10 months; the last major ipod was released in oct. 2005. I say any given tuesday between now and october or expo paris:rolleyes:
powers74
Apr 10, 08:39 PM
Or make a lot of people happy. Either way everyone's going to be paying attention.
Lethal
Well, yeah, it will probably make more people happy, but it will be fun to see all the people bitching and moaning around here.
Lethal
Well, yeah, it will probably make more people happy, but it will be fun to see all the people bitching and moaning around here.
TangoCharlie
Jul 20, 08:38 AM
Anyone else think this is getting out of hand? Two cores, great improvement. Four cores, ehh it's faster but Joe can't tell. Eight cores, now thats just stupid.
Let me guess it will only come with 512mb of Ram :p (ok it will be at least a GB).
The riduculous speculation is certainly getting out of control! A quad core iMac... I don't think so! Not for a long while. 8 Cores (ie dual-quads) will only become available in the top-end of the MacPro (assuming the MacPro does indeed go with the Xeon CPU), and the top-end XServes.
If you want wild speculation, here goes....
Apple might use the Conroe and ConroeXE in the first Mac Pros and then add in support for Kentsfield (quad) when it becomes available. This could well be the reason why Intel has brought forward the release of Kentsfield.
Back to reality: Apple wil use Xeon 51xx (5150 and 5160) in the MacPro, and Core 2 Duo (Merom) in the iMac and MBP to be announced at the WWDC. The top iMac config will get a boost to 2.33GHz. In addition, Apple will use the price-drops for the Yonah to upgrade the Core Solo mini to Core Duo.
Any further speculation is just farcical! :eek:
Let me guess it will only come with 512mb of Ram :p (ok it will be at least a GB).
The riduculous speculation is certainly getting out of control! A quad core iMac... I don't think so! Not for a long while. 8 Cores (ie dual-quads) will only become available in the top-end of the MacPro (assuming the MacPro does indeed go with the Xeon CPU), and the top-end XServes.
If you want wild speculation, here goes....
Apple might use the Conroe and ConroeXE in the first Mac Pros and then add in support for Kentsfield (quad) when it becomes available. This could well be the reason why Intel has brought forward the release of Kentsfield.
Back to reality: Apple wil use Xeon 51xx (5150 and 5160) in the MacPro, and Core 2 Duo (Merom) in the iMac and MBP to be announced at the WWDC. The top iMac config will get a boost to 2.33GHz. In addition, Apple will use the price-drops for the Yonah to upgrade the Core Solo mini to Core Duo.
Any further speculation is just farcical! :eek:
Macnoviz
Jul 20, 10:14 AM
At some point your going to have deminished returns. Sure multimedia apps can take advantage of a few more cores, but I dont see Mail running faster on 4 cores, nevermind 2!
How fast do you want mail to go? The main reasons you need good processors is not for browsing, e-mail, text, and such and such. I highly doubt someone who does all these things on a five year old computer will be much slower than someone on a 16 GB RAM top of the line Powermac
Why don't they just call it: Big Mac.
I think that's the best name I've heard in this thread (sorry, Chundles)
How fast do you want mail to go? The main reasons you need good processors is not for browsing, e-mail, text, and such and such. I highly doubt someone who does all these things on a five year old computer will be much slower than someone on a 16 GB RAM top of the line Powermac
Why don't they just call it: Big Mac.
I think that's the best name I've heard in this thread (sorry, Chundles)
Xian Zhu Xuande
Mar 31, 03:02 PM
This is a smart move. It had to happen sooner or later.
John Gruber would eat Steve Job's ***** if he could. His opinion is extremely biased.
Except... he's right. This was a bait-and-switch from Google. I don't think it was a bad move for the future of the platform, but it does render a lot of their PR commentary through history as bogus. As for Gruber, you clearly don't like him, but while he is certainly a fan of Apple he is usually correct.
John Gruber would eat Steve Job's ***** if he could. His opinion is extremely biased.
Except... he's right. This was a bait-and-switch from Google. I don't think it was a bad move for the future of the platform, but it does render a lot of their PR commentary through history as bogus. As for Gruber, you clearly don't like him, but while he is certainly a fan of Apple he is usually correct.
DPazdanISU
Sep 19, 06:50 AM
excellent, isn't the core 2 duo 64bit? if it is then I would like to buy one over the current models for sure
(i'm going for a macbook not pro)
(i'm going for a macbook not pro)
bryanc
Jul 27, 03:46 PM
Well it's back to the future for all of us. Remember when the Mac was going 64-bit with the introduction of the G5 PowerMac on June 23, 2003? :rolleyes: Only more thanthree years later and we're doing it all over again thanks to Yonah's 7 month retrograde.
Just so long as Steve doesn't say we'll be at 3 GHz in a year. :eek:
Cheers
Just so long as Steve doesn't say we'll be at 3 GHz in a year. :eek:
Cheers
the vj
Apr 25, 02:55 PM
Jobs.... you better say sorry dude. :rolleyes:
THX1139
Apr 10, 05:54 PM
There is a part of me that hopes Apple screws up and dumbs down FCS. This is the only remaining software that keeps me buying expensive Macs. If they turn FCS into a glorified iApp, then I'm dumping my Mac's and moving on to a build your own PC where I can run Linux and all of the industry standard professional apps.
I think that with this new release of FinalCut, Apple is going to shove a dagger into it's professional line. In the last keynote, Jobs mentioned the "transition from a post-PC" business model. The only way that Apple can devote itself exclusively to iStuff is to wean the professional's away from using their products. Once FCS becomes a new video editing program aimed more for the masses running on iPads, Apple will be able to say that they don't have a need for the pro line of computers anymore. Say goodbye to MacPro anything.
Whatever Apple announces Tuesday is going to be a strong indicator for the future of the professional line. If they announce an amazing FCS 4 for professionals, then we will know they are committed to the long run. However, if they turn FinalCut into some kind of cheesy video editing app for the mass consumer, then you better start rethinking your professional future with Apple - unless you make your money from making crappy youtube videos.
I think that with this new release of FinalCut, Apple is going to shove a dagger into it's professional line. In the last keynote, Jobs mentioned the "transition from a post-PC" business model. The only way that Apple can devote itself exclusively to iStuff is to wean the professional's away from using their products. Once FCS becomes a new video editing program aimed more for the masses running on iPads, Apple will be able to say that they don't have a need for the pro line of computers anymore. Say goodbye to MacPro anything.
Whatever Apple announces Tuesday is going to be a strong indicator for the future of the professional line. If they announce an amazing FCS 4 for professionals, then we will know they are committed to the long run. However, if they turn FinalCut into some kind of cheesy video editing app for the mass consumer, then you better start rethinking your professional future with Apple - unless you make your money from making crappy youtube videos.
notabadname
Apr 6, 03:50 PM
Wow, that's success that only a Ballmer could love.
Apple does need some competition. I hope these competitors focus on some of the Apple shortcomings like the religious adherence to the Cocoa Touch UI. Ideally there would be a more hybrid iOS/MacOS functionality in an iPad such that it could morph up to a more desktop like experience when docked. And conversely, it seems like MacBook Air/ Mac OS X Lion is getting a more iOS like feel. There's a middle ground there that Apple needs to get to. I suspect they will. But as with tethering, and allowing re-duplication of core apps by third parties, it will take Apple a while to let go here and allow the iPad to become that perfect combo.
They still seem to ultimately strike this balance better than any other vendor.
Not really. They built an excellent product, at what is still a leading price point, all without ANY competition.
It is the other manufacturers that need Apple as a competitor. First the iPod, THEN all the clones that came out after, the iPhone, THEN all the clones and finally the iPad THEN . . . . you get the idea. Apple has been creating innovative products, in a vacuum, that cause the rest of the market to follow, for decades, just fine. Unlike other manufacturers, they strive for excellence with out the need for a product to "duplicate" and spurn them on.
Apple does need some competition. I hope these competitors focus on some of the Apple shortcomings like the religious adherence to the Cocoa Touch UI. Ideally there would be a more hybrid iOS/MacOS functionality in an iPad such that it could morph up to a more desktop like experience when docked. And conversely, it seems like MacBook Air/ Mac OS X Lion is getting a more iOS like feel. There's a middle ground there that Apple needs to get to. I suspect they will. But as with tethering, and allowing re-duplication of core apps by third parties, it will take Apple a while to let go here and allow the iPad to become that perfect combo.
They still seem to ultimately strike this balance better than any other vendor.
Not really. They built an excellent product, at what is still a leading price point, all without ANY competition.
It is the other manufacturers that need Apple as a competitor. First the iPod, THEN all the clones that came out after, the iPhone, THEN all the clones and finally the iPad THEN . . . . you get the idea. Apple has been creating innovative products, in a vacuum, that cause the rest of the market to follow, for decades, just fine. Unlike other manufacturers, they strive for excellence with out the need for a product to "duplicate" and spurn them on.