Adobe and America go from an ownership to a rental economy

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by RichA, May 8, 2013.

  1. RichA

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Thu, 09 May 2013 20:55:44 -0400, nospam <>
    wrote:

    >In article <>, Tony Cooper
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >> > it has nothing to do with macs. with rare
    >> >exception, products that do more cost more. no surprise there.
    >> >
    >> >if macs are priced too high to attract the user that doesn't need all
    >> >those specs, then so are similar pcs. why doesn't he mention those?

    >>
    >> The lowest priced Mac is higher in price than many PCs.

    >
    >only because it has better specs, not because it's a mac.


    Of course it's because it's a Mac. Who do you think decides what
    features/specs a model will have?
    >
    >a similar spec pc will have a higher price than those 'many pcs' you're
    >talking about.


    Certainly. But that's not what was said. The statement "The lowest
    priced Mac is higher in price than many PCs" is patently obvious and
    true.

    >
    >> There are
    >> people who don't have any interest or need for the additional features
    >> of the lowest priced Macs, so they feel that the Macs are priced too
    >> high. They aren't interested in the "do more".

    >
    >and they're not interested in the higher priced pcs either.
    >
    >but you don't mention that, do you?


    Of course I did. The higher priced PCs have additional features
    compared to the lower priced PCs. It's right there above this.

    Are you really this thick?


    >there are also people who don't have any interest in the cheapest thing
    >available. they want a quality product and willing to pay for it.
    >
    >you don't mention that either.


    No, I didn't. There are also people who have no interest in any
    computer of any kind, and I didn't mention that. What I said was that
    some people want the least expensive product.
    >
    >> The "comparable specs" argument doesn't work for them. They want an
    >> entry level machine at a low price.

    >
    >some do, others do not.


    So who's arguing with that?

    >and what they're really interested in is solutions, not specs.


    Yes, and the least expensive can be the solution for some people.

    >> There's no need to mention PCs
    >> with "similar" specs. The market segment discussed isn't interested
    >> in them, either.

    >
    >then there's no need to mention either one, so why single out macs?
    >
    >this is about bottom-tier versus mid-tier products, not mac versus pc.
    >
    >> That's no slam against Macs. It's simply a representation of how the
    >> market works for just about every type of product.

    >
    >it's a slam against macs if you only mention macs.


    PCs are mentioned, and have been since the beginning.
    >
    >if you *also* mention similar priced pcs, then it's about price tiers.
    >
    >but you don't.


    And what, pray tell, do you think determines price tiers? And who
    determines what they will offer?

    >> Automobiles are a
    >> prime example of this.

    >
    >cars and computers are marketed very differently.


    You really are dense if you can't connect these dots.

    Honestly, nospam, the more you say the more bullishly stupid you come
    across.
    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
     
    Tony Cooper, May 10, 2013
    #21
    1. Advertising

  2. RichA

    Whisky-dave Guest

    On Friday, May 10, 2013 12:49:10 AM UTC+1, Eric Stevens wrote:
    > On Thu, 09 May 2013 11:26:13 -0400, nospam <>
    >


    <snip>

    >
    > >> He wrote the "full version is priced too high for the casual

    >
    > >> non-professional user" but went on to say " but that's not the same as

    >
    > >> being "overpriced"'. How can you interpret that as saying "Macs as

    >
    > >> being too expensive"? How can you interpret that as saying "Macs as

    >
    > >> being too expensive" when he goes on to write ' Macs are priced too

    >
    > >> high to attract the user that doesn't need all those specs. That, as

    >
    > >> nospam preaches, doesn't mean they are "overpriced".'?

    >
    > >

    >
    > >he calls it "the mac argument".

    >
    >
    >
    > And what's wrong with that?




    I don't think that is the "Mac argument" the Mac arguments that I've seen are from those PC users that don't actually understand that the Mac uses more expensive parts and 'better' parts that the PC he see's as having the same or near identical tech specs.


    > and that is one of the reasons Do you think it's somehow wrong or a slur
    >
    > on Mac to claim "The full version is priced too high for the casual
    >
    > non-professional user, but that's not the same as being "overpriced"
    >
    > for what it delivers"?
    >


    That's one good way of putting it, but why bring the ability of teh user into it. ?

    i.e the casual non-professional user
     
    Whisky-dave, May 10, 2013
    #22
    1. Advertising

  3. RichA

    PeterN Guest

    On 5/9/2013 7:58 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
    > On Thu, 09 May 2013 14:19:49 -0400, PeterN
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> On 5/9/2013 1:10 PM, Bowser wrote:
    >>> On Wed, 08 May 2013 16:02:31 -0400, PeterN
    >>> <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> On 5/8/2013 1:50 PM, Bowser wrote:
    >>>>> On Tue, 7 May 2013 18:14:19 -0700 (PDT), RichA <>
    >>>>> wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Adobe is going to put its software in the Cloud and charge you a user
    >>>>>> fee to "rent" its use. This is like movies and music which are going
    >>>>>> in a similar direction. Problem is, it makes these things subject to
    >>>>>> the whims of companies, prevailing politics and morality. The
    >>>>>> companies decide they don't like something about it, or politicians
    >>>>>> decide it offends the general public, they pull it. This applies more
    >>>>>> to movies and music than to Adobe's software, but you never know what
    >>>>>> institutions and people will do with things that are not physically in
    >>>>>> your possession. Lastly, you also become victim of the service
    >>>>>> provider, service speed, etc., because all the use of the software is
    >>>>>> now cloud-based.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> This move is insulting, and I won't go along. When CS6 no longer
    >>>>> suffices, I'll move to another product. **** Adobe.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> I would not get too excited about a rumor posted as "fact," by Rich. As
    >>>> I said earlier, while Adobe is exploring the idea, it's far from a done
    >>>> deal. While I do not defend avarice by any entity, I think that PS is
    >>>> one of the most pirated software, and Adobe has a right to protect
    >>>> itself from theft.
    >>>
    >>> Two issues here:
    >>>
    >>> 1. It is a done deal. There are lots of news stories on this one, very
    >>> few positive.
    >>>
    >>> 2. Moving their SW to the cloud won't prevent piracy. Hardly. Thieves
    >>> will still steal, and crackers will still find a way.
    >>>
    >>> This is naked greed by Adobe, nothing more.
    >>>

    >>
    >> About two weeks ago I received a market survey from Adobe, on whether I
    >> would be interested in moving to the Cloud. The survey was after the
    >> announcement that development on CS 7 had stopped. Adobe would like you
    >> to think its a done deal, but I suspect it's a market test. MS tried
    >> this a few years ago, and go slammed back by user protest. I have signed
    >> a petition against the movement to the Cloud. My signature will be
    >> worthless unless several hundred thousand others join in. Also, if we
    >> give strong indicators of market resistance, instead of just bitching
    >> and monaing, Adobe will come around. Meanwhile, wht an opportunity for
    >> Corel to get back in the game.

    >
    > Fifteen years ago Corel's stuff was as good as Adobe's. Now its about
    > ten years behind. I doubt that it's got the money to bridge that gap
    > in a hurry.
    >


    Maybe not 10 years, but Corel certainly is not on a par with Adobe, The
    major isssue I have, is that on a subscription model, how much incentive
    is there for innovation. If that gap is not filled by Corel, somebody
    will step into the void.


    --
    PeterN
     
    PeterN, May 11, 2013
    #23
  4. RichA

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Tony Cooper
    <> wrote:

    > >> > it has nothing to do with macs. with rare
    > >> >exception, products that do more cost more. no surprise there.
    > >> >
    > >> >if macs are priced too high to attract the user that doesn't need all
    > >> >those specs, then so are similar pcs. why doesn't he mention those?
    > >>
    > >> The lowest priced Mac is higher in price than many PCs.

    > >
    > >only because it has better specs, not because it's a mac.

    >
    > Of course it's because it's a Mac. Who do you think decides what
    > features/specs a model will have?


    no, not because it's a mac.

    the price is higher because it has better specs, just as a similar spec
    lenovo or acer or sony would be priced higher than the 'many pcs'
    you're talking about.

    > >a similar spec pc will have a higher price than those 'many pcs' you're
    > >talking about.

    >
    > Certainly. But that's not what was said. The statement "The lowest
    > priced Mac is higher in price than many PCs" is patently obvious and
    > true.


    it's a misleading statement and you aren't going to get away with 'but
    it's true' excuse.

    the lowest price mac also does a whole lot more than many pcs, which is
    why it costs more. that's *also* patently obvious and true.

    > >> There are
    > >> people who don't have any interest or need for the additional features
    > >> of the lowest priced Macs, so they feel that the Macs are priced too
    > >> high. They aren't interested in the "do more".

    > >
    > >and they're not interested in the higher priced pcs either.
    > >
    > >but you don't mention that, do you?

    >
    > Of course I did. The higher priced PCs have additional features
    > compared to the lower priced PCs. It's right there above this.


    *now* you do, after i called you on it. you did not mention pcs in your
    earlier post.

    here's your post:

    In article <>, Tony Cooper
    <> wrote:
    > I won't argue with "overpriced", but the counter to that argument is
    > the one nospam trots out defending Apple's high prices: the "specs"
    > include more than the lower priced comparable programs. The only area
    > where PS CS is overpriced in comparison with what a comparable
    > featured program offers is when you consider Elements as a competitor.
    >
    > The full version is priced too high for the casual non-professional
    > user, but that's not the same as being "overpriced" for what it
    > delivers. Again, that's the Mac argument: Macs are priced too high
    > to attract the user that doesn't need all those specs. That, as
    > nospam preaches, doesn't mean they are "overpriced".
    >
    > I do argue with "underperforming". What performance issues does CS
    > have? What won't it do that it should do based on what is claimed?
    >
    > The underperformer is usually the user, not the program.


    you mention apple in the very first sentence. you mention macs twice in
    the second paragraph. nowhere do you mention pcs anywhere in that post.

    you do mention ps cs, which i guess if you have vision problems, could
    look like pcs. maybe that's it.

    > Are you really this thick?


    not as thick as you.

    > >there are also people who don't have any interest in the cheapest thing
    > >available. they want a quality product and willing to pay for it.
    > >
    > >you don't mention that either.

    >
    > No, I didn't. There are also people who have no interest in any
    > computer of any kind, and I didn't mention that. What I said was that
    > some people want the least expensive product.


    some do. not all.

    however, that doesn't have anything to do with macs.

    > >> The "comparable specs" argument doesn't work for them. They want an
    > >> entry level machine at a low price.

    > >
    > >some do, others do not.

    >
    > So who's arguing with that?
    >
    > >and what they're really interested in is solutions, not specs.

    >
    > Yes, and the least expensive can be the solution for some people.


    it can be, but it isn't always.

    many times, the least expensive choice is a bad user experience and
    people are willing to pay for something that doesn't suck. this is what
    companies are starting to realize.

    other times, people realize the cheapest isn't always as much of a
    bargain as they thought, especially when they have to buy all sorts of
    additional stuff to do what they set out to do. or, they realize the
    cheap product just won't cut it no matter what they do and they need
    something more capable, so they end up getting that instead.

    > >> There's no need to mention PCs
    > >> with "similar" specs. The market segment discussed isn't interested
    > >> in them, either.

    > >
    > >then there's no need to mention either one, so why single out macs?
    > >
    > >this is about bottom-tier versus mid-tier products, not mac versus pc.
    > >
    > >> That's no slam against Macs. It's simply a representation of how the
    > >> market works for just about every type of product.

    > >
    > >it's a slam against macs if you only mention macs.

    >
    > PCs are mentioned, and have been since the beginning.


    you're a liar. see above.

    > >if you *also* mention similar priced pcs, then it's about price tiers.
    > >
    > >but you don't.

    >
    > And what, pray tell, do you think determines price tiers? And who
    > determines what they will offer?


    features do, not the logo on the box.
     
    nospam, May 11, 2013
    #24
  5. RichA

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Eric Stevens
    <> wrote:

    > >> >> You quote Google.
    > >> >
    > >> >i mentioned google, microsoft and indirectly, amazon (kindle fire) and
    > >> >google again (nexus 7).
    > >> >
    > >> >> What about (for example) Samsung?
    > >> >
    > >> >what about them?
    > >>
    > >> I dunno.
    > >>
    > >> What about them in the context of iPhone?

    > >
    > >they copied it so well that even samsung's lawyers couldn't tell the
    > >difference in court. that's one way to catch up.

    >
    > So all you need to make an iPhone is a case?


    you need more than just a case, but the point is they copied it.

    > No wonder Samsung is selling more than Apple.


    overall they do, because samsung has zillions of models and apple has
    only one model plus the two previous year's models.

    if you compare the galaxy s3 (the model that directly competes with the
    iphone 5), samsung sells less than apple, about half as many.

    <http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57570235-37/iphone-5-beats-galaxy-s3-
    as-top-seller-says-report/>
    The iPhone 5 surpassed Samsung's Galaxy S3 last quarter as the
    hottest-selling smartphone worldwide, according to a Strategy
    Analytics report out today.

    > >> >he calls it "the mac argument".
    > >>
    > >> And what's wrong with that?

    > >
    > >it has nothing to do with macs. that's what.
    > >
    > >it's different price tiers. that's all.

    >
    > That's just another way to talk about price groups. Of course a more
    > highly spec'd machine will fall into a different price group/tier.


    exactly.

    might be a mac, might be a pc. it's about the specs, not the logo.

    > >> Do you think it's somehow wrong or a slur
    > >> on Mac to claim "The full version is priced too high for the casual
    > >> non-professional user, but that's not the same as being "overpriced"
    > >> for what it delivers"?

    > >
    > >if someone only mentions macs, yes. why single them out, when there are
    > >other products with similar specs that cost about the same?

    >
    > The situation of Macs is well known to many, making the argument easy
    > to understand. What other brand/model would you suggest?


    why single out one brand?

    > >> >it's not the mac argument. it has nothing to do with macs. with rare
    > >> >exception, products that do more cost more. no surprise there.
    > >>
    > >> Do you really mean that Apple and Mac supporters have never claimed
    > >> "The full version is priced too high for the casual non-professional
    > >> user, but that's not the same as being "overpriced" for what it
    > >> delivers"? I would be surprised if they haven't as that statement is
    > >> perfectly true. Why are you objecting to it?

    > >
    > >i'm objecting to tying it to macs when ignoring that similar pcs cost
    > >about the same. it's furthers the longstanding myth that macs are more
    > >expensive. they are not.

    >
    > You are overly sensitive. Does mentioning the name Mac bring you out
    > in hives?


    misinformation does.

    it doesn't matter what the misinformation is about. it could be apple
    or nikon or google or anyone else. if it's wrong, it needs to be
    corrected.

    there just happens to be a *lot* of misinformation about apple.
     
    nospam, May 11, 2013
    #25
  6. RichA

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Wed, 08 May 2013 14:58:11 -0500, George Kerby <>
    wrote:
    :
    :
    :
    : On 5/8/13 12:50 PM, in article ,
    : "Bowser" <> wrote:
    :
    : > On Tue, 7 May 2013 18:14:19 -0700 (PDT), RichA <>
    : > wrote:
    : >
    : >> Adobe is going to put its software in the Cloud and charge you a user
    : >> fee to "rent" its use. This is like movies and music which are going
    : >> in a similar direction. Problem is, it makes these things subject to
    : >> the whims of companies, prevailing politics and morality. The
    : >> companies decide they don't like something about it, or politicians
    : >> decide it offends the general public, they pull it. This applies more
    : >> to movies and music than to Adobe's software, but you never know what
    : >> institutions and people will do with things that are not physically in
    : >> your possession. Lastly, you also become victim of the service
    : >> provider, service speed, etc., because all the use of the software is
    : >> now cloud-based.
    : >
    : > This move is insulting, and I won't go along. When CS6 no longer
    : > suffices, I'll move to another product. **** Adobe.
    :
    : Agreed. Their stuff has become overpriced and underperforming for the last
    : seven years or so. **** em', indeed!

    <chuckle!> And to think it was just last month, when I was looking for a way
    to add ICC metadata to some JPEG images, that several of the Usual Suspects
    gave me to understand what a lazy, ignorant Luddite I am for never having used
    Photoshop. :^)

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, May 11, 2013
    #26
  7. RichA

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Sat, 11 May 2013 11:31:49 -0400, nospam <>
    wrote:

    >In article <>, Tony Cooper
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >> >> > it has nothing to do with macs. with rare
    >> >> >exception, products that do more cost more. no surprise there.
    >> >> >
    >> >> >if macs are priced too high to attract the user that doesn't need all
    >> >> >those specs, then so are similar pcs. why doesn't he mention those?
    >> >>
    >> >> The lowest priced Mac is higher in price than many PCs.
    >> >
    >> >only because it has better specs, not because it's a mac.

    >>
    >> Of course it's because it's a Mac. Who do you think decides what
    >> features/specs a model will have?

    >
    >no, not because it's a mac.
    >

    We are getting to the point here where I can't believe that you are
    serious about what you say. You are denying, apparently, that Apple
    isn't making the decision to offer laptops that are priced higher -but
    offer more features- than many PC laptops. If the manufacturer of the
    product does not make the decision of what to offer, who does?

    >the price is higher because it has better specs, just as a similar spec
    >lenovo or acer or sony would be priced higher than the 'many pcs'
    >you're talking about.


    Do you deny, though, that many PCs are priced lower than the minimum
    offerings by Mac? The question isn't about "why", but about whether
    or not the statement is true. You are arguing a point not made.
    >
    >> >a similar spec pc will have a higher price than those 'many pcs' you're
    >> >talking about.

    >>
    >> Certainly. But that's not what was said. The statement "The lowest
    >> priced Mac is higher in price than many PCs" is patently obvious and
    >> true.

    >
    >it's a misleading statement and you aren't going to get away with 'but
    >it's true' excuse.


    No, it's not misleading at all. It's absolutely and obviously true
    and misleads no one.

    >the lowest price mac also does a whole lot more than many pcs, which is
    >why it costs more. that's *also* patently obvious and true.


    Well, I'm not sure that "do a lot more" is necessarily true. All
    laptops, essentially, do the same thing. The OS may allow one to do
    something better, the screen may present a clearer image, the
    mechanical components may be of better quality...but they basically
    all do the same thing. There are some things, like a built-in video
    camera, that are not present in all laptops, but that's about it for
    "do".

    >> And what, pray tell, do you think determines price tiers? And who
    >> determines what they will offer?

    >
    >features do, not the logo on the box.


    Bizarre. Who determines what the features will be if not the people
    in the company whose logo it is? Features don't make any decisions.
    They are the result of decisions.

    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
     
    Tony Cooper, May 11, 2013
    #27
  8. RichA

    J. Clarke Guest

    In article <>, tonycooper214
    @gmail.com says...
    >
    > On Sat, 11 May 2013 11:31:49 -0400, nospam <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >In article <>, Tony Cooper
    > ><> wrote:
    > >
    > >> >> > it has nothing to do with macs. with rare
    > >> >> >exception, products that do more cost more. no surprise there.
    > >> >> >
    > >> >> >if macs are priced too high to attract the user that doesn't need all
    > >> >> >those specs, then so are similar pcs. why doesn't he mention those?
    > >> >>
    > >> >> The lowest priced Mac is higher in price than many PCs.
    > >> >
    > >> >only because it has better specs, not because it's a mac.
    > >>
    > >> Of course it's because it's a Mac. Who do you think decides what
    > >> features/specs a model will have?

    > >
    > >no, not because it's a mac.
    > >

    > We are getting to the point here where I can't believe that you are
    > serious about what you say. You are denying, apparently, that Apple
    > isn't making the decision to offer laptops that are priced higher -but
    > offer more features- than many PC laptops. If the manufacturer of the
    > product does not make the decision of what to offer, who does?
    >
    > >the price is higher because it has better specs, just as a similar spec
    > >lenovo or acer or sony would be priced higher than the 'many pcs'
    > >you're talking about.

    >
    > Do you deny, though, that many PCs are priced lower than the minimum
    > offerings by Mac? The question isn't about "why", but about whether
    > or not the statement is true. You are arguing a point not made.
    > >
    > >> >a similar spec pc will have a higher price than those 'many pcs' you're
    > >> >talking about.
    > >>
    > >> Certainly. But that's not what was said. The statement "The lowest
    > >> priced Mac is higher in price than many PCs" is patently obvious and
    > >> true.

    > >
    > >it's a misleading statement and you aren't going to get away with 'but
    > >it's true' excuse.

    >
    > No, it's not misleading at all. It's absolutely and obviously true
    > and misleads no one.
    >
    > >the lowest price mac also does a whole lot more than many pcs, which is
    > >why it costs more. that's *also* patently obvious and true.

    >
    > Well, I'm not sure that "do a lot more" is necessarily true. All
    > laptops, essentially, do the same thing. The OS may allow one to do
    > something better, the screen may present a clearer image, the
    > mechanical components may be of better quality...but they basically
    > all do the same thing. There are some things, like a built-in video
    > camera, that are not present in all laptops, but that's about it for
    > "do".


    And where is the Macbook tablet? My Thinkpad tablet is so old that it
    had XP on it when I got it. But Apple has never put a penabled screen
    on a Macbook.

    > >> And what, pray tell, do you think determines price tiers? And who
    > >> determines what they will offer?

    > >
    > >features do, not the logo on the box.

    >
    > Bizarre. Who determines what the features will be if not the people
    > in the company whose logo it is? Features don't make any decisions.
    > They are the result of decisions.
     
    J. Clarke, May 12, 2013
    #28
  9. RichA

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, J. Clarke
    <> wrote:

    > And where is the Macbook tablet?


    ipad.

    > My Thinkpad tablet is so old that it
    > had XP on it when I got it. But Apple has never put a penabled screen
    > on a Macbook.


    because that would be stupid. mac os is designed for mouse/keyboard,
    not a stylus and certainly not touch.

    there were windows tablets with styluses but they never sold
    particularly well. it's a bad idea.

    the ipad was designed for touch from the ground up, not something that
    was added to the existing mac os. that's why it's so successful, far
    more than any previous tablet had been.
     
    nospam, May 12, 2013
    #29
  10. RichA

    android Guest

    In article <120520131037495945%>,
    nospam <> wrote:

    > In article <>, J. Clarke
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > > And where is the Macbook tablet?

    >
    > ipad.
    >
    > > My Thinkpad tablet is so old that it
    > > had XP on it when I got it. But Apple has never put a penabled screen
    > > on a Macbook.

    >
    > because that would be stupid. mac os is designed for mouse/keyboard,
    > not a stylus and certainly not touch.
    >
    > there were windows tablets with styluses but they never sold
    > particularly well. it's a bad idea.
    >
    > the ipad was designed for touch from the ground up, not something that
    > was added to the existing mac os. that's why it's so successful, far
    > more than any previous tablet had been.


    Try to load some proper software on them pads for pro work on the go!
    With a proper os on a pad you can do that, and ad keyboard/mouse.
    --
    teleportation kills
     
    android, May 12, 2013
    #30
  11. RichA

    android Guest

    In article <CDB5181A.9B7B8%>,
    George Kerby <> wrote:

    > On 5/12/13 6:49 AM, in article , "android"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > > In article <>,
    > > "J. Clarke" <> wrote:
    > >
    > >>>> the lowest price mac also does a whole lot more than many pcs, which is
    > >>>> why it costs more. that's *also* patently obvious and true.
    > >>>
    > >>> Well, I'm not sure that "do a lot more" is necessarily true. All
    > >>> laptops, essentially, do the same thing. The OS may allow one to do
    > >>> something better, the screen may present a clearer image, the
    > >>> mechanical components may be of better quality...but they basically
    > >>> all do the same thing. There are some things, like a built-in video
    > >>> camera, that are not present in all laptops, but that's about it for
    > >>> "do".
    > >>
    > >> And where is the Macbook tablet? My Thinkpad tablet is so old that it
    > >> had XP on it when I got it. But Apple has never put a penabled screen
    > >> on a Macbook.

    > >
    > > http://www.modbook.com/

    >
    > Sure they are selling like free hotcakes! LOL!
    >
    > And Tony C thought Macs were expensive...


    They, ain't expensive if they pay for your meals...
    --
    teleportation kills
     
    android, May 12, 2013
    #31
  12. RichA

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, android <>
    wrote:

    > > > And where is the Macbook tablet?

    > >
    > > ipad.
    > >
    > > > My Thinkpad tablet is so old that it
    > > > had XP on it when I got it. But Apple has never put a penabled screen
    > > > on a Macbook.

    > >
    > > because that would be stupid. mac os is designed for mouse/keyboard,
    > > not a stylus and certainly not touch.
    > >
    > > there were windows tablets with styluses but they never sold
    > > particularly well. it's a bad idea.
    > >
    > > the ipad was designed for touch from the ground up, not something that
    > > was added to the existing mac os. that's why it's so successful, far
    > > more than any previous tablet had been.

    >
    > Try to load some proper software on them pads for pro work on the go!


    nearly 1 million apps from which to choose, many of which can be used
    for 'pro work' whatever that means.

    > With a proper os on a pad you can do that, and ad keyboard/mouse.


    ios is a 'proper os'. there's nothing improper about it and for tasks
    that require a lot of typing, use a bluetooth keyboard. a mouse makes
    no sense on a touch device. your finger *is* the mouse.

    meanwhile, the windows tablets that ran what you call a 'proper os',
    failed in the marketplace.
     
    nospam, May 12, 2013
    #32
  13. RichA

    nospam Guest

    In article <CDB51792.9B7B7%>, George Kerby
    <> wrote:

    > > And where is the Macbook tablet? My Thinkpad tablet is so old that it
    > > had XP on it when I got it. But Apple has never put a penabled screen
    > > on a Macbook.

    >
    > It didn't work for PC, why should Apple try such nonsense? Particularly when
    > they have such a commanding success with the iPad line?


    exactly.
     
    nospam, May 12, 2013
    #33
  14. RichA

    android Guest

    In article <120520131113254097%>,
    nospam <> wrote:

    > In article <>, android <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > > > > And where is the Macbook tablet?
    > > >
    > > > ipad.
    > > >
    > > > > My Thinkpad tablet is so old that it
    > > > > had XP on it when I got it. But Apple has never put a penabled screen
    > > > > on a Macbook.
    > > >
    > > > because that would be stupid. mac os is designed for mouse/keyboard,
    > > > not a stylus and certainly not touch.
    > > >
    > > > there were windows tablets with styluses but they never sold
    > > > particularly well. it's a bad idea.
    > > >
    > > > the ipad was designed for touch from the ground up, not something that
    > > > was added to the existing mac os. that's why it's so successful, far
    > > > more than any previous tablet had been.

    > >
    > > Try to load some proper software on them pads for pro work on the go!

    >
    > nearly 1 million apps from which to choose, many of which can be used
    > for 'pro work' whatever that means.
    >
    > > With a proper os on a pad you can do that, and ad keyboard/mouse.

    >
    > ios is a 'proper os'. there's nothing improper about it and for tasks
    > that require a lot of typing, use a bluetooth keyboard. a mouse makes
    > no sense on a touch device. your finger *is* the mouse.
    >
    > meanwhile, the windows tablets that ran what you call a 'proper os',
    > failed in the marketplace.


    I'm typing on a Mac right now, as you see in the headers. I don't think
    that Indesign or Photoshop loads well on pads, in their full versions.
    --
    teleportation kills
     
    android, May 12, 2013
    #34
  15. RichA

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, android <>
    wrote:

    > > > With a proper os on a pad you can do that, and ad keyboard/mouse.

    > >
    > > ios is a 'proper os'. there's nothing improper about it and for tasks
    > > that require a lot of typing, use a bluetooth keyboard. a mouse makes
    > > no sense on a touch device. your finger *is* the mouse.
    > >
    > > meanwhile, the windows tablets that ran what you call a 'proper os',
    > > failed in the marketplace.

    >
    > I'm typing on a Mac right now, as you see in the headers. I don't think
    > that Indesign or Photoshop loads well on pads, in their full versions.


    so what? those aren't the only two programs in the world and certainly
    not what defines 'pro'.

    anyway, photoshop touch runs on the ipad. also, iphoto on the ipad is
    more capable than iphoto on the mac. there are hundreds of other photo
    manipulation apps.

    there are apps to work with microsoft office files and microsoft is
    working on office for the ipad.

    there are also a lot of apps that only exist on an ipad and do not
    exist on a mac/pc.

    pick the best tool for the job.
     
    nospam, May 12, 2013
    #35
  16. RichA

    android Guest

    In article <120520131131007416%>,
    nospam <> wrote:

    > anyway, photoshop touch runs on the ipad. also, iphoto on the ipad is
    > more capable than iphoto on the mac. there are hundreds of other photo
    > manipulation apps.


    PS touch won't handle more than 12 mp or so...
    --
    teleportation kills
     
    android, May 12, 2013
    #36
  17. RichA

    PeterN Guest

    On 5/12/2013 11:31 AM, nospam wrote:

    >
    > pick the best tool for the job.
    >


    Yup!
    Last November I was looking for a new lightweight computer.
    At the Apple store they advised me that their was no Apple product that
    would meet my needs.
    I wound up with my Lenovo.

    --
    PeterN
     
    PeterN, May 12, 2013
    #37
  18. RichA

    J. Clarke Guest

    In article <>, says...
    >
    > In article <>,
    > "J. Clarke" <> wrote:
    >
    > > > >the lowest price mac also does a whole lot more than many pcs, which is
    > > > >why it costs more. that's *also* patently obvious and true.
    > > >
    > > > Well, I'm not sure that "do a lot more" is necessarily true. All
    > > > laptops, essentially, do the same thing. The OS may allow one to do
    > > > something better, the screen may present a clearer image, the
    > > > mechanical components may be of better quality...but they basically
    > > > all do the same thing. There are some things, like a built-in video
    > > > camera, that are not present in all laptops, but that's about it for
    > > > "do".

    > >
    > > And where is the Macbook tablet? My Thinkpad tablet is so old that it
    > > had XP on it when I got it. But Apple has never put a penabled screen
    > > on a Macbook.

    >
    > http://www.modbook.com/


    Which is not made by Apple.
     
    J. Clarke, May 12, 2013
    #38
  19. RichA

    android Guest

    In article <>,
    "J. Clarke" <> wrote:

    > In article <>, says...
    > >
    > > In article <>,
    > > "J. Clarke" <> wrote:
    > >
    > > > > >the lowest price mac also does a whole lot more than many pcs, which is
    > > > > >why it costs more. that's *also* patently obvious and true.
    > > > >
    > > > > Well, I'm not sure that "do a lot more" is necessarily true. All
    > > > > laptops, essentially, do the same thing. The OS may allow one to do
    > > > > something better, the screen may present a clearer image, the
    > > > > mechanical components may be of better quality...but they basically
    > > > > all do the same thing. There are some things, like a built-in video
    > > > > camera, that are not present in all laptops, but that's about it for
    > > > > "do".
    > > >
    > > > And where is the Macbook tablet? My Thinkpad tablet is so old that it
    > > > had XP on it when I got it. But Apple has never put a penabled screen
    > > > on a Macbook.

    > >
    > > http://www.modbook.com/

    >
    > Which is not made by Apple.


    Nooo... It''s a third party modification of an Apple product...
    --
    teleportation kills
     
    android, May 12, 2013
    #39
  20. RichA

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, android <>
    wrote:

    > > anyway, photoshop touch runs on the ipad. also, iphoto on the ipad is
    > > more capable than iphoto on the mac. there are hundreds of other photo
    > > manipulation apps.

    >
    > PS touch won't handle more than 12 mp or so...


    so what?
     
    nospam, May 12, 2013
    #40
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Zogby
    Replies:
    188
    Views:
    3,014
    Rowdy Yates
    Aug 15, 2004
  2. One-Shot Scot

    Rental DVDs: "Rental Only - Not For Resale."

    One-Shot Scot, Sep 11, 2004, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,521
    One-Shot Scot
    Sep 11, 2004
  3. Mikhail
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    384
    Stephen
    Jul 28, 2009
  4. RichA
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    186
    Sandman
    Sep 2, 2013
  5. RichA

    Apple's foray into the "service/rental economy"

    RichA, Jun 3, 2014, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    59
    Views:
    633
    Whisky-dave
    Jun 17, 2014
Loading...

Share This Page