No, they don't "still" come with iTunes preinstalled. Nor did they ever. You either got a used and/or returned unit.
HP computers came with iTunes when they had their agreement with Apple (HP iPod)
No, they don't "still" come with iTunes preinstalled. Nor did they ever. You either got a used and/or returned unit.
So unless you think modern print has looked ugly for the last 60 years, you should at least appreciate some of what Metro is doing.
As of a while ago, Microsoft announced that they had sold 100,000,000 Win8 licenses.
Are there even that many Macs in the wild, total?
There was an article that Windows 8 gives the continuous "sold vs. shipped" debate a whole new meaning: There are estimates that of 100 million of Windows 8 copies _sold_ (and paid for) only about a third are actually shipped. That would be PC makers having to pay Microsoft for Windows 8 but then shipping the computer with Windows 7 because that is what the customer wants.
No.
The same style applied to two entire different industries and products doesn't mean you should respect both applications of it.
The reason I dislike metro is it seems a very odd fit on a 16:9 screen. The programs I've used tend to go with massively oversized content with text that is way too small (look at the headlines app). I know I can adjust the scale but you should see how confused my customers look when I explain to them the difference between making things larger in metro apps and that the DPI settings for the desktop don't effect the start screen or "fullscreen" (what I've resorted to calling them rather than explaining to people what Metro is) programs.
Oh yea, I forgot its "Modern" UI, they had to retract the Metro name very quickly (after already officially using it) when the lawsuits came.
It's much more likely that iPads will remain what they are. They will be given to the CEOs and board members while the average worker continues to use a Windows-based computer. This will likely have Office on it.
iPads not having Office will lose them money, sure, but it's not going to lead to a doomsday scenario. Office not being on the iPad will, however, slow enterprise adoption. So will a lack of a few other tools that certain professionals use.
Metro is like launchpad... no one uses it, pointless. Go back to "desktop" and stick with it.
Well, not withstanding that all of the those old Windows crashes (which by the way, if you looked at them, were almost always ring-0/Device Driver crashes, caused by 3rd party hardware or device driver faults,) were fairly commonplace, they were pretty much wiped out by the time that Vista SP1 came out, with a full WDM library. Now, lately you might see a driver/hardware issue but its very rare these days (and also, again 3rd party,) and rarer still some outer ring crashes (although almost universally games, frequently doing something dumb with the GPU.)
I can't think of an application crash in a basic consumer application actually written by Microsoft, like say, I.E. 10
I'd also like to think if they had tens or hundreds of thousands of people experiencing that issue in that admittedly critical application, they might actually do something to fix it, within 4-5 years.
I didn't say iCloud was your solution to not having Safari crash. That was, indeed Apples solution. It follows however, that if there is this issue common enough for iOS that half a million views are on a single thread, that iCloud isn't a full solution to PC-free syncing on iOS.
If Apple says disable iCloud how can you sync/backup/restore etc to an iOS device without iTunes?
Its just an example of something I (and I'm sure many people) did last week. I'll repeat, can you do that with iCloud or Dropbox?
Net Appliances says 60 million in use. Which is right around the number of macs shipped total in the last 8 years. Its a sure bet that Mac OS X gets utterly eclipsed by the end of the year, and 95% probability by the end of the summer.
But you CAN charge an iphone with a windows 8 pc or tablet. You CAN'T with another iphone (but this was really a piggy backed argument regarding my comment to someone else's fatuous statement) We're arguing different things. You're arguing you don't have to charge an iphone with a PC-- true. I'm arguing that you can both charge and performance syncing/maintenance tasks on a PC that you simply cannot do with iOS devices alone.
However and incidentally, if you had just two iOS devices, and no plug, you couldn't charge one or the other iOS device, but if you had an iOS device and a Windows 8 machine with a usb cable you could charge the iOS device.
Understood. All I'm saying is that I'm very well aware that iOS can't do everything for itself, alone without the support of iTunes. Although 3rd party apps can help in some cases, that certainly doesn't mean all cases.
Separate issue... but he was talking about the lack of easy native file access via standard protocols to iOS devices. If you took a random hard drive with gigs of music on it, and wanted it on your iOS device you'd be very likely to need an intermediate pc to transfer said music.
Apparently I haven't been explaining my position clearly enough. Let me try this again.
How many people are using a smartphone from 2007? Very few people. How many people are using a Windows OS from 2007 or prior? QUITE A LOT.
As for what you were wrong about, you said I couldn't rip music with my MBA. You were wrong.
I'm not sure what you think I disagree with here.
I thought it was pretty obvious that I wasn't including extra hardware in the scenario. You know, since we were not including extra hardware in the iPad scenario.
-Then why make the comparison at all?
-So I can rip music onto my iPad with other hardware? And no, you can't say 'sure, just use a PC to do it'. -_-
I already answered that. Because I find it interesting that iOS could soon become a more popular OS than Windows. Obviously, the poster who made the comparison did as well.
Why can't I say that? But it's not really the point. An iPad can't rip CDs. It's not a feature. That doesn't make it dependent on a PC. It simply makes it different than a PC.
But it isn't really all that interesting. They're products with completely different life cycles. >_>;
BTW the total number of macs sold as of 2012 is roughly 122,000,000 but that comparison is hardly fair.
Just goes to show how some people think. 100,000,000 units in a few months is seen as a failure, but 122 M over several decades is seen as a stunning achievement.
You gotta understand that those 122,000,000 people willingly chose Macs, whereas those 100,000,000 people who bought Windows didn't have any other choice.
According to some people, tablets are kicking normal PCs to the curb. Oh, and then there are places you can buy Linux PCs -f you look-.
That little quip above was a sarcastic play on words to all those people here who were saying that no one willingly buys a Windows PC.
Weirdly enough, my response to them was about the same as yours.
>>As I posted earlier, NetMarketShare has Windows 8 at 3.82% and Mac at 7.01% for April 2013.
Exactly. Windows 8 passed Linux desktop market share, but not OS X.
Just goes to show how some people think. 100,000,000 units in a few months is seen as a failure, but 122 M over several decades is seen as a stunning achievement.
Funny how you lump all OSX together, but list Windows 8 separate from the rest of Windows. I think we need a fair comparison if you're going to compare Apples to Apples (or rather Windows).
Thus, what is Mountain Lion's share? I see it as 38% of OSX for April 2013, so that would mean it has a 2.66% overall market share versus 3.82% for Windows 8.
Except windows 8 users can still use iTunes.
If that happened (as unlikely as it is) Apple could revisit their decision. Not a big deal.