If you bought the porn from Apple, it would be OK to leave your ring on. But if you bought porn elsewhere, it would be disrespectful to leave your Apple Ring on your finger. Infidelity is ugly, after all.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Analyst Claims 60-Inch 'iTV' Could Launch in Late 2013 With 'iRing' Motion Control and iPad-Like Auxiliary Screens
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If you bought the porn from Apple, it would be OK to leave your ring on. But if you bought porn elsewhere, it would be disrespectful to leave your Apple Ring on your finger. Infidelity is ugly, after all.
Huh, didn't know that. Well I guess Apple are s*** out of luck on that name then haha.
That is heresy.
Who wants a stylus? You have to get em, put em away, you lose em. Yech! Nobody wants a stylus. So lets not use a stylus.
God gave us 10 styluseslets not invent another
As soon as you have a stylus, youre dead
-The Steve
"[W]e believe Apple will release a miniature device called "iRing" that will be placed on a user's finger and act as a navigation pointer for "iTV"', enhancing the motion detection experience and negating some of the functionality found in a remote."
Oh please. That is the dumbest thing I've read on here in years, and you all know how much competition there is in the "dumb" category.
Ok, so maybe a miniature controller or some sort. Worn as a ring? No way.
Oh please. That is the dumbest thing I've read on here in years, and you all know how much competition there is in the "dumb" category.
Ok, so maybe a miniature controller or some sort. Worn as a ring? No way.
What I want is for them to shut up. Or at least when they make a claim like this and it is proven totally wrong then they should be banned from ever making such claims again. They make the companies they work for look stupid when they toss out these wild and crazy claims.
----------
As an option sure. But not 'in the box' as THE system. Let the user decide if they want to ring' watch, device or even just the simple silver remote
Not exactly. Accessories don't suck and the user experience can be better with them. For some users. THAT is the part that Apple knows. That the opinion is not universal and thus it is better not to require them so those that want can pick what they want and those that don't can still use their whatever
Not only that, but it will have no HDMI inputs. You will simply buy an adapter (or 5) from Apple at $79.99 each.
But everybody uses DVI already, don't they?
Good luck with that content provider bit. They still can't get HBO to put up shows in a timely manner, can't get even 720p on all titles and the pricing is wicked. 4k content would be like $50 a movie and $9.99 a tv episode.
And then there's the bandwidth
Yeah, Apple would not do this. You should be able to use an iPhone or iPod or the Apple Remote to do the wireless pointing and the iPad to do the job of the small screen.
I guess Apple is dead then.
http://www.patentlyapple.com/patent...nced-active-stylus-to-work-with-idevices.html
Better yet, an Apple toe ring so I don't have to lift my hand to change channels.
Or an ear-Ring? Just shake your head!
Attachments
That particular situation was not so cut and dry.
The truth was basically that Cisco bought the product and trademark from another company and cancelled the product. They failed to have a product under said mark until something like 5 days before their last grace period to renew the trademark was over when they got wind that Apple was going to apply for the mark as soon as it was open. So they suddenly put out a press release for a new product and applied to renew the mark. Apple took them to court saying this suddenly announced and to be released later in the year product was merely a ploy to keep the mark from Apple. The courts basically agreed and said Cisco had to share ownership but if they failed to actually release this product or ended it they gave up their share to Apple.
This is the absolute dumbest thing I have ever read. The iRing? What an absolute joke.
Let me get this straight... to use this stupid TV, I have to buy an iRing and wave it at the screen like some idiot, then I have to go get my mini iTV(that looks exactly like an iPad) and carry that around with me all over the house. And I also have to wear my useless iWatch for some reason to make this whole stupid contraption work properly.
This whole idea really is stupid beyond belief. Apple has REALLY jumped the shark if they ever release something so stupid.
Let me get this straight... to use this stupid TV, I have to buy an iRing and wave it at the screen like some idiot, then I have to go get my mini iTV(that looks exactly like an iPad) and carry that around with me all over the house. And I also have to wear my useless iWatch for some reason to make this whole stupid contraption work properly.
This whole idea really is stupid beyond belief. Apple has REALLY jumped the shark if they ever release something so stupid.
Well guess what. An "iRing" controller and "iPad-like" secondary screens won't revolutionize anything.
When Apple "revolutionizes" an industry, it sets out to totally own that industry. In terms of, yes, hardware + OS, but also in profit share, mindshare, and most importantly in terms of infrastructure. Apple sets out to replace the current infrastructure with its own, re-making that industry in its own image. Apple's new infrastructure becomes indispensable to the industry going forward. The device and control mechanisms are just the frosting on the cake.
It takes a long time to build up an infrastructure. And sometimes it can be done in secret, so when it's unveiled, all competitors are instantly years behind. Because there's no shortcut.
Other times, infrastructure technology can be tested in the open, right under everyone's eyes. Click-wheel iPod games for example. Remember those? The few, obscure, cheap, games that were available for mid-2000s iPods? Well, Apple used them to test online purchase, download, and installation of software onto mobile devices. Through iTunes. And that led to the App Store, which is one of the major value adds of the current iOS ecosystem, if not the biggest value add. And Apple got the basic App Store features ironed out before the first iPhone was ever released.
So, whether infrastructure development, testing, and iteration is done publicly or not, the infrastructure is the key to anything Apple will do in the television space. And that includes content, which requires contracts with many deeply entrenched old-guard content providers and distribution networks. Many of which will work hard to avoid becoming iTunes monkeys like record labels and recording artists or destroyed like the Tower Records and Blockbusters of the world.
Hardware shmardware. Apple's hardware-profit business model could totally change for television. They might not even need their own television set. An old Hollywood saying comes to mind:
"Content is king. Distribution is King Kong."
Apple needs to bring as much content to the table as possible in their remake of the television industry. But they absolutely must own a new, powerful, and easy-to-use distribution mechanism. Such as iCloud plus some variant of the current iTunes + Apple TV "hockey puck." Without that, they'll just be another high-end TV maker. None of whom is revolutionizing much of anything (other than industrial design.)
(Edit: By the way, the DirecTV app for iPad has an incredibly good remote control feature. In fact, the whole app is unbelievably good. The "iPad-like" controller is already here.)
I bet the folks at Apple who deliberately leaked the iRing nonsense are having a jolly good laugh today. Never heard anything so ridiculous. It's not a late April fool by any chance?