ridiculous that this doesn't work in 10.5 Leopard.
ridiculous that you're complaining when you've had 4 years to do a $29 upgrade.
Also, iChat works just fine.
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.
Apple Improves Full Screen Performance on FaceTime for Mac
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
ridiculous that you're complaining when you've had 4 years to do a $29 upgrade.
Also, iChat works just fine.
And here I was thinking Snow leopard came out Aug. 09.....
For those having trouble because the App Store doesn't recognize an installed app. Have you opened those apps for the first time yet? That happened to me with iMovie, but after I opened it for the first time, the Apps store recognized it.
Theres no issue there. CPU going to 130% for a video streaming app is nothing. The video has to be captured and compressed on the fly and sent across the internet while at the same time receiving video and decoding it.
Don't be a troll... anything can be considered minor compared to some things that happen around the world. It's all about context.
In the context of this forum and what we're talking about, it IS outrageous. What about iLife? 'Cause I have no doubt that this is the way that the iLife package is going. They are going to have to fix this somehow.
Zimmer, you are so off topic with this thread. You criticize Menge for complaining about this techincal topic while "Billions are starving in poverty"? Yet you have a:
24" iMac, 2.16GHz C2D, 2.5GB RAM, 550GB HD
17" MacBook Pro, 2.66GHz i7, 4GB RAM, 500GB HD
16GB iPhone 3GS White
Apple TV 2nd Gen
So what are your priorities with all of these luxuries with which you indulge yourself? You could have a Cricket phone (or equivalent) and a cheap PC (or old, used Mac) for thousands of dollars less, and contribute the difference towards world poverty.
I don't care how much money you contribute to charity -- if any at all -- but unless you demonstrate a sacrifice of living at a level of Mother Teresa or Gandhi, your remonstrances are empty.
Please, spare us these maudlin posts until you are ready to abandon your personal luxuries. Until then, they are nothing less than hypocritical finger-pointing.
Has this fixed the problem with FaceTime that won't let you even use the service? My mum's iMac won't accept her AppleID or MobileMe for use on FaceTime, reporting a "network connection" problem after spinning for ages - yet it works perfectly on her iPhone 4 on the same network?
For the few people who are complaining about Apple charging for FaceTime, did Apple ever say that the app would remain free after it exited it's beta? No.
Macbook Pro
Are people having issues downloading the update because of a different email address used for purchasing the machine vs the app store?
On a side note, Curious if this update made it into the mbp I just purchased.
Are people having issues downloading the update because of a different email address used for purchasing the machine vs the app store?
On a side note, Curious if this update made it into the mbp I just purchased.
It's not much different with Skype for Mac.
And I wonder how come I never get such a nice image quality and DoF as shown on the screenshot with camera on my MBP...
The accounting requirements are real. This is part of GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles), and imposed by the SEC as part of financial reporting requirements for a publicly traded company. I sometimes face this exact same issue at my own company. If you don't follow the rules, you end up having to restate income, which can have a detrimental effect on the stock price.
It's not SOX, it's GAAP. If you ship an "incomplete" product, you can't recognize revenue for the product until the product is "complete". This is an SEC reporting requirement. If Apple ships a free "new functional component", even if it's software, that means (possibly), per the SEC, the customer should have received it in the first place. So Apple could have to go back and restate any revenue for the original products which are getting the new component. It's a gray area, which clearly doesn't apply to bug fixes, but clearly does apply to a new function that is fully branded and promoted, as FaceTime is.
Although the SEC has cracked down on the most egregious examples of companies shipping incomplete products (for example, totally disfunctional products or even empty boxes), it's unlikely they would come after Apple in this case. But GAAP interpretation can sometimes be something of an art, and in most big companies the lawyers force the company to err on the side of caution in order to avoid possible problems. The downside in this case would be possible restatement of billions of dollars in revenue.
Understood, but ....
If this was *really* only being done to dodge a potential legal technicality, why wouldn't Apple just sell these upgrades for 1 cent, instead of what comes out to over a dollar after sales tax?
If this was *really* only being done to dodge a potential legal technicality, why wouldn't Apple just sell these upgrades for 1 cent, instead of what comes out to over a dollar after sales tax?
Because it looks better to shareholders if you charge more for it!!!
Let's be clear, there is absolutely no law that requires Apple to charge for FaceTime or any of these other items. Apple is CHOOSING to do it.
This is all about appearances to shareholders. If they give it away, they have to account for doing that, and it would show up as a loss. If they charge for it, it's $$$$ PROFIT on a new product. Why charge 99 cents instead of 1 cent? MORE PROFIT! If you only care about appearances to your shareholders, which of the 3 do you choose?
But let's stop this pretending that some law requires them to charge for it. It is totally false, and intentionally perpetuating that falsehood is a LIE.