If I were you, I'd surf elsewhere. Going to macrumors.com, Thinksecret.com or a myriad of other like-minded sites devoted to everything Apple, you're going to be frustrated to no end for a long time to come.I am so sick of iPhone this and iPhone that....until the thing comes comes out, who cares???
This looks rediculous now. hoo - rah...![]()
That's an entirely different arguement.
Leopard is SOFTWARE, which is something that Apple can develop in-house, without hardware suppliers.
Leopard's delay was entirely Apple's fault.
The iPhone delay isn't the same.
The iPhone, just like everything else that Apple offers in terms of HARDWARE is dependent on whether or not Apple can actually get the parts and components it needs.
Apple can't just wave a wand and suddenly produce the chips it needs. It has to depend on other companies to supply the chips.
Do you guys honestly not see the difference here?
[edit: the article mentions how all the suppliers are meeting their ship times and goals, so it appears that waiting for the required parts isn't the cause for the delay. my mistake.]
My mom's stock is still at 15% of it's 1999 value. It's all about timing.
So where do you draw the line? I can make the same argument about leopard.... Leopard won't be available because Apple's suppliers (employees) are unable to produce the code by the supplied date. It's not Apple's fault after all, it's the employees. Suppliers are very much employees. They were chosen for their ability to deliver a product just like an employee. They are paid for their goods and services supplied to the company. They are both and expense and a liability to the company and it is the company's duty to investigate the abilities of each to meet a deadline or demand. It's that simple. Chain of command. If a supplier can't supply a part or a programmer can't perform, it is Apple's fault. They chose poorly. If it were someone else's fault then a stockholder would have recourse with that person or company. It doesn't work that way. We vote with our feet or dollars and Apple does to.
Quick quiz... are you a liberal or conservative?... If you are self employed, and personally couldn't turn in a project on time because your computer crashed because of a defective part and you lost the job is it your fault or the computer manufacturer's?
Answer A. - your fault. Conservative. You understand it's your job to choose the most reliable computer and have a backup plan. Your work is too important.
B. Computer makers fault - liberal - You have no personal responsibility in the matter. There should be a government agency ensuring the reliability of computers with a new computer reliability tax which should be placed upon those that can afford it. (hint: they can afford the tax because they take personal responsibility for their actions and knowning that, are more successful)
You won't see Apple at a press conference stating "hey, it's not our fault, so and so couldn't provide enough hard drives, don't blame us. Sure, I guess it could easily happen again. We have no control over things like that. Gosh, I hope our next product isn't delayed too. Everybody cross your fingers. This is all just a big game of luck you know. Like rich people. They all inherited the money or won the lottery or something."
What you will see Apple say, especially to stockholders, "We realize our poor judgement in hard drive suppliers and are retooling our hard drive supplier choosing methods to ensure this doesn't happen again"
Putting the blame on another company for your own company's misfortune would be immature at best.
Why does Apple not just hire a few more engineers/developers/QA people? Sounds like they could use them anyway in the long term.
An Apple employee there told her not to buy the iphone when it comes out because its version 1.0.
If a supplier can't supply a part or a programmer can't perform, it is Apple's fault.
what i think is funnier is you lot are all willing to pay $75-$100 (before tax) a month for an iPhone!
if you were planning to sell it in July then maybe you'd have a problem but if you keep it for ten years or longer like most shareholders used to. You will have a very nice nest egg.
Vista was firstly expected (not announced) to be shipped at the end of 2005. When XP was released, there were a lot of rumors about new operation system to be released somewhere at 2003. Finally it embodied as SP2 for XP. Firstly on September 2003 Bill Gates announced that Microsoft working on a new operation system.Why? Because Vista hit shelves 4 years late, first expected in 2003, and couldn't even manage to catch up to Tiger which was out in 2005?Or because Vista had so many features cut along the way, while Leopard hasn't?
(Or maybe because Tiger is rock-solid, mature, and costs less than the less-capable Vista?)
Leopard was firstly expected at the end of 2006(2 years ago, when tiger was released).
... Answer A. - your fault. Conservative. You understand it's your job to choose the most reliable computer and have a backup plan. Your work is too important...
This looks rediculous now. hoo - rah...![]()
Poor Battery life is the real iPhone killer. If this speculation is true, and the iPhone does have issues with battery life after the release...
The one thing that has made me nuts over the past few years, is the next gen phones that have worse battery life than my circa 1995 phone.
you know what? Thats EXACTLY what they should have done. If they wouldn't have demoed it in macworld, they could have silently pushed back the iphone, released leopard ahead of schedule, released the iphone when ever it was ready and BAM, instance all-the-hype-you-can-eat pr! And NO ONE would have known or cared that the iphone would have been pushed back.
But then we would have had to sit here and watch the "iphone almost ready?" rumors come through. can't win I guess.
Why does Apple not just hire a few more engineers/developers/QA people? Sounds like they could use them anyway in the long term.
Apple "promised" iPhone in June. What is your evidence that Apple will not deliver that? Even this latest "dire" rumor says late June.
That's something Microsoft and others have been criticized for. I do NOT want to see Apple make the same mistake. There's a book on this very mistake:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
Doubling the number of programmers or engineers does NOT halve the time to complete a project--especially when they are dumped in after the fact. Throwing late staff additions at a product can actually reduce quality and make the project even more behind until features have to be cut.
"Assigning more programmers to a project running behind schedule will make it even later, due to the time required for the new programmers to learn about the project, as well as the increased communication overhead."