�algiris
Mar 31, 02:30 PM
This is a smart move. It had to happen sooner or later.
John Gruber would eat Steve Job's ***** if he could. His opinion is extremely biased.
Doesn't mean he's not right on this one.
John Gruber would eat Steve Job's ***** if he could. His opinion is extremely biased.
Doesn't mean he's not right on this one.
mytdave
Apr 6, 02:48 PM
It's nice for Apple to have high iPad2 sales, and I think that's great. It's too bad the Xoom isn't selling more, although 100k isn't too terrible right out of the gate.
I've seen and hefted a Xoom, and you know what? It's a pretty decent piece of gear. Good job Moto! From a hardware perspective I liked it every bit as much as the iPad2. In my opinion, its only downfall is Android. For me, Android is not intuitive at all. I can deal with that when it comes to traditional computers, but I don't have time to waste with that sort of nonsense on an appliance - I want it to just work, and that's what Apple provides.
I've seen and hefted a Xoom, and you know what? It's a pretty decent piece of gear. Good job Moto! From a hardware perspective I liked it every bit as much as the iPad2. In my opinion, its only downfall is Android. For me, Android is not intuitive at all. I can deal with that when it comes to traditional computers, but I don't have time to waste with that sort of nonsense on an appliance - I want it to just work, and that's what Apple provides.
McGiord
Mar 31, 10:57 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
All the traditional phone manufacturers were used to release a new hardware every year and get the carriers financing the hardware coat over the 2 year contract, even allowing the loyal customers a free or small fee upgrade when the right one comes for them. So google fragmented model might be in sync with the traditional way of delivering new ozone hardware/with updated software for the typical mobile phone user.
Having more control for the benefit of the end user is a must for any of these players. Apple model has been highly successful, as well as google's model. How they will continue, is just a matter of time.
All the traditional phone manufacturers were used to release a new hardware every year and get the carriers financing the hardware coat over the 2 year contract, even allowing the loyal customers a free or small fee upgrade when the right one comes for them. So google fragmented model might be in sync with the traditional way of delivering new ozone hardware/with updated software for the typical mobile phone user.
Having more control for the benefit of the end user is a must for any of these players. Apple model has been highly successful, as well as google's model. How they will continue, is just a matter of time.
manu chao
Apr 27, 08:40 AM
Funny comment from Engadget:
Q: Why is my iphone tracking me?
A: It's not. It's tracking networks and cell towers near wherever you go.
Q: What is the difference between tracking me, and tracking the towers wherever I happen to go? Isn't that the same thing?
A: No. Because it's crowd-sourced. Total crowd size = 1.
Q: Umm. Ok? Soo. Why have you been keeping logs for the past year?
A: That was a bug.
Q: Then why was it unencrypted?
A: That was a bug.
Q: Right. Then why when I opted out did it ignore my choice?
A: That was a bug.
I think is quite conceivable that keeping those logs forever, not encrypting them, maintaining them despite an opt out, and not removing the timestamps was done in the spirit of: "Let's keep the data, maybe they will be useful at some point, and why bother do encrypt them, that is just some extra lines of code to write."
And it is this spirit which is somehow worrying.
Q: Why is my iphone tracking me?
A: It's not. It's tracking networks and cell towers near wherever you go.
Q: What is the difference between tracking me, and tracking the towers wherever I happen to go? Isn't that the same thing?
A: No. Because it's crowd-sourced. Total crowd size = 1.
Q: Umm. Ok? Soo. Why have you been keeping logs for the past year?
A: That was a bug.
Q: Then why was it unencrypted?
A: That was a bug.
Q: Right. Then why when I opted out did it ignore my choice?
A: That was a bug.
I think is quite conceivable that keeping those logs forever, not encrypting them, maintaining them despite an opt out, and not removing the timestamps was done in the spirit of: "Let's keep the data, maybe they will be useful at some point, and why bother do encrypt them, that is just some extra lines of code to write."
And it is this spirit which is somehow worrying.
kallisti
Mar 22, 05:52 PM
I'm not american, perhaps you should be utilising the 'proper' English that was invented here.
And you're last sentence makes you look rather condescending and quite frankly a bit of a pretentious moron.
And I'm sorry to say, I've never been to the states, but of course you make an unfounded and ignorant assertion that I have never travelled. Really, you're not doing yourself much good with that mentality you have.
Glad that you're just showcasing your pitiful character to the rest of us.
Just stop already. You made a couple of stupid and incorrect statements. You got called on them. Suck it up and admit you were wrong. It happens to the best of us :)
And you're last sentence makes you look rather condescending and quite frankly a bit of a pretentious moron.
And I'm sorry to say, I've never been to the states, but of course you make an unfounded and ignorant assertion that I have never travelled. Really, you're not doing yourself much good with that mentality you have.
Glad that you're just showcasing your pitiful character to the rest of us.
Just stop already. You made a couple of stupid and incorrect statements. You got called on them. Suck it up and admit you were wrong. It happens to the best of us :)
Blue Velvet
Nov 28, 06:27 PM
Announcing their hand before negotiations even start indicate a degree of flexibility in their position... this is just posturing at this stage.
inkswamp
Jul 27, 02:22 PM
but is still more productive because it handles more calculations per clock cycle
I'm no processor geek. I have a basic understanding of the terminology and how things work so correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this one of the advantages that the PPC had over Intel chips? Does this mean Intel is moving toward shorter pipes? Are we talking more instructions per clock cycle or what? What does "calculations" mean in this context?
I'm no processor geek. I have a basic understanding of the terminology and how things work so correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this one of the advantages that the PPC had over Intel chips? Does this mean Intel is moving toward shorter pipes? Are we talking more instructions per clock cycle or what? What does "calculations" mean in this context?
khollister
Mar 22, 01:37 PM
Yeah a 50% smaller screen for the same price and less battery life is certainly going to crush the iPad2.
Plus RIM's usually obtuse software - I hate my company BlackBerry
Plus RIM's usually obtuse software - I hate my company BlackBerry
aswitcher
Aug 5, 09:25 PM
*iChat Phone - Call numbers through iChat as part of .Mac... I guess you could make a conference with a combination of multiple phone numbers/iChatters.
*Maps - A new application designed to compete with Google Earth, but of course be much, much snazzier. Apparently, the next MBP would include a GPS chip so that you could see a "You Are Here" on the map.
I am hoping the iPhone has BT and GPS, and links to Maps on your Mac! :eek:
*Maps - A new application designed to compete with Google Earth, but of course be much, much snazzier. Apparently, the next MBP would include a GPS chip so that you could see a "You Are Here" on the map.
I am hoping the iPhone has BT and GPS, and links to Maps on your Mac! :eek:
aricher
Sep 14, 04:49 PM
He's totally mistaken! The Cloverton CPUs will *all* be 64-bits, as Woodcrest (found in current Mac Pros) is. Intel is not going to ever go back to a 32-bit Xeon class CPU.
The difference between Woodcrest and "Tigerton" is that Woodcrest CPUs achieve their "dual core" status by basically placing two complete Xeon CPUs under one outer casing, and making them communicate with each other through the front-side bus on the motherboard.
Cloverton will be the same way, but with 4 cores packed into one casing, instead of just two.
"Tigerton" will finally allow both cores to interconnect with each other through an internal interface built into the CPU, instead of slowing communications down by routing it off one CPU core, through the motherboard's front-side bus, and back onto the other core.
I got this great response this morning from my IT snob:
"Where in that linked article does it say 64bit? I see 65 nm, but not 64 bit. Duct taping two 32 bit cores together may get you Mac 64 bit processing... great for drawing cool pictures."
Anyone have a link that shows that Clovertown is 64 bit? Please help me to defeat this PC IT ogre
The difference between Woodcrest and "Tigerton" is that Woodcrest CPUs achieve their "dual core" status by basically placing two complete Xeon CPUs under one outer casing, and making them communicate with each other through the front-side bus on the motherboard.
Cloverton will be the same way, but with 4 cores packed into one casing, instead of just two.
"Tigerton" will finally allow both cores to interconnect with each other through an internal interface built into the CPU, instead of slowing communications down by routing it off one CPU core, through the motherboard's front-side bus, and back onto the other core.
I got this great response this morning from my IT snob:
"Where in that linked article does it say 64bit? I see 65 nm, but not 64 bit. Duct taping two 32 bit cores together may get you Mac 64 bit processing... great for drawing cool pictures."
Anyone have a link that shows that Clovertown is 64 bit? Please help me to defeat this PC IT ogre
Full of Win
Mar 31, 02:27 PM
Good. I hope they take one of the last strengths of the iPad ecosystem away from it.
Burnsey
Mar 20, 11:13 PM
Well, you see, it is not about the one-man-one-vote thing. That works just fine. You just have to make sure you keep the wrong men from voting.
The problem is your not voting for a leader, you're just voting for the new mouthpiece.
The problem is your not voting for a leader, you're just voting for the new mouthpiece.
mkruck
Apr 6, 05:01 PM
I'm an Apple mobile device user, and I have never ever been on an Android-centric forum. Not one time! Why would I care what people who have such an obvious difference in taste think about what I have?
It never ceases to amaze me at how many Android users have to flock to a site called "MacRumors" because they feel then need to lead us poor blinded Apple "fanboys" to the bright shining city on a hill that is Android paradise.
At least go have your Android orgy, where it may be appreciated by others who care to watch that type of thing...wait...there are such things as Android forums, right?
Or...
It could be considered being close minded and afraid of new things.
Just saying, you know?
It never ceases to amaze me at how many Android users have to flock to a site called "MacRumors" because they feel then need to lead us poor blinded Apple "fanboys" to the bright shining city on a hill that is Android paradise.
At least go have your Android orgy, where it may be appreciated by others who care to watch that type of thing...wait...there are such things as Android forums, right?
Or...
It could be considered being close minded and afraid of new things.
Just saying, you know?
tundrabuggy
Apr 19, 03:35 PM
So True...
Poor lost souls rely on Steve to think for them, bring them courage, and guide them in worship.
Anyone who fails to fall in line, is immediately a threat to them.
It's this weakness is laughable.
Funny, I'm a Dallas Cowboy fan, the fans are fanatics and everyone who is not a Dallas fan HATES the Cowboys. I feel the same heat being an Apple fanatic. The fans are loyal and defending of the brand while every other tech fan hates us. I need a big white Apple logo with a blue Dallas Cowboy star in it. I might be shot!!!! lol
Poor lost souls rely on Steve to think for them, bring them courage, and guide them in worship.
Anyone who fails to fall in line, is immediately a threat to them.
It's this weakness is laughable.
Funny, I'm a Dallas Cowboy fan, the fans are fanatics and everyone who is not a Dallas fan HATES the Cowboys. I feel the same heat being an Apple fanatic. The fans are loyal and defending of the brand while every other tech fan hates us. I need a big white Apple logo with a blue Dallas Cowboy star in it. I might be shot!!!! lol
princealfie
Nov 29, 09:16 AM
They aren't. The entire music business revenues are down 40% since 2001. Sales are down hugely. I can tell you from representing these artists that all the money is down too.
Are you spending as much on music as you did years ago?
Of course not. Most of the music sucks to be honest nowadays. I prefer the underground stuff from emusic, not big label stuff.
For example, Jay-Z's new album sucks compared to Reasonable Doubt.
The same with Nas nowadays compared to Illmatic.
The same with Mobb Deep.
etc. etc.
Get the picture? Artists who are hungry in the beginning put out a good album. Then they fall off the earth.
It's only the music industry that is losing quality. The only album this year that's from a major label that's any good this year is DJ Primo's production on Christina Aguilera's album and that's it period.
Sad, isn't it?
Are you spending as much on music as you did years ago?
Of course not. Most of the music sucks to be honest nowadays. I prefer the underground stuff from emusic, not big label stuff.
For example, Jay-Z's new album sucks compared to Reasonable Doubt.
The same with Nas nowadays compared to Illmatic.
The same with Mobb Deep.
etc. etc.
Get the picture? Artists who are hungry in the beginning put out a good album. Then they fall off the earth.
It's only the music industry that is losing quality. The only album this year that's from a major label that's any good this year is DJ Primo's production on Christina Aguilera's album and that's it period.
Sad, isn't it?
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 05:50 PM
Here we have an article laying out the case for non intervention (http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/03/2011322135442593945.html) by a Princeton law professor (emeritus) published by Al Jazeera. A worthy read, and here are two exerpts I've commented on.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
littleman23408
Dec 6, 10:25 PM
IC-10 license test is killing me. I can only manage 2nd. I can get into 3rd pretty quick (at the hairpin before the long straight) and then I can't get 2nd until the same turn, and then there is just not enough race left to get past 1st. I can get kind of close to him, but nowhere near close enough to cut him off at the last turn.
G5power
Jul 27, 09:48 AM
Assuming August 7 as an announcement date of new systems, the waiting is killer.
mcrain
Mar 23, 02:59 PM
"Lying" implies intent. Are you accusing them of lying, or getting it wrong? They absolutely lied, and they got stuff wrong. I believe there was malevolent intent, and to the extent that can't be proven, there was clear reckless disregard for the truth.
Is it your position that Libya represents a larger danger to American assets/security than Iraq? If not, is it your suggestion that America should be involved in every humanitarian crisis with brutal dictators worldwide, or at least those comparable to Libya? If so, why aren't we in North Korea? Why aren't we in any number of African nations? There are many in the mainstream media and many on the left who are saying today that there are problems. Asking why we didn't go into other African countries, criticizing the coalition and the idea that this is "minimal" US involvement. I'm not claiming the left is perfect, but rather pointing out that your claim (re: hipocricy from 'the left in media') is far too broad and ignores the realities of the media coverage and congressional responses.
But I also think it's important (especially in this forum) to point out hypocrisy stemming from the left so that the Macrumors Echo Chamber doesn't keep you all in denial. I've been in these forums for a long time, and I can tell you that while some denial occurs, liberals are far more likely to be critical of the politicians they support than conservatives are.
Is it your position that Libya represents a larger danger to American assets/security than Iraq? If not, is it your suggestion that America should be involved in every humanitarian crisis with brutal dictators worldwide, or at least those comparable to Libya? If so, why aren't we in North Korea? Why aren't we in any number of African nations? There are many in the mainstream media and many on the left who are saying today that there are problems. Asking why we didn't go into other African countries, criticizing the coalition and the idea that this is "minimal" US involvement. I'm not claiming the left is perfect, but rather pointing out that your claim (re: hipocricy from 'the left in media') is far too broad and ignores the realities of the media coverage and congressional responses.
But I also think it's important (especially in this forum) to point out hypocrisy stemming from the left so that the Macrumors Echo Chamber doesn't keep you all in denial. I've been in these forums for a long time, and I can tell you that while some denial occurs, liberals are far more likely to be critical of the politicians they support than conservatives are.
KnightWRX
Apr 27, 08:19 AM
Apple is planning on releasing a free iOS update in the next few weeks that performs the following:
- reduces the size of the crowd-sourced Wi-Fi hotspot and cell tower database cached on the iPhone,
- ceases backing up this cache, and
- deletes this cache entirely when Location Services is turned off.
Article Link: Apple Officially Addresses Location Data Controversy (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/27/apple-officially-addresses-location-data-controversy/)
Wow, Apple is planning putting in all points I had asked for in a post ? :eek: Good Job Cupertino, well played. :D
- reduces the size of the crowd-sourced Wi-Fi hotspot and cell tower database cached on the iPhone,
- ceases backing up this cache, and
- deletes this cache entirely when Location Services is turned off.
Article Link: Apple Officially Addresses Location Data Controversy (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/27/apple-officially-addresses-location-data-controversy/)
Wow, Apple is planning putting in all points I had asked for in a post ? :eek: Good Job Cupertino, well played. :D
triceretops
Apr 27, 08:59 AM
I wonder if this is why I can no longer get more than a days charge on my iPhone 4 with minimal use since it seems like it's an always on thing.
If you are having battery issues and you have Apple Care on the phone, you can take it to a store and have them replace the battery.
If you are having battery issues and you have Apple Care on the phone, you can take it to a store and have them replace the battery.
guffman
Aug 6, 01:46 PM
Apple is described as an "Applicant".
good catch - I still think it won't matter...
EDIT: In this link, the company is also described as an "Applicant"
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=odbjam.6.1
good catch - I still think it won't matter...
EDIT: In this link, the company is also described as an "Applicant"
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=odbjam.6.1
ABernardoJr
Apr 25, 03:12 PM
statistics show that distribution of firearms mainly lead to more homocides and also suicides using firearms.
if guns are outlawed, their distribution is greatly limited, making it a lot harder for outlaws to obtain them.
the more you spread guns, the greater is the risk of them being used in illegal activities.
..oh wait... this forum is about apple and computers, right? :rolleyes:
Do you know what an outlaw is? Much less how an outlaw determined to obtain something is not going to stop "because it's harder" or because they are not allowed to? Hence the "outlaw" term?
if guns are outlawed, their distribution is greatly limited, making it a lot harder for outlaws to obtain them.
the more you spread guns, the greater is the risk of them being used in illegal activities.
..oh wait... this forum is about apple and computers, right? :rolleyes:
Do you know what an outlaw is? Much less how an outlaw determined to obtain something is not going to stop "because it's harder" or because they are not allowed to? Hence the "outlaw" term?
Reach9
Apr 11, 01:33 PM
The iPhone 4 is still the best smartphone in the market, so not surprising.
As for people expecting a 4" screen on the next iPhone dream on. They are not going to make an iPhone with a bigger screen.
You're kidding right? iPhone 4 and iOS 4 are incredibly stale. Apple has realized this and hence strong rumors suggest a total revamped iOS 5. Anyway i don't agree with you, i don't think the iPhone 4 is the best smartphone in the market.
What is the best smartphone in the market? The major Android phones (Thunderbolt, EVO etc.)
I wouldn't put that much thought into the OP guys. No way Apple would not take advantage of the Holiday season. Do you think people will actually buy the over-a-year old iPhone 4?
Remember how many sources said that the iPad 2 wouldn't be released until September? Remember how many people said there won't be an iPhone 4, until Gizmodo leaked the 'prototype'?
We'll see about the iPhone 5 in WWDC.
If anything Apple could have kept their iPad 2 for a September launch, but Apple is actually losing big time in the smartphone market, imo.
If i don't see an iPhone 5 in WWDC, then i'll consider jumping ship.
Apple has never been one to react to competition in the recent years. They seem to do what they think is best and let others follow them.
I think they know that if they bring out the best one when it is released, they will sell as many as they can make for a long time.
Of course Apple reacts to competition, every company in a market economy does. Apple might not blatantly say "the competition has a faster processor, that's why we made the A4 chip" but a basic University Econ class will teach you that every company reacts to the competition. Apple is no different.
Even if they do what they think is best, then they're greatly failing.
As a smartphone it is the iPhone that is following the competition, such as the lack of a notification system.
As for people expecting a 4" screen on the next iPhone dream on. They are not going to make an iPhone with a bigger screen.
You're kidding right? iPhone 4 and iOS 4 are incredibly stale. Apple has realized this and hence strong rumors suggest a total revamped iOS 5. Anyway i don't agree with you, i don't think the iPhone 4 is the best smartphone in the market.
What is the best smartphone in the market? The major Android phones (Thunderbolt, EVO etc.)
I wouldn't put that much thought into the OP guys. No way Apple would not take advantage of the Holiday season. Do you think people will actually buy the over-a-year old iPhone 4?
Remember how many sources said that the iPad 2 wouldn't be released until September? Remember how many people said there won't be an iPhone 4, until Gizmodo leaked the 'prototype'?
We'll see about the iPhone 5 in WWDC.
If anything Apple could have kept their iPad 2 for a September launch, but Apple is actually losing big time in the smartphone market, imo.
If i don't see an iPhone 5 in WWDC, then i'll consider jumping ship.
Apple has never been one to react to competition in the recent years. They seem to do what they think is best and let others follow them.
I think they know that if they bring out the best one when it is released, they will sell as many as they can make for a long time.
Of course Apple reacts to competition, every company in a market economy does. Apple might not blatantly say "the competition has a faster processor, that's why we made the A4 chip" but a basic University Econ class will teach you that every company reacts to the competition. Apple is no different.
Even if they do what they think is best, then they're greatly failing.
As a smartphone it is the iPhone that is following the competition, such as the lack of a notification system.
