Chris Harlan
Forum Replies Created
-
[TImothy Auld] “I had the pleasure of meeting this marvelous human being on a shoot and we stayed in touch for the few years he had left. I have never met another human in this life more accepting (for review) of other people’s ideas. If he saw a flaw in your argument he would cut you to ribbons. But never in a mean way. He thought. He appreciated other thinkers (I don’t kid myself for a minute that he regarded me as such but he was polite enough to disguise that.) This was a man who loved and enjoyed life. And that is, after all, what it is all about.
Tim”
What a marvelous pleasure that must have been, Tim. I’ve looked up to and have enjoyed this guy for years. Even in this short piece, simply watching his thought process and the associations he is making as he extemporizes, is inspiring.
-
[Frank Gothmann] “Just to add my two cents: count me in on the desire to see an Adobe developed DI codec. I have also supplied my general “wish list” to Adobe in the past.”
Me three.
-
[Kevin Patrick] “https://www.macworld.com/article/1165889/mac_pro_users_clamor_for_hardware_u…
Craig being quoted in a recent Macworld article on a new Mac Pro.
“
I’ll give a hardy “Attaboy!”
-
[Andrew Richards] “From the article:
“A dual-socket Mac Pro based on the new chips with 16 processors could potentially outperform iMacs and store more data.”
…ya think?
“Potentially.
-
[Jim Giberti] “They’ve definitely got my attention.
Adobe’s had about 8 months to listen to the FCP professional community and capitalize on a once in a program opportunity to move an entire market segment over night.
If they hit it out of the park, and I hope they do, I’ll be an immediate adopter. We already have a few Creative suites and I’d immediately upgrade to the broader suites.
Real audio mixing, real tracks, 64 bit, .h264 playable…show me more.
My question to Shane is, how do you know it’s lacking in some of the FCP7 features when it hasn’t been released yet?.
“Got my attention, too. I’m guessing Shane’s got a Beta.
-
[Shane Ross] “Well, looks like the Conan show editors are liking Adobe CS6…”
That’s a hoot! Thanks for posting.
-
[Walter Soyka] “Open systems and closed systems each have advantages, and so the pendulum swings back and forth.
That said, I agree with Andy: licensing may be very good for us, but it seems an unlikely path for Apple.
“That’s how I see it, however much I’d like the other.
-
[Andrew Richards] ”
I’m spent, I’ve made my case against this enough already.
Best,
Andy”That’s pretty funny stuff!
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “[Chris Harlan] “Yes, you buy hardware, but you also buy apps and content, and you subscribe to storage space.”
That storage space is free (unless you pay for more).
And what did you have to buy to view all of these cool things? A Galaxy 2?
iCloud/iTunes is useless without…..?
“
This is getting ridiculous. Yes. Some of that storage space is free. Other storage services are not, or will not be–iTunes Match, for instance. And, since I’ve already answered the rest of your comments in the post this is a response to, let me just re-post them again:
No one in this thread is even remotely suggesting that Apple does not make the vast majority of their money through sales of physical appliances; what they are saying is that things have gotten far too complicated for the “hardware/software dichotomy” model to be of much use in describing Apple.
So, a) yes, they make most of their money through hardware sales, but b) their services have grown substantial enough that they could fuel a very large corporation on its own, and c) the way that services and hardware are intertwined creates a unique synergy that is neither one nor the other, but something more.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “…to buy hardware. You cannot purchase those services separately and reap the benefits without an Apple hardware ecosystem from your desktop, to your office, to your tv, to your pocket.
“That ecosystem is being moved away from the desktop. The whole point of iCloud is to dethrone the desktop as a hub and turn it into a satellite node. Apple’s ideal is now for you to buy a thin client device–modified, certainly, since it can also store apps locally–and use their centralized server as market place and storage. Yes, you buy hardware, but you also buy apps and content, and you subscribe to storage space. No one in this thread is even remotely suggesting that Apple does not make the vast majority of their money through sales of physical appliances; what they are saying is that things have gotten far too complicated for the “hardware/software dichotomy” model to be of much use in describing Apple.
So, a) yes, they make most of their money through hardware sales, but b) their services have grown substantial enough that they could fuel a very large corporation on its own, and c) the way that services and hardware are intertwined creates a unique synergy that is neither one nor the other, but something more.
At the end of the day, its a silly thing to argue about. It’s probably some subconscious flaw of mine, in that I seldom meet a maxim that I don’t try to take an axe to.