iPhone and Apple TV

GameMaster · 01-09-2007, 03:29 PM

iPhone:

http://www.apple.com/iphone/

Apple TV:

http://www.apple.com/appletv/

Apple TV, not so amazing. But iPhone looks pretty cool. Must switch to Cingular!

KillerGremlin · 01-09-2007, 04:14 PM

so i saw, the phone looks cute...and really really expensive

it's a nifty shift in technology, and it's thin as hell...but really expensive

but what else is new with apple

Dyne · 01-09-2007, 04:19 PM

iPhone looks awesome. What's the battery life on it though?

MrCoffee · 01-09-2007, 04:21 PM

How much more would it be to get audio/svideo from your computer to your TV? i know i can get 75feet of svideo for $40, not sure about audio....if your comp is in the same room that could be a better idea.

Null · 01-09-2007, 06:36 PM

iphone is neat. but too much for a phone, and too little storage to use as an ipod.

altho its a neat little look at what the future ipods will be looking like. and some of their functionality.

KillerGremlin · 01-09-2007, 10:19 PM

i really would have to play with that phone before considering buying it. i still like having my phone and my music player as two seperate entities. who knows what the future will hold.

KillerGremlin · 01-10-2007, 10:37 PM

....and in current news, cisco is *surprise!* suing apple for stealing their trademark name...the "iphone"

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2007/01/10/D8MIN3LO0.html

GameMaster · 01-11-2007, 02:26 AM

I hope they lose the legal battle. The 'i' prefix has been a part of Apple's marketing ever since the iMac first debuted.

Null · 01-11-2007, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GameMaster

I hope they lose the legal battle. The 'i' prefix has been a part of Apple's marketing ever since the iMac first debuted.

i dont know if they really have that big of a case. apparently theres already many other things with the name iphone anyway. unoriginal name :P

Apple calls the lawsuit 'silly'
http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/11/a...suit-is-silly/

Quote:

Oh no they didn't! By now you already know it's on, and the latest round in the iPhone v. iPhone dance-off comes from Apple spokesman Steve Dowling, who was quoted as saying the Cisco lawsuit is "silly" and that several companies are already using the term iPhone for VoIP products. He called Cisco's trademark "tenuous at best" and noted his company was the first to ever use the name for a cellphone. He goes on to boast that Cisco is gonna totally get served: "if Cisco wants to challenge us on it, we're very confident we'll prevail." Oh yeah -- Apple to Cisco: let's see you dance, sucka!

Typhoid · 01-11-2007, 03:16 PM

So if I make something called the "ipod" and release it, apple wont care?
Awesome!
*Gets inventing*

Null · 01-11-2007, 03:43 PM

no no, they dont care if you make it BEFORE they think of it.

they'll piss their pants if you make it after theirs. lol

KillerGremlin · 01-11-2007, 04:56 PM

it should be a fun lawsuit, i'm sure a lot of apple fans are going, "cisco who? what!"

cisco ftw!

besides, i never understood the whole "let's take something simple and put an i in front of it!" thing that apple does...would it kill some of the apple marketing people to come up with an original awesome name instead of milking the "i-object" structure, or to be more exact...the "ipod"

Null · 01-11-2007, 11:32 PM

that question was asked of nintendo doing super infront of every game for the SNES... then 64 after every game for the 64.

one could ask that of sony and the playstation name... playstation , ps2, ps3. playstation portable...

microsoft with windows, windows 95, 98, 2000, Windows XP...Windows Vista..

companies just do it so you associate it with that company.

thatmariolover · 01-12-2007, 02:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Typhoid

So if I make something called the "ipod" and release it, apple wont care?
Awesome!
*Gets inventing*

That's completely different. There were already several products named iPhone that were patented before Cisco's patent was in place. Apple's patent is the first to concern a mobile phone, so they're confident there's nothing Cisco can do without risking a patent battle of their own.