The Devil's Advocate - Apple Patents Exposé & iTMS UI: Part Patent, Part Speculation
by
- January 21st, 2005
I missed out on all the pre-Macworld gossiping, so here's my way, hopefully, to make amends. One part news, and one part speculation. First the news.
New Patent Filings
Apple filed for two patent applications for a " computer interface having a virtual single-layer mode for viewing overlapping objects " on June 20, 2003 and October 22, 2003, which were published by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) as US Patent Application Nos. 20040261038 and 20040261037, respectively. Application No. 20040261037 is a continuation of an application filed back on June 20, 2003. These applications basically cover Apple's window managing Exposé user interface. The Abstract describes the invention:
The interface includes a user-selectable mode in which the windows are rearranged, and resized if necessary, so that all open windows can be simultaneously viewed within the area of the display, thereby enabling any one of the windows to be easily selected for access.
If you've never tried Exposé, Apple has a nice mockup of the feature for you to try.
Apple also filed a patent application for an "Graphical user interface for browsing, searching and presenting media items" on April 26, 2004, which was published by the USPTO as US Patent Application No. 20040268451. The application is a continuation of a February 10, 2004 filing. This application generally covers the user interface for an online media store (e.g., the iTunes Music Store (iTMS)).
The Abstract describes the invention:
Improved graphical user interfaces suitable for reviewing, browsing, previewing and/or purchasing media items are also disclosed. The graphical user interfaces are suitable for reviewing or browsing numerous media items. The graphical user interfaces are also suitable for previewing or purchasing media items in an on-line manner. The graphical user interfaces are particularly useful for a system that provides purchase and distribution of media in a client-server environment.
Right. I know. That's nothing earth shattering. So on to the speculation.
Not So Strange Bedfellows: Sony, TiVo, and Apple
All these filings are really securing Apple's position in the Internet consumer media and entertainment arena. One of the greatest advantages the iPod enjoys is a simplified user interface and experience. By methodically shoring up the user interface look-and-feel with patents, Apple has left a lot of companies holding very small wedges of the market share pie.
Functionally, the iPod is not that different from other MP3 players, but mere mortals can approach the iPod and iTunes interface and make great use of the platform. That, ultimately, is why Apple is eating the competitions' lunch. It is not easy making a good user interface; those ignoring that truth have suffered for it-one way or another.
Speculation: Option A
This brings me to my first bit of speculation: Apple is working on software for a TiVo-like Digital Video Recorder (DVR) with an iMovie Video Store (iMVS) interface as part of a joint venture with Sony. What's my basis for this? Just pure speculation spurred by the somewhat odd appearance of Sony's President during the Macworld keynote. Perhaps that is why Sony's President highlighted how important the software and interface are to designing products. Imagine a TiVo with an Apple-slick interface and with one more thing: a "Shop for videos" option that launches an iMovie Video Store right on your television. Such a device would even create a viable market for a video iPod.
|
Ignore the man behind the RDF Before anyone mocks the utility of a video iPod (because of Steve Jobs' two perennial arguments against it), let me suggest that you not believe the reality distortion field (RDF) hype. Remember, your favorite producer of the RDF also said you would not want a flash based MP3 player, yet here we are. Anyway, the common arguments against a video iPod are that 1) a video iPod's screen would be too small to enjoy watching video, and that 2) you cannot watch a video iPod passively because video demands your full attention, which, unlike music, would limit you from using it while driving/jogging/smashing atoms, etc. To dispel these two fallacious arguments (and yes, to say Steve Jobs' is flat-out wrong regarding the video iPod), let me cite two existing products/technologies. The first is the paperback novel. Yes, people read these all the time on their commutes (e.g., in the car passenger seat, on the subway, on the bus), on vacations, on plane trips (even on your personal Gulfstream), while waiting (e.g., at the doctor's office) and in a million other places. Certainly reading is not something you're going to do while driving (at least one would hope), and yet the paperback novel is a very successful and widely used medium. As for questions of the screen being too small, perhaps the RDF has caused people to forget about perspective. Yes, simply move the device closer to your face, voilà, the picture is bigger. Again, we have a device proving the point: the Blackberry. Blackberry users constantly read and respond to emails on very small screens with even tinier text. Basically Steve Jobs' arguments against a video iPod are the same ones lobbed against all sorts of new mediums in the past. You know, like folks that suggested you would never want to listen to a record because it isn't as good as being at a live performance, that suggested you would never want to watch a movie on your television because it wasn't as good as watching it at the movie theatre, or that suggested you would never want to listen to music from an MP3 player because the format was so much worse than CDs in quality, and on and on. Despite such snobbery, those "lesser" venues became quite successful. While, true, I would not prefer to watch the latest Star Wars movie on a small video iPod having the option of a movie theatre. However, those of us without Gulfstreams do not always enjoy as many options as we might like, and watching a movie while waiting in line at the DMV would make the experience more palatable. And there is certainly a great deal of content that is not heavy on high-definition special effects that would work great on a small screen. A great many television shows will scale down to the small screen rather nicely; I certainly would enjoy watching episodes of the Apprentice or Charlie Rose interviews on my commute. |
By having a DVR that syncs to your video iPod via Rendezvous as easily as your iPod does with iTunes, you really are kickstarting an entire new industry. The great part is with such a DVR (possibly as part of Sony's Playstation 3), you have an end-run around cable companies' monopoly as a delivery system for on-demand movies.
Actually, you make an end-run around the entire television distribution system. This is probably one of the reasons cable companies and television networks are hoping TiVo goes out of business; they can sense such a device could threaten some of their revenue and power.
With Apple's patented interface for purchasing, "browsing, searching and presenting media items," such an Apple DVR would allow for independent video producers to access a wider audience than ever before. Just as Apple is giving access to many independent labels on the iTMS, it could do the same with an iMovie Video Store enabled DVR. I know that I would enjoy watching Kevin Rose's Internet video productions straight on my TiVo (or better still, on an Apple DVR). Putting out a DVR "from the makers of the iPod and the Walkman" would certainly command a good deal of market power.
Speculation: Option B
Now some may question, why go through all the trouble of a joint venture with Sony when Apple could just buy TiVo? TiVo's market cap is a meager $332 million, making it quite a bargain for the right company. I'm relatively confident that whatever it would cost Apple to buy 51% of TiVo would be more than compensated for by an up-tick in its own market cap from the markets' positive reaction to such news.
Actually, I am surprised that Microsoft hasn't yet scooped-up TiVo as a way to dominate the industry instead of its floundering adventures with UltimateTV. Having $6 billion in the bank, Apple could easily afford to buy TiVo. Obviously, so could Microsoft. But TiVo and Apple already have cooperated together insofar as TiVo has adopted Apple's Rendezvous network technology, but more importantly I believe there is a reasonable amount of respect between the two companies on a technical level. So to a great extent, if Apple showed some interest, the folks at TiVo would likely be receptive. Then again, history has shown that if Microsoft shows enough money, TiVo may well be receptive.
One hopes that if such an opportunity exists (i.e., to buy some promising talent and technology) that Apple would not again lack the vision and miss out as it did with Microsoft's purchase of Bungie. One can argue that had Apple bought Bungie instead of Microsoft, and were Halo released as a Mac game first, that such a move could have revitalized the Mac as a legitimate gaming platform.
After all, Halo made the Xbox a success, and with the right vision, it could have done wonders for gaming on the Mac. The sad thing is, like with TiVo, one had the impression that the people at Bungie really liked and felt more kinship towards Apple, but Microsoft beat Apple to the punch.
Regardless, should Apple seek to buy TiVo, it would not be unprecedented. In the past, Apple has not been above buying out media-technology companies to strengthen its position. For example, Apple bought Emagic for Logic, a program used in the professional music production industry-a field with significantly less revenue generating potential than the video distribution industry. Another reason to consider buying TiVo is that it owns some key patents in the field. Certainly a TiVo buyout makes an awful lot of sense were Apple to forge ahead into the DVR consumer space.
Option C: Both A and B
What may make even more sense, and might allow Apple to dominate the Internet video distribution industry as it currently does the Internet music distribution industry, is to do both options A and B. By buying the talent at TiVo, developing a killer software distribution system (i.e., an iMovie Video Store), and by owning all the best interface and DVR patents in the field, Apple would have a lock. Further, by licensing the software to Sony and perhaps others, Apple can secure rights to distribute a significant quantity of video content.
Such a deal could also help Sony. It must be relatively concerned about Microsoft and the Xbox, which recently started to outsell the Playstation 2 in the US. By providing a compelling Apple-licensed user interface on the Playstation 3, Apple could help cut the legs out from under Microsoft in the home media console market and help deliver Sony games, music and video content into the living room.
Option D: None of the Above
Of course Apple can choose to do nothing. It would be a shame were Apple not to leverage its patents for media browsing and purchasing interfaces and iPod success into other digital-hub related spaces -- including the nascent battle for the living room. I would hate to see the iPod be Apple's "one trick pony" in the consumer electronics space. If we believe Apple's rhetoric regarding it wanting to be a digital-hub provider, then it will eventually need to address the commercial video space (i.e., television and movies) or it risks losing that market to those with more backbone.
is an attorney. Please don't hold that against him. This work does not necessarily reflect the views and/or opinions of The Mac Observer, any third parties, or even John for that matter. No assertions of fact are being made, but rather the reader is simply asked to consider the possibilities.
You can send your comments directly to me, or you can also post your comments below.
Most Recent Columns From The Devil's Advocate
- Mac UI Ain't All That: The Future & History of the User Interface - August 15th
- MacWindows: The New Trojan Wars - April 4th
- TMO Scoop: Apple Files Patent for Looking Glass - January 25th
The Devil's Advocate Archives
Observer Comments
One of my MacWorld SF prediction is that Apple will release an upgraded iMovie that can manage a video clip library, QuickTime channels and recorded iChats. Thought that would be the first step before launching an iMovie store. I was wrong. Look like Apple plans to sell all forms of digital media (first Music, next Movies) through iTunes.
Dude what’s with you and Sony? Why would Sony tie the PS3 to Apple when they have their own competing content delivery and playback products? I realize Sony is disjointed, but I don't think they're THAT out of whack.
Tivo... see the problem with media centers and PVRs is that there is no escaping the fact that the ideal device MUST be integrated with the cable box. The only thing keeping Tivo alive is the fact that the current crop of cable company PVRs suck suck suck. That will change.
IR blaster's aren't exactly elegant, so unless Apple plans to start partnering with cable box manufacturers I don't see how they can offer a user experience that warrants them releasing a "media center". I know that is bad news to all of you who keep wanting one, but home theater is in a state of flux and there are too many technologies and formats flying around and no standards.
Fri Jan 21, 2005 3:23 pm Subject: Apple buying Tivo?
It actually sounds interesting, but MS would wet themselves.
Now if Apple were to quietly start picking up shares in TiVo they could get a good holding before it became public. Steve J has sufficient personal funds to start adding some to his portfolio. By the time MS found out and started a bidding war for TiVo Apple & Steve would be in a position to either win the war very quickly, or profit from the bidding war - a win-win situation and only MS would loose.
I'd say forget about recording "free" TV - Apple will just stream it's H.264 HD version direct from its iFlicks Video Store. You can throw away the TiVo searching function. Rather, you search for content online at the iFlicks Video Store - and not only future scheduled broadcasts, but past archived broadcasts; basically, whatever content creators (TV/movie/music/sports studios) are willing to distribute for a fee (or sponsored by advertising in the stream). There will be ad-supported channels for live broadcasts, ad-free subscribed channels for personalized on-demand playlists, and content that you can just buy (like movies) for forever-viewing. That's why I think Apple has shown no interest in the TiVo search TV schedules/record-the-broadcast market.
Apple would end-run the cable/DSL/phone/satellite/DVD/DVR industry by taking over the content aggregation/search, delivery, and playback functions in its Mac+PC client software (iFlicks Video Store and iFlicks "client" software). And of course, Apple would sell the cool storage and playback hardware for the home and the car (both Mac mini like), and on the go (tablet?) as well. (Note this is the same model as has been used for music where Apple did an end-run on the brick-and-mortar record stores.)
This will be a huge task. Note that content aggregation is currently done by broadcast/cable/satellite networks, online portals (Yahoo/MSN/AOL), and video stores (Blockbuster/NetFlix). Search is currently done by TiVo, Google, and online portals. Delivery is currently done by broadcast/cable/satellite/DSL/phone networks. Playback is currently done by TV tuners and TiVo/DVR/MS Media Center PCs. Apple would take on all of these at once.
Can't wait! 
The key of course to on-demand IP TV streaming is H.264. Given today's bandwidth limitations in the US (Comcast announced 6 GBps recently), what quality video stream can an end user get?
But that's why this is the year of HD!!!
By the way, see Cringely's latest at www.pbs.org/cringely.
QuoteYeah how bout you pick up a few shares of Tivo yourself. And while you're at it, maybe snag a little NetFlix too. At least you won't have to worry about paying any capital gains tax. Hehe.kenaustus wrote:
It actually sounds interesting, but MS would wet themselves.
Now if Apple were to quietly start picking up shares in TiVo they could get a good holding before it became public. Steve J has sufficient personal funds to start adding some to his portfolio. By the time MS found out and started a bidding war for TiVo Apple & Steve would be in a position to either win the war very quickly, or profit from the bidding war - a win-win situation and only MS would loose.
Given that Apple was willing to license the iPod to Sony, I'd think it is highly likely that they'd be willing to 'give' Sony a license to Apple's DRMed-video-playback-software (for the Playstation 3) or Apple's device (like the HP iPod deal). Or Apple could just make iFlicks for the PC available first on a Sony PC (at the same time, the Mac version is released).
Ooh, speculation is so much fun!!!
QuoteBiff wrote:
Dude what’s with you and Sony? Why would Sony tie the PS3 to Apple when they have their own competing content delivery and playback products? I realize Sony is disjointed, but I don't think they're THAT out of whack.
Tivo... see the problem with media centers and PVRs is that there is no escaping the fact that the ideal device MUST be integrated with the cable box. The only thing keeping Tivo alive is the fact that the current crop of cable company PVRs suck suck suck. That will change.
IR blaster's aren't exactly elegant, so unless Apple plans to start partnering with cable box manufacturers I don't see how they can offer a user experience that warrants them releasing a "media center". I know that is bad news to all of you who keep wanting one, but home theater is in a state of flux and there are too many technologies and formats flying around and no standards.
In Japan, Sony has combined a playstation with a DVR. The general consensus is the Xbox 2 will have this (they arleady have a media center option for the xbox straight from Microsoft. So it's not unthinkable.
As for IR blasters, they do suck. But the FCC just required that cable providers make a PCMCIA type card that you can shove into a TV or a TiVo and it basically integrates the cable box into that device. TiVo said this would be in their new boxes. So that problem is basically solved too.
That doesn't make his speculation any more certain, but it's not completely crazy either.
Fri Jan 21, 2005 3:45 pm Subject: Not that far-fetched
Cringely recently made a similar strong arguement for a Sony/Apple alliance:
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20050120.html
The idea of Apple doing an end run around everyone else (again) and introducing the Next Big Retroactively-Obvious Thing (TM) is really quite feasible. It wouldn't be a shock to me if Apple creates another successful niche for themselves where others have stumbled!
I particularly would like the idea of time-shifting my TV viewing without going the Tivo route (which is overkill for a casual viewer like me!), which still involves some forethought. An iMVS would allow me to watch a show AFTER it had passed. Maybe I've decided to get caught up with "Lost"... with iMVS, I could then easily "rent" previous episodes digitally for a modest price (I hope!). Without the need for a permanent archive (and intrusive DRM) for such fleeting television shows, a streaming (or some other temporary) method would be acceptable for most of us, if the price were reasonable. Win win for everyone too: happy customers, new revenue stream for content providers.
If I want to buy a theatrical movie thru iMVS to keep, it would of course cost more.
So why can't I have this NOW? (And no, this is NOT the same as "On Demand" movies or Pay Per View!) Go for it, Apple!
-Ken P
Addendum: after-post edit/ acknowledgement to Guest for the Cringely link!
Why would Sony tie the PS3 to Apple when they have their own competing content delivery and playback products?
Conflict of interest.
If I'm Universal or Warner how do I get my movies/music on the PS3? I can sell the DVD's in store. But how can I sell them digitally? Oh!! Apple has the ITuneMusic/Movie/TVStore completely separate from Sony.
I like the speculation of Apple and Sony working together. Cringely has an article about it and boy does it make sense. I've always thought that iTunes would make a great PS2 program. I could output through my stereo connection. add movies to the mix and WOW you really have something there.
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20050120.html
It's an enticing vision of the HD future. And if Apple doesn't capitalize on it someone else will.
John,
Can you tell us exactly what TiVo has patented that would make Apple want to buy them?
Having read the speculation by Cringely, Guest (above), and Apple-X.net, would TiVo's patents get in the way of Apple's possible online video store? It would seem that TiVo does not have any patents on searching for and delivery of video over the Internet.
As we write, I hope Apple is in talks with loads of content producers (including Pixar!), trying to convince them of the economics of releasing already-shown TV or movie content to such a iTunes/iFlix store.
A little analysis: Movies go from theatres to pay-per-view to premium cable to basic cable to free TV. It also goes to airlines, on-demand cable, and to DVD sales and rentals. What if it is released to iFlix (for rental or sale) at the same time it goes to on-demand cable and to DVD? It doesn't seem to harm any of the other streams while adding another outlet for impulse viewing.
Excepting premium cable TV (which are more like movie content), TV shows go from first-run ad-filled broadcast to rerun broadcast. Then to syndication (local TV and cable). It also goes to airlines. And if it is a hit, it might be packaged as a DVD for sale. What if it is released to iFlix right after first-run? It could even be packaged with new ads, i.e., for other upcoming TV content. This may decrease the syndication revenue. But given a much larger online market, the iFlix revenue in time may be way more than the syndication revenue. (I would envision that the producer would get pennies per view but that it would add up over time.)
In the same way that advertising revenue is moving from TV and print, to the internet, I can see this added form of revenue as an intriguing concept for content providers to check out.
Quote:
Sony and Pixar could help here with their vast collection of movies.
Sony yes, but let's remember that Pixar has only produced about 6 major films. Hardly a 'vast collection.' Not only that, but Disney does their distribution, so they don't even own the distribution rights anyway. Pixar having any library at all is wishful thinking at best.
The Comcast upgrage should've been 6Mbps not 6GBps.
From http://weblogs.jupiterresearch.com/analysts/laszlo
"Building a simple weighted average combining published BSP subscriber numbers and Broadband Reports speed test data, the average US broadband connection as of this week ran about 2.1 Mbps, with cable averaging 2.7 Mbps and DSL managing a respectable 1.2 Mbps."
Guest thanks for that blurb about CableCards. For some reason I had not heard about that. Although it sounds like a while before 2-way cards will be available.
As for everyone else: You are insane. You have no grasp of reality. You have no business sense. You obviously have NOT been watching any of the companies you are speculating about.
Fri Jan 21, 2005 4:59 pm Subject: Not iMovie Store
iMovie is a content creation application. iTunes is a content *VIEWING* application.
The likely store hosts here would be QuickTime, an extended iTunes, iPhoto (!), or a wholly new iVideo Movie Store (iVMS ... although that might have bad connotations )
IMHO, iTunes is a great music store because it was a great music catalog/player first. It is a great music store because songs I buy there sit right alongside the rip of the Beatles' White Album I did in 1997. The problem is: we don't really have a video cataloguing application from Apple.
QuickTime Player plays videos, but I doubt it would serve as a basis for a future movie store (first because it has a rather bad name amongst long-time Windows users as QT/windows was a pain in the butt several years back; second because it isn't a household name and doesn't fit the "oh that must be from Apple" iApp naming scheme; third because "Quicktime Player" is a clumsy name to begin with).
iMovie doesn't catalogue movies; it catalogues clips with the express purpose of making them into movies.
DVD Player ... well, I just don't think so, and we'll leave it at that (you can guess my arguments against that one).
iPhoto now catalogues videos, although targetting the 10-second digicam clips. I don't think this would be repurposed to a movie store as "iPhoto Movie Store" just sounds stupid
IMHO, if Apple's going to go into the movie business, it will either be via iTunes, or via a wholly new app.
Disney's movies have fallen away from what i would call family content. They are constantly portraying liberal or family seperating concepts. Unless it is like Lion King 7.5.5. I think Pixar's movies of family friendly material has been more disney than Disney.
I think the New Disney is Pixar/Sony.
Sorry but if Disner is so hell bent on $$$, they deserve to lose their place in our theatre of good will.
I think having an iMVS on a TiVo makes a lot of sense. More than on a Mac. I know I don't want to have to go to may Mac to order a show and then back to the TV to watch it. Some of the features of a digital hub are going to move into the living room. Not all. A lot will still need a PC/Mac. But if Apple doesnt do something for the living room I'm afraid they may lose out on being the "it" thing to have as far as digital hubs go.
Guest wrote "I know I don't want to have to go to may Mac to order a show and then back to the TV to watch it."
SJ told Mossberg last year at the Airport Express introduction that Apple was working on a remote for AirTunes. Well, we're still waiting ....
And the future Mac mini will go in the living room with that remote and the ten foot interface for iTunes/iFlix/iPhoto.
Wonder why nobody speculate that future versions of Mac mini can play Playstation games and Sony licenses iTunes for PS3, PSP and MP3 players. IMHO: Above tie-up is likely since Sony admitted that they have made a strategic mistake wrt digital music. Continuing to fight against the number one is continuing the strategic mistake. As for the PS games, since Sony makes money on game and lose money in hardware, why not license hardware design to Apple. This will help them fight Microsoft Xbox.
iTunes refer to the playback software in iPod not FairPlay or iTunes on Mac/PC.
How doesn't it makes sense for Apple to partner with Sony on the PS3? It's an excellent business move for the both of them.
The Playstation 2 was never the complete home-entertainment center that Sony wanted it to be, and the PSX isn't exactly taking off. If Sony realizes they can't achieve their goal alone, who's a better partner than Apple? If anyone can engineer a GUI that works smooth and elegantly with a DualShock, it's them. Then imagine the content they could provide. iTunes Music Store, a possible iMovie video store, DVR capabilities, all driven through a painless controller interface.
The PS3 could be like a TiVo wired to an inexpensive, on-demand video and music store, that also plays games from the PS3 down to the PS1 plus CDs and DVDs, and of course can interface with an iPod, all under the Playstaion brandname. With a system like that, Sony would have the next console wars won before they even began.
Now think of it from Apple's perspective. They'd have the chance to partner with Sony on the console series that's dominated two straight generations, this generation in particular by a staggering degree. The PS2 alone has sold tens of millions of units, and with the console industry bigger than it's ever been, the PS3 is poised to sell tens of millions more. Apple would assuredly have the most exposure in their history. Forget the iPod Halo Effect, they'd have a Playstation Halo Effect.
A partnership like that would garuntee the PS3's dominance and, compared to where they are now, launch Apple into the stratosphere.
I agree with the poster who said it will not be the iMovie Store - that would be like putting the iTMS in Garageband. However I think Quicktime would be able to take on video management.
In my opinion, the dark grey lower area of Quicktime Player would be perfect for a drop-down drawer style browser window, with relatively similar controls to iTunes but obviously the actual video and controls would be on the top portion. To me, once you've found the video to watch you don't want to see the library at all times like iTunes. Or perhaps the Quicktime of today would be similar to the "mini player" of iTunes, and zooming it would swap to the library view. Or the library could be shown in an entirely separate window. I'm sure Apple would find a very elegant interface. And if they opt to keep Quicktime as the barebones player, my choice for library name is "Cinema".
But anways, if Apple bought TiVo, built their store into the TiVo interface, allowed shows to be streamed to and from your computer and made TiVo Mac-mini size, I would be one of the first to buy.
Comments are currently closed. Please email the author instead.
Recent Headlines - Updated February 3rd
- Fri, 7:27 PM
- Product News - Apple Addresses iBooks Textbook Issues with App Update
- 7:08 PM
- News - Apple Rolls Out Updated Snow Leopard Security Fix
- 5:39 PM
- Particle Debris - If Only Selling High Tech Were Easy
- 5:30 PM
- Free on iTunes - 3 Free Panorama Apps for iPhone
- 5:23 PM
- News - Tim Cook Touts Apple Charity in Employee Meeting
- 4:26 PM
- News - Apple Clarifies iBooks Author EULA, Excludes Claim on Content
- 3:43 PM
- Apple Stock Watch - Analyst: Apple Comfy With High End Smartphones & Other Notes
- 2:10 PM
- Quick Look Review - AirPort Utility 6 for Lion is for Beginners
- 1:32 PM
- Deal Brothers - 15” MacBook Pro 2.2GHz Quad-Core Intel i7: $1,699
- 10:55 AM
- News - Germany Overturns Injunction, Apple Resumes iPhone Sales
- 10:25 AM
- Hot Forum Topic - Reader Discussion: Apple, iPhones & NFC
- 9:47 AM
- News - German Court Gives Motorola iCloud Injunction
The Mac Observer Reader Specials
TypeStyler 11 is now in the Mac App Store!! -- Special Introductory Price of $59.95!! -- To Buy From The Mac App Store Click Here Now!! Or buy direct
from Strider Software.
Mac RAM Upgrades: MacBook Pro 16GB kits $475, 8GB Kits for $119.99! iMac 16GB RAM Kits (4x 4GB) for $229.99! Mac Pro Memory 32GB Kit for $399.99, 64GB Kit for $889.99! Mac Hard Drives 2TB Seagate SATA II for $249.99! Click Here!
-
If you're using a Mac, then you've gotta check out Online Poker Mac.
This mac poker and online casino mac site
actually does the unthinkable, it actually rewards! -
-
-
-
-
-
