Apple iPhone 4S release: live

The launch of the iPhone 4S last week was overshadowed by two things. Foremost was the death of Apple's co-founder and charismatic leader, Steve Jobs.
Jobs' failing health had been the only cloud on Apple's horizon in recent years. His death was not

unexpected - yet its abruptness was still a shock, as Jobs only stepped down as Apple CEO in August.
The other shadow to fall on the iPhone 4S was the sense of disappointment felt by some. This was not at all surprising: the hype around Apple product launches is now so great, and the level of - mostly uttterly incorrect - speculations so furious, that anti-climax is inevitable.
Frankly, if Apple were to announce it had created a perpetual motion machine and also harnessed nuclear fusion to produce limitless energy - unboxing the Holy Grail as its 'one more thing' - the event would still be greeted by seismic rumblings of discontent.
No surprise then that the iPhone 4S launch was dubbed "disappointing" and a "damp squib". Cupertino's shares even dipped on the revelation that Apple had not, as expected by scores of tech watchers, brought forth the fabled iPhone 5 after all.
The tech press' collective 'meh' was almost audible, not least because the gadget hounds have spent the past year predicting the arrival of the iPhone 5. And now their iPhone 5 vigil begins anew: another year of waiting, hyping and writing another thousand iPhone 5 stories. Little wonder they are blue.
But don't be deceived by this spectre of anti-climax. There's nothing shabby about the iPhone 4S. On the contrary, it's a very respectable update to a very popular smartphone.
Early indications suggest mobile consumers aren't fazed by the lack of the iPhone 5. Apple has racked up record pre-orders for its latest iPhone iteration. On Monday it announced iPhone 4S pre-orders had exceeded one million in the first 24 hours since the device was made available. This compares to 600,000 day-one pre-orders for last year's model, the iPhone 4.
If the iPhone 4S is disappointing there are an awful lot of technology companies that can only dream of being so dismal.
But let's play devil's advocate and ask exactly what features gadget hounds were hoping the mythical iPhone 5 would usher in? Earlier this year, silicon.com's sister site CNET News.com made a fine list of the top 20 most-wanted iPhone 5 features.
Top of this wish list was 4G support - a next-generation network technology that hasn't even been rolled out in the UK, since the spectrum required to underpin it hasn't gone under the hammer yet. So does the whole world - that is, not just the US where 4G has been rolled out - need a 4G iPhone? No, not yet.
Another coveted feature according to the list was near-field communications (NFC) - a technology that enables contactless payments and content sharing between NFC-enabled devices. Again, the infrastructure required to render NFC useful to the masses, rather than an innovative gimmick for the techie few, is not yet in place. In the UK, for instance, around 40,000 retailers accept contactless payments - so that's an awful lot of shops that don't.
On the NFC content-sharing front, RIM has just announced it will incorporate a 'tap to share' system called BlackBerry Tag into the next update of its smartphone OS. There's no firm launch date on this - and RIM's handset portfolio currently includes just two NFC handsets - so finding another NFC-owning BlackBerry user to contactlessly share content with is going to take considerably longer than contactlessly sharing the content itself.
Technology features in and of themselves are meaningless. What matters is whether they contribute something positive to the user experience. Which is why saying no to emerging technologies such as NFC is the right decision for Apple at this time.
It's also why, when Apple upgraded the iPhone's camera to eight megapixels, rather than cramming more megapixels atop the same sensor, it included a larger sensor to ensure better quality pictures - not just a spec sheet bump. Unlike other companies that play spec sheet top trumps - often in a misguided attempt to leapfrog Apple - Apple prioritises the user experience. That's not a bug, it's a feature - arguably Apple's defining feature.

Innovators and Creators Around the World Are Steve Jobs’ True Legacy

“Steve Jobs gave the best performance by a CEO in 50 years, maybe 100 years.” That’s how Google’s Eric Schmidt assessed the career of Apple’s Steve Jobs, who died on Wednesday. Schmidt, of course, served as the CEO of Google as it became one of the great corporate success stories in American history. Yet history

will agree with Schmidt’s assessment of Jobs. Not only did the Apple CEO create a company worth some $350 billion, he also changed the way Americans think about computers and, indeed, how they think about their lives.

To computer technology, known for its arcane complexity, he brought simplicity. To an industry known for its geeky/ugly functionality, he brought beauty. To a new generation of work-at-home-work-at-Starbucks creators and entrepreneurs, he brought a new kind of creative grace.

The U.S. economy is going through hard times now, but they would be even harder if not for Jobs’ vision of everyone being his or her own producer. 

If a big part of economic activity and growth comes from the human desire to grow, develop and flourish, it’s Jobs who made that personal empowerment possible for millions; go to any Apple store and you will see people learning how to do things they didn’t know how to do, and then going forth to do them in their own way.

That’s the essential Jobs vision: We can all do this, and more--with a Mac. 

And the consequence of that empowering vision was truly transformative. Some of us remember back to the famous “1984” advertisement for the new Macintosh computer, which ran just once on TV, during the 1984 Super Bowl. It ends with the words, “On January 24th, Apple Computer will introduce Macintosh. And you'll see why 1984 won’t be like ‘1984.’” That is, the future world will not belong to centralized bureaucracies and their mainframes, but rather, it will belong to creative individuals and their personal computers, each free to do their own thing. That emancipatory vision has stuck in our imagination ever since. 

Just three years ago, a Barack Obama campaign supporter used a brilliant parody of that ad to help the then-Illinois Senator defeat the Democratic favorite, Hillary Rodham Clinton, for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination.

Indeed, President Obama joined in the mourning for Jobs, issuing a statement less than two hours after his passing: “Steve was among the greatest of American innovators--brave enough to think differently, bold enough to believe he could change the world, and talented enough to do it.” Yet while Obama deserves credit for taking note of Jobs’ passing, the comparison between Jobs’ legacy of changing the world and Obama’s ongoing effort at world-changing is not flattering to the President. 

After all, Jobs truly did succeed: He was that rare combination, a visionary who could see something better in the future, but who could then get down into the nitty-gritty to push projects through to triumphant completion. Obama, of course, might have some sort of U.S.-meets-U.N. vision for America, but he lacks the leadership capacity to actually get something done. And so with Obama, we suffered through a series of forgettable programs--“stimulus,” “green jobs,” “cap and trade.” Whereas with Jobs, we will all remember, “iMac,” “iPod,” “iPhone,” and “iPad.”

As Intel’s Andrew Grove has observed, the high-tech world operates at a speed three times faster than the federal government. The reason is simple: The high-tech world fully embraces the vision of endless transformation, while bureaucratic government is inherently conservative and even reactionary. 

And while savvy techsters are choosing among communications tools that include email, instant messaging, text messages, tweets and Facebook chats, the U.S. government, with Obama’s help, is still trying to prop up the Postal Service, the basic conception of which hasn’t changed much since Ben Franklin was appointed as the first Postmaster General back in 1775.

Entrepreneurs such as Jobs helped make Silicon Valley’s non-stop transformation possible.  Not everyone wins in the Jobs/Silicon Valley vision of an endless tech frontier that puts a premium on endless adaptability. But the imperative for such personal adaptability comes from the competitive reality of the globalized economy.

But Jobs’ greatest impact was not economic. His true impact was on the culture and on the conception of self in the 20th and 21st centuries. He offered a vision that was many things: It was capitalist, but it was also arty-liberal. And yet it was even more libertarian. And above all, it was cool.

More than two centuries ago, the poet William Blake declared, “I must create a system or be enslaved by another man’s . . . my business is to create.” That was Steve Jobs, who created a world that the rest of us can live in, long after his passing. It is we, the living and the creating, who are his true legacy.

Successor Faces Tough Job at Apple(Photos)

Steve Jobs is legendary for a relentless, driving style that has helped him disrupt more industries than any other chief executive of his generation.

The question now: Is his successor, Tim Cook, aggressive enough to muscle Apple into new turf like TV and publishing where the company hasn't yet established a dominant foothold?

The real test for Mr. Cook will come when he is no longer benefiting from Mr. Jobs's triumphs and must conquer new markets on his own. Executives in media companies, for instance, are reluctant to give up control of their products and fear Apple will end up eating away at their profits. Mr. Cook must win them over.

Investors are standing by Apple's new management for now—its stock fell just 0.65% Thursday while the broader Nasdaq dropped nearly 2%.

An Apple spokeswoman declined to comment.

An immediate challenge for Mr. Cook will be to advance Apple's plans in what is expected to be a key market for growth: digital video. Apple is working on new technology to deliver video to televisions, and has been discussing whether to try to launch a subscription TV service, according to people familiar with the matter. Unlike the iPod and music, where Apple has a commanding position, the battle to rule online video remains wide open and the company faces fierce competition.

Apple's digital-book, magazine and newspaper services are in their early days.

Even if Mr. Cook is willing to take the kind of risks that Mr. Jobs did, the company's board will likely scrutinize his moves more carefully, said Forrester Research Chief Executive George Colony. "It will be very reasoned and logical, but Apple will not take the leaps that it took when you had Steve in that chair," he said.

Then there's the bully factor. One of the biggest advantages that Apple will lose without Mr. Jobs at the helm, said an Apple business partner, is the "fear that Steve instilled."

For instance, Mr. Jobs famously browbeat some music industry executives to agree to his terms when he launched the iTunes music store that eventually upended the music industry.

"Steve can be pretty unvarnished, he's never understated about his beliefs," said Time Warner Inc. CEO Jeff Bewkes, whose company had to negotiate with Apple over iTunes. "If he thinks that you're not doing something right, he will tell you why in pretty colorful terms, which I have always appreciated."

At times, Mr. Jobs used his power of persuasion to convince companies that they had to work with Apple, even if it meant giving up some control. "It all stems from Steve's animal drive to not let anyone control him or his company," said Jean-Louis Gassee, a venture capitalist and former Apple executive.

Compared with Mr. Jobs's fiery style, Mr. Cook's management approach is more measured and analytical, people who know him say.

In a letter to employees on Thursday, Mr. Cook said Apple wouldn't change. "Steve built a culture that is unlike any other in the world and we are going to stay true to that—it is in our DNA."

Mr. Jobs will go down in the annals of business as one of the greatest disrupters. His Apple II helped launch the PC revolution. His Macintosh and publishing software took printing out of commercial printing shops and put it on anyone's desktop. His iPod grabbed dominance of the portable music player—a market pioneered by Sony Corp.'s transistor radios in the 1950s and its Walkman in the 1970s—from traditional consumer-electronic giants. He then used the iPod to help launch iTunes and wrest control of music sales from record stores, helping spell the demise of retailers like Tower Records.

Mr. Jobs's iPhone shook up the mobile-phone world, and his iPad ushered in a whole new category of mobile gadgets that consumers didn't even know they wanted.

Mr. Jobs often forced competitors to react to Apple. Last week, Google Inc. acquired Motorola Inc. in large part to shore up its patents so it can continue to offer a smartphone-operating system that competes with Apple. Hewlett-Packard Co. recently said it was spinning off its computer business and shutting down the business that it acquired from Palm Inc. as it was unable to compete in the mobile-device world that Apple now dominates.

Mr. Jobs's success in reaching deals with partners often gave Apple a huge competitive advantage. When Apple signed an exclusive deal with AT&T Inc. for the iPhone, it persuaded the carrier to give it complete control over the branding and marketing of the device, a concession that no other mobile phone maker has been able to get.

When Apple ran into a problem with AT&T, Mr. Jobs made the phone call that triggered prompt action. When iPhone sales started accelerating after the debut of the iPhone 3GS in 2009 and AT&T had trouble handling the network capacity from iPhone users, Mr. Jobs called Glenn Lurie, then AT&T's point man on its relationship with Apple, and chewed him out for poor service that damaged Apple's brand, according to people familiar with the matter. The following year, the carrier rolled out a major commitment to boost spending on its network.

When record companies were initially balking at the idea of the iTunes music store in 2003, Mr. Jobs made a plea directly with the rock group the Eagles to persuade them, and its label, AOL Time Warner Inc.'s Warner Music to sign. He even offered to personally demo the service for Eagles singer Don Henley.

Mr. Jobs won media chiefs over by convincing them that they lacked successful digital strategies and needed to be saved, several media executives said. "He tells you you are a nematode," said one senior media executive. He makes you feel that "if you listen to him, you have a chance."

More recently, Apple has made headway in striking deals for digital delivery of newspapers and magazines, after Mr. Jobs disparaged publishers' print products, people familiar with the matter said. Big names like Condé Nast and Hearst Corp. have come around, beginning to sell subscriptions to their titles through iTunes, even as Apple has restricted how they can sell their content and gather data. Media executives have often said they have no choice but to do business with Apple as few other digital distribution alternatives exist.

When talks between Apple and some of the major magazine publishers were hung up on the terms under which publishers could sell their iPad editions, Mr. Jobs offered to step in and "break any ties," one industry executive said. Ultimately, however, the two sides worked out their differences, rendering his intervention unnecessary.

As for the future under Mr. Cook, this executive said, "The question is going to be if a whole new version of this needs to be invented, I don't know enough about [Cook's] background to know if he's going to spur the innovation to create breakout products," he said. "But I can say they have a big bench."

Mr. Jobs often criticizes, in public and private, the experience of watching TV as clumsy and bad for consumers. But he has said the existing system, where consumers get content from different cable and satellite providers that use different technologies, makes it difficult to innovate.

Both he and Mr. Cook have called Apple TV, a box that allows consumers to watch media from iTunes and a few other online video services, like Netflix Inc., on TVs, "a hobby."

But the area is shaping up to be a big priority for a wide range of companies, from cable and satellite providers to its Internet rivals like Google Inc. And to crack it, Apple needs to try to redefine not only the experience of watching TV but the business model of how consumers pay for it once again, analysts say. While iTunes popularized buying individual TV shows or movies, consumers already are flocking to new subscription services like Netflix that offer unlimited access for a low monthly fee.

In 2009, Apple tried rounding up media companies to offer a bundle of TV shows for a monthly fee through iTunes, according to people familiar with the discussions. But it tabled the talks after few showed interest.

"They just don't have the deals yet," said Richard Doherty, an analyst at the Envisioneering Group. Mr. Doherty likens Apple's attempt to change the TV business model to "pushing this giant marshmallow uphill." TV, with myriad rights holders and cable and satellite companies to reckon with, is "light years" tougher to transform than the music industry, he said.

People who have worked with Mr. Cook at Apple say that he often arrives at the same conclusion as Mr. Jobs, albeit with a lower-key approach. Suppliers who have dealt with Mr. Cook's team say he is a formidable negotiator, and his team haggles down the price of parts to the half a penny.

Apple has more cash than the U.S. Treasury(Photo-Video)

Apple Inc. may not have more money than God. But it's got more cash than Uncle Sam.

As the government struggled to reach an agreement on raising the debt ceiling, the U.S. Treasury's cash balance fell to $74 billion this week. That's less than the $76 billion that Apple now has in cash.

It's not terribly likely that the government will ask Apple Chief Executive Steve Jobs for help. But it wouldn't be the first time the government has asked for a bailout from an industry mogul.

In the mid-1890s, with the U.S. economy still recovering from the financial panic of 1893, the U.S. Treasury was in danger of going bankrupt as worried investors clamored to collect what they were owed from U.S. gold reserves. With few options left, President Cleveland met with New York financier J.P. Morgan, who pledged a whopping $60 million in gold. Adjusted for inflation, that would be about $1.5 billion today.

"The fact that Morgan had become a cosigner on the federal debt was what impressed the markets," historian H.W. Brands wrote in his account "The Upside-Down Bailout." "Within days the Treasury's condition stabilized; within weeks the dollar's danger had passed."

To be fair, comparing Apple's cash reserves with the Treasury's is not exactly apples to apples.

Apple's billions are essentially the funds in its bank accounts, while the federal number represents the amount of money the government has left before it hits the legal debt limit — a figure that can be changed by Congress.

At about $362 billion, Apple is the second-largest company in the world by market value (behind Exxon Mobil Corp. at $395 billion) — big by any standard, but still far smaller than the U.S. government, which will spend close to $3.8 trillion this year, 10 times what Apple is worth.

Still, Apple's reasons for keeping such a giant cash stockpile may well be related to worries about the stability of the U.S. government's finances.

"One of the reasons U.S. companies have amassed so much cash is that it provides them financial flexibility in times of heightened uncertainty," said Laurie Simon Hodrick, a professor of business economics at Columbia University's business school. "It might seem ironic, but as the risk of a government default grows, bringing with it the specter of higher interest rates, the incentives for firms to finance with internally generated cash grows as well."

Apple Shares Jump on Record IPhone, IPad Sales

Apple Inc. (AAPL)’s stock price jumped to more than $400 for the first time, after record sales of iPhones and iPads helped third-quarter profit blow past estimates.

Net income in the period more than doubled to $7.31 billion, or $7.79 a share, from $3.25 billion, or $3.51,

a year earlier, Apple said yesterday in a statement. Sales climbed 82 percent to $28.6 billion. Analysts had predicted profit of $5.87 a share and revenue of $25 billion, according to Bloomberg data.

IPhone sales were buoyed by international demand, particularly in China, where total revenue jumped sixfold to $3.8 billion. After overcoming supply shortages for the iPad 2 following its March debut, Apple saw sales of the tablet soar. The device is now its second-biggest revenue source -- behind the iPhone -- less than two years after first being introduced.

“They have the wind at their backs in a big way, and it’s being reflected in these numbers,” said Ryan Jacob, an Apple investor at Jacob Asset Management. “They have a unique ability to increase market share and introduce new products.”

Apple shares jumped as much as 7.5 percent to $405 in extended trading after the results were posted. The stock, up 17 percent this year, had closed at a record $376.85 yesterday in regular Nasdaq Stock Market trading.

The report eased investors’ concerns that sales would suffer from the lack of a new iPhone, which isn’t expected until September. The Cupertino, California-based company also has been operating without the day-to-day attention of Chief Executive Officer Steve Jobs, who has been on medical leave since January.

‘A Juggernaut’

“Apple is a juggernaut and they prove it every quarter,” said Mike Binger, an Apple investor at Thrivent Asset Management in Appleton, Wisconsin, which has about $70 billion under management.

Apple’s expansion into China and other fast-growing economies helped make up for slower growth in the U.S. Sales in China, Taiwan and Hong Kong have totaled $8.8 billion in the first three quarters of the fiscal year, Apple said.

“China was very key to our results,” said Chief Operating Officer Tim Cook, who is handling day-to-day leadership during Jobs’s medical leave. “This has been a substantial opportunity for Apple, and I firmly believe that we’re just scratching the surface right now.”

Apple sold 20.3 million iPhones and 9.3 million iPads in the third quarter, which ended June 25. Mac computer sales were 3.95 million, short of a record.

Fourth Quarter

The company said profit in the fourth quarter would be about $5.50 a share on sales of $25 billion. Analysts on average predict $6.41 a share on sales of $27.7 billion for that period, which ends in September.

Apple typically gives a lowball forecast, making it less relevant to investors. The company had previously beaten the average earning projection for at least 29 straight quarters, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

“The forecast is meaningless,” said Thrivent’s Binger.

In the third quarter, gross profit margin, the percentage of sales left after deducting production costs, was 41.7 percent, compared with 39.1 percent a year earlier.

Since Jobs went on leave, some members of Apple’s board have discussed CEO succession with executive recruiters, the Wall Street Journal reported yesterday, citing unnamed people familiar with the matter. The talks included at least one head of a high-profile technology company, the Journal said.

Jobs’s Health

The health of Jobs, who has struggled with a rare form of cancer, is the only major concern for Apple, said Erick Maronak, chief investment officer of Victory Capital Management Inc. in New York, which has about $2.5 billion under management.

“In the end, it’s really all going to circle back to Jobs -- his health, his role,” Maronak said. Apple is his firm’s largest holding, accounting for about 5 percent, he said.

Jobs's health wasn't discussed on Apple's conference call yesterday, and no analysts inquired about it.

Apple is expanding its retail operations by opening 30 locations in the September period, including in Hong Kong. The chain of stores generated $3.5 billion last quarter.

The results reinforced the idea that tablets are taking sales from traditional personal computers. Apple said 86 percent of Fortune 500 companies are testing or deploying the iPad, and that sales of the tablet topped those of the Mac computer among primary and secondary schools.

“We sold every iPad we could make,” Peter Oppenheimer, the company’s chief financial officer, said on the call.

Patent Fights

Apple also discussed its patent disputes, which involve rivals such as Samsung Electronics Co. and HTC Corp. (2498)

“We have a very simple view here, and that view is we love competition,” Cook said. “We think it’s great for us and for everyone. But we want people to invent their own self, and we’re going to make sure that we defend our portfolio.”

The iPod, meanwhile, fell short of projections. Apple sold 7.54 million units of the media player last quarter, compared with the 8.5 million predicted by analysts. That product is the oldest of Apple’s main mobile devices and faces cannibalization from the iPhone and iPad, which also can play music.

It was the first time since 2008 that the third-quarter results didn’t include the release of a new iPhone. The new model slated for September has a faster chip for processing data and an 8-megapixel camera, two people familiar with the matter said last month.

The company also is introducing a new Mac operating system called OS X Lion today. And later this year it will release its iCloud service, which let users store, synchronize and access music, pictures and documents from different Apple devices.

“We are extremely pleased with the momentum of our business,” Oppenheimer said.

Why Google + social networking = electric wok

A spectre is haunting the technology industry. It is called "electric wok syndrome" and it mainly afflicts engineers and those who invest in their fantasies. The condition takes its name from the fact that nobody in his or her right mind would want an electric wok. But because it is possible to make such things, they are

manufactured, regardless of whether or not there is a need for them. The syndrome is thus characterised by the mantra: "Technology is the answer; now what was that question again?"
The past two weeks have seen a virulent outbreak of the syndrome. It was triggered by Google's limited release of a new "service" called Google+ which was widely interpreted as the search giant's first serious foray into social networking. Initially available by invitation only to a select group of geeks and early adopters (which did not at first include this columnist), it has been the source of frenzied speculation in the blogosphere, not least because it implied that Google was finally getting ready to take on the 800lb gorilla of social networking, Facebook.
In its "limited field test" form, Google+ has five components: Circles, Hangouts, Instant Upload, Huddle and Sparks. The blurb explains that Circles allows you to assign your friends in an arbitrary number of "circles" – family, colleagues, poker buddies etc – "just like real life". Hangouts brings "the unplanned meet-up to the web for the first time. Let specific buddies (or entire circles) know you're hanging out and see who drops by for a face-to-face chat". It is, apparently, "the next best thing until teleportation arrives". (I am not making this up.) Instant Upload means that your pictures and videos upload automatically to a private album, ready for sharing. Huddle is group text-chat, which apparently will be very useful "when you're trying to get six different people to decide on a movie". And Sparks is some kind of RSS feed on steroids. "Tell Sparks what you're into and it will send you stuff it thinks you will like."
To read some of the excited commentary on these innovations you'd think that teleportation had actually arrived. Watching people salivate over Circles and, er, Hangouts helps to explain how the ancient Egyptians came to worship an insect. It also reminds one of the astonishing power that large corporations possess to create a reality-distortion field around them which, among other things, disables the capacity to believe that these organisations might sometimes do very silly things indeed. There was a time, for example, when Microsoft's every move was greeted with the hushed reverence with which devout Catholics greet papal utterances. Grown men swoon whenever Steve Jobs appears in public. And it's not that long ago since Google launched its incomprehensible "Wave" service (now defunct) and an idiotic venture called "Buzz" – things that excited geeks but left the rest of the world unmoved.
So the question du jour is whether Google+ is an electric wok or not. Initial reactions suggest that it is. First of all, it's engagingly flaky so that even simple tasks such as setting up a user profile are formidably difficult, as my Guardian colleague Charles Arthur reported in his hilarious, and admirably acerbic, review in which he describes his attempts to create a profile and upload a photograph. "If Google were a start-up," he concluded, "it would have lost precisely 99.999% of every would-be joiner. Getting photos uploaded is the most fundamental thing you have to be able to do and every start-up knows it." He's right: geeks and early adopters revel in difficulty; ordinary users abominate it. They like stuff that just works.
Charles Arthur's experience is by no means unique. What it suggests is that Google+ is what software people call a "closed beta" – ie a release that is OK for techies but not suitable for normal people. And that's fine. It will improve over time. But the thing about social networking is that it's now a zero-sum game because it depends on a very scarce resource – its users' time and attention. Facebook's users already spend a lot of time on the site, time that won't be available to Google+, no matter how slick its photo-upload process becomes.
Which is a pity, because Facebook needs some real competition. Last week, it announced some new features that look suspiciously like bits of Google +. And it let slip that it has reached 750 million users. It's beginning to look like the winner that took all. Oh, and if you really want an electric wok, you can get one from Amazon. It even comes with a tempura rack and a spatula.

Final Cut Pro X under fire from professionals

Final Cut Pro X fails to impress advanced users, in what may be regarded as an uncharacteristically negative Apple product launch.
Apple introduced Final Cut Pro X, the upgrade for its editing software. Many have welcomed it with open arms, calling it revolutionary and much-welcomed update, but there are also some very legitimate complaints. For the most part, these criticisms come from professional film editors, many of which won’t affect the

average user.
The New York Times’ David Pogue outlined the main issues in detail, which you can find here if you want a thorough look at what extremely advanced Final Cut Pro buffs will likely be frustrated by. In short, however, the missing elements are the absence of multicamera editing, external video monitoring, and EDL and XML imports/exports. The backup application disk is also gone. Many users are incensed by the inability to move former Final Cut Pro projects over the new version for further editing as well.
Industry veterans’ opinions run the gamut and include everything from praise for the product as well as extremely harsh rejection (Walter Biscardi of Creative Cow’s comment “All in all the worst product launch I’ve ever seen from Apple or pretty much any software manufacturer” has been making the rounds). Perhaps most revealing are the user reviews, ranging everywhere from one to five stars, but ultimately pinning Final Cut Pro X at two and a half stars – certainly not the initial impression Apple was hoping for.
And just to add intrigue to insult, Apple is being accused of censoring some of its user reviews from the Mac App Store. 9to5Mac noticed shortly after the launch, as particularly unflattering comments continued to roll in, there were suddenly no reviews available for Final Cut Pro X. All other products in the Mac App Store didn’t experience any such glitch, making the absence this particular user feedback enough to raise a few eyebrows. They’ve since returned, but it’s enough to make you wonder if Apple’s seriously feeling the heat.

 The company isn’t exactly used to ill-received product launches (see: Steve Jobs’ outrage over MobileMe’s failure).

Apple sues Samsung for 'copying' iPad

Apple is one participant in a web of litigation among phone makers and software firms over who owns the patents used in smartphones, as rivals aggressively rush into the smartphone and tablet market that the US firm jumpstarted with the iPhone and iPad.

Nokia has also sued Apple, which in turn has sued Taiwanese handset maker HTC.

Samsung is one of the fastest growing smartphone makers and has emerged as Apple's strongest competitor in the booming tablet market with models in three sizes, but it remains a distant second in the sector.

Its Galaxy products use Google's Android operating system, which directly competes with Apple's mobile software. However, Apple's claims against Samsung focus on Galaxy's design features, such as the look of its screen icons, the lawsuit said.

John Jackson, an analyst with CCS Insight, said Samsung is essentially Apple's only real tablet competitor at this stage. "It's clear that they do not intend to let Apple run away with the category," Mr Jackson said.

The lawsuit, filed on Friday, alleges Samsung violated Apple's patents and trademarks.

"This kind of blatant copying is wrong," Apple spokeswoman Kristin Huguet said in a statement.

Samsung said it would respond to the legal action "through appropriate legal measures to protect our intellectual property".

"Samsung's development of core technologies and strengthening our intellectual property portfolio are keys to our continued success," it said in a statement.

Steve Jobs, Apple chief executive, has criticised Samsung and other rivals in presentations of new products or technology debates. Analysts say Samsung's response to this has been muted, partly because Apple was Samsung's second-biggest customer last year after Sony.

Apple brought in around 6.2 trillion won (£3.5bn) of sales to Samsung in 2010 mainly by purchasing semiconductors, according to Samsung's annual report.

"This is more like a symbolic move by Apple that it is quite serious about rivals advancing and it is trying to hold back its close competitors," said John Park, an analyst at Daishin Securities in Seoul. "Samsung is unlikely to respond aggressively given that Apple is its core client in the component business."

To better compete with Apple, Samsung redesigned within weeks its new 10.1-inch tablet, first introduced in February, to make it the thinnest in the category after Apple set the trend with its iPad 2.

The global smartphone market is expected to grow 58pc this year and Android is set account for 39pc of the market, while the tablet market is likely to quadruple to 70m units, according to research firm Gartner.

Apple iPad 2 Hongkong Release Date Still Not Happening

Apple promised an April Release date for the iPad 2 in Hongkong, but its already pass April’s first week and its still not happening. What could be causing this delay? April arrives, so as the excitement of most asian countries that will finally have a taste of the Apple iPad 2. Apple has confirmed that the release date for the Apple iPad 2 is this April 2011. The only problem is that they did not indicated what date it actually is. The iPad 2 has been leaked into Hongkong by local vendors, pricing the device twice from its regular $499-$850 range. Well this will be over soon as the Apple iPad 2 arrives in Hongkong, Korea and Singapore this month.

A couple of countries were announced to be going to have the Apple iPad 2 shipped, Included in the list are countries outside the united States. “While competitors are still struggling to catch up with our first iPad, we’ve changed the game again with iPad 2,” Steve Jobs, Apple’s chief executive officer, said in a statement. “We’re experiencing amazing demand for iPad 2 in the US, and customers around the world have told us they can’t wait to get their hands on it. We appreciate everyone’s patience and we are working hard to build enough iPads for everyone,” he noted.

Japan had its shipment of Apple iPad 2 delayed after the incident that crippled the country, The 25 countries where iPad 2 were promised to go on sale at the end of March in placed that include Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and Britain. What kind of delay is causing this? Will the Apple iPad 2 really make it this April? The demand of the iPad 2 in Hongkong is high and people are starting to get disappointed as release date still not happening.

Apple iPad 2 on Sale this March 11 on Verizon

Apple iPad 2 is being prepped up for its March 11 release date. Apple Stores will surely have a very long line again for its iPad 2 Sale. Its popularity has just gone high when it was unveiled last Wednesday with CEO Steve Jobs. 

The Apple iPad 2 was featured as thinner, Lighter and faster. Sources are also saying that the Apple iPad 2 will be made available on Verizon Wireless with a price tag of $ 499 for 16 gig, $599 for the 32gig, and $699 for the 64gig (All Wifi Only Units).

Verizon Wireless has already confirmed that they will be offering the Apple iPad 2 this upcoming March 11. AT&T and Verizon has not yet confirmed that the 3G version will be available on this date. So those who want the Apple iPad 2 3G will have to wait. Although, AT&T also had not confirmed that they will be releasing the Apple iPad 2 on March 11. Its your choice on which provider you will be sticking to.

The Apple iPad 2 has a similar appearance to its predecessor but comes with its new features. A front and rear camera, a 1.3lbs weight and a new shell for the Apple iPad 2. Having 33% thinner aluminum shell with a flat back and beveled corners wrapping around the 9.7-in. screen. Its Display has not changed at all, still has a 1024 by 768 pixels, with 132 pixels per inch. Get yourself ready for the Apple iPad 2 Sale this March 11!.