Live data from Hacker News

Apple TV, Apple TV, Apple TV, and Apple TV+

dcurt.is

131–140 of 207 posts

Re: Apple TV, Apple TV, Apple TV, and Apple TV+

#132

Remember when .NET came out? Everything was .NET. As a result, no-one really had any idea what .NET actually was. Eventually we figured out it was "Microsoft's Java". Windows also went through a phase in which seemingly everything was Windows.

Even Sun Microsystems had a phase where they made thought-terminating illogical statements. My 2 favorites: "The network is the computer" - No, it's not, and Sun's tech at the time, just Unix servers, definitely did not have any enlightened concept of networking that others lacked. It had Berkeley sockets and NFS. Such a statement makes me think of single-system image cluster computing, or other cool stuff, but they…

Sun: "We put the dot into dot-com!"

Microsoft: "Oh yeah? Well we put the COM into dot-com. Pthththth!"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Component_Object_Model

IBM: ”When they put the dot into dot-com, they forgot how they were going to connect the dots. Badoom psssh!”

https://www.itbusiness.ca/news/ibm-brings-on-demand-computin...

Re: Apple TV, Apple TV, Apple TV, and Apple TV+

#133
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft's email services are still a naming mess. Live, Outlook and Hotmail all seem to be interconnected, and I don't really know what differentiates them anymore.

I thought Hotmail and Live were dead, replaced by Outlook.com?

Here's the fun part: if I type in Hotmail.com into my browser, I'm redirected to a page titled 'Outlook' that's on a subdomain of Live.com (outlook.live.com)

But if I type in Live.com, I'm redirected to the same page that says 'Outlook' but is actually outlook.live.com

So Hotmail is Outlook but Outlook is Live.com but Live.com itself is Outlook

Re: Apple TV, Apple TV, Apple TV, and Apple TV+

#134
post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even Sun Microsystems had a phase where they made thought-terminating illogical statements. My 2 favorites: "The network is the computer" - No, it's not, and Sun's tech at the time, just Unix servers, definitely did not have any enlightened concept of networking that others lacked. It had Berkeley sockets and NFS. Such a statement makes me think of single-system image cluster computing, or other cool stuff, but they…

“The network is the computer” is truer today than it’s ever been though.

"The door is a jar."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkmoQvbMRFk

Re: Apple TV, Apple TV, Apple TV, and Apple TV+

#138
post #104

Remember when .NET came out? Everything was .NET. As a result, no-one really had any idea what .NET actually was. Eventually we figured out it was "Microsoft's Java". Windows also went through a phase in which seemingly everything was Windows.

Seems like Apple is going through Xerox phases..Very soon they will have to explain everything. There was a time when Xerox had to explain what their products were for. In one of the computer ads the headline said "This Xerox machine can't make a copy" https://ries.typepad.com/.shared/image.html?/photos/uncatego...

Not even Xerox can Xerox. [1] [2]

Not even Lego has Legos. [3]

But even Google can Google. [4]

[1] https://beta.worldcat.org/archivegrid/collection/data/880574...

>Just a little reminder from Xerox / prepared by Needham, Harper & Steers Advertising, Inc. -- Not even Xerox can Xerox / prepared by Needham Harper Worldwide, Inc. (March 1985) -- Once a trademark, not always a trademark / [Xerox Corporation].

[2] https://trademarkmusings.wordpress.com/2009/12/05/not-even-x...

>Though it was a long time ago, I recall that my law school Business Torts casebook contained a copy of Xerox’s old ad, “Not Even Xerox Can Xerox”, which Xerox used to promote proper use of its trademark and fight genericide. Back in the day, Xerox was by far the most well-know copier brand, leased by offices all over. In this day and age, now that most people have a copier at home (as part of a multifunction printer) and it could be a Canon, HP, Brother, Epson or other brand, I think the younger folk are not so likely to refer to copying as “Xeroxing”. It poses an interesting quandary: Xerox may be winning the genericide war but they are no longer dominating the competition. Which is preferable?

[3] http://www.lego.com/en-us/legal/legal-notice/fair-play

>Proper Use of the LEGO Trademark on a Web Site

>If the LEGO trademark is used at all, it should always be used as an adjective, not as a noun. For example, say "MODELS BUILT OF LEGO BRICKS". Never say "MODELS BUILT OF LEGOs". Also, the trademark should appear in the same typeface as the surrounding text and should not be isolated or set apart from the surrounding text. In other words, the trademarks should not be emphasized or highlighted. Finally, the LEGO trademark should always appear with a ® symbol each time it is used.

[4] https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=65cb8ea7-6425...

>In a well-reasoned opinion, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that the GOOGLE trademark has not suffered death by genericide – even if the public uses it as a verb for searching the Internet.

>The case before the court sprang from the registration of 763 domain names that incorporated the term GOOGLE. After losing a domain name dispute arbitration, the domain name owners sued to have various trademark registrations for GOOGLE cancelled, claiming that the mark had become generic for the act of searching the Internet. The court rightly observed that a claim of genericide must always relate to specific goods or services, and that use of “google” as a verb for searching the Internet was not sufficient evidence that GOOGLE had become generic for “search engine services” or any other goods or services.

>The general rule of thumb is that trademarks are best thought of as “adjectives” that modify a generic noun. But this “part of speech” approach is not determinative to whether a mark has become generic. And while for years Xerox sought to instill in the public’s mind the trademark significance of XEROX by stating that “not even Xerox can xerox,” evidently Google can google without destroying the mark.

Re: Apple TV, Apple TV, Apple TV, and Apple TV+

#139
post #126

Remember when .NET came out? Everything was .NET. As a result, no-one really had any idea what .NET actually was. Eventually we figured out it was "Microsoft's Java". Windows also went through a phase in which seemingly everything was Windows.

Windows Server 2003 was briefly called Windows .Net Server during its beta phase.

There was a Visual Studio .Net as well, 2002 if I remember correctly.

Re: Apple TV, Apple TV, Apple TV, and Apple TV+

#140
post #101

What? No mention of the Apple TV remote, the Apple TV Siri remote, the Apple TV remote app, or the iOS Apple TV remote app shortcut feature on iOS? The physical Apple remotes are so terrible, I've stopped using Apple TV (all of them). The Apple remote app is better, but is useless for when you need to hit pause, as your phone has gone to sleep.

The awful remote is tolerable with one of these cases: https://www.amazon.com/Fintie-Protective-Case-Apple-Remote/d...

I'm not sure it solves the main problem which is scrolling on the remote is almost unusable.

They would have been better sticking with the remote that came with the early versions.

Post reply on HN