Has the Plex app on Roku improved recently? The last time I used it the experience had a definite flimsy, underpowered feel. I find the Air Video Server and corresponding iOS app much nicer. I use AirPlay and Apple TV, of course, to view on a big screen TV. A rather peculiar feature is that Apple TV works on my home network, which is not connected to the internet, while Roku simply fails to function if it cannot connect to the internet.

Isn't this mainly just the dark side of Moore's Law? I'm right on the cusp now for Mountain Lion so I am not unfamiliar with the frustration that I will need a new MBP for future updates but I also know how much technology has progressed since I got my classic 15" MBP that runs so well. On the other hand Macs tend to hold their value so you should be able to sell your model to someone who doesn't need the latest update for a good price. Try that with a 5 year old Toshiba (or a 1 year old model).

Oh please, bitch. The Mach microkernel was pioneered by Avie Tevanian and his colleagues at CMU. He left CMU to join a new company called NeXT which had as its CEO Steve Jobs after he left Apple. NeXTStep was developed but did not reach critical mass. When Jobs returned to Apple he brought Tevanian and Jon Rubenstein (previously head of hardware engineering at NeXT) to head Software and Hardware respectively at the 'new' Apple. The software for the Mac, iPhone, iPad, AppleTV, and iPod touch is all developed from the foundation of NeXTStep and the mach microkernel.

What is it with you guys? Apple introduces the first consumer friendly PC in the Apple ][, then the first mass market gui PC in the Mac (after the failed and distinctly not mass market Lisa), the first mp3 player that did not suck too much in the iPod, the first cell phone that often delights rather than inspire you to smash it: iPhone, and finally a pad format device that people actually want to use. But you aren't impressed. Wow. Mit der dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens. That's as much /. as I can take for today.

The world still has TNT and tactical weapons yet the Nobel Prizes are what are popularly associated with Alfred Nobel.

Youngin's today have no idea how limited processing power and memory were in those days. For years when a user moved a window around the screen a ghostly outline of the boundary of the window is all you got for feedback. When you let go of the window the old one was erased and the window was redrawn in its new position. And we had to walk to school uphill and into the wind both ways, etc.

Current value of those shares if held to the present day would be 8,000,000 x $500 = $4 Billion and still climbing (of course that would have required nerves of steel). Even Doctor Evil would be impressed. (N.B. Apple stock has split three times).

By the way anyone who accuses Apple (or any other company that actually creates and sells products based on their patents) a patent troll indicates gross ignorance on the part of the accuser. The only definition I've heard of that term is a company that has no products of its own so that cross licensing is never an option for negotiation. Patent trolls are "purely abstract" companies that game the patent system to change it from an attempt to encourage innovation to one that kills innovation (cf. Intellectual Ventures and its vile ilk).

Also in the smaller form factor there is the iPod touch which is essentially an iPhone without the monthly bill. It also runs a Plex client which can throw the video to an Apple TV connected big screen.

I know there is some turmoil going on, but last time I checked Portugal was still considered to be in Europe. So that is not really a counter-example.

Have you heard of VPN? It is widely used by business and government so trying to prevent its use is very problematic. As long as there are locations on the net that are not 'owned' by the copyright cartel the darknet will continue to flourish. Ironically a side effect of this development is that all other internet activity of an individual using VPN becomes much less vulnerable to surveillance. Positive efforts to encourage people to safeguard privacy have been fairly ineffective but this sort of activity is doing that job rather well.

To stop people from smirking you should refer to "peers" rather than "piers". Although the nautical image it conjures up is entertaining.

I understand your point about leverage. What I think you are trying to ignore is the wealth of products Apple makes and will continue to sell. The Mac (at least in name) goes back to '84. That is almost 30 years. Apple has never sold more or made more money on the Mac than in the most recent quarter. There is a huge amount of growth potential from the multitudes who are not satisfied with their current choice and are willing to try an Apple product because of their experience with the iPhone, iPad, and/or iPod. This is even more true of the iPhone and iPad. They insures an enormous amount of time (decades) before an improbable absence of a new successul product is felt. Finally there is the $100 billion that Apple (and by extension The Apple Store) has in cash or cash equivalents that could sustain them if they decided to nothing but sail around in yachts. Anyone waiting for Apple to fail because of the Apple Store needs to be very young and very patient.

That is a better explanation of your position than other critics have presented (mindless zealots who are unable to control their impulse to purchase). I still think it suffers from a time scale perspective. I don't see how Apple can continue to introduce products that experience exponential growth (I mean that in the mathematical sense, not the uneducated hyperbolic sense). But they still have four categories (laptops, handheld media players/internet devices, cellphone capable internet devices, and tablets) that will continue to grow for as far as the eye can see (except maybe iPods and they remain a huge market). A few non-revolutionary products will do little to dampen the desire to buy always improved, hit products from a tech store that doesn't suck.

When and if those products become irrelevant, assuming nothing new and significant ever appears, Apple would have to adjust its Apple Store strategy but it would do so as a huge incumbent. This would be some twenty or thirty years in the future judging from the wintel life cycle. This suggests geopolitical forces that would apply to the US and West generally are more likely to matter than commercial forces. That is what I mean by time scale. Your speculation would better apply to an Apple that prospered greatly from the iPod but never ventured into new territory. Simple media players become commodities and Apple Stores whither on the vine. But that is not what happened. In any case betting that Apple will not produce a new hit product has already become a fools game.

Really? Did Sun create a multitouch API from the ground up like Apple? There were plenty of "smartphones" before the iPhone but what they had in common was that they all sucked. They had their little clicky keyboards and mouse substitutes and they ran like miniature laptop computers with interfaces from the 80's that were not even compelling on laptops. On top of all that you are putting forth a prototype as your example. Are you for real? A prototype? That's hilarious.

What is most amusing is touting the Apple Store as the seeds of Apples downfall. I remember how the idea was mocked as naive and incompetent by citing previous failed efforts like the Gateway stores. However, as the Apple Store has become possibly the most successful retail store in history the critics have quietly shuffled off and learned that their insights might be less than perfect. But not you. Impending disaster. Apple is Doomed!

By the way, the reason for Apple's success is that it is not Apple, It is Next Computer wearing an Apple skin. Apple acquired Next but it was actually a takeover of Apple by Next. The OS, NextStep, is the basis of the system software of all the Apple devices. Even as Next was fading it was acknowledged that it was a superb OS but it had arrived too late and lacked the critical mass of users needed to survive. The Apple acquisition and transition from MacOS changed that factor by stealth. There are other important factors, like the successful launch of the Apple Store, but Apple with MacOS would not be where it is today.

"When they defended themselves against psystar"

What? Apple didn't defend themselves against Psystar in the legal sense. They sued Psystar to prevent Psystar from selling computers with Mac OS X pre-installed. It took quite a while to successfully litigate (these cases can be drawn out) but Psystar did lose and it appears to no longer be in business. Are you thinking of some other case?

Apple in its earlier years, like Google more recently, seemed to be less interested in playing the copyright/patent game that established players tend to favor. In the 80's they saw what they considered their innovations pilfered by competitors and they were unprepared for the legal battles. If you recall the keynote speech by Steve Jobs announcing the iPhone, he spent considerable time making it clear Apple had applied for many patents to defend what he saw as Apple's innovations in this case. He also made clear that Apple was prepared to successfully defend its position this time. These sorts of battles are long and drawn out. Don't expect it to end anytime soon.

Personally I think this sort of activity is less than optimal but as long as the laws are in place I expect corporations to continue these battles. What is sorely needed is comprehensive patent reform. Expecting individual companies to abstain is naive. They know they will get eaten alive.

1977 - Consumer friendly complete computer out of the box Apple II
1983 - Mass market desktop metaphor computer and software Lisa
1984 - Macintosh
1987(?) - Small business affordable ($6000) PostScript laser printer LaserWriter ...
2001 - iPod (hard drive based music player with easily purchased popular digital music, N.B. iTMS took some time to develop
2001 - Mac OS X first unix OS that allowed but did not require geek cred
2001 - Apple Store first tech store that didn't suck (usually) in contrast to Best Buy, Circuit City, etc
2007 - iPhone first modern multitouch based "smartphone"
2010 - iPad first tablet that is not a laptop wannabe due to same iPhone pioneered multitouch interface

Dates are off the top of my head so could be off slightly. You can contest all you want about "didn't exist before" but these things were not in stores available to buy from competitors