Popeye206
Apr 25, 10:33 AM
There's a black Escalade parked outside with a guy in a suit and sunglasses. I think there's an Apple sticker on the rear window? :eek:
Someone, please call Jesse Ventura! Help!
:rolleyes:
Someone, please call Jesse Ventura! Help!
:rolleyes:
chrono1081
Apr 7, 01:54 PM
It's sad but it's starting to sound like that's exactly what anti-Apple people want. They're making it sound like Apple regularly colludes with suppliers. Maybe it does, but there's no proof, or at least Apple buying up the supply of touch panels certainly doesn't constitute proof.
Apple legitimately amassed a large cash reserve. Apple is using that massive hoard of cash to secure the best possible deals with component suppliers. If that's called anticompetitive, then I don't know what to say.
+1 its not anticompetitive, its smart. Apple actually MOVES these things and people buy them. It would only be anti-competitive if they bought a ton of them on purpose and never used them.
The amount of anti-apple on mac rumors is sickening anymore. Its like going to engadget.
Apple legitimately amassed a large cash reserve. Apple is using that massive hoard of cash to secure the best possible deals with component suppliers. If that's called anticompetitive, then I don't know what to say.
+1 its not anticompetitive, its smart. Apple actually MOVES these things and people buy them. It would only be anti-competitive if they bought a ton of them on purpose and never used them.
The amount of anti-apple on mac rumors is sickening anymore. Its like going to engadget.
Erwin-Br
Apr 23, 07:41 PM
Having extra resolution would probably look awesome on the GUI, but I'm afraid everything else is going to look like crap.
The graphics used on websites, for example, would become a pixel counting fest. Unless the entire web updates their graphics, of course. But that would mean slow loading times. Imagine all the smileys used on this forum would have a resolution of 512x512 pixels, or more. Yikes!
The graphics used on websites, for example, would become a pixel counting fest. Unless the entire web updates their graphics, of course. But that would mean slow loading times. Imagine all the smileys used on this forum would have a resolution of 512x512 pixels, or more. Yikes!
iScott428
Mar 29, 03:41 PM
The reason that simple, brainless product assembly is not done in the US has nothing to due with low quality. It is due to lower manufacturing costs in China, which has no regulations.
There is no evidence at all that American-made products are of lower quality than any other country's products. (Is there any fighter jet better than the American-made F-16 or F-22?)
Right I get that, and thats the point. On the military note does any country spend/waste more money than us on our armed forces. Not even close.
There is no evidence at all that American-made products are of lower quality than any other country's products. (Is there any fighter jet better than the American-made F-16 or F-22?)
Right I get that, and thats the point. On the military note does any country spend/waste more money than us on our armed forces. Not even close.
Eidorian
Aug 11, 10:25 AM
They are already available, these are standard PC parts now remember.
http://www.microdirect.co.uk/ProductInfo.aspx?ProductID=14564&GroupID=1674That's Conroe. Merom can be put into the current iMac/Mac Mini. If you're adventureous to open the machines up or getting a third party installation. Otherwise you're looking at an entire logic board replacement for the laptops. It's probably better just to wait and buy an entire new laptop.
There is no current Mac that this chip can "drop into", apart from maybe a Mac Pro, but going from a Woodcrest to a Conroe would be a downgrade in that case.
The Merom that should eventually go into the iMac, mini, MBP and MacBook are currently not on sale to the consumer.http://guides.macrumors.com/Merom
Read the Guide...
http://www.microdirect.co.uk/ProductInfo.aspx?ProductID=14564&GroupID=1674That's Conroe. Merom can be put into the current iMac/Mac Mini. If you're adventureous to open the machines up or getting a third party installation. Otherwise you're looking at an entire logic board replacement for the laptops. It's probably better just to wait and buy an entire new laptop.
There is no current Mac that this chip can "drop into", apart from maybe a Mac Pro, but going from a Woodcrest to a Conroe would be a downgrade in that case.
The Merom that should eventually go into the iMac, mini, MBP and MacBook are currently not on sale to the consumer.http://guides.macrumors.com/Merom
Read the Guide...
Don't panic
Apr 10, 10:58 AM
I got 42.
dethmaShine
Mar 27, 01:00 PM
Release a new phone and make the people wait for months for the new OS? WTH?
I thought WebOS and H/Palm already had that market cornered.
Who made the rule that both the software and the hardware have to be released on the same date?
I guess this never happened with the mac lineup. The hardware was always released before and after the software.
I thought WebOS and H/Palm already had that market cornered.
Who made the rule that both the software and the hardware have to be released on the same date?
I guess this never happened with the mac lineup. The hardware was always released before and after the software.
marksman
Apr 7, 07:19 PM
I don't know if I buy this whole shortage thing.
If there is such a big shortage, why aren't people/businesses creating more production plants and capitalizing on the demand (which is only getting started from the looks of it). Where there is serious demand there is serious $$$ to be made!
It seems like basic economics to me but I've been wrong before...
There was no production of these screens two years ago. The demand has far outrstripped any expectations anyone would have had 3 years ago. It takes time to get new plants online.
I suspect Apple's long-term contracts with suppliers include future factories and production being brought online to help boost their ability to provide screens. It takes time though.
If there is such a big shortage, why aren't people/businesses creating more production plants and capitalizing on the demand (which is only getting started from the looks of it). Where there is serious demand there is serious $$$ to be made!
It seems like basic economics to me but I've been wrong before...
There was no production of these screens two years ago. The demand has far outrstripped any expectations anyone would have had 3 years ago. It takes time to get new plants online.
I suspect Apple's long-term contracts with suppliers include future factories and production being brought online to help boost their ability to provide screens. It takes time though.
barkins
Sep 15, 11:43 PM
Hm, I just bought the macbook pro with the intel core duo (1) ... will it be able to run the new lepord or will the speed be hampered? :confused:
amanset
Aug 2, 11:58 AM
How about an official release for DashCode? I mean it is a developer's conference after all ...
And seeing as we are unlikely to see iSights built in to the display - for reasons people have stated here - how about a new version of the iSight, seeing as the old one can't be sold in Europe anymore.
And seeing as we are unlikely to see iSights built in to the display - for reasons people have stated here - how about a new version of the iSight, seeing as the old one can't be sold in Europe anymore.
brijazz
May 4, 03:40 PM
Fine. Seems like a logical move, but if Apple wants me to foot part of the bill for distributing their software (via my paid Internet connection) then I certainly expect a significant cut in the cost of the upgrade.
If you drive to the store to buy it instead, should they pay for your gas?
If you order it online, should they pay you for the bit of bandwidth that you used up in placing your order?
Maybe you'll be eco-friendly and walk to the store instead? Bill 'em for new soles on your shoes!
:rolleyes:
If you drive to the store to buy it instead, should they pay for your gas?
If you order it online, should they pay you for the bit of bandwidth that you used up in placing your order?
Maybe you'll be eco-friendly and walk to the store instead? Bill 'em for new soles on your shoes!
:rolleyes:
ChrisTX
Apr 20, 05:34 AM
I dont agree. A 4" screen would be larger real estate, but that would mean developers would have to rewrite their apps to fit the new size. For example, the iPad has an obviously larger screen space, which means that developers had to scale their software up to match, because lets face it, the 2x button just makes things look like pixels and thats just awful, this is not SNES system.
But the iPad has similar dimensions and screen ratio. But a 4" display would makes things look stretched, so developers would have to code each app to fit the new stretched screen. This would also be quite annoying on the app store, looking for apps which work on 3g, 3gs, i4 and i5 and iPad and iPad 2. It would just become a nuisance to download an app to see its stretched on older phones. this wouldn't be a good move by apple just yet. Apple like to care for older tech users, the 3g and 3gs users, and this larger screen would make apps not run as smoothly.
Have you ever tried to run any iPhone apps on the iPad? Have you not noticed that what they scale down to is a size larger than the iPhone's current 3.5" size? Not sure why Apple chose a size slightly larger than 3.5" but none the less they scale just fine.
But the iPad has similar dimensions and screen ratio. But a 4" display would makes things look stretched, so developers would have to code each app to fit the new stretched screen. This would also be quite annoying on the app store, looking for apps which work on 3g, 3gs, i4 and i5 and iPad and iPad 2. It would just become a nuisance to download an app to see its stretched on older phones. this wouldn't be a good move by apple just yet. Apple like to care for older tech users, the 3g and 3gs users, and this larger screen would make apps not run as smoothly.
Have you ever tried to run any iPhone apps on the iPad? Have you not noticed that what they scale down to is a size larger than the iPhone's current 3.5" size? Not sure why Apple chose a size slightly larger than 3.5" but none the less they scale just fine.
Full of Win
Mar 27, 12:09 AM
If true...sounds like iPhone 3GS and iPad 1 owners are going to be shown the door.
paul4339
Apr 7, 05:01 PM
What Microsoft has doesn't transfer to the tablet market. Ok, they have cash. They have enough money to give away 80 million tablets. If they do that, over the next three years, the cash is gone, and Apple + Android will still sell more units :D
Distribution channel? What distribution channel does Microsoft have for hardware? They don't. Zune was a failure. XBox and tablets are two completely different markets.
The developers are writing iPhone / iPad apps.
And how would Microsoft go about "leveraging the desktop"? People throw out computers and buy an iPad. People don't say "well, I have a Windows PC, I will buy a Microsoft tablet to go with it". They say "well, I have a Windows PC, I will buy an iPad so I can get rid of that old PC".
>Ok, they have cash.
They have enough buy RIM, Motorola, and HTC if they really wanted to.
> Distribution channel?
MS has probably one of the widest distribution channels on the consumer and enterprise markets...BTW, Im not saying they should make MS hardware, just the OS. They have contacts with almost ALL the manufacturers and resellers. One thing I learned was never to underestimate Microsoft. (I agree that their hardware products are mostly failures)
> The developers are writing iPhone / iPad apps.
I agree... that's why they have to leverage their existing developer communities.
> And how would Microsoft go about "leveraging the desktop"? People throw out computers and buy an iPad. People don't say "well, I have a Windows PC, I will buy a Microsoft tablet to go with it". They say "well, I have a Windows PC, I will buy an iPad so I can get rid of that old PC"
Not true. People go with what they know - and Apple/Google are quickly setting the new OS standard for tablets; But do not ignore that's LOTs of people that are familiar with Windows (over 1 billion window users. Are they going to throw that away or find a way to leverage?).
Distribution channel? What distribution channel does Microsoft have for hardware? They don't. Zune was a failure. XBox and tablets are two completely different markets.
The developers are writing iPhone / iPad apps.
And how would Microsoft go about "leveraging the desktop"? People throw out computers and buy an iPad. People don't say "well, I have a Windows PC, I will buy a Microsoft tablet to go with it". They say "well, I have a Windows PC, I will buy an iPad so I can get rid of that old PC".
>Ok, they have cash.
They have enough buy RIM, Motorola, and HTC if they really wanted to.
> Distribution channel?
MS has probably one of the widest distribution channels on the consumer and enterprise markets...BTW, Im not saying they should make MS hardware, just the OS. They have contacts with almost ALL the manufacturers and resellers. One thing I learned was never to underestimate Microsoft. (I agree that their hardware products are mostly failures)
> The developers are writing iPhone / iPad apps.
I agree... that's why they have to leverage their existing developer communities.
> And how would Microsoft go about "leveraging the desktop"? People throw out computers and buy an iPad. People don't say "well, I have a Windows PC, I will buy a Microsoft tablet to go with it". They say "well, I have a Windows PC, I will buy an iPad so I can get rid of that old PC"
Not true. People go with what they know - and Apple/Google are quickly setting the new OS standard for tablets; But do not ignore that's LOTs of people that are familiar with Windows (over 1 billion window users. Are they going to throw that away or find a way to leverage?).
jaxstate
Aug 4, 09:53 AM
LOL. You win post of the day.
Give me a break. People voted negative on this because they are waiting on merom MBPs and now think that, contrary to they're hopes and prayers the past few weeks, that the Merom MBP revisions wont be out until september. This is no clandestine PC-clone smear campaign. who's it going to effect? This forum is full of the faithful, messing around here isn't going to change national opinion of Microsoft or apple products. It's not Steve Ballmer twisting his handlebar mustaches as he chortles to himself, going from one article to the next, voting negative at each. Let's get real here.
Give me a break. People voted negative on this because they are waiting on merom MBPs and now think that, contrary to they're hopes and prayers the past few weeks, that the Merom MBP revisions wont be out until september. This is no clandestine PC-clone smear campaign. who's it going to effect? This forum is full of the faithful, messing around here isn't going to change national opinion of Microsoft or apple products. It's not Steve Ballmer twisting his handlebar mustaches as he chortles to himself, going from one article to the next, voting negative at each. Let's get real here.
Peace
Sep 11, 01:33 PM
I still can't help but wonder what Apple is going to do with the Conroe CPU if anything.
itcheroni
Apr 15, 12:38 PM
Essentially my theory is (and it's not really mine but I've forgotten who deserves credit for it) that as tax rates drop, wealth concentrates and becomes less mobile. The free market ceases to operate because bargaining power, knowledge, and resources are all on one side, eventually causing 95% to be at the whim of the remaining 5.
This was essentially the status quo in places like pre-revolution France. It predominated societies until the reforms of the 20th Century. It was only then that we saw incomes improve for the masses. The historical record clearly shows that higher marginal tax rates are good because they don't allow the rich to rest on their laurels while at the same time helping out the unfortunate (who are then able to more fully participate in the economy).
If you remember the name of the economist, please let me know. There are a lot of differences in perspective I have, I can tell just from your brief description, but I would like to learn the finer details of the theory.
Was it an economist or someone who actually understands economics? :D :p
This was essentially the status quo in places like pre-revolution France. It predominated societies until the reforms of the 20th Century. It was only then that we saw incomes improve for the masses. The historical record clearly shows that higher marginal tax rates are good because they don't allow the rich to rest on their laurels while at the same time helping out the unfortunate (who are then able to more fully participate in the economy).
If you remember the name of the economist, please let me know. There are a lot of differences in perspective I have, I can tell just from your brief description, but I would like to learn the finer details of the theory.
Was it an economist or someone who actually understands economics? :D :p
azentropy
Mar 27, 08:32 AM
Don't know if this is true, but IF Apple was to "delay" an iOS 5 release, they would start leaking those plans now.
RalfTheDog
Apr 7, 11:28 AM
I can't believe the number of positive votes and gloaters we have in here. Aren't you the same people who are outraged because you can't get your iPad 2 because the scalpers bought them all up?
Look, if Apple dominates the tablet market because the iPad is genuinely better than the other guy's tablet (and don't get me wrong, I think it is) and that causes Apple's sales to far eclipse everyone else, then GREAT! People vote with their wallets and the dominant winner is clear. But if Apple becomes the dominant player because, heck, they're so big that they can simply BUY THEIR WAY to the top, then that's not really fair for anybody, is it?
Isn't that how Windows got their market share? Because Microsoft got so big that they could start dictating deals to the PC makers? Didn't we bash them for "forcing" Windows on consumers, not giving them a fair choice?
scalpers nothing, it was customers. People want the iPad.
They only need like ~100,000.
RIM is no Google. I can't picture them using more than 10,000 in the same time frame
Look, if Apple dominates the tablet market because the iPad is genuinely better than the other guy's tablet (and don't get me wrong, I think it is) and that causes Apple's sales to far eclipse everyone else, then GREAT! People vote with their wallets and the dominant winner is clear. But if Apple becomes the dominant player because, heck, they're so big that they can simply BUY THEIR WAY to the top, then that's not really fair for anybody, is it?
Isn't that how Windows got their market share? Because Microsoft got so big that they could start dictating deals to the PC makers? Didn't we bash them for "forcing" Windows on consumers, not giving them a fair choice?
scalpers nothing, it was customers. People want the iPad.
They only need like ~100,000.
RIM is no Google. I can't picture them using more than 10,000 in the same time frame
ravenvii
May 3, 03:14 PM
The game will begin very soon. Here's the roles for all players:
PLAYERS:
1. -aggie- : Rosius WIZARD
2. Eldiablojoe : Dante COUPLE
3. Moyank24 : Beatrice COUPLE
4. ucfgrad93 : Rhon ADVENTURER
5. appleguy123 : Wilmer ADVENTURER
6. Don't panic : Loras ADVENTURER
7. Plutonius : Jorah ADVENTURER
8. mscriv : ??? VILLAIN
Instructions: chrmjenkins will post the opening narrative very soon. I will then post the initial map (only one room at first). You all will then designate a leader of the party, who will report to me the actions you want to take (this will not take up a turn). Finally, you will vote on what action to take. The possible actions will be:
Explore room
Go through door (specify the door)
Split up.
To report the action, the designated leader must post the message all in bold for a quicker response.
PLAYERS:
1. -aggie- : Rosius WIZARD
2. Eldiablojoe : Dante COUPLE
3. Moyank24 : Beatrice COUPLE
4. ucfgrad93 : Rhon ADVENTURER
5. appleguy123 : Wilmer ADVENTURER
6. Don't panic : Loras ADVENTURER
7. Plutonius : Jorah ADVENTURER
8. mscriv : ??? VILLAIN
Instructions: chrmjenkins will post the opening narrative very soon. I will then post the initial map (only one room at first). You all will then designate a leader of the party, who will report to me the actions you want to take (this will not take up a turn). Finally, you will vote on what action to take. The possible actions will be:
Explore room
Go through door (specify the door)
Split up.
To report the action, the designated leader must post the message all in bold for a quicker response.
DeathChill
Apr 8, 08:14 PM
I disagree. The OS on the most number of devices always ends up "winning" (for a lack of a better word.) It has happened time and time again. Windows beat MacOS after a few years due to it being on a wider range of hardware. The same happened with Android on phones. It will most defiantly happen again; if not with Android, defiantly with an OS which works on the same business model and is not tied to specific hardware.
The 'average user' customer likes choice. The iPad provides none. An iPad is an iPad and that is that. Whereas Android provides a wide range of models and sizes and colours and specs.
You're ignoring a huge factor: price. Mac products were more expensive than their PC counterparts. That's not at all true for the iPad. As well, Apple has huge brand cachet and their products are gorgeous to look at and touch.
I'm not sure that choice is going to be a huge advantage in the tablet market as there's not much differentiation that is going to matter to the normal consumer. Sure, there can be different sizes but most people are happy with the iPad's size (no, not tech nerds who demand to have a tablet they can carry everywhere ;)).
The 'average user' customer likes choice. The iPad provides none. An iPad is an iPad and that is that. Whereas Android provides a wide range of models and sizes and colours and specs.
You're ignoring a huge factor: price. Mac products were more expensive than their PC counterparts. That's not at all true for the iPad. As well, Apple has huge brand cachet and their products are gorgeous to look at and touch.
I'm not sure that choice is going to be a huge advantage in the tablet market as there's not much differentiation that is going to matter to the normal consumer. Sure, there can be different sizes but most people are happy with the iPad's size (no, not tech nerds who demand to have a tablet they can carry everywhere ;)).
Old Smuggler
Sep 11, 02:34 AM
I can't see how Apple can begin an sell movies and not also sell a Media Mac.
It would be like iTMS and no iPods... how well would that work? :rolleyes:
Has anyone ever considered that the media mac would not be a hardware upgrade to the mini but a software one via itunes 7
or is it just me?
It would be like iTMS and no iPods... how well would that work? :rolleyes:
Has anyone ever considered that the media mac would not be a hardware upgrade to the mini but a software one via itunes 7
or is it just me?
TangoCharlie
Jul 23, 01:53 PM
Niice. I would assume that they forgo using the 2.0 GHz chip though. Right now, their lineup is pretty solid using two different speeds. Unless the modify the structure of the lineup (as in lower prices), I think it would make sense.
I aggree that Apple will only use two speeds in the upgraded MBP... but it'll be the slower two speeds. Even tho' Merom is supposed to be more energy efficent than Yonah, Apple will opt for the "cooller" lower speed cpus in the MBP. Similarly, when the "cut-down" Meroms come out (slower and smaller L2 cache), they'll be the CPUs used in the MacBook and Mac mini.
As an aside, TFA states that Merom will be used in the MBP.... which is true, but Apple are also going to use it in an updated iMac too :-)
I aggree that Apple will only use two speeds in the upgraded MBP... but it'll be the slower two speeds. Even tho' Merom is supposed to be more energy efficent than Yonah, Apple will opt for the "cooller" lower speed cpus in the MBP. Similarly, when the "cut-down" Meroms come out (slower and smaller L2 cache), they'll be the CPUs used in the MacBook and Mac mini.
As an aside, TFA states that Merom will be used in the MBP.... which is true, but Apple are also going to use it in an updated iMac too :-)
Cavepainter
Mar 30, 02:36 PM
I hardly think $1 for 20 gigabytes of available anywhere storage is very unreasonable.
Maybe that rate wouldn't be bad, but if you read the article, that's not what they're charging. Beyond the initial free amount, its $1 per 1 gig, not $1 per 20 gigs. A terabyte per year is a thousand dollars a year. That's not too cheap. And this isn't including bandwidth usage, which is gonna cost money too, of course. Plus, what do you think, are these rates and bandwidth usage costs gonna be higher or lower in the future?
They (banks) aren't storing physical cash somewhere anymore, it's all just a line of electronic code that states what your balance is.
Well, it actually it still exists as money, but of course banks aren't storing it all in a vault- they're loaning it out to other people, at rates 10 to 100 times greater than the interest rate they are offering you for using that money- and they're using your money to make them money. I'm sure they could loan out money at much lower rates and still do fine, but that's what we're used to paying, so there you go. But anyway, back on track-
If you want premium content, you pay for it.
That premium content you're happy to be paying lots of money for is actually making the provider plenty of money on the back end too- remember cable and satellite television still has plenty of advertisements. Again, they could probably charge you a third of what you currently pay and it would still be profitable. (I'm just sayin'...)
People just think it's ridiculous to spend money on music because avenues have popped up where you can get it for free.
True, but for me, no, I actually buy my music and support the artists- I just think its ridiculous to buy my music and pay someone else over and over and over again, forever, just to be able listen to it.
I have 2 computers at home, a laptop, a phone that has storage, a DVR, even my Xbox can store music files..... How nice to be able to visit my parents, or go on vacation, or be at a friend's house, log on to their computer, and have my entire music library instantly available at my fingertips.
80 gigs of music in a computer's memory doesn't actually "weigh" all that much. You can have all those files right there on your devices right now, unless you have terabytes of things to store. As storage continues to grow on computers, I think you'll find that the prices will be more and more appealing for larger and larger amounts of storage.
Look, I understand your points, and if you have multiple platforms that need to share and sync enormous amounts of files, that can be a challenge and the cloud would be convenient. But for the amount of music and photography and other files I have and the way I would store it and access it, I personally would rather just have all the files I need right there on my computer at my fingertips without having to pay someone to access it from a remote location. You're certainly free to spend money to access things you already purchased, but its not for me. To each their own.
Maybe that rate wouldn't be bad, but if you read the article, that's not what they're charging. Beyond the initial free amount, its $1 per 1 gig, not $1 per 20 gigs. A terabyte per year is a thousand dollars a year. That's not too cheap. And this isn't including bandwidth usage, which is gonna cost money too, of course. Plus, what do you think, are these rates and bandwidth usage costs gonna be higher or lower in the future?
They (banks) aren't storing physical cash somewhere anymore, it's all just a line of electronic code that states what your balance is.
Well, it actually it still exists as money, but of course banks aren't storing it all in a vault- they're loaning it out to other people, at rates 10 to 100 times greater than the interest rate they are offering you for using that money- and they're using your money to make them money. I'm sure they could loan out money at much lower rates and still do fine, but that's what we're used to paying, so there you go. But anyway, back on track-
If you want premium content, you pay for it.
That premium content you're happy to be paying lots of money for is actually making the provider plenty of money on the back end too- remember cable and satellite television still has plenty of advertisements. Again, they could probably charge you a third of what you currently pay and it would still be profitable. (I'm just sayin'...)
People just think it's ridiculous to spend money on music because avenues have popped up where you can get it for free.
True, but for me, no, I actually buy my music and support the artists- I just think its ridiculous to buy my music and pay someone else over and over and over again, forever, just to be able listen to it.
I have 2 computers at home, a laptop, a phone that has storage, a DVR, even my Xbox can store music files..... How nice to be able to visit my parents, or go on vacation, or be at a friend's house, log on to their computer, and have my entire music library instantly available at my fingertips.
80 gigs of music in a computer's memory doesn't actually "weigh" all that much. You can have all those files right there on your devices right now, unless you have terabytes of things to store. As storage continues to grow on computers, I think you'll find that the prices will be more and more appealing for larger and larger amounts of storage.
Look, I understand your points, and if you have multiple platforms that need to share and sync enormous amounts of files, that can be a challenge and the cloud would be convenient. But for the amount of music and photography and other files I have and the way I would store it and access it, I personally would rather just have all the files I need right there on my computer at my fingertips without having to pay someone to access it from a remote location. You're certainly free to spend money to access things you already purchased, but its not for me. To each their own.