|
#9
August 9th, 2004, 02:17 PM
| ||||
| ||||
|
couple of things wrong with this idea... - the itms is a response to the demand for online music downloads spurred by napster. there is no similar interest for photos like there is for music. - the idea of looking at pics on your ipod is pretty (for lack of a better word) lame. small screen, essentially useless compared to (as mentioned before) the screen on your digicam. need to carry and transfer pics? you already can, or get a flash drive. - how does this benefit apple? sell more ipods? hardly. make money selling photos? unlikely. go through another (probably high) cost to port iphoto and then sell(?) it to windows users? yes.  |
|
#10
August 11th, 2004, 03:40 PM
| |||
| |||
|
professional people who need photos can get them easily online anyway. I can't see ANYWHERE near as many people saying "hmm, why not get a 99cent photo of someone I don't know or some landmark or something" as "Why not get a song for 99cents much easier than I can anywhere else". There isn't enough demand for photos at all.
__________________ "But how can you communicate with Enzo Hernandez when he speaks Spanish and you speak Mexican?" Indigo iMac G3 500mHz G4 1gHz iBook www.humongousrotatingbearentertainment.com |
|
#11
August 11th, 2004, 03:47 PM
| ||||
| ||||
|
Check: www.vraweb.org www.tssphoto.com creative.gettyimages.com http://www.nationalgeographic.com/ph...hy/imagesales/
__________________ My current machine is an iMac Core 2 Duo 2.16 GHz 24" and a MacBook Pro 13" with MacOS X 10.6. My oldest Apple was born in 1977. GS/P/>SS d-(++) s+: a+ C+(C) U* P L+ E--- W++ N- o+ K? w O-- M++ V PS+ PE+ Y- PGP t+ 5 X+ R tv-- b+++ DI++ D+ G e+++ h---- r+++ y? Time is not changing, I'm just traveling through time. |
|
#12
August 11th, 2004, 03:50 PM
| ||||
| ||||
|
no one said that such things dont exist, simply that the demand is small. take for instance, the fact that you had to show us those. ok everyone who has been to these sites before, raise your hands. hmmm, not many... |
|
#13
August 11th, 2004, 04:56 PM
| ||||
| ||||
|
Professionals do. It's much less expensive to buy a good image than to take the time necessary to shoot it.
__________________ My current machine is an iMac Core 2 Duo 2.16 GHz 24" and a MacBook Pro 13" with MacOS X 10.6. My oldest Apple was born in 1977. GS/P/>SS d-(++) s+: a+ C+(C) U* P L+ E--- W++ N- o+ K? w O-- M++ V PS+ PE+ Y- PGP t+ 5 X+ R tv-- b+++ DI++ D+ G e+++ h---- r+++ y? Time is not changing, I'm just traveling through time. |
|
#15
August 11th, 2004, 05:02 PM
| ||||
| ||||
|
This would fit the traditionnal Apple market, no 
__________________ My current machine is an iMac Core 2 Duo 2.16 GHz 24" and a MacBook Pro 13" with MacOS X 10.6. My oldest Apple was born in 1977. GS/P/>SS d-(++) s+: a+ C+(C) U* P L+ E--- W++ N- o+ K? w O-- M++ V PS+ PE+ Y- PGP t+ 5 X+ R tv-- b+++ DI++ D+ G e+++ h---- r+++ y? Time is not changing, I'm just traveling through time. |
|
#16
August 12th, 2004, 10:42 AM
| ||||
| ||||
|
Aren't macs popular in graphic design firms? Don't graphic design firms need a lot of stock photos? Sounds like a good idea to me even if it's just 1%. I think apple should partner with getty or veer on that idea. |
 |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:49 PM.
