Dmac77
Apr 24, 11:48 PM
That is safe. It is a shame you didn't get a ticket.
So do I. I would use them on people who think it is safe to travel 90+ mph on the freeway.:rolleyes:
Why do I feel like you are one of the people who purposely try to slow people down because you need to be on some higher moral ground and make sure the entire world does the speed you believe is safe?
So do I. I would use them on people who think it is safe to travel 90+ mph on the freeway.:rolleyes:
Why do I feel like you are one of the people who purposely try to slow people down because you need to be on some higher moral ground and make sure the entire world does the speed you believe is safe?
gnasher729
Apr 11, 05:22 AM
Should be public anyway, why can't we have cool 3rd party devices?
Because the 3rd party device could be in your neighbours house so your neighbour can see or hear anything that is played through AirPlay from your devices without you knowing. And you might be playing stuff that you wouldn't want your neighbour to see.
Because the 3rd party device could be in your neighbours house so your neighbour can see or hear anything that is played through AirPlay from your devices without you knowing. And you might be playing stuff that you wouldn't want your neighbour to see.
levitynyc
Sep 9, 11:43 AM
Sorry, but that's a ridiculous comparison. The only Mac you can reasonably compare the XPS 700 to is the Mac Pro, which has a lot more computing power for that kind of money.
My point is that with the new processors and RAM upgrades, the iMac is headed towards more powerful use that could potentially switch over a PC gamer. If you wanted to do some serious gaming on the 24" iMac you could....if not for the poor video card options.
Throw a dog a bone here and at least give us a 512MB option.
My point is that with the new processors and RAM upgrades, the iMac is headed towards more powerful use that could potentially switch over a PC gamer. If you wanted to do some serious gaming on the 24" iMac you could....if not for the poor video card options.
Throw a dog a bone here and at least give us a 512MB option.
anotherkenny
Apr 30, 04:40 PM
Tom was referring to this feature (http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2011/01/shows-over-how-hollywood-strong-armed-intel.ars).
"Intel... takes advantage of a new hardware module inside Sandy Bridge's GPU to enable the secure delivery of downloadable HD content to PCs, has been blasted as "DRM." But of course it's only a DRM-enabler�a hardware block that can store predistributed keys that the Sandy Bridge GPU uses to decrypt movies a frame at a time before they go out over the HDMI port."
It allows for secure playback of cloud movies, without the risk of pirating. Your own files aren't being scrutinized.
Clix Pix put the matte preference well in an old post (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=245491):
Go "matte.....easier on your eyes under all lighting conditions, more accurate representation of what will be printed or show on other people's monitors."
Photographers and people who don't like sparkled/ full of reflection monitors go with matte.
"Intel... takes advantage of a new hardware module inside Sandy Bridge's GPU to enable the secure delivery of downloadable HD content to PCs, has been blasted as "DRM." But of course it's only a DRM-enabler�a hardware block that can store predistributed keys that the Sandy Bridge GPU uses to decrypt movies a frame at a time before they go out over the HDMI port."
It allows for secure playback of cloud movies, without the risk of pirating. Your own files aren't being scrutinized.
Clix Pix put the matte preference well in an old post (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=245491):
Go "matte.....easier on your eyes under all lighting conditions, more accurate representation of what will be printed or show on other people's monitors."
Photographers and people who don't like sparkled/ full of reflection monitors go with matte.
KingCrimson
Apr 28, 05:26 PM
Wow, Apple is pretty much unstoppable now. And if anyone tries to get in their way, they've got a $60b war chest.
Cite? The latest Yahoo! financial page has them at $29 billion.
Cite? The latest Yahoo! financial page has them at $29 billion.
iRobby
Apr 22, 03:00 AM
I have no idea how this would be useful. Buffer times, connection loss, no WiFi around, these are all problems that will prevent this from working.
What's wrong with storing music on hard drives locally?
Not sure how I feel about this or if I'd use it til details are released by Apple. For those not interested know this is an option we can continue using our hard drives on desktops as well as IOS Devices like we are now. Personally, I may just use DropBox for access to all my files including music unless this program has major industry revolutionary characteristics.
What's wrong with storing music on hard drives locally?
Not sure how I feel about this or if I'd use it til details are released by Apple. For those not interested know this is an option we can continue using our hard drives on desktops as well as IOS Devices like we are now. Personally, I may just use DropBox for access to all my files including music unless this program has major industry revolutionary characteristics.
Evangelion
Aug 24, 03:29 AM
Of COURSE Apple was infringing on the patent if you assume it was a valid patent. I'm saying the patent never should have been granted because it's not something you can patent.
That might be so. But Apple has lots of questionable patents as well. Is the Click-wheel REALLY an innovation worth patenting? "We have a wheel, and we have buttons. Why not conbine them?". IIRC, they are also patenting the Mag-Safe, even though similar systems have been used for long time in pressure-cookers (IIRC).
And finally, to answer your statement in the first paragraph: This is EXACTLY why the patent system IS messed up.
Because Apple lost? Yes, patent-system IS messed up. But Apple is taking advatange of it as well. Now that Apple lost, everybody complains, yet no-one complains when Apple files for obvious patents as well.
That might be so. But Apple has lots of questionable patents as well. Is the Click-wheel REALLY an innovation worth patenting? "We have a wheel, and we have buttons. Why not conbine them?". IIRC, they are also patenting the Mag-Safe, even though similar systems have been used for long time in pressure-cookers (IIRC).
And finally, to answer your statement in the first paragraph: This is EXACTLY why the patent system IS messed up.
Because Apple lost? Yes, patent-system IS messed up. But Apple is taking advatange of it as well. Now that Apple lost, everybody complains, yet no-one complains when Apple files for obvious patents as well.
CrackedButter
Sep 19, 06:21 PM
Rather than a RAID, what they need is a foolproof NAS (Network-attached storage). A NAS is basically a special purpose computer that has a network port (wired/wireless) as well as internal/external storage through USB/SATA/eSATA. For example D-Link makes a NAS that is compatible with uPnP as well as Bonjour. This box has space for an internal hard drive (ATA) as well as USB2 for external HDs. It has 802.11g wireless as well as ethernet port. You just connect is as another network device in your home and then you can dump your media into it from your PC/Mac. So, for people with laptops, you can buy your media or RIP them into the NAS and then iTV can use it. This can work well for people with laptops. iTV should be able to work off of a NAS rather than a PC/Mac.
The current versions of NAS may not be foolproof (Apple quality standards) and therefore this is a companion product that Apple could produce for home media storage. Another advantage of the NAS is that it can be near where iTV is rather than the computer since the bandwidth requirements for iTV are more important than for the computer. You don't want glitches while playing back media. So, you could live with downloading the media from online into NAS directly (through a slower wireless connection). Then have the NAS connected through wired ethernet to iTV.
Hope this makes sense!!
Makes sense to me but you should be informing the other guy. :)
The current versions of NAS may not be foolproof (Apple quality standards) and therefore this is a companion product that Apple could produce for home media storage. Another advantage of the NAS is that it can be near where iTV is rather than the computer since the bandwidth requirements for iTV are more important than for the computer. You don't want glitches while playing back media. So, you could live with downloading the media from online into NAS directly (through a slower wireless connection). Then have the NAS connected through wired ethernet to iTV.
Hope this makes sense!!
Makes sense to me but you should be informing the other guy. :)
Eidorian
Apr 14, 05:54 PM
After thinking about this some more, I have come to believe this is just damage control over AMD's recent chipset certification (http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/mainboards/display/20110413152041_AMD_First_to_Certify_USB_3_0_Supporting_Chipset.html) from the USB-IF.
They are just reassuring their support of USB 3.0. I still believe that Thunderbolt will require its additional controller and will not be supported directly on the chipset for Panther Point. (Intel 7 Series, excluding X79)
They are just reassuring their support of USB 3.0. I still believe that Thunderbolt will require its additional controller and will not be supported directly on the chipset for Panther Point. (Intel 7 Series, excluding X79)
fetchmebeers
Sep 12, 02:43 PM
I've waited a year and a half or more for a larger iPod. My mac has almost 70GB of music and I hate manually changing out songs. I never went to the video 5G since the only difference was video with no larger drive... music only for me. If I was to upload album art for all of my imported music 17 thousand plus songs does that take up alot of storage room? Anyone know how much art adds to storage??:p
no, album arts don't take up that much of a space
and believe me, you won't be able to put artworks on EVERY SINGLE one of your song file.... you can't, technically.
and as for the video... well i thought the same way as you did, but now that i got the video one(my old one was photo) it just totally blowed my mind... video thing is just too a great stride for me to deal with
i'm a music lover myself and that was the only reason that prompted me to buy an ipod but now it seems that peripheral things appease more than anything these dyas
no, album arts don't take up that much of a space
and believe me, you won't be able to put artworks on EVERY SINGLE one of your song file.... you can't, technically.
and as for the video... well i thought the same way as you did, but now that i got the video one(my old one was photo) it just totally blowed my mind... video thing is just too a great stride for me to deal with
i'm a music lover myself and that was the only reason that prompted me to buy an ipod but now it seems that peripheral things appease more than anything these dyas
Chundles
Oct 12, 04:10 PM
Steve, if you are reading this, make a nano in ORANGE and I'll buy one. :)
Sorry if someone already mentioned orange in this thread. I just came along and couldn't be bothered to read the entire thread up to this point.
ORANGE!
Yep, seconded. And proper, bright, "safety orange."
Sorry if someone already mentioned orange in this thread. I just came along and couldn't be bothered to read the entire thread up to this point.
ORANGE!
Yep, seconded. And proper, bright, "safety orange."
bjdku
Aug 31, 01:38 PM
If that's true for an small format movie, the Itunes Movie store will bomb. There is no way in hell people will pay that money. Is better buy a DVD at your local store.
Apple knows that, so that's why I am pretty sure it won't happen.
I agree they know better, and who has been feverishly building bandwidth and capability to deliver full length full resolution movies...Google has.
And who just joined the Apple Board, the Google CEO!!!!
Tantalizing!
Apple knows that, so that's why I am pretty sure it won't happen.
I agree they know better, and who has been feverishly building bandwidth and capability to deliver full length full resolution movies...Google has.
And who just joined the Apple Board, the Google CEO!!!!
Tantalizing!
fblack
Sep 10, 12:25 PM
I agree that the expandability of the 24inch imac is impressive, but until I see ease of upgradability as well Im all for a mid range. Its also about the CPU, the C2D's are nice, but their not really a match for their desktop counterparts, there are some of us that want the power of a desktop but dont have the budget for the xeon range...
I'm right with you when you say "that some of us want the power of a desktop but dont have the budget for the xeon range." Also I dont like all in one solutions. However, the 24" might be apple's way of saying that's close enough. Plus looking at what Macworld had to say about the 2.16 C2D and the potential for the 24" 2.33 it sure does narrow the performance some what and this might be what apple is thinking.
More significant, the 2.16GHz system narrowed the performance gap between iMac and Mac Pro product lines. With twice the number of processor cores, all running faster than the iMac, the Mac Pro had a definite advantage in this match up. But because not all applications and tasks take full advantage of the Mac multiprocessing capabilities, most results showed the Mac Pro between 20 and 30 percent faster than the 2.16GHz iMac. I expect that test results of the new 24-inch model�with its faster graphics and the optional 2.33GHz processor upgrade�could close this performance gap even further.
http://www.macworld.com/2006/09/firstlooks/imacbench/index.php
I cant wait to see the benchmarks on the 24". :)
But dont get me wrong I would still prefer a headless tower. :cool:
I'm right with you when you say "that some of us want the power of a desktop but dont have the budget for the xeon range." Also I dont like all in one solutions. However, the 24" might be apple's way of saying that's close enough. Plus looking at what Macworld had to say about the 2.16 C2D and the potential for the 24" 2.33 it sure does narrow the performance some what and this might be what apple is thinking.
More significant, the 2.16GHz system narrowed the performance gap between iMac and Mac Pro product lines. With twice the number of processor cores, all running faster than the iMac, the Mac Pro had a definite advantage in this match up. But because not all applications and tasks take full advantage of the Mac multiprocessing capabilities, most results showed the Mac Pro between 20 and 30 percent faster than the 2.16GHz iMac. I expect that test results of the new 24-inch model�with its faster graphics and the optional 2.33GHz processor upgrade�could close this performance gap even further.
http://www.macworld.com/2006/09/firstlooks/imacbench/index.php
I cant wait to see the benchmarks on the 24". :)
But dont get me wrong I would still prefer a headless tower. :cool:
Umbongo
Apr 30, 04:16 PM
Wonder if the top of the line Core i7 Sandy Bridge iMac will be faster than many of the SP Mac Pro configurations.
It'll be faster than the quad core models for sure and is comparable to the 3.33Ghz 6-core model as shown in these benchmarks (http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/287?vs=142).
It'll be faster than the quad core models for sure and is comparable to the 3.33Ghz 6-core model as shown in these benchmarks (http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/287?vs=142).
!� V �!
Apr 30, 06:21 PM
Bought monitors with anti-glare coatings. And monitor hoods.
My first computer was a PowerBook G3 and after that it was an LCD iMac (not the Luxo). Never had to ever use a CRT other than school and even then it sucked big time. I feel privileged. With the release of all this gloss glass monitors from :apple:, I am saving a boat load of money by simply not upgrading to the crap offerings and just use a Dell monitor and update to a Mac Mini or MacPro when the time presents itself to upgrade.
Thank you :apple: for not offering any Anti-Glare across the entire hardware lineup. :p
My first computer was a PowerBook G3 and after that it was an LCD iMac (not the Luxo). Never had to ever use a CRT other than school and even then it sucked big time. I feel privileged. With the release of all this gloss glass monitors from :apple:, I am saving a boat load of money by simply not upgrading to the crap offerings and just use a Dell monitor and update to a Mac Mini or MacPro when the time presents itself to upgrade.
Thank you :apple: for not offering any Anti-Glare across the entire hardware lineup. :p
Silentwave
Sep 18, 06:44 PM
A 10megapixel phone will record more clearly the low quality picture that comes from these tiny lenses.
It will be a much larger file, and won't look much better than a 3MP. Still, as the lenses improve this will change.
There IS a limit as to what can be done at a given price point. Eventually the cost of a good lens for it will outweigh the benefits.
Sticking a 10mp sensor in a phone to me is ridiculous. Very few people ever need 10mp, and if they do they get a real camera instead. Not only does the phone have a very limited set of potential lens features, but the lens will generally be low quality and poorly corrected unless you spend a significant amount of money for a good one. Even then size will become an issue.
All a 10mp phone will do is be unusable in anything but superb light. It'll probably have even worse dynamic range than existing phones, record murky detail, and have the poorest signal to noise ratio on the planet.
It will be a much larger file, and won't look much better than a 3MP. Still, as the lenses improve this will change.
There IS a limit as to what can be done at a given price point. Eventually the cost of a good lens for it will outweigh the benefits.
Sticking a 10mp sensor in a phone to me is ridiculous. Very few people ever need 10mp, and if they do they get a real camera instead. Not only does the phone have a very limited set of potential lens features, but the lens will generally be low quality and poorly corrected unless you spend a significant amount of money for a good one. Even then size will become an issue.
All a 10mp phone will do is be unusable in anything but superb light. It'll probably have even worse dynamic range than existing phones, record murky detail, and have the poorest signal to noise ratio on the planet.
zacman
Mar 29, 11:43 AM
iOS is losing marketshare for over 2 years now, so nothing really new there in that prediction. WP7 devices are available unlocked in Europe for around 250� (Omnia 7 16 GB, 19% VAT included) which is on par with the iPod touch (8GB, 210 �, 19% VAT included).
So overall WP7 will grow really fast especially when Nokia will release their phones.
So overall WP7 will grow really fast especially when Nokia will release their phones.
cube
Mar 30, 01:28 PM
deleted
mrsir2009
Apr 25, 12:03 AM
OP: That lady was driving the speed limit... What the ****s wrong with you?
Eidorian
Jul 17, 10:55 AM
Merom to launch July 23rd according to the latest Intel roadmap from this site :
http://www.hkepc.com/bbs/itnews.php?tid=631837I sure hope it's July 23rd.
http://www.hkepc.com/bbs/itnews.php?tid=631837I sure hope it's July 23rd.
asxtb
Sep 5, 07:56 AM
I really doubt that Apple will put a TV tuner in this thing (if it's real). Think about it -
Point 1 - If Apple puts a tuner in then they have to deal with the myriad of different types of TV.
Point 2 - THEY SELL TV SHOWS!
Does Steve want you to Tivo the new episode of "The Office" on your "MediaMac/Airport Express Video/Super iPod" or does he want you to come to the iTunes store and download it for $2? Apple, despite most of our (including my own) beliefs is a business and they have to think of the $$$ first.
Why give something away when you can make money off it? That's still my theory as to why the mini didn't have a tuner from the start.
As you said, Apple is a business and they have to think of the money first. Let's say they sell a media center for $300. That's $300. Upfront. They put it in the bank and turn it into $400. Taking that initial $300, that is 150 TV shows. That's a lot of TV shows. And that money will be gradually trickling in. Being a business, Apple wants your money now, not a couple bucks here and a couple bucks there. Plus there will be a lot of people that won't buy the media center and will continue buying the shows from iTunes.
Point 1 - If Apple puts a tuner in then they have to deal with the myriad of different types of TV.
Point 2 - THEY SELL TV SHOWS!
Does Steve want you to Tivo the new episode of "The Office" on your "MediaMac/Airport Express Video/Super iPod" or does he want you to come to the iTunes store and download it for $2? Apple, despite most of our (including my own) beliefs is a business and they have to think of the $$$ first.
Why give something away when you can make money off it? That's still my theory as to why the mini didn't have a tuner from the start.
As you said, Apple is a business and they have to think of the money first. Let's say they sell a media center for $300. That's $300. Upfront. They put it in the bank and turn it into $400. Taking that initial $300, that is 150 TV shows. That's a lot of TV shows. And that money will be gradually trickling in. Being a business, Apple wants your money now, not a couple bucks here and a couple bucks there. Plus there will be a lot of people that won't buy the media center and will continue buying the shows from iTunes.
barkomatic
Apr 10, 06:50 PM
What's hard in the U.S. is that most people make a modest or poor salary--yet the culture is very materialistic and there is a lot of pressure to buy so many luxury goods and services. At least in third world countries, your friends aren't pressuring you to take extravagant vacations you can't afford or go out to expensive restaurants.
cmcconkey
Sep 26, 08:56 AM
You got customer service from Verizon? Is this before or after they tacked on the taxes that aren't being collected anymore? Or crippled the Bluetooth on their phones? Or put a terrible GUI on their phones? Or any other number of things that they've done that are anti-consumer?
I admit they do indeed do these things... or have done these things in the past. But the situation that I spoke of was last week, also every time I have called them they have worked with everything and entered things just right so that if I wanted to change my plan it would not be prorated at all.
Christopher
I admit they do indeed do these things... or have done these things in the past. But the situation that I spoke of was last week, also every time I have called them they have worked with everything and entered things just right so that if I wanted to change my plan it would not be prorated at all.
Christopher
reallynotnick
Apr 25, 04:15 PM
Absolutely perfect design? Not even close.
Things apple needs to do to make a better MBP with a redesign:
MUST DO:
(1) IPS screen. I actually don't mind lower resolutions on small screens (1280x800 is fine for 13.3"), but please, please give me a real IPS panel.
(2) Sharp edges need to go. I don't care what people say, working on a macbook for any extended period of time leaves deep grooves in my wrists/palms.
(3) A better design for cooling. Even with light cpu usage, the fans go crazy on my MBP and it gets terribly loud. Awful experience. I'm hoping Ivy Bridge will help with this. Either way, the fans need to be quieter. Maybe larger, slower fans rather than small fast ones?
WOULD BE NICE:
(4) Ability to turn off the super bright glowing apple logo would be nice
(5) Change 13.3" macbook to 14" (they prob won't do this)
(6) Support some kind of docking station (maybe just with thunderbolt?)
I love this idea so I'll just add on
As for 6, I either would like it to be 14in in the same form factor (less bezel) or just make it a smaller 13in with less bezel.
7. Do a hybrid HDD/SSD drive, like Seagate has.
8. Remove optical drive (makes room for things I actually use, like processors/gpus/cooling)
9. Make a matte option on the 13in, (ideally ditch the glass in general for either regular glossy or matte screens)
10. Make the laptop slightly lighter, like .2-.5lbs lighter
11. Put a real GPU in the 13in
12. Also somehow fit a quad core in the 13in
13. Allow for 16GB of RAM
If they did all this by next summer, well gosh I would be the happiest guy in the world but even half of these things would be pretty nice.
Things apple needs to do to make a better MBP with a redesign:
MUST DO:
(1) IPS screen. I actually don't mind lower resolutions on small screens (1280x800 is fine for 13.3"), but please, please give me a real IPS panel.
(2) Sharp edges need to go. I don't care what people say, working on a macbook for any extended period of time leaves deep grooves in my wrists/palms.
(3) A better design for cooling. Even with light cpu usage, the fans go crazy on my MBP and it gets terribly loud. Awful experience. I'm hoping Ivy Bridge will help with this. Either way, the fans need to be quieter. Maybe larger, slower fans rather than small fast ones?
WOULD BE NICE:
(4) Ability to turn off the super bright glowing apple logo would be nice
(5) Change 13.3" macbook to 14" (they prob won't do this)
(6) Support some kind of docking station (maybe just with thunderbolt?)
I love this idea so I'll just add on
As for 6, I either would like it to be 14in in the same form factor (less bezel) or just make it a smaller 13in with less bezel.
7. Do a hybrid HDD/SSD drive, like Seagate has.
8. Remove optical drive (makes room for things I actually use, like processors/gpus/cooling)
9. Make a matte option on the 13in, (ideally ditch the glass in general for either regular glossy or matte screens)
10. Make the laptop slightly lighter, like .2-.5lbs lighter
11. Put a real GPU in the 13in
12. Also somehow fit a quad core in the 13in
13. Allow for 16GB of RAM
If they did all this by next summer, well gosh I would be the happiest guy in the world but even half of these things would be pretty nice.