Dr.Gargoyle
Sep 14, 08:22 AM
I rerally hope it is more than Aperture 2.0. The displays were recently updated, so... I am lost
Bernard SG
Apr 29, 03:39 AM
Microsoft doesn't sell hardware. Apple does and mobile devices make up a large part of Apple's sales and revenue. They are a tiny blip on the radar percentage wise as far as pc's are concerned, no matter how you spin the numbers. 90% >4.6%. And yes, Apple makes a tremendous amount of money on the products they sell, far more than anyone else, and I realize that most of you take a tremendous amount of personal pride in the money Apple makes. And as a consumer, I find that absolutely bizarre. But that's just me.
As a consumer, it is not irrelevant how much money a company makes when it comes to choosing a product or service to purchase. Apple being super-profitable is comforting to the extent that it means the Apple ecosystem will be sustainable for years to come.
As far as Microsoft is concerned, while I agree that the news of its death is highly exaggerated, the current state of things is worrying as far as it means the company, despite its very high market-share in PC OS, is not anymore an industry leader as in bringing out bleeding-edge innovation and inspiring the market: outside of Windows, Office and the XBox, all their initiatives are abysmal failures. That doesn't mean that Microsoft is doomed: it has a high potential and the money for bouncing back, but that will be at the cost of tough, painful decisions they have to make NOW. And meanwhile, the actual leaders, namely Apple and Google are not going to sleep.
As a consumer, it is not irrelevant how much money a company makes when it comes to choosing a product or service to purchase. Apple being super-profitable is comforting to the extent that it means the Apple ecosystem will be sustainable for years to come.
As far as Microsoft is concerned, while I agree that the news of its death is highly exaggerated, the current state of things is worrying as far as it means the company, despite its very high market-share in PC OS, is not anymore an industry leader as in bringing out bleeding-edge innovation and inspiring the market: outside of Windows, Office and the XBox, all their initiatives are abysmal failures. That doesn't mean that Microsoft is doomed: it has a high potential and the money for bouncing back, but that will be at the cost of tough, painful decisions they have to make NOW. And meanwhile, the actual leaders, namely Apple and Google are not going to sleep.
Silentwave
Jul 18, 09:08 PM
Any one know when the 45nm architecture processors are going to appear?
I'm gonna wait for those, for OS X 10.5 and iLife 07 to invest in a Mac
On track for 2007.
I'm gonna wait for those, for OS X 10.5 and iLife 07 to invest in a Mac
On track for 2007.
gekko513
Aug 23, 06:51 PM
It's not...the press release says that Apple can recoup some of the money if Creative is able to license the patent to other companies.
I found that very part of the settlement very puzzling. If anything, you'd think Apple should be able to recoup som of the money if Creative isn't able to license the patent to other companies that infringe on the same patent, as it would show that Creative doesn't have a legal leg to stand on.
I found that very part of the settlement very puzzling. If anything, you'd think Apple should be able to recoup som of the money if Creative isn't able to license the patent to other companies that infringe on the same patent, as it would show that Creative doesn't have a legal leg to stand on.
TheManOfSilver
Sep 4, 08:01 PM
If you're like me, you don't have your Mac right next to your TV. Not only would I have to string a DVI/HDMI cable aaaall the way across the room, I would also have to get an equally long digital audio cable. Probably end up costing about the same as a video AirPort Express (if they keep the prices the same) but with the added hassle of getting those cables across the room.
This would be a lot less expensive than buying a Mac mini, especially if you already have a powerful desktop just waiting to play some HD videos...
Exactly! I think other potential twists would include a video Airport Express with a built-in TV tuner (to stream tv content back to your iMac/Mac Pro for recording, or an optional built-in HD for local storage when you don't have your Mac on or something.
This would be a lot less expensive than buying a Mac mini, especially if you already have a powerful desktop just waiting to play some HD videos...
Exactly! I think other potential twists would include a video Airport Express with a built-in TV tuner (to stream tv content back to your iMac/Mac Pro for recording, or an optional built-in HD for local storage when you don't have your Mac on or something.
Indiana82
Sep 14, 04:41 PM
If Jobs is realy taking a plane to the whole way down to germany, I think he is presenting more than a software update. But is he realy comming? Or is it again a live-streaming kinda thing? Or might someone else be leading through the show?
WHO KNOWS!
WHO KNOWS!
RollTide
Apr 30, 02:49 PM
Ill be in Panama city Florida a couple days after the release, may pick one up on the way home if we go by a store. Have to find a list of stores.
mrkramer
Apr 17, 02:13 AM
why would I want to pay someone $17 an hour to a job a monkey is almost qualified to do? Sounds like an opportunity to hire less people, or jack my prices up. A job is worth simply what a job is worth. Period. If I'm trying to offer services at competitive prices, and someone is willing to bag groceries for $3 an hour, then they should be ALLOWED to. Rather than me just choose to hire nobody and using automated checkouts.
What happens then? More people find jobs, and prices go down. $3 dollars suddenly buys you a subway sandwich. # of consumers goes up bc more people are employed, which brings in more revenue, causes more hiring etc.
Also, people who do want to make $10 bucks an hour are forced to either be productive or learn something useful, which is good for everyone, plus that $10 is worth more now bc of deflation. Deflation would also drive interest rates on loans down bc the money you pay back is worth more.
Best case scenario, taxes are low at this point, and the government isn't a handout machine, so people feel the need to donate to an EFFICIENT charity. Rather than to the government, which is the most inefficient entity on the planet.
You do realize that one of the main reasons why the great depression was so bad was because Hoover was so worried about inflation that he caused deflation right? With deflation what you have is nobody is buying because if they wait then they can get something for cheaper and the economy suffers as a result. How many people do you think would buy iPhones if they new that next week there was going to be a price drop?
US government regulations for increasing gas efficiency has resulted in car companies making vehicles lighter at rate beyond evolving the technology to maintain safety, which has resulted in an average of 10,000 avoidable deaths per year since the early 70's
But hey, maybe that fraction of environmental impact we have that's causing that fraction of a global degree change might have been marginally altered. Maybe. And it's only cost us ~300,000 lives so far. Thank you government! Just tack that onto the millions you killed by restricting DDT use, and you can further brag about your death toll
If you are going to make a claim like that you really should provide a source.
What happens then? More people find jobs, and prices go down. $3 dollars suddenly buys you a subway sandwich. # of consumers goes up bc more people are employed, which brings in more revenue, causes more hiring etc.
Also, people who do want to make $10 bucks an hour are forced to either be productive or learn something useful, which is good for everyone, plus that $10 is worth more now bc of deflation. Deflation would also drive interest rates on loans down bc the money you pay back is worth more.
Best case scenario, taxes are low at this point, and the government isn't a handout machine, so people feel the need to donate to an EFFICIENT charity. Rather than to the government, which is the most inefficient entity on the planet.
You do realize that one of the main reasons why the great depression was so bad was because Hoover was so worried about inflation that he caused deflation right? With deflation what you have is nobody is buying because if they wait then they can get something for cheaper and the economy suffers as a result. How many people do you think would buy iPhones if they new that next week there was going to be a price drop?
US government regulations for increasing gas efficiency has resulted in car companies making vehicles lighter at rate beyond evolving the technology to maintain safety, which has resulted in an average of 10,000 avoidable deaths per year since the early 70's
But hey, maybe that fraction of environmental impact we have that's causing that fraction of a global degree change might have been marginally altered. Maybe. And it's only cost us ~300,000 lives so far. Thank you government! Just tack that onto the millions you killed by restricting DDT use, and you can further brag about your death toll
If you are going to make a claim like that you really should provide a source.
Rocketman
Aug 31, 03:24 PM
I don't care what it is, just give us something new to talk about. Mac Pro really nice machine but we saw it coming months in advance. Maybe not he exact spec but yeah we all knew it was coming. Same with Merom, Conroe etc... Give us something new, really new.
Get used to the new way. The only real suprise news from now on willl be specific software features, cosmetics and any new details not widely anticipated. The primary processor and platform/form factors are likely to remain unsurprising.
Furthermore, chip advances just took a big leap. Do not expect that again for 2 or more years.
Rocketman
Get used to the new way. The only real suprise news from now on willl be specific software features, cosmetics and any new details not widely anticipated. The primary processor and platform/form factors are likely to remain unsurprising.
Furthermore, chip advances just took a big leap. Do not expect that again for 2 or more years.
Rocketman
AndroidfoLife
Mar 29, 03:07 PM
I predict that in 2015, iOS handset users will still have the highest customer satisfaction and that Apple will be walking away with the lion's share of the smartphone industry's profits.
Meaning there will be more grumpy non-iPhone users and more grumpy HTC/Nokia/Samsung/Motorola/LG shareholders.
Highly doubtful the other companies and react to growing customer needs faster then apple can. I think in 2015 windows phone 7 could have a good run. Depends on some factors. One of which is RIM. If RIM slips a little more its enterprise clients will jump right to WP 7. As an android lover I know it is not ready for Enterprise and iOS is seen to be more of a novalty smart phone by the greater tech world. I am not going to lie a Blackberry bold 9700 looks like the real deal when it comes to getting work done on your cell phone. Everything else looks like a toy in comparison.
Meaning there will be more grumpy non-iPhone users and more grumpy HTC/Nokia/Samsung/Motorola/LG shareholders.
Highly doubtful the other companies and react to growing customer needs faster then apple can. I think in 2015 windows phone 7 could have a good run. Depends on some factors. One of which is RIM. If RIM slips a little more its enterprise clients will jump right to WP 7. As an android lover I know it is not ready for Enterprise and iOS is seen to be more of a novalty smart phone by the greater tech world. I am not going to lie a Blackberry bold 9700 looks like the real deal when it comes to getting work done on your cell phone. Everything else looks like a toy in comparison.
Lightivity
Oct 5, 03:16 AM
Being 16x9 encoded is not the same thing as being anaporphically encoded.
Being 16x9 encoded just means that the video is meant to be viewed at a 16x9 ratio. Yes, the movies (that I have bought, anyway,) are 16x9. Specifically, Good Will Hunting is 640x344.
Anamorphically encoded refers to the act of 'stretching' 16x9 source to the height of 4x3; so that you effectively get 33% more 'vertical' data than horizontal. The TV is then supposed to 'squish' the video back to 16x9. So, for example, if you tell your DVD player that you have a '16x9 anamorphic' TV, it will output the widescreen video to fill the entire 720x480 resolution. If you tell it you have a '16x9 non-anamorphic', it will still be outputting 720x480, but will add black bars on the top and bottom, to achive a 'video' resolution of 720x405.
My TV, for example, has a special '16x9 anamorphic' mode where it actually re-aims its electron beam so that it's only drawing in the 16x9 area, but at a higher vertical density than it normally would. Meaning that I no longer have square pixels. Instead, I have pixels that are 1.33 times wider than tall. (More data packed in height-wise.)
If iTunes movies were sold as anamorphic, then Good Will Hunting would be 640x372, and rely on the TV to 'squish' the 372 high into the height that 344 should be. Thereby displaying more vertical information in the same space.
I know exactly what 'anamorphic' means, and it was precisely what I meant when saying "16x9-encoded", with the exception that 'anamorphic' is a totally confusing and natively incorrect term.
Why? Because nothing is ever stretched or squashed in digital video. The anamorphic concept has unfortunately been transfered from the celluloid world where light truly is pressed together on a 35-mm film frame only to be expanded in the theater. Now, maybe I should have added the word "enhanced for widescreen" after "16x9-encoded" but it doesn't matter: All 16x9-videomaterial is encoded so that all 720x480 pixels carry the approximate dimension of 16x9 with the aim of fitting a television that holds a display with 1.78:1 proportions. That is the very definition of 16x9. It is not anamorphical. It is not sqeezed. It is just 16x9 pixels spread across a compatible display.
Ehurtley, what I think you thought I meant, was aspect ratio. But that is something completely else. The aspect ratio is the proportions of the frame the director intended the action to be shown in, and there are several. One is 2.35:1, but the most common is 1.85:1, which most closely resembles the 1.78:1 frame that 16x9-encoded video fits right into. The only ones using the 1:78:1 aspect ratio is tv-productions. Film productions rarely use it (they stick to conventional 2.35:1 and 1.85:1).
Don't confuse the 1.78:1 aspect ratio which -- together with 1.85:1 and 2.35:1 -- is the artistic concept of framing action, with 16x9-encoding which is the technical solution of using a standard pixel resolution in a widescreen setup.
So, my question remains: is there any 16x9-encoded film content on iTunes Store?
Being 16x9 encoded just means that the video is meant to be viewed at a 16x9 ratio. Yes, the movies (that I have bought, anyway,) are 16x9. Specifically, Good Will Hunting is 640x344.
Anamorphically encoded refers to the act of 'stretching' 16x9 source to the height of 4x3; so that you effectively get 33% more 'vertical' data than horizontal. The TV is then supposed to 'squish' the video back to 16x9. So, for example, if you tell your DVD player that you have a '16x9 anamorphic' TV, it will output the widescreen video to fill the entire 720x480 resolution. If you tell it you have a '16x9 non-anamorphic', it will still be outputting 720x480, but will add black bars on the top and bottom, to achive a 'video' resolution of 720x405.
My TV, for example, has a special '16x9 anamorphic' mode where it actually re-aims its electron beam so that it's only drawing in the 16x9 area, but at a higher vertical density than it normally would. Meaning that I no longer have square pixels. Instead, I have pixels that are 1.33 times wider than tall. (More data packed in height-wise.)
If iTunes movies were sold as anamorphic, then Good Will Hunting would be 640x372, and rely on the TV to 'squish' the 372 high into the height that 344 should be. Thereby displaying more vertical information in the same space.
I know exactly what 'anamorphic' means, and it was precisely what I meant when saying "16x9-encoded", with the exception that 'anamorphic' is a totally confusing and natively incorrect term.
Why? Because nothing is ever stretched or squashed in digital video. The anamorphic concept has unfortunately been transfered from the celluloid world where light truly is pressed together on a 35-mm film frame only to be expanded in the theater. Now, maybe I should have added the word "enhanced for widescreen" after "16x9-encoded" but it doesn't matter: All 16x9-videomaterial is encoded so that all 720x480 pixels carry the approximate dimension of 16x9 with the aim of fitting a television that holds a display with 1.78:1 proportions. That is the very definition of 16x9. It is not anamorphical. It is not sqeezed. It is just 16x9 pixels spread across a compatible display.
Ehurtley, what I think you thought I meant, was aspect ratio. But that is something completely else. The aspect ratio is the proportions of the frame the director intended the action to be shown in, and there are several. One is 2.35:1, but the most common is 1.85:1, which most closely resembles the 1.78:1 frame that 16x9-encoded video fits right into. The only ones using the 1:78:1 aspect ratio is tv-productions. Film productions rarely use it (they stick to conventional 2.35:1 and 1.85:1).
Don't confuse the 1.78:1 aspect ratio which -- together with 1.85:1 and 2.35:1 -- is the artistic concept of framing action, with 16x9-encoding which is the technical solution of using a standard pixel resolution in a widescreen setup.
So, my question remains: is there any 16x9-encoded film content on iTunes Store?
jettredmont
Sep 5, 03:10 PM
So, any bets on the new name for Airport Extreme?
My bets:
Airport Super K-Rad
Airport Gnarly Waves
Airport Excellent
Airport 3: Direct to Video!
My bets:
Airport Super K-Rad
Airport Gnarly Waves
Airport Excellent
Airport 3: Direct to Video!
dernhelm
Sep 5, 02:22 PM
Now, if it's simply an updated Airport Express that now allows you to stream movies but you still have to use your computer do send the files through (AirTunes) then I'll pass. I really don't think they would do it this way though, or at least I hope not.
Plan on being dissapointed. That's pretty much what they'll release. The device will front-end your television, and might (if you are lucky) support component video or DVI, but most likely just composite video. It will probably have a front-row like interface and a remote that can work with it, but it will be incapable of storing any content. The mac will store the content, this device will simply make it available to a TV in any room in your house. Pair it up with a mac mini, and you have a pretty inexpensive solution for downloading TV or Movie content and watching it on your TV.
Myself, I think this could be VERY cool. But I don't spend a lot of time watching TV. If they do it right, I could cancel my NetFlix subscription, though. It just depends on the amount of content.
Plan on being dissapointed. That's pretty much what they'll release. The device will front-end your television, and might (if you are lucky) support component video or DVI, but most likely just composite video. It will probably have a front-row like interface and a remote that can work with it, but it will be incapable of storing any content. The mac will store the content, this device will simply make it available to a TV in any room in your house. Pair it up with a mac mini, and you have a pretty inexpensive solution for downloading TV or Movie content and watching it on your TV.
Myself, I think this could be VERY cool. But I don't spend a lot of time watching TV. If they do it right, I could cancel my NetFlix subscription, though. It just depends on the amount of content.
steve_hill4
Sep 9, 10:35 AM
The last revision of the iMac G5 (the one with the iSight) had the option of 2.5GB of RAM. It had 512MB built-in and you could option a 2GB stick for the 1 open slot it had.
That 2GB of course cost an arm and a leg...
That's right actually, it was 512MB soldered and a single slot wasn't it? I also thought for a short time after the new C2D iMacs were announced and it said max. 3GB, 1GB would be soldered and there would be a single 2GB slot or two 1GB slots.
Some good points have been raised on the 64-bit OS front. Since Leopard will fully support 64-bit down to the kernal, I would hope this first 64-bit Intel iMac would benefit as much as the Mac Pro.
However, does anyone know for sure whether a) the OS X on the new iMacs is 64-bit and/or b) whether OS X on Intel has even been translated to 64-bit, (thinking Mac Pro here too)? It's something I have yet to bother looking into, but any answers here would be appreciated.
That 2GB of course cost an arm and a leg...
That's right actually, it was 512MB soldered and a single slot wasn't it? I also thought for a short time after the new C2D iMacs were announced and it said max. 3GB, 1GB would be soldered and there would be a single 2GB slot or two 1GB slots.
Some good points have been raised on the 64-bit OS front. Since Leopard will fully support 64-bit down to the kernal, I would hope this first 64-bit Intel iMac would benefit as much as the Mac Pro.
However, does anyone know for sure whether a) the OS X on the new iMacs is 64-bit and/or b) whether OS X on Intel has even been translated to 64-bit, (thinking Mac Pro here too)? It's something I have yet to bother looking into, but any answers here would be appreciated.
Cougarcat
Apr 30, 03:49 PM
SB + Mediocre GPU = meh :(
A 2560x1440 screen deserves more than some lame mobile gpu.
Given the thickness of the machine, a mobile GPU is the only thing that will fit.
A 2560x1440 screen deserves more than some lame mobile gpu.
Given the thickness of the machine, a mobile GPU is the only thing that will fit.
jose fuertes s.
Sep 25, 11:31 AM
i think LG's new phone is quite similar.
http://xataka.com/archivos/2006/09/25-lg-sb610-otro-movil-extrafin.php
http://xataka.com/archivos/2006/09/25-lg-sb610-otro-movil-extrafin.php
BBC B 32k
Aug 28, 01:23 PM
my cat has told me that there will be a 23" chin-less iMac with the new Core 2 Duo chips, 1gig std, wireless kbd and mouse std. Or he is just hungry - hard to tell just what he is saying but he has friends in high places (trees mostly)
still heres hoping he's spot on
still heres hoping he's spot on
sixth
Aug 29, 08:04 AM
RIGHT...good joke guys...
newamiga
Sep 5, 10:27 PM
Just saw this on Engadget .. coincidence?
"Tzero Teams with Analog Devices to Enable Wireless High-Definition Video
Ultra Wideband Design Connects HDMI� Devices Wirelessly, Helps Consumers Eliminate Cost and Complexity of Hard-wired Installations"
http://www.tzerotech.com/site/content/pr_106.html
Very interesting and they are just down the road in Sunnyvale.. makes one wonder??
:cool: :cool:
"Tzero Teams with Analog Devices to Enable Wireless High-Definition Video
Ultra Wideband Design Connects HDMI� Devices Wirelessly, Helps Consumers Eliminate Cost and Complexity of Hard-wired Installations"
http://www.tzerotech.com/site/content/pr_106.html
Very interesting and they are just down the road in Sunnyvale.. makes one wonder??
:cool: :cool:
Cougarcat
Sep 14, 08:08 AM
Wow, Steve wasn't kidding when he said "see you soon." Apple is on a roll...
babyj
Sep 2, 06:51 PM
It had better do. The British public (those who pay license, which like 99% do) has the legal right to every single piece of footage, news story, radio recording etc. etc. the BBC has ever produced, but we have access to about 1% of it.
It's a big point of controversy here. Partly it's been due to technology limitations, but pretty soon there'll be no excuse, and the BBC should be right off the bat finding new ways to deliver what belongs to us.
I don't think it is that simple. There are obstacles to the BBC offering more material in digital formats, if they could they would. Plus they already offer far more than any other tv companies in the UK at present.
Everyone seems far too pre-occupied with the USA, forgetting the fact that there is very little (ie none) tv content available to users outside the USA. I'd of thought addressing that would be higher on the list of priorities than offering movies to the USA, especially as there isn't any real opposition for the movie market at present.
More important in the UK though is the Premiership (the top football/soccer league in the UK) - if they started offering complete games for download at say £2 each they'd probably sell out of iPods within a week. It worked for Sky and I'm sure it would for Apple / iTunes.
A bigger threat is Microsofts new 'ipod killer', so I'd be surprised if there isn't a major make over for the iPod range soon - definetly in time for Christmas. No doubt it will be better for watching video, with a movie store following later.
I don't see upgrades to the existing Mini/iMac/Macbook range being that news worthy. Nor is an enhanced home media server type offering likely to be coming soon, I'd of thought that will come in Leopard.
It's a big point of controversy here. Partly it's been due to technology limitations, but pretty soon there'll be no excuse, and the BBC should be right off the bat finding new ways to deliver what belongs to us.
I don't think it is that simple. There are obstacles to the BBC offering more material in digital formats, if they could they would. Plus they already offer far more than any other tv companies in the UK at present.
Everyone seems far too pre-occupied with the USA, forgetting the fact that there is very little (ie none) tv content available to users outside the USA. I'd of thought addressing that would be higher on the list of priorities than offering movies to the USA, especially as there isn't any real opposition for the movie market at present.
More important in the UK though is the Premiership (the top football/soccer league in the UK) - if they started offering complete games for download at say £2 each they'd probably sell out of iPods within a week. It worked for Sky and I'm sure it would for Apple / iTunes.
A bigger threat is Microsofts new 'ipod killer', so I'd be surprised if there isn't a major make over for the iPod range soon - definetly in time for Christmas. No doubt it will be better for watching video, with a movie store following later.
I don't see upgrades to the existing Mini/iMac/Macbook range being that news worthy. Nor is an enhanced home media server type offering likely to be coming soon, I'd of thought that will come in Leopard.
Eidorian
Sep 10, 11:11 AM
I've gone over the 30" mock up with Multimedia. I like the idea and it's possible. Still, has anyone else looked at the road map for mobile chips? There's nothing beyond dual core! We just get die shrinking and more cache.
snakelda
Mar 22, 02:55 PM
Finally some Mac rumors.. :D
Lol yeah true
Lol yeah true
andiwm2003
Sep 9, 08:31 AM
Yes of course it can, you obviously don't understand what x86_64 is.
Manic Mouse obviously understands what 64 bit means. that is obvious if one is able to read the post.;)
i also wonder if the new systems are really future proof or if hybrid systems like this will in a few years be not compatible. also how will windows run on a system like this? what about games that usually expect a certain hardware setup?
Manic Mouse obviously understands what 64 bit means. that is obvious if one is able to read the post.;)
i also wonder if the new systems are really future proof or if hybrid systems like this will in a few years be not compatible. also how will windows run on a system like this? what about games that usually expect a certain hardware setup?