Multimedia
Sep 9, 12:21 PM
Looks like MacCentral forgot to mention the fact that no matter how few cores an application can use - even if it's only ONE, the fact that more can be run at full speed SIMULTANEOUSLY is the whole reason for wanting-having-needing more cores - not wiether or not what you normally run can use 2, 3 or even all 4 cores at this time. OS X automatically delegates work to however many cores are vacant or underused so the user gets immediate benefit from 4 cores they will never get from 2. And I am 100% certain that tthe benefit is radically more than 20-30%.
It's an old think I always do only one thing at a time mentality that overlooks this otherwise obvious reason - a new way of working and a new way of thinking about how to do work - for going with more cores if you can afford it.
It's an old think I always do only one thing at a time mentality that overlooks this otherwise obvious reason - a new way of working and a new way of thinking about how to do work - for going with more cores if you can afford it.
waltchui
Apr 4, 12:35 PM
just fyi, being from san diego. Otay Mesa/Otay ranch is only 5-10 minutes from the Mexican border/Tijuana
Spagolli94
Sep 12, 03:46 PM
i'm sorry but the 30G iPod has a stupid price. If someone is that tight and has to get an iPod, they would probably buy used.
I will by the 30GB and am anything but tight. Why? Because I only have 15GB of music and have been adding music at a rate of about 1GB per year. I have no need to watch movies or look at photos on my iPod. If I'm traveling, I have a PowerBook on the plane with me. My iPod is used in the car and the gym, that's it.
That said, both the 30GB and 80GB have more than enough storage. So, I will make my decision based on physical dimensions - at the gym a smaller iPod is a big plus. The fact that the 30GB is cheaper is just icing on the cake. For my needs, I would have bought the 30GB, even it were the same price... even it the 30GB were more.
I agree with you though. If you currently have or anticipate needing over 30GB of space, the 80GB is a MUCH better value when it comes to GB per dollar.
I will by the 30GB and am anything but tight. Why? Because I only have 15GB of music and have been adding music at a rate of about 1GB per year. I have no need to watch movies or look at photos on my iPod. If I'm traveling, I have a PowerBook on the plane with me. My iPod is used in the car and the gym, that's it.
That said, both the 30GB and 80GB have more than enough storage. So, I will make my decision based on physical dimensions - at the gym a smaller iPod is a big plus. The fact that the 30GB is cheaper is just icing on the cake. For my needs, I would have bought the 30GB, even it were the same price... even it the 30GB were more.
I agree with you though. If you currently have or anticipate needing over 30GB of space, the 80GB is a MUCH better value when it comes to GB per dollar.
logandzwon
Mar 30, 01:45 PM
That's like saying it's OK to name a restaurant "Burger Place" because it's technically a "Fast Food Place".
ya or "Burger King" because technically they were just the king of making burgers?
ya or "Burger King" because technically they were just the king of making burgers?
w00master
Nov 13, 01:56 PM
99% of these are in a huff self important 'tempest in a teapot' stories;
its not required-nay not even helpful to be a fanboy to point this out-just 2 good eyes and a brain;
Alway been complainers, always will be;
If the rules are clearly spelled out and they dont follow them-then they shouldnt be crybabies in public
simple
CAREFULLY read APPLEs developers rules
follow them
dont try to breach them
you dont need a PhD to understand this
So, did you even READ what Rogue Amoeba had to say?
I'm seriously amazed with you apologists. You guys are defending Apple in an instance where they are CLEARLY in the wrong.
w00master
its not required-nay not even helpful to be a fanboy to point this out-just 2 good eyes and a brain;
Alway been complainers, always will be;
If the rules are clearly spelled out and they dont follow them-then they shouldnt be crybabies in public
simple
CAREFULLY read APPLEs developers rules
follow them
dont try to breach them
you dont need a PhD to understand this
So, did you even READ what Rogue Amoeba had to say?
I'm seriously amazed with you apologists. You guys are defending Apple in an instance where they are CLEARLY in the wrong.
w00master
turbobass
Mar 22, 08:45 PM
I just want to say a big "AMERICA, **** YEAH!" about this ...
But also I wanted to say we should be rewarding WIRELESS protocols. ThunderBolt = Fast, great. Polite golf clap. No AMERICA **** YEAH for ThunderBolt. Everything should be WIRELESS now. 2011 baby!:mad:
But also I wanted to say we should be rewarding WIRELESS protocols. ThunderBolt = Fast, great. Polite golf clap. No AMERICA **** YEAH for ThunderBolt. Everything should be WIRELESS now. 2011 baby!:mad:
KingYaba
Aug 23, 10:28 PM
Apple got lucky. Good to hear no real damage was done.
Full of Win
Apr 30, 01:13 PM
One step closer to the MacBook Air update.
Multimedia
Sep 12, 05:22 PM
Okay, so it appears that owners of 5th generation iPods (before the latest release) who update their iPod software to version 1.2 get a few cool features that come pre-loaded out of the box on the latest 5th generation iPods, but not all.
We get:
• Gapless playback
• Ability to adjust backlight brightness (I'm particularly excited about this, I've been wanting it for ages, I bet it increases battery battery life immensely with the brightness turned way down)
• When rapidly scrolling through ARTISTS we get overlayed alphabet letters which correspond to where we are on our list
• Ability to play games bought from iTunes
We don't get:
• New search function
** Video playback details yet to be determinedAnd we FAIL to get ability to load 640x480 H.264 Baseline encoded video "...because it cannot be played on this 11month "old" iPod." What a crock! It's a load of bullocks I tell ya!I take it that your conversion is over and the old iPod cannot play "Hi-Res H.264" and my asumptions prior in this thread where right :/
And as I already pointed out, that owners of "old" iPod 5G will have to reconvert movies and TV series and EVERYTHING they download from this day an, since all movies and tv episodes will be in 640x480 from now on.
Geez. Unlike M$ Apple has never been to much concerned with backwards compatibility, users without at least 10.3 Panther don't get much new fun these days. But like this....?Yeah. They don't even let us put them on the "old" 5g iPod.
It's gotta be a simple firmware update that they should give us. What good is that new capability to the Store if they won't load and play on the large base of first adopters' units out there? I am very perplexed at this revolting development. :confused: :eek:
Makes no sense to me at all. Anyone else understand it?
We get:
• Gapless playback
• Ability to adjust backlight brightness (I'm particularly excited about this, I've been wanting it for ages, I bet it increases battery battery life immensely with the brightness turned way down)
• When rapidly scrolling through ARTISTS we get overlayed alphabet letters which correspond to where we are on our list
• Ability to play games bought from iTunes
We don't get:
• New search function
** Video playback details yet to be determinedAnd we FAIL to get ability to load 640x480 H.264 Baseline encoded video "...because it cannot be played on this 11month "old" iPod." What a crock! It's a load of bullocks I tell ya!I take it that your conversion is over and the old iPod cannot play "Hi-Res H.264" and my asumptions prior in this thread where right :/
And as I already pointed out, that owners of "old" iPod 5G will have to reconvert movies and TV series and EVERYTHING they download from this day an, since all movies and tv episodes will be in 640x480 from now on.
Geez. Unlike M$ Apple has never been to much concerned with backwards compatibility, users without at least 10.3 Panther don't get much new fun these days. But like this....?Yeah. They don't even let us put them on the "old" 5g iPod.
It's gotta be a simple firmware update that they should give us. What good is that new capability to the Store if they won't load and play on the large base of first adopters' units out there? I am very perplexed at this revolting development. :confused: :eek:
Makes no sense to me at all. Anyone else understand it?
Squonk
Sep 26, 09:05 AM
I'm with you. As a MVNO, Apple could kick Helio's ass. Maybe they are becoming an MVNO and they're leasing their network time from Cingular? That makes sense, don't it?
Think about it...
.Mac mobile
The cellphone connects to your .Mac mail, your iCal calendar, and your Address Book.
iChat and text messaging would become one and the same. I could use iChat to talk with a friend on his iPhone, and vice versa. The iPhone has a camera, right? Video conference from the train, anyone?
Buy ringtones at the iTunes store, or just use any song in your library as your ringtone, or write your own ringtone in Garageband.
Download your podcasts from anywhere.
(snip)
Yes, this is all conjecture, but it's the only thing that really makes a full-fledged Apple iPhone make sense to me in their overall plan for world domination.
I love the concept! The phone syncing to your .mac account (if you have one) instead of syncing the phone to your Mac directly.
AND... This would then handle the PC users. They could get a .mac account and have access to all these goodness as well.
Sadly, knowing Cingular, and the rest of the network providers, they would charge out the *ss for this capability. I like having the ability with my SE T637 that I surf for free midi files, download them to my mac, connect to the phone via bluetooth and upload the midi's - voila, free ringtones. Sure, some of them are cheesy, but I'm not paying $1 per ringtone.
I'm already (over)paying for a .mac account. I really don't want to pay more money again for a portal between my cellular account and the .mac account. Sadly, that is probably what the reality would be and probably rightfully so - technology isn't free.
Think about it...
.Mac mobile
The cellphone connects to your .Mac mail, your iCal calendar, and your Address Book.
iChat and text messaging would become one and the same. I could use iChat to talk with a friend on his iPhone, and vice versa. The iPhone has a camera, right? Video conference from the train, anyone?
Buy ringtones at the iTunes store, or just use any song in your library as your ringtone, or write your own ringtone in Garageband.
Download your podcasts from anywhere.
(snip)
Yes, this is all conjecture, but it's the only thing that really makes a full-fledged Apple iPhone make sense to me in their overall plan for world domination.
I love the concept! The phone syncing to your .mac account (if you have one) instead of syncing the phone to your Mac directly.
AND... This would then handle the PC users. They could get a .mac account and have access to all these goodness as well.
Sadly, knowing Cingular, and the rest of the network providers, they would charge out the *ss for this capability. I like having the ability with my SE T637 that I surf for free midi files, download them to my mac, connect to the phone via bluetooth and upload the midi's - voila, free ringtones. Sure, some of them are cheesy, but I'm not paying $1 per ringtone.
I'm already (over)paying for a .mac account. I really don't want to pay more money again for a portal between my cellular account and the .mac account. Sadly, that is probably what the reality would be and probably rightfully so - technology isn't free.
cozmot
Mar 23, 04:14 AM
So who said OS X is completely secure? Go back and read the statements that have been made.
That's just a straw man argument concocted to give some posters here an excuse to be argumentative, nothing more.
That's just a straw man argument concocted to give some posters here an excuse to be argumentative, nothing more.
soapsuds
Sep 6, 01:09 AM
3 Mbps for a 720p movie? That's actually pretty close to a typical broadband download rate... neglecting the 2 GB storage requirements, all they would have to do is add the ability to watch a video as it is being downloaded (I'm pretty sure iTunes currently doesn't do that, which seems rather stupid, although the iTunes video player is also quite clunky) to make that feasible. I would still guess that they'll only do 640x480 or something like that, because it would be "good enough" for most people. If they stick to 320x240 for movies nobody will buy them.
If they can put the menu logic into iTunes, all the "Airport Express A/V" would have do do is add an H264 decoder chip and video DAC to the current Airport Express, that would be a pretty cheap solution. I think there is already a way to plug a remote control via USB into an Airport Express and remote-control iTunes. I don't see any reason why they couldn't fit this into something roughly the same cost as the current Airport Express ($130). Have iTunes for Windows handle simple movie and music playback, have the Mac version do a more full-featured FrontRow experience. Can most current Macs encode 640x480 into H264 or at least MP4 in real time to handle the UI? I suppose they could use a more quick & dirty compression technique for the UI, perhaps something that could take advantage of the large amounts of black background.
The only sticky part is the current AirportExpress is designed to sit on your powerstrip, where an IR receiver wouldn't work. So either you need a receiver on a cord, use an R/F remote instead of IR, or turn it into a "box with a cord" design more like a cable box.
If they can put the menu logic into iTunes, all the "Airport Express A/V" would have do do is add an H264 decoder chip and video DAC to the current Airport Express, that would be a pretty cheap solution. I think there is already a way to plug a remote control via USB into an Airport Express and remote-control iTunes. I don't see any reason why they couldn't fit this into something roughly the same cost as the current Airport Express ($130). Have iTunes for Windows handle simple movie and music playback, have the Mac version do a more full-featured FrontRow experience. Can most current Macs encode 640x480 into H264 or at least MP4 in real time to handle the UI? I suppose they could use a more quick & dirty compression technique for the UI, perhaps something that could take advantage of the large amounts of black background.
The only sticky part is the current AirportExpress is designed to sit on your powerstrip, where an IR receiver wouldn't work. So either you need a receiver on a cord, use an R/F remote instead of IR, or turn it into a "box with a cord" design more like a cable box.
xionxiox
Apr 4, 11:56 AM
Was It really necessary to kill him?
No
The robbers were armed and dangerous. So yes, it was necessary.
No
The robbers were armed and dangerous. So yes, it was necessary.
Popeye206
Apr 22, 04:48 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?
I think the idea is, you could log onto your account from anyone's iOS device and now you'd be able to play any of your songs.
Also, opens up the door to automatically syncing multiple iOS devices without having to do anything. Add music to your library and now it's available on all your devices without physical syncing.
It will be interesting to see what Apple's spin is on this. They've invested a ton into this so there has to be a "big thing" that goes with this.
UPDATE: Read some more comments and I have to agree.... this allows people with small storage devices like a 16BG iPad to have access to much larger music libraries and you no longer have to juggle playlists. Smart.
What's wrong with storing music on hard drives locally?
I think the idea is, you could log onto your account from anyone's iOS device and now you'd be able to play any of your songs.
Also, opens up the door to automatically syncing multiple iOS devices without having to do anything. Add music to your library and now it's available on all your devices without physical syncing.
It will be interesting to see what Apple's spin is on this. They've invested a ton into this so there has to be a "big thing" that goes with this.
UPDATE: Read some more comments and I have to agree.... this allows people with small storage devices like a 16BG iPad to have access to much larger music libraries and you no longer have to juggle playlists. Smart.
cmaier
Nov 17, 06:53 PM
Because the iPhone doesn't have a copyright.
it has a trademark. also see my previous post, and the linked tweet - apple frequently rejects apps for containing representations of iPhones (including hand drawn images that are not copyright by Apple). That's the point.
it has a trademark. also see my previous post, and the linked tweet - apple frequently rejects apps for containing representations of iPhones (including hand drawn images that are not copyright by Apple). That's the point.
projectle
Sep 20, 03:44 PM
Right off the bat, I have two final generation Powerbook G4s (one is mine, one is my son's) so I figured that it would be a good side by side test for the new video formats.
I went to iTunes and grabbed a copy of Grosse Pointe Blank and popped the DVD version in for a side by side test.
I have to say that the quality on the iTunes version was very great. There are portions of the video where the quality definitely look better than the DVD version played back through the Apple DVD Player and portions that without a doubt look significantly worse.
When it comes to Title Sequences (Credits and some text overlays in the begining), the DVD wins hands down as the edges get a very choppy on the iTunes version.
When it comes to your normal scenes where people are talking and not much is going on, the iTunes version seems to have the edge (less pixelized backgrounds, appears to have greater detail around edges of fairly stationary objects, etc.).
When it comes to high action sequences, it really is a toss up between the two as neither really look that great (substantial bluring around moving objects).
For the parts of the show that matter, I would say that h264 (iTunes) scales better on larger high resolution screens than MPEG2 (DVD).
I plan on grabbing some stills and editing them together at the seams to see if there really is a noticable difference or if my eyes are playing tricks on me, but that will have to wait for a couple days.
I went to iTunes and grabbed a copy of Grosse Pointe Blank and popped the DVD version in for a side by side test.
I have to say that the quality on the iTunes version was very great. There are portions of the video where the quality definitely look better than the DVD version played back through the Apple DVD Player and portions that without a doubt look significantly worse.
When it comes to Title Sequences (Credits and some text overlays in the begining), the DVD wins hands down as the edges get a very choppy on the iTunes version.
When it comes to your normal scenes where people are talking and not much is going on, the iTunes version seems to have the edge (less pixelized backgrounds, appears to have greater detail around edges of fairly stationary objects, etc.).
When it comes to high action sequences, it really is a toss up between the two as neither really look that great (substantial bluring around moving objects).
For the parts of the show that matter, I would say that h264 (iTunes) scales better on larger high resolution screens than MPEG2 (DVD).
I plan on grabbing some stills and editing them together at the seams to see if there really is a noticable difference or if my eyes are playing tricks on me, but that will have to wait for a couple days.
Eidorian
May 3, 12:12 PM
You can see the multiple monitor setups for those cards in the usual hardware sites.That is still one display per output though.
Chopper9
Oct 12, 05:28 PM
Why do they always use the smaller sized iPods for the special editions?
I wanted the U2 iPod, but it was not the 60 gig.
I would like a red iPod, but want the 8 gig!
USE THE BEST MODEL... ESPECIALLY SINCE ITS GOING TO CHARITY!!!!!!!
I wanted the U2 iPod, but it was not the 60 gig.
I would like a red iPod, but want the 8 gig!
USE THE BEST MODEL... ESPECIALLY SINCE ITS GOING TO CHARITY!!!!!!!
cwt1nospam
Jan 1, 05:21 PM
Sad, but true :(
(And I don't feel the need to argue or debate or say more in this thread to justify this obvious fact.)
Too bad you don't feel the need to learn the facts either. Just where are these viruses going to come from? How will they get executed/installed? Answer: They will not come because they can't execute. That's what a walled garden is: protection from the wild.
(And I don't feel the need to argue or debate or say more in this thread to justify this obvious fact.)
Too bad you don't feel the need to learn the facts either. Just where are these viruses going to come from? How will they get executed/installed? Answer: They will not come because they can't execute. That's what a walled garden is: protection from the wild.
John Jacob
Sep 26, 07:44 AM
What about India? I want me an iPhone!! :mad:
And why the exclusive deal? Wouldn't that mean that Apple would sell LESS iPhone's? I can't see how an exclusive deal with Cingular/O2 benefits anyone other than Cingular/O2...
And why the exclusive deal? Wouldn't that mean that Apple would sell LESS iPhone's? I can't see how an exclusive deal with Cingular/O2 benefits anyone other than Cingular/O2...
Homy
Sep 9, 10:13 AM
I'm just not sure why everyone is so impressed with these imacs.
Faster processor, double the RAM, cheaper AND 21-37% better game performance:
New 17" C2D is 37% faster in UT 2004 than old 17" CD.
New 17" C2D is 21% faster in UT 2004 than old 20" CD.
New 20" C2D is 37.5% faster in UT 2004 than old 20" CD.
and I don't even play UT 2004 ;).
Faster processor, double the RAM, cheaper AND 21-37% better game performance:
New 17" C2D is 37% faster in UT 2004 than old 17" CD.
New 17" C2D is 21% faster in UT 2004 than old 20" CD.
New 20" C2D is 37.5% faster in UT 2004 than old 20" CD.
and I don't even play UT 2004 ;).
eazyway
Oct 27, 07:32 PM
They do build in obsolescence into the ipod as you can't replace the battery (easily). It does become a disposable item, although a pricey one at that. I do love the ipod (even though I don't own one) but this puts me off to the point where I just can't go through with actually buying one. My experience with rechargeable batteries in mobile phones and lap top isn't good.
Actually replacing the battery is a piece of cake with the tool. My kids all have a 3g version and I replaced all the batteries(4) Cost $26 each.
or send it in for replacement.
http://irepair.ca/store/index.php?currency=USD&cPath=52&osCsid=91626da01ccc0f67dbc64c592e2c5d6c
Actually replacing the battery is a piece of cake with the tool. My kids all have a 3g version and I replaced all the batteries(4) Cost $26 each.
or send it in for replacement.
http://irepair.ca/store/index.php?currency=USD&cPath=52&osCsid=91626da01ccc0f67dbc64c592e2c5d6c
kreach
Apr 20, 09:58 AM
nice! Actually.
NebulaClash
Mar 30, 11:52 AM
Oooh! Grammar Nazis fighting for high stakes!
No comments:
Post a Comment