MagnusVonMagnum
Apr 17, 10:16 PM
There's such a thing as 'audiophile' (i.e. akin to fanboy, IMO) and HiFi (i.e. REAL improvements). I believe in the latter and put my money THERE, not magic tricks. And again, there is no shame or 'BS' about my delivery system. What is a shame is that you feel the need to blast something you don't seem to have even tried. There is no limitations with audio an iTunes that I can see. Other than FLAC or Orbis (I don't need either), what's missing? It does MP3, AAC and Apple Lossless.
As for 720p, I could go into scalers and why 720p looks bad on many cheap-o 1080p sets (same reason any resolution less than native looks bad on monitors that don't have high quality scalers; my $600 LG 24" looks GREAT at all resolutions. My $300 LG 24" looks like blurry crap at anything other than native. Look into it. It's why you think 720p sucks. Look up eye resolving distance and you'll see everything I said is 100% true. Watching 1080p on a 42" set is POINTLESS at more than 6 feet or so. You cannot see more than 720p at that distance on that size set, PERIOD. That's not my opinion. It's SCIENCE. And no I don't have to play with 'channels' on my router. I don't know WTF you get these odd ideas from. I just select either 2.4 or 5.0 GHz and it goes without a hitch.
Anyway, have fun with your system. I don't feel like sitting here putting it down just for the heck of it. I wouldn't touch Sonos with a 10 foot pole, personally (obscenely overpriced for what you get, IMO...a lot like Bose really). But if you enjoy it, that's all that matters.
As for 720p, I could go into scalers and why 720p looks bad on many cheap-o 1080p sets (same reason any resolution less than native looks bad on monitors that don't have high quality scalers; my $600 LG 24" looks GREAT at all resolutions. My $300 LG 24" looks like blurry crap at anything other than native. Look into it. It's why you think 720p sucks. Look up eye resolving distance and you'll see everything I said is 100% true. Watching 1080p on a 42" set is POINTLESS at more than 6 feet or so. You cannot see more than 720p at that distance on that size set, PERIOD. That's not my opinion. It's SCIENCE. And no I don't have to play with 'channels' on my router. I don't know WTF you get these odd ideas from. I just select either 2.4 or 5.0 GHz and it goes without a hitch.
Anyway, have fun with your system. I don't feel like sitting here putting it down just for the heck of it. I wouldn't touch Sonos with a 10 foot pole, personally (obscenely overpriced for what you get, IMO...a lot like Bose really). But if you enjoy it, that's all that matters.
JimMacFan
Mar 23, 09:45 PM
Dont forget you'll need an SSD too inside the iMac to achieve the Thunderbolt speeds!!
And it must be a very good and expensive SSD, with more than 700MB/s.
Thunderbolt not worth it right now because its TOO expensive. I'll wait 2 years, when SSDs are much MUCH more cheaper.
So its only SSD to SSD where you get the performance? For example, if I have a regular HD 7200 WD in my Imac and an externall Lacie SSD, I wont see the speeds posted? I needs to be SSD to SSD?
And it must be a very good and expensive SSD, with more than 700MB/s.
Thunderbolt not worth it right now because its TOO expensive. I'll wait 2 years, when SSDs are much MUCH more cheaper.
So its only SSD to SSD where you get the performance? For example, if I have a regular HD 7200 WD in my Imac and an externall Lacie SSD, I wont see the speeds posted? I needs to be SSD to SSD?
chibianh
Aug 23, 04:37 PM
Whoa..
http://www.macminute.com/2006/08/23/apple-creative/
Guess they realized they couldn't win..
http://www.macminute.com/2006/08/23/apple-creative/
Guess they realized they couldn't win..
MacAddict1978
Mar 23, 05:18 PM
Personally I find it hard to believe that so drunk as to warrant avoiding a checkpoint will be collected enough to use the app effectively in the first place.
Anyone saying pull it obviously doesn't EVER drink. In just about every state, 1 beer technically puts you over the limit. Find me anyone who is impaired to drive after 1 beer, or even maybe 3. DUI check points pull EVERYONE over.
I'm totally in favor of things like this as long as organizations like MAD keep lobbying for ridiculous laws. Don't get me wrong, MAD is a very great organization, but kids aren't supposed to drink at all, and are not going to be any less likely to have an accident with a drunk driver because of these apps. Most adults are responsible enough to have a couple of cocktails. Our laws punish everyone, not the alcoholics that really are super drunk and well over the limit. The higher limits that used to allow someone 2 or 3 beers still punished the alcoholics. But to the OP's point... no, really plastered people wouldn't be using this app. They're the ones driving into the phone poles or people that will be on the roads anyway
Anyone saying pull it obviously doesn't EVER drink. In just about every state, 1 beer technically puts you over the limit. Find me anyone who is impaired to drive after 1 beer, or even maybe 3. DUI check points pull EVERYONE over.
I'm totally in favor of things like this as long as organizations like MAD keep lobbying for ridiculous laws. Don't get me wrong, MAD is a very great organization, but kids aren't supposed to drink at all, and are not going to be any less likely to have an accident with a drunk driver because of these apps. Most adults are responsible enough to have a couple of cocktails. Our laws punish everyone, not the alcoholics that really are super drunk and well over the limit. The higher limits that used to allow someone 2 or 3 beers still punished the alcoholics. But to the OP's point... no, really plastered people wouldn't be using this app. They're the ones driving into the phone poles or people that will be on the roads anyway
toddybody
Apr 30, 07:34 PM
That display isn't happening this time.
Huh? Youre under the impression that it will have less resolution than before? :confused:
Huh? Youre under the impression that it will have less resolution than before? :confused:
JimMacFan
Mar 23, 09:18 AM
What are the odds on a 30" display? I'm thinking it's not likely but would buy one if they built it. Probably unlikely since they did away with the 30" monitors already.
milo
Sep 12, 03:59 PM
That is the common sense reaction. You're seeing mac zealots here trying to trumpet how great these new iPods are.
Updating a 4:3 screen with another 4:3 screen and claiming it's improved is like Yugo rereleasing their car and claiming it's improved because the gas cap is a different color. It's still a Yugo.
Even apple admits that the iPod with video is pretty much the same box. Are you sure you're not getting confused by people excited by the new shuffle and nano? Or the software updates, which also apply to the previous iPod? I think I smell a straw man.
Because they use the same battery, how can videos play longer and not music?
Probably because video playback has been optimized, or they're using different video chips or screen.
Well Folks, you all seem to be concerned about if your iPod 5G is outdated..
ever thought about that?
If I got Steve right, no iPod that was sold prior to this very day will be able to play videos from the iTMS sold from this day on - not if Apple hasn't been lying VERY much about the H.264 decoding capabilities of the "old" iPod 5G.
I thought the 5G was already able to handle 640x480 movies, just couldn't display them at full resolution?
Doesn't matter if it has been opened. I bought an iMac right before the new ones came out, it was bto with the upc cut out and sent in for the free iPod offer. They gave a FULL refund with no restocking fee, even I made sure they knew it was opened with the upc cut off. This policy is different than their normal return policy.
Is that policy documented somewhere? Sounds like someone may have decided to be nice to you and make an exception.
Updating a 4:3 screen with another 4:3 screen and claiming it's improved is like Yugo rereleasing their car and claiming it's improved because the gas cap is a different color. It's still a Yugo.
Even apple admits that the iPod with video is pretty much the same box. Are you sure you're not getting confused by people excited by the new shuffle and nano? Or the software updates, which also apply to the previous iPod? I think I smell a straw man.
Because they use the same battery, how can videos play longer and not music?
Probably because video playback has been optimized, or they're using different video chips or screen.
Well Folks, you all seem to be concerned about if your iPod 5G is outdated..
ever thought about that?
If I got Steve right, no iPod that was sold prior to this very day will be able to play videos from the iTMS sold from this day on - not if Apple hasn't been lying VERY much about the H.264 decoding capabilities of the "old" iPod 5G.
I thought the 5G was already able to handle 640x480 movies, just couldn't display them at full resolution?
Doesn't matter if it has been opened. I bought an iMac right before the new ones came out, it was bto with the upc cut out and sent in for the free iPod offer. They gave a FULL refund with no restocking fee, even I made sure they knew it was opened with the upc cut off. This policy is different than their normal return policy.
Is that policy documented somewhere? Sounds like someone may have decided to be nice to you and make an exception.
gloss
Sep 14, 07:08 AM
Maybe the reason for not having a traditional keypad is that this is actually the iPhone Shuffle.
Apple's market research team has concluded that people get tired of talking to the same people all time. And since the iPod Shuffle is such a hit playing songs randomly,
the new iPhone Shuffle will randomly dial numbers, so every call you make is never boring.
Got more than 240 numbers in your adressbook? No problem. Let iTunes autofill your iPhone shuffle and get a new telephonic experience every time. Mom follows Work. Home follows Pizza Parlor. iPhone shuffle loves to improvise. Take the Shuffle switch, for instance. Even if you�ve synced a particular call-list, you can shuffle numbers with a flick.
This was great.
Apple's market research team has concluded that people get tired of talking to the same people all time. And since the iPod Shuffle is such a hit playing songs randomly,
the new iPhone Shuffle will randomly dial numbers, so every call you make is never boring.
Got more than 240 numbers in your adressbook? No problem. Let iTunes autofill your iPhone shuffle and get a new telephonic experience every time. Mom follows Work. Home follows Pizza Parlor. iPhone shuffle loves to improvise. Take the Shuffle switch, for instance. Even if you�ve synced a particular call-list, you can shuffle numbers with a flick.
This was great.
bloodycape
Aug 24, 03:03 AM
I still wish they made them for Apple. Looks like they might! Awesome!!!
New rumor!
Well if they were already make some accessories for the ipod they might actually be tempted to make one or two products sound cards for apple. What I would love to see is Creative licensing their X-FI audo tech to apple to put in the ipod. I have been hearing nothing but good things about X-Fi.
New rumor!
Well if they were already make some accessories for the ipod they might actually be tempted to make one or two products sound cards for apple. What I would love to see is Creative licensing their X-FI audo tech to apple to put in the ipod. I have been hearing nothing but good things about X-Fi.
Cameront9
Aug 24, 12:35 AM
Not Hierarchial File System! Hierarchial MENU System!
Now, we can freely discuss the "merits" of this patent, but fact is that Apple lost, fair 'n square. If Apple thought that Creatives patent was bogus, they would have NOT paid. 100 million dollars is a lot of cash, no matter how you slice it. If the patent was bogus, and they still paid, Apple would be sending other companies a message that said "Want some cash? Sue us with bogus patents, we'll gladly pay!". No, Apple paid because they felt that they were really infringing and that if they had proceedd with the lawsuit, they would have lost a lot more than 100 million.
If it's a BS patent, why did Apple pay? Clearly, it was NOT a BS patent. True, the patent-system might be screwed up, but that is not the point of this discussion.
Alright, Menu system. But it's the same thing. You select songs (files) through groups of albums/artists/etc (folders/directories).
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. I have a feeling that Apple possibly could have won this lawsuit, but it would have taken years of red tape, legal fees, etc, and they would be taking a gamble. Apple's taken gambles in the legal process before and lost (see: Microsoft GUI case). Steve doesn't want to go through that again, so he pays off Creative. Then, being Steve, he somehow uses his RDF to get Creative to join the licensing program, which has the potential to MAKE APPLE MONEY off of this deal.
Did Apple "win" this? Of course not. They're still out 100 million. But they also came out with some interesting deals that make this not a total loss.
And finally, to answer your statement in the first paragraph: This is EXACTLY why the patent system IS messed up. Because it DOES send a message of "hey we filed this patent for something blatantly obvious, give us some money" In most cases, it will be cheaper to settle. Thus companies end up using Patents, rather than products, as a money-maker.
Now, we can freely discuss the "merits" of this patent, but fact is that Apple lost, fair 'n square. If Apple thought that Creatives patent was bogus, they would have NOT paid. 100 million dollars is a lot of cash, no matter how you slice it. If the patent was bogus, and they still paid, Apple would be sending other companies a message that said "Want some cash? Sue us with bogus patents, we'll gladly pay!". No, Apple paid because they felt that they were really infringing and that if they had proceedd with the lawsuit, they would have lost a lot more than 100 million.
If it's a BS patent, why did Apple pay? Clearly, it was NOT a BS patent. True, the patent-system might be screwed up, but that is not the point of this discussion.
Alright, Menu system. But it's the same thing. You select songs (files) through groups of albums/artists/etc (folders/directories).
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. I have a feeling that Apple possibly could have won this lawsuit, but it would have taken years of red tape, legal fees, etc, and they would be taking a gamble. Apple's taken gambles in the legal process before and lost (see: Microsoft GUI case). Steve doesn't want to go through that again, so he pays off Creative. Then, being Steve, he somehow uses his RDF to get Creative to join the licensing program, which has the potential to MAKE APPLE MONEY off of this deal.
Did Apple "win" this? Of course not. They're still out 100 million. But they also came out with some interesting deals that make this not a total loss.
And finally, to answer your statement in the first paragraph: This is EXACTLY why the patent system IS messed up. Because it DOES send a message of "hey we filed this patent for something blatantly obvious, give us some money" In most cases, it will be cheaper to settle. Thus companies end up using Patents, rather than products, as a money-maker.
MarcelV
Aug 31, 03:09 PM
Iand who has been feverishly building bandwidth and capability to deliver full length full resolution movies...Google has.
Google is buying up Dark Fiber. That means no end points into homes like Verizons FIOS has. The bottleneck for full length high resolution movies will be from decentralized distribution centers to the homes. Dark Fiber is helping, but not by much.
Google is buying up Dark Fiber. That means no end points into homes like Verizons FIOS has. The bottleneck for full length high resolution movies will be from decentralized distribution centers to the homes. Dark Fiber is helping, but not by much.
zap2
Apr 10, 06:48 PM
How?
Wouldn't a greater population create more demand for a product?
If population is such an issue, how is China able to succeed?
Sometimes, I don't buy bigger populations means anything, but in this case, I buy it....first off, we have more people, which means more viewpoints, more people who have to agree in congress to do ANYTHING about it, 2nd off, our policies have to be effective to a larger degree.
Say we both have the same unemployment rate,the Sweeden help 50% of the unemployed and we do the same. Sweeden has X unemployed, we'd have 33.3X unemployed, so they have way few less people who would be unhappy and move to do anything. We'd still have a tons of unemployed. The 2nd point is more related to unemployment in general then wage issues specifically.
I'm not saying all our issues with pay are due only to our size, but it does effect how we need to function.
Wouldn't a greater population create more demand for a product?
If population is such an issue, how is China able to succeed?
Sometimes, I don't buy bigger populations means anything, but in this case, I buy it....first off, we have more people, which means more viewpoints, more people who have to agree in congress to do ANYTHING about it, 2nd off, our policies have to be effective to a larger degree.
Say we both have the same unemployment rate,the Sweeden help 50% of the unemployed and we do the same. Sweeden has X unemployed, we'd have 33.3X unemployed, so they have way few less people who would be unhappy and move to do anything. We'd still have a tons of unemployed. The 2nd point is more related to unemployment in general then wage issues specifically.
I'm not saying all our issues with pay are due only to our size, but it does effect how we need to function.
BC2009
Mar 30, 12:18 PM
Yeah -- makes you wonder why the American Revolution ever happened. We replaced somebody who ruled by birthright with somebody who ruled by the merits of being a better lawyer. I guess you can't win. If only all political leaders could have been like George Washington who hated political parties.
Yes, military rulers have always been so wonderful in human history. :rolleyes:
You like the irony? I was trying to be subtle on that one.
Yes, military rulers have always been so wonderful in human history. :rolleyes:
You like the irony? I was trying to be subtle on that one.
cube
Mar 30, 11:33 AM
Microsoft gives no trademark trouble to other windowing systems, even X Window (which already existed before).
Microsoft gives no trademark trouble to OpenOffice, NeoOffice, and so on.
Microsoft gives no trademark trouble to OpenOffice, NeoOffice, and so on.
CBGFilms
Mar 22, 01:44 PM
Perfect, just the news I've been waiting for. Currently have an Early-2008 model which I purchased in September just in need of a bit more power really! Also welcoming the extra USB ports and built in SD reader, Thunderbolt on the newer ones will be nice for an external HDD!
The built-in optical drive on my iMac seems broken too, keeps spitting out disks! :(
Looking forward to the new models!
The built-in optical drive on my iMac seems broken too, keeps spitting out disks! :(
Looking forward to the new models!
venasque
Nov 13, 01:47 PM
I've always felt the sheer number of applications available for the iphone was a huge advantage to the platform. But if this bad press continues Apple will lose this advantage. I want quality applications not junk.
What bothers me most about the above is the inability of anyone in charge to THINK. They just blindly follow "rules" laid out without stopping to use their greatest gift; their brains.
Apple needs to get on top of this right away. They need to understand this is a learning process and adapt/amend procedures that don't work. I appreciate that they are trying to do, but junk still gets through and quality is being driven away in frustration. :(
What bothers me most about the above is the inability of anyone in charge to THINK. They just blindly follow "rules" laid out without stopping to use their greatest gift; their brains.
Apple needs to get on top of this right away. They need to understand this is a learning process and adapt/amend procedures that don't work. I appreciate that they are trying to do, but junk still gets through and quality is being driven away in frustration. :(
TangoCharlie
Jul 14, 11:00 AM
Rumored maybe, but not "widely expected". I only expect the high end Mac Pros to have Woodcrest, I can see the low end having Conroe easily.
Yeah, OK, "rumored" then.... but there are more "rumors" that it'll be Xeon (Woodcrest) rather than Core 2 Duo (Conroe).
In fact, I think "Chinese Wispers" might be more appropriate! :confused:
Yeah, OK, "rumored" then.... but there are more "rumors" that it'll be Xeon (Woodcrest) rather than Core 2 Duo (Conroe).
In fact, I think "Chinese Wispers" might be more appropriate! :confused:
ezekielrage_99
Sep 9, 04:27 AM
That's pretty quick but I thought there may have been a little more speed from the Core 2 Duos.
rstansby
Apr 19, 11:21 PM
The logo on the center of the record, not the album artwork. The Beatle's logo looks like an apple to me, Apple's logo looks like an apple to me. We both know if the sides were reversed, Apple would have filed a suit.
Apple Corps (owned by the The Beatles) did sue Apple.
So there you have it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer
Apple Corps (owned by the The Beatles) did sue Apple.
So there you have it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer
ezekielrage_99
Aug 24, 01:01 AM
Creative's stock up 30% in after-hours trading. The $100 million is a drop in the bucket for Apple, but it will certainly help Creative...
Sounds like a bit of insider trading....
Sounds like a bit of insider trading....
savar
Sep 12, 11:36 PM
Did the engravings get shorter? Now its 27 chars per line. I thought it used to be 30 something. I can't get the same engraving that I had on my last ipod (stolen).
FleurDuMal
Sep 14, 08:38 AM
If Apple can show a version of Aperture which will run smoothly on a Mac Pro, then my two grand is practically theirs already...
An iCamera (CameraPro?) of some kind would be nice, though highly unlikely.
An iCamera (CameraPro?) of some kind would be nice, though highly unlikely.
bboucher790
Apr 4, 11:53 AM
The guard didn't use a gun, it was Apple's unreleased iShotYouInTheFace. They're now using it to protect their stores.
munkery
Apr 11, 02:54 PM
Yeah, let's all waste time worrying about a "possible" threat that hasn't proved to be any significant danger in the wild. It's even better that we can worry about it in an obsolete version of the OS!
:rolleyes:
If this is in response to my post, I was just clarifying some details related to an article discussed earlier in the thread.
For those interested, this threat vector in Leopard would allow a similar means of exploitation as ELF viruses in Linux, which were not very serious and did not manifest as any significant threat in the wild.
:rolleyes:
If this is in response to my post, I was just clarifying some details related to an article discussed earlier in the thread.
For those interested, this threat vector in Leopard would allow a similar means of exploitation as ELF viruses in Linux, which were not very serious and did not manifest as any significant threat in the wild.
0 comments:
Post a Comment