Gatesbasher
Apr 3, 01:23 PM
Are you kidding me?!
The 'pathology of people like me'? Who do you think you are? Facts are that I've neither held, or used either device, so I'll wait until I have until I make my decision. What's so controversial about that? How am I talking about the iPad in any kind of disadvantageous way? I'm just saying I want to try both and have not made up my mind yet. Rational.
The Playbook does exist too, no matter how much you say it doesn't. What on earth are you basing you assumption on? Where did I ever promote the Playbook over the iPad? Please retract your comments.
The Playbook does NOT exist, until people can buy it and compare it with an existing product. You "Haven't made up your mind yet?" On what conceivable basis could you make up your mind between an actual shipping product and pie-in-the-sky vaporware? How is that rational? It used to be Apple products were only sneered at in comparison with existing competitors. Now they have to compete with every imaginary device anybody can dream up, from the HP Slate to next years "100 x as fast" Tegra 3 barn-burner.
The 'pathology of people like me'? Who do you think you are? Facts are that I've neither held, or used either device, so I'll wait until I have until I make my decision. What's so controversial about that? How am I talking about the iPad in any kind of disadvantageous way? I'm just saying I want to try both and have not made up my mind yet. Rational.
The Playbook does exist too, no matter how much you say it doesn't. What on earth are you basing you assumption on? Where did I ever promote the Playbook over the iPad? Please retract your comments.
The Playbook does NOT exist, until people can buy it and compare it with an existing product. You "Haven't made up your mind yet?" On what conceivable basis could you make up your mind between an actual shipping product and pie-in-the-sky vaporware? How is that rational? It used to be Apple products were only sneered at in comparison with existing competitors. Now they have to compete with every imaginary device anybody can dream up, from the HP Slate to next years "100 x as fast" Tegra 3 barn-burner.
63dot
Jan 6, 10:13 AM
If properly maintained, mileage holds no bounds! BMW's will go to 250k easy.
Any car will go 250K miles if properly maintained, yet some cars would need more proper maintenance.
There is nothing better looking on the inside and out as the new BMWs, and if I could have a company car for 5 years, it would be a BMW. But today's BMW (engine longevity wise) is not the same company in any way as the one who put together the very rugged 2002 model. There may not have been the same attention to looks and style, but what counted was that the engine was made to last forever. You wouldn't believe how many of those rusted out and ripped up 2002s there are out there, but they keep on going. Kids get them from their parents and soon grandkids will have them from their grandparents.
That being said, today's automobile safety standards are far more strict. If I got hit, or crashed, I would want to be in a new BMW with airbags vs. an old BMW 2002. And I am sure the new BMW could simply kill the 2002 on a slalom course. And as far as chick magnets (or what some guys use as an accessory), the new BMWs have all the looks going for it.
The maintenance on indestructible cars like the BMW 2002 series, and cars like my 70s/80s Volvo DL-GL series amounts to making sure the upholstery is not too ripped up and the rust is kept to a minimum (bondo, sanding, etc) but what you have is a car, as ugly as the weather and age can pit the hell out of it, which will go for 40 or 50 years without any major engine work. And to be fair, my mechanic says the new Volvo engines of the last decade are pretty fragile. A three year old Volvo engine appears to have more wear than my '84's engine according to him. Of course, the sheer durability and weight of my old Volvo engine does amount to a heavier car that doesn't handle any better than a school bus, and gets terrible mileage. ;)
And when you look at where American cars used to be in terms of reliability compared to anything post 1970s, it's sad. Take a look at Cuba who got left behind after Fidel Castro. Many of the cars people have that are still running are 1950s American cars, back when America used to build everlasting cars.
Any car will go 250K miles if properly maintained, yet some cars would need more proper maintenance.
There is nothing better looking on the inside and out as the new BMWs, and if I could have a company car for 5 years, it would be a BMW. But today's BMW (engine longevity wise) is not the same company in any way as the one who put together the very rugged 2002 model. There may not have been the same attention to looks and style, but what counted was that the engine was made to last forever. You wouldn't believe how many of those rusted out and ripped up 2002s there are out there, but they keep on going. Kids get them from their parents and soon grandkids will have them from their grandparents.
That being said, today's automobile safety standards are far more strict. If I got hit, or crashed, I would want to be in a new BMW with airbags vs. an old BMW 2002. And I am sure the new BMW could simply kill the 2002 on a slalom course. And as far as chick magnets (or what some guys use as an accessory), the new BMWs have all the looks going for it.
The maintenance on indestructible cars like the BMW 2002 series, and cars like my 70s/80s Volvo DL-GL series amounts to making sure the upholstery is not too ripped up and the rust is kept to a minimum (bondo, sanding, etc) but what you have is a car, as ugly as the weather and age can pit the hell out of it, which will go for 40 or 50 years without any major engine work. And to be fair, my mechanic says the new Volvo engines of the last decade are pretty fragile. A three year old Volvo engine appears to have more wear than my '84's engine according to him. Of course, the sheer durability and weight of my old Volvo engine does amount to a heavier car that doesn't handle any better than a school bus, and gets terrible mileage. ;)
And when you look at where American cars used to be in terms of reliability compared to anything post 1970s, it's sad. Take a look at Cuba who got left behind after Fidel Castro. Many of the cars people have that are still running are 1950s American cars, back when America used to build everlasting cars.
heehee
Apr 10, 12:13 AM
My fiancee and I both have stick shift cars. :cool:
Evangelion
Jul 20, 05:11 AM
And, by the way, purchasing stocks based on price isn't very smart. I don't understand why you're singleling out Google just because it has a high stock price. It actually works against your point because it's a great stock-arguably better than Apple.
Stock-price is irrelevant, what matter is the market-capitalization. Quite often I see people comparing two companies and saying stuff like "Company A has a shareprice of $50, whereas Company B has a shareprice of $60. Therefore Company B is better".
I guess Berkshire Hathaway is the Capo di Tutti Capi of companies, since their shareprice is over 90.000 dollars!
Stock-price is irrelevant, what matter is the market-capitalization. Quite often I see people comparing two companies and saying stuff like "Company A has a shareprice of $50, whereas Company B has a shareprice of $60. Therefore Company B is better".
I guess Berkshire Hathaway is the Capo di Tutti Capi of companies, since their shareprice is over 90.000 dollars!
millerb7
May 3, 06:58 AM
Okay, stupid question, sort of related.
I'm running optibay on my MBP (SSD & HDD with SSD split running my apps and OS, and then Win7, and my HDD acting as my storage drive for my media).... when I install Lion how crazy is that going to get?
I HIGHLY doubt (but do hopelessly hope [yes, I know]) that it'll be as easy as swapping my snow leopard with Lion... meaning that my Win7 will remain.... although for some reason I feel that I'll need to format the entire SSD, thus erasing my win7 install?
The only reason I ask is that it's a pita to install Win7 with this setup due to Win7 not loading from disk via USB... so I have to remove the damn optibay and put my optical drive back in.
So basically, I assume I have to re-link my OSX (as it's split now between ssd and hdd)... but do I have to erase my Win7 install as well on the SSD?
I'm running optibay on my MBP (SSD & HDD with SSD split running my apps and OS, and then Win7, and my HDD acting as my storage drive for my media).... when I install Lion how crazy is that going to get?
I HIGHLY doubt (but do hopelessly hope [yes, I know]) that it'll be as easy as swapping my snow leopard with Lion... meaning that my Win7 will remain.... although for some reason I feel that I'll need to format the entire SSD, thus erasing my win7 install?
The only reason I ask is that it's a pita to install Win7 with this setup due to Win7 not loading from disk via USB... so I have to remove the damn optibay and put my optical drive back in.
So basically, I assume I have to re-link my OSX (as it's split now between ssd and hdd)... but do I have to erase my Win7 install as well on the SSD?
Multimedia
Sep 7, 11:31 AM
Did I miss something or did the top end mini model go from $799 to $599. Ok. it has a smaller drive and no superdrive. BUt who uses DVDs anymore?I do. That's how I archive all my HDTV and SDTV recordings. I burn Disk Images with Toast then rip those images to mp4 files with Handbrake to take what starts out as a 6GB HD master and winds up a 351MB mp4 file that looks almost as good as the original - just a little softer is all. So I can get 12 one hour prime time HDTV shows on one 4.38GB DVD or two on a 702.8MB CD.
For me this is the future of TV show recording and storage. I've got it down to a science that is as good as is possible with today's technology to get something that is very big to be very small and still deliver a decent viewing-listening experience on a HD Screen while remaining iPod compatible at the same time.
Only drawback is computing power. Even the 3GHz Mac Pro is too slow to do this in rapid time. So it takes a more time than the programs lengths to do right now that should in future take only a few minutes each. I'm hoping that amount of power will be with us by 2008 or 2009. It's a fundamental challenge that needs to get solved before what I am doing can have mass appeal. It's almost tlike a full itme job - no it is a full time job. Except I'm not getting paid to do it. :eek:
For me this is the future of TV show recording and storage. I've got it down to a science that is as good as is possible with today's technology to get something that is very big to be very small and still deliver a decent viewing-listening experience on a HD Screen while remaining iPod compatible at the same time.
Only drawback is computing power. Even the 3GHz Mac Pro is too slow to do this in rapid time. So it takes a more time than the programs lengths to do right now that should in future take only a few minutes each. I'm hoping that amount of power will be with us by 2008 or 2009. It's a fundamental challenge that needs to get solved before what I am doing can have mass appeal. It's almost tlike a full itme job - no it is a full time job. Except I'm not getting paid to do it. :eek:
skinniezinho
Nov 27, 07:10 AM
What do you think of this drive?
I'm still waiting for it :(
I'm still waiting for it :(
powerbook911
Sep 6, 09:14 PM
From everything I can tell, the movie trailers in Front Row are 480p.
I don't think Apple would want to go below this movie trailer quality. Let's HOPE they don't want to. :)
480p would be impressive to sell at $10 and $15 IMHO. To get it delivered directly to your computer in 2-3 hours. Remember, 480p could look better than a DVD, since DVDs are 480i. Of course, it would look better unless they end up putting too much compression on the 480p.
I don't think Apple would want to go below this movie trailer quality. Let's HOPE they don't want to. :)
480p would be impressive to sell at $10 and $15 IMHO. To get it delivered directly to your computer in 2-3 hours. Remember, 480p could look better than a DVD, since DVDs are 480i. Of course, it would look better unless they end up putting too much compression on the 480p.
paradox00
May 3, 01:29 PM
I'm glad Apple is thinking for themselves and leaving the purists behind as they adopt newer, better ways of doing things. The idea of installing from a disc image is ridiculous. Anyone I've explained it to can understand it, but always mention there must be a better way. "Install" is much better than launching a disc image, opening an applications window, and then dragging the icon over to the other window. Also, dragging a file to the trash doesn't delete all the pieces it came with. An uninstall was needed. I have been using AppZapper, but this will now be built into the OS.
There is a better way. Good programs include a shortcut to the applications folder in the disk image. Some even have arrows directing you to drag the application to the shortcut within the same window. How on earth is an installer better than that?
Apple's uninstall process also works really well. If you want to delete the program but retain the settings, drag the program to the trash, if you want to delete the settings, drag the settings folder from the library to the trash as well or use a third party app like app zapper (as you mentioned). How is the Windows uninstall process better than the one step process of dragging into the trash or dragging into app zapper?
People coming from Windows often criticize macs because they get the job done too efficiently, and they find it hard to believe that things can work so smoothly yet still be effective. They come with the expectation of expecting complexity, and when it isn't there, they find the lack of complexity to be a fault. It's a ridiculous phenomenon, but it's quite real. I should know, I also switched.
There is a better way. Good programs include a shortcut to the applications folder in the disk image. Some even have arrows directing you to drag the application to the shortcut within the same window. How on earth is an installer better than that?
Apple's uninstall process also works really well. If you want to delete the program but retain the settings, drag the program to the trash, if you want to delete the settings, drag the settings folder from the library to the trash as well or use a third party app like app zapper (as you mentioned). How is the Windows uninstall process better than the one step process of dragging into the trash or dragging into app zapper?
People coming from Windows often criticize macs because they get the job done too efficiently, and they find it hard to believe that things can work so smoothly yet still be effective. They come with the expectation of expecting complexity, and when it isn't there, they find the lack of complexity to be a fault. It's a ridiculous phenomenon, but it's quite real. I should know, I also switched.
cmustin
Nov 25, 09:30 AM
No clue but could you please tell me where to purchase it? Its exactly what Im looking for!
Any Army surplus store will carry it.
Any Army surplus store will carry it.
Conner36
Mar 25, 04:33 PM
I will be happy when you dont have to use the dongle but can use an AppleTV to do the processing and have the iphone/ipad/ipodtouch useable as a controller.
Justin
We are wallpapers,justin
nylonsteel
Apr 2, 09:48 PM
nice - short and sweet commericial - wish my corporate company would use ipad2 and iphone4 - their stupid excuse for years is blackberry is more enterprise secure - yeah so so f---in boring - aapl rules over rimm
iRobby
Apr 19, 02:55 PM
This is What I Wanna See:
iMac 27" (Quad Core)
$1,999.99 (Base)
Mac OS X 10.7 Lion
Justin Bieber Shirtless
Justin+ieber+room+designs
wallpaper justin bieber.
Justin+ieber+wallpaper+
comforter,justin bieber Been
Justin Bieber Wallpaper All
iMac 27" (Quad Core)
$1,999.99 (Base)
Mac OS X 10.7 Lion
ZrSiO4-Zircon
Jan 11, 05:55 PM
I really don't think Apple will come out with external optical drives... That is just too... complicated. Personally, and I think alot of people will agree, if you're going to have a small computer device, you don't want to carry another piece of equipment with you everywhere you go.
What's more believable (to me anyway) is the sub-notebook that syncs kind of like the iPod through iTunes.
Maybe iSync will handle that kind of syncing with what I have in mind?
I'm no fortune teller :p
What's more believable (to me anyway) is the sub-notebook that syncs kind of like the iPod through iTunes.
Maybe iSync will handle that kind of syncing with what I have in mind?
I'm no fortune teller :p
kepner
Mar 31, 02:13 AM
Launchpad is now an app in the Applications folder, and can be removed from the Dock.
Is frontrow back?
No, and they removed the mention of it from the Sound prefpane. ("Play Front Row sound effects")
Is frontrow back?
No, and they removed the mention of it from the Sound prefpane. ("Play Front Row sound effects")
Morod
Apr 21, 12:07 PM
(Incidentally: we have like/dislike buttons on a per-post basis now? :confused: )
Good catch! I just noticed this once you pointed it out.
Good catch! I just noticed this once you pointed it out.
Rocketman
Nov 29, 08:14 PM
amps would lead to another possible product
I know this is quite a lot to ask for a first foray into this market for Apple but I think they could do alot with AV hardware, with a little help from established high end companies this could be awesome.
Apple has/had an agreement with Mc Intosh, the audiophile company not to do that. I wonder if they have resolved that by buying the company or a fee?
This is a possible limitation.
Rocketman
I know this is quite a lot to ask for a first foray into this market for Apple but I think they could do alot with AV hardware, with a little help from established high end companies this could be awesome.
Apple has/had an agreement with Mc Intosh, the audiophile company not to do that. I wonder if they have resolved that by buying the company or a fee?
This is a possible limitation.
Rocketman
bommai
Jul 18, 04:06 PM
You cannot rent an HD movie from Blockbuster or Netflix, so what makes you think "Apple has to offer HD quality". There is no need to have better quality than competitors while also providing more convenience.
What is so wrong about stereo sound? A lot of people use the speakers of their TVs for the sound of a movie. Most movie do not really take advantage of sourround sound that much, where you feel like the sound is coming from the left or from behind etc. You might as well use your 5 speakers in stereo mode.
First, couple of corrections. Netflix is already offering both HD-DVD and Bluray Disk rentals of available movies. So, technically high definition movie is for rent. I have not rented any yet because I am waiting for the prices to come down a little bit and also a victor to emerge.
Second, while it might be true that the majority of people in the general population might still be watching movies on a 4x3 non-progressive scan TV with mono/stereo sound, the distribution is quite different in the specific population that might be interested in trendy things like online downloads of movies.
In the middle to upper-middle class segment of tech-savvy market, the presence of 16x9 HD-capable displays and 5.1 surround systems are almost ubiquitous. I have several friends that all have such systems and they are also in the similar tech/economic bracket as me.
Also, it is not that expensive to own a 5.1 surround system anymore. Even though I have a system that cost several thousand dollars, you can pickup a decent Onkyo 5.1 system for $400 from the bigbox retailers. Walmart has even $99 low end systems.
About your claim that movies down take advantage of surround sound, you cannot be more wrong. Are you still watching VHS? Almost all DVDs using Dolby Digital 5.1 encoding and some better ones use DTS (which I love). These make a huge difference. Again, looking at the tech savvy customers that are early adopters, you have to think about movies like iRobot, Star Wars, War of the Worlds, Batman Begins, Spider Man 1 and 2, Bourne Supremacy, etc. These DVDs have impressive sound that cannot be expressed in stereo.
I agree that Apple's download service does not need to be HD, but it has to offer surround sound and original theatrical aspect ratio. You can probably accomplish this feat with a file size of approximately 1.5 to 2 GB per movie using H.264 encoding.
What is so wrong about stereo sound? A lot of people use the speakers of their TVs for the sound of a movie. Most movie do not really take advantage of sourround sound that much, where you feel like the sound is coming from the left or from behind etc. You might as well use your 5 speakers in stereo mode.
First, couple of corrections. Netflix is already offering both HD-DVD and Bluray Disk rentals of available movies. So, technically high definition movie is for rent. I have not rented any yet because I am waiting for the prices to come down a little bit and also a victor to emerge.
Second, while it might be true that the majority of people in the general population might still be watching movies on a 4x3 non-progressive scan TV with mono/stereo sound, the distribution is quite different in the specific population that might be interested in trendy things like online downloads of movies.
In the middle to upper-middle class segment of tech-savvy market, the presence of 16x9 HD-capable displays and 5.1 surround systems are almost ubiquitous. I have several friends that all have such systems and they are also in the similar tech/economic bracket as me.
Also, it is not that expensive to own a 5.1 surround system anymore. Even though I have a system that cost several thousand dollars, you can pickup a decent Onkyo 5.1 system for $400 from the bigbox retailers. Walmart has even $99 low end systems.
About your claim that movies down take advantage of surround sound, you cannot be more wrong. Are you still watching VHS? Almost all DVDs using Dolby Digital 5.1 encoding and some better ones use DTS (which I love). These make a huge difference. Again, looking at the tech savvy customers that are early adopters, you have to think about movies like iRobot, Star Wars, War of the Worlds, Batman Begins, Spider Man 1 and 2, Bourne Supremacy, etc. These DVDs have impressive sound that cannot be expressed in stereo.
I agree that Apple's download service does not need to be HD, but it has to offer surround sound and original theatrical aspect ratio. You can probably accomplish this feat with a file size of approximately 1.5 to 2 GB per movie using H.264 encoding.
interlard
Sep 7, 01:25 PM
I want to RENT a movie for a few dollars, not buy it for $10-$15. Doh!
Imagine if you had to OWN every movie you'd ever seen?
Imagine if you had to OWN every movie you'd ever seen?
heffemonkeyman
Sep 6, 08:11 PM
Too expensive if you ask me. In the cinema I pay $2 for a not so new movie (1/2 year old?), indie stuff/classics/etc. costs $4, new big movies $5.
What planet are you on?
What planet are you on?
mrgreen4242
Aug 29, 12:21 PM
I know this is off topic. But you guys and gals have got to go download the new Bob Dylan Blues Music Video Ad for iTunes pre-selling his new album "Modern Times" (http://www.apple.com/ipod/ads/dylan/). It is incredible! :eek: :cool:
Ya, that is off topic. WAY off topic. Why would you post that here? There's already threads started about this. Bah.
Ya, that is off topic. WAY off topic. Why would you post that here? There's already threads started about this. Bah.
vincenz
Apr 3, 01:10 AM
Great ad, love the new direction
nagromme
Jul 18, 02:06 AM
I hope the rental thing is true--I don't want to own. I'm not with Steve Jobs on this one (assuming the rumors are true that he opposes rentals).
Owning music downloads fits my habits/needs. Owning movie downloads does NOT. The vast majority of movies I watch I never see again. And I don't want to store big movie files long-term. And I don't want to pay a higher price! Lower the price and make it short-term. I like that better.
For the few movies/shows I'd want to own, I want the discs (Blu-Ray preferred :) ) and the ability to take them to a friends' house.
Also, if it's a rental model, I can be more forgiving on quality. They'd have to be better than iPod 320x240 (except, obviously, when played ON an iPod), but if they're a little bit short of DVD quality, I'd still be bored enough to seek instant gratification and rent some. The price would have to be right, of course. Netflix rentals cost about $2.50 each on my plan. For slightly-sub-DVD quality and near-instant delivery, I'd pay maybe $2. For FULL DVD quality I'd certainly be willing to match Netlflix's price, or even pay a little more (for iTunes convenience/speed).
How often would I rent? Depends on selection... which means, probably not often :) At first. But it would be cool to see it grow to a collection that could rival Netflix.
After all, I already do all my movie watching on my Mac (sometimes connected to TV).
Owning music downloads fits my habits/needs. Owning movie downloads does NOT. The vast majority of movies I watch I never see again. And I don't want to store big movie files long-term. And I don't want to pay a higher price! Lower the price and make it short-term. I like that better.
For the few movies/shows I'd want to own, I want the discs (Blu-Ray preferred :) ) and the ability to take them to a friends' house.
Also, if it's a rental model, I can be more forgiving on quality. They'd have to be better than iPod 320x240 (except, obviously, when played ON an iPod), but if they're a little bit short of DVD quality, I'd still be bored enough to seek instant gratification and rent some. The price would have to be right, of course. Netflix rentals cost about $2.50 each on my plan. For slightly-sub-DVD quality and near-instant delivery, I'd pay maybe $2. For FULL DVD quality I'd certainly be willing to match Netlflix's price, or even pay a little more (for iTunes convenience/speed).
How often would I rent? Depends on selection... which means, probably not often :) At first. But it would be cool to see it grow to a collection that could rival Netflix.
After all, I already do all my movie watching on my Mac (sometimes connected to TV).
rjohnstone
Apr 26, 02:15 PM
ding ding ding. I agree.
The store is called the App Store. You can't copy someones store name.
Yes you can... to a certain extent.
Two stores can be named the same if the name is generic in nature.
Apple didn't create the word "App Store". This has been proven in many threads about this very topic.
They popularized it and then went so far as to even give it generic meaning.
Steve did that himself. Now he's trying to lay claim to it after the fact.
Will he win... who knows.
But nothing is as black and white as many claim to believe it is.
Trademark law is complicated.
The store is called the App Store. You can't copy someones store name.
Yes you can... to a certain extent.
Two stores can be named the same if the name is generic in nature.
Apple didn't create the word "App Store". This has been proven in many threads about this very topic.
They popularized it and then went so far as to even give it generic meaning.
Steve did that himself. Now he's trying to lay claim to it after the fact.
Will he win... who knows.
But nothing is as black and white as many claim to believe it is.
Trademark law is complicated.
No comments:
Post a Comment