SciFrog
Dec 1, 09:05 PM
Thanks and I'll be expecting you to blow past me then, in about a month :rolleyes: or so...
Well, I won't get back the #7 spot from you ;) unless these 12 cores Gulftown Mac pros come out at MWSF...
Well, I won't get back the #7 spot from you ;) unless these 12 cores Gulftown Mac pros come out at MWSF...
jwdsail
Apr 21, 01:21 PM
I like Franken, he's a good egg.. Shrug. Minnesota *needs* at least one elected official with an IQ higher than 40...
While I agree that this data (location data in general) really should be better protected against the chance of being intercepted without a user's permission, I think it's more important for all involved in this chicken little act re: iPhone location data to remember that most iPhone users already openly share all of this info and more on sites like Facebook, 4 Square, twitter, flickr, etc..
I don't share this type of data, I hate Facebook, 4square, etc... (and git off my lawn!!!) and if I'm using my iPhone camera, make sure I have location services turned off unless I want to use the gps data for MYSELF... Actually, unless I'm using Navigon I usually keep location services turned off ..
Sadly, the vast majority of smartphone users have handed over more data than this willingly, and don't really seem to care about privacy..
I think that's the real story in all of this, that few are picking up on. And, shrug, that's just pathetic. If all this chicken little energy was put towards educating consumers about their data, their privacy, you wouldn't need Franken to write a letter to Jobs. But, no one *really* wants educated consumers in any marketplace, be it music, video, phones, food... It's just bad for business. And states like MN should be the last to throw a stone in the glass house of privacy, just google how they want to track cars that *gasp* are *too efficient* ... to collect more taxes .. sigh.. God forbid they just raise the license/tag fees.. have to add expensive tech and invade citizen's privacy... sigh. I'd like to see Franken speak out against invasions of privacy by the state just as aggressively..
While I agree that this data (location data in general) really should be better protected against the chance of being intercepted without a user's permission, I think it's more important for all involved in this chicken little act re: iPhone location data to remember that most iPhone users already openly share all of this info and more on sites like Facebook, 4 Square, twitter, flickr, etc..
I don't share this type of data, I hate Facebook, 4square, etc... (and git off my lawn!!!) and if I'm using my iPhone camera, make sure I have location services turned off unless I want to use the gps data for MYSELF... Actually, unless I'm using Navigon I usually keep location services turned off ..
Sadly, the vast majority of smartphone users have handed over more data than this willingly, and don't really seem to care about privacy..
I think that's the real story in all of this, that few are picking up on. And, shrug, that's just pathetic. If all this chicken little energy was put towards educating consumers about their data, their privacy, you wouldn't need Franken to write a letter to Jobs. But, no one *really* wants educated consumers in any marketplace, be it music, video, phones, food... It's just bad for business. And states like MN should be the last to throw a stone in the glass house of privacy, just google how they want to track cars that *gasp* are *too efficient* ... to collect more taxes .. sigh.. God forbid they just raise the license/tag fees.. have to add expensive tech and invade citizen's privacy... sigh. I'd like to see Franken speak out against invasions of privacy by the state just as aggressively..
MacSA
Aug 24, 05:59 PM
Finally some Mac Mini rumours :D ..... lets hope this turns out to be correct. I wonder what specs we'll see in the next update, Surley no more Core Solo? :eek:
The article mentions Core 2 Duo, but I bet they stick with Core Duo. everything else will be the same.
The article mentions Core 2 Duo, but I bet they stick with Core Duo. everything else will be the same.
twoodcc
Apr 21, 05:57 AM
7 mil; I remember those days, not so long ago... Grats!
thanks. hopefully this weekend i can get some things straightened out
thanks. hopefully this weekend i can get some things straightened out
h00ligan
Nov 29, 07:37 PM
seriously...
"The iTV is already known to be able to stream music and photos as well, and the possibility of Apple including an internal hard drive in the iTV has already been raised, but the analyst also believes the iTV will have advanced user interface software to further the ultimate goal of improving user experience and simplifying consumers' use of content."
could you possibly predict anything more vague.. why the hell are people rating this positive?
"The iTV is already known to be able to stream music and photos as well, and the possibility of Apple including an internal hard drive in the iTV has already been raised, but the analyst also believes the iTV will have advanced user interface software to further the ultimate goal of improving user experience and simplifying consumers' use of content."
could you possibly predict anything more vague.. why the hell are people rating this positive?
TerryJ
Jul 14, 10:28 AM
First of all, Blu-Ray discs are a completely new material and fabrication process, so highlighting the fact that they've only made 25GB discs (which were stable-ly created long before almost ANY HD-DVD's) and can't produce a disk which is far above the specs of the competition, is like saying screw the russians cuz they're space program hasn't sent a man to mars (nobody's done it yet, anyway). You can't blame Blu-Ray for not being able to deliver 50 GB yet, the meat of the war is just beginning anyway.
It is true that we don't know what will be delivered in the future. I am sure 50gb+ discs will be available at some point. How soon, however, is important, especially considering there is a format war. If Blu-ray can get those discs out fast with good yields, then obviously that changes things. But reports are they are not at this point, with no timetable on when they might. Add to this the fact that it is a new fabrication process... this can only mean that prices most likely will stay higher longer, as opposed to a cheaper/easier fab process for HD DVDs.
Secondly, what was said about the VC-1 codec is very wrong. Microsoft's VC-1 codec is far worse and more difficult to work with than MPEG 2 or MPEG 4 that sony will probably offer in later versions of Blu-Ray. All this malarky about artifacts doesn't really make sense when you consider that we've been USING MPEG2 IN DVD'S FOR YEARS NOW! There's no way that the algorithim could be to blame for the artifacts! Sure it's fatter, but it's a lighter compression, and as Sony has shown with their PCM Audio on Blu-Ray, sometimes light compression on a bigger disk is better than heavy compression on smaller disks. It will be a lot easier to change to a more efficient codec down the line (which is what we've done with computers time and time again, as well as professional video) so we can get Ultra HD on Blu Ray when it comes out as well.
Watch HD DVD content on a Toshiba HD DVD player vs. BD content on a Samsung BD player... HD DVD content (using VC-1) is consistantly better than BD content (using MPEG2). Not sure what is wrong with the BD stuff exactly, but something is going wrong. And if it's MPEG2 issues, then all those BD discs out now are just stuck being crap. They'd have to reencode and rerelease new versions of the same movies later. That does not help the BD cause.
Remember, HD is over 4x the resolution compared to SD. MPEG-2 was good for SD DVDs. Not sure how good it is for HD if your disc is maxed at 25gb capacity.
I'm sorry, I understand people really want HD-DVD to win because it's easier and cheaper right now, but since when has the easiest option been the best?
If it's cheaper, looks better, sounds better, and has more available titles, then why shouldn't HD DVD win? If BD used a more efficient codec, or at least had 50gb dual layer discs now (so MPEG2 could have a high bit rate at least), and the all the backing studios pumped out more titles, I'd buy it. But that isn't what it's shaping up to be right now. If they can get their act together, this could be a fight... but they are behind.
-Terry
It is true that we don't know what will be delivered in the future. I am sure 50gb+ discs will be available at some point. How soon, however, is important, especially considering there is a format war. If Blu-ray can get those discs out fast with good yields, then obviously that changes things. But reports are they are not at this point, with no timetable on when they might. Add to this the fact that it is a new fabrication process... this can only mean that prices most likely will stay higher longer, as opposed to a cheaper/easier fab process for HD DVDs.
Secondly, what was said about the VC-1 codec is very wrong. Microsoft's VC-1 codec is far worse and more difficult to work with than MPEG 2 or MPEG 4 that sony will probably offer in later versions of Blu-Ray. All this malarky about artifacts doesn't really make sense when you consider that we've been USING MPEG2 IN DVD'S FOR YEARS NOW! There's no way that the algorithim could be to blame for the artifacts! Sure it's fatter, but it's a lighter compression, and as Sony has shown with their PCM Audio on Blu-Ray, sometimes light compression on a bigger disk is better than heavy compression on smaller disks. It will be a lot easier to change to a more efficient codec down the line (which is what we've done with computers time and time again, as well as professional video) so we can get Ultra HD on Blu Ray when it comes out as well.
Watch HD DVD content on a Toshiba HD DVD player vs. BD content on a Samsung BD player... HD DVD content (using VC-1) is consistantly better than BD content (using MPEG2). Not sure what is wrong with the BD stuff exactly, but something is going wrong. And if it's MPEG2 issues, then all those BD discs out now are just stuck being crap. They'd have to reencode and rerelease new versions of the same movies later. That does not help the BD cause.
Remember, HD is over 4x the resolution compared to SD. MPEG-2 was good for SD DVDs. Not sure how good it is for HD if your disc is maxed at 25gb capacity.
I'm sorry, I understand people really want HD-DVD to win because it's easier and cheaper right now, but since when has the easiest option been the best?
If it's cheaper, looks better, sounds better, and has more available titles, then why shouldn't HD DVD win? If BD used a more efficient codec, or at least had 50gb dual layer discs now (so MPEG2 could have a high bit rate at least), and the all the backing studios pumped out more titles, I'd buy it. But that isn't what it's shaping up to be right now. If they can get their act together, this could be a fight... but they are behind.
-Terry
Krafty
Nov 26, 09:28 PM
http://lulzimg.com/i9/39dde9c5.jpg
Jr. Bacon Cheeseburger + 1/4lb Baconator = First meal of the day
Wendys, you had me at bacon.
Jr. Bacon Cheeseburger + 1/4lb Baconator = First meal of the day
Wendys, you had me at bacon.
dguisinger
Aug 7, 07:42 AM
There will never be NTFS write abilities in Mac OS X for a long time as Microsoft still keeps NTFS writing a propritary technology only licensed for use in Windows XP.
Oh, i wouldnt say that....
Microsoft and Apple did a 5-yr cross license of patents in 1997. Now, that doesnt mean you get access for only 5 years, that means anything that was patented up to 2002 is cross licensed perpetually between the two companies.
If NTFS is patented, it was around well before that date. If its not, then Apple just has to write the code to write NTFS.
Interesting question is; when did the first iPod patents arrive? Does MS have access to anything for Zune that creative & co didnt?
Oh, i wouldnt say that....
Microsoft and Apple did a 5-yr cross license of patents in 1997. Now, that doesnt mean you get access for only 5 years, that means anything that was patented up to 2002 is cross licensed perpetually between the two companies.
If NTFS is patented, it was around well before that date. If its not, then Apple just has to write the code to write NTFS.
Interesting question is; when did the first iPod patents arrive? Does MS have access to anything for Zune that creative & co didnt?
spicyapple
Nov 28, 03:10 PM
...here is a link (http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/11631/) to the CNN review of the zune.
It's funny when Soledad asks if it can do email. She might have thought so because of its size compared with the Blackberry. And then she whips out the shuffle... OMG that is classic.
Does anyone remember Soledad in a kid's computer TV show some years back? She played a computer....
It's funny when Soledad asks if it can do email. She might have thought so because of its size compared with the Blackberry. And then she whips out the shuffle... OMG that is classic.
Does anyone remember Soledad in a kid's computer TV show some years back? She played a computer....
bketchum
Sep 1, 12:19 PM
Originally Posted by BlizzardBomb
I'm wondering if Apple would kill off the 17" if they did introduce a 23". I'm pretty sure now that the manufacturing cost difference between 17" and 20" is quite small.
I highly doubt they would killl it off. I think they'd drop the price on it which would make it even more desirable for standard consumers with a budget. Sort of a, why get the mini when I could just pay a bit more for the iMac 17" kind of thing.
And the 17-inch iMac has an important educational role, taking the place of the eMac.
I'm wondering if Apple would kill off the 17" if they did introduce a 23". I'm pretty sure now that the manufacturing cost difference between 17" and 20" is quite small.
I highly doubt they would killl it off. I think they'd drop the price on it which would make it even more desirable for standard consumers with a budget. Sort of a, why get the mini when I could just pay a bit more for the iMac 17" kind of thing.
And the 17-inch iMac has an important educational role, taking the place of the eMac.
dethmaShine
May 2, 06:12 PM
That's a very nice feature! Too bad it won't work for apps not from the app store...
It does.
It does.
Brianstorm91
Jan 12, 11:34 AM
Look here (http://www.adiumx.com/sparkle/?forceShow%5B%5D=model), 9to5mac has this on their front page.
Scroll down to "model" - "MacBookAir"
Scroll down to "model" - "MacBookAir"
skottichan
Apr 1, 02:00 AM
I assume Safari 5.1 is in this refresh of Lion Preview?
Is it faster? How is memory the resource usage? :cool:I retract my previous statement; the current build seems just as bad as the last and that's on the aforementioned 8GB toting i7 MBP. Even with Flash disabled and harmful scripts blocked, it's a hog capable of eating a combined 3GB or more on its own; the split processes in Activity Monitor just make it look nicer.
Unrelated: does anyone else have a problem keeping their Google Calendars synced in iCal? I hop in and it shows me the local calendars, but I end up having to go into settings and manually recheck my Delegates to get the server-side calendars to trickle back down.
Is it faster? How is memory the resource usage? :cool:I retract my previous statement; the current build seems just as bad as the last and that's on the aforementioned 8GB toting i7 MBP. Even with Flash disabled and harmful scripts blocked, it's a hog capable of eating a combined 3GB or more on its own; the split processes in Activity Monitor just make it look nicer.
Unrelated: does anyone else have a problem keeping their Google Calendars synced in iCal? I hop in and it shows me the local calendars, but I end up having to go into settings and manually recheck my Delegates to get the server-side calendars to trickle back down.
Nermal
Nov 25, 02:54 PM
http://filmonic.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Avatar-Extended-Collections-Edition.jpg
This for myself
I preordered that from Amazon some time ago and it hasn't turned up yet :(
Edit: It's here! :D (I should've complained sooner since that's clearly what did it...)
This for myself
I preordered that from Amazon some time ago and it hasn't turned up yet :(
Edit: It's here! :D (I should've complained sooner since that's clearly what did it...)
KindredMAC
Nov 27, 02:51 PM
I like the idea of a 17" widescreen Apple LCD..... however ONLY if it is priced at $199. Like everyone keeps saying, you can pick up a mighty nice 19" Widescreen LCD at Best Buy or Walmart for between $179-$249. I should know, I have 3 ProViews hooked up to my PowerMac G5 at home and have loved life for the last 9 months!
But in reality, I don't think a 17" is Apple's answer. Lowering the prices of the current model lineup is indeed the way to go. I've been one of the biggest bitchers about Apple's price point on LCD's for years now. That 20" LCD should not be anymore than $299. Plain and simple...simple and plain!
The 23" model should be in the ball park of $499 and the 30" should pop in at $999. Then to really goose people, Apple should bring a 36" model in at $1499.
Apple LCDs are not worth the extra price tag as long as you do your home work before purchasing an LCD monitor from a different company.
But in reality, I don't think a 17" is Apple's answer. Lowering the prices of the current model lineup is indeed the way to go. I've been one of the biggest bitchers about Apple's price point on LCD's for years now. That 20" LCD should not be anymore than $299. Plain and simple...simple and plain!
The 23" model should be in the ball park of $499 and the 30" should pop in at $999. Then to really goose people, Apple should bring a 36" model in at $1499.
Apple LCDs are not worth the extra price tag as long as you do your home work before purchasing an LCD monitor from a different company.
Clive At Five
Sep 1, 12:55 PM
Dammit, you see what they're doing with this 23" iMac, don't you? They're trying to plug up the gaping hole in their product line by introducing a "Pro" iMac of sorts. They'll use it as an excuse NOT to make a freaking mid-level Mac.
It'll still be a gaping hole, even with the top level Merom, but it'll be small enough for Apple to ignore it. Infidels!
Prove me wrong, Apple. Prove me wrong.
-Clive
It'll still be a gaping hole, even with the top level Merom, but it'll be small enough for Apple to ignore it. Infidels!
Prove me wrong, Apple. Prove me wrong.
-Clive
Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 12:41 AM
Well, personally I would consider "loyalists" part of military assets. And I'm sure most generals do as well because that's the way they talk about killing soldiers. Thus inflicting "material" damage should include the people who operate the weapons via command.
And one would figure that since there are a huge number of "defectors", some of these loyalists must be pretty hard-core and you'll have to kill them to prevent them from picking up a simple AK and IED later on and blow up things from the shadows. This might seem harsh, but the reality of it is that if they pick a side, they accept their fate as a loser.
The UN mandate calls for a no-fly zone. Under current military doctrine that requires that the opponent's air defense network be degraded. Some military personnel will inevitably die when their air defense installations come under attack. Other than that, we don't have the authority to attack loyalists unless they are threatening the safety of civilians by bombarding rebel cities or some such, and then only if they can be clearly identified and attacked without risking civilian lives. Loyalist units that are simply surrounding a rebel strongholds are not legitimate targets at this stage.
However, in light of the situation, I would understand the need to leave some "real warriors" alive and hope they join the new administration because looking at these rebels, they are mostly a bunch of city slickers or something that found a gun, see smoke, run toward the front lines all exited...to come right back carrying their dead in a bedsheet. It's a real joke how they handle this rebelion. If this is how it is, we're going to need troops on the ground to get these guys in shape...if not during...then after the supplanting of Quadafi.
This is pretty much how any irregular force has behaved at any time in history (see the beginnings of the American and French revolutions for example) It's not something we can control. Some rebel units are made up of defected regular army units, they will undoubtedly form the core of any rebel advance and show better cohesion. By merely existing as a force in being the, the irregular units (or more correctly, loose bands) legitimize the opposition, and they've proven somewhat effective in defense.
As for troops on the ground - this is a Libyan civil war. The UN's mission is to prevent Gaddafi from murdering his own people in his attempt to maintain power. The Libyans must do the rest.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the end result of all this is not at all dissimilar to the goings-on in Iraq.
As long as we don't invade, this is unlikely to be as bad as Iraq. We are aiding a popular uprising against hated autocrat, not invading a foreign country with plans of occupation and prolonged rooting out of insurgents. There are still many potential pitfalls and I am not arguing that the situation is necessarily a good one, but it is certainly less risky than the 2003 Iraq invasion.
And one would figure that since there are a huge number of "defectors", some of these loyalists must be pretty hard-core and you'll have to kill them to prevent them from picking up a simple AK and IED later on and blow up things from the shadows. This might seem harsh, but the reality of it is that if they pick a side, they accept their fate as a loser.
The UN mandate calls for a no-fly zone. Under current military doctrine that requires that the opponent's air defense network be degraded. Some military personnel will inevitably die when their air defense installations come under attack. Other than that, we don't have the authority to attack loyalists unless they are threatening the safety of civilians by bombarding rebel cities or some such, and then only if they can be clearly identified and attacked without risking civilian lives. Loyalist units that are simply surrounding a rebel strongholds are not legitimate targets at this stage.
However, in light of the situation, I would understand the need to leave some "real warriors" alive and hope they join the new administration because looking at these rebels, they are mostly a bunch of city slickers or something that found a gun, see smoke, run toward the front lines all exited...to come right back carrying their dead in a bedsheet. It's a real joke how they handle this rebelion. If this is how it is, we're going to need troops on the ground to get these guys in shape...if not during...then after the supplanting of Quadafi.
This is pretty much how any irregular force has behaved at any time in history (see the beginnings of the American and French revolutions for example) It's not something we can control. Some rebel units are made up of defected regular army units, they will undoubtedly form the core of any rebel advance and show better cohesion. By merely existing as a force in being the, the irregular units (or more correctly, loose bands) legitimize the opposition, and they've proven somewhat effective in defense.
As for troops on the ground - this is a Libyan civil war. The UN's mission is to prevent Gaddafi from murdering his own people in his attempt to maintain power. The Libyans must do the rest.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the end result of all this is not at all dissimilar to the goings-on in Iraq.
As long as we don't invade, this is unlikely to be as bad as Iraq. We are aiding a popular uprising against hated autocrat, not invading a foreign country with plans of occupation and prolonged rooting out of insurgents. There are still many potential pitfalls and I am not arguing that the situation is necessarily a good one, but it is certainly less risky than the 2003 Iraq invasion.
leekohler
Apr 20, 02:43 PM
Yes, I love driving manual transmission cars. It's fun.
HecubusPro
Aug 29, 05:21 PM
Quite a few people on this board want Apple to simply announce the next Macbook Pro with Merom, even if it has delayed shipping. That would, however, compel students who need computers now to look elsewhere.
(1000th post - WOOT!)
I agree with you completely on this point, without having heard it put that way before. And congrats on the 1K post. :)
(1000th post - WOOT!)
I agree with you completely on this point, without having heard it put that way before. And congrats on the 1K post. :)
lifeinhd
Feb 24, 06:57 PM
how do you drive a monitor like that? I tought that both HDMI and DVI has respectivetly 1920*1080 and 1920*1200 as max res. ! am I wrong?
a) I have an older-school MBP (though not the one in my sig, that never actually existed), the DVI port of which is capable of driving up to 2560x1600.
b) My monitor is 1920x1200. I really wanted 16:10, aaand... this is what was available :p My next monitor, once I get some $$$, will be a used 30" Cinema Display, but that's a couple years out.
a) I have an older-school MBP (though not the one in my sig, that never actually existed), the DVI port of which is capable of driving up to 2560x1600.
b) My monitor is 1920x1200. I really wanted 16:10, aaand... this is what was available :p My next monitor, once I get some $$$, will be a used 30" Cinema Display, but that's a couple years out.
PBF
Apr 2, 05:32 PM
On a happier note -- I don't think I've seen this mentioned yet -- DP 2 seems to be taking about 1.5gb less space.
You sure? The DP2 installer is 3.7GB vs. 3.35GB of DP1.
You sure? The DP2 installer is 3.7GB vs. 3.35GB of DP1.
Raska
Mar 31, 07:26 PM
Is Safari still buggy as feck? Can you drag images out and not have them be .weblocs? Is google maps working properly without tile distortions/not loading?
Google Maps looks fine, so do dragging images. There is something strange I noticed trying to refresh a page. The best is to just post the pictures to show the bug.
http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/5367/safaribug1.png
The first is the popover that slide into view when I tried to refresh the page.
http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/1071/safaribug2.png
The second is the address bar glitching once the popover is dismissed.
Google Maps looks fine, so do dragging images. There is something strange I noticed trying to refresh a page. The best is to just post the pictures to show the bug.
http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/5367/safaribug1.png
The first is the popover that slide into view when I tried to refresh the page.
http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/1071/safaribug2.png
The second is the address bar glitching once the popover is dismissed.
Built
Apr 2, 09:51 PM
Seriously? You do understand that that is a small sample of folks. Most of whom choose to gripe and moan and not to do things like return it.
CWallace
Jan 11, 07:43 PM
they also think the macbook's gonna have a super drive standard across the line, so they're obviously not talking about the same thing
Considering how inexpensive DVD burners are now, it probably costs Apple more to stock non-burners (for builds and AppleCare) in addition to burners then just moving purely to burners, so that would support a move to SuperDrives across the board.
Considering how inexpensive DVD burners are now, it probably costs Apple more to stock non-burners (for builds and AppleCare) in addition to burners then just moving purely to burners, so that would support a move to SuperDrives across the board.
No comments:
Post a Comment