mduser63
Nov 30, 07:57 AM
With a hard disk in it. iTV will not require a computer - will give you internet access on your TV. Dock the iPod, and allow you to buy directly movies, songs & content. I.e. without streaming. Direct download through a Wifi intenet connection. Could even have the ability to stream from the internet - I.e. cable, etc.. coupled with a DVR for recording. Would be amazing if it could do all of the above.
As stated in some interview with Bob Iger that I read somewhere, the iTV will have an internal hard drive. I also have it from someone at Apple that it will have a hard disk, although they didn't tell me anything else that we don't already know and were very cautious about revealing too much.
As stated in some interview with Bob Iger that I read somewhere, the iTV will have an internal hard drive. I also have it from someone at Apple that it will have a hard disk, although they didn't tell me anything else that we don't already know and were very cautious about revealing too much.
I WAS the one
Jun 23, 08:30 PM
iOS and Mac OS will merge. Very slowly over the years. Eventually,This sounds great to me! I can imagine Photoshop don't count on adobe products pal, Apple wants you to use Apple products and grab to your seat ... I bet it will be just one way to install apps... The AppStore pro. We are screwed.
gusapple
Apr 12, 09:08 PM
I know this thread is probably full of pro video geeks so don't eat me alive here. What's the primary difference between FCP and Express aside from the fact that Final Cut Pro is packaged in a suite of applications?
I find that things just go smoother in FCP. Applications don't crash as easily as they do in Express, and when they do, it's easier to recover them. Also, I find myself having much more power to control rendering and export settings than in FCE. I guess once you go pro, it's hard to go back. Just make the jump though. If you are thinking of editing as a profession or even as a large hobby, Final Cut Pro is a wonderful and integrated way to start.
I find that things just go smoother in FCP. Applications don't crash as easily as they do in Express, and when they do, it's easier to recover them. Also, I find myself having much more power to control rendering and export settings than in FCE. I guess once you go pro, it's hard to go back. Just make the jump though. If you are thinking of editing as a profession or even as a large hobby, Final Cut Pro is a wonderful and integrated way to start.
MrFirework
Nov 15, 10:25 AM
How long before it ends up in the MacBook Pro?
(joking)
Thank GOD that "joking" is in there.
::to myself:: calm... calm... 1-2-3-4-5-4-3-2-1.... calm...
(joking)
Thank GOD that "joking" is in there.
::to myself:: calm... calm... 1-2-3-4-5-4-3-2-1.... calm...
Meandmunch
Mar 25, 04:02 PM
Very cool!
By the time the big game console companies (xbox, PS3) finally decide it's time to move forward with a new system (2014-15 is what has been projected), a device as mundane as an iPhone sporting a A7-A8 processor will blow right past existing console tech. iDevices and there closest competitors will be biting deeply into console market share.
By the time the big game console companies (xbox, PS3) finally decide it's time to move forward with a new system (2014-15 is what has been projected), a device as mundane as an iPhone sporting a A7-A8 processor will blow right past existing console tech. iDevices and there closest competitors will be biting deeply into console market share.
Rocketman
Jan 2, 12:22 PM
Highly unlikely that the Quad chip will end up in the iTV. Especially at the already announced $299 proce point of iTV
The shown device was the "breakout box".
iTV is YA Apple "ecosystem" comprising of software like OSX, Front Row, and super DVR. It has a ($299) breakout box to hook to existing computers and TV's. It has a new iMac, which if you buy it, replaces 2-3 separate elements. It will have a supersize display screen with iTV enabled features.
Of course this is all speculation, but it is based on a wide ranging discussion of media experts since the pre-release of iTV.
Rocketman
The shown device was the "breakout box".
iTV is YA Apple "ecosystem" comprising of software like OSX, Front Row, and super DVR. It has a ($299) breakout box to hook to existing computers and TV's. It has a new iMac, which if you buy it, replaces 2-3 separate elements. It will have a supersize display screen with iTV enabled features.
Of course this is all speculation, but it is based on a wide ranging discussion of media experts since the pre-release of iTV.
Rocketman
macman312
Mar 22, 07:23 PM
Do people seriously have that many songs?!!! seriously?!!!
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
WHY?? I bought a ipod touch 8GB with my new macbook pro... but I should've got a classic I have 70GB of music and videos. The only reason I got a touch is because I like the games but if I get a iphone 5 I will also get a classic .
Also I have a old ipod video and you can use it as a 80GB portable harddrive. I will also email steve jobs.... is it sjobs@apple.com or steve@apple.com?
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
WHY?? I bought a ipod touch 8GB with my new macbook pro... but I should've got a classic I have 70GB of music and videos. The only reason I got a touch is because I like the games but if I get a iphone 5 I will also get a classic .
Also I have a old ipod video and you can use it as a 80GB portable harddrive. I will also email steve jobs.... is it sjobs@apple.com or steve@apple.com?
chuckles:)
Dec 28, 10:38 AM
untill they release video content internationally, a lot of us will have no use for any of this. itunes video in canada by macworld?
Dr.Gargoyle
Sep 6, 06:36 PM
Luckily I get .Mac for free, but $99 is very expensive when compared to using flcker, gmail, youtube, etc.
Not to mention the �99 we pay each for .mac over here.
Not to mention the �99 we pay each for .mac over here.
paradox00
May 2, 05:08 PM
I got a another newbie question
I am planning on moving out of Windows (7) and onto MAC OS X, but I want to wait for Lion since its close to a finished product. Now my question is, if Lion comes out, would that mean every Mac (Mac Pro, iMac, iMac mini, Macbook, MB Pros, etc) would have Lion installed/packaged or is there a specific mac that will have Lion on its first day and the other macs would have to wait???
All macs sold after launch will come with Lion either pre-installed or with an upgrade disk (if they shipped before Lion launched).
Edit: Lion should also be compatible with any mac with a Core 2 Duo or newer (my Core Duo MBP will, sadly, be obsolete).
I am planning on moving out of Windows (7) and onto MAC OS X, but I want to wait for Lion since its close to a finished product. Now my question is, if Lion comes out, would that mean every Mac (Mac Pro, iMac, iMac mini, Macbook, MB Pros, etc) would have Lion installed/packaged or is there a specific mac that will have Lion on its first day and the other macs would have to wait???
All macs sold after launch will come with Lion either pre-installed or with an upgrade disk (if they shipped before Lion launched).
Edit: Lion should also be compatible with any mac with a Core 2 Duo or newer (my Core Duo MBP will, sadly, be obsolete).
*LTD*
Apr 3, 07:10 AM
The advert speaks volumes to me, I love it..... a select few won't, but it's just not possible to please 100% of the people 100% of the time.
It's alright. Apple knows exactly what they're doing when it comes to ads. I'm not sure what that negative critics' basis for comparison is. All those successful Xoom and Galaxy Tab ads that were responsible for record-breaking sales? LOL
It's alright. Apple knows exactly what they're doing when it comes to ads. I'm not sure what that negative critics' basis for comparison is. All those successful Xoom and Galaxy Tab ads that were responsible for record-breaking sales? LOL
Ravich
Mar 20, 10:13 PM
Maybe Apple should ban all religious apps.
That's for apple to decide.
In a way, religion is very like homeopathy, since it pretends that something non-existant has the ability to cure/help/heal etc.
I'll say it again: homeopathy is not directly harmful. Ex-gay therapy is.
Like homeopathy, religion can encourage one to do nothing of value ('let's pray for Japan', 'let's try to cure cancer with just water') rather than something physical which actually has an effect. It could be construed as being dangerous and damaging in that sense.
Again: how is that directly harmful? Directly. Harmful.
That's for apple to decide.
In a way, religion is very like homeopathy, since it pretends that something non-existant has the ability to cure/help/heal etc.
I'll say it again: homeopathy is not directly harmful. Ex-gay therapy is.
Like homeopathy, religion can encourage one to do nothing of value ('let's pray for Japan', 'let's try to cure cancer with just water') rather than something physical which actually has an effect. It could be construed as being dangerous and damaging in that sense.
Again: how is that directly harmful? Directly. Harmful.
cwerdna
Dec 5, 01:55 AM
According to http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-6140649.html "SanDisk tied Apple Computer, with 39 percent of all MP3 players sold for the week, but the similarities end there. iPods led all manufacturers with 66 percent of dollars spent in the category, while SanDisk had 18 percent...
Those figures do not include iPods sold directly from Apple, which does not release sales figures from Apple.com or Apple stores...
Microsoft's much-ballyhooed MP3 player, the Zune, captured 2.1 percent of units sold, tying with Disney and coming in behind Apple, SanDisk, Creative and Memorex."
Those figures do not include iPods sold directly from Apple, which does not release sales figures from Apple.com or Apple stores...
Microsoft's much-ballyhooed MP3 player, the Zune, captured 2.1 percent of units sold, tying with Disney and coming in behind Apple, SanDisk, Creative and Memorex."
balamw
Sep 6, 07:07 PM
Honestly though, am I the only one who thinks they should change/add/replace iTunes and just keep it for music, and make a separate app for videos & films? The "iTunes Movie Store"? That sounds like the "Home Depot Car Dealership & Laser Tag Center".
:p I concur. iTunes is getting too busy with Music/Audiobooks/Podcasts/TV Shows and Video already...
As some have suggested perhaps "Showtime" refers to something like a new app...
B
:p I concur. iTunes is getting too busy with Music/Audiobooks/Podcasts/TV Shows and Video already...
As some have suggested perhaps "Showtime" refers to something like a new app...
B
JRM PowerPod
Aug 6, 11:13 PM
I think we can draw some more info from those covered banners, it looks like they might announce something at wwdc. More so, its possible that those announcements are represented in pictorial form on those covered banners.
PLEASE DON'T FLAME ME, I'M JUST JOKING
Just an idea?
PLEASE DON'T FLAME ME, I'M JUST JOKING
Just an idea?
puma1552
Feb 5, 08:48 PM
For something creeping up on 15 years old, that thing is in fantastic shape. Mustangs are an odd car for me. I never seem to like them each time a new one is released, but then the older they get, the more I start to like them. A buddy of mine has a '93 Cobra with just a couple thousand miles on it, and I absolutely love it.
I read a story a while back about people and their music tastes. Many people never really get out of their 20's with their favorite bands. The stuff you like around that age is what sticks with you forever as your favorite. I think it might be something similar with cars. I see cars from back in the early-mid 90s, when I was in high school and then into college, and I get all nostalgic and stuff. Fox body 5L Mustangs, FC RX7s, C4 Corvettes, Syclone/Typhoon, etc. The older I get, and the older those cars get, the more I love them. New cars are nice, but some things just stick with you. And those cars are permanently stuck with me.
Treat that Stang nice Puma, because it is certainly a keeper.
Well said.
Yeah it's definitely been taken care of, both owners kept it for quite a few years each, both only putting about 6,500 miles a year on it. You can tell it's been garaged likely its whole life because the headlights and tail lights aren't hazy from sun exposure.
I remember when these cars were just 1-2 years old, basically factory fresh, and I would go to the dealer and drool over them under the lights at night--ones just like this, with these 17" wheels and leather. I've always loved them, and probably always will. I'm also a fan of the 5L cars, and the thirdgen F-bodies of the day (I own a thirdgen Camaro too).
I really can't wait to get it.:)
I read a story a while back about people and their music tastes. Many people never really get out of their 20's with their favorite bands. The stuff you like around that age is what sticks with you forever as your favorite. I think it might be something similar with cars. I see cars from back in the early-mid 90s, when I was in high school and then into college, and I get all nostalgic and stuff. Fox body 5L Mustangs, FC RX7s, C4 Corvettes, Syclone/Typhoon, etc. The older I get, and the older those cars get, the more I love them. New cars are nice, but some things just stick with you. And those cars are permanently stuck with me.
Treat that Stang nice Puma, because it is certainly a keeper.
Well said.
Yeah it's definitely been taken care of, both owners kept it for quite a few years each, both only putting about 6,500 miles a year on it. You can tell it's been garaged likely its whole life because the headlights and tail lights aren't hazy from sun exposure.
I remember when these cars were just 1-2 years old, basically factory fresh, and I would go to the dealer and drool over them under the lights at night--ones just like this, with these 17" wheels and leather. I've always loved them, and probably always will. I'm also a fan of the 5L cars, and the thirdgen F-bodies of the day (I own a thirdgen Camaro too).
I really can't wait to get it.:)
slffl
Apr 26, 09:20 PM
Count me in there.
Apple have become Big Brother and Big Bully lately.
In the past they trod more lightly.
Oh give me a break! Maybe it's because all you read are the headlines which focus on Apple. Apple has no more lawsuits than any other company out there, not to mention the private lawsuits against Apple for dumb ass stuff like 'tracking', antennas, batteries, etc. etc. etc.....
Apple have become Big Brother and Big Bully lately.
In the past they trod more lightly.
Oh give me a break! Maybe it's because all you read are the headlines which focus on Apple. Apple has no more lawsuits than any other company out there, not to mention the private lawsuits against Apple for dumb ass stuff like 'tracking', antennas, batteries, etc. etc. etc.....
Constable Odo
Mar 25, 04:46 PM
I recall some of the naysayers around here not even a year ago stating that such a device would never be suitable for gaming. And here we are. With HD output to your TV.
Vision, people. Vision.
Most of the naysayers believe that tilting and touch-screen gaming is for sissies. They want actual analog controllers and such. They'll never change that attitude because they what they were raised on. The younger, current group of gamers will find that tilt & touch is very natural for them so they won't be as prone to griping that the past is slowly fading away.
I like racing games a lot and this one looks terrific. Apple needs to build a game console with two iPad2 chips in it or one quad-core ARM processor. That would make one fine low-cost system with more games than you could possibly want available. Apple would just have to work out some touch & tilt controllers for it.
Vision, people. Vision.
Most of the naysayers believe that tilting and touch-screen gaming is for sissies. They want actual analog controllers and such. They'll never change that attitude because they what they were raised on. The younger, current group of gamers will find that tilt & touch is very natural for them so they won't be as prone to griping that the past is slowly fading away.
I like racing games a lot and this one looks terrific. Apple needs to build a game console with two iPad2 chips in it or one quad-core ARM processor. That would make one fine low-cost system with more games than you could possibly want available. Apple would just have to work out some touch & tilt controllers for it.
MattG
Aug 7, 07:40 AM
I was kind of getting tired of Apple updating the iPods so often, but now that we've had all these recent updates to other hardware (laptops, iMacs), I'd be kind of excited now to see something really new and different from the iPod lineup. Here's to hoping for something with a huge screen and better video capabilities.
Yakuza
Nov 24, 10:08 AM
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41C0o2GAJGL._SS500_.jpg
Props if anyone knows who used that bag.
i would say Indidana Jones, but i'm not sure
Props if anyone knows who used that bag.
i would say Indidana Jones, but i'm not sure
Multimedia
Nov 15, 05:55 PM
For some time, Handbrake didn't use more than two cores - owners of Quad G5s reported CPU usage of exactly 50 percent, then someone changed it and Quad G5s reported 100 percent CPU usage.
What we don't know: Was the code changed to use up to four processors, or as many processors as are available? Developers are usually very unwilling to ship code that they haven't been able to try out, so expect a version using eight cores about two days after the developers have access to an eight core machine.
In the case of Handbrake, encoding to MPEG4 seems already limited by the speed of the DVD drive; you can't encode faster than you can read from the DVD. H.264 is still limited by processor speed. Using eight cores is not too difficult; for example, if you encode 60 minutes of video, just give 7 1/2 minutes to each core.I almost NEVER use handbrake from an optical DVD. That makes no sense to me. Why would you do that? :confused:
I use Handbrake about 12-18 hours of every day and I use it after creating high quality DVD images from EyeTV HDTV recordings with Toast 7.1 UB. On a Mac Pro Handbrake can use more than 3 cores and Toast can use all 4 cores. This is why I want an 8 core Mac Pro. Once you start running Toast and Handbrake simultaneously, you see why those of us who do this kind of repetitive DVD Image creation for Handbrake to mp4 compression truly need 8-cores NOW. :eek:
What we don't know: Was the code changed to use up to four processors, or as many processors as are available? Developers are usually very unwilling to ship code that they haven't been able to try out, so expect a version using eight cores about two days after the developers have access to an eight core machine.
In the case of Handbrake, encoding to MPEG4 seems already limited by the speed of the DVD drive; you can't encode faster than you can read from the DVD. H.264 is still limited by processor speed. Using eight cores is not too difficult; for example, if you encode 60 minutes of video, just give 7 1/2 minutes to each core.I almost NEVER use handbrake from an optical DVD. That makes no sense to me. Why would you do that? :confused:
I use Handbrake about 12-18 hours of every day and I use it after creating high quality DVD images from EyeTV HDTV recordings with Toast 7.1 UB. On a Mac Pro Handbrake can use more than 3 cores and Toast can use all 4 cores. This is why I want an 8 core Mac Pro. Once you start running Toast and Handbrake simultaneously, you see why those of us who do this kind of repetitive DVD Image creation for Handbrake to mp4 compression truly need 8-cores NOW. :eek:
guzhogi
Jun 23, 08:17 AM
You just described a touchless OS X. It does exactly that...
How does having these features make it "touchless"?
Oh, you will always be able to run Xcode on a Mac. You'll just have to buy the developer subscription for a few thousand dollars per year in order to get it activated...
Actually, a few months ago, Apple changed the developer programs to be only $99 a year.
One thing I'd like to see is a stylus that can be used with this & an iPad. Before I get flamed, hear me out. It wouldn't be just stylus only. It'll work just the way it is with your fingers, but also use a stylus for fine work like a painting/drawing program. Some people have bulky fingers that are too imprecise for drawing.
I gess you mean OS XI or OS 11.0 :rolleyes:
Yeah. I just don't see the whole Mac OS UI being totally revamped to the iOS in just a point upgrade (ie 10.7). This would require a full upgrade as in Mac OS XI, 11, or whatever it would be called.
How does having these features make it "touchless"?
Oh, you will always be able to run Xcode on a Mac. You'll just have to buy the developer subscription for a few thousand dollars per year in order to get it activated...
Actually, a few months ago, Apple changed the developer programs to be only $99 a year.
One thing I'd like to see is a stylus that can be used with this & an iPad. Before I get flamed, hear me out. It wouldn't be just stylus only. It'll work just the way it is with your fingers, but also use a stylus for fine work like a painting/drawing program. Some people have bulky fingers that are too imprecise for drawing.
I gess you mean OS XI or OS 11.0 :rolleyes:
Yeah. I just don't see the whole Mac OS UI being totally revamped to the iOS in just a point upgrade (ie 10.7). This would require a full upgrade as in Mac OS XI, 11, or whatever it would be called.
ezekielrage_99
Aug 27, 07:39 PM
This is the $64K question. Does anyone know when the X3000 is due to be released?
I was under the impression when the Core 2 Duos were released, but I hope very soon because they are a measurable improvement over the GMA950 which isn't as bad as everyone make it out to be.
I was under the impression when the Core 2 Duos were released, but I hope very soon because they are a measurable improvement over the GMA950 which isn't as bad as everyone make it out to be.
adroit
Nov 15, 11:25 AM
That really depends on the program, on how "parallelizable" the application is.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
This is true, but there are still many many ways to optimize the multi-core processor that's not currently being use.
For example, I am waiting for a program to compile right now. Although I have a dual core on my computer, the compiler only compile one file at a time and usually takes about 10 min to do a full compile . If I have an 8 core computer with a multi-threaded compiler then I can cut the total time to jsut over a min + couple of seconds for linking time.
I think the main problem with muti-threading program is that it is difficult to implement, especially for coders who only knows high-level languages. Muti-threading in low-level program such as C is not easy but at least it is straight-forward. But trying to muti-thread high-level language such as VB or C# can get you into a big headace since everything is abstracted from the programmer. To do that, you need to get into unsafe code and call a bunch of DLLs, and it's easy to get memory leaks. Basically it can start to get very complicated, very quickly.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
This is true, but there are still many many ways to optimize the multi-core processor that's not currently being use.
For example, I am waiting for a program to compile right now. Although I have a dual core on my computer, the compiler only compile one file at a time and usually takes about 10 min to do a full compile . If I have an 8 core computer with a multi-threaded compiler then I can cut the total time to jsut over a min + couple of seconds for linking time.
I think the main problem with muti-threading program is that it is difficult to implement, especially for coders who only knows high-level languages. Muti-threading in low-level program such as C is not easy but at least it is straight-forward. But trying to muti-thread high-level language such as VB or C# can get you into a big headace since everything is abstracted from the programmer. To do that, you need to get into unsafe code and call a bunch of DLLs, and it's easy to get memory leaks. Basically it can start to get very complicated, very quickly.
No comments:
Post a Comment