galstaph
Jul 13, 10:32 PM
imagine the data you could put onto those disks though!
OdduWon
Oct 23, 09:44 AM
look there they are... oh no, wait those are irish books professionals
Maldini
Jan 12, 05:09 PM
+100
I'm sure it is something very mundane, like streaming movie rentals via iTunes.
I dont think they have all these huge banners for iTunes streaming, they probably mean there is something coming in 2008
I'm sure it is something very mundane, like streaming movie rentals via iTunes.
I dont think they have all these huge banners for iTunes streaming, they probably mean there is something coming in 2008
toaoc
Mar 25, 07:25 AM
...is an ipod that is just about music and nothing else. and yeah the sound quality of the classic thats out right now does suck...i'd like to see improved battery life, higher quality chips (DAC, amps,...), digital output, maybe airplay - and all of that in a sexy, indestructable metal case with a click wheel and a small non touch display...
led1002
Mar 19, 04:24 PM
i highly doubt that many computer buyers even look at Macs.
most of them "know" computers as running windows and purchased from dell catalog they get with their newspaper each week.
jxyama, I think you have something there... last nite my wife (who is computer ignorant) asks whether I have a MAC or a PC. Turns out her best friend (newbie PC user for about 1 year) has convinced her that MACs aren't as good. My wife or her friend have never even used one but they 'KNOW' they are inferior to MACs. Now if either of them were to have to make a buying decision it's not hard to imagine what they'll walk out the store with.
How could any new user have a different opinion unless they happen to know a MAC user. Only 2% use MACs so they're unlikely to be exposed to one, PC users (98%) will bad mouth a MAC, and Apples advertising, while award winning does very little to enlighten people about the product.
most of them "know" computers as running windows and purchased from dell catalog they get with their newspaper each week.
jxyama, I think you have something there... last nite my wife (who is computer ignorant) asks whether I have a MAC or a PC. Turns out her best friend (newbie PC user for about 1 year) has convinced her that MACs aren't as good. My wife or her friend have never even used one but they 'KNOW' they are inferior to MACs. Now if either of them were to have to make a buying decision it's not hard to imagine what they'll walk out the store with.
How could any new user have a different opinion unless they happen to know a MAC user. Only 2% use MACs so they're unlikely to be exposed to one, PC users (98%) will bad mouth a MAC, and Apples advertising, while award winning does very little to enlighten people about the product.
AppliedVisual
Oct 23, 11:11 AM
I've read that even the current MBP supports 4gigs.
Apple just doesn't offer it in their store since the CPU can only address around 3,2gigs (like every other 32bit cpu).
Unfortunately, the current MBP is restricted to about 3.2GB because of the 32bit CPU *AND* the 32bit i945 chipset. Intel won't have a 64bit mobile chipset until they ship Crestline (the i965 mobile chipset for Santa Rosa). So, unless Crestline is ready early and Apple has some sort of exclusive agreement, the updated MBP still will not allow anyone to use more than approximately 3.2GB of RAM.
In a 32bit system, the 32bit CPUs and/or chipsets can address a total memory capacity of 4GB. But this 4GB address window must account for all memory I/O addresses, BIOS/ROM as well as video memory in addition to the actual RAM heap. That is why when you install 4GB of RAM, you essentially miss out on the last 600 to 800 MB. Also why the C2D/Merom iMac systems can only be configured with up to 3GB of RAM. Apple probably figured they didn't need to sell people RAM that they can't use. Some PC vendors still sell 4GB installed into such systems even though it can't all be used because by installing two matched 2GB modules, the dual-channel performance benefits are there, just not the last 800MB.
Apple just doesn't offer it in their store since the CPU can only address around 3,2gigs (like every other 32bit cpu).
Unfortunately, the current MBP is restricted to about 3.2GB because of the 32bit CPU *AND* the 32bit i945 chipset. Intel won't have a 64bit mobile chipset until they ship Crestline (the i965 mobile chipset for Santa Rosa). So, unless Crestline is ready early and Apple has some sort of exclusive agreement, the updated MBP still will not allow anyone to use more than approximately 3.2GB of RAM.
In a 32bit system, the 32bit CPUs and/or chipsets can address a total memory capacity of 4GB. But this 4GB address window must account for all memory I/O addresses, BIOS/ROM as well as video memory in addition to the actual RAM heap. That is why when you install 4GB of RAM, you essentially miss out on the last 600 to 800 MB. Also why the C2D/Merom iMac systems can only be configured with up to 3GB of RAM. Apple probably figured they didn't need to sell people RAM that they can't use. Some PC vendors still sell 4GB installed into such systems even though it can't all be used because by installing two matched 2GB modules, the dual-channel performance benefits are there, just not the last 800MB.
SiliconAddict
Jul 18, 11:57 AM
meh. I already have Blockbuster's online rental. If I want to take something with me on the go I rent it, rip it and away I go. Yes this has more instant gratification but I'm a patiant person so meh...for those who aren't on a Netflix or Blockbuster plan I can see this as being nice...as long as its priced right.
levitynyc
Mar 25, 03:50 PM
Time to grab a 10 foot HDMI cord.
zap2
Apr 8, 04:00 PM
So who's Obama gonna blow up next? Syria, Yemen?
Not just Obama's attack....yes, signed on, but there was a request for rebels. I don't have as issue with the West using their military power for support, but there should be an internal force that wants the change and us strong enough to at least use some force without the West.
Not just Obama's attack....yes, signed on, but there was a request for rebels. I don't have as issue with the West using their military power for support, but there should be an internal force that wants the change and us strong enough to at least use some force without the West.
Willis
Aug 6, 09:00 PM
Hasta la Vista, Vista
classic!! I want to see a pic!
classic!! I want to see a pic!
rmhop81
Sep 7, 05:41 PM
well the problem is that sub accounts cannot exist without the main account and main account has to be renewed every year. so this essentially means i cannot use family pack by myself for 5 years.
i never said that u could go 5 years off one family pack. i simply posted those bc people were complaining about apple's price....newegg is cheaper so order from there for the exact same product....
i never said that u could go 5 years off one family pack. i simply posted those bc people were complaining about apple's price....newegg is cheaper so order from there for the exact same product....
speakerwizard
Nov 15, 08:11 AM
well, OSX whooped xp for multicore usage then
aaps59
Feb 7, 04:24 PM
2005 LR3 SE, mountain road in Northern New Hampshire
The Beatles
Apr 3, 11:59 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Love this ad makes me want to buy one. only if there was stock on Australia.
Are you kidding me. I haven't looked into it but I would bet there's nothing holding you back from investing in apple. You have a computer most likely with an Internet connection?
Go online and trade. If you want to use an investing firm there are plenty, all you gotta do is call them or go to their site.
Try www.Wedbush.com
All you have to do is wire them
Your money or send them a check with the amount you want to invest plus the investment fee ($10 to $50+) and there
you go.
Love this ad makes me want to buy one. only if there was stock on Australia.
Are you kidding me. I haven't looked into it but I would bet there's nothing holding you back from investing in apple. You have a computer most likely with an Internet connection?
Go online and trade. If you want to use an investing firm there are plenty, all you gotta do is call them or go to their site.
Try www.Wedbush.com
All you have to do is wire them
Your money or send them a check with the amount you want to invest plus the investment fee ($10 to $50+) and there
you go.
brianus
Sep 1, 01:25 PM
The problem with adding tuners from what I understand is that there are many different standards throughout the world. Anyone knows if there are there tuners that do it all at the moment? Even without a tuner though, it'd be a pretty slick machine.
Also, if Apple markets those as HDTVs-that-are-also-computers instead of computers-with-big-screens, I think they could go after a part of the HDTV market that would more than compensate the "downgrades" from the Mac Pro. But a 23-inch model would not only cause downgrades from the Mac Pro. People like me would upgrade from the Mini too! I wanted more than the 20-inch iMac's 1680x1050 for my main screen. Since I bought a Dell screen to go with my Mini, Apple lost a sale there.
A 23-inch iMac would also crank up Apple's coolness factor a couple of notches. I mean... the Mac Pro is cool and all, but few people - the regular folks, not us gadgets freaks - want to have such a huge box in their living room, and Apple could give better specs to a 23-inch iMac than those of a Mini+screen. Anyways, I think it'd be an awesome product. I hope we'll see something like that in the near future.
Um, hate to break it to ya, but Apple sells television shows.
Relax. Merom in C2D iMacs is only a Rumor. It is not a fact at all. Conroe inside a new design is much more likely.
Says who? AppleInsider is now confirming this story. They have been dead-on accurate all year. Read 'em and weep (I'd like to see Conroe instead of Merom, but it ain't happenin').
Also, if Apple markets those as HDTVs-that-are-also-computers instead of computers-with-big-screens, I think they could go after a part of the HDTV market that would more than compensate the "downgrades" from the Mac Pro. But a 23-inch model would not only cause downgrades from the Mac Pro. People like me would upgrade from the Mini too! I wanted more than the 20-inch iMac's 1680x1050 for my main screen. Since I bought a Dell screen to go with my Mini, Apple lost a sale there.
A 23-inch iMac would also crank up Apple's coolness factor a couple of notches. I mean... the Mac Pro is cool and all, but few people - the regular folks, not us gadgets freaks - want to have such a huge box in their living room, and Apple could give better specs to a 23-inch iMac than those of a Mini+screen. Anyways, I think it'd be an awesome product. I hope we'll see something like that in the near future.
Um, hate to break it to ya, but Apple sells television shows.
Relax. Merom in C2D iMacs is only a Rumor. It is not a fact at all. Conroe inside a new design is much more likely.
Says who? AppleInsider is now confirming this story. They have been dead-on accurate all year. Read 'em and weep (I'd like to see Conroe instead of Merom, but it ain't happenin').
skunk
Mar 20, 08:39 AM
The jets and rockets are there to prevent Gaddafi from killing civilians, not to prevent Gaddafi from winning.However, if his armour is destroyed and his defences shattered, and his troops are unwilling to pose as sitting ducks, the rebels will have a damned sight easier task.
milo
Aug 29, 09:16 AM
Yeah, imagine that. Their top-of-the-like 64bit full-tower quad-core workstation and their bottom-of-the-barrel consumer-model have wildly different specs!
Which would be fine...if there were a model in the middle. It's like a car company selling a huge SUV and a tiny two door car, with nothing in between.
Which would be fine...if there were a model in the middle. It's like a car company selling a huge SUV and a tiny two door car, with nothing in between.
foodle
Mar 25, 06:40 PM
An iPad 2 is $500. A PlayStation 3 is much cheaper.
But remember that the PS3 was $600 at launch, but is $300 now. Each PS3 game is $60, while Real Racing 2 is $7. So the cost proposition after a few games is not that different.
But remember that the PS3 was $600 at launch, but is $300 now. Each PS3 game is $60, while Real Racing 2 is $7. So the cost proposition after a few games is not that different.
AvSRoCkCO1067
Aug 16, 09:11 AM
Compete with Zune? Seriously? Zune is even on Apple's radar?
Let me get this straight, maybe I'm mistaken. Is this the same Zune that was announced that it will "play music! videos! games! ... wait... no, we changed our minds... no games. And videos? Yeah we can't quite get that to work, it won't do that either. But it plays music! And looks like an iPod... except its a tad on the fugly side...."
Please. Apple already has something to compete with this, its called the iPod. Who needs wireless??
Actually...it's called the iPod 4G :p .
Apple's already a generation ahead of the 'Zune' - wireless, unless providing a way to purchase songs on the go, is completely and utterly...useless :) .
Let me get this straight, maybe I'm mistaken. Is this the same Zune that was announced that it will "play music! videos! games! ... wait... no, we changed our minds... no games. And videos? Yeah we can't quite get that to work, it won't do that either. But it plays music! And looks like an iPod... except its a tad on the fugly side...."
Please. Apple already has something to compete with this, its called the iPod. Who needs wireless??
Actually...it's called the iPod 4G :p .
Apple's already a generation ahead of the 'Zune' - wireless, unless providing a way to purchase songs on the go, is completely and utterly...useless :) .
kdjc00
Mar 28, 01:19 PM
it will be interesting to see where apple takes that capabilities of this features to expand its gaming line. i hope it expands it to the apple tv. HD 1080p games would be great..
Rot'nApple
Apr 2, 08:06 PM
I really like this ad. Maybe this will be the new direction of Apple's marketing?
I liked the ad too. It seems Apple was finally addressing the bazillion iPad wannabes and to some extent the gazillion iPhone wannabes, who's commercials tout the latest tech specs or a keyword like 'lightening fast' but yet fail to demo the everyday usefulness. Something Apple has long touted in its iPhone commercials let alone their iPad ones.
Beat that Xoom! I don't want to feel cacooned by my tablet and I don't want my eyes turning into the next Terminator. I want technology to get out of the way and just work while the ad points to what would be useful if I purchase one.
Apple, for it's iOS devices, have nailed that roadmap! :cool: :apple:
I liked the ad too. It seems Apple was finally addressing the bazillion iPad wannabes and to some extent the gazillion iPhone wannabes, who's commercials tout the latest tech specs or a keyword like 'lightening fast' but yet fail to demo the everyday usefulness. Something Apple has long touted in its iPhone commercials let alone their iPad ones.
Beat that Xoom! I don't want to feel cacooned by my tablet and I don't want my eyes turning into the next Terminator. I want technology to get out of the way and just work while the ad points to what would be useful if I purchase one.
Apple, for it's iOS devices, have nailed that roadmap! :cool: :apple:
stcanard
Nov 30, 10:47 AM
Another way to ask this question: If Apple decided to compete head-to-head with this feature, what should they do differently?
Here's the funny thing, I can tell you a feature is poorly thought out, even if I can't necessarily tell you how to solve it :) The fact that we don't have an answer is probably a good start on why the iPod doesn't already do it.
First thing I can say is this: Dump the idea of restrictions on non-DRM'd songs. If "the guy with guitar" wants to beam you his own song he should be allowed to decide that you can keep it as long as you want and send it to as many people as you want.
This goes back to the root of the problem with these devices and online stores: The record labels aren't worried about piracy, they're worried about all the guys on the street being able to bypass them by advertising virally then selling their own burned CDs. Sure it's only one or two now people now, but then it starts to grow, and some band ends up hitting it big and getting radio play, then everybody starts doing it, and then gradually the RIAA loses their money train.
Here's the funny thing, I can tell you a feature is poorly thought out, even if I can't necessarily tell you how to solve it :) The fact that we don't have an answer is probably a good start on why the iPod doesn't already do it.
First thing I can say is this: Dump the idea of restrictions on non-DRM'd songs. If "the guy with guitar" wants to beam you his own song he should be allowed to decide that you can keep it as long as you want and send it to as many people as you want.
This goes back to the root of the problem with these devices and online stores: The record labels aren't worried about piracy, they're worried about all the guys on the street being able to bypass them by advertising virally then selling their own burned CDs. Sure it's only one or two now people now, but then it starts to grow, and some band ends up hitting it big and getting radio play, then everybody starts doing it, and then gradually the RIAA loses their money train.
gnasher729
Nov 15, 09:53 AM
I wonder how Handbrake, iDVD encoding, or Quicktime encoding will take advantage of the extra cores?
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.
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.
biscuitdunker
Apr 3, 12:50 PM
wow an ipad 2 being used in the dark and it doesnt leak light! where can i buy one?;)
No comments:
Post a Comment