nishioka
Apr 22, 04:22 AM
Well I can already listen to my music on my MacBook, iPad and iPhone so why would I want it?
Maybe you wouldn't. I could see a use for it myself - I have a library of music so big you couldn't fit it all on any existing iPhone, and it's annoying to be out someplace and wanting to listen to a song, but you can't because you had to exclude it from your last sync. It would be preferable then for me to be able to link my iPhone to my music library and just have Apple deliver everything to me on demand... be it from the hard drive at home or from a central location.
Of course, how this is all implemented will play a big role in whether the service is useful to me or not. If I can't listen to the CDs I bought and imported into iTunes for example... that's a dealbreaker as far as I'm concerned.
Maybe you wouldn't. I could see a use for it myself - I have a library of music so big you couldn't fit it all on any existing iPhone, and it's annoying to be out someplace and wanting to listen to a song, but you can't because you had to exclude it from your last sync. It would be preferable then for me to be able to link my iPhone to my music library and just have Apple deliver everything to me on demand... be it from the hard drive at home or from a central location.
Of course, how this is all implemented will play a big role in whether the service is useful to me or not. If I can't listen to the CDs I bought and imported into iTunes for example... that's a dealbreaker as far as I'm concerned.
Peace
Sep 1, 10:54 AM
Not sure if it's a typo or not but MacNN is saying Apple has confirmed a special event for Sept. 14th.
http://www.macnn.com/articles/06/08/31/boot.camp.mac.gui/
http://www.macnn.com/articles/06/08/31/boot.camp.mac.gui/
CalfCanuck
Sep 14, 07:16 PM
That'd be very nice, but I think that's too niche for Apple to get into. Although Apple does take its photography seriously, it only really produces hardware that is versatile and can be used for many different tasks - i.e. although the Mac Pro is serious photograhpy equipment, it can also be serious movie editing or CAD equipment. Infact, I can't think of any hardware made by Apple that is specifically photography directed.
Then again, there's nothing to say they won't break the habit of a lifetime.
While I have nothing to back up this idea beyond wild speculation, it makes sense if you think about it for a while.
I used the name "Aperture.iPod" just for this thread. I think the APerture features would be targeted to special audience, but even the Photo uploading features (plus integration into iPhoto) would give it the broader appeal you correctly discuss.
Several reason why this might happen:
1. Apple has had a product called the Photo iPod since October 2004. The fact that few of it's users probably use it for Photos merely points out that it failed in it's targeted market for a number of reasons (probably lack of easy uploading from cameras when not at a computer, small screen, and lack of support for RAW).
2. Apple's announcement a few days ago about the new iTunes store: (to quote Page 1) "TV shows will now be sold at 640x480 px h264. While the updated 5G iPods announced today will be able to play the new format, there has not been any indication from Apple of yet that the new shows will be playable on older 5G iPods. Apple's official knowledge-base article still states that h264-encoded movies must be 320 x 240 at 30 fps."
So why will Apple start selling a video size that isn't designed for the current iPod? While it could be for the "iTV" device, I'd image that is a bit too small a resolution to get people excited about. And even if it is, why start selling it 6 months before the device ships?
3. If Apple was to introduce a new Video iPod with a larger screen, this new larger box would allow a number of things that can''t fit on a small iPod and are perfect for both video AND photography - a large 640 x 480 screen, FW or USB2 connections, and potentially CF/SD card slots (or at least an IO for a fast adapter via the USB2 connection.)
Hence my conclusion (based on pure speculation) - all these things point to a dual use device. Handheld, but larger than normal iPods, and suitable for both consumer video playback AND photography.
What better place to introduce this than the biggest consumer photo show in the world?
Then again, there's nothing to say they won't break the habit of a lifetime.
While I have nothing to back up this idea beyond wild speculation, it makes sense if you think about it for a while.
I used the name "Aperture.iPod" just for this thread. I think the APerture features would be targeted to special audience, but even the Photo uploading features (plus integration into iPhoto) would give it the broader appeal you correctly discuss.
Several reason why this might happen:
1. Apple has had a product called the Photo iPod since October 2004. The fact that few of it's users probably use it for Photos merely points out that it failed in it's targeted market for a number of reasons (probably lack of easy uploading from cameras when not at a computer, small screen, and lack of support for RAW).
2. Apple's announcement a few days ago about the new iTunes store: (to quote Page 1) "TV shows will now be sold at 640x480 px h264. While the updated 5G iPods announced today will be able to play the new format, there has not been any indication from Apple of yet that the new shows will be playable on older 5G iPods. Apple's official knowledge-base article still states that h264-encoded movies must be 320 x 240 at 30 fps."
So why will Apple start selling a video size that isn't designed for the current iPod? While it could be for the "iTV" device, I'd image that is a bit too small a resolution to get people excited about. And even if it is, why start selling it 6 months before the device ships?
3. If Apple was to introduce a new Video iPod with a larger screen, this new larger box would allow a number of things that can''t fit on a small iPod and are perfect for both video AND photography - a large 640 x 480 screen, FW or USB2 connections, and potentially CF/SD card slots (or at least an IO for a fast adapter via the USB2 connection.)
Hence my conclusion (based on pure speculation) - all these things point to a dual use device. Handheld, but larger than normal iPods, and suitable for both consumer video playback AND photography.
What better place to introduce this than the biggest consumer photo show in the world?
milo
Aug 28, 04:18 PM
Speaking of returns, is there a possibility of buying the machine and if they don't auto-upgrade me to the new one, return it and buy a new one?
Only if you buy the machine but don't open the box (unless you're willing to pay a 10% restocking fee). And that's only if you get the standard config, no custom BTO. Plus if you order it, you'll pay shipping back to them.
this goes to show how behind apple is in updating.
clearly they arent ready to adapt to an intel platform. the cant even make simple processor adjustments on time!
all the major companies have made this transition.
Actually NONE of the pc companies have made the transition. They haven't shipped a single machine with the new chips, just made announcements of shipments days or weeks away (and that was just earlier today...even if apple was behind, they'd only be hours behind, not even a full day). Right now apple is only behind in press releases, which has nothing to do with being ready to adapt to an intel platform. Now ranting about PC companies that haven't shipped the new machines yet...THAT is ridiculous.
Only if you buy the machine but don't open the box (unless you're willing to pay a 10% restocking fee). And that's only if you get the standard config, no custom BTO. Plus if you order it, you'll pay shipping back to them.
this goes to show how behind apple is in updating.
clearly they arent ready to adapt to an intel platform. the cant even make simple processor adjustments on time!
all the major companies have made this transition.
Actually NONE of the pc companies have made the transition. They haven't shipped a single machine with the new chips, just made announcements of shipments days or weeks away (and that was just earlier today...even if apple was behind, they'd only be hours behind, not even a full day). Right now apple is only behind in press releases, which has nothing to do with being ready to adapt to an intel platform. Now ranting about PC companies that haven't shipped the new machines yet...THAT is ridiculous.
Peace
Sep 5, 05:58 PM
Wow, you really don't get it.
Watching on the tv is exactly what this is about. The whole point is that you don't need to have a *computer* or even a *hard drive* next to the TV since you can just stream the video from a computer ANYWHERE in your house.
Seriously, did you even look at the picture you responded to?
Yes I did milo.And it's a fine rendition :)
Only thing is one still has to connect some kind of A/V cables to the TV..
Think about that concept.
Watching on the tv is exactly what this is about. The whole point is that you don't need to have a *computer* or even a *hard drive* next to the TV since you can just stream the video from a computer ANYWHERE in your house.
Seriously, did you even look at the picture you responded to?
Yes I did milo.And it's a fine rendition :)
Only thing is one still has to connect some kind of A/V cables to the TV..
Think about that concept.
McDave
Sep 4, 09:46 PM
I really doubt that Apple will put a TV tuner in this thing (if it's real). Think about it -
Point 1 - If Apple puts a tuner in then they have to deal with the myriad of different types of TV.
Point 2 - THEY SELL TV SHOWS!
Does Steve want you to Tivo the new episode of "The Office" on your "MediaMac/Airport Express Video/Super iPod" or does he want you to come to the iTunes store and download it for $2? Apple, despite most of our (including my own) beliefs is a business and they have to think of the $$$ first.
Why give something away when you can make money off it? That's still my theory as to why the mini didn't have a tuner from the start.
Too true! Why create a device to capture/de-schedule broadcast TV (with the mis-timings, satellite rain-fade & commercials) when you can sell most of the content directly, with one mouse/remote-click.
I think this will do to movies & TV what the iPod did for music, just don't forget the Blu-Ray player.
McD
Point 1 - If Apple puts a tuner in then they have to deal with the myriad of different types of TV.
Point 2 - THEY SELL TV SHOWS!
Does Steve want you to Tivo the new episode of "The Office" on your "MediaMac/Airport Express Video/Super iPod" or does he want you to come to the iTunes store and download it for $2? Apple, despite most of our (including my own) beliefs is a business and they have to think of the $$$ first.
Why give something away when you can make money off it? That's still my theory as to why the mini didn't have a tuner from the start.
Too true! Why create a device to capture/de-schedule broadcast TV (with the mis-timings, satellite rain-fade & commercials) when you can sell most of the content directly, with one mouse/remote-click.
I think this will do to movies & TV what the iPod did for music, just don't forget the Blu-Ray player.
McD
MacRumors
Mar 29, 11:07 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/29/idc-projects-windows-phone-to-top-iphone-in-market-share-by-2015/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/29/120017-idc_2015_smartphone_projections.png
long straight ponytail
hairstyles long hairquot;,
Casual Long Straight Hairstyle
short haircuts photos
women with straight hair
medium lenght mens haircuts
If you have straight hair,
long hair styles for women
2011 Women Curly Hairstyles
medium straight hair styles
hairstyles long straight hair
McPhee Long Straight
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/29/120017-idc_2015_smartphone_projections.png
dolph0291
Mar 30, 01:29 PM
I think he used iTunes as an example because it is something that Mac users would be familliar with as opposed to some other application that you would look at and say "WTF is that?"
Anyway, an .exe in Windows is refered to as an "application". A "program" is a collection of files that includes one or more .exe and possibly other files. This has been the case since Windows XP (possibly earlier).
An .exe is an executable, not an application. Some people may have called them applications, but not MS. Never. Until now.
Anyway, an .exe in Windows is refered to as an "application". A "program" is a collection of files that includes one or more .exe and possibly other files. This has been the case since Windows XP (possibly earlier).
An .exe is an executable, not an application. Some people may have called them applications, but not MS. Never. Until now.
fall3n
Aug 28, 03:29 PM
Hey I said I too have been waiting - since June - to replace my 6 1/2 year old G4. Don't even have iWeb or Tiger. At this point, I almost want to wait to get Leopard pre-installed on a Santa Rosa motherboard. It's a vicious circle. So sue me for being a little bored while I wait for revisions. And speaking of, can we stop the should I buy now or wait threads. Find one and read it.
there will ALWAYS be updates, if you keep waiting for the next one you'll be waiting forever. Santa rosa isn't going to be THAT amazing of an upgrade. I'd just buy the core duo 2 when they release and then upgrade to leopard later. But that's just me.
there will ALWAYS be updates, if you keep waiting for the next one you'll be waiting forever. Santa rosa isn't going to be THAT amazing of an upgrade. I'd just buy the core duo 2 when they release and then upgrade to leopard later. But that's just me.
EagerDragon
Sep 9, 07:03 AM
Driving 1.5 hours to the Apple store this morning and the same on the way back. But I am not buying yet, just looking and getting a feel for the entire line. Oh I forgot.... and turning green with envy. Boy is going to be hard.
iMacZealot
Sep 20, 08:00 PM
Finally, someone gets it right.
CDMA is technically superior to GSM just about any way you care to measure it. GSM's widespread adoption in Europe was by fiat as a protectionist measure for European telecom companies, primarily because the European technology providers did not want to license CDMA from an American company. CDMA was basically slandered six ways to Sunday to justify using GSM. It was nothing more than a case of Not Invented Here writ large and turf protection. This early rapid push to standardize on GSM in as many places as possible as a strategic hedge gave them a strong market position in most of the rest of the world. In the US, the various protocols had to fight it out on the open market which took time to sort itself out.
Ultimately, the GSM consortium lost and Qualcomm got the last laugh because the technology does not scale as well as CDMA. Every last telecom equipment provider in Europe has since licensed the CDMA technology, and some version of the technology is part of the next generation cellular infrastructure under a few different names.
While GSM has better interoperability globally, I would make the observation that CDMA works just fine in the US, which is no small region of the planet and the third most populous country. For many people, the better quality is worth it.
I find a few things wrong with this:
1) I don't think EU chose GSM because it was European and not American --- according to Wikipedia, GSM publicly came out in 1990 and CDMA (or IS-95) in 1996.
2) I think it's hard to compare IS-95 and GSM. It's comparing apples to oranges. Sure, there are some things better about them, but CDMA and TDMA are completely different techniques and hard to compare.
3) When you're talking about CDMA being used in future technologies in Europe, if you mean UMTS, that's not CDMA. It's the next generation GSM 3G technology, but uses wideband CDMA or WCDMA in the process. It is considered GSM technology.
4) If you're choosing your new cellular provider based on whether they use CDMA or GSM, that's sad because you're going to get a phone that makes calls anyway. The rest, in my opinion, differs between what the execs at T-Cingizon PCS are thinking.
CDMA is technically superior to GSM just about any way you care to measure it. GSM's widespread adoption in Europe was by fiat as a protectionist measure for European telecom companies, primarily because the European technology providers did not want to license CDMA from an American company. CDMA was basically slandered six ways to Sunday to justify using GSM. It was nothing more than a case of Not Invented Here writ large and turf protection. This early rapid push to standardize on GSM in as many places as possible as a strategic hedge gave them a strong market position in most of the rest of the world. In the US, the various protocols had to fight it out on the open market which took time to sort itself out.
Ultimately, the GSM consortium lost and Qualcomm got the last laugh because the technology does not scale as well as CDMA. Every last telecom equipment provider in Europe has since licensed the CDMA technology, and some version of the technology is part of the next generation cellular infrastructure under a few different names.
While GSM has better interoperability globally, I would make the observation that CDMA works just fine in the US, which is no small region of the planet and the third most populous country. For many people, the better quality is worth it.
I find a few things wrong with this:
1) I don't think EU chose GSM because it was European and not American --- according to Wikipedia, GSM publicly came out in 1990 and CDMA (or IS-95) in 1996.
2) I think it's hard to compare IS-95 and GSM. It's comparing apples to oranges. Sure, there are some things better about them, but CDMA and TDMA are completely different techniques and hard to compare.
3) When you're talking about CDMA being used in future technologies in Europe, if you mean UMTS, that's not CDMA. It's the next generation GSM 3G technology, but uses wideband CDMA or WCDMA in the process. It is considered GSM technology.
4) If you're choosing your new cellular provider based on whether they use CDMA or GSM, that's sad because you're going to get a phone that makes calls anyway. The rest, in my opinion, differs between what the execs at T-Cingizon PCS are thinking.
calculus
Oct 12, 01:27 PM
As long as it doesn't have any Bono or Oprah-related crap engraved on it, we're golden.
That is a worry...
That is a worry...
BoyBach
Aug 28, 12:27 PM
I expect to see a speed bump across the entire range (excluding the Mac Pro) within the coming weeks.
mechamac
Sep 19, 03:17 PM
I bought The Ladykillers and got the movie in 40 minutes. I watched it on my iMac (last Intel-model, 17") and the quality was really great. Might be slightly softer than DVD quality, but color, detail, everything is really sharp. Not at all like the TV shows. Chapter skipping is great....no complaints, really. I doubt I'll be buying many movies, but I'll certainly buy again when the selection improves.
My Netflix account stays, though.
My Netflix account stays, though.
acslater017
Sep 5, 04:06 PM
I expect upgrades to the laptops, iMac, and Mini. Also, there is a good chance of introducing either a iPhone or a iHome.
iTunes Movie Store is certain, although it would be interesting to note how apple goes about selling movies (like the resolution, download times, pricing etc.)
haha wasn't the iHome that supposed elevator photo thing?
iTunes Movie Store is certain, although it would be interesting to note how apple goes about selling movies (like the resolution, download times, pricing etc.)
haha wasn't the iHome that supposed elevator photo thing?
bigmc6000
Mar 23, 05:33 PM
I don't know how much support I'm going to get for this but are we seriously going to sit around and blame only the drunk drivers for this? I mean, really. Our entire society aggrandizes the idea of having a beer and bars/restaurants go out of their way to make drinks that have gratuitous amounts of alcohol but don't taste like it and we're going to sit around and solely blame the person.
WTH is the accountability to bars? They say a bar can't serve you if you're drunk - mmhmm. I will guarantee you that the bar down the street only cares if you're too drunk to stand, they couldn't care less if you're above .08%. If people cared more about preventing DD and less about just trying to catch people who gave in to the temptation of alcohol we'd have a "taxi-tax." Each drink sold has a 5 cent tax - every bar in the area has to require people to blow before they leave and if they are above .08 they have 2 options - take a cab home (paid for by the taxi-tax) or sit around, drink water and wait until it's low enough for you to drive. I've been to a fair number of bars and I've had enough where I had to have a friend drive and I will tell you that not once in my entire adult life would I have given a crap if they charged me 5 cents more per drink. Even if it had to be 10 cents more per drink I'd be fine with that as well.
As I said, if this was about safety and not just trying to get people, put them in jail and take their money they'd do that but instead they do this, help the state budget but leave millions of lives at risk every single day...
WTH is the accountability to bars? They say a bar can't serve you if you're drunk - mmhmm. I will guarantee you that the bar down the street only cares if you're too drunk to stand, they couldn't care less if you're above .08%. If people cared more about preventing DD and less about just trying to catch people who gave in to the temptation of alcohol we'd have a "taxi-tax." Each drink sold has a 5 cent tax - every bar in the area has to require people to blow before they leave and if they are above .08 they have 2 options - take a cab home (paid for by the taxi-tax) or sit around, drink water and wait until it's low enough for you to drive. I've been to a fair number of bars and I've had enough where I had to have a friend drive and I will tell you that not once in my entire adult life would I have given a crap if they charged me 5 cents more per drink. Even if it had to be 10 cents more per drink I'd be fine with that as well.
As I said, if this was about safety and not just trying to get people, put them in jail and take their money they'd do that but instead they do this, help the state budget but leave millions of lives at risk every single day...
zekegri
Mar 23, 05:18 PM
If I am sober enough to go through the process and find out where the checkpoints are then I should be able to use the software.
greenstork
Jul 17, 03:54 PM
I'd bet it all that the iMac gets an Allendale with maybe a Conroe top-end option.
That makes sense, it offers some product differentiation, and saves Apple a few pennies allowing them to offer a lower priced consumer desktop. Mac Pros will likely get at least one Woodcrest dualie model on the top end and perhaps a Conroe on the bottom but it is entirely possible that it will be Woodcrest across the board, to achieve economies of scale both in purchase power and motherboard engineering.
Could someone answer me this, who actually understands the Core Microarchitecture. Is the Conroe extreme edition (2.93 GHz) a better high end gaming chip than a quad woodcrest setup, say at 2.66 GHz? I've heard more than a couple comments that the Conroe is better suited for gamers than a Woodcrest but this makes no sense to me. Again please, no fanboy speculators answering this, I'd really like to know the rationale using some expert technological analysis. What makes the conroe EE so expensive? At a higher cost than the 3.0 GHz Woodcrest, it must excel in some regard.
That makes sense, it offers some product differentiation, and saves Apple a few pennies allowing them to offer a lower priced consumer desktop. Mac Pros will likely get at least one Woodcrest dualie model on the top end and perhaps a Conroe on the bottom but it is entirely possible that it will be Woodcrest across the board, to achieve economies of scale both in purchase power and motherboard engineering.
Could someone answer me this, who actually understands the Core Microarchitecture. Is the Conroe extreme edition (2.93 GHz) a better high end gaming chip than a quad woodcrest setup, say at 2.66 GHz? I've heard more than a couple comments that the Conroe is better suited for gamers than a Woodcrest but this makes no sense to me. Again please, no fanboy speculators answering this, I'd really like to know the rationale using some expert technological analysis. What makes the conroe EE so expensive? At a higher cost than the 3.0 GHz Woodcrest, it must excel in some regard.
RichP
Sep 19, 01:37 PM
I wonder if these people are buying one to "test it out" or are buying multiple movies.
I concur. 1 and 3 months out will really tell how this service fares.
So far though, it is a good start.
I concur. 1 and 3 months out will really tell how this service fares.
So far though, it is a good start.
Hardtimes
Apr 20, 01:08 PM
Just don't go anywhere
Steve
Sent from my iphone
Steve
Sent from my iphone
LightSpeed1
Mar 29, 02:21 PM
As far as windows phone market share passing iPhone ever - I'll believe that $#*% when I see it.
Joshuarocks
Apr 19, 10:59 PM
See the roll eyes after his post, I think he was being sarcastic.
While I agree with not listening to corporate run media, you are severely misguided if you believe the BBC is quality journalism.
Watch John Pilgers "The war you don't see" to see just how they think they should report what world leaders say. It's shocking.
John Pilgers? Does he reside in the US? Does he have a website?
While I agree with not listening to corporate run media, you are severely misguided if you believe the BBC is quality journalism.
Watch John Pilgers "The war you don't see" to see just how they think they should report what world leaders say. It's shocking.
John Pilgers? Does he reside in the US? Does he have a website?
BenRoethig
Aug 28, 12:25 PM
I predict Apple will update from Core 1 to Core 2 within eight days. The only changes beside the CPU is perhaps a doubling of video memory on the iMac and MBPs.
macintel4me
Sep 4, 11:40 PM
This seems contradictory.
10 bucks, but it only streams?
Maybe I am missing something, or maybe this is just pieces of the puzzle.
$10 to buy to your computer. It then streams to your living room using the 'new device'.
10 bucks, but it only streams?
Maybe I am missing something, or maybe this is just pieces of the puzzle.
$10 to buy to your computer. It then streams to your living room using the 'new device'.
No comments:
Post a Comment