LostPacket
Nov 29, 02:26 PM
I don't care what extra features it has, as long as Apple designs a decent remote for it. Something full-sized with a click-wheel. I'd love to fast-forward through a movie using the click-wheel. The 4X, 8X etc on my current PVR just doesn't do it for me.
gnasher729
Nov 15, 12:05 PM
Applications should be, and most likely are written to take advantage of available resources. A developer should be writing applications to take advantage of 8-cores already, they don't need an 8-core machine to do so.
You are not a developer, I take it?
Are you seriously suggesting that a developer should ship a product with features that are not only untested, but haven't even been tried out?
What do you prefer: Unpack 8 core Mac Pro, install Handbrake, run it, 50 percent CPU usage, or unpack 8 core Mac Pro, install Handbrake, run it, kaboom!
You are not a developer, I take it?
Are you seriously suggesting that a developer should ship a product with features that are not only untested, but haven't even been tried out?
What do you prefer: Unpack 8 core Mac Pro, install Handbrake, run it, 50 percent CPU usage, or unpack 8 core Mac Pro, install Handbrake, run it, kaboom!
jav6454
Mar 24, 04:09 PM
What history? Developing crappy integrated graphics?
I missed writing "SMALL performance edge".
My assessment is not based on a small performance edge. It is based on Fusion enabling a whole new set of functionality thanks to OpenCL and DirectX 11 class hardware.
I established my preference BEFORE watching that video. That Sandy Bridge performs so poor in that demo just confirms my choice.
You got it wrong.
Zacate, Brazos and pretty much every Fusion platform does not compete against Sandy Bridge. No...
It competes against Intel's Atom platform. Atom CPU offerings beat the many of the offerings on the AMD side. However, on the GPU side, AMD has got Intel really well.
Anandtech did a nice little article on this. They found the whole Fusion concept and implementation as a whole beats Intel's Atom implementation overall for the HTPC. However, down to specifics, well I just discussed it.
I missed writing "SMALL performance edge".
My assessment is not based on a small performance edge. It is based on Fusion enabling a whole new set of functionality thanks to OpenCL and DirectX 11 class hardware.
I established my preference BEFORE watching that video. That Sandy Bridge performs so poor in that demo just confirms my choice.
You got it wrong.
Zacate, Brazos and pretty much every Fusion platform does not compete against Sandy Bridge. No...
It competes against Intel's Atom platform. Atom CPU offerings beat the many of the offerings on the AMD side. However, on the GPU side, AMD has got Intel really well.
Anandtech did a nice little article on this. They found the whole Fusion concept and implementation as a whole beats Intel's Atom implementation overall for the HTPC. However, down to specifics, well I just discussed it.
iJohnHenry
Mar 20, 10:50 AM
I'm not smart enough to know what the right thing to do is in Libya. But it does make me roll my eyes to hear the CNN anchor talk about how Qaddafi is "thumbing his nose at America".
The propoganda machine is cranked-up and running. :rolleyes:
Let's go kill some badguys!
It's "the World", but American media pretend that the U.S. IS the World.
I actually think having troops is better.
Can we count on you to volunteer?
The propoganda machine is cranked-up and running. :rolleyes:
Let's go kill some badguys!
It's "the World", but American media pretend that the U.S. IS the World.
I actually think having troops is better.
Can we count on you to volunteer?
extrafuzzyllama
Sep 28, 11:51 AM
where can i get some quality silicon cases? i have stayed away from silicon cases since the ipod with click wheel because it collected dust and link and when i tired cleaning it off it just got worst and now with my new ipod touch 4 i am going to try a silicon until a switcheasy case is made
i am just looking for a simple silicon case
thx
i am just looking for a simple silicon case
thx
islanders
Dec 27, 10:33 PM
I'm waiting for one format or the other to win, and I don't have an HD set anyway.
You're comparing apples to oranges now. A cable box is a tuner and a self-contained unit. As far as we know, iTV will not have a tuner. Its only known function at this time is to stream content from a Mac, so that makes iTV like a Slingbox, not a cableco DVR. And Slingboxes don't have hard drives.
I wouldn't hold my breath on the word processing and web surfing. WebTV showed surfing the internet on a TV sucked because trying to read normal-sized text from six feet away was hard, and bumping the text size up would goof up the page layout generally. Same reason word processing would be silly.
I'm predicting a price around $400, but I'm also expecting a streaming device.
What bandwidth? The stuff you watch is downloaded to your Mac first, or even the iTV itself. They don't stream it every time you want to watch it. The iTunes Store is open for business for movies. The bandwidth problem has already been addressed.
That's lack of competition caused by effects of previous government sanctioned monopolies. And some "cooperation" by the different players in the industry. Kinda like how airline tickets and auto insurance are all pretty much the same.
Ok, I don�t know what a slingbox is� and I thought it was going to stream or operate like a TiVo, where it downloads while you are asleep, so it would need a harddrive.
Also, I�m not sure what you mean by TV? Do you mean a CRT with an aspect of 4:3? And, I would assume you don�t mean a flat panel LCD or Plasma, which now outsells tube tvs? A small HD plasma is 42�� and cost about $1000. I just got a Panny 9UK HD Plasma and it works quite will with a mac mini.
And when you download from the iTunes store this does go to a harddrive? So you think I�m going to buy both a new computer and the iTV, and pay $20 to download a few movies?
I already know I�m an idiot, thanks, but this still doesn�t make sense to me.
My point about price fixing was a wild hope that Apple might step in with iDish and offer a service without all the commercials, but I also said that I think this will be a HD movie download service, and web serfer, video server... like a mac mini, TiVo with streaming abilities from iTV.
The bandwidth limitation will be an issue if iTV wants to go past a download service.
You're comparing apples to oranges now. A cable box is a tuner and a self-contained unit. As far as we know, iTV will not have a tuner. Its only known function at this time is to stream content from a Mac, so that makes iTV like a Slingbox, not a cableco DVR. And Slingboxes don't have hard drives.
I wouldn't hold my breath on the word processing and web surfing. WebTV showed surfing the internet on a TV sucked because trying to read normal-sized text from six feet away was hard, and bumping the text size up would goof up the page layout generally. Same reason word processing would be silly.
I'm predicting a price around $400, but I'm also expecting a streaming device.
What bandwidth? The stuff you watch is downloaded to your Mac first, or even the iTV itself. They don't stream it every time you want to watch it. The iTunes Store is open for business for movies. The bandwidth problem has already been addressed.
That's lack of competition caused by effects of previous government sanctioned monopolies. And some "cooperation" by the different players in the industry. Kinda like how airline tickets and auto insurance are all pretty much the same.
Ok, I don�t know what a slingbox is� and I thought it was going to stream or operate like a TiVo, where it downloads while you are asleep, so it would need a harddrive.
Also, I�m not sure what you mean by TV? Do you mean a CRT with an aspect of 4:3? And, I would assume you don�t mean a flat panel LCD or Plasma, which now outsells tube tvs? A small HD plasma is 42�� and cost about $1000. I just got a Panny 9UK HD Plasma and it works quite will with a mac mini.
And when you download from the iTunes store this does go to a harddrive? So you think I�m going to buy both a new computer and the iTV, and pay $20 to download a few movies?
I already know I�m an idiot, thanks, but this still doesn�t make sense to me.
My point about price fixing was a wild hope that Apple might step in with iDish and offer a service without all the commercials, but I also said that I think this will be a HD movie download service, and web serfer, video server... like a mac mini, TiVo with streaming abilities from iTV.
The bandwidth limitation will be an issue if iTV wants to go past a download service.
Daveway
Jan 1, 07:04 PM
Where did you find that image? Are there others?
Its on the Apple.com front page
Its on the Apple.com front page
quadgirl
Sep 1, 01:23 PM
Is there really a big market for a 23" iMac @ 2000? I hope this rumor is bogus. I'd much rather see Apple come out with a headless Gaming mid-tower with a Core 2 Duo Extreme and X1600 card. Dual HD bays and one optical bay. AP/BT built in. 3 PCIe slots (one used by X1600). I think that would would fill a gap Apple has in their consumer line-up right now.
A Headless Conroe would be awesome. Easily expandable and fast. But, will Apple do it? Pigs may fly. The Mac Pro is great, but most people simply can't afford one and don't need 4 processors.
Come on Apple, bridge the gap!
A Headless Conroe would be awesome. Easily expandable and fast. But, will Apple do it? Pigs may fly. The Mac Pro is great, but most people simply can't afford one and don't need 4 processors.
Come on Apple, bridge the gap!
popelife
Jan 3, 08:07 PM
I guess a 14�� laptop with a decent word processor is too much to ask for?
What's wrong with a MacBook and:
a) Pages
or
b) MS Word (yuck... but ymmv)
or
c) Framemaker in Boot Camp
?
Agreed, the world of word processing isn't overrun with great apps. Times change, and word processing just isn't sexy any more... even though there are plenty of theses and books and magazine articles still being written.
(I notice that MS are preparing to give away updates to Office 2007 - and Vista - to anyone that got Office pre-installed on their PC. Talk about abusing their monopoly... No struggling WP developer can hope to survive against those sort of tactics.)
With a bit of luck Pages 3.0 will be along next week. Hardly a keynote showstopper, but props to Apple for getting into that market at all. Pages is cute.
If you specifically need the long-doc and publishing features of Framemaker, then it's Windows time. Sad but true. Take it up with Adobe.
What's wrong with a MacBook and:
a) Pages
or
b) MS Word (yuck... but ymmv)
or
c) Framemaker in Boot Camp
?
Agreed, the world of word processing isn't overrun with great apps. Times change, and word processing just isn't sexy any more... even though there are plenty of theses and books and magazine articles still being written.
(I notice that MS are preparing to give away updates to Office 2007 - and Vista - to anyone that got Office pre-installed on their PC. Talk about abusing their monopoly... No struggling WP developer can hope to survive against those sort of tactics.)
With a bit of luck Pages 3.0 will be along next week. Hardly a keynote showstopper, but props to Apple for getting into that market at all. Pages is cute.
If you specifically need the long-doc and publishing features of Framemaker, then it's Windows time. Sad but true. Take it up with Adobe.
LastLine
May 2, 04:42 PM
Not a huge fan of this in iOS Simulator when developing, all that said though - increased consistency across the platforms can only be a good thing IMO.
MattDell
Sep 6, 08:29 PM
Renting would never fly. It's far too easy to just burn the movie to DVD if it's already in digital format. The movie executives would flip. It would take some impressive coding to prevent users from doing this, and even then... somebody will figure out a way around it.
So, no. I don't think any movie corporation will allow digital movie rentals.
-Matt
So, no. I don't think any movie corporation will allow digital movie rentals.
-Matt
feare
Apr 2, 08:43 AM
It's definitely a lot smoother than the first preview was, especially in the animation department. Mission Control is no longer choppy for me, and while opening folders in launchpad is still choppy, it is much less so than in the first preview (I'm also on my Cinema Display right now, which seems to push my 2009 13" mbp).
In fact, animations on the whole seem to be smoother than in SL. When using my cinema display, opening large stacks tended to be a little choppy, but now they open smoothly.
And the default wallpaper is much improved.
In fact, animations on the whole seem to be smoother than in SL. When using my cinema display, opening large stacks tended to be a little choppy, but now they open smoothly.
And the default wallpaper is much improved.
archer75
May 3, 04:44 PM
The Quad i5 or i7?
The i7. I actually have an i7 920 in my PC but the sandy bridge is still a good upgrade.
The i7. I actually have an i7 920 in my PC but the sandy bridge is still a good upgrade.
skiltrip
Sep 30, 10:16 AM
I'm still rocking my eBay Hong Kong cases. Order a couple more earlier in the week to the tune of $1.99 each. Got a gel style smoke colored case, and a clear hard snap on case. Both from seller Ashopone. I like trying out different cases for only a buck or two each.
I tried out the Grip Vue at my local Best Buy. One of the green ones was already torn open, so I figured what the hell and popped in on my iPod. I loved the fit, but I didn't like the feel of the buttons. It's like I wasn't getting any feedback at all. Wasn't sure if I was pressing it or not. Do you people with Grip Vue find the buttons awkward feeling, or are they ok on yours?
I tried out the Grip Vue at my local Best Buy. One of the green ones was already torn open, so I figured what the hell and popped in on my iPod. I loved the fit, but I didn't like the feel of the buttons. It's like I wasn't getting any feedback at all. Wasn't sure if I was pressing it or not. Do you people with Grip Vue find the buttons awkward feeling, or are they ok on yours?
zoran
Nov 23, 04:39 AM
So when will the faster versions of clovertown be available, any rumor on that?
Cubert
Jul 19, 03:46 PM
Boooo-Yahhhh!
Quoth Jim Cramer.
Quoth Jim Cramer.
Rt&Dzine
Mar 22, 01:47 PM
Yes, it's a company that makes it's own decisions and it's own products. They choose what they will allow and won't allow. If you are a car company you choose to make a mini van or not. Apple chooses what they want, we accept what they give us. If you don't, dont download it or get it, no one is forcing you to have it!
I actually agree. But would you still think this if they didn't allow "Gay B-Gone." Or would you cry that gays always get their way?
I actually agree. But would you still think this if they didn't allow "Gay B-Gone." Or would you cry that gays always get their way?
Phobophobia
Jul 20, 02:50 AM
Vista will sell more copies in its first two weeks than Leopard in its first year. As several hundred thousand years of humanity have demonstrated, rhyme and reason matters little.
I have doubts about this statement.
Leopard will be able to run on all macs from the past several years. Vista requires a relatively new machine.
Vista likely will cost much more than Leopard.
Most copies of Vista will be sold with new computers.
Steve has been saving the good stuff for Leopard. He's known for a long time that he needs to steal M$'s thunder with this release.
I have doubts about this statement.
Leopard will be able to run on all macs from the past several years. Vista requires a relatively new machine.
Vista likely will cost much more than Leopard.
Most copies of Vista will be sold with new computers.
Steve has been saving the good stuff for Leopard. He's known for a long time that he needs to steal M$'s thunder with this release.
prady16
Oct 23, 08:12 AM
I hope to have it order Tuesday and delivered by the end of the week?
Any chance?
I highly doubt it!
Any chance?
I highly doubt it!
jettredmont
Aug 16, 02:00 PM
We need flat data rates on mobiles in the UK. It will happen (esp. if they want people to embrace 3g that they spent all the money on), it's just when.
While it's nice to dream, when you are talking about a service (downloading music from your server to your device) that the vast majority of people are going to be using many hours in a day, I doubt you'll see that being "cheap" on the current setups any time soon. For one, there isn't that kind of capacity in the networks. For another, while it may be different in the UK, there are still many pockets of poor or nonexistent coverage. Finally, the cost of portable storage is decreasing significantly (by which I mean, several orders of magnitude) faster than the cost of network bandwidth.
Network capacity is where it all starts off. Why are ringtones so expensive? Well, for one, because people still buy them. But, offering $1 or $0.25 ringtones would yield a killing for both the record companies (getting $0.25 for 1/6th of a song? Seems about right relative to $1/song) and greatly expand the service in terms of total market size (ie, 1/3rd revenue per download, but much more than 3x increase in number of downloads). Why don't they do this? Because their networks, to a one, could not stand for this traffic to increase enough that the market would expand enough to make the change profitable. When you pay $3 for a ringtone download you are paying primarily to keep other people from doing the same. Sounds perverse, but that's the reality when you have a limited-availability resource, it is the foundation of supply vs demand.
Expanding on the second: I'd never, ever, buy something that I would want to use when driving, for instance, across the "boring states" of Nevada and south-eastern Oregon, that requires a constant connection to any type of service. Why? Because even cell phones are useless for about a three hour stretch of Highway 95 going up from Winnemucca. If cell phones aren't working now, how long will it be before some next-generation service comes in and "wires" the place up?
I might shoot myself without my iPod to listen to during that three hours of scrubgrass, migrating crickets, and mountains.
But, seriously, you guys are talking about a concept that would have garnered a lot of conversation fifteen years ago. The fact of the day is, though, that networking is not getting cheaper at a rate of doubling bandwidth per year, and small, portable hard drive storage (or non-hard drive Flash storage, even moreso) is. Wireless networking isn't winning on power consumption either (Flash storage wins there by a longshot as well).
Until people start having libraries that are infeasible to transport with them (which means, hard drive space can't keep up with library space, which certainly isn't the case today as library space isn't doubling per year either)and which can be trickle-downloaded to a low-profile wireless device in realtime, the idea here is dead. Sorry, that's just the facts.
While it's nice to dream, when you are talking about a service (downloading music from your server to your device) that the vast majority of people are going to be using many hours in a day, I doubt you'll see that being "cheap" on the current setups any time soon. For one, there isn't that kind of capacity in the networks. For another, while it may be different in the UK, there are still many pockets of poor or nonexistent coverage. Finally, the cost of portable storage is decreasing significantly (by which I mean, several orders of magnitude) faster than the cost of network bandwidth.
Network capacity is where it all starts off. Why are ringtones so expensive? Well, for one, because people still buy them. But, offering $1 or $0.25 ringtones would yield a killing for both the record companies (getting $0.25 for 1/6th of a song? Seems about right relative to $1/song) and greatly expand the service in terms of total market size (ie, 1/3rd revenue per download, but much more than 3x increase in number of downloads). Why don't they do this? Because their networks, to a one, could not stand for this traffic to increase enough that the market would expand enough to make the change profitable. When you pay $3 for a ringtone download you are paying primarily to keep other people from doing the same. Sounds perverse, but that's the reality when you have a limited-availability resource, it is the foundation of supply vs demand.
Expanding on the second: I'd never, ever, buy something that I would want to use when driving, for instance, across the "boring states" of Nevada and south-eastern Oregon, that requires a constant connection to any type of service. Why? Because even cell phones are useless for about a three hour stretch of Highway 95 going up from Winnemucca. If cell phones aren't working now, how long will it be before some next-generation service comes in and "wires" the place up?
I might shoot myself without my iPod to listen to during that three hours of scrubgrass, migrating crickets, and mountains.
But, seriously, you guys are talking about a concept that would have garnered a lot of conversation fifteen years ago. The fact of the day is, though, that networking is not getting cheaper at a rate of doubling bandwidth per year, and small, portable hard drive storage (or non-hard drive Flash storage, even moreso) is. Wireless networking isn't winning on power consumption either (Flash storage wins there by a longshot as well).
Until people start having libraries that are infeasible to transport with them (which means, hard drive space can't keep up with library space, which certainly isn't the case today as library space isn't doubling per year either)and which can be trickle-downloaded to a low-profile wireless device in realtime, the idea here is dead. Sorry, that's just the facts.
hob
Aug 6, 09:09 PM
Oh my
it's like christmas come early
infact it's better
christmas sucks, and it's cold
WWDC is my favourite holiday :p
it's like christmas come early
infact it's better
christmas sucks, and it's cold
WWDC is my favourite holiday :p
Compile 'em all
Jan 5, 08:22 AM
For a word processor, I'm using Open Office...I'm pretty happy with it except that it uses X11.
Use NeoOffice. It is a port of OpenOffice and uses Aqua instead of X11.
Use NeoOffice. It is a port of OpenOffice and uses Aqua instead of X11.
Charlie Sheen
Mar 24, 01:04 PM
next step amd cpus
zin
Mar 24, 02:38 PM
Please don't put an AMD 5XXX series into the new iMacs! :(
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий