EricNau
Dec 27, 10:38 PM
I'm predicting a price around $400, but I'm also expecting a streaming device.
Didn't Jobs say it would be priced at $299?
Didn't Jobs say it would be priced at $299?
PowerFullMac
Jan 12, 09:56 AM
Subtract keyboard. Add multi-touch and WiMax. Thin as an iPhone.
Nope, more powerfull with real OS X.
Nope, more powerfull with real OS X.
Digital Dude
Jun 22, 03:09 PM
I don’t feel this should be a ‘Page 2’ topic in that it makes more sense as to why Apple is dragging its feet on a replacement of their 30-inch desktop display.
As for a new MacPro, I think Apple couldn't care less about professional designers anymore. It's now all about bubblegum social interaction with 16-year old bee-bopping mall kids.
As for a new MacPro, I think Apple couldn't care less about professional designers anymore. It's now all about bubblegum social interaction with 16-year old bee-bopping mall kids.
0815
Apr 19, 11:43 AM
Just in time - I just decided yesterday that it is time to replace my first generation Intel iMac. I hope they have a 500GB SSD option for the update (the current option of 256 GB SSD is too small and you cant even order them with two 256GB SSDs). Thunderbold would also be nice (no need for it right away, but I guess in a year or two I will be happy to have one)
raymondkerr
Feb 23, 10:09 AM
Fantastic setup, would love to get those speakers, I'm in the UK also, what make/model of speakers ?
Thanks
Raymond
Thanks
Raymond
Evangelion
Aug 30, 02:27 AM
I've got hard facts to back up my claim. Do you have any for yours? :)
Those prices might not be valid anymore. And could you mention any of the reasons why anyone would use Yonah instead of Merom, if the prices are identical (more or less)?
Those prices might not be valid anymore. And could you mention any of the reasons why anyone would use Yonah instead of Merom, if the prices are identical (more or less)?
viggin
Apr 12, 11:43 PM
Here's the deal...(and I just realized that the way this is written might make it look like I have earlier posts in this thread. I don't. I'm jumping in right here.)
The reason that I think pros fear "dumbed down" isn't so much because they want something that is difficult to use, but rather because sometimes making difficult things easy makes things that were previously easy difficult, or impossible.
So just this week I had to help somebody with an iMovie problem. There was a part where they had 3 overlapping audio tracks. Movie audio, voiceover, and music. Try as they might, and try as I might, we could not get the movie audio to actually go away -- even though we had set it's volume level to "0%."
Oh...and did I mention that they're on a white iBook? Fine machine, but a little slow. So I copy their iMovie stuff onto an external drive so we can look at it on my Core i7 iMac instead.
Except iMovie on my iMac won't recognize the project on an external drive. I know that supposedly iMovie is supposed to...but it won't work. So I have to copy the files onto my iMac, and then iMovie magically sees them...because they're in the spot that iMovie wants files to be in.
Well the only way to get the clips to work right that I could come up with, was to actually run all their clips through Quicktime 7 and just delete the audio track off them. Voila! No audio track for iMovie to play, when it's not supposed to.
My point is that I spent 30 minutes dinking around with the "Easy" iMovie to do what would have taken me 10 seconds to do in Final Cut. (Select audio. Delete.)
And that's pretty much my experience every time I get lulled into trying to run a quick project through iMovie. Everything seems to be going well, I'm even sort of enjoying myself (Don't tell anyone), then I hit a snag or a wall...bump up into some limitation of iMovie that there isn't a very good work-around to...and wish that I'd just used Final Cut to begin with.
So while I agree that there are those who want pro tools to be difficult simply for the sake of having a high barrier of entry...
...I also think there are a ton of us that are just afraid that the cost of these new and handy features will be that some of the things we rely on doing, especially things that are a little "hackish," will become difficult/impossible. In the name of simplicity.
It's like my iPhone. I love it to pieces, and I don't plan to have any other type of phone any time soon, but sometimes I wish for a few more advanced features...features that are available (Usually through third-party tools) on Android. Instead I'm stuck hoping and wishing and praying that Apple will implement them.
The reason that I think pros fear "dumbed down" isn't so much because they want something that is difficult to use, but rather because sometimes making difficult things easy makes things that were previously easy difficult, or impossible.
So just this week I had to help somebody with an iMovie problem. There was a part where they had 3 overlapping audio tracks. Movie audio, voiceover, and music. Try as they might, and try as I might, we could not get the movie audio to actually go away -- even though we had set it's volume level to "0%."
Oh...and did I mention that they're on a white iBook? Fine machine, but a little slow. So I copy their iMovie stuff onto an external drive so we can look at it on my Core i7 iMac instead.
Except iMovie on my iMac won't recognize the project on an external drive. I know that supposedly iMovie is supposed to...but it won't work. So I have to copy the files onto my iMac, and then iMovie magically sees them...because they're in the spot that iMovie wants files to be in.
Well the only way to get the clips to work right that I could come up with, was to actually run all their clips through Quicktime 7 and just delete the audio track off them. Voila! No audio track for iMovie to play, when it's not supposed to.
My point is that I spent 30 minutes dinking around with the "Easy" iMovie to do what would have taken me 10 seconds to do in Final Cut. (Select audio. Delete.)
And that's pretty much my experience every time I get lulled into trying to run a quick project through iMovie. Everything seems to be going well, I'm even sort of enjoying myself (Don't tell anyone), then I hit a snag or a wall...bump up into some limitation of iMovie that there isn't a very good work-around to...and wish that I'd just used Final Cut to begin with.
So while I agree that there are those who want pro tools to be difficult simply for the sake of having a high barrier of entry...
...I also think there are a ton of us that are just afraid that the cost of these new and handy features will be that some of the things we rely on doing, especially things that are a little "hackish," will become difficult/impossible. In the name of simplicity.
It's like my iPhone. I love it to pieces, and I don't plan to have any other type of phone any time soon, but sometimes I wish for a few more advanced features...features that are available (Usually through third-party tools) on Android. Instead I'm stuck hoping and wishing and praying that Apple will implement them.
twoodcc
Dec 2, 04:59 AM
Well, I won't get back the #7 spot from you ;) unless these 12 cores Gulftown Mac pros come out at MWSF...
wait, by MWSF you mean CES?
wait, by MWSF you mean CES?
exabytes18
Jul 18, 03:36 AM
With such big files readily available to the public, I want to see so many people decide to rent a movie that the ISPs struggle with their oversold services. :D
citizenzen
Mar 22, 10:32 AM
So what are your thoughts? Should Apple have rejected the app?
I don't think that apple should be in the business of approving apps.
I think they should do their best to categorize them and create methods to protect certain age groups from accessing inappropriate apps.
But otherwise get out of the business of approving 'this' while denying 'that'.
I don't think that apple should be in the business of approving apps.
I think they should do their best to categorize them and create methods to protect certain age groups from accessing inappropriate apps.
But otherwise get out of the business of approving 'this' while denying 'that'.
e-coli
Jun 22, 12:22 PM
No chance. The ergonomics would be a disaster.
Multimedia
Nov 16, 01:43 PM
The bandwidth of DIMMs doesn't really change with their capacity (assuming their timings are the same). It is the number of active channels that gives you the increase in memory bandwidth.
I believe the memory controller will interleave the lower 512MB (since you have a branch populated with 512MB) of each DIMM resulting in full bandwidth access (4 channels) to that range of memory (512 x 4 = 2 GB) with the remainder of the 2 GB DIMMs (the remaining 3 GB) only getting the benefit of a single branch (two channels).
Personally I wouldn't purchase 2 GB DIMMs given their extra cost in relation to two 1 GB DIMMs... in other words use more of the memory slots you have ... unless you really want to leave room to add more RAM later.In this class of RAM the 2GB sticks are now less than two 1GB sticks. So I don't see why buying only 1GB sticks would be advisable any more.
AV was saying that the 512 sticks run half as fast as 1 and 2GB sticks. Is that not correct or did I misunderstand what he meant?
...you dont need 8 cores?? see the 4 cores Mac pro goes down in retail price.It already is the lowest.An unlikely scenario. Don't expect any price drops on mac pros for a long time after clovertown chips are in them.I agree with you 100%. Apple Mac Pro is already the lowest priced Dual Woodcrest product on the market. Dell costs a lot more. So why would you expect Clovertown to impact the price of the existing line that is already at a rock bottom price Alpinism? :confused: :eek:Thats the beauty of going Intel, you dont drop the price ? DELL, HP and the other competitors WILL.Apple started lowest and none of the other vendors followed so your premise is not turning out to be true in the real world. :rolleyes:
To rip DVD's. Why add additional, unnecessary steps?I don't rip DVDs. I rip DVD Images created with Toast from EyeTV broadcast recordings. So it's not an extra step. If you mean why not export direct to mp4 from EyeTV the answer is because they look like C**p. You want a really good looking mp4 file, Handbrake is the only way to go IMHO. And the maximum quality Toast encode to DVD image is also the best way to provide Handbrake with a superior master to rip from.
Anyway that's why what I use is ready for an 8-core Mac Pro now.
I believe the memory controller will interleave the lower 512MB (since you have a branch populated with 512MB) of each DIMM resulting in full bandwidth access (4 channels) to that range of memory (512 x 4 = 2 GB) with the remainder of the 2 GB DIMMs (the remaining 3 GB) only getting the benefit of a single branch (two channels).
Personally I wouldn't purchase 2 GB DIMMs given their extra cost in relation to two 1 GB DIMMs... in other words use more of the memory slots you have ... unless you really want to leave room to add more RAM later.In this class of RAM the 2GB sticks are now less than two 1GB sticks. So I don't see why buying only 1GB sticks would be advisable any more.
AV was saying that the 512 sticks run half as fast as 1 and 2GB sticks. Is that not correct or did I misunderstand what he meant?
...you dont need 8 cores?? see the 4 cores Mac pro goes down in retail price.It already is the lowest.An unlikely scenario. Don't expect any price drops on mac pros for a long time after clovertown chips are in them.I agree with you 100%. Apple Mac Pro is already the lowest priced Dual Woodcrest product on the market. Dell costs a lot more. So why would you expect Clovertown to impact the price of the existing line that is already at a rock bottom price Alpinism? :confused: :eek:Thats the beauty of going Intel, you dont drop the price ? DELL, HP and the other competitors WILL.Apple started lowest and none of the other vendors followed so your premise is not turning out to be true in the real world. :rolleyes:
To rip DVD's. Why add additional, unnecessary steps?I don't rip DVDs. I rip DVD Images created with Toast from EyeTV broadcast recordings. So it's not an extra step. If you mean why not export direct to mp4 from EyeTV the answer is because they look like C**p. You want a really good looking mp4 file, Handbrake is the only way to go IMHO. And the maximum quality Toast encode to DVD image is also the best way to provide Handbrake with a superior master to rip from.
Anyway that's why what I use is ready for an 8-core Mac Pro now.
sisyphus
Sep 6, 06:15 PM
I know they want to sell and that it is probably easier to manage, but I would rather rent than buy. I have bought a total of 4 DVDs. So few movies are worth owning. Some are actually worth renting.
boncellis
Sep 6, 07:39 PM
: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
It could be, but Apple has so much invested in the iTunes "brand" that I don't see them moving away from it. I agree they really should improve it though, the video playback and iTMS browsing need to be faster.
As some have suggested perhaps "Showtime" refers to something like a new app...
B
It could be, but Apple has so much invested in the iTunes "brand" that I don't see them moving away from it. I agree they really should improve it though, the video playback and iTMS browsing need to be faster.
PaperQueen
Sep 20, 08:08 PM
The first is the dermaSHOT (http://www.myincipio.com/product/IPOD_TOUCH_IP-900/iPod-touch-4G-dermaSHOT-Silicone-Case---Black.html). I am worried, however, that I will have the same problem with lint-magnet, because it is also made of silicone. Any ideas there?
That�s the case I have (see my notes in post #44 of this thread). It�s not �sticky� so no problems grabbing dust or lint...at least I haven�t had any problems that way.
My only concern is that it�s not as snug top to bottom as it should be. Not so loose it�s going to slip out, but feels like there�s a little play in it when you push the power button off and on.
That�s the case I have (see my notes in post #44 of this thread). It�s not �sticky� so no problems grabbing dust or lint...at least I haven�t had any problems that way.
My only concern is that it�s not as snug top to bottom as it should be. Not so loose it�s going to slip out, but feels like there�s a little play in it when you push the power button off and on.
Gatesbasher
Mar 24, 01:48 PM
You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)....
I for one misunderstood you too. Thanks for the elucidation.
I know there's no hope for anyone willing to listen to 128,000 bps noise, or worse yet pay money for it. I don't know about 320k, but my feeling on the subject of compression is this:
I was one of the people convinced by the propaganda that led to the DVD Audio and SACD fiasco. I have since done a lot more reading and am convinced by the math that CDs are about as good as there is any reason for them to be, human hearing being what it is. (I always thought increasing the sampling rate was stupid.)
As far as Apple Lossless and other codecs of the same type�if they can compress video signals losslessly to 2% of their original size for DVDs, why should I doubt you can compress music to 40 or 50%? The thing about going below that is, maybe at first listen, the difference doesn't leap out at you�but maybe it would with extended exposure, and with better equipment than you're using right now. What you're assuming is that you're never going to have better equipment, and that "small" differences in quality are inconsequential.
My problem with that is that then you've been set up for the next decrease in quality, and the one after that, and the one after that. Eventually you're buying 128,000 bps tracks and making fun of "audiophiles" who can tell the difference, and then one of the true triumphs of 20th Century technology�really good audio reproduction�is lost.
Video that can't be told from the real thing is never going to happen in my lifetime, but with sound we were there�and then threw it away!
I for one misunderstood you too. Thanks for the elucidation.
I know there's no hope for anyone willing to listen to 128,000 bps noise, or worse yet pay money for it. I don't know about 320k, but my feeling on the subject of compression is this:
I was one of the people convinced by the propaganda that led to the DVD Audio and SACD fiasco. I have since done a lot more reading and am convinced by the math that CDs are about as good as there is any reason for them to be, human hearing being what it is. (I always thought increasing the sampling rate was stupid.)
As far as Apple Lossless and other codecs of the same type�if they can compress video signals losslessly to 2% of their original size for DVDs, why should I doubt you can compress music to 40 or 50%? The thing about going below that is, maybe at first listen, the difference doesn't leap out at you�but maybe it would with extended exposure, and with better equipment than you're using right now. What you're assuming is that you're never going to have better equipment, and that "small" differences in quality are inconsequential.
My problem with that is that then you've been set up for the next decrease in quality, and the one after that, and the one after that. Eventually you're buying 128,000 bps tracks and making fun of "audiophiles" who can tell the difference, and then one of the true triumphs of 20th Century technology�really good audio reproduction�is lost.
Video that can't be told from the real thing is never going to happen in my lifetime, but with sound we were there�and then threw it away!
Time Less
Mar 25, 03:41 PM
Can the new GPU even do 1080p?
i would think so since apple says the ipad 2 will output 1080p to a tv. only 720p for iphone 4.
i would think so since apple says the ipad 2 will output 1080p to a tv. only 720p for iphone 4.
socamx
Jan 12, 10:46 AM
Take a look at this:
http://flickr.com/photos/peteryan/2187596838/
Personaly i think it's fake, because of the non-capital letter on the begining of the second sentence... but who knows it could be true the disposition of the this so called macbook air is quite original and not in the tradicional way laptop upside down opened a little...
It looks exactly like the 15 inch Macbook Pro. You can clearly make out the cd drive, the IR port for the remote and the button to release the screen.
http://flickr.com/photos/peteryan/2187596838/
Personaly i think it's fake, because of the non-capital letter on the begining of the second sentence... but who knows it could be true the disposition of the this so called macbook air is quite original and not in the tradicional way laptop upside down opened a little...
It looks exactly like the 15 inch Macbook Pro. You can clearly make out the cd drive, the IR port for the remote and the button to release the screen.
skunk
Mar 21, 02:52 PM
I hope so, but the next question is how long Libya will have multiple governments, and under what conditions the rebels recieve official international recognition.I don't think there will be any conditions: at some point, effective authority will simply be seen to reside with them, rather than Daffy the Duck, and at that point, they will become the de facto recognised representatives.
aiqw9182
Mar 24, 03:07 PM
I'm not talking about using a discrete GPU, but about what you can do with just the CPU (or should I call it "APU"?).
Once again, Sandy Bridge will smoke the Llano CPU. The amount of applications that currently support OpenCL are slim to none. You can keep using your theoretical AMD video to somehow prove something but the fact remains: Sandy Bridge's CPU will outperform AMD's Llano in EVERY application that isn't supported for OpenCL, and it will outperform it in EVERY application that does have OpenCL support if you have a discrete GPU. End of story. Saying that Sandy Bridge is a 'bad purchase' is laughable at best when we haven't even seen any hard benchmarks for Llano, all we've seen a video from AMD's own YouTube channel. What the hell do you expect them to upload? Them getting destroyed by Intel like they do in every other test that has been done since 2006?
Once again, Sandy Bridge will smoke the Llano CPU. The amount of applications that currently support OpenCL are slim to none. You can keep using your theoretical AMD video to somehow prove something but the fact remains: Sandy Bridge's CPU will outperform AMD's Llano in EVERY application that isn't supported for OpenCL, and it will outperform it in EVERY application that does have OpenCL support if you have a discrete GPU. End of story. Saying that Sandy Bridge is a 'bad purchase' is laughable at best when we haven't even seen any hard benchmarks for Llano, all we've seen a video from AMD's own YouTube channel. What the hell do you expect them to upload? Them getting destroyed by Intel like they do in every other test that has been done since 2006?
Benguitar
Nov 26, 04:02 PM
Lighten up, guy.:)
I know, :p
I didn't know they had Lego Games on the iPad.....
:eek: Want.
I know, :p
I didn't know they had Lego Games on the iPad.....
:eek: Want.
MattDell
Sep 6, 08:34 PM
I do backup all of my ipod videos on DVD.
That brings up something that has really bugged me for a while. I think it is absurd that if you delete something you bought from Apple, you have to pay to get it back! If I buy a song, I should be buying a license to that song... not just one 'instance' of that particular song.
Apple keeps track of all the songs you buy anyway, so it's my opinion that you should be able to just "get another copy" if you have already purchased a song.
I think this would be especially great for movies. That way you won't have to eat up precious hard drive space. You could purchase your movie, download it, watch it, delete it, and then re-download the movie if you want to view it again.
-Matt
That brings up something that has really bugged me for a while. I think it is absurd that if you delete something you bought from Apple, you have to pay to get it back! If I buy a song, I should be buying a license to that song... not just one 'instance' of that particular song.
Apple keeps track of all the songs you buy anyway, so it's my opinion that you should be able to just "get another copy" if you have already purchased a song.
I think this would be especially great for movies. That way you won't have to eat up precious hard drive space. You could purchase your movie, download it, watch it, delete it, and then re-download the movie if you want to view it again.
-Matt
JRM PowerPod
Aug 7, 05:26 AM
Mac Pro
Mac Prostitute
hmmmm............
sounds a bit contentious to me
Mac Prostitute
hmmmm............
sounds a bit contentious to me
Lollypop
Jul 18, 01:45 AM
Lets see how they make this happen, movies are big downloads (or so im told :p ;) ) people wont like spending a lot of time downloading a file only for it to become completely useless a while later. But if it increases the content in the iTMS then so be it!
No comments:
Post a Comment