balamw
Sep 6, 01:18 AM
If they can put the menu logic into iTunes, all the "Airport Express A/V" would have do do is add an H264 decoder chip and video DAC to the current Airport Express, that would be a pretty cheap solution.
Just note that the H.264 decoder chip in the 5G iPod is what sets the resolution and bitrate limits for current iTMS videos to no more than 320x240 and under 768 kbps. Any more powerful chip would put out more heat and require a larger box to dissipate it. If they went with MPEG-4 they could already handle 2Mbps 480x480 files which is competitive with current digital satellite offerings.
B
Just note that the H.264 decoder chip in the 5G iPod is what sets the resolution and bitrate limits for current iTMS videos to no more than 320x240 and under 768 kbps. Any more powerful chip would put out more heat and require a larger box to dissipate it. If they went with MPEG-4 they could already handle 2Mbps 480x480 files which is competitive with current digital satellite offerings.
B
kevin.rivers
Jul 14, 11:11 AM
LOL! That's the silliest thing I've seen on here in a long time.
I am glad you have enough knowledge to tell me why it is silly, instead of making a silly comment yourself.
I am glad you have enough knowledge to tell me why it is silly, instead of making a silly comment yourself.
manu chao
Sep 10, 05:21 PM
This is my expectation. I am one customer who needs 8 cores for sure. I also expect to need 16 when they become available. Clovertown is not expected to be any longer than Kentsfield.
If you need 16 cores, shouldn't you get a rack with four Xserves (once the new Xserves with Intel-processors become available)?
Sure, getting the same in one (quiet) box for the price of one box would be preferable but this is not available yet.
Or, do you mean you want 16 cores but right now you are not willing to spent what it takes to get it.
(Sorry for the tone, I would like to have 16 cores for my work as well.)
If you need 16 cores, shouldn't you get a rack with four Xserves (once the new Xserves with Intel-processors become available)?
Sure, getting the same in one (quiet) box for the price of one box would be preferable but this is not available yet.
Or, do you mean you want 16 cores but right now you are not willing to spent what it takes to get it.
(Sorry for the tone, I would like to have 16 cores for my work as well.)
rontheancient
Oct 27, 05:56 PM
They should be welcomed with open arms at Mac Expo:rolleyes:
They should be welcomed with LOADED arms at Mac Expo.
They should be welcomed with LOADED arms at Mac Expo.
Ingot
Apr 20, 01:17 PM
This is great for my alcoholic blackouts. Fire up the program and find out where I've been. Although on my last trip to San Diego it put me across the border and into a Tijuana cat house.
SEE? A positive use for this. Keep it up Pollyana! I love it!
SEE? A positive use for this. Keep it up Pollyana! I love it!
rockosmodurnlif
Apr 4, 12:40 PM
Are iDevices worth a life? The criminals think they are because they brought guns.
toddybody
Mar 22, 03:21 PM
Honestly, if it made any sense whatsoever then Apple wouldn't have killed it. Do the math. You're living in the past, kid.
As an ex-kid I take extreme offense to that statement. Besides, are you really going to tell me Apple makes sense all the time? I guarantee Apple made more money off the 24inch iMac than they did the MacPro for that period...now, with the introduction of the 27inch they wanted to diversify the iMac line more so...hence the 21.5.
My beef with your original statement stands (as its UBER subjective)...why is a 24inch screen "useless"? What if Apple came out with a 14inch MBP, and I said the 15inch was "useless". Uhhh, thats called an OPINION...look it up grand dad;)
As an ex-kid I take extreme offense to that statement. Besides, are you really going to tell me Apple makes sense all the time? I guarantee Apple made more money off the 24inch iMac than they did the MacPro for that period...now, with the introduction of the 27inch they wanted to diversify the iMac line more so...hence the 21.5.
My beef with your original statement stands (as its UBER subjective)...why is a 24inch screen "useless"? What if Apple came out with a 14inch MBP, and I said the 15inch was "useless". Uhhh, thats called an OPINION...look it up grand dad;)
MattInOz
May 3, 06:19 PM
My iMacs have 2 Firewire ports (a 27" and a 24") which I use for TM and a SD clone external. The new iMacs only have one FW port - with 4 USB connections. Seems like a slower way to have to back up, and I see no externals out there that run Thunderbolt.
Am I missing something? :confused:
You can daisy chain the Firewire drives.
I'm assuming you don't run both backups at the same time as both would be competing for the internal drive and would make the whole process much slower what with all the seeking well and internal drive speed being the limiting factor. So if only one device is moving data at a time then the two devices in Daisy Chain shouldn't be noticeably slower than on dedicated ports.
Am I missing something? :confused:
You can daisy chain the Firewire drives.
I'm assuming you don't run both backups at the same time as both would be competing for the internal drive and would make the whole process much slower what with all the seeking well and internal drive speed being the limiting factor. So if only one device is moving data at a time then the two devices in Daisy Chain shouldn't be noticeably slower than on dedicated ports.
Squonk
Sep 26, 08:52 AM
Include all the functionality of the Apple remote to allow the iPhone to drive your iTV and Front Row.
"Mom, hold on a second, I need to change the channel..." :D
"Mom, hold on a second, I need to change the channel..." :D
kevin.rivers
Jul 14, 10:49 PM
Whether IMac takes Merom or Conroe, it's still 64 bit. Does anybody have any feeling whether the IMac will be able to handle > 2GB of memory (assuming 2GB dimms are for sale)? That would make me very happy :)
Thanks,
Steve
As far as I know it can handle 2GB+ memory now up to 4GB on the 945G.
http://www.intel.com/products/chipsets/945g/
The 945G supports 64-bit, so you can drop in a Merom. So current intel iMacs will do 4GB and 64bit.
If Apple drops in Merom in the next few months without moving to a new chipset. I am guessing the amount of memory will still be limited by the chipset, at 4GB.
If Apple goes Merom with a new chipset, or Conroe that will change the ball game.
So. The last factor is of course cost. 2GB sticks are way too much to be cost effective. I would hope to see the cost come down, once the need for 4GB of memory in a mobile becomes necessary. I don't think it is right now.
Thanks,
Steve
As far as I know it can handle 2GB+ memory now up to 4GB on the 945G.
http://www.intel.com/products/chipsets/945g/
The 945G supports 64-bit, so you can drop in a Merom. So current intel iMacs will do 4GB and 64bit.
If Apple drops in Merom in the next few months without moving to a new chipset. I am guessing the amount of memory will still be limited by the chipset, at 4GB.
If Apple goes Merom with a new chipset, or Conroe that will change the ball game.
So. The last factor is of course cost. 2GB sticks are way too much to be cost effective. I would hope to see the cost come down, once the need for 4GB of memory in a mobile becomes necessary. I don't think it is right now.
majorp
Sep 1, 11:46 AM
i wonder if it will lose its chin?! ^^^^^^ yes...precisely
ezekielrage_99
Aug 29, 08:06 AM
Me too!
Does your MacBook have a 5-7 day wait? C2D will be sweet :cool:
Does your MacBook have a 5-7 day wait? C2D will be sweet :cool:
Maxx Power
Oct 27, 09:36 AM
But this particular crap from Greenpeace has already been debunked.
They have gone from a respectable environmentalist group to a militant anti-business lobby.
I am Green, but I am not Greenpeace!
link at /. where this has been gone over a while ago, what a bogus Greenpeace report: http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=198431&cid=16258305
I don't know if you can call that debunking. I see a lot of greenpeace arguments as well that are valid. If anything, I'd say the author and the posts go so far as to trivialize what greenpeace had to point out, but not invalidating it. You can't invalidate environmental risks that occur sometime down the road by purely using data from now.
Same thing with global warming, which should be renamed into a non-misleading term "global weather change" since strictly speaking some regions will warm up, others will cool down (like europe, right now, with the gulf stream cut short, they've been getting snow in Germany and France for example, consistently over the last few years where there wasn't any before), we know for a fact we can affect our weather, we know for a fact that in many regions (mine for example), the weather has been consistently warming up and gradually changing on the yearly scale (last year the temp record in winter was broken again by 1 degree, and has been since the beginning of records), so it's not a debate about whether or not global warming is an observable fact, it should be a debate about how much it is caused by us and to what extent it'll affect us and what can we actively do about it. Anymore debate into its existence is a stall of time and a waste of effort.
I think that any argument against greenpeace implying that "artificial chemicals, when dumped into our ecosystem, will not do harm as long as we don't observe it" can be safely ignored. If you put it this way, the scientific industry that does this kind of environmental research doesn't even close to the funding that R&D gets, and that it isn't revenue generating. There isn't nearly as big of a chance that the eco-scientists will catch problems as fast as they are made.
They have gone from a respectable environmentalist group to a militant anti-business lobby.
I am Green, but I am not Greenpeace!
link at /. where this has been gone over a while ago, what a bogus Greenpeace report: http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=198431&cid=16258305
I don't know if you can call that debunking. I see a lot of greenpeace arguments as well that are valid. If anything, I'd say the author and the posts go so far as to trivialize what greenpeace had to point out, but not invalidating it. You can't invalidate environmental risks that occur sometime down the road by purely using data from now.
Same thing with global warming, which should be renamed into a non-misleading term "global weather change" since strictly speaking some regions will warm up, others will cool down (like europe, right now, with the gulf stream cut short, they've been getting snow in Germany and France for example, consistently over the last few years where there wasn't any before), we know for a fact we can affect our weather, we know for a fact that in many regions (mine for example), the weather has been consistently warming up and gradually changing on the yearly scale (last year the temp record in winter was broken again by 1 degree, and has been since the beginning of records), so it's not a debate about whether or not global warming is an observable fact, it should be a debate about how much it is caused by us and to what extent it'll affect us and what can we actively do about it. Anymore debate into its existence is a stall of time and a waste of effort.
I think that any argument against greenpeace implying that "artificial chemicals, when dumped into our ecosystem, will not do harm as long as we don't observe it" can be safely ignored. If you put it this way, the scientific industry that does this kind of environmental research doesn't even close to the funding that R&D gets, and that it isn't revenue generating. There isn't nearly as big of a chance that the eco-scientists will catch problems as fast as they are made.
shervieux
Apr 23, 05:30 PM
That's what's going to happen, I'm sure of it. And I'm honestly kind of impressed that the MacBook Pro still doesn't give you an option to buy one without a DVD drive; I have a 2011 MBP and I swear, it doesn't get any use whatsoever. Apple's obsession with using every square millimeter of space on a portable device apparently ends when it comes to optical disk drives on MBPs.
I'd much rather have additional battery life. QC i7s eat battery for breakfast, even Sandy Bridge.
Normally, I would say I could go either way with the optical drive. But lately, I have been having to burn a lot of CD's and DVD's for people. I would be willing to give up the optical drive for a second hard drive in a MBP. I would want a thunderbolt quad core with 4gb ram. I need a min of 750gb in hard drive space.
If the price of SSD was not so high, I would look into an AIR. A 13-inch quad core air with 4gb ram would be sweet. I just priced out what I would need in an AIR (but drive still too small) and it comes to the price of just getting a MBP.
I'd much rather have additional battery life. QC i7s eat battery for breakfast, even Sandy Bridge.
Normally, I would say I could go either way with the optical drive. But lately, I have been having to burn a lot of CD's and DVD's for people. I would be willing to give up the optical drive for a second hard drive in a MBP. I would want a thunderbolt quad core with 4gb ram. I need a min of 750gb in hard drive space.
If the price of SSD was not so high, I would look into an AIR. A 13-inch quad core air with 4gb ram would be sweet. I just priced out what I would need in an AIR (but drive still too small) and it comes to the price of just getting a MBP.
adamfilip
Sep 11, 07:50 AM
BTW it's NOT Cloverton. It's ClovertownExactly my thinking as well.
Thanks for the typo correction. but large type sizes are not necessary
Thanks for the typo correction. but large type sizes are not necessary
powermac_daddy
Aug 23, 08:19 PM
nice.... good job.
apple got too much money anyway.
who cares
apple got too much money anyway.
who cares
archurban
Oct 12, 10:21 PM
well, take a look at this video. new red nano looks exactly the same like other 2nd nano. but it's red. click wheel is white. now, it answers what you guys are curious about it.
http://cbs2chicago.com/local/local_story_285181627.html
http://cbs2chicago.com/local/local_story_285181627.html
zwida
Sep 10, 09:51 AM
Erhm..so the new realeased merom iMac will last for how long:confused: :confused:
worth it to buy now???
thinkiNG of getting one...cant bear with my 3 yrs old of centrinO noteBook...:mad:
I think it's worth buying now. There will always be something better out there. If you're suffering with a 3-year-old Centrino, make your computing life better now with a new iMac.
worth it to buy now???
thinkiNG of getting one...cant bear with my 3 yrs old of centrinO noteBook...:mad:
I think it's worth buying now. There will always be something better out there. If you're suffering with a 3-year-old Centrino, make your computing life better now with a new iMac.
Benjy91
Mar 30, 12:01 PM
By that argument, aren't windows and office generic terms???
Aren't Pages, Apple, and Safari generic terms?
Only in the software industry. These are all generic terms outside of the realm of software, but in software they are patentable.
It'd be like Apple or Microsoft trying to call their next OS "Operating System" and trying to patent it, or trying to release a piece of software called "Internet Browser" and trying to patent that.
Aren't Pages, Apple, and Safari generic terms?
Only in the software industry. These are all generic terms outside of the realm of software, but in software they are patentable.
It'd be like Apple or Microsoft trying to call their next OS "Operating System" and trying to patent it, or trying to release a piece of software called "Internet Browser" and trying to patent that.
Wolfpup
Jan 14, 11:25 AM
You should have a unique identifier (password) attached to authentication mechanism (UAC in Windows). So, Windows users should run as standard users. But, using a standard account in Windows causes issues with some software, such as some online games, that require admin accounts (or "run as administrator"; superuser) to function.
Maybe theoretically you should do that, but I don't know anyone that actually does on Windows or OS X. In both cases you aren't actually running with your full powers all the time, and get prompted to escalate if something needs admin access.
Many online games on Windows 7 still require running as Administrator (superuser privileges) to function. This requires setting the "Properties" to allow "run as Administrator" or turning off UAC. This is risky as the games connect to remote servers and download content. Trojans are installed without authentication if accessed with superuser privileges. This example, using online games, shows the problem with how software is being written for Windows.
Commercial software shouldn't be installing malware...I mean tons of it now has all kinds of DRM that is arguably malware, but...
While I'd rather run something without giving it full access to the system, ultimately you're trusting the publisher either way.
The issue with online games found in Windows is not problematic on Mac OS X given that software for Mac is written following the guidelines of the principle of least privilege (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Principle_of_least_privilege) more so than Windows software.
Be that as it may, that's not a problem with the OS. If games are prompting for admin access though, my guess is it's because they're installing DRM, which on either OS is going to demand mucking about in the system.
I'm opposed to most forms of DRM for a variety of reasons (and also opposed to thieves), but this has nothing to do with Windows.
Mac OS X is much better insulated from Malware.
Why?
Vulnerabilities in those components in Mac OS X are attributed as OS X vulnerabilities because OS X includes them by default so this artificially inflates the number of vulnerabilities in OS X when looking at vulnerability comparisons.
I really doubt they double count things like that, given they're counted separately. I suppose there might be some validity to it if they did.
These components have worse security in Windows. How these vulnerabilities manifest in Windows is through Internet Explorer.
Maybe theoretically you should do that, but I don't know anyone that actually does on Windows or OS X. In both cases you aren't actually running with your full powers all the time, and get prompted to escalate if something needs admin access.
Many online games on Windows 7 still require running as Administrator (superuser privileges) to function. This requires setting the "Properties" to allow "run as Administrator" or turning off UAC. This is risky as the games connect to remote servers and download content. Trojans are installed without authentication if accessed with superuser privileges. This example, using online games, shows the problem with how software is being written for Windows.
Commercial software shouldn't be installing malware...I mean tons of it now has all kinds of DRM that is arguably malware, but...
While I'd rather run something without giving it full access to the system, ultimately you're trusting the publisher either way.
The issue with online games found in Windows is not problematic on Mac OS X given that software for Mac is written following the guidelines of the principle of least privilege (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Principle_of_least_privilege) more so than Windows software.
Be that as it may, that's not a problem with the OS. If games are prompting for admin access though, my guess is it's because they're installing DRM, which on either OS is going to demand mucking about in the system.
I'm opposed to most forms of DRM for a variety of reasons (and also opposed to thieves), but this has nothing to do with Windows.
Mac OS X is much better insulated from Malware.
Why?
Vulnerabilities in those components in Mac OS X are attributed as OS X vulnerabilities because OS X includes them by default so this artificially inflates the number of vulnerabilities in OS X when looking at vulnerability comparisons.
I really doubt they double count things like that, given they're counted separately. I suppose there might be some validity to it if they did.
These components have worse security in Windows. How these vulnerabilities manifest in Windows is through Internet Explorer.
tigress666
Mar 23, 04:53 PM
I personally think passing around checkpoint info is protected under free speech. But, to repeat myself, anyone who is over the legal limit and uses an app to avoid a DUI is a selfish, irresponsible *******.
+1.
Though I've heard of cops pulling people over for flashing their lights at oncoming cars to warn of speed traps... I wonder if those people managed to get out of that ticket with the "Freedom of speech" (I hope they did).
+1.
Though I've heard of cops pulling people over for flashing their lights at oncoming cars to warn of speed traps... I wonder if those people managed to get out of that ticket with the "Freedom of speech" (I hope they did).
Tears Apart
Mar 22, 01:57 PM
Sources or not I think such release is to be expected quite soon. Right now Apple sells laptops as powerful as their desktops!
jason221
Apr 25, 05:28 PM
I wish they would release it before September 28... I'd rather wait for the new design but college starts this fall so that's not an option. Oh well.
enklined
Mar 23, 04:41 PM
I got into a spat with a friend of a friend on Facebook about this. My buddy posted "Hey watch out for a DUI check point [insert location here." To which his friend said "Wow, good job helping drunk drivers get away free. Thats dumb."
Isn't it possible that the heads up provided up this app (and friends, newspapers, etc) may make people who know they will be drinking later in the evening re-think their mode of transportation? Could be saving a life or two.
Isn't it possible that the heads up provided up this app (and friends, newspapers, etc) may make people who know they will be drinking later in the evening re-think their mode of transportation? Could be saving a life or two.
No comments:
Post a Comment