adrianblaine
Oct 24, 06:13 AM
APPLE STORE IS DOWN,
no joke
at least in Germany
Thumbs up :)
The only stores I found still up were the US and Canada
no joke
at least in Germany
Thumbs up :)
The only stores I found still up were the US and Canada
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.
Jacquear
Jun 24, 11:14 AM
have fun carrying an iMac :)
Lol! There will be someone who tries it I'm sure
Lol! There will be someone who tries it I'm sure
mjteix
Mar 25, 07:02 PM
Intel's TDPs are not actual power consumed. So yes, the 130 W scenario still kicks.
Correct, the power consumed is less than any of the TDP ratings.
Then why "2x CPUs 130W rated. So thats 260W, right there."?
If the power consumption is less than the TDP, it should be: 2x CPUs 95W rated. So that's 190W max, anyway.
If you want an example of power consumption from a similar computer, go here (http://h18000.www1.hp.com/products/quickspecs/13277_na/13277_na.HTML). The maximum power consumption is 570W for 2x Xeon X5570 (TDP=2x95W), 12GB RAM, FX4800 gpu (TDP=150W), 2x 1TB HDD, ODD, Ethernet, on a 650W 80PLUS� BRONZE PSU.
If you change the gpu for one with a 300W TDP, and if the power consumption is still less than the TDP, then a 800W PSU would do the trick. No?
Correct, the power consumed is less than any of the TDP ratings.
Then why "2x CPUs 130W rated. So thats 260W, right there."?
If the power consumption is less than the TDP, it should be: 2x CPUs 95W rated. So that's 190W max, anyway.
If you want an example of power consumption from a similar computer, go here (http://h18000.www1.hp.com/products/quickspecs/13277_na/13277_na.HTML). The maximum power consumption is 570W for 2x Xeon X5570 (TDP=2x95W), 12GB RAM, FX4800 gpu (TDP=150W), 2x 1TB HDD, ODD, Ethernet, on a 650W 80PLUS� BRONZE PSU.
If you change the gpu for one with a 300W TDP, and if the power consumption is still less than the TDP, then a 800W PSU would do the trick. No?
Nym
Nov 30, 10:58 AM
No way, M$ doesn't like Apple for what it is, for their history, if Apple would sink there would always be competition, and monopoly... 90% of the world's computers running Windoze? what's that? :D
DMann
Nov 27, 01:17 PM
This may pave the way to larger wide-screens.
I would love to see a 40" widescreen.
I would love to see a 40" widescreen.
Mattsasa
Mar 24, 02:49 PM
Please don't put an AMD 5XXX series into the new iMacs! :(
Why not????
Why not????
Full of Win
Mar 22, 03:43 PM
Did not say he would improve it either. :(
Adding Bluetooth makes a lot of sense.
Adding Bluetooth makes a lot of sense.
LethalWolfe
Apr 13, 01:10 AM
This is so that each eye receives 24fps for 3d. So finally 3d will now look like a 3d "movie" rather than a 3d flip book.
Each eye already receives 24fps (for both 2D and 3D) but the 48fps will make the motion look less choppy and less blurry. The differences can be seen in both 2D and 3D but 3D should be more comfortable to watch at the higher frame rate (especially for long periods of time).
Lethal
Each eye already receives 24fps (for both 2D and 3D) but the 48fps will make the motion look less choppy and less blurry. The differences can be seen in both 2D and 3D but 3D should be more comfortable to watch at the higher frame rate (especially for long periods of time).
Lethal
iEvolution
Mar 22, 09:15 PM
Nice! Best news I've heard for a long time.
I will be updating to the 220GB just for video output..would be nice if they would add high definition output.
I love the people that act like 220GB is a ridiculous amount, with the file sizes always increasing (FYI, the estimate of 40,000 songs with the current 160GB is a miscalculation, how many things are still selling 128kbps songs and how many people are still using that bit rate?) an increase in capacity is ALWAYS welcome.
Further, add videos to the classic and 220GB would be considered small.
I will be updating to the 220GB just for video output..would be nice if they would add high definition output.
I love the people that act like 220GB is a ridiculous amount, with the file sizes always increasing (FYI, the estimate of 40,000 songs with the current 160GB is a miscalculation, how many things are still selling 128kbps songs and how many people are still using that bit rate?) an increase in capacity is ALWAYS welcome.
Further, add videos to the classic and 220GB would be considered small.
aswitcher
Aug 7, 03:56 AM
Dude, it's even better than that! Its song capacity is only limited by how many cassette tapes you can carry!
Is there a car phone version that plugs directly into the tape deck?
Is there a car phone version that plugs directly into the tape deck?
petpirepete
Jun 22, 01:24 PM
I doubt 10.7 will be such an overhaul. Probably more like Mac OS X 11.0 or a totally new naming scheme.
I gess you mean OS XI or OS 11.0 :rolleyes:
I gess you mean OS XI or OS 11.0 :rolleyes:
Rodimus Prime
Feb 26, 11:14 PM
I currently have a 4.7L V8 Dodge Dakota. I'd buy a diesel version of it in a heartbeat. I could still get the power/hauling ability needed but have the mileage to justify having the pickup.
But now with the possibility of having $5/gal gas looming, the 18 HWY MPG may force my hand.
Had the truck for over 5 years, but it may get too cost prohibitive to keep.
I take it you need to haul, tow stuff often enough that not having the truck would be painful.
My dad refuses to get rid of there 1995 Ram that gets like 15 MPG HWY on a good day because it is nice to have a truck for when stuff needs to be hauled or we need the bed.
Mind you the truck has been pretty much reduced to just that type of duty or if one of our other cars are out of action for one reason or another it is a spare vehicle.
SUV and trucks have their places. Problem I see is to many people only want trucks when really in a family with 2 vehicles you really only need a max of 1 SUV/truck between them and a car for the rest. That is how my parents did it for a while. SUV for my mom/family car and a gas and my dad drove a car.
Dad car mainly went 2 and from work and my mom SUV was for when the family went somewhere together and my mom drove it to and from work but my mom drove like 6 miles each way compared to my dads near 30 miles each way.
But now with the possibility of having $5/gal gas looming, the 18 HWY MPG may force my hand.
Had the truck for over 5 years, but it may get too cost prohibitive to keep.
I take it you need to haul, tow stuff often enough that not having the truck would be painful.
My dad refuses to get rid of there 1995 Ram that gets like 15 MPG HWY on a good day because it is nice to have a truck for when stuff needs to be hauled or we need the bed.
Mind you the truck has been pretty much reduced to just that type of duty or if one of our other cars are out of action for one reason or another it is a spare vehicle.
SUV and trucks have their places. Problem I see is to many people only want trucks when really in a family with 2 vehicles you really only need a max of 1 SUV/truck between them and a car for the rest. That is how my parents did it for a while. SUV for my mom/family car and a gas and my dad drove a car.
Dad car mainly went 2 and from work and my mom SUV was for when the family went somewhere together and my mom drove it to and from work but my mom drove like 6 miles each way compared to my dads near 30 miles each way.
whoooaaahhhh
Jul 14, 09:54 AM
Good post, sums up the current situation very nicely.
Given that dual layer 50GB blu-ray discs cant even be produced yet, i think the 200GB claim is complete vaporware.
I hope HD-DVD wins this war soon, as it is out of the gates first, and thus far a far superior format. If Blu-Ray were to give up now, i dont think many people would be sad. One format is better for everyone.
NO.
First of all, Blu-Ray discs are a completely new material and fabrication process, so highlighting the fact that they've only made 25GB discs (which were stable-ly created long before almost ANY HD-DVD's) and can't produce a disk which is far above the specs of the competition, is like saying screw the russians cuz they're space program hasn't sent a man to mars (nobody's done it yet, anyway). You can't blame Blu-Ray for not being able to deliver 50 GB yet, the meat of the war is just beginning anyway.
Secondly, what was said about the VC-1 codec is very wrong. Microsoft's VC-1 codec is far worse and more difficult to work with than MPEG 2 or MPEG 4 that sony will probably offer in later versions of Blu-Ray. All this malarky about artifacts doesn't really make sense when you consider that we've been USING MPEG2 IN DVD'S FOR YEARS NOW! There's no way that the algorithim could be to blame for the artifacts! Sure it's fatter, but it's a lighter compression, and as Sony has shown with their PCM Audio on Blu-Ray, sometimes light compression on a bigger disk is better than heavy compression on smaller disks. It will be a lot easier to change to a more efficient codec down the line (which is what we've done with computers time and time again, as well as professional video) so we can get Ultra HD on Blu Ray when it comes out as well.
I'm sorry, I understand people really want HD-DVD to win because it's easier and cheaper right now, but since when has the easiest option been the best? If Blu-Ray doesn't win this war we'll have another short life-span format, this version of HD will not be enough for the professional industry much longer, take it from a video guy. I've written a frickin' paper on this very subject.
IMHO I'd like to see a Blu-Ray with the Mac Pro's to help solidify the consumer base into purchasing a better product, because that's how you standardize something in the market...sales...But I don't know that it will happen. Although remember DVD-RAM? Apple seemed to like that for awhile...that died...
I also don't want microsoft handling my video codec, anybody remember the wonderous creation of WMV/WMA? The one that like none of us can use on macs? HD-DVD's codec is a derivation of the WMV-HD codec. Welcome to the Microsoft reality. They really like controlling proprietary codecs. Also...MPEG was created by a group of companies and people working together, Microsoft created WMV, so they've got almost complete say in how that plays out.
Given that dual layer 50GB blu-ray discs cant even be produced yet, i think the 200GB claim is complete vaporware.
I hope HD-DVD wins this war soon, as it is out of the gates first, and thus far a far superior format. If Blu-Ray were to give up now, i dont think many people would be sad. One format is better for everyone.
NO.
First of all, Blu-Ray discs are a completely new material and fabrication process, so highlighting the fact that they've only made 25GB discs (which were stable-ly created long before almost ANY HD-DVD's) and can't produce a disk which is far above the specs of the competition, is like saying screw the russians cuz they're space program hasn't sent a man to mars (nobody's done it yet, anyway). You can't blame Blu-Ray for not being able to deliver 50 GB yet, the meat of the war is just beginning anyway.
Secondly, what was said about the VC-1 codec is very wrong. Microsoft's VC-1 codec is far worse and more difficult to work with than MPEG 2 or MPEG 4 that sony will probably offer in later versions of Blu-Ray. All this malarky about artifacts doesn't really make sense when you consider that we've been USING MPEG2 IN DVD'S FOR YEARS NOW! There's no way that the algorithim could be to blame for the artifacts! Sure it's fatter, but it's a lighter compression, and as Sony has shown with their PCM Audio on Blu-Ray, sometimes light compression on a bigger disk is better than heavy compression on smaller disks. It will be a lot easier to change to a more efficient codec down the line (which is what we've done with computers time and time again, as well as professional video) so we can get Ultra HD on Blu Ray when it comes out as well.
I'm sorry, I understand people really want HD-DVD to win because it's easier and cheaper right now, but since when has the easiest option been the best? If Blu-Ray doesn't win this war we'll have another short life-span format, this version of HD will not be enough for the professional industry much longer, take it from a video guy. I've written a frickin' paper on this very subject.
IMHO I'd like to see a Blu-Ray with the Mac Pro's to help solidify the consumer base into purchasing a better product, because that's how you standardize something in the market...sales...But I don't know that it will happen. Although remember DVD-RAM? Apple seemed to like that for awhile...that died...
I also don't want microsoft handling my video codec, anybody remember the wonderous creation of WMV/WMA? The one that like none of us can use on macs? HD-DVD's codec is a derivation of the WMV-HD codec. Welcome to the Microsoft reality. They really like controlling proprietary codecs. Also...MPEG was created by a group of companies and people working together, Microsoft created WMV, so they've got almost complete say in how that plays out.
darkplanets
Jun 22, 12:13 PM
As long as it has OSX (or whatever the next is) underneath, always, then I have no problems with an integrated iOS layer in OSX. In fact, I would much rather see dashboard disappear and iOS take its place, because let's face it; dashboard is worthless due to its horrible implementation.
Let's make that a prediction, shall we?
If this comes to fruition I see dashboard getting the boot and the iOS overlay taking its place, but only on touch enabled macs.
Can someone say new touch enabled cinema display, as well as the new "track pad gadget" being released? This would make perfect sense, if this rumor were true.
Let's make that a prediction, shall we?
If this comes to fruition I see dashboard getting the boot and the iOS overlay taking its place, but only on touch enabled macs.
Can someone say new touch enabled cinema display, as well as the new "track pad gadget" being released? This would make perfect sense, if this rumor were true.
louis Fashion
Apr 21, 08:40 PM
You and Full of Win must be related. Or married. Or both.
No they both married their sisters.
No they both married their sisters.
aiqw9182
Mar 24, 02:19 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdPi4GPEI74
Uhh, ok? You linked to a video where the HD 3000 is going against an unreleased APU from AMD. May as well have posted a comparison to the GMA 950 to the 6990. :rolleyes:
I never said there was nothing better than the Intel 3000, I said it doesn't suck as bad as he makes it out to be(or AMD's unreleased propaganda, or you).
Uhh, ok? You linked to a video where the HD 3000 is going against an unreleased APU from AMD. May as well have posted a comparison to the GMA 950 to the 6990. :rolleyes:
I never said there was nothing better than the Intel 3000, I said it doesn't suck as bad as he makes it out to be(or AMD's unreleased propaganda, or you).
Sky Blue
Apr 2, 09:32 AM
Thus far, stability-wise, it is not too bad for a beta. A lot of the UI rendering errors from beta 1 have been ironed out. My bet would be that this will be a $29 upgrade, as it doesn't add much but rather refines what 10.6 started.
haha, no chance. Tons of new features here. I can see Apple charging less than $129 if they go the App Store route, but if boxed retail is released I'm sure it'll be $129.
haha, no chance. Tons of new features here. I can see Apple charging less than $129 if they go the App Store route, but if boxed retail is released I'm sure it'll be $129.
newagemac
May 2, 05:03 PM
They could have simplified the whole process in the following way:
lifeinhd
Feb 21, 05:17 AM
Lol I again drank it 2 days ago by buying a Intel MacBook. Sorry G4's, looks like retirement is looming again. ;)
Not concerned with the impending refresh? Or do you plan to return and rebuy post-refresh?
Not concerned with the impending refresh? Or do you plan to return and rebuy post-refresh?
quagmire
Mar 12, 06:16 PM
EDIT: I forgot to post this earlier: a GM spokesman has denied (http://www.vindy.com/news/2011/feb/22/diesel-cruze-report-refuted/) that the North American Cruze diesel has gotten the green light for production. He seems to imply that GM is waiting to gauge reactions to the existing Cruze lineup before making a decision on a diesel option. So, no new information really. It's obviously a product under consideration, but it seems unlikely we'd see it in showrooms till late next year at the earliest.
Do you think GM would confirm an internet report of a diesel Cruze coming? Unless it comes from themselves, they won't confirm anything.
Do you think GM would confirm an internet report of a diesel Cruze coming? Unless it comes from themselves, they won't confirm anything.
techluvr
Jan 6, 11:48 AM
When I get my license, if everything goes according to plan, it will be a 2011 Subaru Outback 3.6R Limited. Absolute sportiest car I've ever driven, and it's a wagon. Perfect. Don't have any pics right now, sorry.
aquajet
Aug 31, 04:03 PM
Acording the story in the link I posted above, it's happened to at least one person so far. That may be what they're going for with the Mini's. Would they do the same thing with C2D and MBP's, MB's, etc.?
I can't recall Apple ever doing this on any machine besides the mini. I hope it's just an oversight of some sort. Regardless, I can already feel the pressure mounting in my brain...
I can't recall Apple ever doing this on any machine besides the mini. I hope it's just an oversight of some sort. Regardless, I can already feel the pressure mounting in my brain...
iBug2
May 2, 06:03 PM
So you're saying we should go back to Mac OS Classic cooperative multi-tasking ?
Hello ?
The 80s called, they want their computing paradigms back. Cooperative multi-tasking makes sense on ressource limited architectures. Even the iPhone/iPad like devices are far from "ressource limited". We had pre-emptive multi-tasking on much less capable devices (think 386s with 8 MB of RAM).
Obviously the guy you replied to did not know anything he was talking about. Apple's resume function on Lion does not break the multitasking we have on SL anyway and it's just a nice addition.
Hello ?
The 80s called, they want their computing paradigms back. Cooperative multi-tasking makes sense on ressource limited architectures. Even the iPhone/iPad like devices are far from "ressource limited". We had pre-emptive multi-tasking on much less capable devices (think 386s with 8 MB of RAM).
Obviously the guy you replied to did not know anything he was talking about. Apple's resume function on Lion does not break the multitasking we have on SL anyway and it's just a nice addition.
No comments:
Post a Comment