kiwi_the_iwik
Apr 6, 02:28 AM
My wishlist?
I'd love the option for fast HD compression and ftp transfer straight from the program.
Also, greater MXF support for P2, as well as metadata compatibility would be very welcome additions.
AVC-Intra would be brilliant (without having to constantly rewrap...), to go along with existing DVCPRO HD support.
Currently, we have to resort to 3rd party strategies for all of the above, which can be a major pain (and expense).
I'd love the option for fast HD compression and ftp transfer straight from the program.
Also, greater MXF support for P2, as well as metadata compatibility would be very welcome additions.
AVC-Intra would be brilliant (without having to constantly rewrap...), to go along with existing DVCPRO HD support.
Currently, we have to resort to 3rd party strategies for all of the above, which can be a major pain (and expense).
leekohler
Apr 27, 09:31 AM
No matter what Obama does, these people are not going to be satisfied. They're absolutely insane. Trump should be ashamed of himself. I was once proud of the Trump Tower here in Chicago. Now I'd like to see it burned to the ground.
brenden
Apr 8, 07:46 AM
Not surprised. Best buy has always been a super shady retailer with subpar employees. Sadly its the easiest place to buy electronics other than ordering online.
Billy Boo Bob
Nov 28, 11:02 PM
1 Random artist finds inspiration and writes a song
2 Artist decides his song is so good that he/she records it in a professional studio (which he can rent) so the sound quality is superb
3 Artists logs into the iTMS and publishes his song
4 Artists gets $ from every song sold and the iTMS charges the artist for the distribution
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
2 Artist decides his song is so good that he/she records it in a professional studio (which he can rent) so the sound quality is superb
3 Artists logs into the iTMS and publishes his song
4 Artists gets $ from every song sold and the iTMS charges the artist for the distribution
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
slackpacker
Apr 10, 07:56 AM
Are you speculating or have you just disobeyed your NDA? ;-)
speculating from what the video showed and a little past history industry knowledge
speculating from what the video showed and a little past history industry knowledge
xxBURT0Nxx
Apr 9, 09:45 AM
I don't think 2IS is getting that IF Intel allowed Nvidia to continue making sandy bridge chipsets, Nvidia could've easily integrated a 320m successor into the south bridge. This would give you the best of both worlds, the downclocked Low-voltage Intel HD graphics when on battery or basic surfing, or the 320m successor in the south bridge when playing games or aperture photo editing. All this WITHOUT raising the motherboard chip count that putting a separate discrete (on it's own, not integrated into the chipset like 320m) would entail.
I thought the 320m was also integrated? Wouldn't that mean that would be your only graphics card were nvidia allowed to add them to sandy bridge? I don't see why you would have integrated intel hd 3000 along with an integrated 320m (or successor).
I thought the 320m was also integrated? Wouldn't that mean that would be your only graphics card were nvidia allowed to add them to sandy bridge? I don't see why you would have integrated intel hd 3000 along with an integrated 320m (or successor).
brewser
Apr 7, 11:50 PM
This notion that Best Buy is the only one hoarding stock is typical of the stereotypical Apple fan. And once again, I've never bought Apple or Mac products at Best Buy because the staff are not knowledgeable in most cases, the same way I never bought a Mac at Circuit City for the short period they carried Macs.
But which stores are well stocked the best with iPads?
See if you can guess. I'll give you a hint, it begins with an A.
Sure you can say, those are Apple's rules, deal with it, but that doesn't make it right.
The truth probably is that some Best Buys are probably near Walmarts and Targets so they don't want to be out of stock for 2-3 weeks while Apple hoards stock at its stores. I'm sure none of them want to be out of stock for 2-3 weeks and suspect that Best Buy is the not the only offender of conserving stock due to Apple's inability to meet demand.
Not one of these chains wants to be known as the chain that didn't have iPads for 2-3 weeks giving consumers the impression they don't carry it anymore!
The only difference is Best Buy got CAUGHT!
I would bet that this directive came from corporate and applied to a limited number of stores that were faced with the possibility of being out of stock for an extended period of time.
People can conjecture here all they want, but no one really knows the details of Apple's supply promises vs. what it delivered with any of these chains.
You are an idiot to believe any of that. BB wants to save stock for their Sunday ads. That is the drive to bring customers in. They do this with any limited product. It's their nature. They need a certain number that matches their ad. They will tell you they are out of stock but they are waiting for Sunday.
But which stores are well stocked the best with iPads?
See if you can guess. I'll give you a hint, it begins with an A.
Sure you can say, those are Apple's rules, deal with it, but that doesn't make it right.
The truth probably is that some Best Buys are probably near Walmarts and Targets so they don't want to be out of stock for 2-3 weeks while Apple hoards stock at its stores. I'm sure none of them want to be out of stock for 2-3 weeks and suspect that Best Buy is the not the only offender of conserving stock due to Apple's inability to meet demand.
Not one of these chains wants to be known as the chain that didn't have iPads for 2-3 weeks giving consumers the impression they don't carry it anymore!
The only difference is Best Buy got CAUGHT!
I would bet that this directive came from corporate and applied to a limited number of stores that were faced with the possibility of being out of stock for an extended period of time.
People can conjecture here all they want, but no one really knows the details of Apple's supply promises vs. what it delivered with any of these chains.
You are an idiot to believe any of that. BB wants to save stock for their Sunday ads. That is the drive to bring customers in. They do this with any limited product. It's their nature. They need a certain number that matches their ad. They will tell you they are out of stock but they are waiting for Sunday.
rjohnstone
Apr 25, 02:55 PM
On any android device, you can opt out beginning with the setup of the device. It's not hidden in the TOS when you buy the device.
This...
You are explicitly asked if you want Google to collect this information.
You can say NO. It does reduce the accuracy of some programs when you opt out, but YOU have the choice.
You do have the option to enable this feature at any time if you feel you need too.
This...
You are explicitly asked if you want Google to collect this information.
You can say NO. It does reduce the accuracy of some programs when you opt out, but YOU have the choice.
You do have the option to enable this feature at any time if you feel you need too.
fabian9
Apr 11, 01:08 PM
"the 3GS also adds support for 7.2 Mbit/s HSDPA allowing faster downlink speeds"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone_3GS
Technically he's right.
Technically, I'm right, you can't "add" 3GS, because 3GS isn't a standard. :p
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone_3GS
Technically he's right.
Technically, I'm right, you can't "add" 3GS, because 3GS isn't a standard. :p
mjsanders5uk
Apr 5, 05:02 PM
and Mac Pros!
and entry level MacBook!
and Mac minis!
and ...
Not again..
NAB is for broadcast professionals - its doubtful there will be computer releases here.
and entry level MacBook!
and Mac minis!
and ...
Not again..
NAB is for broadcast professionals - its doubtful there will be computer releases here.
Multimedia
Jul 21, 12:20 PM
It really depends on your application.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use...
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.I strongly disagree. I could use 16 cores right now for notihng more than simple consumer electronics video compression routines. There will be a Mac Pro with 8 cores this Winter 2007.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
This is not even beginning to discuss how many Final Cut Studio Editors need 16 Cores. Man, I can't believe you wrote that. I think you are overlooking the obvious - the need to run multiple copies of today's applicaitons simultaneously.
So as long as the heat issue can be overcome, I don't see why 8 Cores can't belong inside an iMac by the end of 2008.
I apologize if I read a little hot. But I find the line of thought that 4 or 8 Cores are enough or more than enough to really annoy me. They are not nearly enough for those of us who see the problem of not enough cores EVERY DAY. The rest of you either have no imagination or are only using your Macs for word processing, browsing and email.
I am sincerely frustrated by not having enough cores to do simple stupid work efficiently. Just look at how crippled this G5 Quad is already only running three things. They can't even run full speed due to lack of cores.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use...
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.I strongly disagree. I could use 16 cores right now for notihng more than simple consumer electronics video compression routines. There will be a Mac Pro with 8 cores this Winter 2007.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
This is not even beginning to discuss how many Final Cut Studio Editors need 16 Cores. Man, I can't believe you wrote that. I think you are overlooking the obvious - the need to run multiple copies of today's applicaitons simultaneously.
So as long as the heat issue can be overcome, I don't see why 8 Cores can't belong inside an iMac by the end of 2008.
I apologize if I read a little hot. But I find the line of thought that 4 or 8 Cores are enough or more than enough to really annoy me. They are not nearly enough for those of us who see the problem of not enough cores EVERY DAY. The rest of you either have no imagination or are only using your Macs for word processing, browsing and email.
I am sincerely frustrated by not having enough cores to do simple stupid work efficiently. Just look at how crippled this G5 Quad is already only running three things. They can't even run full speed due to lack of cores.
NoNothing
Apr 7, 11:08 PM
As best as I can figure, it works like this. Managers get good grades if they sell certain amounts of products.
I'll use low numbers here. Let's say BB corporate wants you to sell at least 5 iPads a day to make your "Quota". One day, 10 iPads come in. You sell all ten, yay, you made quota for the day.
But the next day, none get shipped to the store. So, boo, you didn't make quota, since you didn't have any to sell.
Mr. Manager (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4DMPmoJkJQ)
So quotas are done on a daily basis and not a weekly basis? WOW. And I thought the quarterly earning reports made companies make bad decisions.
I'll use low numbers here. Let's say BB corporate wants you to sell at least 5 iPads a day to make your "Quota". One day, 10 iPads come in. You sell all ten, yay, you made quota for the day.
But the next day, none get shipped to the store. So, boo, you didn't make quota, since you didn't have any to sell.
Mr. Manager (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4DMPmoJkJQ)
So quotas are done on a daily basis and not a weekly basis? WOW. And I thought the quarterly earning reports made companies make bad decisions.
cmaier
Apr 20, 02:52 PM
Apple filed similar suits again HTC and Nokia last spring. You'll notice that the ITC is not favoring Apple's claims.
The suits aren't very similar at all.
The suits aren't very similar at all.
EagerDragon
Aug 27, 02:55 PM
All these changes are also likely to see a departure from the standard Alum shell. There will probably be a new attractive enclosure to separate the lines. Almost instant load of applications along with all the extra speed of Leopard on a sweet Meron chip with all the new iCandy and functionality will likely make me pull my credit card. Can't wait for next summer!!!!!!
Bring it ON!!!!!!!:)
Bring it ON!!!!!!!:)
shartypants
Mar 25, 10:51 PM
Look forward to seeing what additional features where added since the last developer release.
regandarcy
Apr 6, 10:56 AM
So are the current MacBook airs using a dedicated gpu? Or is it integrated? I'm confused. :-)
Flowbee
Mar 22, 12:56 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Yes, and RIM has a history of making excellent touch screen devices.
:rolleyes:
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Yes, and RIM has a history of making excellent touch screen devices.
:rolleyes:
TheKrillr
Aug 27, 08:19 PM
Not true.
Recent years, updates came right before the end of the promotion.
I didn't know that, thats very good to know. I'm in need of a macbook by the 25th and was afraid i'd have to end up ordering right before the release of Merom.
Recent years, updates came right before the end of the promotion.
I didn't know that, thats very good to know. I'm in need of a macbook by the 25th and was afraid i'd have to end up ordering right before the release of Merom.
BoyBach
Nov 29, 12:52 PM
To those saying they'll boycott, I'd just like to point out...
...Universal is by far the largest record label in the world, and those of you that say you don't listen to anyone of their artists might need to dig deeper into their subsidiaries, as just a few of the musicians in their stable are:...
That's a nice back catalogue, but how many new albums has The Carpenters, Jimi Hendrix, Carole King, John Lennon, etc released recently that weren't 'Greatest Hits' and 'Best of's? The challenge for the "Big Boy's" of the record industry is to find the next group of artists that will still be selling in 20-30 years time. I don't think my children and grandchildren will be buying Pussycat Dolls and Britney Spears albums in thirty years time. This is reason that their music sales have been falling, it's not exclusively piracy.
...Universal is by far the largest record label in the world, and those of you that say you don't listen to anyone of their artists might need to dig deeper into their subsidiaries, as just a few of the musicians in their stable are:...
That's a nice back catalogue, but how many new albums has The Carpenters, Jimi Hendrix, Carole King, John Lennon, etc released recently that weren't 'Greatest Hits' and 'Best of's? The challenge for the "Big Boy's" of the record industry is to find the next group of artists that will still be selling in 20-30 years time. I don't think my children and grandchildren will be buying Pussycat Dolls and Britney Spears albums in thirty years time. This is reason that their music sales have been falling, it's not exclusively piracy.
Halebopp
Apr 25, 03:23 PM
good luck with the lawsuit, sounds like a gigantic waste of time, money and resources.....pathetic
SevenInchScrew
Dec 8, 12:30 AM
...or in photo mode which you use a few times and then never look do it again.
I disagree. I've played a good deal of GT5 now at a friend's place. The game itself is not very good, in my opinion, especially after 6 years waiting. But the Photo Mode is VERY excellent. There is at least one thing this game does very well, and that is screenshots. I'm not spending $60 for a screenshot generator, but the feature is quite awesome.
Bad Physics in damage- Forza's canned animation damage is better?
At least in Forza you don't have to "Unlock" the damage. ;)
I disagree. I've played a good deal of GT5 now at a friend's place. The game itself is not very good, in my opinion, especially after 6 years waiting. But the Photo Mode is VERY excellent. There is at least one thing this game does very well, and that is screenshots. I'm not spending $60 for a screenshot generator, but the feature is quite awesome.
Bad Physics in damage- Forza's canned animation damage is better?
At least in Forza you don't have to "Unlock" the damage. ;)
AppleFreak89
Jun 9, 08:58 AM
Everything BIBBZ is saying is correct and works the same at my store. we had a lot of people trade in their 3g for 3gs' and pay $5 out of pocket :). its a good deal.
p0intblank
Aug 16, 10:43 PM
Photoshop actually runs faster than I thought it would. :D
If only I could afford a Mac Pro... :(
If only I could afford a Mac Pro... :(
milo
Jul 14, 03:04 PM
Power Supply at the top is REALLY stupid.
Why?
Why?
No comments:
Post a Comment