gnasher729
Aug 17, 03:42 AM
I think movie editing depends a lot on the speed of the disk subsystem. After all Mini DV is 12GB per hour. That's a of data. When yo "scrub" a shot all that data has to move off the disk and onto the video card. Even with 16MB of RAM not much of the video data can be help in RAM. So the G5 and Intel machine have disks that are about the same speed. Speed of a disk is measured by how fast the bit fly under the read/write head not the interface speed. So I am not surprized the Intel Mac Pro is not hugly faster for video.
Mini DV is 3,600,000 bytes per second. That is nothing. That is just slightly above what a wireless network will do.
Mini DV is 3,600,000 bytes per second. That is nothing. That is just slightly above what a wireless network will do.
swingerofbirch
Aug 26, 07:40 PM
I'm sure the GPU will also be bumped, at the very least. The MBP will probably also see some things that the MB has like a user-removable hard drive and magnetic latch. The CPU and GPU alone make it worth getting the new one, IMO.
Also, I'll say it one last time (yea right) - the imac should not and will not get a mobile processor. It only got Yonah because there was no alternative. It had a real desktop processor when one was available on the PPC side (G5), and it will have a real desktop processor now that one is available on the intel side (Conroe). Leave merom for what it was meant for - laptops.
I agree with you wholeheartedly.
But, I guess they COULD have put a pentium d in them...didnt they have dual cores?
Also, I'll say it one last time (yea right) - the imac should not and will not get a mobile processor. It only got Yonah because there was no alternative. It had a real desktop processor when one was available on the PPC side (G5), and it will have a real desktop processor now that one is available on the intel side (Conroe). Leave merom for what it was meant for - laptops.
I agree with you wholeheartedly.
But, I guess they COULD have put a pentium d in them...didnt they have dual cores?
pherplexed
Jul 27, 10:11 AM
wasn't this announced last friday? (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060721145043.shtml)
davmcn
Apr 25, 02:02 PM
This makes me laugh. A couple of months back people were complaining about suspicious information going out at random hours of the morning. Now we've just heard our iPhones/iPods are taking down our random locations, Coincidence ? :P
pkson
Apr 19, 05:41 PM
After reading some of the lawsuit, I had to post this..
http://pk.funnyseoul.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/2010-11-04_174623.jpg
http://pk.funnyseoul.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/pn_20101104170853.jpg
http://pk.funnyseoul.com/2010/11/galaxy-tab-released/
http://pk.funnyseoul.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/2010-11-04_174623.jpg
http://pk.funnyseoul.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/pn_20101104170853.jpg
http://pk.funnyseoul.com/2010/11/galaxy-tab-released/
Bill McEnaney
Mar 1, 04:47 AM
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
Dr. Josiah B. Gould, the Plato scholar who taught me Ancient Philosophy, told us that, that although homosexuality was common among Greek aristocrats in ancient Greece, to them, sodomy was repugnant.
Dr. Josiah B. Gould, the Plato scholar who taught me Ancient Philosophy, told us that, that although homosexuality was common among Greek aristocrats in ancient Greece, to them, sodomy was repugnant.
zap2
Apr 29, 01:08 PM
I don't want anyone to attack anyone else. Whomever calls names, name-calling is libel or slander. I say, "Attack ideas, not people."
Not if its true. So saying "Palin is a tax lower lowering nut" can be true. Its up for debate, but you can make the argument based off factual arguments.
Doesn't mean its a good idea or helpful to the nation, but its not libel/slander if its true.
I I wasn't talking about liberals in general. I said that most of the name-callers I knew of were liberals.
But its clear what you are implying
Not if its true. So saying "Palin is a tax lower lowering nut" can be true. Its up for debate, but you can make the argument based off factual arguments.
Doesn't mean its a good idea or helpful to the nation, but its not libel/slander if its true.
I I wasn't talking about liberals in general. I said that most of the name-callers I knew of were liberals.
But its clear what you are implying
epitaphic
Aug 19, 09:06 AM
Can I rotate the 2nd display 90 degrees like I can in Windows?
Short answer: Yes
Long answer: Yes you can
;)
Short answer: Yes
Long answer: Yes you can
;)
anthonymoody
Apr 8, 08:14 AM
Aren't retail stores in the business of, you know, making sales? Why the F would they artificially limit the sales of a given product? Makes zero sense unless they just wanted to be douchey and keep people returning day after day to drive up foot traffic and hope for other spillover sales foam impulse purchases. But could that be worth all that much?
Reminds me of a true story - went into one of those pre-made sandwich shops because I need to feed a horde unexpectedly, and quickly. I asked for all their stock of three different kinds of sandwich. The woman behind the counter said "but sir what will we sell to other people!".
Bizarre way to run a business.
Reminds me of a true story - went into one of those pre-made sandwich shops because I need to feed a horde unexpectedly, and quickly. I asked for all their stock of three different kinds of sandwich. The woman behind the counter said "but sir what will we sell to other people!".
Bizarre way to run a business.
gorgeousninja
Mar 23, 09:32 AM
LG and others had semi-smartphones with 3.5" screens back in 2006 and early 2007
If you ever used one of the LG phones or the numerous Japanese keitai's of that time then you'd know, that even though they were cutting edge for the time, they were still nowhere near being 'smartphones'.
Terrible UI with endless menu's, confusing icons, and new features randomly bolted on.
No matter how much the petty minded haters want to see it, the truth is that Apple made a quantum leap forward with the iPhone, and some people ought to be a little less bitter and more thankful for it.
If you ever used one of the LG phones or the numerous Japanese keitai's of that time then you'd know, that even though they were cutting edge for the time, they were still nowhere near being 'smartphones'.
Terrible UI with endless menu's, confusing icons, and new features randomly bolted on.
No matter how much the petty minded haters want to see it, the truth is that Apple made a quantum leap forward with the iPhone, and some people ought to be a little less bitter and more thankful for it.
umichfan
Jun 12, 02:09 PM
So if Im getting this right....I bring my 3GS to Radio Shack on the 15th to preorder the iphone 4 and then I have to turn in my old phone in order to get the buy back gift card? But then I would be without a phone for over a week? My local Radio Shack said I could get $256 for my 3gs. But if I read right that price could go down the closer it gets to the ip4 launch?
Thanks
Thanks
(L)
Sep 19, 02:42 AM
If all MBPs came with a gig of RAM standard, DL DVD drives, and a better graphics card (and Merom CPU), I would be thrilled.
Look, I don't mean to pick on anybody, and I'm sure this is valid and relevant, but just about anybody would love to see things get generally better. Like, I wish the MacBooks were as fast as the Mac Pros and weigh in at 1 lb. Realistically, while I do agree that MBP's would make sense with 1gb ram standard, I'm not so sure about the other updates. As for updating the CPU, Apple does well to keep up on the technology so long as they can afford to, even if it is the operating system that draws most new users, and I do think they will update it soon, at least for MBPs. But, this is to stay competitive and to offer a pro model that can really be used as a pro model - not to thrill consumers with just how much they can upgrade the machines.
Look, I don't mean to pick on anybody, and I'm sure this is valid and relevant, but just about anybody would love to see things get generally better. Like, I wish the MacBooks were as fast as the Mac Pros and weigh in at 1 lb. Realistically, while I do agree that MBP's would make sense with 1gb ram standard, I'm not so sure about the other updates. As for updating the CPU, Apple does well to keep up on the technology so long as they can afford to, even if it is the operating system that draws most new users, and I do think they will update it soon, at least for MBPs. But, this is to stay competitive and to offer a pro model that can really be used as a pro model - not to thrill consumers with just how much they can upgrade the machines.
LanPhantom
Mar 31, 02:35 PM
The biggest advantage always given for Android over iOS is that it's "open source." Well, clearly that's not the case anymore. So, I can't think of any other reason to use Android over iOS, or even Windows 7. It looks like junk, and it's just a cheap ripoff of iOS.
I've been wanting to say this for a very long time. Google's OS has no advantage over iOS. You could even say it has a disadvantage. Having to create a vanilla code base that needs to function on multiple pieces of hardware is complex, more complexity creates weaker system.
But here's my point. The ONLY ONLY reason why Android market share is anywhere near what it is today is because of the Buy One Get One options at most phone retailers. iOS has NEVER done that and hopefully never will. If you didn't care about the phone or service but needed two "Newer Smart Phones" one for you and one for your wife, why not go with the "Blah Blah" model from Verizon where if I buy one today I get the second for free (two year agreement and activation fees required).
Market share means nothing. This platform is doomed unless Google reins it in and get control over it. If they do, providers will be less willing to work with them, if they don't, by by Android.
My Two Cents.
-LanPhantom
I've been wanting to say this for a very long time. Google's OS has no advantage over iOS. You could even say it has a disadvantage. Having to create a vanilla code base that needs to function on multiple pieces of hardware is complex, more complexity creates weaker system.
But here's my point. The ONLY ONLY reason why Android market share is anywhere near what it is today is because of the Buy One Get One options at most phone retailers. iOS has NEVER done that and hopefully never will. If you didn't care about the phone or service but needed two "Newer Smart Phones" one for you and one for your wife, why not go with the "Blah Blah" model from Verizon where if I buy one today I get the second for free (two year agreement and activation fees required).
Market share means nothing. This platform is doomed unless Google reins it in and get control over it. If they do, providers will be less willing to work with them, if they don't, by by Android.
My Two Cents.
-LanPhantom
blesscheese
Mar 26, 09:16 AM
Wait until the first revision comes up! as always, the desperates install the new OS that come full of bugs and then complains starts "I lost all my data".
Just my 2cents.
Not to mention that this sort of upgrades just make you buying a new machine to run the system as it should.
I agree...btw, before they release the new OS, shouldn't they fix the flaws in the old one first? Oh well, no chance of that now, "the new OS is far better than the old one..." (shades of M$ hyping Windows 95 as "the best ever," and then to market Win98, talking about how crappy Win95 was).
Is it me, or has Snow Leopard felt more like a marketing tool to get Apple's hands more fully into my wallet? The 10.6.6 update just to put the App Store icon in my dock was a bit over the top.
Just my 2cents.
Not to mention that this sort of upgrades just make you buying a new machine to run the system as it should.
I agree...btw, before they release the new OS, shouldn't they fix the flaws in the old one first? Oh well, no chance of that now, "the new OS is far better than the old one..." (shades of M$ hyping Windows 95 as "the best ever," and then to market Win98, talking about how crappy Win95 was).
Is it me, or has Snow Leopard felt more like a marketing tool to get Apple's hands more fully into my wallet? The 10.6.6 update just to put the App Store icon in my dock was a bit over the top.
Thinine
Apr 10, 01:21 AM
Interesting news, but the bit about booting competitors is downright disgusting.
It's not like they threatened anyone. They likely went to the organizers and said "We'd like to make a really cool announcement at your event but we'd need most of your presentation and sponsorship space to do it." SuperMeet said sure, Apple paid, and here we are. It's not like the other sponsors didn't get their money back (I'm assuming.)
It's not like they threatened anyone. They likely went to the organizers and said "We'd like to make a really cool announcement at your event but we'd need most of your presentation and sponsorship space to do it." SuperMeet said sure, Apple paid, and here we are. It's not like the other sponsors didn't get their money back (I'm assuming.)
Mike84
Apr 25, 03:13 PM
"Federal Marshals need a warrant. . . . . "
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible
Also, there is a case in California, upheld by the 9th Circuit, that says the police do NOT need a warrant to come onto your property and place a GPS tracking device on your car and track you and your car. It might get overturned at the USSC, but today, it is legal. Their legal theory is that you don’t have a right to privacy on PUBLIC roads, and it also isn't unreasonable to think that no one would ever come on your property, uninvited. . salesmen, delivery people, the neighbor, etc. So, unless your yard is fenced, and/or clearly posted NO TRESPASSING, the police can put that GPS on your car.
You are right, but you are wrong in mentioning that you need a fence and a sign saying "NO TRESPASSING" for cops to come in and take a look. Look up the cases from the United States Supreme Court that hold otherwise. That will not stop cops and it has not stopped cops. For example, cases where people were growing pot in their barn. Cops jumped the fence, peeked into the barn, saw the rugs, boom you have a warrant because it is based on probable cause. . However, this is not the point of the discussion here.
I think Apple just moved for summary judgment as a matter of law and get with it because these attorneys are trying to see if Apple will settle, but I highly doubt they will even consider it.
"If you are a federal marshal you have to have a warrant to do this kind of thing, and Apple is doing it without one."
This lawyer needs to go back to law school. The 4th amendment, which protects our right to privacy, is to prevent the government from infringing on that right. Last I checked Apple was not part of the government.
Also, Apple is not tracking anything. They simple have a file on your phone that has all of this information. (correct me if I am wrong).
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible
Also, there is a case in California, upheld by the 9th Circuit, that says the police do NOT need a warrant to come onto your property and place a GPS tracking device on your car and track you and your car. It might get overturned at the USSC, but today, it is legal. Their legal theory is that you don’t have a right to privacy on PUBLIC roads, and it also isn't unreasonable to think that no one would ever come on your property, uninvited. . salesmen, delivery people, the neighbor, etc. So, unless your yard is fenced, and/or clearly posted NO TRESPASSING, the police can put that GPS on your car.
You are right, but you are wrong in mentioning that you need a fence and a sign saying "NO TRESPASSING" for cops to come in and take a look. Look up the cases from the United States Supreme Court that hold otherwise. That will not stop cops and it has not stopped cops. For example, cases where people were growing pot in their barn. Cops jumped the fence, peeked into the barn, saw the rugs, boom you have a warrant because it is based on probable cause. . However, this is not the point of the discussion here.
I think Apple just moved for summary judgment as a matter of law and get with it because these attorneys are trying to see if Apple will settle, but I highly doubt they will even consider it.
"If you are a federal marshal you have to have a warrant to do this kind of thing, and Apple is doing it without one."
This lawyer needs to go back to law school. The 4th amendment, which protects our right to privacy, is to prevent the government from infringing on that right. Last I checked Apple was not part of the government.
Also, Apple is not tracking anything. They simple have a file on your phone that has all of this information. (correct me if I am wrong).
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.
AppleFreak89
Jun 8, 07:55 PM
I kind of take offense to the statement that the radioshack employees can ruin your credit. truth is it is impossible..there is no way to touch your credit when running an activation. the used phone incident sounded like a mistake, hardly the norm. I've never heard of that happening. Radioshack is connected to the carries and in fact have their own representative for each carrier. Also, Radioshack offers a 30-day policy same as everywhere. Oh and the cell-phones sold at Walmart, target and Sam's club are owned by Radioshack BTW.
dscuber9000
Mar 22, 10:52 PM
Oh yeah... and here's a fun little nugget for those who like to tout Obama's coalition:
Do you think the scale of our intervention is anywhere close to the scale of our intervention in Iraq? We don't even have any troops in Libya! We barely even need a coalition at all! I'm sorry that you're still sore about how the war in Iraq went, but trying to compare this to it is just stupid. Just stupid.
Do you think the scale of our intervention is anywhere close to the scale of our intervention in Iraq? We don't even have any troops in Libya! We barely even need a coalition at all! I'm sorry that you're still sore about how the war in Iraq went, but trying to compare this to it is just stupid. Just stupid.
miketcool
Aug 11, 06:38 PM
You all must realize now that the touch screen scroll wheel is for the iPhone, not, the iPod. You wont watch video's on your phone, but youll listen to audio, dial numbers and store info. The Video player will be a spin off and be video oriented, this will be mobile oriented. $399, I'd still buy a mobile hub with music and phone capabilities.
It Cometh.
It Cometh.
braddouglass
Apr 6, 01:07 PM
Awesome, can't wait.
Picking up the 11" soon as they are out.
RICH B!tch! hahaha
I'm referring to his iMac and MBP and Iphone and Ipad and soon to be MBA
Picking up the 11" soon as they are out.
RICH B!tch! hahaha
I'm referring to his iMac and MBP and Iphone and Ipad and soon to be MBA
netdog
Aug 11, 03:22 PM
First, what makes you think the cellusage is similar to internet????? Mind blowing step here.
Secondly, Europa has 291 million internet users; North america US&Canada 227 milion; Rest of the world 500 million
Hence europe would be close to 30% of the total market???? What about india??? Japan??? china??? come on you cant say jack *** from this statistics
China, having bypassed installing a massive landline strucutre, now has enormous GSM network penetration.
India is also a HUGE GSM market.
Secondly, Europa has 291 million internet users; North america US&Canada 227 milion; Rest of the world 500 million
Hence europe would be close to 30% of the total market???? What about india??? Japan??? china??? come on you cant say jack *** from this statistics
China, having bypassed installing a massive landline strucutre, now has enormous GSM network penetration.
India is also a HUGE GSM market.
robbyx
Apr 25, 04:29 PM
Normally I would argue that the customer doesn't have a right to a lot of things. But in this case - if you bought a device and it is tracking you (I'm not saying it is or it isn't) - the customer does have a right to know.
This (sort of) reminds me of how now your are legally allowed to get a free credit report once a year to determine whether or not it's correct. Companies used to make a fortune charging for something that people, inherently had the right to know.
Where does these RIGHTS you speak of come from? Frankly, I don't know if it's a right or not, but I hear the word "right" used a lot these days by people who have no idea what it means.
Much ado about nothing.
This (sort of) reminds me of how now your are legally allowed to get a free credit report once a year to determine whether or not it's correct. Companies used to make a fortune charging for something that people, inherently had the right to know.
Where does these RIGHTS you speak of come from? Frankly, I don't know if it's a right or not, but I hear the word "right" used a lot these days by people who have no idea what it means.
Much ado about nothing.
leekohler
Apr 28, 04:00 PM
Because there was never a question of wither or not any of those men were born in the US, with Obama the past was always a bit hazy as to if he was actually born in Hawaii or thats just what his parents told him. Obviously he doesn’t remember BEING BORN in hawaii..his parents could have just told him that.
But now we have proof and its all over with there’s no need to be calling names about it.
I'm sorry, but why was there a question about whether Obama was born in the US? Why even ask such a question? Why you think people wondered? And John McCain certainly was not born in the US, but birthers never concerned themselves with that little tidbit, did they? Did they ask McCain for his birth certificate? Why was there never a question of other presidents being born in the US? How was it so "obvious"?
But now we have proof and its all over with there’s no need to be calling names about it.
I'm sorry, but why was there a question about whether Obama was born in the US? Why even ask such a question? Why you think people wondered? And John McCain certainly was not born in the US, but birthers never concerned themselves with that little tidbit, did they? Did they ask McCain for his birth certificate? Why was there never a question of other presidents being born in the US? How was it so "obvious"?
0 comments:
Post a Comment