Sydde
Mar 23, 06:03 PM
Isn't that an ad feminam?
Well, I suppose it really should have been ad homines � the (proper) plural would I think mitigate the gender.
Well, I suppose it really should have been ad homines � the (proper) plural would I think mitigate the gender.
starflyer
Mar 23, 09:30 AM
So you don't understand the primary differences between the cellphone market and the launch of the iPhone and the tablet market and the launch of the iPad. If you did you would understand why this is not the case.
Exactly. What people fail to realize is that the iPad market is more comparable to the iPod Touch then the iPhone for which there still isn't any competition.
Exactly. What people fail to realize is that the iPad market is more comparable to the iPod Touch then the iPhone for which there still isn't any competition.
milo
Jul 14, 03:04 PM
Power Supply at the top is REALLY stupid.
Why?
Why?
tobio
Aug 7, 06:38 PM
I went for enhanced mail, specifically because of the system wide todo's and notes. All the other stuff is nice, but those features are actually going to make my working life better (I use my mac for my actual work wherever possible). The system wide features of the OS are what truly makes it great for me. The sort of things that you use every day without even noticing them (until you try to do them in windows).
pmz
Apr 6, 10:30 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
I have a 13" ultimate of the current generation. The limiting factor for me is the graphics, not the processor. so going to sandy bridge with the intel 3000 would be a less appealing machine for my uses than the current model. It's really too bad the sandy bridge macs are tied to those garbage integrated graphics.
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
I have a 13" ultimate of the current generation. The limiting factor for me is the graphics, not the processor. so going to sandy bridge with the intel 3000 would be a less appealing machine for my uses than the current model. It's really too bad the sandy bridge macs are tied to those garbage integrated graphics.
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
zelet
Aug 25, 04:02 PM
Another person who can never be satisfied.:rolleyes:
Are you telling me somebody who spent thousands of dollars on "premium" hardware doesn't have a right to be pissed when both systems he bought were DOA? That is stupid! Apple should have kissed his ass and gave him a new computer after the second major repair. He was nicer than I would have ever been. I would have gone to the Apple store and caused a HUGE scene in the middle of a busy Saturday about it.
Apple computers are expensive. They are worth it when they work (and they usually do) but when Apple makes a mistake they should correct it better than anybody.
Are you telling me somebody who spent thousands of dollars on "premium" hardware doesn't have a right to be pissed when both systems he bought were DOA? That is stupid! Apple should have kissed his ass and gave him a new computer after the second major repair. He was nicer than I would have ever been. I would have gone to the Apple store and caused a HUGE scene in the middle of a busy Saturday about it.
Apple computers are expensive. They are worth it when they work (and they usually do) but when Apple makes a mistake they should correct it better than anybody.
Bengt77
Mar 26, 02:36 PM
No, they could go DVD or Mac App Store. I hope we get a USB version, but I don't think it'll happen.
My bet is on distribution on custom design USB drives, like this one (http://molotalk.com/new-macbook-air-ships-with-custom-printed-software-reinstall-usb-drive/).
My bet is on distribution on custom design USB drives, like this one (http://molotalk.com/new-macbook-air-ships-with-custom-printed-software-reinstall-usb-drive/).
brianus
Sep 13, 10:05 AM
probably due to latency involved in distributing the load across the two processors. that's the same problem a single Clovertown would have. Only true quads wouldn't suffer from these problems (earliest seems to be Harpertown in don't know if there are any non-MCM Xeons scheduled before then)
What about Tigerton (2007)? Isn't that a "true" quad?
What about Tigerton (2007)? Isn't that a "true" quad?
asterizk
Nov 28, 07:05 PM
I think they'll be a long way off getting money from every iPod sold. For a start its such an illogical thing to ask for (Did the music companies ask for money for every CD player or Tape Recorder sold? Nope), plus I suspect the main reason that Microsoft agreed to pay money in the first place is that they needed to get the music labels on board to boost the Zune Music Store, Microsoft was in the weaker position here and I believe the labels exploited that weakness.
Yup.. Gruber made a similar statement (http://daringfireball.net/2006/11/buy_that_for_a_dollar) recently.
Yup.. Gruber made a similar statement (http://daringfireball.net/2006/11/buy_that_for_a_dollar) recently.
yg17
Apr 27, 08:59 AM
Before yesterday?
In before the election.
In before the election.
GregA
Mar 26, 05:21 PM
While Apple may yet issue several such candidates before reaching the final version to be released to consumers, the candidate designation would suggest that Apple has essentially completed development on the new operating system version and will simply be fixing bugs that crop up at the last minute during the testing process.
so, it's beta #1? Feature complete but still has bugs to iron out.
Golden master is usually when they are confident of no bugs isn't it?
so, it's beta #1? Feature complete but still has bugs to iron out.
Golden master is usually when they are confident of no bugs isn't it?
twoodcc
Apr 10, 08:55 PM
can't wait to see what it's all gonna be about! hope it ships soon!
Yvan256
Apr 10, 12:02 PM
Wow. You'd think a FCP Users group would be able to track down a halfway decent graphic artist to make their banner graphic...
At least the one on their website looks fine (yet still ugly), the one on MacRumors looks resized and the pixels got messed up... :confused:
At least the one on their website looks fine (yet still ugly), the one on MacRumors looks resized and the pixels got messed up... :confused:
mygoldens
Mar 22, 06:34 PM
It won�t sell because the iPad lines will block the view in store.
I will probably buy one! :D
There will not be any lines and hey, they might just have some stock!
What a novel idea! Have stock for a product that you say you produce, WOW what a concept!
I will probably buy one! :D
There will not be any lines and hey, they might just have some stock!
What a novel idea! Have stock for a product that you say you produce, WOW what a concept!
davidcmc
Mar 22, 03:01 PM
Come: present tense. See: iPad2
Will come: future tense. See: Samsung tablet.
May come: conditional tense. See: RIM tablet.
The prices are official. Stop this fanboy **** about "it's not released yet".
Xoom has been released and sells well, although not so much as the iPad, but it still grabs some market share.
You people keep trying to find problems where there are no problems.
It's an official announcement, the tablets are officially coming with an official price that makes real front to the iPad, you accepting it or not.
It's like you fanboy people hate the fact that competitors are doing well.
The Galaxy Tab 8.9 and 10.1 are thinner than the iPad 2, that must be too much for fanboys hearts.
Will come: future tense. See: Samsung tablet.
May come: conditional tense. See: RIM tablet.
The prices are official. Stop this fanboy **** about "it's not released yet".
Xoom has been released and sells well, although not so much as the iPad, but it still grabs some market share.
You people keep trying to find problems where there are no problems.
It's an official announcement, the tablets are officially coming with an official price that makes real front to the iPad, you accepting it or not.
It's like you fanboy people hate the fact that competitors are doing well.
The Galaxy Tab 8.9 and 10.1 are thinner than the iPad 2, that must be too much for fanboys hearts.
Skika
Mar 26, 08:00 AM
Will it have a new theme? I think its really time for aqua to be put to rest and something new comes along.
Soura2112
Apr 6, 03:09 PM
First off I'm not a full time pro, I do about 30% pro work the rest is for family and friends who I don't charge cause it's usually simple. That being said I want to get more pro work. I'm in the process if buying a new HD Cam so I want Blu Ray ability. With buying a new video camera and hopefully the new FCP if it meets my standards will be an expensive month since I don't have an internal or external Blu Ray drive yet and I want full use of Blu Ray, even if we must go with LaCie or whatever Blu Ray drive you like.
Even for my non pro videos of my dogs I want Blu Ray use it's that simple, 1080p, not 720 files to run through iTunes then to my Apple TV, only way to stream videos at my house at the moment outside of iPad and iPhone. I could pay to connect my 360 and sadly no PS3 to Mac stream. (I may be wrong on my home streaming so be nice please).
Most of my pro video is sports and some weddings. They all want a disc, not all want Blu Ray but I want the option for my clients.
of Duty Modern Warfare 2
call of duty modern warfare 2
Even for my non pro videos of my dogs I want Blu Ray use it's that simple, 1080p, not 720 files to run through iTunes then to my Apple TV, only way to stream videos at my house at the moment outside of iPad and iPhone. I could pay to connect my 360 and sadly no PS3 to Mac stream. (I may be wrong on my home streaming so be nice please).
Most of my pro video is sports and some weddings. They all want a disc, not all want Blu Ray but I want the option for my clients.
samh004
Nov 28, 07:14 PM
I was under the assumption that the money paid to Universal was to allow the streaming of music from one device to another. I assumed that was the real reason behind the payment.
Seeing as Apple does not stream music to random devices, they shouldn't have to pay a royalty.
I don't think I voiced my opinion about this last time it was brought up, but I reckon although the iPod makes enough profit so as not to pass that royalty onto the consumer (in price), I would still feel like I was paying that royalty, were I to buy an iPod.
If I felt like I paid a royalty, and was already downloading songs legally from iTunes anyway, I'd want to download more stuff illegally than I have before, just to make use of that royalty.
That's what I will do if I have to buy an iPod in the future with a pre-paid royalty. You heard me... this tactic will only encourage more piracy. Stupid really !
Seeing as Apple does not stream music to random devices, they shouldn't have to pay a royalty.
I don't think I voiced my opinion about this last time it was brought up, but I reckon although the iPod makes enough profit so as not to pass that royalty onto the consumer (in price), I would still feel like I was paying that royalty, were I to buy an iPod.
If I felt like I paid a royalty, and was already downloading songs legally from iTunes anyway, I'd want to download more stuff illegally than I have before, just to make use of that royalty.
That's what I will do if I have to buy an iPod in the future with a pre-paid royalty. You heard me... this tactic will only encourage more piracy. Stupid really !
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 02:21 PM
Now in Europe I know it is different and that GSM is the standard.
It is more like 81% of the world market.
It is more like 81% of the world market.
Some_Big_Spoon
Mar 26, 02:40 PM
Initial release is buggy, and I've turned off most of the new features that have been hyped. My hope is, as always, speed improvements across the board, as the desktop/windows/pointer metaphor (in my opinion) has run its course.
antster94
Mar 22, 12:44 PM
Competition is good.
OzyOly
Apr 6, 11:43 AM
Can't wait. Shall be my new Work machine. :)
jmbear
Nov 29, 12:39 PM
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 internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
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..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
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..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
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.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. 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.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
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..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
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..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
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.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. 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.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
Al Coholic
Mar 26, 06:03 PM
Maybe not the worst, but definitely the most useless.
Spotlight does a so much better job.
Agreed. I keep my dock pretty sparse so if the app ain't there it's only a few keystrokes away.
The new Launcher is just one of those eye-candy apps. It'll be the first thing I delete.
Spotlight does a so much better job.
Agreed. I keep my dock pretty sparse so if the app ain't there it's only a few keystrokes away.
The new Launcher is just one of those eye-candy apps. It'll be the first thing I delete.
