toddybody
Apr 19, 12:02 PM
Which is why desktops won't die out.
+1
Dont get me wrong...I love my iPad 2. I just could never give up the ease and efficiency of a Dektop.
+1
Dont get me wrong...I love my iPad 2. I just could never give up the ease and efficiency of a Dektop.
wordoflife
Nov 23, 05:43 PM
Blackberry Tour is both GSM and CDMA, like the Bold on Sprint. You can pop in any simcard overseas and it will work.
Ahh okay ... I just saw the Sprint logo
Ahh okay ... I just saw the Sprint logo
zedsdead
Jan 13, 04:03 PM
Apple will NOT do that, however, remember the collapsing port patent filed by Apple?
Apple is supposed to be building an Ultra-Portable. Ethernet takes up space. I seriously doubt it will be in the Macbook Air or whatever apple decides to call it. Wifi will be enough. This laptop is not ment to be a main computer.
Apple is supposed to be building an Ultra-Portable. Ethernet takes up space. I seriously doubt it will be in the Macbook Air or whatever apple decides to call it. Wifi will be enough. This laptop is not ment to be a main computer.
prodigee
Feb 27, 09:25 PM
What did you unplug before taking the picture? :o
My SD card for my camera. :P
Looks like you do a fair bit of typing on that thing!
My old one started looking like that but then Apple replaced it with a new one. I bought a keyboard cover. Not because I hate shiny keys, but because hair and stuff was falling in the keys.
Here at school it is my only computer, and I used it almost exclusively last year because I was on the move so much. So yeah I guess you could say I do a lot of typing on here haha. :)
My SD card for my camera. :P
Looks like you do a fair bit of typing on that thing!
My old one started looking like that but then Apple replaced it with a new one. I bought a keyboard cover. Not because I hate shiny keys, but because hair and stuff was falling in the keys.
Here at school it is my only computer, and I used it almost exclusively last year because I was on the move so much. So yeah I guess you could say I do a lot of typing on here haha. :)
KingSleaze
Apr 8, 09:59 AM
For example, Apple had to make Safari due to Microsoft pulling out of the mac.
And there I thought that Microshaft stopped development of Internet Exploder for the Mac because Apple released Safari. Which happened first?
And there I thought that Microshaft stopped development of Internet Exploder for the Mac because Apple released Safari. Which happened first?
danielwsmithee
Nov 29, 03:33 PM
Its outputs are HDMI and component video. It is designed for HD content.The Question is will it do 1080p & 720p or just 480p?
Psychic Shopper
Jul 18, 11:18 AM
I must have watched 20 different video clips from the Daily Show on You Tube, streaming in almost real time. Why would I want to buy that content on the Itunes store?
SeaFox
Dec 28, 01:52 AM
anything is possible minus 1 thing: the option to dock and iPod simply is so out of place that I do not know why it keeps getting brought up. iTV is focused on streaming content from your computer, not your iPod.
I think an iPod dock is a great idea. It would be nice to be able to use your iTV for something without a computer running. Hey, take your iPod to a friend's house and you can all watch a movie at their house from your collection, just like taking your entire video library with you.
There are two problems with this:
1) HD content takes up a huge amount of space. So if Apple did offer HD movies, the copy iTunes will transfer to your iPod would be reduced quality.
2) iTunes purchases would not be playable on the component outputs on the iTV. The movie studios would require you use an HDMI connection or something else that supported HDCP to ensure you didn't copy the movie out of the iTunes ecosphere.
As several of us have discussed before, my hope is that iTV will be able to stream all forms of content on my computer, but with particular emphasis on digital media. So if I want to bring a word doc up and type or a movie I am working on in final cut pro, I can do so. Similarly, and with more fully developed components all my digital media can be run on my tv. The goal is to make this experience integrate all the entertainment features we love, but throughout our homes. Quality preservation is essential and I think they will work to ensure that takes place.
The issue here is you're asking your iTV to open other files, in other words, you're asking it to be a regular computer. That isn't going to work because it makes the OS/interface more complicated. A home entertainment component needs to be simple and fast. This is where Apple's embedded OSX rumors would be coming in. Everyone read that and thought about the Apple Phone because that was the hot topic of the week and the was the notion of a PDA Apple phone. But an embedded real-time operating system is just what the iTV needs.
People need to stop comparing the iTV to a Mac Mini, they should thinking of it the same way you think of an XBox compared to a Windows PC. Yeah, they're both made by Microsoft, but the XBox doesn't run Windows, it runs a smaller GUI on top of what is mostly a DirectX back end.
What's funny is the reason people keep thinking of the Mini is because what consumers really want is an Apple DVR, a Mac Mini with a little stronger hardware, no external power supply, and a built in tuner. Add PVR functionality to Front Row and maybe a little bit more expansive remote and you'd have that. But since the Mini isn't expandable, it isn't even possible for a consumer to cobble together the solution themselves from a PCI tuner card and DVR software available, the closest they can do has lots of "extra parts" lying around from the ElGato external tuner, a monitor adapter to give them the connection they need, and the Mini's power supply, and it still would not be as easy to navigate since a keyboard would probably be needed at some point.
So a MacMini wont download and play a HD movie or display a word doc, and you need the iTV to accomplish this basic task?
No, it will do those things, but a MacMini costs $600. Not everyone wants to keep their main computer hooked up to the TV. The iTV allows them to watch their iTunes Store-purchased movies on a larger screen than their regular monitor without moving their computer.
Also, most people don’t need final cut pro or photo shop. So, that’s why I was thinking this could be a basic computer. If not you will need the mac mini to go with it, and why not simply include the iTV with the Mac Mini so you don’t have two devises in a limited shelf space.
The iTV is meant to be an add-on to an existing Macintosh household. Not a self-contained entertainment product like a CableCo box or a PS2.
The idea is the iTV would support more common TV connection methods out of the box, be designed to fit in better aesthetically with home entertainment components, offer better video performance, overall stability, and lower power usage than a MacMini for less.
Is the problem the iTV will address processing the images or scaling them?
I hope so. Maybe it will be upconverting for watching current iTunes movies on an HDTV?
I think an iPod dock is a great idea. It would be nice to be able to use your iTV for something without a computer running. Hey, take your iPod to a friend's house and you can all watch a movie at their house from your collection, just like taking your entire video library with you.
There are two problems with this:
1) HD content takes up a huge amount of space. So if Apple did offer HD movies, the copy iTunes will transfer to your iPod would be reduced quality.
2) iTunes purchases would not be playable on the component outputs on the iTV. The movie studios would require you use an HDMI connection or something else that supported HDCP to ensure you didn't copy the movie out of the iTunes ecosphere.
As several of us have discussed before, my hope is that iTV will be able to stream all forms of content on my computer, but with particular emphasis on digital media. So if I want to bring a word doc up and type or a movie I am working on in final cut pro, I can do so. Similarly, and with more fully developed components all my digital media can be run on my tv. The goal is to make this experience integrate all the entertainment features we love, but throughout our homes. Quality preservation is essential and I think they will work to ensure that takes place.
The issue here is you're asking your iTV to open other files, in other words, you're asking it to be a regular computer. That isn't going to work because it makes the OS/interface more complicated. A home entertainment component needs to be simple and fast. This is where Apple's embedded OSX rumors would be coming in. Everyone read that and thought about the Apple Phone because that was the hot topic of the week and the was the notion of a PDA Apple phone. But an embedded real-time operating system is just what the iTV needs.
People need to stop comparing the iTV to a Mac Mini, they should thinking of it the same way you think of an XBox compared to a Windows PC. Yeah, they're both made by Microsoft, but the XBox doesn't run Windows, it runs a smaller GUI on top of what is mostly a DirectX back end.
What's funny is the reason people keep thinking of the Mini is because what consumers really want is an Apple DVR, a Mac Mini with a little stronger hardware, no external power supply, and a built in tuner. Add PVR functionality to Front Row and maybe a little bit more expansive remote and you'd have that. But since the Mini isn't expandable, it isn't even possible for a consumer to cobble together the solution themselves from a PCI tuner card and DVR software available, the closest they can do has lots of "extra parts" lying around from the ElGato external tuner, a monitor adapter to give them the connection they need, and the Mini's power supply, and it still would not be as easy to navigate since a keyboard would probably be needed at some point.
So a MacMini wont download and play a HD movie or display a word doc, and you need the iTV to accomplish this basic task?
No, it will do those things, but a MacMini costs $600. Not everyone wants to keep their main computer hooked up to the TV. The iTV allows them to watch their iTunes Store-purchased movies on a larger screen than their regular monitor without moving their computer.
Also, most people don’t need final cut pro or photo shop. So, that’s why I was thinking this could be a basic computer. If not you will need the mac mini to go with it, and why not simply include the iTV with the Mac Mini so you don’t have two devises in a limited shelf space.
The iTV is meant to be an add-on to an existing Macintosh household. Not a self-contained entertainment product like a CableCo box or a PS2.
The idea is the iTV would support more common TV connection methods out of the box, be designed to fit in better aesthetically with home entertainment components, offer better video performance, overall stability, and lower power usage than a MacMini for less.
Is the problem the iTV will address processing the images or scaling them?
I hope so. Maybe it will be upconverting for watching current iTunes movies on an HDTV?
Evangelion
Jul 20, 05:05 AM
People dont want to download the source and compile it
What makes you think that you have to do that?
even the best package managers dont really solve the problem, I want to download any application and run it, I dont want to have something check dependancies and then get teh appropriate version ect.
have you ever used Linux? Application-installation in any modern Linux-distro is VERY smooth. If I want to install an app in Ubuntu (the previous distro I used), how do I do that? Well, I load a package-manager, which gives me a list of apps. I select the app I want to install, and click "Install". And that's it. How much simpler could it be? Why does everyone think that loading a web-browser, searching the app with Google, browsing to the website, downloading the installer (assuming that the apps is free. Usually with Mac, it's not) and running the installer is somehow "easier" that launching an app, selecting the app to be installed from a list and clicking "install"? Seriously?
The newest Suse enterprise desktop has a lot of Mac os like features, and claim to have done a lot of research into user interface optomization ect, but thats only Suse, what about the rest, Linux will never have a singular unified front, and that is its achilees heel, and the macs inherant strenght (ok so the mac isnt that unified anymore)
What do you mean by "unified front"? The GUI? Most distros use either KDE or GNOME (usually alloweing the user to choose which one he prefers), so they are in fact quite unified.
What makes you think that you have to do that?
even the best package managers dont really solve the problem, I want to download any application and run it, I dont want to have something check dependancies and then get teh appropriate version ect.
have you ever used Linux? Application-installation in any modern Linux-distro is VERY smooth. If I want to install an app in Ubuntu (the previous distro I used), how do I do that? Well, I load a package-manager, which gives me a list of apps. I select the app I want to install, and click "Install". And that's it. How much simpler could it be? Why does everyone think that loading a web-browser, searching the app with Google, browsing to the website, downloading the installer (assuming that the apps is free. Usually with Mac, it's not) and running the installer is somehow "easier" that launching an app, selecting the app to be installed from a list and clicking "install"? Seriously?
The newest Suse enterprise desktop has a lot of Mac os like features, and claim to have done a lot of research into user interface optomization ect, but thats only Suse, what about the rest, Linux will never have a singular unified front, and that is its achilees heel, and the macs inherant strenght (ok so the mac isnt that unified anymore)
What do you mean by "unified front"? The GUI? Most distros use either KDE or GNOME (usually alloweing the user to choose which one he prefers), so they are in fact quite unified.
BRLawyer
Nov 16, 09:36 AM
Well, with the Intel Core roadmap for 2016 possibly getting up to close to 300 heterogeneous cores per motherboard/PC, certainly Windows is out of the race but OS XX 20.x will have to have evolved to probably DAML/OWL Semantic Web Ontology based, with System Strategy and System Policy Reasoners, i.e. a Cognitive OS with a flexible Operating Envelope. I think that would definitely make Safari snappier!
Well, this reminds me of that presentation given by Steve Jobs (on the new G4s, I think), where he said, for a certain specific technology ("latent semantic" or whatever) that:
"I have no idea what that is; but trust me, it works..!" :p
Well, this reminds me of that presentation given by Steve Jobs (on the new G4s, I think), where he said, for a certain specific technology ("latent semantic" or whatever) that:
"I have no idea what that is; but trust me, it works..!" :p
Unorthodox
Oct 23, 12:54 PM
The wheels on the rumor mill go 'round and 'round, 'round and 'round, 'round and 'round.
Dont Hurt Me
Aug 29, 04:37 PM
We've all been crying for a new cube since the mini came out... is the mini an awesome machine? Absolutely, I love mine. But there is a market for a headless iMac/Cube/MacPro mini... people like me. I don't need a quad core computer. I don't need 16gb of RAM. I don't need 4 harddrive bays, or even two optical drive slots.
I do want a fast CPU, an upgradable GPU, a couple of full size HDDs and a full size optical drive. I also want something quiet, relatively affordable (something a bit less than an iMac would be idea), and stylish.
I don't think that Apple would lose Mac Pro sales to something like this - they might lose iMac sales but if the margins are the same for them who cares, and any loss of mini sales would be upsells, so it'd be a good thing.
I think a lot PC types, especially gamers, would be interested, bringing in new markets... None of my gamer friends would be satisfied by an iMac, but neither would they shell out $2-3k for a Mac Pro.
Let's see, the mini is 6.5x6.5x2 inches, would anyone even notice if it went to 8.5x8.5x4? Even better would be 8x8x8, just for the cube dimensions, done in iPod white (or black), would look stellar on a desktop. Core 2 Duo 1.83ghz, 4 RAM slots for an 8gb max with 512mb installed stock, 1 16x PCIe w/ 7300GT base (BTO options), 1 PCI slot, 2 3.5" drive bays w/ 160gb standard, 1 5.25" bay w/ SD, AE, BT2, 6 USB2 (4 back, 2 front), 1 FW 400, 1 eSATA (in place of FW800)... $999 anyone? BTO options for slower/fast CPUs and GPUs, more RAM, bigger HDD and a $200 TV tuner/video encoder breakout box... :DThat is the machine that Apple needs, at the moment its still the marketeers at Apple who seem to rule their product offerings with mini vs All in one vs workstation..
I do want a fast CPU, an upgradable GPU, a couple of full size HDDs and a full size optical drive. I also want something quiet, relatively affordable (something a bit less than an iMac would be idea), and stylish.
I don't think that Apple would lose Mac Pro sales to something like this - they might lose iMac sales but if the margins are the same for them who cares, and any loss of mini sales would be upsells, so it'd be a good thing.
I think a lot PC types, especially gamers, would be interested, bringing in new markets... None of my gamer friends would be satisfied by an iMac, but neither would they shell out $2-3k for a Mac Pro.
Let's see, the mini is 6.5x6.5x2 inches, would anyone even notice if it went to 8.5x8.5x4? Even better would be 8x8x8, just for the cube dimensions, done in iPod white (or black), would look stellar on a desktop. Core 2 Duo 1.83ghz, 4 RAM slots for an 8gb max with 512mb installed stock, 1 16x PCIe w/ 7300GT base (BTO options), 1 PCI slot, 2 3.5" drive bays w/ 160gb standard, 1 5.25" bay w/ SD, AE, BT2, 6 USB2 (4 back, 2 front), 1 FW 400, 1 eSATA (in place of FW800)... $999 anyone? BTO options for slower/fast CPUs and GPUs, more RAM, bigger HDD and a $200 TV tuner/video encoder breakout box... :DThat is the machine that Apple needs, at the moment its still the marketeers at Apple who seem to rule their product offerings with mini vs All in one vs workstation..
28monkeys
Mar 22, 08:44 PM
Never abandon your classic. That is company's identity
zioxide
Jan 12, 11:28 AM
are you kidding me?
Macbook Air?
WORST NAME EVER
There's no way Apple would ever call something that.
Macbook Air?
WORST NAME EVER
There's no way Apple would ever call something that.
k8to
Aug 31, 02:34 PM
The worry is that in a few years interesting software applications will only come in x64 - companies will drop the fat binaries due to the expenses associated with multiple versions of the software.
[...]
So, not only can the 64-bit chip be significantly faster when in 64-bit mode - it is more future-proof.
Ding, ding, ding! I buy computers around once every four years, sometimes even less frequently. A "Core Duo" without EMT64 or amd64 or whatever you want to is not a four year computer. It is not good performance for money compared to merom (especially since you have to buy a whole rest of the computer to get it), and more importantly, x86-64 only apps will exist in this 4-5 year window.
Larger companies, and general apps aren't such a big concern. They will probably be willing to supply x86 versions four years from now for all but the most demanding apps. However, independent developers working on projects making interesting niche software are less likely to want to deal with the hassle of fixing bugs on multiple architectures.
I've actually had development tasks where a single process used over 4 gigs virtual. I've never needed to do such on my personal machine so far, but it would be pretty unsurprising to cross that boundary in the next few years. With x86-64 the task can just run all night, and swap what may. With x86, it might involve lots of workarounds, or be simply impossible. This does not appeal to me!
[...]
So, not only can the 64-bit chip be significantly faster when in 64-bit mode - it is more future-proof.
Ding, ding, ding! I buy computers around once every four years, sometimes even less frequently. A "Core Duo" without EMT64 or amd64 or whatever you want to is not a four year computer. It is not good performance for money compared to merom (especially since you have to buy a whole rest of the computer to get it), and more importantly, x86-64 only apps will exist in this 4-5 year window.
Larger companies, and general apps aren't such a big concern. They will probably be willing to supply x86 versions four years from now for all but the most demanding apps. However, independent developers working on projects making interesting niche software are less likely to want to deal with the hassle of fixing bugs on multiple architectures.
I've actually had development tasks where a single process used over 4 gigs virtual. I've never needed to do such on my personal machine so far, but it would be pretty unsurprising to cross that boundary in the next few years. With x86-64 the task can just run all night, and swap what may. With x86, it might involve lots of workarounds, or be simply impossible. This does not appeal to me!
CWallace
Jan 11, 07:43 PM
they also think the macbook's gonna have a super drive standard across the line, so they're obviously not talking about the same thing
Considering how inexpensive DVD burners are now, it probably costs Apple more to stock non-burners (for builds and AppleCare) in addition to burners then just moving purely to burners, so that would support a move to SuperDrives across the board.
Considering how inexpensive DVD burners are now, it probably costs Apple more to stock non-burners (for builds and AppleCare) in addition to burners then just moving purely to burners, so that would support a move to SuperDrives across the board.
TheAnswer
Jul 18, 11:41 AM
I don't know if the rumor is true or not, especially since lately AI and TS seem to be at odds about all the hardware news at WWDC, but here is what I'd like to see:
1. Streaming of movies now in theatres at least at DVD quality.
2. Streaming rentals of movies out of DVD at a little better resolution than we have now.
3. The option to purchase a DVD or HD quality version of a movie we have just watched the streaming rental of, with the ability to burn a copy.
1. Streaming of movies now in theatres at least at DVD quality.
2. Streaming rentals of movies out of DVD at a little better resolution than we have now.
3. The option to purchase a DVD or HD quality version of a movie we have just watched the streaming rental of, with the ability to burn a copy.
EricNau
Jul 18, 02:01 AM
Whether buying or renting, I hope these movies will be better quality than the current videos on the iTunes Music Store. I wouldn't pay a dime for a video that wasn't at least DVD quality.
It's good that iTunes is gaining more features that will help keep it ahead of Microsoft.
It's good that iTunes is gaining more features that will help keep it ahead of Microsoft.
nsayer
Nov 15, 12:13 PM
Seems to me this might be a way not for Apple to release an 8 core machine, but perhaps to release a one-chip, 4 core Mac Pro. That might result in slightly lower manufacturing and/or parts costs.
miketcool
Aug 16, 10:20 AM
Can't believe they got rid of the click wheel though, although that rectangular thing would probably work the screen pretty well.
I'm sure there might be a software hack that enables that.
I'm sure there might be a software hack that enables that.
Kranchammer
Mar 24, 01:37 PM
Mac Pro's have big power supplies but thats mainly for the CPU and Ram, adding a 6970 would be pushing its limits, especially for gaming.
Well, true, but unlike Apple's more portable offerings, there is nothing ,technologically or physically at least, stopping them from providing a psu in the next iteration of the Mac Pro that is capable of powering the later power-hungry gpu monsters.
Well, true, but unlike Apple's more portable offerings, there is nothing ,technologically or physically at least, stopping them from providing a psu in the next iteration of the Mac Pro that is capable of powering the later power-hungry gpu monsters.
Fubar1977
Apr 17, 10:35 AM
IMO, if a gearbox has a setting where it will automatically shift gears for you and you don't have to touch it, it's an automatic gearbox.
Sure, some auto gearboxes (DSG) are better than others (torque converter) but they're still automatic.
I must admit that, other than a couple of times just to try it out, I pretty much never use manual mode on the DSG box.
TBH there is no-way I could manually change faster than this box can.
In my case it`s fitted to a 2 litre turbo-diesel and the 6 speed DSG can keep the engine in the "power band" pretty much constantly if you want it to.
In "Sport Mode" it`s so damn fierce it`s almost undriveable.
I have embarrased many a petrol powered car in this thing :)
Sure, some auto gearboxes (DSG) are better than others (torque converter) but they're still automatic.
I must admit that, other than a couple of times just to try it out, I pretty much never use manual mode on the DSG box.
TBH there is no-way I could manually change faster than this box can.
In my case it`s fitted to a 2 litre turbo-diesel and the 6 speed DSG can keep the engine in the "power band" pretty much constantly if you want it to.
In "Sport Mode" it`s so damn fierce it`s almost undriveable.
I have embarrased many a petrol powered car in this thing :)
econgeek
Apr 12, 09:53 PM
Eh. People bitched about Aperture getting these features too, but so far Aperture's never grabbed me by the neck and forced me to use them. I assume Final Cut will be the same.
Face Detection worked great in iPhoto. In Aperture it is a PITA even if you want to use it. For instance, I haven't figured out how to say "this is just a cloud, there is no face there, really, don't ask me every time I start up the face detection feature."
Face Detection worked great in iPhoto. In Aperture it is a PITA even if you want to use it. For instance, I haven't figured out how to say "this is just a cloud, there is no face there, really, don't ask me every time I start up the face detection feature."
OdduWon
Nov 28, 11:54 AM
I disagree, take the price of a mini, add a good 17" monitor (4:3 (but not a super cheap one)) then compare the price to the 17" iMac. Not much difference and the iMac has better everything.
true ,but you could get dual monitors slightly cheaper... oh wait no graphics card, yeah what is up with the mini? it should be the coolest piece of hardware, but it has gotten no love. wheres all the love ?:p
true ,but you could get dual monitors slightly cheaper... oh wait no graphics card, yeah what is up with the mini? it should be the coolest piece of hardware, but it has gotten no love. wheres all the love ?:p
No comments:
Post a Comment