citizenzen
Mar 17, 01:31 PM
If you need links for the items the 5p listed, you weren't paying attention during the campaign.
Exactly. Citizenzen is just avoiding the obvious truth and he knows it.
If the truth is so obvious, prove it.
If there are "lots" of examples, then show them.
Otherwise, you're engaging in, at best, lazy debate.
I expect better from both of you.
Exactly. Citizenzen is just avoiding the obvious truth and he knows it.
If the truth is so obvious, prove it.
If there are "lots" of examples, then show them.
Otherwise, you're engaging in, at best, lazy debate.
I expect better from both of you.
Squire
Aug 7, 06:31 AM
this is me going out an a limb here.
but do you think the desktop lineup could become this?
Mac mini (2 models)
the Mac
iMac
Mac Pro
I'd like to see your "Mac" model bumped up past the iMac. I think a lot of people, myself included, would pay a premium for the ability to upgrade. In fact, I wouldn't care if they didn't offer a completely new model as long as they offer some "affordable" manifestations of the Mac Pro. So how's this (and go easy on me here because I rarely delve into the technical aspect of things):
Eventually (i.e. by November), Core 2 Duo/Woodcrest across he board:
1) Mac mini: 2 models both with the 1.86 GHz Core 2 Duo
2) iMac: 2 models with 1.86 GHz and 2.13 GHz Core 2 Duo
3) Mac Pro: 4 models; 2 Core 2 Duo-based systems (2.40 GHz and 2.66 GHz) and 2 Xeon-based systems (2.80 GHz and 3.0 GHz). The higher-end Xeon systems would sport the same enclosure as the Core 2 Duo systems (similar to the PM G5) but would come in an anodized charcoal black enclosure.
Any takers?
-Squire
but do you think the desktop lineup could become this?
Mac mini (2 models)
the Mac
iMac
Mac Pro
I'd like to see your "Mac" model bumped up past the iMac. I think a lot of people, myself included, would pay a premium for the ability to upgrade. In fact, I wouldn't care if they didn't offer a completely new model as long as they offer some "affordable" manifestations of the Mac Pro. So how's this (and go easy on me here because I rarely delve into the technical aspect of things):
Eventually (i.e. by November), Core 2 Duo/Woodcrest across he board:
1) Mac mini: 2 models both with the 1.86 GHz Core 2 Duo
2) iMac: 2 models with 1.86 GHz and 2.13 GHz Core 2 Duo
3) Mac Pro: 4 models; 2 Core 2 Duo-based systems (2.40 GHz and 2.66 GHz) and 2 Xeon-based systems (2.80 GHz and 3.0 GHz). The higher-end Xeon systems would sport the same enclosure as the Core 2 Duo systems (similar to the PM G5) but would come in an anodized charcoal black enclosure.
Any takers?
-Squire
MacSA
Aug 7, 05:32 PM
As a recent switcher to Mac, I have had a lot of experience with M$'s System Restore function. It is NOT a "go back and find that data I deleted" application. It IS a "can we please go back to a time when this computer wasn't totally ********* up" application.
I know, I cant believe people are comparing it to the sytem restore on Windows... sys restore on my PC is total bollocks and never solved any problem I had.
I know, I cant believe people are comparing it to the sytem restore on Windows... sys restore on my PC is total bollocks and never solved any problem I had.
GregAndonian
Apr 10, 08:52 PM
In fact the very first version of FCP was announced at Supermeet.
Was the supermeet focused on something else at one point? Because otherwise that sounds a little hard to believe that a usergroup would exist for a product that wasn't out yet...
"Hey Bill, we should go to the Final Cut Pro Supermeet this year. I hear they're going to talk about a new editing program called Final Cut Pro- sounds pretty neat."
Was the supermeet focused on something else at one point? Because otherwise that sounds a little hard to believe that a usergroup would exist for a product that wasn't out yet...
"Hey Bill, we should go to the Final Cut Pro Supermeet this year. I hear they're going to talk about a new editing program called Final Cut Pro- sounds pretty neat."
alent1234
Apr 20, 07:37 AM
I'm surprised to see iPhones have outsold iPod Touches by so much; I've never really considered the figures but just assumed that there would be way more iPod Touches around than iPhones.
most ipods i see are Nano's for people to listen to music on the train home. why buy a Touch when it's useless unless you have wifi. it's just a lower priced SKU for apple to defend the iphone market share
most ipods i see are Nano's for people to listen to music on the train home. why buy a Touch when it's useless unless you have wifi. it's just a lower priced SKU for apple to defend the iphone market share
Porco
Aug 6, 06:25 PM
Why sell a new keyboard for front row, if you can sell a new Mac to the same person? Including the sensor in the Cinema Displays would enable Apple to sell more of their display, on which they probably have a very good profit margin (when you compare to other manufacturers).
Because people would buy a new keyboard for some extra functionality; they wouldn't dump their entire system for one feature. And besides, my idea was a solution to the Mac Pro specific issue - therefore it would have to be available as a replacement part for the Mac Pro, making it sensible as an optional purchase for every mac owner. But regardless of that, it would be included with the new computer! If all the other macs have an integrated IR sensor, are you suggesting Apple will want people to buy an iMac rather than a Mac Pro? Really? Also, everyone needs a keyboard, it's on the low-end of the price scale as an upgradable item and it would be easy to add IR.
They could also just put it into the tower. Even if that is under the desk, it might not be that much of a problem. In my experience the sensor responds very nicely to the remote even if the line of sight between them is somewhat obstructed.
They could, but the keyboard is, I would have thought, much much more likely to be in a predictably close position to the screen in the vast majority of cases.
However the best solution I think, was suggested by someone on these forums. I don't know, whether it has been quoted here already, because I did not go through all the messages. This poster suggested to combine the sensor with an external iSight. That could be connected to any monitor and would probably have a good IR reception because of beeing on top of the monitor and thus very exposed.
Not everyone needs or wants an external iSight. Everyone uses a keyboard. I think my solution works not only because of the exposure/position, but also in the ubiquity of the item. The IR sensors in the other machines are on the machines themselves because that's where it makes sense - but they are there, accessible, whatever your set-up is, wherever you put it (with the possible exception of the mini I guess if you really wanted that hidden away). The keyboard solution would just take the most predictably accessible (and standard) element of the system for a Mac Pro and puts the IR there - a display is optional, an external iSight is optional, the keyboard that comes with every machine - well that's standard.
Because people would buy a new keyboard for some extra functionality; they wouldn't dump their entire system for one feature. And besides, my idea was a solution to the Mac Pro specific issue - therefore it would have to be available as a replacement part for the Mac Pro, making it sensible as an optional purchase for every mac owner. But regardless of that, it would be included with the new computer! If all the other macs have an integrated IR sensor, are you suggesting Apple will want people to buy an iMac rather than a Mac Pro? Really? Also, everyone needs a keyboard, it's on the low-end of the price scale as an upgradable item and it would be easy to add IR.
They could also just put it into the tower. Even if that is under the desk, it might not be that much of a problem. In my experience the sensor responds very nicely to the remote even if the line of sight between them is somewhat obstructed.
They could, but the keyboard is, I would have thought, much much more likely to be in a predictably close position to the screen in the vast majority of cases.
However the best solution I think, was suggested by someone on these forums. I don't know, whether it has been quoted here already, because I did not go through all the messages. This poster suggested to combine the sensor with an external iSight. That could be connected to any monitor and would probably have a good IR reception because of beeing on top of the monitor and thus very exposed.
Not everyone needs or wants an external iSight. Everyone uses a keyboard. I think my solution works not only because of the exposure/position, but also in the ubiquity of the item. The IR sensors in the other machines are on the machines themselves because that's where it makes sense - but they are there, accessible, whatever your set-up is, wherever you put it (with the possible exception of the mini I guess if you really wanted that hidden away). The keyboard solution would just take the most predictably accessible (and standard) element of the system for a Mac Pro and puts the IR there - a display is optional, an external iSight is optional, the keyboard that comes with every machine - well that's standard.
Ugg
Apr 27, 12:09 PM
I'm not a birther. But I would love to know why the certificate looks new when the president is nearly 50. Now I'm about five months older than he, my original birth certificate has faded. The certificate he produced clearly isn't the original. Or if it is the original, it's astoundingly well-preserved.
You obviously are posting without knowing anything about what a long form BC is. The short form is what the parents get and what you get when you ask the state for a copy. The long form is what is kept on file by the state. In other words, since it is handled very infrequently, it's probably going to look pristine.
If you don't like the guy, then say so, but it seems to me that to you, ignorance is more important than knowledge.
You obviously are posting without knowing anything about what a long form BC is. The short form is what the parents get and what you get when you ask the state for a copy. The long form is what is kept on file by the state. In other words, since it is handled very infrequently, it's probably going to look pristine.
If you don't like the guy, then say so, but it seems to me that to you, ignorance is more important than knowledge.
generik
Sep 13, 05:34 AM
Seems like someone in Anantech has managed to do just that with the upcoming Clovertown chips (http://anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2832&p=6).
It is like the iMac/Mac Mini -> Merom all over again!
It is like the iMac/Mac Mini -> Merom all over again!
Mike84
Apr 25, 03:47 PM
Being sued and breaking the law are two different things. I can sue you for killing the tree between our yards. You didnt break any law, but I can still sue.
I kinda see where he is a bit right. If I turn off or say no to allowing the apps to use my location this might suggest to the user that it is not tracking and storing this data. I do not think that it is a stretch to make that connection.
I do agree this is way out of hand though.
Then it would be a frivolous lawsuit and it would be dismissed.
So, there really isn't a point buddy. :D
I kinda see where he is a bit right. If I turn off or say no to allowing the apps to use my location this might suggest to the user that it is not tracking and storing this data. I do not think that it is a stretch to make that connection.
I do agree this is way out of hand though.
Then it would be a frivolous lawsuit and it would be dismissed.
So, there really isn't a point buddy. :D
Stella
Apr 25, 02:19 PM
Apple may ( are probably ) innocent, but they mis managed this. If they pushed out an official press release to explain why this, instead of keeping quite then the whole thing would have blown over.
cgmpowers
Jul 15, 12:24 PM
Has anyone considered this as to why Apple 'maybe' including two optical drives? We have external lightscribe 'superdrives' from Lacie (and others) but haven't seen one by Apple yet. That'd be a nice feature. So that's the first drive. The second optical drive is probably that BlueRay drive (massive storage capability compared to the other optical drive, and probably NOT capable of Lightscribing).
Other thoughts, I do agree it'd be nice to have four bays for hard drives but hard drive sizes are increasing again. I'd be very happy with two 500 or 600 gb hard drives (which is what I'll be ordering).
1 GB of ram min. is a must, I'm opting for at least 4 GB.
I also don't care if its 2.66 Ghz or 3.00 Ghz as long as its a quad (two dual core).. I just need an Intel MacPro soon.. My G4 1ghz machines are SO MUCH showing its age..
Other thoughts, I do agree it'd be nice to have four bays for hard drives but hard drive sizes are increasing again. I'd be very happy with two 500 or 600 gb hard drives (which is what I'll be ordering).
1 GB of ram min. is a must, I'm opting for at least 4 GB.
I also don't care if its 2.66 Ghz or 3.00 Ghz as long as its a quad (two dual core).. I just need an Intel MacPro soon.. My G4 1ghz machines are SO MUCH showing its age..
ncook06
Sep 13, 09:50 AM
I'm just wondering if I can drop one of these into an iMac... Are they pin-compatible? Also sort of wondering about a heat issue.
davidcmc
Mar 22, 03:45 PM
Says the man who doesn't even own one.
I can assure that doubling the 256MB of the first iPad is not enough for people that need a lot of multitask, like me.
I don't need to own an iPad 2.
The competitors have 1GB RAM, iPad 2 has 512MB.
It's simple: Apple is always behind hardware-wise because they like to priorize esthetics and appearance (besides the "so wonderful OS" ad). It's been this way for Macs, it seems to be the same way for iPads.
Android phones are selling more than iPhone.
iPhone has started a market, competitors are improving it.
iPad has started a market, competitors are improving it.
If you just can't recognize how multitask works better with 1GB RAM and true background apps (QNX, Honeycomb), then you deserve to use a limited thing like an iPad.
I've only bought the first iPad because there were no competitors at that time (and I hate netbooks), but now things are different. To be honest, A LOT different.
People said that the iPhone was going to be the best phone out there, but the market is showing something different.
People say the iPad is the best tablet out there, but it seems that the market is going to show something different.
There are 2 sides: Apple fanboys and realistic people.
I like products, not brands.
I can assure that doubling the 256MB of the first iPad is not enough for people that need a lot of multitask, like me.
I don't need to own an iPad 2.
The competitors have 1GB RAM, iPad 2 has 512MB.
It's simple: Apple is always behind hardware-wise because they like to priorize esthetics and appearance (besides the "so wonderful OS" ad). It's been this way for Macs, it seems to be the same way for iPads.
Android phones are selling more than iPhone.
iPhone has started a market, competitors are improving it.
iPad has started a market, competitors are improving it.
If you just can't recognize how multitask works better with 1GB RAM and true background apps (QNX, Honeycomb), then you deserve to use a limited thing like an iPad.
I've only bought the first iPad because there were no competitors at that time (and I hate netbooks), but now things are different. To be honest, A LOT different.
People said that the iPhone was going to be the best phone out there, but the market is showing something different.
People say the iPad is the best tablet out there, but it seems that the market is going to show something different.
There are 2 sides: Apple fanboys and realistic people.
I like products, not brands.
mccldwll
Apr 27, 08:34 AM
I think it was not a bug, nut data waiting to be sent to Apple for profit generating purposes.
Well........in Full of's case, nut data certainly was accurate.
Well........in Full of's case, nut data certainly was accurate.
DeVizardofOZ
Aug 26, 05:57 AM
in my experience, their support has always sucked..even from day 1 with my first PowerMac G5 back in 2004.
Let's see...
PowerMac G5 arrived with a defective superdrive, miscalibrated fans. The genius 'couldn't hear the fans', and accidentally put the repair in someone else's name, so when I tried to pick it up, I had to haggle to get it. Oh, and when I did finally get it, the superdrive was still broken. Super...
Cinema Display arrived with 7 dead pixels...I know this is a touchy issue, but the problem with their support regarding it was that none of them knew the actual number to replace it at. The phone people told me 5, the store (after the 45 minute drive there) told me 15, and another rep (who finally replaced it) told me 3.
iMac G5 had a defective power supply on arrival--would shut off randomly, some times not turning on. They refused to acknowledge this the first time we were there...the second time we were there...third time...fourth time they gave in--by saying "we'll keep it overnight." They still.."couldn't find a problem." When they gave it back, it worked for..two weeks, then the fans started being wonky. They couldn't hear that the first or second visit, on the third visit they took it overnight, "couldn't hear any audible issue", but it shutdown on them. I guess taking our word for it, they replaced the fan assembly, logic board, and power supply. Worked for a month, now it still shuts down.
MacBook Pro had the defective battery (random shutdowns), now fixed. Also, I had the screen buzz (now fixed), CPU A Whine (now fixed). They basically fixed all the issues in this machine, but were four days over their expected return time.
I'm not saying their support is totally crap, but they're certainly not consistent in performance, technical knowledge, friendliness, or even coverage. I was talking to a friend about "what I'd do if I were Steve Jobs," and the first thing we agreed on was to fire the entire AppleCare department, and all the genius', because they all seem to suck.
But hey, my iBook G4 and MacBook are fine...
There shouldn't be LUCK involved when buying ANYTHING, including an APPLE:p
Let's see...
PowerMac G5 arrived with a defective superdrive, miscalibrated fans. The genius 'couldn't hear the fans', and accidentally put the repair in someone else's name, so when I tried to pick it up, I had to haggle to get it. Oh, and when I did finally get it, the superdrive was still broken. Super...
Cinema Display arrived with 7 dead pixels...I know this is a touchy issue, but the problem with their support regarding it was that none of them knew the actual number to replace it at. The phone people told me 5, the store (after the 45 minute drive there) told me 15, and another rep (who finally replaced it) told me 3.
iMac G5 had a defective power supply on arrival--would shut off randomly, some times not turning on. They refused to acknowledge this the first time we were there...the second time we were there...third time...fourth time they gave in--by saying "we'll keep it overnight." They still.."couldn't find a problem." When they gave it back, it worked for..two weeks, then the fans started being wonky. They couldn't hear that the first or second visit, on the third visit they took it overnight, "couldn't hear any audible issue", but it shutdown on them. I guess taking our word for it, they replaced the fan assembly, logic board, and power supply. Worked for a month, now it still shuts down.
MacBook Pro had the defective battery (random shutdowns), now fixed. Also, I had the screen buzz (now fixed), CPU A Whine (now fixed). They basically fixed all the issues in this machine, but were four days over their expected return time.
I'm not saying their support is totally crap, but they're certainly not consistent in performance, technical knowledge, friendliness, or even coverage. I was talking to a friend about "what I'd do if I were Steve Jobs," and the first thing we agreed on was to fire the entire AppleCare department, and all the genius', because they all seem to suck.
But hey, my iBook G4 and MacBook are fine...
There shouldn't be LUCK involved when buying ANYTHING, including an APPLE:p
brianus
Sep 20, 04:07 PM
So - are you inferring that Windows 2000 or Windows XP never blue screen? Because (if you are) that's a load of crap. I've seen blue screens in both OS's. Granted it's usually tied to hardware only, but it still happens. I've had an external USB drive blue screen in XP every time I turned it on, tried on 3 XP computers. Hardware fault, no doubt. Lately my HP Laptop dvd drive has been causing XP Pro to blue screen every other time I insert a dvd-r. Again - hardware fault.
Otherwise are both OS's stable? Damn straight. But problems do occur and I hope you're not suggesting otherwise. No OS is without its flaws.
Huh? When did I say they never, ever experience any crashes whatsoever? Good god, I have never seen such a collection of mind-bendingly literal-minded people in one thread. Yikes. No idiot would ever say they never ever crash. As was painfully obvious, I was comparing Mac users' perceptions of older Windows OS's to the more recent ones and saying their impressions were inaccurate. I've been dealing with OS X kernel panics and CarbonLib issues all day, but I would never suggest things are as bad as in the OS 8 days when you'd get that little "bomb" at the system would shut down.
It's already happened, just not in as a melodramatic way as you suggest (back to 1GHz? geez). AMD took a small step back, Hz wise when they introduced dual core, though it still advanced their "+" processor ratings I suppose that few noticed the actual clock reduction. Intel took a major step back Hz wise between Netburst and Core 2. The 5000 and 5100 series Xeon CPUs demonstrate this, you can get a Dell precision 690 with 3.73GHz Netburst based chips or the same 690 with 3.0GHz Core2 based chips.
One thing I've noticed is that store ads no longer quote GHz like they used to, but rather processor model numbers. Makes sense: most people will not bother to investigate further, but if they did see the GHz numbers of Pentiums on the same sale ad as those of Core 2's, they might not be so hot on the latter. And please, everyone for the love of god, do not treat me to 5 replies in which you remonstrate me for not getting that the Core 2's are actually faster - I GET IT.
Otherwise are both OS's stable? Damn straight. But problems do occur and I hope you're not suggesting otherwise. No OS is without its flaws.
Huh? When did I say they never, ever experience any crashes whatsoever? Good god, I have never seen such a collection of mind-bendingly literal-minded people in one thread. Yikes. No idiot would ever say they never ever crash. As was painfully obvious, I was comparing Mac users' perceptions of older Windows OS's to the more recent ones and saying their impressions were inaccurate. I've been dealing with OS X kernel panics and CarbonLib issues all day, but I would never suggest things are as bad as in the OS 8 days when you'd get that little "bomb" at the system would shut down.
It's already happened, just not in as a melodramatic way as you suggest (back to 1GHz? geez). AMD took a small step back, Hz wise when they introduced dual core, though it still advanced their "+" processor ratings I suppose that few noticed the actual clock reduction. Intel took a major step back Hz wise between Netburst and Core 2. The 5000 and 5100 series Xeon CPUs demonstrate this, you can get a Dell precision 690 with 3.73GHz Netburst based chips or the same 690 with 3.0GHz Core2 based chips.
One thing I've noticed is that store ads no longer quote GHz like they used to, but rather processor model numbers. Makes sense: most people will not bother to investigate further, but if they did see the GHz numbers of Pentiums on the same sale ad as those of Core 2's, they might not be so hot on the latter. And please, everyone for the love of god, do not treat me to 5 replies in which you remonstrate me for not getting that the Core 2's are actually faster - I GET IT.
Multimedia
Aug 21, 05:43 AM
I stopped by the Apple store tonight to play with a Macpro. I'm getting ready to buy and thought I'd get some hands on experience to see how it performed with Finalcut Pro. I was especially interested in how it handles playback of uncompressed footage.
The store had a 2.6 hooked up to a 30"ACD. Everything on the machine was stock. I launched FCP and it appeared with a project already loaded (about 5 seconds). The project was a simple 20-30 second 720x480 NTSC clip of hockey game footage. I selected the clip and copied it to a new layer and threw a blend mode on it AND changed the speed to 85%. Next I copied and made another layer and changed the speed and offset it and changed the transparency to 80%. 3 layers total with the top two manipulated. I hit the render and it finished in about 30 seconds. :)
I know, not very scientific, but I just wanted to get a feel for how fast the Macpro would render manipulated footage. Anyhow, next I changed the output in project settings to "uncompressed" and hit render again. Again, it took less than a minute to render and the CPU usage in console was maxing out at only 42% per core.
Once the render completed, I hit the play button to see how the stock Macpro would handle playback of the uncompressed footage. It played for about 4 seconds then threw an error saying that frames were being dropped during playback. Not good. I was hoping that the Macpro would be able to play uncompressed footage from the timeline without 3rd party acceleration or setting up a raid. The error message suggested turning off RT effects (of which I did, but still had dropped frames) or get a faster drive. There was a couple other things the error suggested, but I can't remember at the moment. I wonder if having the ATI card would have made a difference? Not sure if FCP uses the GPU for playback, but I would think that should make a difference. Ram would probably help too. Anyone know what might be going on? Am I expecting too much out of this machine?
Sorry for sort of getting off topic. I thought this might be an appropriate area to post this; I wasn't feeling up to starting a new thread.That's great info. Would you please tell us:
1. How fast that is compared to what Mac model-speed you are currently using?
2. IE Were you impressed or not so impressed with how fast-slow it rendered?
3. What kind of speed were you expecting?
I'm no expert, but my guess is that the lack of RAM may have been the culprit. Need more independent tests like this from other FCP users. Thanks a lot. :)
The store had a 2.6 hooked up to a 30"ACD. Everything on the machine was stock. I launched FCP and it appeared with a project already loaded (about 5 seconds). The project was a simple 20-30 second 720x480 NTSC clip of hockey game footage. I selected the clip and copied it to a new layer and threw a blend mode on it AND changed the speed to 85%. Next I copied and made another layer and changed the speed and offset it and changed the transparency to 80%. 3 layers total with the top two manipulated. I hit the render and it finished in about 30 seconds. :)
I know, not very scientific, but I just wanted to get a feel for how fast the Macpro would render manipulated footage. Anyhow, next I changed the output in project settings to "uncompressed" and hit render again. Again, it took less than a minute to render and the CPU usage in console was maxing out at only 42% per core.
Once the render completed, I hit the play button to see how the stock Macpro would handle playback of the uncompressed footage. It played for about 4 seconds then threw an error saying that frames were being dropped during playback. Not good. I was hoping that the Macpro would be able to play uncompressed footage from the timeline without 3rd party acceleration or setting up a raid. The error message suggested turning off RT effects (of which I did, but still had dropped frames) or get a faster drive. There was a couple other things the error suggested, but I can't remember at the moment. I wonder if having the ATI card would have made a difference? Not sure if FCP uses the GPU for playback, but I would think that should make a difference. Ram would probably help too. Anyone know what might be going on? Am I expecting too much out of this machine?
Sorry for sort of getting off topic. I thought this might be an appropriate area to post this; I wasn't feeling up to starting a new thread.That's great info. Would you please tell us:
1. How fast that is compared to what Mac model-speed you are currently using?
2. IE Were you impressed or not so impressed with how fast-slow it rendered?
3. What kind of speed were you expecting?
I'm no expert, but my guess is that the lack of RAM may have been the culprit. Need more independent tests like this from other FCP users. Thanks a lot. :)
.jpg "at sep kisses sean penn,")
dougny
Nov 28, 06:44 PM
(Did the music companies ask for money for every CD player or Tape Recorder sold? Nope)
Actually, they do. They also got paid on every blank tape sold when cassettes were big. I think it is crazy for everyone to think that the music industry is greedy when it getting squeezed out of all of their revenue streams. So, Apple makes hundreds of millions off of their back on the itunes site, and a billion off of iPod sales, and they cannot share in the wealth?
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
Actually, they do. They also got paid on every blank tape sold when cassettes were big. I think it is crazy for everyone to think that the music industry is greedy when it getting squeezed out of all of their revenue streams. So, Apple makes hundreds of millions off of their back on the itunes site, and a billion off of iPod sales, and they cannot share in the wealth?
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
dgree03
Apr 6, 04:21 PM
Isn't it amazing that so many of these XOOM owners also, coincidentally, "own" an iPad/iPad 2, or their spouse/mom/dog/significant other does?
Either there's a lot of exaggerating (astroturfing) going on, or someone's spouse/mom/dog/significant other has a lot more sense. ;)
Why, I own an iPad and a XOOM and a Galaxy Tab and that HP Windows 7 Slate thingy and a Nook and a prototype PlayBook and I can tell you from personal experience that the iPad is like 100x better than all of those! :rolleyes:
I own both currently, and the reason is because I just like all technology. I give everything that looks interesting to me a fair try before dismissing it. I dont mind people talking about their own experiences with their own iPad, i just hate the people who comment on other hardware have NEVER used it at any length.
I like what the iPAD offers hardware wise and 3rd party accessory wise. If I could stick Honeycomb on a iPAD 2 hardware... I would be in heaven.
Either there's a lot of exaggerating (astroturfing) going on, or someone's spouse/mom/dog/significant other has a lot more sense. ;)
Why, I own an iPad and a XOOM and a Galaxy Tab and that HP Windows 7 Slate thingy and a Nook and a prototype PlayBook and I can tell you from personal experience that the iPad is like 100x better than all of those! :rolleyes:
I own both currently, and the reason is because I just like all technology. I give everything that looks interesting to me a fair try before dismissing it. I dont mind people talking about their own experiences with their own iPad, i just hate the people who comment on other hardware have NEVER used it at any length.
I like what the iPAD offers hardware wise and 3rd party accessory wise. If I could stick Honeycomb on a iPAD 2 hardware... I would be in heaven.
Nuck81
Dec 9, 11:24 AM
My biggest complaint about the game is that it's atmosphere and presentation are just absolutely sterile.
With the exception of car models the graphics don't approach what we see in other console racers. NFSL Shift makes it look like a PS2 game when it comes to detail, but GT5 makes a huge comeback and almost breaks dead even since it runs at 60fps. I went back and played Shift the other day and it was so choppy I almost couldn't play it.
The sound is also disappointing. Except for the car engines (to the guy that said they all sound the same, stop putting the same muffler and tranny on every car, it covers up their distinct sound) everything else is canned a tinny. When I go off track I hardly get any indication on sound. Go off track on Shift and you can hear pebbles, gravel, and dirt grinding under your car and banging around on the sides. Shift snarls, roars, rumbles and get's you excited to be out there and racing with other cars. GT5 is like driving miss daisy. The AI follows a single line, there is no off road sound, hardly any rumble on the gamepad, and it doesn't do a lot to put you in the game.
But GT5 makes up for a lot just by how the cars feel when they drive. Every single car is different and you can tell instantly. It drives so well I had to go get a Driving Force GT just to enjoy the drive as much as I can. Also I'll use it for Shift 2, and other racing games I have.
If you want a racing game, there are better ones than GT5. I'd recommend Shift over GT5 to someone who just wants a racing game. But if you want to drive cars, and come as close as you can without actually driving one on a console, there is not a better ride on any system (other than PC) than GT5.
With the exception of car models the graphics don't approach what we see in other console racers. NFSL Shift makes it look like a PS2 game when it comes to detail, but GT5 makes a huge comeback and almost breaks dead even since it runs at 60fps. I went back and played Shift the other day and it was so choppy I almost couldn't play it.
The sound is also disappointing. Except for the car engines (to the guy that said they all sound the same, stop putting the same muffler and tranny on every car, it covers up their distinct sound) everything else is canned a tinny. When I go off track I hardly get any indication on sound. Go off track on Shift and you can hear pebbles, gravel, and dirt grinding under your car and banging around on the sides. Shift snarls, roars, rumbles and get's you excited to be out there and racing with other cars. GT5 is like driving miss daisy. The AI follows a single line, there is no off road sound, hardly any rumble on the gamepad, and it doesn't do a lot to put you in the game.
But GT5 makes up for a lot just by how the cars feel when they drive. Every single car is different and you can tell instantly. It drives so well I had to go get a Driving Force GT just to enjoy the drive as much as I can. Also I'll use it for Shift 2, and other racing games I have.
If you want a racing game, there are better ones than GT5. I'd recommend Shift over GT5 to someone who just wants a racing game. But if you want to drive cars, and come as close as you can without actually driving one on a console, there is not a better ride on any system (other than PC) than GT5.
NY Guitarist
Apr 5, 07:23 PM
I hope the next release of FCS integrates the different apps within the suite under a single UI.
The whole "Send to" export concept always seemed like an awkward workaround for using this package as a "suite".
As sad as it was to see Apple kill off Shake, my hope is that it will be reborn inside FC as the node based compositor portion of the package. Motion inherited some of Shake's features, notably SmoothCam, so hopefully more of Shake will live on in FCP.
I'd really like to see FCS become of a single app where the "suite" of apps becomes more of a "mode" of operating. In other words if you choose to do editing the UI can switch to a mode that focuses on that, as with compositing, titles (LiveType) or audio editing (Soundtrack).. and so on.
The whole "Send to" export concept always seemed like an awkward workaround for using this package as a "suite".
As sad as it was to see Apple kill off Shake, my hope is that it will be reborn inside FC as the node based compositor portion of the package. Motion inherited some of Shake's features, notably SmoothCam, so hopefully more of Shake will live on in FCP.
I'd really like to see FCS become of a single app where the "suite" of apps becomes more of a "mode" of operating. In other words if you choose to do editing the UI can switch to a mode that focuses on that, as with compositing, titles (LiveType) or audio editing (Soundtrack).. and so on.
Apple Corps
Aug 27, 09:27 AM
good information, logical thought.
do you think apple's $100M payoff to Creative*, and possible need to restate financial information for recent quarters/years because of questionable executive compensation, make the company more reluctant than might otherwise have been the case to intro new chips that are, in the beginning more costly and thus will reduce profits?
*--i know, i know, it's only 1% of apple's cash reserves. But that's not meaningless money: trust me, companies make plenty of strategic decisions that affect their products' features, support quality, whatever, over amounts far less than $100M.
Why are you saying the new chips will be more costly??? All reports indicate that Merom will release at the same cost as Yonah.
do you think apple's $100M payoff to Creative*, and possible need to restate financial information for recent quarters/years because of questionable executive compensation, make the company more reluctant than might otherwise have been the case to intro new chips that are, in the beginning more costly and thus will reduce profits?
*--i know, i know, it's only 1% of apple's cash reserves. But that's not meaningless money: trust me, companies make plenty of strategic decisions that affect their products' features, support quality, whatever, over amounts far less than $100M.
Why are you saying the new chips will be more costly??? All reports indicate that Merom will release at the same cost as Yonah.
Josias
Sep 19, 10:20 AM
I think any rumorsite reporting new MBP's after September 1st, should be taken down:p
What I really want for Apple to announce in the MBP is:
68 Wh battery on all (4.5 hrs sucks compared to MacBooks 6 hours)
FW800 on all (really should be there on a pro)
Magnetic latch (so cool!:D)
Merom (of course)
DL SuperDrive (I'm not using it, but I think it is required for a pro machine)
Many people say the X1600 is too slow to take advantage of 256 MB? WTF?:p
So my friends 128 MB Radeon 9000 could just as well be 32 MB?
I think Apple should consider putting 256 MB on all models, X1600 Pro in low end, and X1800 in hi-end.
I'm not saying I need this stuff, but this is what I'd like for Apple to release.
What I really want for Apple to announce in the MBP is:
68 Wh battery on all (4.5 hrs sucks compared to MacBooks 6 hours)
FW800 on all (really should be there on a pro)
Magnetic latch (so cool!:D)
Merom (of course)
DL SuperDrive (I'm not using it, but I think it is required for a pro machine)
Many people say the X1600 is too slow to take advantage of 256 MB? WTF?:p
So my friends 128 MB Radeon 9000 could just as well be 32 MB?
I think Apple should consider putting 256 MB on all models, X1600 Pro in low end, and X1800 in hi-end.
I'm not saying I need this stuff, but this is what I'd like for Apple to release.
macmax77
Aug 25, 10:24 PM
I don't know about support, but i must say soemthing is not well..
After been an Apple user since the 80"s i never had a problem with Apple.
Well, my cousin's mac, my friend;s iMac G5, my iBook and my iMac G5 all had problems, we bought them together almost (no more than a year and a half, and they all experienced soem kind of problem, my cousin's is here besides me because the motherboard died and he gave me his screen because my screen had issues.
He went PC.
My friend went PC too , and i am not going there because there is nothing in the world that i hat more than a pc, but i cannot talk like i used to saying how reliable Apples are, they are ****** or have been for me in the alst 2 years:mad: :mad:
After been an Apple user since the 80"s i never had a problem with Apple.
Well, my cousin's mac, my friend;s iMac G5, my iBook and my iMac G5 all had problems, we bought them together almost (no more than a year and a half, and they all experienced soem kind of problem, my cousin's is here besides me because the motherboard died and he gave me his screen because my screen had issues.
He went PC.
My friend went PC too , and i am not going there because there is nothing in the world that i hat more than a pc, but i cannot talk like i used to saying how reliable Apples are, they are ****** or have been for me in the alst 2 years:mad: :mad:
No comments:
Post a Comment