FF_productions
Jul 15, 12:41 AM
Exactly - this is one of the reasons I'm glad Apple is going with a minimum RAM configuration. I'd much rather buy RAM from a reputable 3rd party dealer than have to succumb myself to Apple's significant premiums. Always buy 3rd party, never from Apple. :cool:
Still, it's ridiculous that Apple's Top-Of-The-Line machines don't come STANDARD with 1 gig of ram. I can guarantee they will when they come out next month. If the MacBook Pro's can come with 1 gig of ram standard, the Mac Pro's will too. I cannot wait to see this new Mac Pro, it's new design, it's new everything. I'm getting that countdown widget...
Ok, I just got it
http://www.apple.com/downloads/dashboard/developer/wwdc2006countdown.html
Still, it's ridiculous that Apple's Top-Of-The-Line machines don't come STANDARD with 1 gig of ram. I can guarantee they will when they come out next month. If the MacBook Pro's can come with 1 gig of ram standard, the Mac Pro's will too. I cannot wait to see this new Mac Pro, it's new design, it's new everything. I'm getting that countdown widget...
Ok, I just got it
http://www.apple.com/downloads/dashboard/developer/wwdc2006countdown.html
SevenInchScrew
Dec 10, 01:06 AM
For all my whining and complaining about the game part of GT5, I still stand, firmly, behind my previous statement about how amazing "Photo Mode" is. It is the most amazing thing I've seen on a console this generation. The lighting engine in this game is beyond words. The vehicular "Uncanny Valley" is upon us....
Click to HUGE-size
http://imgur.com/ydtza.jpg
http://imgur.com/OdFGf.jpg
http://imgur.com/9rznQ.jpg
http://imgur.com/YtIud.jpg
http://imgur.com/OjHVn.jpg
http://imgur.com/wz6q6.jpg
Click to HUGE-size
http://imgur.com/ydtza.jpg
http://imgur.com/OdFGf.jpg
http://imgur.com/9rznQ.jpg
http://imgur.com/YtIud.jpg
http://imgur.com/OjHVn.jpg
http://imgur.com/wz6q6.jpg
MattyMac
Aug 11, 11:09 AM
Yes Yes Yes
kavika411
Apr 11, 03:17 PM
I may not be saying anything new or original, but I'm betting there won't be any more iPod, iPad, iPhone, or Mac updates until "the cloud" is rolled out. Once it's rolled out, there will be at least a month or two or three between flipping the switch on the cloud - to get it up and running and integrating with the existing hardware that will be able to utilize it - and the first rollout of post-cloud-release generation of products. So, the question is when will Apple have the next media event? I'm betting it is in May, and that the cloud will be turned on a week or two after that, and then there won't be any new iPhone, etc. until August or September. Perhaps there will be one single iPod update released contemporaneous with the cloud going live that will hype the cloud, and draw some people into it who may have otherwise not be a likely customer of the cloud.
Multimedia
Sep 19, 11:29 AM
I missed you guys this morning. ;)
NebulaClash
Apr 27, 08:03 AM
I thought they said that there was not any concerns?
There aren't any concerns, but since the media hyped this up so much, they had to address it. Now they have. Should be the end of the story. But it won't be since there are anti-Apple folks who will push to keep this story alive as long as they can until the next Apple-gate story gets created.
There aren't any concerns, but since the media hyped this up so much, they had to address it. Now they have. Should be the end of the story. But it won't be since there are anti-Apple folks who will push to keep this story alive as long as they can until the next Apple-gate story gets created.
tipt
Apr 10, 06:47 PM
This is simple, folks. I predict the introduction of AirEdit, to go with AirPlay and AirPrint.
What do we currently have in place?
Q Master
Logic Nodes
AirPlay
OS X server (now bundled in lion)
iPad multitouch UI tablet with the power to stream A/V over a network
AppleTV to stream media over a mac network to an HDTV
iTunes as a hub for media
Now, how could FCP utilize all of that? How could all these little pieces add up to one large, powerful network for editing and distributing media throughout a home or office?
I'll bet the iPad will be able to control the FCP UI and take advantage of a cluster of Mac Pro's (or a single mac) to do a lot of the editing, compressing, etc, and then use the iPad to stream that footage to any HDTV with an AppleTV or mac connected to it.
I'm sure there will be a new UI and we can always sit at the workstation if we please, but imagine being able to make edits, compress, and stream rough drafts across the country/world. You can be editing on your xserve cluster from the airport while your waiting for your flight. With in air wifi, you could probably even work from the plane...without the bulk of a laptop.
The guy in the video mentioned thunderbolt and that Apple knew what the competition was up to. Something to that effect. Must be a reason for point that out specifically.
What do we currently have in place?
Q Master
Logic Nodes
AirPlay
OS X server (now bundled in lion)
iPad multitouch UI tablet with the power to stream A/V over a network
AppleTV to stream media over a mac network to an HDTV
iTunes as a hub for media
Now, how could FCP utilize all of that? How could all these little pieces add up to one large, powerful network for editing and distributing media throughout a home or office?
I'll bet the iPad will be able to control the FCP UI and take advantage of a cluster of Mac Pro's (or a single mac) to do a lot of the editing, compressing, etc, and then use the iPad to stream that footage to any HDTV with an AppleTV or mac connected to it.
I'm sure there will be a new UI and we can always sit at the workstation if we please, but imagine being able to make edits, compress, and stream rough drafts across the country/world. You can be editing on your xserve cluster from the airport while your waiting for your flight. With in air wifi, you could probably even work from the plane...without the bulk of a laptop.
The guy in the video mentioned thunderbolt and that Apple knew what the competition was up to. Something to that effect. Must be a reason for point that out specifically.
Simiber
Apr 25, 01:54 PM
I'm not from the US so if someone with some legal background over there could point out to me how this would work..? Where I'm from you have to have suffered damages in order to sue someone, otherwise a government regulator would just impose a fine on the company or require them to stop what they are doing..? How have these people (who are suing apple) suffered losses as a result of this apparent spying technology..?
Awakener
Apr 13, 11:40 AM
You're going to be paying for a data plan anyway, so why not make some of that money back in a subsidy?
Yeah, I really don't get why you wouldn't buy with a subsidy. You're basically going to pay either AT&T or Verizon either way, so what's the difference whether you have a contract or not? EXCEPT, now there is talk iPhone 5 will be carrier independent! http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/02/11/why-a-tiny-iphone-could-be-a-big-deal/
HTC is outselling iPhone 4 atleast in some markets.
http://m.bgr.com/2011/03/31/htc-thunderbolt-outselling-iphone-4-at-verizon-wireless-stores-analyst-claims/
It today the news looks more likely iPhone 5 may be delayed:
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20110413PD212.html
Yeah, I really don't get why you wouldn't buy with a subsidy. You're basically going to pay either AT&T or Verizon either way, so what's the difference whether you have a contract or not? EXCEPT, now there is talk iPhone 5 will be carrier independent! http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/02/11/why-a-tiny-iphone-could-be-a-big-deal/
HTC is outselling iPhone 4 atleast in some markets.
http://m.bgr.com/2011/03/31/htc-thunderbolt-outselling-iphone-4-at-verizon-wireless-stores-analyst-claims/
It today the news looks more likely iPhone 5 may be delayed:
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20110413PD212.html
70355
Aug 7, 04:54 PM
But Steve always likes to try to be ahead of his own schedules ....underpromising and overdelivering. :)
Like the whole 3ghz thing?
Like the whole 3ghz thing?
Dr Kevorkian94
Apr 11, 02:25 PM
it better be a hell of a upgrade if they wait that long, because if not it will be unacceptable.
cmaier
Apr 19, 08:12 PM
Me, Urg, first caveman to make rock round! Michelin and Firestone steal idea!
Sorry. Your patent expired many thousands of years ago.
Sorry. Your patent expired many thousands of years ago.
Mattie Num Nums
Mar 31, 02:27 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.
Thats not at all what this article is saying. The Android project is still going to be "open source".
Thats not at all what this article is saying. The Android project is still going to be "open source".
Tailpike1153
Apr 27, 08:58 AM
I think it was not a bug, nut data waiting to be sent to Apple for profit generating purposes.
But if Apple has been using this acquired data, why on earth is it allowing Google and others to eat away at its mobile & tablet marketshare? Why collect data if it isn't relevant to you business.
But if Apple has been using this acquired data, why on earth is it allowing Google and others to eat away at its mobile & tablet marketshare? Why collect data if it isn't relevant to you business.
mwswami
Jul 22, 01:12 PM
Well, people here have mentioned it. I haven't seen any sources for these claims, however.
Here it is straight from the horse's mouth.
Coming Sooner Than You Think: Intel Next-Generation Enterprise Platforms (http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20060307corp_a.htm)
INTEL DEVELOPER FORUM, San Francisco, March 7, 2006 � Pat Gelsinger, Intel senior vice president ...
"Further reinforcing Intel�s near�term portfolio of leading multicore products, Gelsinger also gave developers their first public view of a running quad�core processor, codenamed Clovertown, for dual�processor servers. Clovertown is socket�compatible with the Bensley platform and is slated to ship in early 2007. It will deliver increased processing capacity and is well�suited for multi�threaded applications, such as those used in databases, financial services and supply�chain management. Additionally, the company also plans to ship a quad�core processor �� codenamed Kentsfield �� for high�end desktop PCs in early 2007."
Here it is straight from the horse's mouth.
Coming Sooner Than You Think: Intel Next-Generation Enterprise Platforms (http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20060307corp_a.htm)
INTEL DEVELOPER FORUM, San Francisco, March 7, 2006 � Pat Gelsinger, Intel senior vice president ...
"Further reinforcing Intel�s near�term portfolio of leading multicore products, Gelsinger also gave developers their first public view of a running quad�core processor, codenamed Clovertown, for dual�processor servers. Clovertown is socket�compatible with the Bensley platform and is slated to ship in early 2007. It will deliver increased processing capacity and is well�suited for multi�threaded applications, such as those used in databases, financial services and supply�chain management. Additionally, the company also plans to ship a quad�core processor �� codenamed Kentsfield �� for high�end desktop PCs in early 2007."
TripHop
Jun 14, 06:24 PM
If you get a reservation pin, you will have a phone on launch day, bottom line. No pin, no guarantee of a phone. With the pin, you can pick it up when you want. At opening or 8pm at night. I would make damn sure i am the 1st person in line at 1PM EST to be sure you get a PIN.
We just cant call it a pre-order, and cant take money before the 24th.
Be srue you talk to the store manager, and again, if you get something other than what i said, call another store.My Radio Shack Manager knows nothing about PIN numbers and is opening at normal 9AM tomorrow. Says he still doesn't know exactly how the pre-orders will be conducted. Hasn't heard from corporate yet. Still in the dark he says. :confused:
We just cant call it a pre-order, and cant take money before the 24th.
Be srue you talk to the store manager, and again, if you get something other than what i said, call another store.My Radio Shack Manager knows nothing about PIN numbers and is opening at normal 9AM tomorrow. Says he still doesn't know exactly how the pre-orders will be conducted. Hasn't heard from corporate yet. Still in the dark he says. :confused:
syklee26
Mar 26, 01:27 AM
I have a feeling Apple won't charge $129 for Lion. It is not going to be easy to tell users that, after charging only $29 for SL, they are back to charging $129.
I feel like Apple may charge around $49 for Lion.
This is unless Jobs is going to be at WWDC with some really awesome secret features in his sleeve, like he did with Leopard.
I feel like Apple may charge around $49 for Lion.
This is unless Jobs is going to be at WWDC with some really awesome secret features in his sleeve, like he did with Leopard.
ahuman7341
Aug 5, 05:57 PM
BitTorrent seems very NO!
The main reson I don't like the idea of it is the security issues. I Also think Apple will be aware of the security issues so I doubt that software update will use BitTorrent. Although Apple may have a client that comes with leopard or in iTunes.
The main reson I don't like the idea of it is the security issues. I Also think Apple will be aware of the security issues so I doubt that software update will use BitTorrent. Although Apple may have a client that comes with leopard or in iTunes.
babyj
Nov 28, 07:57 PM
This isn't a new story - at least one of the major labels was talking about wanting a payment for every iPod sold prior to the last round of contract deals.
Their reasoning was nothing to do with the blank tape / copied music argument - they said that their music was driving sales of iPods so they deserved a cut of iPod profits from Apple.
How they said it with a straight face I'll never know.
This isn't about getting money to the artists that deserve it, this is all about increasing the profits of the major record labels. They don't give a damn about anything, certainly not their artists, they just care about their own profit.
Though I think their biggest problem is that they have looked in to the future and have realised that it doesn't include them and they are worried. Who needs record labels with digital distribution? How long before a major artist signs a deal directly with a digital shop or distributor and cuts out the record label?
Their reasoning was nothing to do with the blank tape / copied music argument - they said that their music was driving sales of iPods so they deserved a cut of iPod profits from Apple.
How they said it with a straight face I'll never know.
This isn't about getting money to the artists that deserve it, this is all about increasing the profits of the major record labels. They don't give a damn about anything, certainly not their artists, they just care about their own profit.
Though I think their biggest problem is that they have looked in to the future and have realised that it doesn't include them and they are worried. Who needs record labels with digital distribution? How long before a major artist signs a deal directly with a digital shop or distributor and cuts out the record label?
bibbz
Jun 9, 07:34 PM
Bibbz,
I have a couple questions.. I want to preorder with radioshack. I am NOT the primary account holder, but I am an authorized user. I also know the last 4 digits of the account holders social. Will this be a problem when picking up the phone?
I also have a FAN account. Will these be a problem?
FAN account isnt an issue.
At the shack we can only do an upgrade or add a line if the account holder is in the store. Some stores will do it, bc physically the computer will let us, but we are not supposed to.
I have a couple questions.. I want to preorder with radioshack. I am NOT the primary account holder, but I am an authorized user. I also know the last 4 digits of the account holders social. Will this be a problem when picking up the phone?
I also have a FAN account. Will these be a problem?
FAN account isnt an issue.
At the shack we can only do an upgrade or add a line if the account holder is in the store. Some stores will do it, bc physically the computer will let us, but we are not supposed to.
kdarling
Apr 19, 04:04 PM
You made up your mind and you argue accordingly.
No, that's why I used questions. I'd really like to know if anyone thinks a normal buyer would think the Galaxy is made by Apple.
Consider this: Many people know the name "iPhone" and the way it looks, they may even know the name "Macintosh", but not the name "Apple".
They might have talked to someone who used an iPhone and was very happy with it, were convinced to buy one, and go to a shop and pick up the phone that looks exactly like the one they wanted to buy.
And end up with a Samsung phone when they actually wanted an iPhone.
So your argument is that someone would be familiar with the iPhone UI but not know it's made by Apple?
And that therefore when they went to buy an iPhone, they'd totally ignore the words Samsung Galaxy on the box simply because... what? some of the icons look similar?
Well, who knows. It's certainly happened with Chinese knockoffs!
No, that's why I used questions. I'd really like to know if anyone thinks a normal buyer would think the Galaxy is made by Apple.
Consider this: Many people know the name "iPhone" and the way it looks, they may even know the name "Macintosh", but not the name "Apple".
They might have talked to someone who used an iPhone and was very happy with it, were convinced to buy one, and go to a shop and pick up the phone that looks exactly like the one they wanted to buy.
And end up with a Samsung phone when they actually wanted an iPhone.
So your argument is that someone would be familiar with the iPhone UI but not know it's made by Apple?
And that therefore when they went to buy an iPhone, they'd totally ignore the words Samsung Galaxy on the box simply because... what? some of the icons look similar?
Well, who knows. It's certainly happened with Chinese knockoffs!
Gelfin
Mar 4, 04:15 PM
Except I was responding to a post that suggested heterosexuals stop having sex...
I've reread the post in question several times, and I am just not seeing it. Would you mind explaining how you came to the conclusion that neko girl was suggesting heterosexuals stop having sex?
I mean, even if she was, good luck with that.
I've reread the post in question several times, and I am just not seeing it. Would you mind explaining how you came to the conclusion that neko girl was suggesting heterosexuals stop having sex?
I mean, even if she was, good luck with that.
Kane.Elson
Jul 27, 10:21 PM
Ahh so many announcments !!! Kill me now !
I'm waiting for the end of august then I'm buying whatever I can get.
I'm waiting for the end of august then I'm buying whatever I can get.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 05:50 PM
Here we have an article laying out the case for non intervention (http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/03/2011322135442593945.html) by a Princeton law professor (emeritus) published by Al Jazeera. A worthy read, and here are two exerpts I've commented on.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
No comments:
Post a Comment