killmoms
Apr 13, 12:52 AM
All I need to know is if AJA will be supporting it.
If the answer is �yes,� then the whiny �pros� in this thread can shut up and get used to the new interface�it�s still just as pro as before.
SUPER excited about this. Can�t wait to see the rest of the suite. I�m doing a ton of hardware upgrades at my office now (new edit suites). Wish I could wait until the new FCS was out, but for now I�ll just eagerly await the day I can unleash all 12 cores of my incoming Mac Pros on some video game trailers. :D
If the answer is �yes,� then the whiny �pros� in this thread can shut up and get used to the new interface�it�s still just as pro as before.
SUPER excited about this. Can�t wait to see the rest of the suite. I�m doing a ton of hardware upgrades at my office now (new edit suites). Wish I could wait until the new FCS was out, but for now I�ll just eagerly await the day I can unleash all 12 cores of my incoming Mac Pros on some video game trailers. :D
rezenclowd3
Jan 28, 01:07 PM
I like the idea of a pop-up navigation system!
Less chance of theft or break-in
And one more motor/slider mechanism to fail. I will stick with vehicles that don't have fancy shmancy electronics. Besides....its more weight ;-)
Less chance of theft or break-in
And one more motor/slider mechanism to fail. I will stick with vehicles that don't have fancy shmancy electronics. Besides....its more weight ;-)
portishead
Apr 21, 12:34 PM
At least he's got a birth certificate. You and Full of Win must be related. Or married. Or both.
bug67
Sep 14, 02:33 PM
Whatever. I got one anyway. No problems whatsoever. :D
Plymouthbreezer
Apr 20, 02:24 PM
Yes, but probably not as good as one who drives them on a daily basic.
LumbermanSVO
Apr 12, 09:02 PM
I drive a non-syncronised 10-speed stick with a hellacious clutch pedal 6-days a week, or about 105k miles a year. Even the worst backing situations, where I'm feathering the clutch a LOT, aren't enough to get my leg tired anymore. The clutch pedals in most cars feels like stepping on a rotten plumb to me now.
With enough time you can learn to float the gears(clutchless shifting) with any manual transmission, yes, even the synchronized ones. Once you learn it you'll find that it takes less force to get it in gear than when you use the clutch. Most of my missed shifts in the big truck or the car are from my hand slipping off the lever from having too loose of a grip on.
Even after all the time in the big truck I still prefer my personal vehicles to have a manual. I did just buy a car with an auto though, but at $825 you can't be too picky about what trans it has. :D
With enough time you can learn to float the gears(clutchless shifting) with any manual transmission, yes, even the synchronized ones. Once you learn it you'll find that it takes less force to get it in gear than when you use the clutch. Most of my missed shifts in the big truck or the car are from my hand slipping off the lever from having too loose of a grip on.
Even after all the time in the big truck I still prefer my personal vehicles to have a manual. I did just buy a car with an auto though, but at $825 you can't be too picky about what trans it has. :D
SockRolid
Jun 22, 01:17 PM
From Wikipedia on "touch screens" -
'The proposition is that human arm held in an unsupported horizontal position rapidly becomes fatigued and painful, the so-called "gorilla arm". It is often cited as a prima facie example of what not to do in ergonomics.'
It doesn't really matter whether a touch-screen iMac runs Mac OS X or iOS. It will be uncomfortable to use for more than a few minutes. Unless the screen is more horizontal than vertical. And just look how well that worked out for Microsoft Surface (aka Big-Ass Table.)
So I'm not sure exactly how beneficial a touch-screen iMac would be for Apple or its developers or its users. If it runs iOS, would there be yet another class of apps in the App Store? For full-screen iMac apps? And if it runs Mac OS X, wouldn't it be better to simply replace the Magic Mouse with the Magic Trackpad? (And keep the non-touch screen?)
If anything, I see a convergence of the user experience of Apple's MacBooks and desktop Macs. The keyboards are already virtually identical. Maybe the Magic Mouse was just an interim step toward the Magic Trackpad...
'The proposition is that human arm held in an unsupported horizontal position rapidly becomes fatigued and painful, the so-called "gorilla arm". It is often cited as a prima facie example of what not to do in ergonomics.'
It doesn't really matter whether a touch-screen iMac runs Mac OS X or iOS. It will be uncomfortable to use for more than a few minutes. Unless the screen is more horizontal than vertical. And just look how well that worked out for Microsoft Surface (aka Big-Ass Table.)
So I'm not sure exactly how beneficial a touch-screen iMac would be for Apple or its developers or its users. If it runs iOS, would there be yet another class of apps in the App Store? For full-screen iMac apps? And if it runs Mac OS X, wouldn't it be better to simply replace the Magic Mouse with the Magic Trackpad? (And keep the non-touch screen?)
If anything, I see a convergence of the user experience of Apple's MacBooks and desktop Macs. The keyboards are already virtually identical. Maybe the Magic Mouse was just an interim step toward the Magic Trackpad...
umu
Jan 1, 05:46 PM
How about some kind of iSight?
lizard79
Dec 3, 04:15 AM
well - that's my point. I'd like my mac for work at my "working" place and the iTV connected to the hifi-system, external hdd with the iTunes library, movies etc. close to the "entertainment" area. And the ipod should be closer to the entertainment than work area..
hope you're wrong - althought I think you might be right ;)
cheers. hans
I mean I get what you are saying, but it doesn't seem like it would be very useful for two reasons. 1. By the very nature of how iTV works, you have a Mac somewhere else in the house and therefore have a tiny, hidden out of the way docking station right there. 2. iTV should either slip seemlesly into your aray of tv components and look elegant. Slapping an ipod on it makes it look like just another charging dock station and not nearly as sleek as the houaing it is in now.
hope you're wrong - althought I think you might be right ;)
cheers. hans
I mean I get what you are saying, but it doesn't seem like it would be very useful for two reasons. 1. By the very nature of how iTV works, you have a Mac somewhere else in the house and therefore have a tiny, hidden out of the way docking station right there. 2. iTV should either slip seemlesly into your aray of tv components and look elegant. Slapping an ipod on it makes it look like just another charging dock station and not nearly as sleek as the houaing it is in now.
Multimedia
Nov 25, 03:11 PM
Certainly not the most expensive mac ever sold. The 1990-1992 40 Mhz II fx @ $8,970-$10,970 (http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_ii/stats/mac_iifx.html) was shipping while the 1989-1993 II ci sported an MSRP of $8,800 at 25Mhz (http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_ii/stats/mac_iici.html). Cheapest the ci sold for even at developer discount at the end of its amazingly long 4+ year run was over $3,300, and those were early 90's dollars.
So to my mind, a few grand on a new machine these days is dirt cheap.I forgot that. You are so right. Apple marketing would be well served to use that fact by reminding 8-core customers what they had to pay back in the day for what is practically NOTHING today. Thanks for that correction. Man that was a lot of money for so little power back then. :(
Both could hold no more than 128MB of RAM running on a 40MHz or 25MHz bus respectively. Biggest possible HD was 160MB. Wow. Talk about a quantum leap. :eek:
So to my mind, a few grand on a new machine these days is dirt cheap.I forgot that. You are so right. Apple marketing would be well served to use that fact by reminding 8-core customers what they had to pay back in the day for what is practically NOTHING today. Thanks for that correction. Man that was a lot of money for so little power back then. :(
Both could hold no more than 128MB of RAM running on a 40MHz or 25MHz bus respectively. Biggest possible HD was 160MB. Wow. Talk about a quantum leap. :eek:
Mr. Gates
Mar 23, 04:53 AM
I would need a 2.4 TB iPod to store all of my Music.
Right now I'm using an 80 gig and choosing different playlists on my monthly sync.
I only use it for the car so I'm not too concerned with upgrading.
With my iPhone I use the app "ORB (http://www.orb.com/en/orblive)" and have full access to the home server anytime but that depends on DATA and is sometimes slow or in bad coverage areas.
I only need this for the car, so no big deal.
But if they stop making the classic I would be bummed out
Right now I'm using an 80 gig and choosing different playlists on my monthly sync.
I only use it for the car so I'm not too concerned with upgrading.
With my iPhone I use the app "ORB (http://www.orb.com/en/orblive)" and have full access to the home server anytime but that depends on DATA and is sometimes slow or in bad coverage areas.
I only need this for the car, so no big deal.
But if they stop making the classic I would be bummed out
balamw
Sep 7, 12:58 PM
I'm sure apple engineers can do these same napkin calculations. There would have to be some alternative to the straight dl. Maybe a torrent of some kind built into iTunes 7. I don't know. Just thinking.
The torrent isn't going to increase your DL speed to > 150 kBps (typical for 1.5 Mbps links including overhead) if that's all your pipe can do.
Perhaps what they'll do is more like a TiVo suggestions like service where it'll download movies you might want to watch in the background at night or while you are away and "unlock" them when you start to watch it.
We'll see next week.
B
The torrent isn't going to increase your DL speed to > 150 kBps (typical for 1.5 Mbps links including overhead) if that's all your pipe can do.
Perhaps what they'll do is more like a TiVo suggestions like service where it'll download movies you might want to watch in the background at night or while you are away and "unlock" them when you start to watch it.
We'll see next week.
B
Carl Spackler
Nov 29, 03:46 PM
With HDMI, they'd have to be shooting higher than 480p. I'd say they'd go all out with 1080p, why not?
I was pleased and surprised to see no s-video out. They're clearly aiming for a product that's designed to stick around for a while. If we're going to see blu-ray Macs, and how can we not, iTV will have to be able to handle 1080p content.
I was pleased and surprised to see no s-video out. They're clearly aiming for a product that's designed to stick around for a while. If we're going to see blu-ray Macs, and how can we not, iTV will have to be able to handle 1080p content.
Erwin-Br
Mar 24, 04:40 PM
Because they suck, and have put up subpar product offerings. Also, those products need a NUCLEAR REACTOR to power and burn houses quicker than gas does.
Okay, so it's more power hungry. Not an issue on a Mac Pro workstation, though. Anything else?
Okay, so it's more power hungry. Not an issue on a Mac Pro workstation, though. Anything else?
LimeiBook86
Nov 27, 03:56 PM
A 17" LCD screen made by Apple would be a good deal for people buying Mac Minis but, the price would have to be just right in order for people to actually thing of buying an Apple LCD rather than another brand LCD that they can get cheaper. Also I don't think Apple would want to cannibalize their sales for the iMac. The Mac Mini with a 17" LCD screen (maybe a built-in iSight, although that would raise the price) is roughly the same specs as a 17" iMac ($1,199 model). Except the iMac has a dedicated ATI Graphics Chipset, a larger Hard Drive, and a few more add-ons (Keyboard, Mouse etc)
If Apple were to do this they would have to be pretty careful. I can't see Apple doing this in the near future, although I do agree a 20" LCD screen as a starting size is a bit high, and so is the price. But, don't get me wrong, I love the 20" LCD panel in my iMac. I just think Apple might see a demand for a smaller size, cheaper LCD screen. :)
If Apple were to do this they would have to be pretty careful. I can't see Apple doing this in the near future, although I do agree a 20" LCD screen as a starting size is a bit high, and so is the price. But, don't get me wrong, I love the 20" LCD panel in my iMac. I just think Apple might see a demand for a smaller size, cheaper LCD screen. :)
obeygiant
Mar 19, 10:03 AM
Here's a video on the latest developments in Lybia. The "No Fly Zone" really means, "No Fly for Quadaffi plus Yes Bombing for US and UK".
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/42143060#42143060
Is it me, or does war seem kind of rediculous now. :cool:
I mean, I understand the need for "non occupational forces", but this is getting kind of rediculous. It almost seems like it's almost a capitalist motive to demonstrate weapons for sale at every opportunity. :D
:confused: Do you even know whats going on in Libya right now? These are all strange conclusions to make considering that there are French fighter jets flying over Libya.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/42143060#42143060
Is it me, or does war seem kind of rediculous now. :cool:
I mean, I understand the need for "non occupational forces", but this is getting kind of rediculous. It almost seems like it's almost a capitalist motive to demonstrate weapons for sale at every opportunity. :D
:confused: Do you even know whats going on in Libya right now? These are all strange conclusions to make considering that there are French fighter jets flying over Libya.
MShock
May 2, 05:40 PM
Interesting� after the new GNOME 3.0 release, I'm convinced we will move farther way from the typical menu layout to a more minimalist, more web interactive interface. iOS is probably the closest to that, but I see windows looking more like FireFox 4 for Windows with the Firefox pop down menu and elimination of File, Edit, View etc. at the top. Mac OS 10.8 or 11 will probably follow suit, except have more webOS like functionality, and will converge several apps into 1�
noodle654
Jan 11, 09:46 PM
If that is the real name I will be shocked. It is horrible.
bigpics
Mar 24, 02:27 PM
My problem ... is that then you've been set up for the next decrease in quality, and the one after that, and the one after that. Eventually you're buying 128,000 bps tracks and making fun of "audiophiles" who can tell the difference, and then one of the true triumphs of 20th Century technology—really good audio reproduction—is lost.
Video that can't be told from the real thing is never going to happen in my lifetime, but with sound we were there—and then threw it away!
All of what you said! Especially the part quoted -and the true nut of it that I took the liberty of bolding. The "dumbing down" of our ears continues apace.
And I forgot to mention things like what (even "HD") radio stations are doing to the signal - e.g., compressing nearly all popular music to a 20 db maximum dynamic range, and in some cases even speeding up the play (while "correcting" for frequency), allowing a better fit with their commercial breaks.
Video that can't be told from the real thing is never going to happen in my lifetime, but with sound we were there—and then threw it away!
All of what you said! Especially the part quoted -and the true nut of it that I took the liberty of bolding. The "dumbing down" of our ears continues apace.
And I forgot to mention things like what (even "HD") radio stations are doing to the signal - e.g., compressing nearly all popular music to a 20 db maximum dynamic range, and in some cases even speeding up the play (while "correcting" for frequency), allowing a better fit with their commercial breaks.
2ndPath
Sep 1, 01:33 PM
Is there really a big market for a 23" iMac @ 2000? I hope this rumor is bogus. I'd much rather see Apple come out with a headless Gaming mid-tower with a Core 2 Duo Extreme and X1600 card. Dual HD bays and one optical bay. AP/BT built in. 3 PCIe slots (one used by X1600). I think that would would fill a gap Apple has in their consumer line-up right now.
That would be a nice machine. But remember: Apple seems to think in black and white. For them there is nothing in between the consume and the pro.
That would be a nice machine. But remember: Apple seems to think in black and white. For them there is nothing in between the consume and the pro.
bigandy
Nov 29, 04:54 PM
Living room, car, blah blah blah.
Nobody has yet delivered a truly GOOD streaming media solution for my hot air balloon. Are you listening Apple???!!!!! :mad:
they always have to miss some huge market opportunity, don't they.
bastards.
Nobody has yet delivered a truly GOOD streaming media solution for my hot air balloon. Are you listening Apple???!!!!! :mad:
they always have to miss some huge market opportunity, don't they.
bastards.
oracle_ab
Apr 27, 10:03 AM
Context doesn't impact a trademark either. The only thing that would permit anyone to use the "App Store" trademark if it was granted would be outside of Apple's selected field of trade.
I could call my restaurant "App Store" because Apple did not trademark App Store as it relates to restoration and food. I could call my new Car model the "GM App Store", as it does not relate to the field in which Apple trademarked it.
I can't however call my store that sells Applications "App Store" or use "App Store" in a portion of its name, or for the slogan "KnightMarket : The best darn App Store!"
That is why descriptive trademarks aren't usually awarded and granted. Because it gives too much power to a single entity in a certain field of trade. We'll see how the USPTO decides this when they hand in their final decision in Apple's request, especially now that Microsoft filed in the opposition phase (which is exactly why the USPTO has an opposition phase to begin with).
This I totally agree with. In regard to written language, context makes a difference. Context may be substituted for your more correct language of "field of trade." One wouldn't be in violation of the trademark if presenting it in general terms (outside of the field or in reference to something w/in the field, much like Windows OS vs. GUI windows), but would be if they wanted to use the term w/in their own title w/in the same field.
I think we're saying the same things, but perhaps my original post wasn't clear and relied to heavily on implied understanding....
I could call my restaurant "App Store" because Apple did not trademark App Store as it relates to restoration and food. I could call my new Car model the "GM App Store", as it does not relate to the field in which Apple trademarked it.
I can't however call my store that sells Applications "App Store" or use "App Store" in a portion of its name, or for the slogan "KnightMarket : The best darn App Store!"
That is why descriptive trademarks aren't usually awarded and granted. Because it gives too much power to a single entity in a certain field of trade. We'll see how the USPTO decides this when they hand in their final decision in Apple's request, especially now that Microsoft filed in the opposition phase (which is exactly why the USPTO has an opposition phase to begin with).
This I totally agree with. In regard to written language, context makes a difference. Context may be substituted for your more correct language of "field of trade." One wouldn't be in violation of the trademark if presenting it in general terms (outside of the field or in reference to something w/in the field, much like Windows OS vs. GUI windows), but would be if they wanted to use the term w/in their own title w/in the same field.
I think we're saying the same things, but perhaps my original post wasn't clear and relied to heavily on implied understanding....
AFPoster
Mar 22, 01:17 PM
His profile says he's the Director of IT. Who am I to question that?
It also says "If you could describe an instigator it would be me."
It also says "If you could describe an instigator it would be me."
twoodcc
Jan 6, 08:44 PM
We are now in 56th place!
And mc68k should be over 10 million about now! Congrats! Happy new year :D
great news! glad we are passing some teams!
thats great news! it's been a while since we've been able to pass teams with ease. prob due to new enthusiastic users + the bigadv WUs
i'll be at 8 digits, not too bad. but it's really just a #. things might be changing for me for the worse WU-wise temporarily
congrats! yeah my numbers might be down a lil also in the next couple of weeks it's looking like
And mc68k should be over 10 million about now! Congrats! Happy new year :D
great news! glad we are passing some teams!
thats great news! it's been a while since we've been able to pass teams with ease. prob due to new enthusiastic users + the bigadv WUs
i'll be at 8 digits, not too bad. but it's really just a #. things might be changing for me for the worse WU-wise temporarily
congrats! yeah my numbers might be down a lil also in the next couple of weeks it's looking like
No comments:
Post a Comment