OttawaGuy
Jan 12, 04:12 PM
Perhaps AIR is an acronym?
Apple I______ R______ :)
Apple I______ R______ :)
AppleScruff1
Apr 23, 11:37 AM
for all your defending of this feature ... can you give me even one positive reason this is good for the average person that out-weighs the negative ones ... just one
It's a good feature because Apple has it, otherwise he would be in an uproar.
It's a good feature because Apple has it, otherwise he would be in an uproar.
kntgsp
Sep 14, 10:28 AM
bmustaf
I agree with you on the points that Apple does need a reminder of where it stands in the consumer/producer relationship every now and then, just as any other company does. Consumer Reports generally does a good job with facilitating this. I'd much rather a major publication start taking Apple to task about not allowing sideloading/locking down the device though to be honest.
My issue, from a personal viewpoint as an iPhone and Android user, is the way the iPhone4 antenna issue was approached and in my opinion blown out of proportion in terms of the net effect.
Yes the phone suffers a -20dB attenuation when you hold the device and bridge that antenna. My HTC Desire gave me a -14dB attenuation when I held it in one hand and my Galaxy S gives me -18dB when holding it in one hand. The only difference is that the attenuation on the iPhone4 is possible by simply bridging that antenna with your pinky finger rather than needing to hold the device.
The point there is that how often does someone do that where they lay a device on a table and touch that particular spot with a pinky finger? Or why would someone do that? The issue is that the signal attenuates when the device is held. But every phone suffers that to some degree, with even phones that have internal antennas giving comparable attenuation when held in your hand.
They focused quite a bit on "if I touch the device just like this when it's laying down it gives me the attenuation" despite the fact no one does that. They should have looked at it from a net user experience, where "does a -20dB attenuation make a phone not recommendable compared to a phone with only a -15dB attenuation" being the more deciding factor.
To me personally, I can't see how someone can recommend a phone that gives you -15 to -18dB attenuation when held and then not recommend a phone that gives you -20dB simply because it can also be reproduced by touching a marked spot with your pinky if the device is laying on a table. That's not to say that Apple should be proud that their phone also attenuates (and usually more so by varying degrees), but where's the cutoff?
Is -19dB the maximum allowable attenuation before you say something isn't recommendable? I think that's a fair question to ask.
I agree with you on the points that Apple does need a reminder of where it stands in the consumer/producer relationship every now and then, just as any other company does. Consumer Reports generally does a good job with facilitating this. I'd much rather a major publication start taking Apple to task about not allowing sideloading/locking down the device though to be honest.
My issue, from a personal viewpoint as an iPhone and Android user, is the way the iPhone4 antenna issue was approached and in my opinion blown out of proportion in terms of the net effect.
Yes the phone suffers a -20dB attenuation when you hold the device and bridge that antenna. My HTC Desire gave me a -14dB attenuation when I held it in one hand and my Galaxy S gives me -18dB when holding it in one hand. The only difference is that the attenuation on the iPhone4 is possible by simply bridging that antenna with your pinky finger rather than needing to hold the device.
The point there is that how often does someone do that where they lay a device on a table and touch that particular spot with a pinky finger? Or why would someone do that? The issue is that the signal attenuates when the device is held. But every phone suffers that to some degree, with even phones that have internal antennas giving comparable attenuation when held in your hand.
They focused quite a bit on "if I touch the device just like this when it's laying down it gives me the attenuation" despite the fact no one does that. They should have looked at it from a net user experience, where "does a -20dB attenuation make a phone not recommendable compared to a phone with only a -15dB attenuation" being the more deciding factor.
To me personally, I can't see how someone can recommend a phone that gives you -15 to -18dB attenuation when held and then not recommend a phone that gives you -20dB simply because it can also be reproduced by touching a marked spot with your pinky if the device is laying on a table. That's not to say that Apple should be proud that their phone also attenuates (and usually more so by varying degrees), but where's the cutoff?
Is -19dB the maximum allowable attenuation before you say something isn't recommendable? I think that's a fair question to ask.
jettredmont
Aug 16, 09:15 PM
Here is a map of the Sirius satellite orbits. You can get a signal pretty far south, at least as far as southern Mexico. But to conserve power, Sirius shuts the power down once the bird goes "below" the equator. XM does have a owership in WorldSpace which does broadcast around the globe through a network of various satellites.
http://www.mts.net/~jwt/sirius-xmorbitanim.gif
Very interesting. Wonder why they did a "wobbly" geo-synch, and how their receivers cope with it. I'd guess it's a cost-related thing, but maybe there's an engineering reason for it (certainly does keep at least one bird near-vertical within the US at all times ...) Note that XM is depicted there as a "true" stationary orbit above the equator.
In any case, still, you're not going to see those satellites from Bombay, no matter how long and hard you look, without a really big mirror ...
http://www.mts.net/~jwt/sirius-xmorbitanim.gif
Very interesting. Wonder why they did a "wobbly" geo-synch, and how their receivers cope with it. I'd guess it's a cost-related thing, but maybe there's an engineering reason for it (certainly does keep at least one bird near-vertical within the US at all times ...) Note that XM is depicted there as a "true" stationary orbit above the equator.
In any case, still, you're not going to see those satellites from Bombay, no matter how long and hard you look, without a really big mirror ...
fastlane1588
Sep 5, 08:37 AM
come on mbp!
brepublican
Aug 29, 11:09 AM
If the MacBook and Mini stay with core 1 CPUs, sales will grind to a halt.
True. This alleged upgrade is not enough to make me wanna go for a mini. I'm waiting for Meroms in the iMacs before I even begin to think about upgrading
True. This alleged upgrade is not enough to make me wanna go for a mini. I'm waiting for Meroms in the iMacs before I even begin to think about upgrading
millerb7
May 3, 06:58 AM
Okay, stupid question, sort of related.
I'm running optibay on my MBP (SSD & HDD with SSD split running my apps and OS, and then Win7, and my HDD acting as my storage drive for my media).... when I install Lion how crazy is that going to get?
I HIGHLY doubt (but do hopelessly hope [yes, I know]) that it'll be as easy as swapping my snow leopard with Lion... meaning that my Win7 will remain.... although for some reason I feel that I'll need to format the entire SSD, thus erasing my win7 install?
The only reason I ask is that it's a pita to install Win7 with this setup due to Win7 not loading from disk via USB... so I have to remove the damn optibay and put my optical drive back in.
So basically, I assume I have to re-link my OSX (as it's split now between ssd and hdd)... but do I have to erase my Win7 install as well on the SSD?
I'm running optibay on my MBP (SSD & HDD with SSD split running my apps and OS, and then Win7, and my HDD acting as my storage drive for my media).... when I install Lion how crazy is that going to get?
I HIGHLY doubt (but do hopelessly hope [yes, I know]) that it'll be as easy as swapping my snow leopard with Lion... meaning that my Win7 will remain.... although for some reason I feel that I'll need to format the entire SSD, thus erasing my win7 install?
The only reason I ask is that it's a pita to install Win7 with this setup due to Win7 not loading from disk via USB... so I have to remove the damn optibay and put my optical drive back in.
So basically, I assume I have to re-link my OSX (as it's split now between ssd and hdd)... but do I have to erase my Win7 install as well on the SSD?
whoooaaahhhh
Jul 14, 09:54 AM
Good post, sums up the current situation very nicely.
Given that dual layer 50GB blu-ray discs cant even be produced yet, i think the 200GB claim is complete vaporware.
I hope HD-DVD wins this war soon, as it is out of the gates first, and thus far a far superior format. If Blu-Ray were to give up now, i dont think many people would be sad. One format is better for everyone.
NO.
First of all, Blu-Ray discs are a completely new material and fabrication process, so highlighting the fact that they've only made 25GB discs (which were stable-ly created long before almost ANY HD-DVD's) and can't produce a disk which is far above the specs of the competition, is like saying screw the russians cuz they're space program hasn't sent a man to mars (nobody's done it yet, anyway). You can't blame Blu-Ray for not being able to deliver 50 GB yet, the meat of the war is just beginning anyway.
Secondly, what was said about the VC-1 codec is very wrong. Microsoft's VC-1 codec is far worse and more difficult to work with than MPEG 2 or MPEG 4 that sony will probably offer in later versions of Blu-Ray. All this malarky about artifacts doesn't really make sense when you consider that we've been USING MPEG2 IN DVD'S FOR YEARS NOW! There's no way that the algorithim could be to blame for the artifacts! Sure it's fatter, but it's a lighter compression, and as Sony has shown with their PCM Audio on Blu-Ray, sometimes light compression on a bigger disk is better than heavy compression on smaller disks. It will be a lot easier to change to a more efficient codec down the line (which is what we've done with computers time and time again, as well as professional video) so we can get Ultra HD on Blu Ray when it comes out as well.
I'm sorry, I understand people really want HD-DVD to win because it's easier and cheaper right now, but since when has the easiest option been the best? If Blu-Ray doesn't win this war we'll have another short life-span format, this version of HD will not be enough for the professional industry much longer, take it from a video guy. I've written a frickin' paper on this very subject.
IMHO I'd like to see a Blu-Ray with the Mac Pro's to help solidify the consumer base into purchasing a better product, because that's how you standardize something in the market...sales...But I don't know that it will happen. Although remember DVD-RAM? Apple seemed to like that for awhile...that died...
I also don't want microsoft handling my video codec, anybody remember the wonderous creation of WMV/WMA? The one that like none of us can use on macs? HD-DVD's codec is a derivation of the WMV-HD codec. Welcome to the Microsoft reality. They really like controlling proprietary codecs. Also...MPEG was created by a group of companies and people working together, Microsoft created WMV, so they've got almost complete say in how that plays out.
Given that dual layer 50GB blu-ray discs cant even be produced yet, i think the 200GB claim is complete vaporware.
I hope HD-DVD wins this war soon, as it is out of the gates first, and thus far a far superior format. If Blu-Ray were to give up now, i dont think many people would be sad. One format is better for everyone.
NO.
First of all, Blu-Ray discs are a completely new material and fabrication process, so highlighting the fact that they've only made 25GB discs (which were stable-ly created long before almost ANY HD-DVD's) and can't produce a disk which is far above the specs of the competition, is like saying screw the russians cuz they're space program hasn't sent a man to mars (nobody's done it yet, anyway). You can't blame Blu-Ray for not being able to deliver 50 GB yet, the meat of the war is just beginning anyway.
Secondly, what was said about the VC-1 codec is very wrong. Microsoft's VC-1 codec is far worse and more difficult to work with than MPEG 2 or MPEG 4 that sony will probably offer in later versions of Blu-Ray. All this malarky about artifacts doesn't really make sense when you consider that we've been USING MPEG2 IN DVD'S FOR YEARS NOW! There's no way that the algorithim could be to blame for the artifacts! Sure it's fatter, but it's a lighter compression, and as Sony has shown with their PCM Audio on Blu-Ray, sometimes light compression on a bigger disk is better than heavy compression on smaller disks. It will be a lot easier to change to a more efficient codec down the line (which is what we've done with computers time and time again, as well as professional video) so we can get Ultra HD on Blu Ray when it comes out as well.
I'm sorry, I understand people really want HD-DVD to win because it's easier and cheaper right now, but since when has the easiest option been the best? If Blu-Ray doesn't win this war we'll have another short life-span format, this version of HD will not be enough for the professional industry much longer, take it from a video guy. I've written a frickin' paper on this very subject.
IMHO I'd like to see a Blu-Ray with the Mac Pro's to help solidify the consumer base into purchasing a better product, because that's how you standardize something in the market...sales...But I don't know that it will happen. Although remember DVD-RAM? Apple seemed to like that for awhile...that died...
I also don't want microsoft handling my video codec, anybody remember the wonderous creation of WMV/WMA? The one that like none of us can use on macs? HD-DVD's codec is a derivation of the WMV-HD codec. Welcome to the Microsoft reality. They really like controlling proprietary codecs. Also...MPEG was created by a group of companies and people working together, Microsoft created WMV, so they've got almost complete say in how that plays out.
sunwukong
Nov 28, 10:55 PM
This thing has a serious bug infestation : :eek:
Zune Scene Tech Support : http://www.zunescene.com/forums/index.php?PHPSESSID=e68f9fffa988200ca99f9040d747224f&board=15.0
Zune Scene Tech Support : http://www.zunescene.com/forums/index.php?PHPSESSID=e68f9fffa988200ca99f9040d747224f&board=15.0
iBorg20181
Oct 24, 01:35 AM
The current Napa64 platform (that is, Napa with Merom as the CPU) does support 64-bit instructions. It can't address more than 4 GiB of physical memory, but it can run the faster 64-bit instructions.
And that's exactly what I've been waiting for! I don't care about using more than 4GB ram (or 3.2GB as Applied Visual has pointed out), but the 64-bit capability of Merom MBPs will be, I believe, important within the next couple of years that I'll be using this new lappie!
:D
iBorg
And that's exactly what I've been waiting for! I don't care about using more than 4GB ram (or 3.2GB as Applied Visual has pointed out), but the 64-bit capability of Merom MBPs will be, I believe, important within the next couple of years that I'll be using this new lappie!
:D
iBorg
zedsdead
Apr 19, 11:00 AM
The iMac update is likely to be a spec bump, Sandy Bridge, better Graphics, etc...plus Thunderbolt. I plan to hang on to my current model for now.
I am more excited about a potential Mac Mini Update, because I need one of those.
I am more excited about a potential Mac Mini Update, because I need one of those.
oldwatery
Apr 26, 07:31 PM
anyone else getting a little bit fed up of apples lawsuits?
Count me in there.
Apple have become Big Brother and Big Bully lately.
In the past they trod more lightly.
Count me in there.
Apple have become Big Brother and Big Bully lately.
In the past they trod more lightly.
SuperCachetes
Mar 18, 09:10 AM
In Libya, there's a massive peace movement against Gaddafi. You don't have that in country "X".
I think that really depends on what country "X" is, and on your perspective.
Is this the peace movement you mean?
http://media.cleveland.com/world_impact/photo/libya-rebels-ras-lanuf-030511jpg-47d8f70bb90b2259.jpg
this isn't forcefully spreading democracy like Bush did...
Yet.
Plus we aren't sending in a ground force to occupy the country if we did that I would have a problem with it.
Are missiles okay? How about bombs?
I think that really depends on what country "X" is, and on your perspective.
Is this the peace movement you mean?
http://media.cleveland.com/world_impact/photo/libya-rebels-ras-lanuf-030511jpg-47d8f70bb90b2259.jpg
this isn't forcefully spreading democracy like Bush did...
Yet.
Plus we aren't sending in a ground force to occupy the country if we did that I would have a problem with it.
Are missiles okay? How about bombs?
Giaguara
Apr 15, 10:40 AM
If I was stupid - I wouldn't speak two languages
If I was an ignorant person - I would have stayed in my home country and not learn about the ways of the world...I believe that you have spent too much time in front of you mac.
If I was a vain pretender to knowledge - Do you know who Ernest Satow was ? Do you know over 2,000 Japanese kanji characters ? Do you know how to live in another country ? You have NO IDEA
Gee... Should we be impressed?
Are you telling perhaps that the fact you [say you] speak 2 languages makes it = you can not be stupid in anything, AND the fact that you live in Japan = you can not be ignorant?
I can think of many ignorant people who speak 2 or 3 times as many languages as you, and who have lived in more than 2 countries.
If I was an ignorant person - I would have stayed in my home country and not learn about the ways of the world...I believe that you have spent too much time in front of you mac.
If I was a vain pretender to knowledge - Do you know who Ernest Satow was ? Do you know over 2,000 Japanese kanji characters ? Do you know how to live in another country ? You have NO IDEA
Gee... Should we be impressed?
Are you telling perhaps that the fact you [say you] speak 2 languages makes it = you can not be stupid in anything, AND the fact that you live in Japan = you can not be ignorant?
I can think of many ignorant people who speak 2 or 3 times as many languages as you, and who have lived in more than 2 countries.
G4DP
May 2, 05:12 PM
V-Tech OS anyone?
Shake it till it wobbles children.
Shake it till it wobbles children.
claus1225
Apr 2, 07:35 PM
this commercial makes ipad seemed like it's only for kids.
jettredmont
Aug 16, 02:00 PM
We need flat data rates on mobiles in the UK. It will happen (esp. if they want people to embrace 3g that they spent all the money on), it's just when.
While it's nice to dream, when you are talking about a service (downloading music from your server to your device) that the vast majority of people are going to be using many hours in a day, I doubt you'll see that being "cheap" on the current setups any time soon. For one, there isn't that kind of capacity in the networks. For another, while it may be different in the UK, there are still many pockets of poor or nonexistent coverage. Finally, the cost of portable storage is decreasing significantly (by which I mean, several orders of magnitude) faster than the cost of network bandwidth.
Network capacity is where it all starts off. Why are ringtones so expensive? Well, for one, because people still buy them. But, offering $1 or $0.25 ringtones would yield a killing for both the record companies (getting $0.25 for 1/6th of a song? Seems about right relative to $1/song) and greatly expand the service in terms of total market size (ie, 1/3rd revenue per download, but much more than 3x increase in number of downloads). Why don't they do this? Because their networks, to a one, could not stand for this traffic to increase enough that the market would expand enough to make the change profitable. When you pay $3 for a ringtone download you are paying primarily to keep other people from doing the same. Sounds perverse, but that's the reality when you have a limited-availability resource, it is the foundation of supply vs demand.
Expanding on the second: I'd never, ever, buy something that I would want to use when driving, for instance, across the "boring states" of Nevada and south-eastern Oregon, that requires a constant connection to any type of service. Why? Because even cell phones are useless for about a three hour stretch of Highway 95 going up from Winnemucca. If cell phones aren't working now, how long will it be before some next-generation service comes in and "wires" the place up?
I might shoot myself without my iPod to listen to during that three hours of scrubgrass, migrating crickets, and mountains.
But, seriously, you guys are talking about a concept that would have garnered a lot of conversation fifteen years ago. The fact of the day is, though, that networking is not getting cheaper at a rate of doubling bandwidth per year, and small, portable hard drive storage (or non-hard drive Flash storage, even moreso) is. Wireless networking isn't winning on power consumption either (Flash storage wins there by a longshot as well).
Until people start having libraries that are infeasible to transport with them (which means, hard drive space can't keep up with library space, which certainly isn't the case today as library space isn't doubling per year either)and which can be trickle-downloaded to a low-profile wireless device in realtime, the idea here is dead. Sorry, that's just the facts.
While it's nice to dream, when you are talking about a service (downloading music from your server to your device) that the vast majority of people are going to be using many hours in a day, I doubt you'll see that being "cheap" on the current setups any time soon. For one, there isn't that kind of capacity in the networks. For another, while it may be different in the UK, there are still many pockets of poor or nonexistent coverage. Finally, the cost of portable storage is decreasing significantly (by which I mean, several orders of magnitude) faster than the cost of network bandwidth.
Network capacity is where it all starts off. Why are ringtones so expensive? Well, for one, because people still buy them. But, offering $1 or $0.25 ringtones would yield a killing for both the record companies (getting $0.25 for 1/6th of a song? Seems about right relative to $1/song) and greatly expand the service in terms of total market size (ie, 1/3rd revenue per download, but much more than 3x increase in number of downloads). Why don't they do this? Because their networks, to a one, could not stand for this traffic to increase enough that the market would expand enough to make the change profitable. When you pay $3 for a ringtone download you are paying primarily to keep other people from doing the same. Sounds perverse, but that's the reality when you have a limited-availability resource, it is the foundation of supply vs demand.
Expanding on the second: I'd never, ever, buy something that I would want to use when driving, for instance, across the "boring states" of Nevada and south-eastern Oregon, that requires a constant connection to any type of service. Why? Because even cell phones are useless for about a three hour stretch of Highway 95 going up from Winnemucca. If cell phones aren't working now, how long will it be before some next-generation service comes in and "wires" the place up?
I might shoot myself without my iPod to listen to during that three hours of scrubgrass, migrating crickets, and mountains.
But, seriously, you guys are talking about a concept that would have garnered a lot of conversation fifteen years ago. The fact of the day is, though, that networking is not getting cheaper at a rate of doubling bandwidth per year, and small, portable hard drive storage (or non-hard drive Flash storage, even moreso) is. Wireless networking isn't winning on power consumption either (Flash storage wins there by a longshot as well).
Until people start having libraries that are infeasible to transport with them (which means, hard drive space can't keep up with library space, which certainly isn't the case today as library space isn't doubling per year either)and which can be trickle-downloaded to a low-profile wireless device in realtime, the idea here is dead. Sorry, that's just the facts.
MacBoobsPro
Aug 7, 04:52 AM
B&O?
Bang & Olufsen :rolleyes:
Bang & Olufsen :rolleyes:
tokevino
Aug 7, 12:24 AM
I am buying an iMac very soon, and I just want a 64-bit intel core in it. Cmon merom!
IMHO, only Mac Pro and MacBook Pro will get the chance for Core 2s. Intel simply doesn't have the production, yet.
Do you have a particular need for 64 bit computing?
IMHO, only Mac Pro and MacBook Pro will get the chance for Core 2s. Intel simply doesn't have the production, yet.
Do you have a particular need for 64 bit computing?
Will_reed
Jul 14, 09:11 AM
I don't care if it's only a BTO option but having this would be awsome.
Could be a great way to view your 1080p blu-ray movies especially on the cinema display. Or you could burn your 1080p trailers directly off apple.com/trailers and watch them on your hd-dvd player. And what about home movies
How many consumer HD video editors come with computers a blu-ray option would be a really cool adition to idvd.
Could be a great way to view your 1080p blu-ray movies especially on the cinema display. Or you could burn your 1080p trailers directly off apple.com/trailers and watch them on your hd-dvd player. And what about home movies
How many consumer HD video editors come with computers a blu-ray option would be a really cool adition to idvd.
syklee26
Sep 1, 01:37 PM
wouldn't swapping a conroe chip in be an option? just go to Fry's and buy the chip then.
Daveway
Jan 1, 07:01 PM
This year better be good!
I just saw this! OMG1!!1
Apple is putting the heat on for MWSF. I think they're releasing what everyone is expecting (applephone) plus many unexpected additions.
mmmm i love Apple
What does it mean!?! :)
I just saw this! OMG1!!1
Apple is putting the heat on for MWSF. I think they're releasing what everyone is expecting (applephone) plus many unexpected additions.
mmmm i love Apple
What does it mean!?! :)
dr Dunkel
Apr 20, 06:03 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; sv-se) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Yeah, following industry standard is boring :D
Yeah, following industry standard is boring :D
Mr-Stabby
Apr 12, 09:10 PM
Is there anybody actually filming this? From what the tweets are describing, the audience are loving it, i'd like to see this keynote.
0 comments:
Post a Comment