eenu
Aug 16, 11:13 AM
Both companies have cult-like followings (Apple and Stern, and let's face it, Stern is Sirius)
Allow Sirius subscribers to get satellite radio on their ipods, maybe even download a limited portion to the HD.
But the killer feature is the ability to BOOKMARK a song you like and buy it from iTunes later or over the air for those who want wireless.
I already have a lifetime Sirius subscription as well as numerous Apple products including an ipod.
PLEASE make it happen and don't let the Zune get this feature first.
As far as i can see Sirius is really an american service? Lets not forget Apple needs to make product releases applicable for the world outside america....one does exist :p
Allow Sirius subscribers to get satellite radio on their ipods, maybe even download a limited portion to the HD.
But the killer feature is the ability to BOOKMARK a song you like and buy it from iTunes later or over the air for those who want wireless.
I already have a lifetime Sirius subscription as well as numerous Apple products including an ipod.
PLEASE make it happen and don't let the Zune get this feature first.
As far as i can see Sirius is really an american service? Lets not forget Apple needs to make product releases applicable for the world outside america....one does exist :p
Lord Blackadder
Mar 21, 03:31 PM
I don't think there will be any conditions: at some point, effective authority will simply be seen to reside with them, rather than Daffy the Duck, and at that point, they will become the de facto recognised representatives.
That is my thinking as well. I wonder what the Arab League's stance on this will be. They certainly have little love for Gaddafi, but they dread revolutions of any kind. The Libyan opposition seem committed to a parlimentary democracy that would be popularly supported, and that is heartening. There is a real opportunity here for a reasonably good outcome from a political standpoint.
That is my thinking as well. I wonder what the Arab League's stance on this will be. They certainly have little love for Gaddafi, but they dread revolutions of any kind. The Libyan opposition seem committed to a parlimentary democracy that would be popularly supported, and that is heartening. There is a real opportunity here for a reasonably good outcome from a political standpoint.
Gregg2
Apr 11, 12:31 PM
CVTs have nothing to do with "tiptronic" or "paddle" shifters. CVTs are just a new breed of automatics. Semi-automatics can be had in many flavors, including both the traditional automatic and the CVTs.
I'd be interested in a more complete explanation. CVT is what the particular manufacturer I'm considering calls their transmission. And, yes, you can get paddle shifters if you want.
I'd be interested in a more complete explanation. CVT is what the particular manufacturer I'm considering calls their transmission. And, yes, you can get paddle shifters if you want.
FireStar
Oct 30, 01:14 PM
I need a case too :(
I'm looking for a case that can protect from drops/falls and shocks. Screen cover is not necessary, because if the case doesn't come with one I can always buy a separate screen protector.
right now I'm looking at stuff like this case listed on amazon (http://www.amazon.com/Touch-MiniSuit-Diamond-Generation-Chain/dp/B0043L2LRW/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top#productPromotions)
but I don't feel safe with just some random generic case, so does anyone have any recommendations? I've heard otterbox offers good cases with drop/shock protection, but there are none for the itouch 4g right now.
For price, as low as possible, but I would be willing to shell out 30 for a good case (like otterbox!)
oh and did I mention that drop/shock protection is important? :D
any recommendations are good
thx guys
Switcheasy. Not much out yet though. Sad face. :(
I'm looking for a case that can protect from drops/falls and shocks. Screen cover is not necessary, because if the case doesn't come with one I can always buy a separate screen protector.
right now I'm looking at stuff like this case listed on amazon (http://www.amazon.com/Touch-MiniSuit-Diamond-Generation-Chain/dp/B0043L2LRW/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top#productPromotions)
but I don't feel safe with just some random generic case, so does anyone have any recommendations? I've heard otterbox offers good cases with drop/shock protection, but there are none for the itouch 4g right now.
For price, as low as possible, but I would be willing to shell out 30 for a good case (like otterbox!)
oh and did I mention that drop/shock protection is important? :D
any recommendations are good
thx guys
Switcheasy. Not much out yet though. Sad face. :(
Lord Blackadder
Mar 7, 05:18 PM
Indeed, I think you've also inadvertently described the perfect engineering challenge that todays manufacturers really should be embracing, but instead seem so reticent to take up. The most remarkable thing about the original Mini, wasn't its size, it wasn't its cost… it was the whole. And in that respect alone, I cannot think of one car today that is really in anyway comparable whatsoever.
I agree. If you look at "small" cars these days, they really aren't that small. Of course, what made the Mini special was packaging, and I don't think we've seen a revolutionary new "package" since the Mini.
The problem is Chevrolet is in a somewhat unique position in many respects here, it's a known brand, but by name only, usually as the carrier of good ol' boys... to a levy of course, when I think of a Chevy it's either something bright pink, with chrome… lots of chrome, or a pickup truck, not the rebadging of dreadful Daewoo cars. I suspect I'm not alone on that one.
And therein lies the problem. That and the Spark of course.
Chevy definitely has a lot of work to do to establish a brand presence in Europe - especially since Opel already covers so much territory with its lineup. Apart from niche vehicles like the Corvette, there isn't much of "American" Chevy that can make the transition to Europe. And in the long run, Chevy can't rely on rebadged Korean cars.
The Cruze is entirely inoffensive, and does the job entirely adequately by all accounts, as it should, after all it does have 4 wheels and an engine. Autocar likened it to the old Mk2 Seat Toledo saloon, and that's probably an apt comparison. Vanilla. Much like the rest of Vauxhall/Opel/Holden/Buick ranges etc actually. And that is a big problem for GM. A very big problem. One that almost sank the ship in the first place in fact. The captain might be different, but there's still no one at the helm.
Damning with faint praise! In the context of this thread I am happy to see a Cruze diesel come to the US, and I think the Cruze will be an improvement over previous GM small cars, but I don't expect the Cruze to be anything other than a cheap-n-cheerful small car - solid but unexceptional. It is true that their biggest problem is coming up with a reason to buy it over other similarly anonymous cars.
In typical Ford U.S. fashion you mean, fortunately, the profit making arm of Ford, i.e. the european division, produced the even better Mk2. ;)
And we never got to see it here. :mad:
While I haven't driven the Insignia over in Europe, the Regal drives solid and is very stable. So I don't think they did any modifications to the suspension.
A SPEED TV show went over to Europe to drive a US Spec Buick Regal and drove it on the autobahn and nurburgring.
I haven't had any experience with the new Regal, but on paper it certainly looks like a substantial improvement over the previous iterations.
I agree. If you look at "small" cars these days, they really aren't that small. Of course, what made the Mini special was packaging, and I don't think we've seen a revolutionary new "package" since the Mini.
The problem is Chevrolet is in a somewhat unique position in many respects here, it's a known brand, but by name only, usually as the carrier of good ol' boys... to a levy of course, when I think of a Chevy it's either something bright pink, with chrome… lots of chrome, or a pickup truck, not the rebadging of dreadful Daewoo cars. I suspect I'm not alone on that one.
And therein lies the problem. That and the Spark of course.
Chevy definitely has a lot of work to do to establish a brand presence in Europe - especially since Opel already covers so much territory with its lineup. Apart from niche vehicles like the Corvette, there isn't much of "American" Chevy that can make the transition to Europe. And in the long run, Chevy can't rely on rebadged Korean cars.
The Cruze is entirely inoffensive, and does the job entirely adequately by all accounts, as it should, after all it does have 4 wheels and an engine. Autocar likened it to the old Mk2 Seat Toledo saloon, and that's probably an apt comparison. Vanilla. Much like the rest of Vauxhall/Opel/Holden/Buick ranges etc actually. And that is a big problem for GM. A very big problem. One that almost sank the ship in the first place in fact. The captain might be different, but there's still no one at the helm.
Damning with faint praise! In the context of this thread I am happy to see a Cruze diesel come to the US, and I think the Cruze will be an improvement over previous GM small cars, but I don't expect the Cruze to be anything other than a cheap-n-cheerful small car - solid but unexceptional. It is true that their biggest problem is coming up with a reason to buy it over other similarly anonymous cars.
In typical Ford U.S. fashion you mean, fortunately, the profit making arm of Ford, i.e. the european division, produced the even better Mk2. ;)
And we never got to see it here. :mad:
While I haven't driven the Insignia over in Europe, the Regal drives solid and is very stable. So I don't think they did any modifications to the suspension.
A SPEED TV show went over to Europe to drive a US Spec Buick Regal and drove it on the autobahn and nurburgring.
I haven't had any experience with the new Regal, but on paper it certainly looks like a substantial improvement over the previous iterations.
MauiMac
Dec 1, 10:10 PM
I HOPE!!!:confused: :) :) :) !!!
MagnusVonMagnum
Sep 17, 03:34 PM
so the iphone 4 is their highest rated phone ever, based on their tests and they do not recommend it. Doesn't that mean they need to fix their rating system?
No, it means the product has an intermittent defect unrelated to the otherwise stellar performance.
Point is that it IS their best phone. So Apple set out to make the best phone and CR's own testing validates that!
You don't seem to know the difference between a terminal defect and a high performing product. If a Toyota vehicle tests better than anything else out there in every normal category yet has a defect that while rare could kill you (i.e. no brakes or massive unintended acceleration), some readers JUST MIGHT want to know about that defect. And a magazine could in no good conscience recommend a vehicle that has a potentially fatal flaw even if in every other area it's wonderful. While the iPhone is not a "fatal" flaw, it is a potentially terminal one. If the thing is constantly dropping calls simply because you naturally tend to cover the antenna with your hand (for whatever reason), you should probably be aware of this. Given all previous iPhones did not have this problem, it SHOULD be pointed out so consumers can make an INFORMED DECISION.
But you and the other apologists on here (and that's being nice) seem to think they should ignore massive defects or that their tests are somehow flawed even though this is not a normal "testable" function. It's an intermittent DEFECT that Apple admits exists yet they do not seem to want to fix. If Toyota came out and said "we know some of our cars will potentially accelerate out of control, but we've decided we won't fix it but instead will wait for you to call us after you've discovered YOUR car has that problem" (assuming you survive it when it happens to you), I think there would be a more than a bit of uproar.... Oh wait. THAT is EXACTLY what they did and that's exactly what happened. :rolleyes:
Don't worry. I don't expect you or any of the other Apple apologists to "get" it. You're too in love with Steve and Apple to think logically at this point. All you know is that people are ragging on the love of your life and you want it to stop!
You like others who have bought into the google backed media campaign are totally dismissive of the top rating the phone actually got from CR and only focusing on the cannot recommend aspect. If CR cannot recommend their best product, then their rating system is flawed. End of story. Why should apple recall the top rated product in history!
So now there's a Google conspiracy as well? LOL. :D
All it comes down to is that defective products should be fixed by the companies that make them. Apple doesn't want to do it because they are greedy. They don't want to support their computers for more than two years these days for the same reason. They are greedy. They want you to keep buying more products more often. They don't care about long-term customers anymore because they want repeat short-term customers instead. Just wait for iPhone 5. That one will fix it. iTunes 10 is buggy as heck and crashes your computer all the time? Just wait for iTunes 11 to fix it, but be prepared to buy a new computer to use it because it won't work on anything older than Snow Leopard. Sorry, but that's not good business and it's starting to alienate some of us big time.
so what you are saying is that if you want to buy the best smart phone according to consumer reports it would be the iphone 4.
so you are agreeing that the iphone 4 is the best smart phone out there.
because if you don't believe it is the best smart phone, then it means you don't agree with consumer reports. So you are in the same boat with those who do not agree with consumer reports...
so you either defend consumer reports and also agree the iphone 4 is the best phone ever or disagree with them, which puts you in the same boat as those who you accuse of being less than you are.
apple set out to make the best phone....according to consumer reports they succeeded. accept that fact and move on.
Ok, based on your double post and complete illogic I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess your age is rather, shall we say, very young because what you are saying makes about as much sense as saying someone who is against drunk driving is against alcohol as well because they're so obviously mutually exclusive. :rolleyes:
No, it means the product has an intermittent defect unrelated to the otherwise stellar performance.
Point is that it IS their best phone. So Apple set out to make the best phone and CR's own testing validates that!
You don't seem to know the difference between a terminal defect and a high performing product. If a Toyota vehicle tests better than anything else out there in every normal category yet has a defect that while rare could kill you (i.e. no brakes or massive unintended acceleration), some readers JUST MIGHT want to know about that defect. And a magazine could in no good conscience recommend a vehicle that has a potentially fatal flaw even if in every other area it's wonderful. While the iPhone is not a "fatal" flaw, it is a potentially terminal one. If the thing is constantly dropping calls simply because you naturally tend to cover the antenna with your hand (for whatever reason), you should probably be aware of this. Given all previous iPhones did not have this problem, it SHOULD be pointed out so consumers can make an INFORMED DECISION.
But you and the other apologists on here (and that's being nice) seem to think they should ignore massive defects or that their tests are somehow flawed even though this is not a normal "testable" function. It's an intermittent DEFECT that Apple admits exists yet they do not seem to want to fix. If Toyota came out and said "we know some of our cars will potentially accelerate out of control, but we've decided we won't fix it but instead will wait for you to call us after you've discovered YOUR car has that problem" (assuming you survive it when it happens to you), I think there would be a more than a bit of uproar.... Oh wait. THAT is EXACTLY what they did and that's exactly what happened. :rolleyes:
Don't worry. I don't expect you or any of the other Apple apologists to "get" it. You're too in love with Steve and Apple to think logically at this point. All you know is that people are ragging on the love of your life and you want it to stop!
You like others who have bought into the google backed media campaign are totally dismissive of the top rating the phone actually got from CR and only focusing on the cannot recommend aspect. If CR cannot recommend their best product, then their rating system is flawed. End of story. Why should apple recall the top rated product in history!
So now there's a Google conspiracy as well? LOL. :D
All it comes down to is that defective products should be fixed by the companies that make them. Apple doesn't want to do it because they are greedy. They don't want to support their computers for more than two years these days for the same reason. They are greedy. They want you to keep buying more products more often. They don't care about long-term customers anymore because they want repeat short-term customers instead. Just wait for iPhone 5. That one will fix it. iTunes 10 is buggy as heck and crashes your computer all the time? Just wait for iTunes 11 to fix it, but be prepared to buy a new computer to use it because it won't work on anything older than Snow Leopard. Sorry, but that's not good business and it's starting to alienate some of us big time.
so what you are saying is that if you want to buy the best smart phone according to consumer reports it would be the iphone 4.
so you are agreeing that the iphone 4 is the best smart phone out there.
because if you don't believe it is the best smart phone, then it means you don't agree with consumer reports. So you are in the same boat with those who do not agree with consumer reports...
so you either defend consumer reports and also agree the iphone 4 is the best phone ever or disagree with them, which puts you in the same boat as those who you accuse of being less than you are.
apple set out to make the best phone....according to consumer reports they succeeded. accept that fact and move on.
Ok, based on your double post and complete illogic I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess your age is rather, shall we say, very young because what you are saying makes about as much sense as saying someone who is against drunk driving is against alcohol as well because they're so obviously mutually exclusive. :rolleyes:
Spanky Deluxe
Nov 27, 01:01 PM
I don't know if this has been posted here yet or not, I did a quick search but turned up nothing.
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20061127PD208.html
LCD vendors such as ViewSonic and Apple are set to launch 17-inch widescreen LCD monitors by year-end or the first quarter of according to industry sources.
LCD monitor vendors expect 17-inch widescreen monitors to replace entry-level and middle-range 15-inch and 17-inch LCD monitors in the future. The prices for 17-inch widescreen monitors will not necessary be higher than 17-inch 4:3 models amid more efficient panel cutting by makers, according to the vendors.
Currently, LCD panel makers such as HannStar Display and China-based players have launched 17-inch widescreen panels in the market. A fifth-generation (5G) substrate from HannStar can be cut into fifteen 17-inch widescreen panels or fifteen 15-inch 4:3 conventional-sized panels, the sources said.
According to International Data Corporation (IDC), widescreen LCD monitors will account for 34% of the overall monitor market in the fourth quarter of 2007 with 19-inch widescreen monitors being the largest segment among all widescreen monitors. The proportion of 19-inch and 17-inch widescreen monitors will increase to 15.2% and 11.4%, respectively, by the fourth quarter of next year, the research firm added.
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20061127PD208.html
LCD vendors such as ViewSonic and Apple are set to launch 17-inch widescreen LCD monitors by year-end or the first quarter of according to industry sources.
LCD monitor vendors expect 17-inch widescreen monitors to replace entry-level and middle-range 15-inch and 17-inch LCD monitors in the future. The prices for 17-inch widescreen monitors will not necessary be higher than 17-inch 4:3 models amid more efficient panel cutting by makers, according to the vendors.
Currently, LCD panel makers such as HannStar Display and China-based players have launched 17-inch widescreen panels in the market. A fifth-generation (5G) substrate from HannStar can be cut into fifteen 17-inch widescreen panels or fifteen 15-inch 4:3 conventional-sized panels, the sources said.
According to International Data Corporation (IDC), widescreen LCD monitors will account for 34% of the overall monitor market in the fourth quarter of 2007 with 19-inch widescreen monitors being the largest segment among all widescreen monitors. The proportion of 19-inch and 17-inch widescreen monitors will increase to 15.2% and 11.4%, respectively, by the fourth quarter of next year, the research firm added.
Detlev
Jul 18, 08:30 PM
Only way this works is if Apple makes the movie available for download/rental a week or two before DVD release (or earlier, like hotel PPV).
Will not happen. First, any internet connected person with 3 ounces of will can get a bootlegged copy of movies still in the theatres never mind later. Second, the early release of a movie by Apple would set off a tizzy from goliaths like bn.com, amazon.com, Walmart, NetFlicks and others. Third, if the extrapolations are correct and the videos are several GB then people with not so new computers (small HD) and/or slow connections will be left out. You've got to think of the masses not just the MacRumors regulars. It just doesn't fly.
Oh, and I agree with those who say WWDC will not be or should not be the place for announcing this. Again, think of the masses. This would be holiday season material. Plan on upgrades in the third quarter.
Will not happen. First, any internet connected person with 3 ounces of will can get a bootlegged copy of movies still in the theatres never mind later. Second, the early release of a movie by Apple would set off a tizzy from goliaths like bn.com, amazon.com, Walmart, NetFlicks and others. Third, if the extrapolations are correct and the videos are several GB then people with not so new computers (small HD) and/or slow connections will be left out. You've got to think of the masses not just the MacRumors regulars. It just doesn't fly.
Oh, and I agree with those who say WWDC will not be or should not be the place for announcing this. Again, think of the masses. This would be holiday season material. Plan on upgrades in the third quarter.
Eidorian
Aug 25, 12:21 PM
I remember the rumors of iPod docks in the Mini before the last Mini release (February 28th). I though they were pretty ridicolous.:p
Anway's, a chance of X3000 now? That would rock!;)http://www.math.purdue.edu/~abarreno/laptop_chipsets_intel_8_2006.png
Find me a mobile 965.
Anway's, a chance of X3000 now? That would rock!;)http://www.math.purdue.edu/~abarreno/laptop_chipsets_intel_8_2006.png
Find me a mobile 965.
SeaFox
Dec 28, 01:52 AM
anything is possible minus 1 thing: the option to dock and iPod simply is so out of place that I do not know why it keeps getting brought up. iTV is focused on streaming content from your computer, not your iPod.
I think an iPod dock is a great idea. It would be nice to be able to use your iTV for something without a computer running. Hey, take your iPod to a friend's house and you can all watch a movie at their house from your collection, just like taking your entire video library with you.
There are two problems with this:
1) HD content takes up a huge amount of space. So if Apple did offer HD movies, the copy iTunes will transfer to your iPod would be reduced quality.
2) iTunes purchases would not be playable on the component outputs on the iTV. The movie studios would require you use an HDMI connection or something else that supported HDCP to ensure you didn't copy the movie out of the iTunes ecosphere.
As several of us have discussed before, my hope is that iTV will be able to stream all forms of content on my computer, but with particular emphasis on digital media. So if I want to bring a word doc up and type or a movie I am working on in final cut pro, I can do so. Similarly, and with more fully developed components all my digital media can be run on my tv. The goal is to make this experience integrate all the entertainment features we love, but throughout our homes. Quality preservation is essential and I think they will work to ensure that takes place.
The issue here is you're asking your iTV to open other files, in other words, you're asking it to be a regular computer. That isn't going to work because it makes the OS/interface more complicated. A home entertainment component needs to be simple and fast. This is where Apple's embedded OSX rumors would be coming in. Everyone read that and thought about the Apple Phone because that was the hot topic of the week and the was the notion of a PDA Apple phone. But an embedded real-time operating system is just what the iTV needs.
People need to stop comparing the iTV to a Mac Mini, they should thinking of it the same way you think of an XBox compared to a Windows PC. Yeah, they're both made by Microsoft, but the XBox doesn't run Windows, it runs a smaller GUI on top of what is mostly a DirectX back end.
What's funny is the reason people keep thinking of the Mini is because what consumers really want is an Apple DVR, a Mac Mini with a little stronger hardware, no external power supply, and a built in tuner. Add PVR functionality to Front Row and maybe a little bit more expansive remote and you'd have that. But since the Mini isn't expandable, it isn't even possible for a consumer to cobble together the solution themselves from a PCI tuner card and DVR software available, the closest they can do has lots of "extra parts" lying around from the ElGato external tuner, a monitor adapter to give them the connection they need, and the Mini's power supply, and it still would not be as easy to navigate since a keyboard would probably be needed at some point.
So a MacMini wont download and play a HD movie or display a word doc, and you need the iTV to accomplish this basic task?
No, it will do those things, but a MacMini costs $600. Not everyone wants to keep their main computer hooked up to the TV. The iTV allows them to watch their iTunes Store-purchased movies on a larger screen than their regular monitor without moving their computer.
Also, most people don’t need final cut pro or photo shop. So, that’s why I was thinking this could be a basic computer. If not you will need the mac mini to go with it, and why not simply include the iTV with the Mac Mini so you don’t have two devises in a limited shelf space.
The iTV is meant to be an add-on to an existing Macintosh household. Not a self-contained entertainment product like a CableCo box or a PS2.
The idea is the iTV would support more common TV connection methods out of the box, be designed to fit in better aesthetically with home entertainment components, offer better video performance, overall stability, and lower power usage than a MacMini for less.
Is the problem the iTV will address processing the images or scaling them?
I hope so. Maybe it will be upconverting for watching current iTunes movies on an HDTV?
I think an iPod dock is a great idea. It would be nice to be able to use your iTV for something without a computer running. Hey, take your iPod to a friend's house and you can all watch a movie at their house from your collection, just like taking your entire video library with you.
There are two problems with this:
1) HD content takes up a huge amount of space. So if Apple did offer HD movies, the copy iTunes will transfer to your iPod would be reduced quality.
2) iTunes purchases would not be playable on the component outputs on the iTV. The movie studios would require you use an HDMI connection or something else that supported HDCP to ensure you didn't copy the movie out of the iTunes ecosphere.
As several of us have discussed before, my hope is that iTV will be able to stream all forms of content on my computer, but with particular emphasis on digital media. So if I want to bring a word doc up and type or a movie I am working on in final cut pro, I can do so. Similarly, and with more fully developed components all my digital media can be run on my tv. The goal is to make this experience integrate all the entertainment features we love, but throughout our homes. Quality preservation is essential and I think they will work to ensure that takes place.
The issue here is you're asking your iTV to open other files, in other words, you're asking it to be a regular computer. That isn't going to work because it makes the OS/interface more complicated. A home entertainment component needs to be simple and fast. This is where Apple's embedded OSX rumors would be coming in. Everyone read that and thought about the Apple Phone because that was the hot topic of the week and the was the notion of a PDA Apple phone. But an embedded real-time operating system is just what the iTV needs.
People need to stop comparing the iTV to a Mac Mini, they should thinking of it the same way you think of an XBox compared to a Windows PC. Yeah, they're both made by Microsoft, but the XBox doesn't run Windows, it runs a smaller GUI on top of what is mostly a DirectX back end.
What's funny is the reason people keep thinking of the Mini is because what consumers really want is an Apple DVR, a Mac Mini with a little stronger hardware, no external power supply, and a built in tuner. Add PVR functionality to Front Row and maybe a little bit more expansive remote and you'd have that. But since the Mini isn't expandable, it isn't even possible for a consumer to cobble together the solution themselves from a PCI tuner card and DVR software available, the closest they can do has lots of "extra parts" lying around from the ElGato external tuner, a monitor adapter to give them the connection they need, and the Mini's power supply, and it still would not be as easy to navigate since a keyboard would probably be needed at some point.
So a MacMini wont download and play a HD movie or display a word doc, and you need the iTV to accomplish this basic task?
No, it will do those things, but a MacMini costs $600. Not everyone wants to keep their main computer hooked up to the TV. The iTV allows them to watch their iTunes Store-purchased movies on a larger screen than their regular monitor without moving their computer.
Also, most people don’t need final cut pro or photo shop. So, that’s why I was thinking this could be a basic computer. If not you will need the mac mini to go with it, and why not simply include the iTV with the Mac Mini so you don’t have two devises in a limited shelf space.
The iTV is meant to be an add-on to an existing Macintosh household. Not a self-contained entertainment product like a CableCo box or a PS2.
The idea is the iTV would support more common TV connection methods out of the box, be designed to fit in better aesthetically with home entertainment components, offer better video performance, overall stability, and lower power usage than a MacMini for less.
Is the problem the iTV will address processing the images or scaling them?
I hope so. Maybe it will be upconverting for watching current iTunes movies on an HDTV?
twoodcc
Mar 5, 05:13 PM
congrats to whiterabbit for 10 million points!
SMM
Nov 15, 06:52 PM
What a very lovely analogy. Thank you.
For me... 8 cores for the bragging rights only... so I guess I won't get one anytime soon. I'm sure 4 would suit me fine though, I need to upgrade my 1Ghz G4!!!
I work with business applications, many of which are database intensive. I can think of many examples which would greatly improve performance and application reliability, if I could run processes in parallel, rather than in series.
For me... 8 cores for the bragging rights only... so I guess I won't get one anytime soon. I'm sure 4 would suit me fine though, I need to upgrade my 1Ghz G4!!!
I work with business applications, many of which are database intensive. I can think of many examples which would greatly improve performance and application reliability, if I could run processes in parallel, rather than in series.
hobbyrennfahrer
Jan 9, 08:23 AM
some better pics of my 135i...
http://www.abload.de/img/user5837_pic771_126142dmhc.jpg
http://www.abload.de/img/user5837_pic772_126142em6p.jpg
http://www.abload.de/img/user5837_pic3490_127268ms8.jpg
http://www.abload.de/img/user5837_pic3492_127265m9o.jpg
http://www.abload.de/img/user5837_pic771_126142dmhc.jpg
http://www.abload.de/img/user5837_pic772_126142em6p.jpg
http://www.abload.de/img/user5837_pic3490_127268ms8.jpg
http://www.abload.de/img/user5837_pic3492_127265m9o.jpg
macquariumguy
Mar 19, 04:36 AM
They do not have the right to kill each other.
And we have a right to try to stop them killing each other?
No.
And we have a right to try to stop them killing each other?
No.
benjs
Mar 23, 02:22 PM
You still don't get it. It is having all your music with you. The choice to play anything you feel in the mood to hear , not that you play it all from start to finish.
That's exactly it. I bought an iPod classic so that, of the 18,551 tracks I have within my iTunes library, when I am feeling the urge to listen to one of them - I absolutely know that I have it on me.
That's exactly it. I bought an iPod classic so that, of the 18,551 tracks I have within my iTunes library, when I am feeling the urge to listen to one of them - I absolutely know that I have it on me.
MacsRgr8
Sep 7, 08:01 AM
I am hoping for the full 1920 x 1080 rez movies!
Best would be 3 sizes available to choose from:
justin bieber and his
justin bieber and his
Best would be 3 sizes available to choose from:
emotion
Nov 28, 05:07 AM
I'm surprised no one has ventured a guess as to whether these 17" monitors are going to be glossy or matte.
;)
:D :D :D
Cue 10 page heated argument.
;)
:D :D :D
Cue 10 page heated argument.
Tomorrow
Mar 1, 02:36 PM
I'm not very familiar with the differences between the fuels, other than gasoline is more refined.
Diesel is no less refined than gasoline - it's a product of the exact same refinement process.
Different carbon chains are gently boiled off by gradually raising the temperature of the crude. The smaller molecules are the first to burn off. Typically carbon chains 5-8 (pentane through octane) are sold as "gasoline." The next four or so are sold as "kerosene," or jet fuel. After that comes what we call "diesel." Each is as pure as the others, but diesel is made of larger, more complex carbon chains.
I can see both sides of the diesel engine argument. It's hard to deny that diesel engines are, other things being equal, more fuel-efficient than gasoline engines. The higher compression ratio equals greater power output per gallon and greater torque. In the larger sizes that we usually see in trucks, they seem to last longer than gasoline engines, too. But the damn things are noisy, and the exhaust smells really bad.
Diesel is no less refined than gasoline - it's a product of the exact same refinement process.
Different carbon chains are gently boiled off by gradually raising the temperature of the crude. The smaller molecules are the first to burn off. Typically carbon chains 5-8 (pentane through octane) are sold as "gasoline." The next four or so are sold as "kerosene," or jet fuel. After that comes what we call "diesel." Each is as pure as the others, but diesel is made of larger, more complex carbon chains.
I can see both sides of the diesel engine argument. It's hard to deny that diesel engines are, other things being equal, more fuel-efficient than gasoline engines. The higher compression ratio equals greater power output per gallon and greater torque. In the larger sizes that we usually see in trucks, they seem to last longer than gasoline engines, too. But the damn things are noisy, and the exhaust smells really bad.
mc68k
Oct 13, 12:18 PM
What are bigadv units? and how do I run them?
I am currently running two instances using:
./fah6 -local -smp -verbosity 9
do I just add the flag ' -bigadv ' to my command above?
PS: I have a 2.53ghz MBP
the command is ./fah6 -bigadv -smp 8 -local replace with 16 for 16 cores
a MP with 8 cores takes 3+ days out of 6 so it's doubtful a 2.53GHz 2 core would do it by the deadline
I am currently running two instances using:
./fah6 -local -smp -verbosity 9
do I just add the flag ' -bigadv ' to my command above?
PS: I have a 2.53ghz MBP
the command is ./fah6 -bigadv -smp 8 -local replace with 16 for 16 cores
a MP with 8 cores takes 3+ days out of 6 so it's doubtful a 2.53GHz 2 core would do it by the deadline
Thataboy
Jul 18, 06:54 AM
This would only be viable via streaming, and that won't happen because you can't stream to an iPod.
Therefore, we can expect a big download. I imagine the movies will be the same quality as can be found currently in the store. Remember, the online store is to drive IPOD sales. Apple does not have a Music Store because it wants you to have music so badly. The point of a Movie Store would be to drive 6G iPod sales. Therefore, it makes sense to optimize the viewing experience for iPods.
The only way this would be viable, in my opinion, is if a rental were $1.99-$2.99 MAX. Other than that, I can bloody well use Netflix and Instant Handbrake (deleting the files once I return the movie). I am not so impatient that I can't wait 1 day to get a movie from my queue. For $1.99, I could be persuaded.
However, let's be real here. Bandwidth + movie companies greed = huge prices. I can totally see them trying to do this at $9.99, which is warped and insane (and therefore right in line with content producers' mindsets). Even $4.99 is nuttery.
Now... when Apple finds a way to stream movies to an Apple high-speed MVNO-equipped iPod -- now THAT would be hot. But that won't be around for years, if ever at all.
Finally, no way in Hades is this to be announced at WWDC. Maybe a week before or after, but NOT at the same time. I actually don't envision this announcement being made at all, as it would surely coincide with a new iPod (and aren't those all supposed to be delayed?).
Therefore, we can expect a big download. I imagine the movies will be the same quality as can be found currently in the store. Remember, the online store is to drive IPOD sales. Apple does not have a Music Store because it wants you to have music so badly. The point of a Movie Store would be to drive 6G iPod sales. Therefore, it makes sense to optimize the viewing experience for iPods.
The only way this would be viable, in my opinion, is if a rental were $1.99-$2.99 MAX. Other than that, I can bloody well use Netflix and Instant Handbrake (deleting the files once I return the movie). I am not so impatient that I can't wait 1 day to get a movie from my queue. For $1.99, I could be persuaded.
However, let's be real here. Bandwidth + movie companies greed = huge prices. I can totally see them trying to do this at $9.99, which is warped and insane (and therefore right in line with content producers' mindsets). Even $4.99 is nuttery.
Now... when Apple finds a way to stream movies to an Apple high-speed MVNO-equipped iPod -- now THAT would be hot. But that won't be around for years, if ever at all.
Finally, no way in Hades is this to be announced at WWDC. Maybe a week before or after, but NOT at the same time. I actually don't envision this announcement being made at all, as it would surely coincide with a new iPod (and aren't those all supposed to be delayed?).
nebo1ss
Mar 20, 12:56 PM
I am very uncomfortable with the intervention in Libya. When you look at what is happening in Bahrain, Syria, Yemen, Saudi Arabia etc. You have to ask the question why Libya. Perhaps its payback time for the PANAM 101.
Not sure I understand the logic of intervention in one conflict but not another. I fear this is going to hurt us in the long term.
Not sure I understand the logic of intervention in one conflict but not another. I fear this is going to hurt us in the long term.
bigjohn
Jul 18, 08:48 AM
Only way this works is if Apple makes the movie available for download/rental a week or two before DVD release (or earlier, like hotel PPV). Otherwise, I'll just *obtain* it elsewhere.
toddybody
Apr 19, 02:15 PM
Seriously?! How long have you been waiting? Since last refresh?
Keep dreaming. They couldn't even get a Radeon HD 5770, let alone a 5850. The best that could be done was a 5750 in the 27", and while it's not a terrible GPU, it's certainly nowhere near pro-level.
Lulz to that. It's not like those things weren't key to the Early 2011 MacBook Pros being as critically acclaimed as they are now.
No. While Mac mini updates could be right around the corner, the two are on different release timelines and aren't always released at the same time. Essentially, it's irrelevant.
If the 5750 was the best that we got on the highest end model of current, then I'd be shocked if we got anything past 6770. We're definitely not getting cards that use up as much power as the iMac itself or require a second six-pin connector in the Desktop PCIe equivalent.
Since July 2010; not even a full year really.
Sure, but that doesn't mean it'll ever happen.
How many of those machines have you seen naked? As in, without the glass or panel with bare innards in full view? My guess is not very many. They don't have the room to engineer a better video card in the 27". It's almost a wonder they even have the room for something like the Radeon HD 5750 in what they have now. It's not like they took the design of the 21.5", gave it a larger chasis and screen and suddenly had more room to play with. Even so, as it stands, both sizes of iMac get extraordinarily hot. Sure, the 5750 in the Mid-2010 27" model draws less heat than the 4850 in the Late-2009 27" model, but that difference is negligible and even with a 6 series GPU's improvement, I doubt the difference will be substantial enough to warrant THAT much more power relative to the 6 series' lineup.
So, no, they couldn't engineer THAT much better of a card if they wanted. Not without making the iMac thicker than it already is. But it's Apple, they never do.
Keep dreaming. They couldn't even get a Radeon HD 5770, let alone a 5850. The best that could be done was a 5750 in the 27", and while it's not a terrible GPU, it's certainly nowhere near pro-level.
Lulz to that. It's not like those things weren't key to the Early 2011 MacBook Pros being as critically acclaimed as they are now.
No. While Mac mini updates could be right around the corner, the two are on different release timelines and aren't always released at the same time. Essentially, it's irrelevant.
If the 5750 was the best that we got on the highest end model of current, then I'd be shocked if we got anything past 6770. We're definitely not getting cards that use up as much power as the iMac itself or require a second six-pin connector in the Desktop PCIe equivalent.
Since July 2010; not even a full year really.
Sure, but that doesn't mean it'll ever happen.
How many of those machines have you seen naked? As in, without the glass or panel with bare innards in full view? My guess is not very many. They don't have the room to engineer a better video card in the 27". It's almost a wonder they even have the room for something like the Radeon HD 5750 in what they have now. It's not like they took the design of the 21.5", gave it a larger chasis and screen and suddenly had more room to play with. Even so, as it stands, both sizes of iMac get extraordinarily hot. Sure, the 5750 in the Mid-2010 27" model draws less heat than the 4850 in the Late-2009 27" model, but that difference is negligible and even with a 6 series GPU's improvement, I doubt the difference will be substantial enough to warrant THAT much more power relative to the 6 series' lineup.
So, no, they couldn't engineer THAT much better of a card if they wanted. Not without making the iMac thicker than it already is. But it's Apple, they never do.
No comments:
Post a Comment