MikeELL
Aug 18, 06:05 AM
Hi, here's an excited essay for you all!
You've read some talk about apple releasing the iPhone concurrently with the next gen iPod... I'm going to make a prediction (read: wish) of what I see as the ultimate convergance of all the rumours I've seen lately. If I'm right, I'll keep talking about it for quite a while :)
I predict that the "iPhone" is the next-gen-iPod. I think that apple will happily combine both devices if/when they could be satisfied that both sets of functionality were covered.
I forsee a (3G?) phone which is also the next gen ipod (has a none-touch screen over it's entire face). This timing would tie in well with Leopard's release timing. My reasoning is that if Leopard's rumored ability to call any Phone is true, why not speak of it at the wwdc06 keynote unless they had integration with a smart new phone that they hadn't released yet? (the tech itself isn't anything new)
I therefore think the iPhone (combined with iPod or not) has to come before Leopard's release.
It is the talk of wireless iPods which has made me think that iPod/iPhone will eventually be combined. If a combo device has bluetooth/wifi, it also means it can function seemlessly with front row - also not mentioned in wwdc06 keynote and begging for an update given Apple's obsession with Macs as media devices.
For the record, I'd also like to see something like elgato's eyetv incorporated into front row - record from tv and send to your phone/iPod while using the device as a remote control for tv - but that probably counts as a second wish.
Cheers,
MikeELL
You've read some talk about apple releasing the iPhone concurrently with the next gen iPod... I'm going to make a prediction (read: wish) of what I see as the ultimate convergance of all the rumours I've seen lately. If I'm right, I'll keep talking about it for quite a while :)
I predict that the "iPhone" is the next-gen-iPod. I think that apple will happily combine both devices if/when they could be satisfied that both sets of functionality were covered.
I forsee a (3G?) phone which is also the next gen ipod (has a none-touch screen over it's entire face). This timing would tie in well with Leopard's release timing. My reasoning is that if Leopard's rumored ability to call any Phone is true, why not speak of it at the wwdc06 keynote unless they had integration with a smart new phone that they hadn't released yet? (the tech itself isn't anything new)
I therefore think the iPhone (combined with iPod or not) has to come before Leopard's release.
It is the talk of wireless iPods which has made me think that iPod/iPhone will eventually be combined. If a combo device has bluetooth/wifi, it also means it can function seemlessly with front row - also not mentioned in wwdc06 keynote and begging for an update given Apple's obsession with Macs as media devices.
For the record, I'd also like to see something like elgato's eyetv incorporated into front row - record from tv and send to your phone/iPod while using the device as a remote control for tv - but that probably counts as a second wish.
Cheers,
MikeELL
Lord Blackadder
Mar 1, 12:56 PM
I wish there were more affordable Diesels in the States. A Cruze might be a bit "too" affordable, but neither can I step up to a Mercedes. The BMW 330d is sweet, though. I have to rule out VWs based on a personal bias. What to do... :o
The VW diesels are very well-built cars. A friend bought an '09 Jetta TDI and he is satisfied with it. I checked out the BMW 335d at the Detroit Auto show a year ago or so, and while I like the car BMW only offers it as a sedan and the base price is a laughably expensive $44k. If you won't buy a VW and want a newish diesel, your only other vaguely affordable option is a used W210/W211 (1996-2009) Mercedes Benz E-Class diesel. Nice cars, but you'll have to find one and it will be used (and not particularly cheap).
I currently have a 4.7L V8 Dodge Dakota. I'd buy a diesel version of it in a heartbeat. I could still get the power/hauling ability needed but have the mileage to justify having the pickup.
But now with the possibility of having $5/gal gas looming, the 18 HWY MPG may force my hand.
Had the truck for over 5 years, but it may get too cost prohibitive to keep.
that the US car makers still sells trucks, pickups etc. without diesel options is simply a complete lack of any common sense. diesel engines are practically made to be perfect for pulling and towing in commercial vehicles
Chrysler is particularly stupid in my opinion, because they should have put the Mercedes diesel engines from the Sprinter van (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_Sprinter#North_America), which they were already selling here, into the Ram. The Sprinter came with four, five and six cylinder diesels that would fit into a variety of other vehicles, and would be particularly useful in trucks and SUVs. While weaker than the biggest V8s, they still offer a lot of torque for their size and much better fuel economy. Why, Chrysler? Why?
Mercedes sells the Sprinter here now, so the opportunity was lost for Chrysler.
The VW diesels are very well-built cars. A friend bought an '09 Jetta TDI and he is satisfied with it. I checked out the BMW 335d at the Detroit Auto show a year ago or so, and while I like the car BMW only offers it as a sedan and the base price is a laughably expensive $44k. If you won't buy a VW and want a newish diesel, your only other vaguely affordable option is a used W210/W211 (1996-2009) Mercedes Benz E-Class diesel. Nice cars, but you'll have to find one and it will be used (and not particularly cheap).
I currently have a 4.7L V8 Dodge Dakota. I'd buy a diesel version of it in a heartbeat. I could still get the power/hauling ability needed but have the mileage to justify having the pickup.
But now with the possibility of having $5/gal gas looming, the 18 HWY MPG may force my hand.
Had the truck for over 5 years, but it may get too cost prohibitive to keep.
that the US car makers still sells trucks, pickups etc. without diesel options is simply a complete lack of any common sense. diesel engines are practically made to be perfect for pulling and towing in commercial vehicles
Chrysler is particularly stupid in my opinion, because they should have put the Mercedes diesel engines from the Sprinter van (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_Sprinter#North_America), which they were already selling here, into the Ram. The Sprinter came with four, five and six cylinder diesels that would fit into a variety of other vehicles, and would be particularly useful in trucks and SUVs. While weaker than the biggest V8s, they still offer a lot of torque for their size and much better fuel economy. Why, Chrysler? Why?
Mercedes sells the Sprinter here now, so the opportunity was lost for Chrysler.
andiwm2003
Jul 14, 06:20 AM
i hope blu-ray stays optional. a superdrive is good enough for me. blu ray at the current time is a waste of money for me.
Full of Win
Mar 23, 01:31 PM
It is a hard drive with a screen! What else can they do? I suppose they could put a 1TB drive in there and add thunderbolt. . . . . That would be interesting!
I hope they don't do much.
The iPod is a portable media tank. Its not for web-browers, its not for apps, its not for contacts, its not for games. What Apple needs to focus on is OUTPUT. Right now its pretty sad, there is a 30 pin connector digital out and a headphone jack out. Moreover, the 30 pin output is limited in that it does not support the newest Apple adapters (VGA or HDMI)
1. Bluetooth Output: Because it is so widespread in cars, speakers and headphones today, this makes so much sense. The battery is likely large enough that it would not cause a significant reduction in battery life.
2. Update Digital Out to support VGA and HDMI output (with internals to match): The iPod should be able to play the same video files as the iPad 2, and upcoming iPod Touch / iPhone 5 and stream them using the HDMI and VGA adapters from Apple.
3. Wi-Fi for Air-Play/Air-Share: Not Wi-Fi for browsing, but Wi-Fi so it can pair to an Apple TV or iPad or whatever and stream videos and music.
I hope they don't do much.
The iPod is a portable media tank. Its not for web-browers, its not for apps, its not for contacts, its not for games. What Apple needs to focus on is OUTPUT. Right now its pretty sad, there is a 30 pin connector digital out and a headphone jack out. Moreover, the 30 pin output is limited in that it does not support the newest Apple adapters (VGA or HDMI)
1. Bluetooth Output: Because it is so widespread in cars, speakers and headphones today, this makes so much sense. The battery is likely large enough that it would not cause a significant reduction in battery life.
2. Update Digital Out to support VGA and HDMI output (with internals to match): The iPod should be able to play the same video files as the iPad 2, and upcoming iPod Touch / iPhone 5 and stream them using the HDMI and VGA adapters from Apple.
3. Wi-Fi for Air-Play/Air-Share: Not Wi-Fi for browsing, but Wi-Fi so it can pair to an Apple TV or iPad or whatever and stream videos and music.
Tailpike1153
Mar 24, 01:14 PM
Interesting. No complaints from me.
Consultant
Mar 22, 03:41 PM
I'll buy a 220GB iPod classic. No compression win, if that happens.
Gem�tlichkeit
Nov 24, 10:12 AM
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41C0o2GAJGL._SS500_.jpg
Props if anyone knows who used that bag.
The guy on 24? I only know that because I was looking at that same bag ages ago and they marked it as the same bag he uses.
Props if anyone knows who used that bag.
The guy on 24? I only know that because I was looking at that same bag ages ago and they marked it as the same bag he uses.
aiqw9182
Mar 24, 04:46 PM
On the server, AMD has inexpensive 12-core, 4-way CPUs since some time. Now going for 16-core with Bulldozer (well, now it will be more like 16-core integer/8-core floating point).
The absolute bargain now are the 8-core, 4-way CPUs. You can have a 32-core machine for very little money.
The the next Atom will have a DirectX 10.1 GPU, meanwhile Bobcat Fusion already has DirectX 11 hardware and OpenCL.
AMD's CPU's are trash and they're cheap for a reason.
Oh and for someone who doesn't use Windows you sure seem interested in Windows only API's. Love all of those OpenCL applications you listed by the way. ;)
The absolute bargain now are the 8-core, 4-way CPUs. You can have a 32-core machine for very little money.
The the next Atom will have a DirectX 10.1 GPU, meanwhile Bobcat Fusion already has DirectX 11 hardware and OpenCL.
AMD's CPU's are trash and they're cheap for a reason.
Oh and for someone who doesn't use Windows you sure seem interested in Windows only API's. Love all of those OpenCL applications you listed by the way. ;)
MikeNemat
Aug 6, 10:41 PM
Am I supposed to leave out cookies? :p :D
Yep. And Milk. Steve Jobs will climb down your chimney, eat the cookies, and pour the milk into any PCs he finds in your house :)
Yep. And Milk. Steve Jobs will climb down your chimney, eat the cookies, and pour the milk into any PCs he finds in your house :)
lordonuthin
Jan 6, 10:43 PM
mc68k
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
We can't keep this pace up all the time, I will probably be forced to do the same in the summer.
great news! glad we are passing some teams!
congrats! yeah my numbers might be down a lil also in the next couple of weeks it's looking like
Hopefully we can pass another team in about 30 days or so, we'll see if we can pick up some steam from new folders.
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
We can't keep this pace up all the time, I will probably be forced to do the same in the summer.
great news! glad we are passing some teams!
congrats! yeah my numbers might be down a lil also in the next couple of weeks it's looking like
Hopefully we can pass another team in about 30 days or so, we'll see if we can pick up some steam from new folders.
admanimal
Sep 1, 02:48 PM
if it gets bigger, does it get thinner?
The only way it could get thinner is if they give it a power brick rather than an internal one. It's not like components are stacked on top of each other as it is...it's just that some individual components require a certain amount of space. Maybe the chin will shrink, but that's all I see happening as far as size goes.
The only way it could get thinner is if they give it a power brick rather than an internal one. It's not like components are stacked on top of each other as it is...it's just that some individual components require a certain amount of space. Maybe the chin will shrink, but that's all I see happening as far as size goes.
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!?! :)
razzmatazz
Aug 6, 10:33 PM
Happy WWDC Eve everyone! May tomorrow bring you everything you wanted! :rolleyes: ;) :D
Josh
Am I supposed to leave out cookies? :p :D
Josh
Am I supposed to leave out cookies? :p :D
sycho
Jan 28, 10:13 PM
^^ It may be an illusion but are your rear tires smaller than the front ones? Anyways, you have an awesome car. Looks very nice.
Those were the old tires that came with the wheels, I never used them as they were ********. I'm running 225/45/17 Continental ExtremeContact DW. Only have about 50 miles on them and I love them.
Here's the tread on them. They look narrow in the photo, but I assure you they are not.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4120/4935690557_5914c55388_b.jpg
And I can't forget about this minor issue. :P
I put some 268 cams and intake, exhaust. It's pretty quick now.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4088/4973108230_1e77dba35f_b.jpg
Those were the old tires that came with the wheels, I never used them as they were ********. I'm running 225/45/17 Continental ExtremeContact DW. Only have about 50 miles on them and I love them.
Here's the tread on them. They look narrow in the photo, but I assure you they are not.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4120/4935690557_5914c55388_b.jpg
And I can't forget about this minor issue. :P
I put some 268 cams and intake, exhaust. It's pretty quick now.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4088/4973108230_1e77dba35f_b.jpg
RaceTripper
Jan 10, 03:57 PM
That's about 700 pounds too much!
;)
...Some day I may work on that problem. Once it's paid for and I have another car as a daily driver, the JCW could become a dedicated track car with a proper rollcage and bucket and all the unnecessary weight evicted.
;)
...Some day I may work on that problem. Once it's paid for and I have another car as a daily driver, the JCW could become a dedicated track car with a proper rollcage and bucket and all the unnecessary weight evicted.
Lurchdubious
Nov 26, 04:40 PM
Just bought some wood :cool:
http://www.kwaterskibros.com/graphics/lumber6a.jpg
Tape measure:
http://www.mycarpentry.com/image-files/stanley-tape-measure.jpg
Storage tote:
http://common1.csnimages.com/lf/1/hash/2695/245128/1/Stor-It-All-Pro+Series+Small+Storage+Tote+in+Black+with+Red+Buckles+-+6+Piece+Set.jpg
http://www.kwaterskibros.com/graphics/lumber6a.jpg
Tape measure:
http://www.mycarpentry.com/image-files/stanley-tape-measure.jpg
Storage tote:
http://common1.csnimages.com/lf/1/hash/2695/245128/1/Stor-It-All-Pro+Series+Small+Storage+Tote+in+Black+with+Red+Buckles+-+6+Piece+Set.jpg
Built
Apr 3, 02:34 AM
The way I write? This has anything to do with anything?
And again, the "evidence" you keep suggesting exists does not represent what is actually the case. Even within this thread, there are several people telling you they have no issues with their device. I don't have any issues either.
I hate to use the well known argument we often see on these forums, but you will almost always hear from the people who have issues with their products.
You will almost never see threads or comments from people that don't really have a reason to exclaim to the world that their device is perfect. Thus, we see an inflation of negative threads as compared to positive threads, and ignorant people take this to mean there is a wide-spread and critical flaw with all of the devices. Also, the negative comment is more distinctive, and thus more memorable than the positive one- again adding to the illusion you seem to be buying into.
It is, indeed, sad to see someone get so emotionally attached to a consumer product that they cannot admit to themselves that the product may have some flaws.
You obviously need to relax. There is more to life than iPad.
And again, the "evidence" you keep suggesting exists does not represent what is actually the case. Even within this thread, there are several people telling you they have no issues with their device. I don't have any issues either.
I hate to use the well known argument we often see on these forums, but you will almost always hear from the people who have issues with their products.
You will almost never see threads or comments from people that don't really have a reason to exclaim to the world that their device is perfect. Thus, we see an inflation of negative threads as compared to positive threads, and ignorant people take this to mean there is a wide-spread and critical flaw with all of the devices. Also, the negative comment is more distinctive, and thus more memorable than the positive one- again adding to the illusion you seem to be buying into.
It is, indeed, sad to see someone get so emotionally attached to a consumer product that they cannot admit to themselves that the product may have some flaws.
You obviously need to relax. There is more to life than iPad.
apb3
Aug 17, 11:49 AM
I don't really see the demand behind adding wireless functionality into the iPod. I think wireless is the buzz word right now and investment managers and industry analysts don't even know what it means.
Bluetooth headphones, if they sound good, and bluetooth syncing is the only function people might use out of this. However, most people charge as they sync, so they would need to connect the iPod to the computer anyway. Bluetooth headphones would need to be charged too, and that is a nuisance.
The only thing semi-useful out of 802.11 is sending audio to airport express. But I use my laptop for that already, so does this really add any functionality? No one I know will be typing in a 256-bit WPA key into their iPod so they can play their iPod music over their friend's airport express, either. At work, I can view and sample my coworker's library on my computer - even when they leave for lunch. And if I like it, I can buy it on iTunes right there. Again, where is the usefulness of a wireless iPod?
I can see how XM radio might be useful to many, even though it doesn't appeal to me. However, I would think Apple would want an exclusive deal if they were to offer this feature.
A man (almost - I think XM blows as compared to Sirius, seriously) after my own heart.... ;)
and so much more succinct.:D
Bluetooth headphones, if they sound good, and bluetooth syncing is the only function people might use out of this. However, most people charge as they sync, so they would need to connect the iPod to the computer anyway. Bluetooth headphones would need to be charged too, and that is a nuisance.
The only thing semi-useful out of 802.11 is sending audio to airport express. But I use my laptop for that already, so does this really add any functionality? No one I know will be typing in a 256-bit WPA key into their iPod so they can play their iPod music over their friend's airport express, either. At work, I can view and sample my coworker's library on my computer - even when they leave for lunch. And if I like it, I can buy it on iTunes right there. Again, where is the usefulness of a wireless iPod?
I can see how XM radio might be useful to many, even though it doesn't appeal to me. However, I would think Apple would want an exclusive deal if they were to offer this feature.
A man (almost - I think XM blows as compared to Sirius, seriously) after my own heart.... ;)
and so much more succinct.:D
Gatesbasher
Mar 24, 01:48 PM
You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)....
I for one misunderstood you too. Thanks for the elucidation.
I know there's no hope for anyone willing to listen to 128,000 bps noise, or worse yet pay money for it. I don't know about 320k, but my feeling on the subject of compression is this:
I was one of the people convinced by the propaganda that led to the DVD Audio and SACD fiasco. I have since done a lot more reading and am convinced by the math that CDs are about as good as there is any reason for them to be, human hearing being what it is. (I always thought increasing the sampling rate was stupid.)
As far as Apple Lossless and other codecs of the same type�if they can compress video signals losslessly to 2% of their original size for DVDs, why should I doubt you can compress music to 40 or 50%? The thing about going below that is, maybe at first listen, the difference doesn't leap out at you�but maybe it would with extended exposure, and with better equipment than you're using right now. What you're assuming is that you're never going to have better equipment, and that "small" differences in quality are inconsequential.
My problem with that 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!
I for one misunderstood you too. Thanks for the elucidation.
I know there's no hope for anyone willing to listen to 128,000 bps noise, or worse yet pay money for it. I don't know about 320k, but my feeling on the subject of compression is this:
I was one of the people convinced by the propaganda that led to the DVD Audio and SACD fiasco. I have since done a lot more reading and am convinced by the math that CDs are about as good as there is any reason for them to be, human hearing being what it is. (I always thought increasing the sampling rate was stupid.)
As far as Apple Lossless and other codecs of the same type�if they can compress video signals losslessly to 2% of their original size for DVDs, why should I doubt you can compress music to 40 or 50%? The thing about going below that is, maybe at first listen, the difference doesn't leap out at you�but maybe it would with extended exposure, and with better equipment than you're using right now. What you're assuming is that you're never going to have better equipment, and that "small" differences in quality are inconsequential.
My problem with that 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!
jaxstate
Aug 6, 09:18 PM
Blah, it should read "Mac OS X Leopard, introducing Panter 2.0"
Twizz91
Mar 22, 03:47 PM
Did not say he would improve it either. :(
Adding Bluetooth makes a lot of sense.
that would be nice indeed. it would be nice if i could stream music from my classic through my ipad ^^
Adding Bluetooth makes a lot of sense.
that would be nice indeed. it would be nice if i could stream music from my classic through my ipad ^^
whooleytoo
Jul 18, 05:58 AM
I don't think the time is right for online digital movie rentals. Even with a relatively fast broadband service, it still is going to take a fair amount of time to download the file. If the file only plays once, or just for a day, or a few days it's just not worth the effort, IMO.
On the other hand, if it were a subscription service, or a download & keep it would be. Perhaps, in the not too distant future when we all have much faster connections, the download rental market might make more sense.
Surely the TV Shows issue is because the US shows are sold on to European TV Stations, usually after the show has aired in the states. These TV Stations aren't going to be too pleased if they've shelled out a bucketload of money for the UK premier of 24 for example, only to have it show up on iTunes before they've even aired it.
So <the inevitable reply> why don't the air the shows on the same day in every country? In the TV age, it wouldn't make sense. In the digital age, it's the only way that makes any sense.
On the other hand, if it were a subscription service, or a download & keep it would be. Perhaps, in the not too distant future when we all have much faster connections, the download rental market might make more sense.
Surely the TV Shows issue is because the US shows are sold on to European TV Stations, usually after the show has aired in the states. These TV Stations aren't going to be too pleased if they've shelled out a bucketload of money for the UK premier of 24 for example, only to have it show up on iTunes before they've even aired it.
So <the inevitable reply> why don't the air the shows on the same day in every country? In the TV age, it wouldn't make sense. In the digital age, it's the only way that makes any sense.
KnightWRX
Apr 11, 06:12 AM
double.
berkleeboy210
Sep 1, 12:03 PM
just checked the apple store... currently 1-2 business day shipping time for the iMac.
this could mean updates on 9/5.....
MBP's still ship w/ in 24hrs though.
this could mean updates on 9/5.....
MBP's still ship w/ in 24hrs though.
No comments:
Post a Comment