Danksi
Dec 31, 10:59 PM
I guess the problem with a subscription model is, for now, the cost of bandwidth to Apple. A bittorrent-like sharing system might solve that.
.. they could just use a similar setup as their Podcast listings... Apple lists em, for free so far, but the podcasters host the files.
.. they could just use a similar setup as their Podcast listings... Apple lists em, for free so far, but the podcasters host the files.
triceretops
Mar 22, 10:53 PM
Is there an app in which the face of the iPod touch/iPhone has a digital scroll wheel on the bottom half and a screen on the top half to simulate the iPod Classic interface? Maybe that would be enough to satiate the holders on to the classic?
Hmmmmm:rolleyes:
Hmmmmm:rolleyes:
Sport73
Sep 6, 06:36 PM
The most important insight from all of these 'rumors' is that Apple MUST have something more to discuss on Tuesday than simply the release of the Movie Store. With Amazon trumping Apple on content and major questions outstanding about quality and DRM, it would be a big mistake to hold a major press event just for that.
Clearly, the new iPod AND a media streaming/center device is on tap, otherwise this event will go on record as the biggest flop in Apple SE history.
Clearly, the new iPod AND a media streaming/center device is on tap, otherwise this event will go on record as the biggest flop in Apple SE history.
jgould
Feb 21, 06:44 AM
Not concerned with the impending refresh? Or do you plan to return and rebuy post-refresh?
Having picked up a 13" MBP yesterday, I won't take this one back unless there is something that I need in it. Overall I'm not normally someone that worries about the contents of a refresh.
Having picked up a 13" MBP yesterday, I won't take this one back unless there is something that I need in it. Overall I'm not normally someone that worries about the contents of a refresh.
newagemac
May 3, 09:44 AM
THE KILLER FEATURE! :rolleyes:
Seriously, clicking and holding, pressing an x and then confirming sounds a hell of a lot harder than dragging to the trash. This is change for iOS's sake.
I'm not so sure that is true. I was teaching an elderly person how to drag and drop a file into a folder and the whole drag and drop concept did not seem all that easy to her. She kept releasing the mouse button too early, not dropping it in the right place, and not waiting long enough to release the button once she did hover over it. Dragging from a folder to a trash icon in a different location (which may even be set to autohide) seems quite a bit more difficult to do than just staying where you are and holding down on it until it wiggles and then clicking on the "X". Unless of course you have already mastered the concept.
Seriously, clicking and holding, pressing an x and then confirming sounds a hell of a lot harder than dragging to the trash. This is change for iOS's sake.
I'm not so sure that is true. I was teaching an elderly person how to drag and drop a file into a folder and the whole drag and drop concept did not seem all that easy to her. She kept releasing the mouse button too early, not dropping it in the right place, and not waiting long enough to release the button once she did hover over it. Dragging from a folder to a trash icon in a different location (which may even be set to autohide) seems quite a bit more difficult to do than just staying where you are and holding down on it until it wiggles and then clicking on the "X". Unless of course you have already mastered the concept.
toddybody
May 2, 09:29 PM
Consistency is "cool" and all...but I'm one of these weird people who like traditional file structures, trashcans, mice, keyboards...ya know, all that old foggie stuff;) And for the love of Caprica 6, please don't let this be a hint to future touchscreen Macs. I already get OCD when my iPad/iPhone looks like the windows of a school bus.
mtbdudex
Apr 21, 11:13 AM
Time to hide my iPhone file from the wife:rolleyes:
Seriously......privacy issues seem all over the place in this digital age....here is another example.
I guess we need a law disclosing if such and such device tracks you and needs to disclose that to you clearly via a warning label/other....
Seriously......privacy issues seem all over the place in this digital age....here is another example.
I guess we need a law disclosing if such and such device tracks you and needs to disclose that to you clearly via a warning label/other....
Apple OC
Mar 25, 01:10 PM
Looks like the Canadians will be commanding the "No Fly" operation in Lybia
interesting
http://www.cp24.com/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20110325/110325_cda_libya_military/20110325/?hub=CP24Home
interesting
http://www.cp24.com/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20110325/110325_cda_libya_military/20110325/?hub=CP24Home
DrFrankTM
Aug 25, 09:05 AM
I'd be shocked if we saw Merom based Minis before Merom based MBP and MB.. maybe a Core Duo upgrade, to hold us over? A price drop and high speed Yonah?
OR wishful thinking from someone who doesn't want his Core Duo Mini to seem old(even though its not)
Merom would be a good jump up for the Mini. I think it'd be cool if they offer it (even though I've had my Core Duo for just a couple of months :P), but I agree with you that we might simply see faster Yonah chips in the new Minis. One way or the other though, I'm happy the processor isn't soldered. When Merom drops in price, I'll grab the fastest thing I can put in my Mini. Chances are it will make it faster than whatever's the ultimate you can buy from Apple at that time. It's a fun time to be a Mini owner...
OR wishful thinking from someone who doesn't want his Core Duo Mini to seem old(even though its not)
Merom would be a good jump up for the Mini. I think it'd be cool if they offer it (even though I've had my Core Duo for just a couple of months :P), but I agree with you that we might simply see faster Yonah chips in the new Minis. One way or the other though, I'm happy the processor isn't soldered. When Merom drops in price, I'll grab the fastest thing I can put in my Mini. Chances are it will make it faster than whatever's the ultimate you can buy from Apple at that time. It's a fun time to be a Mini owner...
yg17
Mar 22, 11:43 AM
I love how "gays" freak out when non-homosexual people do something. But yet when "gays" want to do something extreme it's because we don't accept them, so when they get in trouble it's a huge ordeal.
To me this is like the people that don't support war. If a veteran was killed in action and a funeral is happening they can picket the funeral all day long (talk about bull ****!) But yet if we don't let them picket they freak out scream free rights free rights. Well guess what those veterans (me included since I serve) gave them that freedom to stand there in picket.
Gays are the same way. I have no issue with gays, I don't agree with it but if your gay, be gay. Just don't expect the world to conform to your way of life, especially a country (United States) founded on Christianity. If anything go to a foreign country and complain then see how bad it really is to come out, unless it's Amsterdam, Iraq or Afghan they'll love your butt over there.
The US was not founded on Christianity, and some 2,000 book written by man about an invisible man in the sky should not be basis for law.
To me this is like the people that don't support war. If a veteran was killed in action and a funeral is happening they can picket the funeral all day long (talk about bull ****!) But yet if we don't let them picket they freak out scream free rights free rights. Well guess what those veterans (me included since I serve) gave them that freedom to stand there in picket.
Gays are the same way. I have no issue with gays, I don't agree with it but if your gay, be gay. Just don't expect the world to conform to your way of life, especially a country (United States) founded on Christianity. If anything go to a foreign country and complain then see how bad it really is to come out, unless it's Amsterdam, Iraq or Afghan they'll love your butt over there.
The US was not founded on Christianity, and some 2,000 book written by man about an invisible man in the sky should not be basis for law.
sisyphus
Sep 6, 06:15 PM
I know they want to sell and that it is probably easier to manage, but I would rather rent than buy. I have bought a total of 4 DVDs. So few movies are worth owning. Some are actually worth renting.
AFPoster
Mar 22, 01:10 PM
I don't believe you, that's my opinion.
I think thats why I said in the first sentence, "that's my opinion".
I think thats why I said in the first sentence, "that's my opinion".
Abstract
Nov 15, 08:02 AM
How long before it ends up in the MacBook Pro?
(joking)
(joking)
mrsir2009
Apr 12, 01:26 PM
Maybe they are rare where you live. In the UK and the rest of Europe they are more common that automatics.
Wow, here in New Zealand you never see new manual cars (unless they're some sort of heavy duty utility vehicle or a utility van). Regular road cars are all automatic now...
Wow, here in New Zealand you never see new manual cars (unless they're some sort of heavy duty utility vehicle or a utility van). Regular road cars are all automatic now...
RaceTripper
Jan 9, 11:52 AM
@hobbyrennfahrer:
very nice! The 135 is a quick car! (especially because its sooooo light).
How do you like the handling on it though?
For me personally I would probably not get the 1 series for some reason, I'm just not a fan of the looks that much - now the 335i coupe, thats a killer car!
The 135i will likely be my next car (or a 1-Series M Coupe). It's not really that light though. At 3400 lbs. it weighs about what a E46 3-series weighs (while at 3600 lbs. the new E90/92 3 Series weighs what the E39 5-series weighed). BMWs just keeping getting bigger and heavier. My JCW is light, at 2600 lbs. :)
The 135i is certainly quick though.
very nice! The 135 is a quick car! (especially because its sooooo light).
How do you like the handling on it though?
For me personally I would probably not get the 1 series for some reason, I'm just not a fan of the looks that much - now the 335i coupe, thats a killer car!
The 135i will likely be my next car (or a 1-Series M Coupe). It's not really that light though. At 3400 lbs. it weighs about what a E46 3-series weighs (while at 3600 lbs. the new E90/92 3 Series weighs what the E39 5-series weighed). BMWs just keeping getting bigger and heavier. My JCW is light, at 2600 lbs. :)
The 135i is certainly quick though.
mac-er
Jul 20, 08:19 AM
"We're not sitting around doing nothing," Apple said about the prospect that mobile phones may soon emerge as very capable digital music players and challenge the iPod.
This was a pretty interesting quote AppleInsider had from the presentation.
This was a pretty interesting quote AppleInsider had from the presentation.
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.
Turbojugend27
Aug 7, 07:06 AM
Pretty bold statement for Apple, I don't think I would use that quite yet. As for myself I am buying my first apple in a week or so and can't wait, I don't think Apple has a userbase yet to be making statements like that.
Butthead
Oct 23, 11:46 AM
Unfortunately, the current MBP is restricted to about 3.2GB because of the 32bit CPU *AND* the 32bit i945 chipset. Intel won't have a 64bit mobile chipset until they ship Crestline (the i965 mobile chipset for Santa Rosa). So, unless Crestline is ready early and Apple has some sort of exclusive agreement, the updated MBP still will not allow anyone to use more than approximately 3.2GB of RAM.
...
Arrgh, MR Administrator should now be boiling up a pot of linguine noodles for self-flagellation. ;P Then do the right thing and fold this thread back into the main MBP rumor thread...sheesh! Not another thread of people who have not read through the 3.6k posts in the main thread on the MBP, all this people rehashing the same stupid "it better have this, I want crestline, I hope, I hope upgraded GPU (not gonna happen, sorry), I want this upgrade and that...NOT GONNA HAPPEN.
Look it's simple Apple couldn't get enough if the lower yield, highest speed Merom chips after they decided to use them in the iMac 1st (while all the PC manufacturers used Conroe for their desktops). meaning that Apple had to wait for Intel to supply them with enough chips to roll out the laptop Meroms, based on exactly the same Napa chipset/platform that the Yonah MBP's are based on. It's simply a minor speed bump by changing over to the 64bit Merom, with very few other upgrades that would constitute a 'silent' upgrade.---same as iMac, just later than iMac cause they couldn't get enough chips for both the iMac & MBP at the same time. End of story.
Major upgrades or case redesign (for better cooling, which would require new motherboards) will not come until Santa Rosa chipset/platform becomes available NEXT year.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=2943835&postcount=2906
But to repeat from that prior post link of a Sept 26th story:
http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2006/09/27/intel_intros_santa_rosa/
"Intel is still saying Santa Rosa will ship in H1 though it's expected to come late Q1/early Q2"
No, Santa Rosa (which Crestline is a part of) will not be showing up miraculously early for Apple this year (or any other manufacturer) only via "exclusive" lol- the mighty Steve-O is all powerful, yet IBM & Freescale blew him off, dream on.
GM965 official name for 'Crestline' mobile chip that comes with integrated Intel GPU (MB's will likely get this one too to the dismay of the MB hopeful; sorry Apple goes for the absolute cheapest solutions in the MB line, this is their history, remember the 1st iBooks that omitted the FW port, even though the MB had the FW support on it!). PM965 would be the one Apple will use for separate ATI or Nvidia GPU.
...
Arrgh, MR Administrator should now be boiling up a pot of linguine noodles for self-flagellation. ;P Then do the right thing and fold this thread back into the main MBP rumor thread...sheesh! Not another thread of people who have not read through the 3.6k posts in the main thread on the MBP, all this people rehashing the same stupid "it better have this, I want crestline, I hope, I hope upgraded GPU (not gonna happen, sorry), I want this upgrade and that...NOT GONNA HAPPEN.
Look it's simple Apple couldn't get enough if the lower yield, highest speed Merom chips after they decided to use them in the iMac 1st (while all the PC manufacturers used Conroe for their desktops). meaning that Apple had to wait for Intel to supply them with enough chips to roll out the laptop Meroms, based on exactly the same Napa chipset/platform that the Yonah MBP's are based on. It's simply a minor speed bump by changing over to the 64bit Merom, with very few other upgrades that would constitute a 'silent' upgrade.---same as iMac, just later than iMac cause they couldn't get enough chips for both the iMac & MBP at the same time. End of story.
Major upgrades or case redesign (for better cooling, which would require new motherboards) will not come until Santa Rosa chipset/platform becomes available NEXT year.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=2943835&postcount=2906
But to repeat from that prior post link of a Sept 26th story:
http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2006/09/27/intel_intros_santa_rosa/
"Intel is still saying Santa Rosa will ship in H1 though it's expected to come late Q1/early Q2"
No, Santa Rosa (which Crestline is a part of) will not be showing up miraculously early for Apple this year (or any other manufacturer) only via "exclusive" lol- the mighty Steve-O is all powerful, yet IBM & Freescale blew him off, dream on.
GM965 official name for 'Crestline' mobile chip that comes with integrated Intel GPU (MB's will likely get this one too to the dismay of the MB hopeful; sorry Apple goes for the absolute cheapest solutions in the MB line, this is their history, remember the 1st iBooks that omitted the FW port, even though the MB had the FW support on it!). PM965 would be the one Apple will use for separate ATI or Nvidia GPU.
smileyborg
Apr 2, 07:02 PM
I really like this ad. Maybe this will be the new direction of Apple's marketing?
Spanky Deluxe
Sep 1, 02:35 PM
I think this means that there will definitely be no Mac Midi. Only the pro user would want a 30" screen and Apple makes loads of cash on their screens anyway. If they offered a mid sized mac they know that a lot of people would go and spend their money on a screen from Dell instead of a screen from Apple. They'd rather force buyers to either buy a Mac Pro (i.e. spend more on Apple) or an iMac with their required screen size (i.e. spend more on Apple).
I wouldn't expect Conroe in the iMac either folks. It would serve them better to use the same platform as used in the MacBook Pros, it would save them on R&D and that way the iMacs can't be faster than their Pro range of laptops.
I wouldn't expect Conroe in the iMac either folks. It would serve them better to use the same platform as used in the MacBook Pros, it would save them on R&D and that way the iMacs can't be faster than their Pro range of laptops.
MacRumors
Sep 6, 08:40 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Apple has updated the Mac Mini to include all Core Duo models. Other than the processor upgrade, there does not appear to be any differences between the previous Mac Mini and today's release. The Mac Mini is available in two offerings:
1.66 GHz Mac Mini
60 GB 5400-rpm SATA Hard Drive
Combo Drive
1.83 GHz Mac Mini
80 GB 5400-rpm SATA Hard Drive
Superdrive
Both models feature:
-2MB Shared L2 Cache
-512 MB 667 MHz DDR2 RAM standard (up to 2 GB supported)
-GMA 950 Integrated graphics
-1 Firewire 400, 4 USB 2.0
-Optical Digital/Analog Audio In/Out
-Gigabit ethernet
-Airport Extreme and Bluetooth 2.0+EDR standard
Of note, the Mac Mini still uses Core Duo (Yonah), not the more advanced Core 2 Duo "Merom" chip found in today's iMac announcements (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060906091309.shtml).
Apple has updated the Mac Mini to include all Core Duo models. Other than the processor upgrade, there does not appear to be any differences between the previous Mac Mini and today's release. The Mac Mini is available in two offerings:
1.66 GHz Mac Mini
60 GB 5400-rpm SATA Hard Drive
Combo Drive
1.83 GHz Mac Mini
80 GB 5400-rpm SATA Hard Drive
Superdrive
Both models feature:
-2MB Shared L2 Cache
-512 MB 667 MHz DDR2 RAM standard (up to 2 GB supported)
-GMA 950 Integrated graphics
-1 Firewire 400, 4 USB 2.0
-Optical Digital/Analog Audio In/Out
-Gigabit ethernet
-Airport Extreme and Bluetooth 2.0+EDR standard
Of note, the Mac Mini still uses Core Duo (Yonah), not the more advanced Core 2 Duo "Merom" chip found in today's iMac announcements (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060906091309.shtml).
Porchland
Sep 8, 03:51 PM
This sure is starting to sound like MOVIEBEAM... and who owns that???
So, we can que up 10-12 movies we want to watch for the month and in the background my mac downloads them and then either stores them on this yet to be anounced product or onto my mac... Then this new Airport(now, available in 1-3 weeks) can then stream it to my TV. This does make a lot more sense now.
If 88 percent (http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/news/releases/pressrelease.asp?ID=2006135) of households have cable or satellite -- and a big chunk of those have access to PPV or on-demand new releases -- I don't understand why an iTunes movie-to-your-TV service is such a big hoopty-do.
Unless Apple goes to a subscription-based service that essentially replaces my cable, this doesn't really give me anything I don't already have other than the ability to watch a movie on an iPod.
I'm excited, I guess, because it's new and a different direction for Apple, but none of the rumors I've seen about what's coming next week show much "think different."
So, we can que up 10-12 movies we want to watch for the month and in the background my mac downloads them and then either stores them on this yet to be anounced product or onto my mac... Then this new Airport(now, available in 1-3 weeks) can then stream it to my TV. This does make a lot more sense now.
If 88 percent (http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/news/releases/pressrelease.asp?ID=2006135) of households have cable or satellite -- and a big chunk of those have access to PPV or on-demand new releases -- I don't understand why an iTunes movie-to-your-TV service is such a big hoopty-do.
Unless Apple goes to a subscription-based service that essentially replaces my cable, this doesn't really give me anything I don't already have other than the ability to watch a movie on an iPod.
I'm excited, I guess, because it's new and a different direction for Apple, but none of the rumors I've seen about what's coming next week show much "think different."
iJohnHenry
Mar 20, 10:50 AM
I'm not smart enough to know what the right thing to do is in Libya. But it does make me roll my eyes to hear the CNN anchor talk about how Qaddafi is "thumbing his nose at America".
The propoganda machine is cranked-up and running. :rolleyes:
Let's go kill some badguys!
It's "the World", but American media pretend that the U.S. IS the World.
I actually think having troops is better.
Can we count on you to volunteer?
The propoganda machine is cranked-up and running. :rolleyes:
Let's go kill some badguys!
It's "the World", but American media pretend that the U.S. IS the World.
I actually think having troops is better.
Can we count on you to volunteer?
No comments:
Post a Comment