benjayman2
Feb 28, 01:57 PM
First attempt to get everything in one shot.
http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/6433/img0390ko.jpg (http://img141.imageshack.us/i/img0390ko.jpg/)
Gave up and started taking pics of parts of our new room.
http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/3861/img0392y.jpg (http://img651.imageshack.us/i/img0392y.jpg/)
Digital and Analog entertainment
http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/4808/img0394m.jpg (http://img193.imageshack.us/i/img0394m.jpg/)
Second attempt to get everything in one shot.
http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/9025/img0396ki.jpg (http://img87.imageshack.us/i/img0396ki.jpg/)
Pic from the window bay.
http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/1438/img0398p.jpg (http://img84.imageshack.us/i/img0398p.jpg/)
The only pic that I thought turned out decent.
http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/1701/img0386of.jpg
Hardware in the sig
http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/6433/img0390ko.jpg (http://img141.imageshack.us/i/img0390ko.jpg/)
Gave up and started taking pics of parts of our new room.
http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/3861/img0392y.jpg (http://img651.imageshack.us/i/img0392y.jpg/)
Digital and Analog entertainment
http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/4808/img0394m.jpg (http://img193.imageshack.us/i/img0394m.jpg/)
Second attempt to get everything in one shot.
http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/9025/img0396ki.jpg (http://img87.imageshack.us/i/img0396ki.jpg/)
Pic from the window bay.
http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/1438/img0398p.jpg (http://img84.imageshack.us/i/img0398p.jpg/)
The only pic that I thought turned out decent.
http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/1701/img0386of.jpg
Hardware in the sig
rubaiyat23
Jul 15, 08:00 PM
Are you sure this drive isn't for Professional Disc for Data media as used in the Sony XDCAM machines?
http://www.tapeonline.com/store/XDCAM_FAQ.asp
It too, is based on Blu-Ray, but with a protective casing a la DVD-RAM.
http://www.tapeonline.com/store/XDCAM_FAQ.asp
It too, is based on Blu-Ray, but with a protective casing a la DVD-RAM.
nagromme
Jul 18, 02:08 AM
people wont like spending a lot of time downloading a file only for it to become completely useless a while later.
I disagree: people already spend time/gas/money DRIVING to a video store to rent something that become worse than useless: you have to drive again to return it :) Or, with Netflix you just have to mail it, but the wait is days--much longer than a download.
I disagree: people already spend time/gas/money DRIVING to a video store to rent something that become worse than useless: you have to drive again to return it :) Or, with Netflix you just have to mail it, but the wait is days--much longer than a download.
sminman
Jan 11, 06:10 PM
I don't see the benefit of a MacBook Slim.
Can someone pursued me or tell me why it would be better then just having a MacBook?
Can someone pursued me or tell me why it would be better then just having a MacBook?
AppleScruff1
Apr 23, 06:53 PM
If it's all just speculation, why be so quick to shout "privacy invasion" when you don't know the full story? It can't be one rule for you and another for everyone else.
The technical explanation from an Apple engineer will probably be the best explanation we'll see - Apple's PR rarely go into technical details on such matters. Anntenna-gate has been the only exception to that rule I can think of.
I'm not the one being quick to shout privacy invasion, it was on every tv news channel and news site. Somebody thinks it's a big deal. Now Apple brass is in damage control mode and must come up with some type of answer to appease the public.
The technical explanation from an Apple engineer will probably be the best explanation we'll see - Apple's PR rarely go into technical details on such matters. Anntenna-gate has been the only exception to that rule I can think of.
I'm not the one being quick to shout privacy invasion, it was on every tv news channel and news site. Somebody thinks it's a big deal. Now Apple brass is in damage control mode and must come up with some type of answer to appease the public.
KnightWRX
Apr 26, 01:57 PM
Add
Windows,
Words
besides others !!
Guys, every trademark is made up of generic words. That's not what people mean when they say App Store is generic. What they actually mean is it is descriptive.
Let's say I open a shoe store. 2 Trademarks :
1- Shoe Box
Both very generic words, same as everyone who argues "Windows! Amazon! Word! it's all generic!" say. However, I'm not trademarking an actual box that contains shoes. I'm trademarking a name for a store. The shoes don't even have to come in boxes.
2- Shoe Store
This one is descriptive. I'm opening a shoe store, I'm deciding to call it Shoe Store. So now, Yellow can't say "Yellow, the best shoe store around!" because that infringes on my mark. That's what people take exception with here. The mark seems descriptive and thus shouldn't be trademarkable. Apple themselves often refer to it in this descriptive nature in their financials and keynotes.
Windows,
Words
besides others !!
Guys, every trademark is made up of generic words. That's not what people mean when they say App Store is generic. What they actually mean is it is descriptive.
Let's say I open a shoe store. 2 Trademarks :
1- Shoe Box
Both very generic words, same as everyone who argues "Windows! Amazon! Word! it's all generic!" say. However, I'm not trademarking an actual box that contains shoes. I'm trademarking a name for a store. The shoes don't even have to come in boxes.
2- Shoe Store
This one is descriptive. I'm opening a shoe store, I'm deciding to call it Shoe Store. So now, Yellow can't say "Yellow, the best shoe store around!" because that infringes on my mark. That's what people take exception with here. The mark seems descriptive and thus shouldn't be trademarkable. Apple themselves often refer to it in this descriptive nature in their financials and keynotes.
zombierunner
Apr 19, 12:36 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-gb) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Thank goodness .. Finally an iMac rumour ... I am still going to wait a bit more and buy it when the new iMacs ship with lion preinstalled .... July I guess
Really hoping for 1080p target display mode will be supported in the new iMacs ...
Thank goodness .. Finally an iMac rumour ... I am still going to wait a bit more and buy it when the new iMacs ship with lion preinstalled .... July I guess
Really hoping for 1080p target display mode will be supported in the new iMacs ...
ChrisA
Nov 15, 10:47 AM
yup, and my webpages will load in the blink of an eye... definitely worth whatever apple will charge. ;)
seriously though, how hard is it to get a program to multi-thread? (if thats the right term; being a complete programming novice, i've no idea)
You answered your own question, in a way. Most people's taskes are not computational. A faster CPU will not make a page load faster. The bottle neck is the speed of the INternet connection. Same with wordprocessing and email. CPU speed is not required.
Whre this WILL help is is video editing and photography. Batch conversions of RAW images will go faster. and for those jobs they are already multi-threaded
As for how easy is it the multi-thread a program. I've done i. Basically you need to design the system from the ground up. There are some special cases where you can add it lter. this would apply to programes that do a computation on a large stack of data while the user waited. You could just swap out the computation modual. But in general it is pretty much a re-design.
seriously though, how hard is it to get a program to multi-thread? (if thats the right term; being a complete programming novice, i've no idea)
You answered your own question, in a way. Most people's taskes are not computational. A faster CPU will not make a page load faster. The bottle neck is the speed of the INternet connection. Same with wordprocessing and email. CPU speed is not required.
Whre this WILL help is is video editing and photography. Batch conversions of RAW images will go faster. and for those jobs they are already multi-threaded
As for how easy is it the multi-thread a program. I've done i. Basically you need to design the system from the ground up. There are some special cases where you can add it lter. this would apply to programes that do a computation on a large stack of data while the user waited. You could just swap out the computation modual. But in general it is pretty much a re-design.
AppliedVisual
Oct 23, 11:11 AM
I've read that even the current MBP supports 4gigs.
Apple just doesn't offer it in their store since the CPU can only address around 3,2gigs (like every other 32bit cpu).
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.
In a 32bit system, the 32bit CPUs and/or chipsets can address a total memory capacity of 4GB. But this 4GB address window must account for all memory I/O addresses, BIOS/ROM as well as video memory in addition to the actual RAM heap. That is why when you install 4GB of RAM, you essentially miss out on the last 600 to 800 MB. Also why the C2D/Merom iMac systems can only be configured with up to 3GB of RAM. Apple probably figured they didn't need to sell people RAM that they can't use. Some PC vendors still sell 4GB installed into such systems even though it can't all be used because by installing two matched 2GB modules, the dual-channel performance benefits are there, just not the last 800MB.
Apple just doesn't offer it in their store since the CPU can only address around 3,2gigs (like every other 32bit cpu).
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.
In a 32bit system, the 32bit CPUs and/or chipsets can address a total memory capacity of 4GB. But this 4GB address window must account for all memory I/O addresses, BIOS/ROM as well as video memory in addition to the actual RAM heap. That is why when you install 4GB of RAM, you essentially miss out on the last 600 to 800 MB. Also why the C2D/Merom iMac systems can only be configured with up to 3GB of RAM. Apple probably figured they didn't need to sell people RAM that they can't use. Some PC vendors still sell 4GB installed into such systems even though it can't all be used because by installing two matched 2GB modules, the dual-channel performance benefits are there, just not the last 800MB.
aswitcher
Aug 7, 03:56 AM
Dude, it's even better than that! Its song capacity is only limited by how many cassette tapes you can carry!
Is there a car phone version that plugs directly into the tape deck?
Is there a car phone version that plugs directly into the tape deck?
SockRolid
Jun 22, 01:17 PM
From Wikipedia on "touch screens" -
'The proposition is that human arm held in an unsupported horizontal position rapidly becomes fatigued and painful, the so-called "gorilla arm". It is often cited as a prima facie example of what not to do in ergonomics.'
It doesn't really matter whether a touch-screen iMac runs Mac OS X or iOS. It will be uncomfortable to use for more than a few minutes. Unless the screen is more horizontal than vertical. And just look how well that worked out for Microsoft Surface (aka Big-Ass Table.)
So I'm not sure exactly how beneficial a touch-screen iMac would be for Apple or its developers or its users. If it runs iOS, would there be yet another class of apps in the App Store? For full-screen iMac apps? And if it runs Mac OS X, wouldn't it be better to simply replace the Magic Mouse with the Magic Trackpad? (And keep the non-touch screen?)
If anything, I see a convergence of the user experience of Apple's MacBooks and desktop Macs. The keyboards are already virtually identical. Maybe the Magic Mouse was just an interim step toward the Magic Trackpad...
'The proposition is that human arm held in an unsupported horizontal position rapidly becomes fatigued and painful, the so-called "gorilla arm". It is often cited as a prima facie example of what not to do in ergonomics.'
It doesn't really matter whether a touch-screen iMac runs Mac OS X or iOS. It will be uncomfortable to use for more than a few minutes. Unless the screen is more horizontal than vertical. And just look how well that worked out for Microsoft Surface (aka Big-Ass Table.)
So I'm not sure exactly how beneficial a touch-screen iMac would be for Apple or its developers or its users. If it runs iOS, would there be yet another class of apps in the App Store? For full-screen iMac apps? And if it runs Mac OS X, wouldn't it be better to simply replace the Magic Mouse with the Magic Trackpad? (And keep the non-touch screen?)
If anything, I see a convergence of the user experience of Apple's MacBooks and desktop Macs. The keyboards are already virtually identical. Maybe the Magic Mouse was just an interim step toward the Magic Trackpad...
ThaDoggg
Apr 10, 02:17 PM
I've only owned cars with a stick shift. It's sad to see that more and more models are now available in automatic only.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
PBF
Apr 3, 06:52 PM
Not that I'm aware of currently, but you know that will be an extension as soon as it is released.
But why would Apple not do it my way by default??? Google did. Smart and logical of them.
But why would Apple not do it my way by default??? Google did. Smart and logical of them.
unlinked
Apr 3, 07:56 AM
I don't have one, however I did like this ad.
Curious if the same marketing company that does the current ip4 commercials does this one; as many have stated opinions of how terrible it is.
This ad has class, the "if you don't have an iPhone", not so much.
I like it a lot more than the "if you don't have an iPhone" ads but it still leaves me a little confused. The only phone/tablet ads I have ever noticed pushing thinness where iPhone ads (maybe I have poor ad retention or they never aired outside of the US). Making things thinner seemed like an Apple fetish that never overly interested me. I'm glad they agree with me a little bit now.
Curious if the same marketing company that does the current ip4 commercials does this one; as many have stated opinions of how terrible it is.
This ad has class, the "if you don't have an iPhone", not so much.
I like it a lot more than the "if you don't have an iPhone" ads but it still leaves me a little confused. The only phone/tablet ads I have ever noticed pushing thinness where iPhone ads (maybe I have poor ad retention or they never aired outside of the US). Making things thinner seemed like an Apple fetish that never overly interested me. I'm glad they agree with me a little bit now.
opinioncircle
Mar 19, 03:43 PM
Must we get involved in this? Can't France do something for once by themselves, or any other european nations for that matter? When was the last time they even fired a weapon? You know, the taliban were once known as freedom fighters too. I'm so sick of these countries, let them self destruct, maybe some day they will choose to civilize themselves. Please, no more US to the rescue, and then they all wonder why many Americans have a feeling of exceptionalism. :rolleyes:
France actually opened the subject of the no fly zone before the US & the UK.
As for other European nations, they fired and are still firing their weapons in the region, with the US forces.
The US, as the UK & France, have major interests in the region (oil, weapons, influence and such), hence the need to be there to protect these assets.
France actually opened the subject of the no fly zone before the US & the UK.
As for other European nations, they fired and are still firing their weapons in the region, with the US forces.
The US, as the UK & France, have major interests in the region (oil, weapons, influence and such), hence the need to be there to protect these assets.
kadajawi
Sep 7, 04:31 AM
Reasoning goes like this:
Music costs a small amount to make - can be as low as $10k for an album.
Sell a bunch and make some profit.
Movies cost upwards of $50 million to make, often $100mil or more, so you got to rent them and sell them and do whatever you can to get that cash back.
And its got to go out the door at $25 if you are buying.
Thing is, if Apple want me to buy a movie for $15, I can rent it for $5 at the store.....and copy it if I want.
Yeah, I know thats against the law but a LOT of people do it, and anyway, if you d/l from Apple, where are you going to keep them all?
250 gig drive will hold about 30 movies. Thats not a lot of movies, and most people dont have 250 drives yet.....
Upwards of $50 million? Yeah, the crappy ones do. Usually though I prefer low budget movies... Donnie Darko was made for maybe 4 million for example. Mulholland Drive: 15 million. Machuca: 1.5 million. 12 Angry Men: $340.000 (ok, that's an old movie, but I doubt it would cost much more when it was made today). American Beauty: 1.5 million. 2046: 12 million. Muxm�uschenstill: 40000 � (absolutely fantastic movie). Why do the actors earn so much money when there are tons of good, unknown actors who could do the job better? Why so many special effects? And even if you use so many... Sin City was 40 million, Renaissance 14 million �, A Scanner Darkly 8.5 millions. These movies shure took quite a lot of efford... why are they so cheap? Somethings going wrong in Hollywood. Too many bad movies done for too much money made only to earn money.
Anyway, buying DVD isn't too expensive too, the Criterion Collection is unfortunately expensive as hell, and you'll have to import them here, but there are quite a few good movies for a low price. Donnie Darko e.g. sells for a low price (around 10 � for the tin box 2 disc version), Mulholland Drive 10 �, some Kubricks 10 � or less, ... the Arthaus label is very expensive unfortunately... they seem to be some sort of German Criterion, without packing in so many specials.
Apple would have to compete with these prices, and that doesn't mean same price, but lower, much lower. I mean what looks better? A nice, big DVD collection, or, well... nothing...?
Music costs a small amount to make - can be as low as $10k for an album.
Sell a bunch and make some profit.
Movies cost upwards of $50 million to make, often $100mil or more, so you got to rent them and sell them and do whatever you can to get that cash back.
And its got to go out the door at $25 if you are buying.
Thing is, if Apple want me to buy a movie for $15, I can rent it for $5 at the store.....and copy it if I want.
Yeah, I know thats against the law but a LOT of people do it, and anyway, if you d/l from Apple, where are you going to keep them all?
250 gig drive will hold about 30 movies. Thats not a lot of movies, and most people dont have 250 drives yet.....
Upwards of $50 million? Yeah, the crappy ones do. Usually though I prefer low budget movies... Donnie Darko was made for maybe 4 million for example. Mulholland Drive: 15 million. Machuca: 1.5 million. 12 Angry Men: $340.000 (ok, that's an old movie, but I doubt it would cost much more when it was made today). American Beauty: 1.5 million. 2046: 12 million. Muxm�uschenstill: 40000 � (absolutely fantastic movie). Why do the actors earn so much money when there are tons of good, unknown actors who could do the job better? Why so many special effects? And even if you use so many... Sin City was 40 million, Renaissance 14 million �, A Scanner Darkly 8.5 millions. These movies shure took quite a lot of efford... why are they so cheap? Somethings going wrong in Hollywood. Too many bad movies done for too much money made only to earn money.
Anyway, buying DVD isn't too expensive too, the Criterion Collection is unfortunately expensive as hell, and you'll have to import them here, but there are quite a few good movies for a low price. Donnie Darko e.g. sells for a low price (around 10 � for the tin box 2 disc version), Mulholland Drive 10 �, some Kubricks 10 � or less, ... the Arthaus label is very expensive unfortunately... they seem to be some sort of German Criterion, without packing in so many specials.
Apple would have to compete with these prices, and that doesn't mean same price, but lower, much lower. I mean what looks better? A nice, big DVD collection, or, well... nothing...?
bassanoclapper
Apr 19, 12:10 PM
Woo hoo!
[waits patiently]
[waits patiently]
SciTeach
Nov 15, 08:26 AM
How long before it ends up in the MacBook Pro?
(joking)
The heck with the MacBook Pro.....how about the Mac MINI!!!
:p ;) :D
(joking)
The heck with the MacBook Pro.....how about the Mac MINI!!!
:p ;) :D
gnasher729
Nov 15, 09:53 AM
I wonder how Handbrake, iDVD encoding, or Quicktime encoding will take advantage of the extra cores?
For some time, Handbrake didn't use more than two cores - owners of Quad G5s reported CPU usage of exactly 50 percent, then someone changed it and Quad G5s reported 100 percent CPU usage.
What we don't know: Was the code changed to use up to four processors, or as many processors as are available? Developers are usually very unwilling to ship code that they haven't been able to try out, so expect a version using eight cores about two days after the developers have access to an eight core machine.
In the case of Handbrake, encoding to MPEG4 seems already limited by the speed of the DVD drive; you can't encode faster than you can read from the DVD. H.264 is still limited by processor speed. Using eight cores is not too difficult; for example, if you encode 60 minutes of video, just give 7 1/2 minutes to each core.
For some time, Handbrake didn't use more than two cores - owners of Quad G5s reported CPU usage of exactly 50 percent, then someone changed it and Quad G5s reported 100 percent CPU usage.
What we don't know: Was the code changed to use up to four processors, or as many processors as are available? Developers are usually very unwilling to ship code that they haven't been able to try out, so expect a version using eight cores about two days after the developers have access to an eight core machine.
In the case of Handbrake, encoding to MPEG4 seems already limited by the speed of the DVD drive; you can't encode faster than you can read from the DVD. H.264 is still limited by processor speed. Using eight cores is not too difficult; for example, if you encode 60 minutes of video, just give 7 1/2 minutes to each core.
clj7
Jan 7, 04:20 AM
My Dad also drives a a VW Golf, which has a GTI engine. Can't even imagine how much petrol it must be going through.
milbournosphere
Feb 25, 11:43 PM
I do believe I saw him holding his sign... ;)
SteveKnobs
Apr 3, 12:56 AM
...but all the Apple apologists...so quick to jump to Apple's defense...say that there is no such problem. :D
You are dead on correct. Many people do not want to endure the wait for a new one if they return it...Many are waiting to see if Apple can resolve the issue in a future production batch. What good is exchanging if the new one is going to have the same, or worse, problem
I love Apple products but I am always entertained by the rabid zeal of the delusional Apple apologists who insist the company can do no wrong...OR...they simply ignore the common, and obvious, flaws in the Apple product they buy, trying to convince themselves that they have the only "good" one...which on some subconscious level they need to tell themselves so they can believe they are "special" somehow.
You did a poll asking hundreds of people if they are waiting for this very reason? Dude you're way wrong. The "many" people you are referring to are probably a very select number of....MacRumors members. Hardly indicative of the general population. I don't know if you heard- but people are going mad trying to get their hands on one. Your "theory" or whatever it is about people waiting to make sure the kinks are worked out is, well....stupid. I've read this whole thread and you seem to be on a kick about the light-bleeding issue. Yet you dont own one? Interesting.
You are dead on correct. Many people do not want to endure the wait for a new one if they return it...Many are waiting to see if Apple can resolve the issue in a future production batch. What good is exchanging if the new one is going to have the same, or worse, problem
I love Apple products but I am always entertained by the rabid zeal of the delusional Apple apologists who insist the company can do no wrong...OR...they simply ignore the common, and obvious, flaws in the Apple product they buy, trying to convince themselves that they have the only "good" one...which on some subconscious level they need to tell themselves so they can believe they are "special" somehow.
You did a poll asking hundreds of people if they are waiting for this very reason? Dude you're way wrong. The "many" people you are referring to are probably a very select number of....MacRumors members. Hardly indicative of the general population. I don't know if you heard- but people are going mad trying to get their hands on one. Your "theory" or whatever it is about people waiting to make sure the kinks are worked out is, well....stupid. I've read this whole thread and you seem to be on a kick about the light-bleeding issue. Yet you dont own one? Interesting.
BoyBach
Sep 1, 02:37 PM
I like my 'chin' and I find 17 inches to be perfectly adequate, thank you very much! ;)
0815
Apr 19, 12:18 PM
when apple refresh a line like this, is there a way of buying a current generation model (rather than the latest release), presumably slightly discounted?
if not, where does the stock go?
thanks
Check the 'refurbished' section on store.apple.com - There you usually buy many of the previous generation model, thats where the 'stock' often ends up. You also might get good deals on previous generation on macmall.com or similar sides (but as this article points out, many 3rd party resellers are running low in stock - so there might not be many discounted 'old' models). I often buy machines in the refurbished section from apples site - nothing wrong with those and full warranty (but a couple of hunded dollars cheaper - also for current generation models)
if not, where does the stock go?
thanks
Check the 'refurbished' section on store.apple.com - There you usually buy many of the previous generation model, thats where the 'stock' often ends up. You also might get good deals on previous generation on macmall.com or similar sides (but as this article points out, many 3rd party resellers are running low in stock - so there might not be many discounted 'old' models). I often buy machines in the refurbished section from apples site - nothing wrong with those and full warranty (but a couple of hunded dollars cheaper - also for current generation models)
No comments:
Post a Comment