supafly1703
Jul 27, 09:43 AM
C'mon Steve, wow us...
Macnoviz
Jul 20, 10:14 AM
At some point your going to have deminished returns. Sure multimedia apps can take advantage of a few more cores, but I dont see Mail running faster on 4 cores, nevermind 2!
How fast do you want mail to go? The main reasons you need good processors is not for browsing, e-mail, text, and such and such. I highly doubt someone who does all these things on a five year old computer will be much slower than someone on a 16 GB RAM top of the line Powermac
Why don't they just call it: Big Mac.
I think that's the best name I've heard in this thread (sorry, Chundles)
How fast do you want mail to go? The main reasons you need good processors is not for browsing, e-mail, text, and such and such. I highly doubt someone who does all these things on a five year old computer will be much slower than someone on a 16 GB RAM top of the line Powermac
Why don't they just call it: Big Mac.
I think that's the best name I've heard in this thread (sorry, Chundles)
bretm
Apr 11, 07:56 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Go get yourself an Atrix or HTC and see if you like it better. You won't. We have an Atrix in our house. And it's dual processor still is slower than the iPhone 4. Heck, just interface snappiness and smoothness is still a lesser experience to the original iPhone.
Go get yourself an Atrix or HTC and see if you like it better. You won't. We have an Atrix in our house. And it's dual processor still is slower than the iPhone 4. Heck, just interface snappiness and smoothness is still a lesser experience to the original iPhone.
nagromme
Aug 7, 03:21 PM
Wow! :eek:
It's amazing how Apple keeps managing BIG updates to OS X. They are moving forward so much more efficiently than Microsoft. Not just polishing little things, but big, useful things. Not to mention some fun ones to attract consumers. I hope the advanced Spotlight features include easy boolean searching.
And now we can all wonder about those OTHER features Steve said they are concealing for now so Microsoft can't make a halfway copy (or attempt to) yet again.
I'm surprised res-independent UI was not discussed, but Apple has already said (http://developer.apple.com/releasenotes/GraphicsImaging/ResolutionIndependentUI.html) that is coming, so maybe it's just not polished enough to bother showing yet. (Or maybe it's better to show when new displays come out? Today's new low prices on Cinema Displays might hint at new displays to come later.)
I've been asking for that background-change effect in iChat for years! Adobe Premiere could do that in the 90s, though not in realtime. Too cool!
Now one question... A new Front Row has been mentioned, but what will it have? PVR, tuner-ready for future Macs or peripherals? At first I also wondered about ["from across the room or across the house"... But I bet they're just talking about sharing iTunes or photos from another Mac, which is old news.
PS, congrats to MR's servers for handling the load :)
It's amazing how Apple keeps managing BIG updates to OS X. They are moving forward so much more efficiently than Microsoft. Not just polishing little things, but big, useful things. Not to mention some fun ones to attract consumers. I hope the advanced Spotlight features include easy boolean searching.
And now we can all wonder about those OTHER features Steve said they are concealing for now so Microsoft can't make a halfway copy (or attempt to) yet again.
I'm surprised res-independent UI was not discussed, but Apple has already said (http://developer.apple.com/releasenotes/GraphicsImaging/ResolutionIndependentUI.html) that is coming, so maybe it's just not polished enough to bother showing yet. (Or maybe it's better to show when new displays come out? Today's new low prices on Cinema Displays might hint at new displays to come later.)
I've been asking for that background-change effect in iChat for years! Adobe Premiere could do that in the 90s, though not in realtime. Too cool!
Now one question... A new Front Row has been mentioned, but what will it have? PVR, tuner-ready for future Macs or peripherals? At first I also wondered about ["from across the room or across the house"... But I bet they're just talking about sharing iTunes or photos from another Mac, which is old news.
PS, congrats to MR's servers for handling the load :)
NJRonbo
Jun 14, 06:24 PM
You know what?
Third friggin' RS store I have called and ALL
say that even if you get a PIN tomorrow it is
no guarantee of a phone.
I think I am going to order directly from Apple.
Third friggin' RS store I have called and ALL
say that even if you get a PIN tomorrow it is
no guarantee of a phone.
I think I am going to order directly from Apple.
JM-Prod
Apr 10, 08:17 AM
Faster horses.
Hmm, you want a faster horse or did you think my comments were screaming for them?
If my expectation are met, it would be a revolution in editing.
The second since introducing digital non-linear editing in the late 80's.
Not faster horses.
Hmm, you want a faster horse or did you think my comments were screaming for them?
If my expectation are met, it would be a revolution in editing.
The second since introducing digital non-linear editing in the late 80's.
Not faster horses.
rdowns
Apr 28, 05:57 PM
all want to know is was why it always has to go to name calling..be it..wacko christians, teabaggers or racists conservatives..it seems like every thread any of the liberals on the forum posts always goes to calling names at whatever group it is that they have a problem with today.
I'm not a liberal but those sound like apt descriptions of some of the people who call themselves Republicans/Tea Party/Conservative. I long for the Republican Party my family supported.
I'm not a liberal but those sound like apt descriptions of some of the people who call themselves Republicans/Tea Party/Conservative. I long for the Republican Party my family supported.
samh004
Nov 28, 07:14 PM
I was under the assumption that the money paid to Universal was to allow the streaming of music from one device to another. I assumed that was the real reason behind the payment.
Seeing as Apple does not stream music to random devices, they shouldn't have to pay a royalty.
I don't think I voiced my opinion about this last time it was brought up, but I reckon although the iPod makes enough profit so as not to pass that royalty onto the consumer (in price), I would still feel like I was paying that royalty, were I to buy an iPod.
If I felt like I paid a royalty, and was already downloading songs legally from iTunes anyway, I'd want to download more stuff illegally than I have before, just to make use of that royalty.
That's what I will do if I have to buy an iPod in the future with a pre-paid royalty. You heard me... this tactic will only encourage more piracy. Stupid really !
Seeing as Apple does not stream music to random devices, they shouldn't have to pay a royalty.
I don't think I voiced my opinion about this last time it was brought up, but I reckon although the iPod makes enough profit so as not to pass that royalty onto the consumer (in price), I would still feel like I was paying that royalty, were I to buy an iPod.
If I felt like I paid a royalty, and was already downloading songs legally from iTunes anyway, I'd want to download more stuff illegally than I have before, just to make use of that royalty.
That's what I will do if I have to buy an iPod in the future with a pre-paid royalty. You heard me... this tactic will only encourage more piracy. Stupid really !
princealfie
Nov 29, 08:58 AM
Time for Apple to change the paradigm again. I think it's time for Apple to start putting together a music production house. Offer musicians the ability to go direct to iTunes with all the marketing necessary to promote their catalogs. I'm not very familiar with the music industry, but I "think" Apple is quite prepared to create their own studios, handle their own promotion/marketing and already have a HIGHLY efficient distribution system in place. Granted, they are not supposed to be creating music according to their Apple Music agreement, but if they just bought Apple Music outright it would make a great fit, eh?
B
Perhaps we need to have a iTube website eh?
B
Perhaps we need to have a iTube website eh?
SuperCachetes
Mar 4, 09:17 PM
Logic is my source. Society needs people, no people means no society. If there were no more babies society would eventually collapse.
Wow. Does your logic also tell you that 100% of society is gay? Do you think that only gay males were posting here, asking for a source?
Your example has no relevance to the actual world we live in. Even if every single homosexual on Earth decided not to raise a child (which is far from the truth), we do not all have to make/raise babies to propagate the species.
Wow. Does your logic also tell you that 100% of society is gay? Do you think that only gay males were posting here, asking for a source?
Your example has no relevance to the actual world we live in. Even if every single homosexual on Earth decided not to raise a child (which is far from the truth), we do not all have to make/raise babies to propagate the species.
DoFoT9
Aug 8, 04:47 AM
i am looking forward to this game. i will be getting the US version though. i haven't pre-ordered or anything, but i still might
me too!! i am So excited! i wont pre order or anything, might save for a steering wheel though. :)
me too!! i am So excited! i wont pre order or anything, might save for a steering wheel though. :)
MacRumors
Nov 28, 06:24 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Reuters reports (http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyID=2006-11-28T213349Z_01_N28267036_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEDIA-SUMMIT-UNIVERSALMUSIC-IPOD.xml&WTmodLoc=TechNewsHome_C2_technologyNews-1) that Universal Music Group Chief Executive said on Tuesday that they may seek a royalty from Apple for iPod sales:
"It would be a nice idea. We have a negotiation coming up not too far. I don't see why we wouldn't do that... but maybe not in the same way,"
Universal made news earlier this month (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/11/20061109124909.shtml) when it was reported that Microsoft had agreed to pay Universal Music a fee for every new Zune Music Player sold. Music studios, of course, currently get a cut from every song sold, but do not get any percentage of iPod sales.
Reuters reports (http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyID=2006-11-28T213349Z_01_N28267036_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEDIA-SUMMIT-UNIVERSALMUSIC-IPOD.xml&WTmodLoc=TechNewsHome_C2_technologyNews-1) that Universal Music Group Chief Executive said on Tuesday that they may seek a royalty from Apple for iPod sales:
"It would be a nice idea. We have a negotiation coming up not too far. I don't see why we wouldn't do that... but maybe not in the same way,"
Universal made news earlier this month (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/11/20061109124909.shtml) when it was reported that Microsoft had agreed to pay Universal Music a fee for every new Zune Music Player sold. Music studios, of course, currently get a cut from every song sold, but do not get any percentage of iPod sales.
pkson
Apr 5, 11:43 PM
I wonder if they're gonna add (slightly useless) stuff from iMovie like face recognition (It's a great idea, but it takes too long to go through all the clips..)
I hope FCP is just awesome beyond comprehension.
I hope FCP is just awesome beyond comprehension.
Peace
Aug 5, 05:15 PM
No MacRumors IRC channel?
http://www.macrumorslive.com/irc/login/
http://www.macrumorslive.com/irc/login/
Billy Boo Bob
Nov 28, 11:02 PM
1 Random artist finds inspiration and writes a song
2 Artist decides his song is so good that he/she records it in a professional studio (which he can rent) so the sound quality is superb
3 Artists logs into the iTMS and publishes his song
4 Artists gets $ from every song sold and the iTMS charges the artist for the distribution
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
2 Artist decides his song is so good that he/she records it in a professional studio (which he can rent) so the sound quality is superb
3 Artists logs into the iTMS and publishes his song
4 Artists gets $ from every song sold and the iTMS charges the artist for the distribution
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
walterwhite
Apr 25, 01:54 PM
Lawyers never seem to see or feel the Karma stick for nonsensical and litigious lawsuits that just end up effecting the rest of us... that do our best to be good human beings.
NJRonbo
Jun 12, 12:29 PM
Another potential problem...
How many iPhone 4s is Radio Shack going to
have in stock on first day of sale?
It's not like they are the Apple or AT&T store.
If I could be assured of a phone on day one
from Radio Shack the deal would be a pretty
good one.
How many iPhone 4s is Radio Shack going to
have in stock on first day of sale?
It's not like they are the Apple or AT&T store.
If I could be assured of a phone on day one
from Radio Shack the deal would be a pretty
good one.
shawnce
Jul 27, 04:11 PM
I never said otherwise.
You did say "successors" and "next generation" which I was pointing out they are not :D
You did say "successors" and "next generation" which I was pointing out they are not :D
afrowq
Apr 6, 08:50 PM
If your sector of the business has decided to move to Premier because it works for them, awesome- but don't paint it as an industry trent. Cause I've seen zero migration from FCP to PP in Toronto post houses. Pro editing is still a two horse race: AVID and FCP.
And I can't help but think how ironic it will be if the new FCS will be built on AV Foundation, which was pioneered on your hated "itoys".
http://www.philiphodgetts.com/2011/02/a-new-64-bit-final-cut-pro/
Never said it was an industry-wide trent (sic). I said "a lot of professionals" have made the switch.
Thanks.
And I can't help but think how ironic it will be if the new FCS will be built on AV Foundation, which was pioneered on your hated "itoys".
http://www.philiphodgetts.com/2011/02/a-new-64-bit-final-cut-pro/
Never said it was an industry-wide trent (sic). I said "a lot of professionals" have made the switch.
Thanks.
princealfie
Nov 29, 11:26 AM
I really don't harbor any hope that this could really be considered as royalty payment by the courts, it was just a little fantasy.
The real implication is on the moral front. You mentioned "group think" and I think that is the real danger for the record labels. If enough people were to convince themselves that the record label has grabbed enough money upfront, then they could step across the moral line that keeps them from piracy.
It's not law enforcement, or the actions of RIAA, that prevents the vast majority from crossing the line into piracy, it's their own built-in moral objection to it.
If the record labels remove this moral hurdle through their own actions, then there are not enough police officers, federal agencies, or private enforcement groups to even begin to stem the resulting piracy wave.
Uhhh... right. :eek:
The real implication is on the moral front. You mentioned "group think" and I think that is the real danger for the record labels. If enough people were to convince themselves that the record label has grabbed enough money upfront, then they could step across the moral line that keeps them from piracy.
It's not law enforcement, or the actions of RIAA, that prevents the vast majority from crossing the line into piracy, it's their own built-in moral objection to it.
If the record labels remove this moral hurdle through their own actions, then there are not enough police officers, federal agencies, or private enforcement groups to even begin to stem the resulting piracy wave.
Uhhh... right. :eek:
fivepoint
Apr 27, 03:00 PM
Really guys? We're going to argue it may be a forgery now. :rolleyes:
Can you name ONE person here who suggested its a forgery? Please provide the quote assuming of course you're not simply making crap up for the sake of argument... attempting to label people instead of discussing the actual issues. NAWWW!!!
BTW- just opened the same file- no layers. So you tell me what I'm missing here.
Am I a liar? I have no idea if you're doing it right, or if you are even using Illustrator, or if the PDF was replaced with a single-layer/object one. Just do a Google search for 'obama birth certificate layers' and you'll see that I'm not the only one who downloaded a file with multiple layers or objects or whatever.
Can you name ONE person here who suggested its a forgery? Please provide the quote assuming of course you're not simply making crap up for the sake of argument... attempting to label people instead of discussing the actual issues. NAWWW!!!
BTW- just opened the same file- no layers. So you tell me what I'm missing here.
Am I a liar? I have no idea if you're doing it right, or if you are even using Illustrator, or if the PDF was replaced with a single-layer/object one. Just do a Google search for 'obama birth certificate layers' and you'll see that I'm not the only one who downloaded a file with multiple layers or objects or whatever.
AppleInLVX
Apr 11, 01:00 PM
And you'll be complaining about battery life and the Android experience in a few days.
Be fair. I'm still using an HTC Hero in spite of the fact that I have Apple everything else. This little underpowered crappy screened, poorly designed device can do things my brother's iPhone 4 cannot. Really cool things. The fact the hardware sucks I will readily give you--however, the experience of the OS is doing to Apple what Apple is doing to RIM. iOS better damned well rock.
Be fair. I'm still using an HTC Hero in spite of the fact that I have Apple everything else. This little underpowered crappy screened, poorly designed device can do things my brother's iPhone 4 cannot. Really cool things. The fact the hardware sucks I will readily give you--however, the experience of the OS is doing to Apple what Apple is doing to RIM. iOS better damned well rock.
DakotaGuy
Aug 11, 02:51 PM
In terms of the global mobile market, it is.
The network coverage in America is just awful too. Until I moved to England, I thought that mobile communications were generally problematic. Now I realize that American cellular service just sucks. Even in NYC.
See now that is something I never understood, how the cell service can be so poor in a place like NYC, yet I was making calls on my CDMA phone in the middle of Wyoming this summer. In fact, there are few places in very unpopulated midwest and west that you can't get a decent signal at least with a CDMA phone. People that come here with GSM are out of luck anywhere except metro areas.
The network coverage in America is just awful too. Until I moved to England, I thought that mobile communications were generally problematic. Now I realize that American cellular service just sucks. Even in NYC.
See now that is something I never understood, how the cell service can be so poor in a place like NYC, yet I was making calls on my CDMA phone in the middle of Wyoming this summer. In fact, there are few places in very unpopulated midwest and west that you can't get a decent signal at least with a CDMA phone. People that come here with GSM are out of luck anywhere except metro areas.
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 02:57 PM
I agree that a carrier free ohone is the way to go but a carrier-subsudized phone is cheaper for the consumer (or at least appears that way in the beginning). I think there maybe networ issues as well. Doesn't Verizon or Nextel operate on a different freq than Cingular/AtT? Not sure.
I seem to be missing some information...:confused:
First, a locked phone is ONLY a problem if you have cdma. If you go GSM the "locking" is software based and can be unlocked. The networks here unlock it for you for a fee. (others do that too but that is another story...)
Secondly, if the "iPone" is GSM based you an sell the same phone both locked and unlocked. The question whether a phone will be "subsidized" is a deal between Apple and the carrier. Just how much the phone will be is up to the carrier.
As an example: Here in europe we have vendors that sell cellphones where you can pick which carrier you want and pay different prices for the phone dependent on what carrier and type of contract you pick. However, you can also buy the buy the phone without a contract (unlocked)
...so why do we have this discussion whether this or that carrier will carry it?
If the new "iPhone" is a hit everybody will carry it. Of course, assuming Apple allows it.
I seem to be missing some information...:confused:
First, a locked phone is ONLY a problem if you have cdma. If you go GSM the "locking" is software based and can be unlocked. The networks here unlock it for you for a fee. (others do that too but that is another story...)
Secondly, if the "iPone" is GSM based you an sell the same phone both locked and unlocked. The question whether a phone will be "subsidized" is a deal between Apple and the carrier. Just how much the phone will be is up to the carrier.
As an example: Here in europe we have vendors that sell cellphones where you can pick which carrier you want and pay different prices for the phone dependent on what carrier and type of contract you pick. However, you can also buy the buy the phone without a contract (unlocked)
...so why do we have this discussion whether this or that carrier will carry it?
If the new "iPhone" is a hit everybody will carry it. Of course, assuming Apple allows it.