pyramid6
Apr 26, 01:29 PM
It mostly has to do with if it is confusing. Apple has a trade mark on "App Store" to sell applications through an online store. Amazon is using "Appstore" and is selling applications through an online store. Apple has a pretty strong case that Amazon is infringing on their trademark. If Amazon used "Appstore" for a chain of tire rotating store, Amazon could probably be in the clear. As it stands they are too close in intended use. Microsofts strategy is to invalidate the trademark. It's up to the USPTO to decide on the trademark.
3N16MA
Mar 25, 03:53 PM
Looks better than any racing sim on the Wii.
razzmatazz
Aug 6, 09:58 PM
how long is the keynote?
They last about an hour to 2 hours
They last about an hour to 2 hours
odyssey924
Apr 13, 12:16 AM
Here's the deal...(and I just realized that the way this is written might make it look like I have earlier posts in this thread. I don't. I'm jumping in right here.)
The reason that I think pros fear "dumbed down" isn't so much because they want something that is difficult to use, but rather because sometimes making difficult things easy makes things that were previously easy difficult, or impossible.
So just this week I had to help somebody with an iMovie problem. There was a part where they had 3 overlapping audio tracks. Movie audio, voiceover, and music. Try as they might, and try as I might, we could not get the movie audio to actually go away -- even though we had set it's volume level to "0%."
Oh...and did I mention that they're on a white iBook? Fine machine, but a little slow. So I copy their iMovie stuff onto an external drive so we can look at it on my Core i7 iMac instead.
Except iMovie on my iMac won't recognize the project on an external drive. I know that supposedly iMovie is supposed to...but it won't work. So I have to copy the files onto my iMac, and then iMovie magically sees them...because they're in the spot that iMovie wants files to be in.
Well the only way to get the clips to work right that I could come up with, was to actually run all their clips through Quicktime 7 and just delete the audio track off them. Voila! No audio track for iMovie to play, when it's not supposed to.
My point is that I spent 30 minutes dinking around with the "Easy" iMovie to do what would have taken me 10 seconds to do in Final Cut. (Select audio. Delete.)
And that's pretty much my experience every time I get lulled into trying to run a quick project through iMovie. Everything seems to be going well, I'm even sort of enjoying myself (Don't tell anyone), then I hit a snag or a wall...bump up into some limitation of iMovie that there isn't a very good work-around to...and wish that I'd just used Final Cut to begin with.
So while I agree that there are those who want pro tools to be difficult simply for the sake of having a high barrier of entry...
...I also think there are a ton of us that are just afraid that the cost of these new and handy features will be that some of the things we rely on doing, especially things that are a little "hackish," will become difficult/impossible. In the name of simplicity.
It's like my iPhone. I love it to pieces, and I don't plan to have any other type of phone any time soon, but sometimes I wish for a few more advanced features...features that are available (Usually through third-party tools) on Android. Instead I'm stuck hoping and wishing and praying that Apple will implement them.
+1 here. Every time I've tried to use iMovie for a "quick" edit it always ends in disasters like this. In my case, I was trying to move some music around and time my edits with the music. It was really infuriating trying to do this in iMovie compared to how fast I could have done it in FCP. I guess we'll have wait till Apple posts more info or we get it in our hands to really tell if it can be run like the current FCP.
The reason that I think pros fear "dumbed down" isn't so much because they want something that is difficult to use, but rather because sometimes making difficult things easy makes things that were previously easy difficult, or impossible.
So just this week I had to help somebody with an iMovie problem. There was a part where they had 3 overlapping audio tracks. Movie audio, voiceover, and music. Try as they might, and try as I might, we could not get the movie audio to actually go away -- even though we had set it's volume level to "0%."
Oh...and did I mention that they're on a white iBook? Fine machine, but a little slow. So I copy their iMovie stuff onto an external drive so we can look at it on my Core i7 iMac instead.
Except iMovie on my iMac won't recognize the project on an external drive. I know that supposedly iMovie is supposed to...but it won't work. So I have to copy the files onto my iMac, and then iMovie magically sees them...because they're in the spot that iMovie wants files to be in.
Well the only way to get the clips to work right that I could come up with, was to actually run all their clips through Quicktime 7 and just delete the audio track off them. Voila! No audio track for iMovie to play, when it's not supposed to.
My point is that I spent 30 minutes dinking around with the "Easy" iMovie to do what would have taken me 10 seconds to do in Final Cut. (Select audio. Delete.)
And that's pretty much my experience every time I get lulled into trying to run a quick project through iMovie. Everything seems to be going well, I'm even sort of enjoying myself (Don't tell anyone), then I hit a snag or a wall...bump up into some limitation of iMovie that there isn't a very good work-around to...and wish that I'd just used Final Cut to begin with.
So while I agree that there are those who want pro tools to be difficult simply for the sake of having a high barrier of entry...
...I also think there are a ton of us that are just afraid that the cost of these new and handy features will be that some of the things we rely on doing, especially things that are a little "hackish," will become difficult/impossible. In the name of simplicity.
It's like my iPhone. I love it to pieces, and I don't plan to have any other type of phone any time soon, but sometimes I wish for a few more advanced features...features that are available (Usually through third-party tools) on Android. Instead I'm stuck hoping and wishing and praying that Apple will implement them.
+1 here. Every time I've tried to use iMovie for a "quick" edit it always ends in disasters like this. In my case, I was trying to move some music around and time my edits with the music. It was really infuriating trying to do this in iMovie compared to how fast I could have done it in FCP. I guess we'll have wait till Apple posts more info or we get it in our hands to really tell if it can be run like the current FCP.
ingenious
Aug 20, 02:39 PM
As far as sharing in your range. Again a waste of battery to support this. I have what I wnat ton hear for the most part. I don't much care to drain my battery searching other users' libs (that will come and go as they wander around and in and out of range - oh great, I found a cool Streets video I don't have!! Oh wait he just left range!!!), it's short-lived enough already.
I think a better idea is just a listing of what others around you are listening to. You can choose (by using the (->) button like in iTunes) to look it up and either buy it or listen to a preview.
I think a better idea is just a listing of what others around you are listening to. You can choose (by using the (->) button like in iTunes) to look it up and either buy it or listen to a preview.
remmy
Mar 18, 09:06 AM
If we let Quadafi "win" which he would, by slaughtering or not...heck it's civil war right? They have a right to kill eachother in war and then the loser will face crimes for it as usual.
.
They do not have the right to kill each other.
Also why do we need two threads, one with a over the top title which implies allot before anything has happened?
.
They do not have the right to kill each other.
Also why do we need two threads, one with a over the top title which implies allot before anything has happened?
Thunderhawks
Apr 19, 11:15 AM
I heard a rumor that these will not have a retina display or BluRay. No, seriously. They won't. My source is never wrong.
Heard this from a friend of a friend who knows an analyst who is predicting these will be WHITE and Verizon AND Toys "R" Us will have them!
Heard this from a friend of a friend who knows an analyst who is predicting these will be WHITE and Verizon AND Toys "R" Us will have them!
Lukeit
Mar 31, 10:58 AM
I won't get a chance to get this installed for a few days but one of the things I noticed about the new version of Safari was that if you dragged a picture from Safari onto your desktop or a folder that it would create a link rather than downloading the picture to that folder. Can anyone with DP2 confirm this is still the case?
Nope... that has been fixed !!!1 Now it works properly and you get to drag a picture!
Nope... that has been fixed !!!1 Now it works properly and you get to drag a picture!
poppe
Sep 1, 12:30 PM
My Guess:
iMac 17" - 1299
1.83 GHz
512MB RAM
160 SATA
8x DL
ATI x1600 - 128
iMac 20" - 1699
2.0 GHz upgradable to 2.16
512MB RAM
250 SATA
8x DL
ATI x1600 128 upgradable to 256 (As is already)
iMac 23": 1900 x 1200 - 1999
2.16 GHz upgradable to 2.33
1 GB Standard
250 SATA upgradable to 500 (as 17" and 20" is)
8x DL
ATI x1600 256
FW 800
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't say upgradable on 17" and 20" hard drives because we already know that.
In a dream world I'd say the 23" vCard would go to the x1800 or something
iMac 17" - 1299
1.83 GHz
512MB RAM
160 SATA
8x DL
ATI x1600 - 128
iMac 20" - 1699
2.0 GHz upgradable to 2.16
512MB RAM
250 SATA
8x DL
ATI x1600 128 upgradable to 256 (As is already)
iMac 23": 1900 x 1200 - 1999
2.16 GHz upgradable to 2.33
1 GB Standard
250 SATA upgradable to 500 (as 17" and 20" is)
8x DL
ATI x1600 256
FW 800
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't say upgradable on 17" and 20" hard drives because we already know that.
In a dream world I'd say the 23" vCard would go to the x1800 or something
weg
Aug 16, 02:06 PM
If they use WiFi with the new iPods, they'll need a chunky battery. When I still used a PDA, the battery life nose dived when you turned on the WiFi. . .
My Nintendo DS lasts pretty long, even if I'm using WiFi.. and if it's just for Music download, WiFi won't be turned on all the time
My Nintendo DS lasts pretty long, even if I'm using WiFi.. and if it's just for Music download, WiFi won't be turned on all the time
Killyp
Aug 7, 05:26 AM
It says Vista 2.0, not 2...
Can we please talk about the subject of the thread, not about shagging farmyard animals?
Can we please talk about the subject of the thread, not about shagging farmyard animals?
Blakeco123
Apr 12, 08:25 PM
I really hope this update is as good as they say. If it is I'll switch from FCE to FCP
moondog190
Feb 25, 09:03 AM
That's no late 2008 MacBook Pro. It can't be, because the late 2008 MacBook Pro was the first to get a unibody design. That might be the early 2008 MacBook Pro with the old classic design. Sorry to say that ;)
Nice setup though! :)
%IMG_DESC_14%
%IMG_DESC_15%
%IMG_DESC_16%
%IMG_DESC_17%
%IMG_DESC_18%
%IMG_DESC_19%
Nice setup though! :)
shawnce
Jul 19, 10:38 PM
Interesting... (http://www.macnn.com/articles/06/07/19/apple.grows.16.in.us/)
Doctor Q
Jul 18, 01:58 AM
I wouldn't rule out downloading a movie, even for limited use, but the price would have to make it worthwhile. It'll have to compete with Netflix, my local video rental store, cable TV, and going to the movie theater. A tough market but a good population of potential customers.
faroZ06
Apr 3, 01:31 AM
Agreed. Those ads killed my ability to defend Apple fandom by saying the snooty arrogance is just some peoples baseless perception.
Embarrassing.
There's an app for that was kinda good.
But if you don't have an iPhone, you can't do this? It just makes it look like a useless device.
Actually, I'm perfectly happy without any Apple stuff besides my iMac. I didn't have an iPod until a week ago, so I was using some tape player for music :D mainly because I didn't care enough about randomly listening to music to buy an iPod.
Embarrassing.
There's an app for that was kinda good.
But if you don't have an iPhone, you can't do this? It just makes it look like a useless device.
Actually, I'm perfectly happy without any Apple stuff besides my iMac. I didn't have an iPod until a week ago, so I was using some tape player for music :D mainly because I didn't care enough about randomly listening to music to buy an iPod.
ffakr
Nov 25, 05:32 PM
Dell is setting the pricing. It's not about the vendor costs.. it's all about what vendors think customers will pay.
I'm shopping for one to two compution nodes right now and the Dell Quad-Core 1U servers price at a bit cheaper at 1.86GHz [quad] vs. the dual-core system at 3.0GHz. Since 1.86GHz is very near the low end of the processor line, I'd suspect that we'll see the high end quad-cores sell for much more than the high-end Dual-cores. It won't matter what the part costs are [they are much closer]. There's too much extra value to end users who really need to run a lot of threads.
For most people, one Core2 Duo is plenty of horsepower for a long, long time. I'm typing on my new MacBookPro Core2 right now. One downside with the Core2Duo.. the thermal envelope IS higher than the Yonah CoreDuo processors. This thing gets pretty loud when the cpu [and the fans] spin up. It is wicked fast though [15" model with 2.33GHz]
This is one reason why I don't suspect we'll see a Core2Duo in a Mini any time soon. First off, the cpu is way too fast for a system with Integrated grpahics (unless you want a mini computation node). Unfortunately, Apple hasn't listened to me for the last few years so they haven't built in X-Grid support into all their consumer apps. If they had, your Mac MediaCenter could invisibly speed up the rendering of your iMovie project that you do on your iMac or Macbook. ;-) [as I always tell Apple, I hold no IP on potentially good ideas I provide publicly to Apple, go take them]
For most people, the towers are way too fast. I've set up a few dual-dual 2.66GHz machines and they are wicked fast. It really is difficult to slow them down even when you go out of your way to try (like Mathematica, HandBrake, a fork-bomb, and several other apps).
For me at home, the only reason I'd want a Tower would be for the X1900 video option. The Core2Duo iMac is more than powerful enough in every other way (even the occasional video work). I don't loose money when I'm waiting on a computational cycle though (like some of the people here)
At work, it's a different story. I'm looking for a very small computational cluster or One large computational node and 4 CPU cores may not be enough for multiple users.
Quad Dual-Core Opterons are too expensive so the Dual Quad-Core Intel systems would be perfect. The only problem is, at 1.66 and 1.83GHz, I'd likely be better off with 2 dual-core Core2Xeons running at 3.0GHz because they'd retire threads much faster and they run cooler (our chiller is over 20 years old so heat is a big issue). The Quad-Core Xeon chips run back up into the thermal range of the old P4 family chips. My whole excuse for new funding is to replace cluster of 22 single processor cluster nodes (ranging from 750MHz to 1GHz Athlons).
BTW.. it was some stupid ffakr who predicted in the last thread on this topic that we wouldn't see quad-core mac towers at this time. :-)
I still suspect we'll see Quad-Core chips in one or two high end Tower models only and that will happen at MWSF at the earliest. I also think that it is no coincidence that Apple hasn't replaced the old PPC XServe Cluster Node yet. :-) Considering the relatively low part cost if moving from dual to quad cores.. I suspect that Apple will return the XServe Cluster Node and it may be Dual quad-core only.
ffakr
I'm shopping for one to two compution nodes right now and the Dell Quad-Core 1U servers price at a bit cheaper at 1.86GHz [quad] vs. the dual-core system at 3.0GHz. Since 1.86GHz is very near the low end of the processor line, I'd suspect that we'll see the high end quad-cores sell for much more than the high-end Dual-cores. It won't matter what the part costs are [they are much closer]. There's too much extra value to end users who really need to run a lot of threads.
For most people, one Core2 Duo is plenty of horsepower for a long, long time. I'm typing on my new MacBookPro Core2 right now. One downside with the Core2Duo.. the thermal envelope IS higher than the Yonah CoreDuo processors. This thing gets pretty loud when the cpu [and the fans] spin up. It is wicked fast though [15" model with 2.33GHz]
This is one reason why I don't suspect we'll see a Core2Duo in a Mini any time soon. First off, the cpu is way too fast for a system with Integrated grpahics (unless you want a mini computation node). Unfortunately, Apple hasn't listened to me for the last few years so they haven't built in X-Grid support into all their consumer apps. If they had, your Mac MediaCenter could invisibly speed up the rendering of your iMovie project that you do on your iMac or Macbook. ;-) [as I always tell Apple, I hold no IP on potentially good ideas I provide publicly to Apple, go take them]
For most people, the towers are way too fast. I've set up a few dual-dual 2.66GHz machines and they are wicked fast. It really is difficult to slow them down even when you go out of your way to try (like Mathematica, HandBrake, a fork-bomb, and several other apps).
For me at home, the only reason I'd want a Tower would be for the X1900 video option. The Core2Duo iMac is more than powerful enough in every other way (even the occasional video work). I don't loose money when I'm waiting on a computational cycle though (like some of the people here)
At work, it's a different story. I'm looking for a very small computational cluster or One large computational node and 4 CPU cores may not be enough for multiple users.
Quad Dual-Core Opterons are too expensive so the Dual Quad-Core Intel systems would be perfect. The only problem is, at 1.66 and 1.83GHz, I'd likely be better off with 2 dual-core Core2Xeons running at 3.0GHz because they'd retire threads much faster and they run cooler (our chiller is over 20 years old so heat is a big issue). The Quad-Core Xeon chips run back up into the thermal range of the old P4 family chips. My whole excuse for new funding is to replace cluster of 22 single processor cluster nodes (ranging from 750MHz to 1GHz Athlons).
BTW.. it was some stupid ffakr who predicted in the last thread on this topic that we wouldn't see quad-core mac towers at this time. :-)
I still suspect we'll see Quad-Core chips in one or two high end Tower models only and that will happen at MWSF at the earliest. I also think that it is no coincidence that Apple hasn't replaced the old PPC XServe Cluster Node yet. :-) Considering the relatively low part cost if moving from dual to quad cores.. I suspect that Apple will return the XServe Cluster Node and it may be Dual quad-core only.
ffakr
islanders
Dec 30, 11:25 AM
People would complain about not being able to drive it in hot weather and having to buy expensive Apple iWax.
no it would run on methane gas, would only be able to turn to the left, and you couldn't roll down the windows :eek:
no it would run on methane gas, would only be able to turn to the left, and you couldn't roll down the windows :eek:
czardmitri
Nov 28, 02:16 PM
one of the key differences between the xbox and zune. is that microsoft only had to contend with 2 other players in the video game indistry. the ipod maybe top. but there are hundred of other companies to battle first just to reach second place. and also phone companies. spending money maynot help them like in the case of the xbox.
The main difference (as I understand it) is that MS can at least attempt to make up for their losses on the sales of xBoxes from the games that are licensed for xBox. They can't do the same with music for the money they're losing on each Zune sold. Apple's margin on music is slim; they make money on the iPods.
The main difference (as I understand it) is that MS can at least attempt to make up for their losses on the sales of xBoxes from the games that are licensed for xBox. They can't do the same with music for the money they're losing on each Zune sold. Apple's margin on music is slim; they make money on the iPods.
MacMan86
Apr 21, 04:05 PM
But it doesn't need to be as persistent and as precise as it is for that to work. My history of last year is not relevent. The file should be flushed/cleaned out after a certain time. After a point, the data isn't useful to the phone.
The data is nearly always useful to the phone. Cell towers don't move very often, cached data would very rarely be out of date. If you go back to a city you visited several months back but have no data connection, the cached cell tower data could still be used to find your rough location.
It also shouldn't be backed-up. The device starts with a new DB when its new, no reason it shouldn't start over when you restore. That would alleviate some of the privacy concerns at least.
I would agree, but there's a hell of a lot of other information in an iTunes backup (geotagged photos, passwords in clear text in plist files stored by 3rd party apps who don't bother to use the Keychain, SMS messages, call logs etc) and if you're worried about privacy you should already have ticked the 'Encrypt backups' box - that's all it takes. I'd say all the other data in an unencrypted backup is just as, if not more, valuable.
And if this same file isn't what is being sent to Apple, and you have information indicating this, then the summary of the article that makes it sound like it is should be fixed.
It says so quite clearly at the top of Levinson's article which this MR article links to (https://alexlevinson.wordpress.com/2011/04/21/3-major-issues-with-the-latest-iphone-tracking-discovery/):
1) Apple is not collecting this data.
And to suggest otherwise is completely misrepresenting Apple. I quote:
Apple is gathering this data, but it�s clearly intentional, as the database is being restored across backups, and even device migrations.
Apple is not harvesting this data from your device. This is data on the device that you as the customer purchased and unless they can show concrete evidence supporting this claim � network traffic analysis of connections to Apple servers � I rebut this claim in full. Through my research in this field and all traffic analysis I have performed, not once have I seen this data traverse a network.
If the phone sends Apple a cell tower ID and gets back a lat/lon of that tower (this is being done anonymously according to T&C's), what is the benefit to Apple of sending this log back to them? They've already got the information from the calls to their servers, no need to get it twice.
The data is nearly always useful to the phone. Cell towers don't move very often, cached data would very rarely be out of date. If you go back to a city you visited several months back but have no data connection, the cached cell tower data could still be used to find your rough location.
It also shouldn't be backed-up. The device starts with a new DB when its new, no reason it shouldn't start over when you restore. That would alleviate some of the privacy concerns at least.
I would agree, but there's a hell of a lot of other information in an iTunes backup (geotagged photos, passwords in clear text in plist files stored by 3rd party apps who don't bother to use the Keychain, SMS messages, call logs etc) and if you're worried about privacy you should already have ticked the 'Encrypt backups' box - that's all it takes. I'd say all the other data in an unencrypted backup is just as, if not more, valuable.
And if this same file isn't what is being sent to Apple, and you have information indicating this, then the summary of the article that makes it sound like it is should be fixed.
It says so quite clearly at the top of Levinson's article which this MR article links to (https://alexlevinson.wordpress.com/2011/04/21/3-major-issues-with-the-latest-iphone-tracking-discovery/):
1) Apple is not collecting this data.
And to suggest otherwise is completely misrepresenting Apple. I quote:
Apple is gathering this data, but it�s clearly intentional, as the database is being restored across backups, and even device migrations.
Apple is not harvesting this data from your device. This is data on the device that you as the customer purchased and unless they can show concrete evidence supporting this claim � network traffic analysis of connections to Apple servers � I rebut this claim in full. Through my research in this field and all traffic analysis I have performed, not once have I seen this data traverse a network.
If the phone sends Apple a cell tower ID and gets back a lat/lon of that tower (this is being done anonymously according to T&C's), what is the benefit to Apple of sending this log back to them? They've already got the information from the calls to their servers, no need to get it twice.
iPadztr
Mar 25, 03:52 PM
Who wouldve thought :). GG
Built
Apr 2, 11:58 PM
Ummm - the reason probably is shown on the 1400 post "light bleed" thread. People WANT the thing bad so they don't "return" it... they get it "swapped". Quite a few people over there are on their 4th to 5th swap
(which boggles my mind frankly) in a search to get one with no bleed.
They all seem to have it to varying degrees but I have to hand it to Apple for (so far) not claiming this is "in spec" to shut down all these
"swaps".
Apple probably lists all these as "exchanges" and therefore they don't count as "returns". Makes the customer happy and makes them look good in the press. Everybody wins.
Towards the end of the huge thread over at Apple.com people are being told the same thing from the reps when they call... that Apple "is looking into the qc issue on this batch of iPads and hopes to resolve the issue". That's good news for everybody.
...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.
(which boggles my mind frankly) in a search to get one with no bleed.
They all seem to have it to varying degrees but I have to hand it to Apple for (so far) not claiming this is "in spec" to shut down all these
"swaps".
Apple probably lists all these as "exchanges" and therefore they don't count as "returns". Makes the customer happy and makes them look good in the press. Everybody wins.
Towards the end of the huge thread over at Apple.com people are being told the same thing from the reps when they call... that Apple "is looking into the qc issue on this batch of iPads and hopes to resolve the issue". That's good news for everybody.
...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.
ipearx
Aug 7, 05:48 AM
An iPhone, not as a cell phone, but as a landline skype style wifi cordless phone to go with iChat. Wouldn't that make sense for Apple to make? Ties in with their computers & iLife, would work in all countries, and would be easy, and possibly cheap for them to make.
Steve Jobs, would probably want want to make a phone that transitions seamlessly between indoor wifi and the cell networks.
Steve Jobs, would probably want want to make a phone that transitions seamlessly between indoor wifi and the cell networks.
lordonuthin
Apr 4, 07:25 PM
congrats to whiterabbit for 12 million points!
Thanks.
Thanks.
No comments:
Post a Comment