gnasher729
Jul 18, 03:11 AM
If I'm going to spend all that time downloading a movie, I should at least be able to keep it. Bah.
There is another possibility that wouldn't require any downloads at all. In the UK, many newspapers come with free CDs or DVDs quite often. It would be possible to ship a DVD with the latest movies that way (and you can fit quite a bit of material in H264 format on a double sided DVD), and the rental from iTMS would just unlock the material on the DVD. If you put trailers and promotional material on the DVD in a way that can be accessed directly, this would make many people rent the movies.
And if you want to watch the movie again in a few years, just put in the DVD again and rent it again; no download needed. In the end, even today harddisks are not yet quite big enough that you would want to keep all your rented movies on your harddisk.
There is another possibility that wouldn't require any downloads at all. In the UK, many newspapers come with free CDs or DVDs quite often. It would be possible to ship a DVD with the latest movies that way (and you can fit quite a bit of material in H264 format on a double sided DVD), and the rental from iTMS would just unlock the material on the DVD. If you put trailers and promotional material on the DVD in a way that can be accessed directly, this would make many people rent the movies.
And if you want to watch the movie again in a few years, just put in the DVD again and rent it again; no download needed. In the end, even today harddisks are not yet quite big enough that you would want to keep all your rented movies on your harddisk.
MacPhilosopher
Sep 14, 12:08 PM
Toyota fixes all vehicles because they all have the potential to have dangerous problems.
Most iPhone owners have no problem whatsoever, and there's no danger at all to anyone.
So Toyota HAS to fix them all. It would be pointless for Apple to fix all iPhones in the field when most of them never have an issue needing a fix. But if you do have a problem, let them know and they will fix it for you for free. That's hardly a burden for such a non-dangerous situation.
We live in this ridiculous era of expectations. Apple comes out with a reasonable solution to a problem that affects a tiny percentage of users, and they get slammed for it. Hypocrisy.
Not to mention, there have been three or fewer known stuck accelerators in Toyotas out of millions of cars. I cannot imagine that there are at least that many for every manufacturer. This was a media fail for both Apple and Toyota, not a product fail.
Most iPhone owners have no problem whatsoever, and there's no danger at all to anyone.
So Toyota HAS to fix them all. It would be pointless for Apple to fix all iPhones in the field when most of them never have an issue needing a fix. But if you do have a problem, let them know and they will fix it for you for free. That's hardly a burden for such a non-dangerous situation.
We live in this ridiculous era of expectations. Apple comes out with a reasonable solution to a problem that affects a tiny percentage of users, and they get slammed for it. Hypocrisy.
Not to mention, there have been three or fewer known stuck accelerators in Toyotas out of millions of cars. I cannot imagine that there are at least that many for every manufacturer. This was a media fail for both Apple and Toyota, not a product fail.
ergle2
Aug 27, 07:55 PM
I was under the impression when the Core 2 Duos were released, but I hope very soon because they are a measurable improvement over the GMA950 which isn't as bad as everyone make it out to be.
The benchmarks I've seen suggest that it's in fact slower.
Take a look at http://www.pconline.com.cn/market/sh/shoppingguide/changshang/0608/844892.html
The Inquirer - I know, that bastion of rumor-mongering and unfounded allegation - has been reporting that OEMs are saying "it sucks".
Maybe this will be sorted out in later steppings, but these were awfully recent revsions...
The benchmarks I've seen suggest that it's in fact slower.
Take a look at http://www.pconline.com.cn/market/sh/shoppingguide/changshang/0608/844892.html
The Inquirer - I know, that bastion of rumor-mongering and unfounded allegation - has been reporting that OEMs are saying "it sucks".
Maybe this will be sorted out in later steppings, but these were awfully recent revsions...
Herdfan
Apr 20, 04:28 PM
Common Upgrades
1. Thunderbolt port
2. HDMI out
3. Sandybridge
Why would they put an HDMI port on it when they can just put the TB port on and then sell an adapter? Win-win for them.
1. Thunderbolt port
2. HDMI out
3. Sandybridge
Why would they put an HDMI port on it when they can just put the TB port on and then sell an adapter? Win-win for them.
Rodimus Prime
Apr 20, 10:33 PM
sorry, but wherever you got your information, it is not correct. fwiw, my last car, a vw passat, i sold with 312k miles on it. i bought it new at the dealer. still had the original clutch. your 100k replacement claim is bogus.
highway mileage is different due to gear ratios, not "physically locked". automatics use different ratios than manuals, even with same engine. shift speed is irrelevant for mileage.
and lastly, manuals do not cost more. every car i've ever owned, new or old, including my 2007 porsche 911, have come standard with a manual transmission. if you want automatic, that's an option you pay extra for, several $thousand in some cases. i've never owned an American car, so maybe the domestics are different, but your blanket statement is still wrong.
on my wife's mercedes, it needs automatic fluid change every 30k miles. dealer charges ~$300 for this. That's $1000 in service in 90k miles assuming nothing breaks. My manual transmission requires no service or fluid changes for 100k miles. $1000 in maintenance vs $0 in maintenance. automatic is far more expensive from a maintenance standpoint.
Umm porsche not exactly a valid argument of a car and that falls in the sports car catigory. Complete different field.
As for the clutchs 300k on a original clutch is pretty far unless you do heavy high way miles there.
Going heavy city lets see I had to replace the clutch in my old car at around 95k. My dad replaced the clutch in is Honda at 110k. Numbers I have been reading off the net about my current car clutches are going at 90-120k range. Now it does depend on driving. You are not going to find mean 300k on a original clutch. 100k is more the norm. Big time with city miles on it.
Also my car manual cost me more about 1000 bucks more but at it is a higher model as the model right below it is auto only. Manuals are being mostly reduced to sporter car lines/models now days leaving autos for everything else.
Yes they have different gear ratios comparing the 2 but for MPG sorry Manuals are losing out. They can not compete with CVS, computer controlled shifting and now adding in extra gears. Those factors are just adding up against Manuals and they can not keep up. Manuals are limited to human timing which losses to computer timing. And the shifting timing is not the speed the shift is done but at what RPM are at the given load. Computers can adjust to getting best MPG at a given load demand far better than a human which means they have better MPG.
highway mileage is different due to gear ratios, not "physically locked". automatics use different ratios than manuals, even with same engine. shift speed is irrelevant for mileage.
and lastly, manuals do not cost more. every car i've ever owned, new or old, including my 2007 porsche 911, have come standard with a manual transmission. if you want automatic, that's an option you pay extra for, several $thousand in some cases. i've never owned an American car, so maybe the domestics are different, but your blanket statement is still wrong.
on my wife's mercedes, it needs automatic fluid change every 30k miles. dealer charges ~$300 for this. That's $1000 in service in 90k miles assuming nothing breaks. My manual transmission requires no service or fluid changes for 100k miles. $1000 in maintenance vs $0 in maintenance. automatic is far more expensive from a maintenance standpoint.
Umm porsche not exactly a valid argument of a car and that falls in the sports car catigory. Complete different field.
As for the clutchs 300k on a original clutch is pretty far unless you do heavy high way miles there.
Going heavy city lets see I had to replace the clutch in my old car at around 95k. My dad replaced the clutch in is Honda at 110k. Numbers I have been reading off the net about my current car clutches are going at 90-120k range. Now it does depend on driving. You are not going to find mean 300k on a original clutch. 100k is more the norm. Big time with city miles on it.
Also my car manual cost me more about 1000 bucks more but at it is a higher model as the model right below it is auto only. Manuals are being mostly reduced to sporter car lines/models now days leaving autos for everything else.
Yes they have different gear ratios comparing the 2 but for MPG sorry Manuals are losing out. They can not compete with CVS, computer controlled shifting and now adding in extra gears. Those factors are just adding up against Manuals and they can not keep up. Manuals are limited to human timing which losses to computer timing. And the shifting timing is not the speed the shift is done but at what RPM are at the given load. Computers can adjust to getting best MPG at a given load demand far better than a human which means they have better MPG.
Greebazoid
Aug 25, 09:05 AM
I havent yet found a situation where the 1.66 Yonah in my mini is the problem. granted, I dont use photoshop and I have the full whack of 2GB RAM - my beef with the mini is when I boot into 'doze and wanna play games - that GMA950 just cant cut the mustard.
So what would make me rush out and buy a new mini (and put this one under the TV) would be a faster graphics processor.
Cant see that happening any time soon tho.
and whats with all the Prius cars? sheeeeshh.
;-)
So what would make me rush out and buy a new mini (and put this one under the TV) would be a faster graphics processor.
Cant see that happening any time soon tho.
and whats with all the Prius cars? sheeeeshh.
;-)
twoodcc
Oct 10, 10:54 AM
Yup, but actually almost at 4mio with points of my old team combined ;)
What I am shooting for is the #5 overall spot of the team, maybe by year end...
oh wow. nice.
hey it's good to have goals. right now my goal is to get into the top 20. second goal is 2 million points after that, which would put me around 11th or 12th
What I am shooting for is the #5 overall spot of the team, maybe by year end...
oh wow. nice.
hey it's good to have goals. right now my goal is to get into the top 20. second goal is 2 million points after that, which would put me around 11th or 12th
PurrBall
Apr 1, 01:06 PM
Screenshots please!
There's a menu when you click +, but other than that it looks the same to me.
279259
There's a menu when you click +, but other than that it looks the same to me.
279259
adrianblaine
Oct 24, 06:13 AM
APPLE STORE IS DOWN,
no joke
at least in Germany
Thumbs up :)
The only stores I found still up were the US and Canada
no joke
at least in Germany
Thumbs up :)
The only stores I found still up were the US and Canada
FFTT
Nov 25, 04:06 PM
Those slow old Core Duo minis put my $2700 Beige G3 tower to shame.
baryon
Apr 10, 03:42 AM
I don't understand why everyone seems to dislike the "new" iCal so much. Clearly, it was adopted by iPad iOS at first and now by Mac OS X Lion. Nothing new here. Nothing unexpected.
I don't remember people disliking/complaining about the iCal look on iPad at all. I tell ya, people complain just for the sake of complaining. What a crowd. :rolleyes:
Are you sure the iPad iCal looks the same as the Lion iCal? I'm pretty sure the iPad version is much less orange! I think that just by changing the color of the Lion version to something less fluorescent, it would be fine.
I don't remember people disliking/complaining about the iCal look on iPad at all. I tell ya, people complain just for the sake of complaining. What a crowd. :rolleyes:
Are you sure the iPad iCal looks the same as the Lion iCal? I'm pretty sure the iPad version is much less orange! I think that just by changing the color of the Lion version to something less fluorescent, it would be fine.
kadajawi
Sep 6, 10:13 AM
The 24" iMac can be upgraded to a 7600GT video card. Anyone know how decent that is? What about the x1600?
Somewhat decent, a bit faster than the 6600GT, less power consumption IIRC. Just look out for normal reviews in the PC territory, that should give you an idea. I think it would be a decent choice in a sub-$1000 computer... over that I'd be expecting something better. Still, the 6600GT which I have is pretty decent, can play most games at a good resolution and high quality settings.
I'm going to buy the basic Mini... the size makes the difference, since it's going to be used at different locations (every few months in a different country ;) ). A superdrive would be nice, but not neccessary.
Anyone knows if student discount and the "free printer" works with refurbs too?
Somewhat decent, a bit faster than the 6600GT, less power consumption IIRC. Just look out for normal reviews in the PC territory, that should give you an idea. I think it would be a decent choice in a sub-$1000 computer... over that I'd be expecting something better. Still, the 6600GT which I have is pretty decent, can play most games at a good resolution and high quality settings.
I'm going to buy the basic Mini... the size makes the difference, since it's going to be used at different locations (every few months in a different country ;) ). A superdrive would be nice, but not neccessary.
Anyone knows if student discount and the "free printer" works with refurbs too?
Evangelion
Jul 20, 11:36 AM
I have used Linux before, admit that I gave up with linux with Suse 9. The point I was trying to make with the package manager is that its not easy to go out and find something, every time you either have to find a package for your specific distribution or have it "built" for your distro. If you look at the way the mac works now I can drag the aduim icon to a remote drive, and from almost any machine that meets the basic specs I can then double click that app, even if its on a network drive, it will run, can you say the same for Linux?
Yes I can. Like I said, I just fire up the package-manager, find the app in question and click "Install". That really is all there is to it. No need to browse the web, looking for installers to download.
By unification I meant giving a constant user experience with singal points of administration, management ect. Some of my previous sessions with linux the applications did not always fully adhere to guidelines that were set out by KDE, whatever theme i choose, it didnt adapt to it for example.
Things are different these days. You are basing your judgement on SUSE9, which was released three years ago. During that three years, Linux has made HUGE progress. Things are chaning for the better, and they are changing FAST. I would say that Linux has changed more during the last three years than it did during the five years before 2003.
Note: that is NOT a bad thing for Apple. I bet that Apple would much rather co-exists with Linux than with Windows. There could never be a monopoly Linux could exploit to harm competitors, Microsoft could do that, and they have done it. Linux is open and follows established standards, Microsoft does not, if they can get away with it. Linux has no interest in destroying competitors, Microsoft does.
I fully admit im not a linux guru, and that things very likely have changed, but my perception is that every distro comes with a boat load of software on the DVD or via download, if you want to get something thats not listed it becomes a bit more difficult.
Well, SUSE does ship with tons of apps on the DVD (mainly so that it could be used wby people without broadband). But if you look at Ubuntu for example, it ships with relatively few apps. In a way, they have selected "best of breed"-apps for their distro. But if the user wants to have some additional piece of software, he can just fire up the package-manager, where he can choose from 16.000 pieces of software. The app the user is looking for is most likely listed there. If he's installing a piece of commercial software, they usually ship with nice installers that are not one bit harder to use than the ones in OS X or Windows.
There is the issue of building your own kernel
You have no need to do that. Seriously. I haven't built my own kernels in years. And when I did, it was because I wanted to do it, not because I had to do it.
Just because you CAN compile your own kernel does not mean that you are required to do so. The possibility is there for power-users.
The mac advantage is that its a bit easier to get, install and run applications than windows, and IMO linux as well.
I disagree. In Linux all the apps I could even want were just few mouse-clicks away. On OS X (and on Windows) I have to hunt for those apps in internet, only to find out that I'm expected to pay for them. I had none of those problems in Linux.
why is there a few big distros out there after years of linux development, why are there so many niche ones, and why do linux users argue with others over their favorite distro?
There are several distros, because one distro can't do it all. Want an OS that can be tweaked and customized to your exact needs and for your specific hardware? Obviously Ubuntu is not ideal then, but Gentoo is. Want a distro that "just works"? Ubuntu would be a good choice then. Want a distro with rock-solid reliablity? Try Debian. Want to run Red Hat servers, but don't want to pay for support? Use CentOS.
All those distros exist because there are users who find them to be better for their needs than the other distros are. And there's nothing wrong with that, since one size does not fit all. No-one could tell the users that "from now on, there will be just one distro". And even if someone could say that, the users who were unhappy with the "one true distro" could start their own distro if they wanted to.
Why do users argue which distro is best? For the same reason why Mac-users tell Linux and Windows-users that OS X is the best? For the same reason why BMW-drivers tell others that BMW is better than Merc is? People like to rationalise their choice of OS.
Diversity and flexability is one of the strenghts of Linux, its users know that, and having a single distro that does everything will counter that strength, they also know that.
They know that there can't be one distro that "does everything". Ubuntu wants to be easy to use OS that just works. Gentoo wnts to be as customizable, flexible and powerful as possible. It would be very, very hard for single OS to offer both of those ideoogies in one package. It would en up being "jack of all trades, master of none".
Take Mandrake (Mandiva these days) and Red Hat for example. Years ago Red Hat decided to use GNOME as their default desktop. There were bunch of Red Hat users who liked the distro, but liked KDE more than GNOME. So they took Red Hat, replaced GNOME with KDE and voila: Mandrake was born. From that point te two started to diverge. as independted OS'es.
Yes I can. Like I said, I just fire up the package-manager, find the app in question and click "Install". That really is all there is to it. No need to browse the web, looking for installers to download.
By unification I meant giving a constant user experience with singal points of administration, management ect. Some of my previous sessions with linux the applications did not always fully adhere to guidelines that were set out by KDE, whatever theme i choose, it didnt adapt to it for example.
Things are different these days. You are basing your judgement on SUSE9, which was released three years ago. During that three years, Linux has made HUGE progress. Things are chaning for the better, and they are changing FAST. I would say that Linux has changed more during the last three years than it did during the five years before 2003.
Note: that is NOT a bad thing for Apple. I bet that Apple would much rather co-exists with Linux than with Windows. There could never be a monopoly Linux could exploit to harm competitors, Microsoft could do that, and they have done it. Linux is open and follows established standards, Microsoft does not, if they can get away with it. Linux has no interest in destroying competitors, Microsoft does.
I fully admit im not a linux guru, and that things very likely have changed, but my perception is that every distro comes with a boat load of software on the DVD or via download, if you want to get something thats not listed it becomes a bit more difficult.
Well, SUSE does ship with tons of apps on the DVD (mainly so that it could be used wby people without broadband). But if you look at Ubuntu for example, it ships with relatively few apps. In a way, they have selected "best of breed"-apps for their distro. But if the user wants to have some additional piece of software, he can just fire up the package-manager, where he can choose from 16.000 pieces of software. The app the user is looking for is most likely listed there. If he's installing a piece of commercial software, they usually ship with nice installers that are not one bit harder to use than the ones in OS X or Windows.
There is the issue of building your own kernel
You have no need to do that. Seriously. I haven't built my own kernels in years. And when I did, it was because I wanted to do it, not because I had to do it.
Just because you CAN compile your own kernel does not mean that you are required to do so. The possibility is there for power-users.
The mac advantage is that its a bit easier to get, install and run applications than windows, and IMO linux as well.
I disagree. In Linux all the apps I could even want were just few mouse-clicks away. On OS X (and on Windows) I have to hunt for those apps in internet, only to find out that I'm expected to pay for them. I had none of those problems in Linux.
why is there a few big distros out there after years of linux development, why are there so many niche ones, and why do linux users argue with others over their favorite distro?
There are several distros, because one distro can't do it all. Want an OS that can be tweaked and customized to your exact needs and for your specific hardware? Obviously Ubuntu is not ideal then, but Gentoo is. Want a distro that "just works"? Ubuntu would be a good choice then. Want a distro with rock-solid reliablity? Try Debian. Want to run Red Hat servers, but don't want to pay for support? Use CentOS.
All those distros exist because there are users who find them to be better for their needs than the other distros are. And there's nothing wrong with that, since one size does not fit all. No-one could tell the users that "from now on, there will be just one distro". And even if someone could say that, the users who were unhappy with the "one true distro" could start their own distro if they wanted to.
Why do users argue which distro is best? For the same reason why Mac-users tell Linux and Windows-users that OS X is the best? For the same reason why BMW-drivers tell others that BMW is better than Merc is? People like to rationalise their choice of OS.
Diversity and flexability is one of the strenghts of Linux, its users know that, and having a single distro that does everything will counter that strength, they also know that.
They know that there can't be one distro that "does everything". Ubuntu wants to be easy to use OS that just works. Gentoo wnts to be as customizable, flexible and powerful as possible. It would be very, very hard for single OS to offer both of those ideoogies in one package. It would en up being "jack of all trades, master of none".
Take Mandrake (Mandiva these days) and Red Hat for example. Years ago Red Hat decided to use GNOME as their default desktop. There were bunch of Red Hat users who liked the distro, but liked KDE more than GNOME. So they took Red Hat, replaced GNOME with KDE and voila: Mandrake was born. From that point te two started to diverge. as independted OS'es.
bigpics
Mar 24, 12:57 PM
Dude, I'm sorry to inform you that what you're saying is an outright lie, and there are guys from the Lossless Compression Clan, called "Apple Lossless codec", "FLAC", and "APE", standing with heavy cluebats in their hands, ready to perform a painful reality sync on anyone thinking compression ALWAYS degrades quality.
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
Schizoid
Apr 21, 11:33 AM
Is Al Frankin running for president again? :rolleyes:
no, all politicians wave the "privacy" banner... they don't want their employers (i.e. you and me) to know where they've been.
no, all politicians wave the "privacy" banner... they don't want their employers (i.e. you and me) to know where they've been.
danielwsmithee
Nov 27, 03:09 PM
I'm sorry, why is their target audience dwindling?It all comes down to how much extra you are willing to pay for the increased monitor specification. Most will pay 20% very few will pay 75%.
maflynn
May 2, 05:10 PM
the iPadification of OSX continues.
Tymmz
Sep 1, 11:50 AM
I'm wondering if Apple would kill off the 17" if they did introduce a 23". I'm pretty sure now that the manufacturing cost difference between 17" and 20" is quite small.
i find 17'' way to small for a desktop computer.
i find 17'' way to small for a desktop computer.
yac_moda
Jul 19, 07:00 PM
No - they are actually losing market share.
"-- 50% of buyers are new to Mac."
The way to compare is not from one quarter to the next, but 3rd quarter with 3rd quarter (Very seasonal buying by education scews all comp companies number this way.) -- SO THEY HAVE HAD A HUGE JUMP :eek:
But we will have to wait to see exactly how much.
"-- 50% of buyers are new to Mac."
The way to compare is not from one quarter to the next, but 3rd quarter with 3rd quarter (Very seasonal buying by education scews all comp companies number this way.) -- SO THEY HAVE HAD A HUGE JUMP :eek:
But we will have to wait to see exactly how much.
azentropy
Sep 15, 09:57 AM
And I would recommend the iPhone 4 to everyone I know, almost all of whom use a case no matter what phone they have.
Let's drop the car analogy, it's causing more trouble than my point is worth. Apple did not fix the issue YET, but they said they would. What would you have them do in the meantime? What would CR have them do? No doubt a product recall which would be silly overkill. Apple's solution is simple, free, and easy.
CR wants them to include a free case in the box at the time of purchase. Isn't that a MORE "simple, free, and easy" solution than what Apple did and are now doing away with? Apple's solution is no longer "simple, free and easy" after Sep. 30th. BTW - it took 7 weeks for me to receive my case.
Let's drop the car analogy, it's causing more trouble than my point is worth. Apple did not fix the issue YET, but they said they would. What would you have them do in the meantime? What would CR have them do? No doubt a product recall which would be silly overkill. Apple's solution is simple, free, and easy.
CR wants them to include a free case in the box at the time of purchase. Isn't that a MORE "simple, free, and easy" solution than what Apple did and are now doing away with? Apple's solution is no longer "simple, free and easy" after Sep. 30th. BTW - it took 7 weeks for me to receive my case.
SciFrog
Mar 23, 06:06 PM
Hopefully the bigadv will switch very soon to SMP2, they have much better restart rates. I also loose the unit almost everytime if I stop it or reboot...
swingerofbirch
Jul 19, 04:55 PM
I've been listening live for a while and they are very tight lipped but they just said that they believe that cell phones are poor MP3 players compared to the iPod (I guess including their own cobranded cell phones?!!?). They said they realize it wont always be the case that iPods are superior to cell phones, and don't think we don't realize that etc, as if to suggest phone iPod integration.
Sony is with Ericsson.
I believe Nokia and Microsoft have some sort of alliance.
And we all know Apple for the second time decided to hitch their wagon to Motorola with the co-branded phone.
Who else is there? LG, Siemens, Samsung? Or would they do it alone? How hard can it be to make a cell phone?
Sony is with Ericsson.
I believe Nokia and Microsoft have some sort of alliance.
And we all know Apple for the second time decided to hitch their wagon to Motorola with the co-branded phone.
Who else is there? LG, Siemens, Samsung? Or would they do it alone? How hard can it be to make a cell phone?
carmenodie
Apr 19, 11:15 AM
the 27 imac is a beast!!!!!
God I wish I had the money to get it.
God I wish I had the money to get it.
trevorlsciact
May 2, 08:17 PM
All you have to do is drag .app in trash then instead of "empty trash", use secure empty trash so it can find the rest of the files:D
Unless I am very mistaken, that is not how that works.
Unless I am very mistaken, that is not how that works.
