wshields
Apr 17, 10:37 AM
Haha, a pre order event? Wow, what a balls up.
Apple rapped them over the knuckles for allegedly withholding stock and rightly so. I wonder if this is the result.
Apple rapped them over the knuckles for allegedly withholding stock and rightly so. I wonder if this is the result.
Lotso
Mar 18, 02:29 PM
Still there. They just cranked it up so that it covers all of us. ;)
Now the question is, what is reality, and how is it being distorted? :eek:
Now the question is, what is reality, and how is it being distorted? :eek:
chillywilly
Sep 12, 02:26 PM
I get iTunes error when I try to open iTunes 7 after installation. Don't know what to do.
Are you on Windows? If so, then do an uninstall, reboot and then reinstall.
Also, try uninstalling QuickTime if there are problems still.
Are you on Windows? If so, then do an uninstall, reboot and then reinstall.
Also, try uninstalling QuickTime if there are problems still.
prady16
Sep 6, 08:30 AM
Does it come with a in-built tv tuner or do we have to get an external one?
citizenzen
Mar 29, 08:59 AM
It's fascinating how quickly the Democrat party has turned into the party of war...
A couple of points, 5P ...
1. I have never supported this latest military action. All I did in my posts was to point to the law that allows Obama to do what he did. It's the same law that's been used to justify numerous military actions since it's passing by both Democrats and Republicans alike. Pointing to a law and saying "this" is why something is allowed is not the same as endorsing either the law or the action that it permits.
2. Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, and Bill Clinton are proof that Democrats have long been willing and able to use the military. The unfortunate truth is that both parties have been "parties of war" to this very day.
A couple of points, 5P ...
1. I have never supported this latest military action. All I did in my posts was to point to the law that allows Obama to do what he did. It's the same law that's been used to justify numerous military actions since it's passing by both Democrats and Republicans alike. Pointing to a law and saying "this" is why something is allowed is not the same as endorsing either the law or the action that it permits.
2. Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, and Bill Clinton are proof that Democrats have long been willing and able to use the military. The unfortunate truth is that both parties have been "parties of war" to this very day.
Mac Fly (film)
Jul 22, 10:52 PM
..ok I will!
tattoo girls - Tribal Tattoos
Tribal Tattoo design,Tribal
Hand Tattoo Latest Designs For
sexy tattoo, sexy girls tattoo
love and hearts tattoo.
tribal letter tattoos designs.
Flower Tattoos. Today tribal
Tattoos For Girls With Tribal
Tribal Tattoos For Girls
Tattoo designs tribal star
tribal tattoo designs.
Girls right back Tattoo circle
Girls Tribal Tattoo Design on
PowerGamerX
Oct 10, 03:53 PM
How are going about mounting the powerbrick behind the desk? I would like mine off my desk aswell.
Well, I just did it, I used green strip putty (I can't remember the name), looks like this only a pine-green
http://www.barrule.com/Workshop/images/products/sylmasta/DURO.gif
I mounted it to the back of the desk, worked really well, just take 2 very small (half inch or so) peices and stick it on. It cleans up pretty easily off plastic, just don't try putting it on dry wall or plaster. (Hence, why I put it on the back of the desk, it wont come off very well, but who looks at the back of the desk?)
Well, I just did it, I used green strip putty (I can't remember the name), looks like this only a pine-green
http://www.barrule.com/Workshop/images/products/sylmasta/DURO.gif
I mounted it to the back of the desk, worked really well, just take 2 very small (half inch or so) peices and stick it on. It cleans up pretty easily off plastic, just don't try putting it on dry wall or plaster. (Hence, why I put it on the back of the desk, it wont come off very well, but who looks at the back of the desk?)
chuckles:)
Sep 4, 04:19 PM
Has anyone considered that apple might not be realeasing the wide screen super secret video ipod because it dosn't exist?
lets all think for a second...
1) touch screens are weak, soft, and matte, not iPod at all
2) they get printy and scratched very easily
3) they would go through oodles of batter power
4) Apple would not make the thing bigger just to hold the extra battery
5) battery life would STINK
6) touch screen starts to complicate the interface, goes against apple's easy as pie rule
7) the thing would have to cost a fortune
please dont kill me, but does anyone have proof, or is it just a dream of perfection?
p.s. does anyone know if they will webcast the event?
lets all think for a second...
1) touch screens are weak, soft, and matte, not iPod at all
2) they get printy and scratched very easily
3) they would go through oodles of batter power
4) Apple would not make the thing bigger just to hold the extra battery
5) battery life would STINK
6) touch screen starts to complicate the interface, goes against apple's easy as pie rule
7) the thing would have to cost a fortune
please dont kill me, but does anyone have proof, or is it just a dream of perfection?
p.s. does anyone know if they will webcast the event?
kuebby
Apr 12, 09:54 PM
And do you know how long it takes to assemble one?
I'm not sure, though I am sure it's a closely guarded secret, considering how secretive Foxconn is in general. I heard the other day that an AP photographer was beaten by their security guards after they caught him taking pictures near the factory, though I can't seem to find the story now.
I'm not sure, though I am sure it's a closely guarded secret, considering how secretive Foxconn is in general. I heard the other day that an AP photographer was beaten by their security guards after they caught him taking pictures near the factory, though I can't seem to find the story now.
FasterQuieter
May 4, 10:06 PM
If it doesn't at all compromise the clarity/brightness/color of a (300ppi-ish) high-res display, great. If it does, no thanks.
BrianMojo
Sep 22, 12:49 PM
Last I checked this kind of anti-competitive action was illegal under monopoly laws...
Multimedia
Aug 9, 12:27 PM
When Phil announced the MacPro and the Xeon chip he stressed on an amazing performance per watt ratio. That sounded a lot like Steve introducing the MacBook Pro and iMac with the first Intel chips. At the time the performance per watt ratio was an important criteria for battery life on notebooks, which is apparently why the PowerBook never got a G5.
With the Xeons high perf/watt, should we be expecting them to be fitted in later MacBook and MacBook Pros?No. Mobiles get Merom processors which are made to get maximum performance on the go.
With the Xeons high perf/watt, should we be expecting them to be fitted in later MacBook and MacBook Pros?No. Mobiles get Merom processors which are made to get maximum performance on the go.
JackieTreehorn
Dec 4, 03:12 AM
Brilliant.
What do you want me to say that people haven't already voiced?
That The Beatles have received 7 Grammy Awards and 15 Ivor Novello Awards.
That they have been awarded 6 Diamond albums, as well as 24 Multi-Platinum albums, 39 Platinum albums and 45 Gold albums in the United States and in the UK they have 4 Multi-Platinum albums, 4 Platinum albums, 8 Gold albums and 1 Silver album?
The fact that you can just dismiss them is laughable but hey i don't want to upset you anymore than i have.
Oh and stop calling me son.
Madonna has sold more albums than Maria Callas. In fact, Britney Spears has sold more albums than Maria Callas. So you would call Madonna and Spears better singers than Callas.
McDonald's sells more meals per day than El Bulli does in a year: So you would call McDonald's a better restaurant than El Bulli.
The amount of sold items has got nothing to do with musical genius. Which most of the Beatles were very limited on.
Just wanted to point out the obvious flaw in your argumentation there, son.
What do you want me to say that people haven't already voiced?
That The Beatles have received 7 Grammy Awards and 15 Ivor Novello Awards.
That they have been awarded 6 Diamond albums, as well as 24 Multi-Platinum albums, 39 Platinum albums and 45 Gold albums in the United States and in the UK they have 4 Multi-Platinum albums, 4 Platinum albums, 8 Gold albums and 1 Silver album?
The fact that you can just dismiss them is laughable but hey i don't want to upset you anymore than i have.
Oh and stop calling me son.
Madonna has sold more albums than Maria Callas. In fact, Britney Spears has sold more albums than Maria Callas. So you would call Madonna and Spears better singers than Callas.
McDonald's sells more meals per day than El Bulli does in a year: So you would call McDonald's a better restaurant than El Bulli.
The amount of sold items has got nothing to do with musical genius. Which most of the Beatles were very limited on.
Just wanted to point out the obvious flaw in your argumentation there, son.
bpaluzzi
Apr 12, 06:57 AM
Private organisations cannot fine people. The RIAA has levied no fines against individuals. There have been lawsuits and settlements, but not fines. Also, the RIAA cannot bring criminal copyright infringement charges, only civil ones. As such, you can't say "you're criminals". Criminal copyright infringement is not something that is brought against the casual software downloader, it is something that is charged against individuals that are into piracy for profit.
And it's not theft, it's copyright infringement. Theft deprives the true owner of his possession, copyright infringement doesn't.
At least if we're going to argue, let's argue using the proper terms.
You're right, it wasn't the RIAA handing the fines, of course, it was courts. But you're wrong, there most certainly have been fines:
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/06/riaa-jury-slaps-2-million-fine-on-jammie-thomas/
http://www.pcworld.com/article/112436/industry_group_pays_childs_riaa_fine.html
My university was one of the schools targeted (several times) by the RIAA, which resulted in subpoenas to individuals, as well as several students losing all access to the university network.
And it's not theft, it's copyright infringement. Theft deprives the true owner of his possession, copyright infringement doesn't.
At least if we're going to argue, let's argue using the proper terms.
You're right, it wasn't the RIAA handing the fines, of course, it was courts. But you're wrong, there most certainly have been fines:
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/06/riaa-jury-slaps-2-million-fine-on-jammie-thomas/
http://www.pcworld.com/article/112436/industry_group_pays_childs_riaa_fine.html
My university was one of the schools targeted (several times) by the RIAA, which resulted in subpoenas to individuals, as well as several students losing all access to the university network.
Pegamush
May 5, 05:19 AM
ok that seems nice, but..
where's the bluetooth syncing?
it's four years people were asking for bluetooth syncing...
what's the problem with it? i don't want to unplug the cable from behind the bed, plug it to the computer just to upload my calendar, music, contacts.
..oh, ok, i've got it. maybe they just want me to subscribe to mobileMe.
i'm sick of castrated technology, i'd like to use them at their full possibilities.
where's the bluetooth syncing?
it's four years people were asking for bluetooth syncing...
what's the problem with it? i don't want to unplug the cable from behind the bed, plug it to the computer just to upload my calendar, music, contacts.
..oh, ok, i've got it. maybe they just want me to subscribe to mobileMe.
i'm sick of castrated technology, i'd like to use them at their full possibilities.
mrploddy
Sep 12, 10:39 PM
Whilst the new Nano's are nice as are the new video ipods I don't see any compelling reason at the minute for me to go and spend some $$$.
I bought my ipod in January (at a substantially reduced price compared to full UK retail when I was in Japan) and it's working a charm. I didn't fall foul of the scratching/screen problems because I was careful enough to buy adhesive screen protector/case. Yeah it might not look as cool inside a rubber enclosure but it sure as hell isn't gonna break.
My problem with the new Nano's is that there just doesnt seem anything that would compell me to upgrade now a MUST HAVE feature. Most certainly I'll upgrade when either a) Ipod has an accident or b) the battery fails as considering a battery service is half the cost of a new 2GB nano it doesnt seem wortwhile.
So yeah...nice...but my wallet stays shut till something happens to my current Nano. Sorry Apple :(
-mrploddy
I bought my ipod in January (at a substantially reduced price compared to full UK retail when I was in Japan) and it's working a charm. I didn't fall foul of the scratching/screen problems because I was careful enough to buy adhesive screen protector/case. Yeah it might not look as cool inside a rubber enclosure but it sure as hell isn't gonna break.
My problem with the new Nano's is that there just doesnt seem anything that would compell me to upgrade now a MUST HAVE feature. Most certainly I'll upgrade when either a) Ipod has an accident or b) the battery fails as considering a battery service is half the cost of a new 2GB nano it doesnt seem wortwhile.
So yeah...nice...but my wallet stays shut till something happens to my current Nano. Sorry Apple :(
-mrploddy
Armsreach
Jan 11, 01:22 PM
Woah, different font - that's not Myriad Set like most of their stuff...
It's still myriad, just the light weight.
It's still myriad, just the light weight.
spinko
Aug 8, 10:00 AM
I had the same reaction... he almost looked gaunt. I just compared shots of Steve yesterday with his appearance at the January Macworld Expo, and there's a noticeable difference. Plus, the tag team approach to demoing Leopard's features made it seem as if he needed time to rest in between the parts of his presentation.
jobs quote:
"money is not everything".
Has his recent illness has made him more humble and wise ?
jobs quote:
"money is not everything".
Has his recent illness has made him more humble and wise ?
da meat tree
Oct 11, 07:14 PM
I like this a lot. Doesn't that light make a glare?
no not at all. at the angle i sit its perfectly fine.
no not at all. at the angle i sit its perfectly fine.
MorphingDragon
Nov 4, 11:32 AM
I'm amazed that you investigated so heavily the CPU usage and yet STILL came to the wrong conclusion, that this is Apple's fault.
For the record, you're completely wrong that FLASH works well on anything but Windows PCs.
Did you not notice in those numbers that FLASH doesn't work well on ALL MACS ON ALL BROWSERS ??? And FLASH is the reason for crashes on both POWERPC and INTEL Macs, even brand new Macs, from what I'm reading in other threads here on MacRumors.
So, how again is this Apple's fault that FLASH doesn't work on any recent Apple platform, iPhone, PowerPC, or INTEL?
Because Adobe doesn't care and has written crappy software. It has nothing to do with Apple.
Not much else crashes any of my Macs, so how is this Apple's fault?
Can you imagine what would happen if Apple let the current version of FLASH on the iPhone and peoples' phones started crashing like their Apple Macs are now? It would be on FOX NEWS!
Apple's making the right call here. The ball is in Adobe's court to get it right first on Macs.
Then I'll insist Apple let FLASH on the iPhone, but not a day sooner.
And I will bet dollars to doughnuts that your Android prediction turns out wrong too, FLASH or no FLASH.
If FLASH is an epic fail on both INTEL and POWERPC Macs and with both Safari and Firefox on Macs, how the hell do you think it's going to do on the iPhone?
This is NOT Apple's problem in my opinion. Adobe has just dropped the ball.
If FLASH crashes on most people's Macs, how do you think it will fair on the iPhone, since it's mostly the same browser?
Please people, think before you put your feet in your mouths.
Its epic fail on WinMO and Windows and Linux.
For the record, you're completely wrong that FLASH works well on anything but Windows PCs.
Did you not notice in those numbers that FLASH doesn't work well on ALL MACS ON ALL BROWSERS ??? And FLASH is the reason for crashes on both POWERPC and INTEL Macs, even brand new Macs, from what I'm reading in other threads here on MacRumors.
So, how again is this Apple's fault that FLASH doesn't work on any recent Apple platform, iPhone, PowerPC, or INTEL?
Because Adobe doesn't care and has written crappy software. It has nothing to do with Apple.
Not much else crashes any of my Macs, so how is this Apple's fault?
Can you imagine what would happen if Apple let the current version of FLASH on the iPhone and peoples' phones started crashing like their Apple Macs are now? It would be on FOX NEWS!
Apple's making the right call here. The ball is in Adobe's court to get it right first on Macs.
Then I'll insist Apple let FLASH on the iPhone, but not a day sooner.
And I will bet dollars to doughnuts that your Android prediction turns out wrong too, FLASH or no FLASH.
If FLASH is an epic fail on both INTEL and POWERPC Macs and with both Safari and Firefox on Macs, how the hell do you think it's going to do on the iPhone?
This is NOT Apple's problem in my opinion. Adobe has just dropped the ball.
If FLASH crashes on most people's Macs, how do you think it will fair on the iPhone, since it's mostly the same browser?
Please people, think before you put your feet in your mouths.
Its epic fail on WinMO and Windows and Linux.
RawBert
Apr 14, 10:01 AM
A lot of my friends are switching.
They're all coming to me for tips and tricks.
They're like, "Wow!" I'm like, "Told ya.":)
They're all coming to me for tips and tricks.
They're like, "Wow!" I'm like, "Told ya.":)
hamholio
Nov 27, 10:04 AM
Lets hope they remaster them - the stereo effects on the original versions can be really painful on a pair of headphones.
Huh??
For one, they would have to be remixed to fix whatever you find wrong with them.
And then -- I can't figure out what you're talking about. I have no problems listening to any Beatles albums in Stereo. They're perhaps wider stereo soundstages than you'd find today (where albums mostly play the same GD thing out of both channels) -- but that makes them sonically interesting, not unlistenable.
Huh??
For one, they would have to be remixed to fix whatever you find wrong with them.
And then -- I can't figure out what you're talking about. I have no problems listening to any Beatles albums in Stereo. They're perhaps wider stereo soundstages than you'd find today (where albums mostly play the same GD thing out of both channels) -- but that makes them sonically interesting, not unlistenable.
IntelliUser
Apr 4, 01:18 PM
No- how ridiculous. Atheism is not a religion.
Dogmatic belief in the nonexistence of God can be considered a religion.
Agnostic atheism cannot though.
Dogmatic belief in the nonexistence of God can be considered a religion.
Agnostic atheism cannot though.
cinder
Apr 13, 07:28 PM
As for 'professionals' getting pissy:
I don't think any of them care too much about the new features as much as they care about the speed updates. That's the biggest benefit for them.
The 'quick' editing features are useful for some 'pro' edits, definitely useful for a pro-sumer.
My best friend is an editor in a production house in Hollywood and his concern was that they didn't talk about tape workflow, video in/out cards, 3rd party support or XML-based export - among other things.
Just the concern is that they re-built the app and added a lot of GUI and 'smart' features but they didn't say anything about the dirty nuts & bolts.
So - it's an area of concern.
If Apple did what they did with iMove - re-built it from the ground up and removed features (most of which were re-added in the next version)
Well that would be a concern as the 'new' version wouldn't have support for their existing workflows.
(not workflows like "we like to do things this way" more workflows like "because of how this was shot or because we need to export to this specific tape deck" workflows that you can't really mess with)
It's mundane stuff to 'fans' and 'prosumers' but critical for higher end production houses.
A lot of people (me included) were pretty annoyed when Quicktime X came out with fewer features than QT7 . . .
As for the other reason editors might be grumpy:
Some of their 'work' will be partially replaced by smart features.
So they might worry that their exec sees this and gets rid of their assistant because "the software can do it!" which isn't necessarily the case.
Professionals get grumpy when all of a sudden software allows people to do things that used to be their 'trick' exclusively.
Old designers complain about Creative Suite, photographers complain about Photoshop/Lightroom/Aperture, music producers complain about Pro Tools and now editors will complain about Final Cut.
I don't think any of them care too much about the new features as much as they care about the speed updates. That's the biggest benefit for them.
The 'quick' editing features are useful for some 'pro' edits, definitely useful for a pro-sumer.
My best friend is an editor in a production house in Hollywood and his concern was that they didn't talk about tape workflow, video in/out cards, 3rd party support or XML-based export - among other things.
Just the concern is that they re-built the app and added a lot of GUI and 'smart' features but they didn't say anything about the dirty nuts & bolts.
So - it's an area of concern.
If Apple did what they did with iMove - re-built it from the ground up and removed features (most of which were re-added in the next version)
Well that would be a concern as the 'new' version wouldn't have support for their existing workflows.
(not workflows like "we like to do things this way" more workflows like "because of how this was shot or because we need to export to this specific tape deck" workflows that you can't really mess with)
It's mundane stuff to 'fans' and 'prosumers' but critical for higher end production houses.
A lot of people (me included) were pretty annoyed when Quicktime X came out with fewer features than QT7 . . .
As for the other reason editors might be grumpy:
Some of their 'work' will be partially replaced by smart features.
So they might worry that their exec sees this and gets rid of their assistant because "the software can do it!" which isn't necessarily the case.
Professionals get grumpy when all of a sudden software allows people to do things that used to be their 'trick' exclusively.
Old designers complain about Creative Suite, photographers complain about Photoshop/Lightroom/Aperture, music producers complain about Pro Tools and now editors will complain about Final Cut.
No comments:
Post a Comment