Multimedia
Aug 26, 07:00 PM
A Little OT but mini TV related: Someone here made a post I can't find that said the EyeTV hybrid HDTV tuner was only relevant to less than 5% of the market. So I did a little Google and found out we are already at 20% HD penetration in USA (http://www.screendigest.com/reports/06highdeftv/readmore/view.html). So I thought I'd just let you all know the Mac mini as an HDTV + Tivo with a 24" display can be set up for about $1300. With the cheapest Dual Link DVI 15" MBP you can find would drive a 30" display for a total of about $2900 soon.
I have a 2GHz Dual Core G5 that can support a 30" Display only paid $900 for. When Dell puts the 30" up on the 20% off block it will only cost $1900 - $380 = $1520. So we are looking at Mac TVs in the 24" - 30" size for as little as $1450 - $2500. That seems pretty amazing to me.
$599 Mac mini Core 2 Duo + EyeTV hybrid $150 + 24" Dell $700 (20% off Sale Price) = $1450 new.
Used any solo or dual G5 PM with a Dual Link Video Card + 30" Dell $1520 (20% off Sale Price) = $2500 or less.
I have a 2GHz Dual Core G5 that can support a 30" Display only paid $900 for. When Dell puts the 30" up on the 20% off block it will only cost $1900 - $380 = $1520. So we are looking at Mac TVs in the 24" - 30" size for as little as $1450 - $2500. That seems pretty amazing to me.
$599 Mac mini Core 2 Duo + EyeTV hybrid $150 + 24" Dell $700 (20% off Sale Price) = $1450 new.
Used any solo or dual G5 PM with a Dual Link Video Card + 30" Dell $1520 (20% off Sale Price) = $2500 or less.
MCIowaRulz
Apr 12, 10:03 PM
Well i'll tell you this FCP 5 (floating around in places i won't mention) is around 1.5 GB so If it is on the App store It will be 1 BIG download for me.
(3 Mbps cable line here)
(3 Mbps cable line here)
ZipZap
May 3, 04:48 AM
It seems like any time there's even a slight implication of any software being tuned to be easier to use, there's a barrage of negative comments lamenting how it's been "watered down."
What's with all this baseless elitism?
(Over uninstalling an app! Such a trite matter)
I see lots of people saying they'll stick with their version, or that it's the end of whatever paradigm they had before... why? Because it's what... "harder to use?" Who is that going to impress?
Not just for Lion, but this is exactly what happened with FCPX.
Which direction would the evolution of software go? Harder? Of course not...
I really wonder what the reasoning behind all this negativity is...
I dont think this is elitism...
Perhaps we can just say that Lion will offer a new level of refinement for a Mac OS.
Lets hope the iOS uninstall is implemented as a real uninstall...otherwise what's the point.
What's with all this baseless elitism?
(Over uninstalling an app! Such a trite matter)
I see lots of people saying they'll stick with their version, or that it's the end of whatever paradigm they had before... why? Because it's what... "harder to use?" Who is that going to impress?
Not just for Lion, but this is exactly what happened with FCPX.
Which direction would the evolution of software go? Harder? Of course not...
I really wonder what the reasoning behind all this negativity is...
I dont think this is elitism...
Perhaps we can just say that Lion will offer a new level of refinement for a Mac OS.
Lets hope the iOS uninstall is implemented as a real uninstall...otherwise what's the point.
pgyanke
Mar 26, 09:11 AM
Imagine taking the steering wheel and pedals out of a real car and putting an iPad on the dashboard.
It does not matter how great the car is, how nice the quality of the machine, what size engine you have, it's still going to be ruined, and make you a slow terrible driver as you can't cannot control it very well using a touch screen.
People said the same thing with touch screens in airplanes yet the top-of-the-line fighters have touch-screen control. Admittedly, they don't use the touch screens as their flight controllers, but when you consider the volume and velocity of their decision-making, it shows it can be done.
I think it will all depend on what you get used to.
It does not matter how great the car is, how nice the quality of the machine, what size engine you have, it's still going to be ruined, and make you a slow terrible driver as you can't cannot control it very well using a touch screen.
People said the same thing with touch screens in airplanes yet the top-of-the-line fighters have touch-screen control. Admittedly, they don't use the touch screens as their flight controllers, but when you consider the volume and velocity of their decision-making, it shows it can be done.
I think it will all depend on what you get used to.
bobbleheadbob
Apr 2, 07:53 PM
Of the 4 in my family, none of these issues exists. Try again?
No problems here either. I love my new iPad 2. (black, 64 gb, ATT.)
No problems here either. I love my new iPad 2. (black, 64 gb, ATT.)
tablo13
Sep 24, 05:22 PM
Something I noticed about my Grip Vue today. The back seems to be collecting quite a bit of germs (dirt, etc.). For those of you who use a Mighty Mouse, think about how that collects dirt, but on a case.
Does it affect the iPod touch itself?
Does it affect the iPod touch itself?
Lord Blackadder
Mar 7, 06:20 PM
Because there is not enough of it, and it will increase our need of foreign oil not lessen it.
There is twice as much gasoline refined from a barrel of sweet crude than diesel.
Can you quote a source on that? As far as I'm aware, that is not necessarily true (http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2174). It all depends on what is in highest demand. Diesel can be refined into gasoline, and gasoline is what people in the US want at the moment. I will try to find some more citeable links than this (http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/26624/Maximum-gallons-of-diesel-from-a-barrel-of-crude-oil), but my impression is that a single barrel of crude always potentially contains more diesel fuel than gasoline. This is a very market-driven process. Refineries make what people want to buy.
It's also worth pointing out that a lot of gasoline has ethanol and other compounds in it that diesel does not have, and that stuff had to be refined before being added - increasing the engery cost of refining gasoline. Regular unleaded gasoline also has more sulphur in it than the now mandatory-for-passenger-cars ULSD fuel.
For a long time, and in many places people that drove diesel vehicles did so because of the tax advantages. The taxes were kept lower in order to make commercial usage cheaper.
Diesel may be cheaper in Europe due to tax structures, but the same could be said about gasoline here. It doesn't have to be that way in either case. On a purely technical level, gasoline should actually cost more because it takes more energy to refine.
It is not greener to go diesel. It takes that resource from other parts of the economy and puts it into cars. Cars do just fine with gasoline. They are relatively clean and there is twice as much of the stuff in a gallon of oil. They don't get better mileage except in volume of stuff. Which is not the correct measurement. If cars became more diesel, then diesel would become dramatically more expensive, affecting the overall livelihood of everyone, dramatically increase the cost of oil and bring about energy devastation much faster than anyone could imagine.
Diesel takes less energy to refine, contains more energy per unit of volume, emits less CO2, you get potentially more of it out of a barrel of crude and diesel engines are always more fuel efficient than equivalent gasoline engines. Where's the problem?
I can't see how you are going to argue that it is necessary for us to drive gasoline-engined cars in order to prevent "energy devastation". Most other countries already use a much larger proportion of diesel and they seem just fine. We could make a lot more diesel with the crude we are currently extracting, and the market for gasoline will never go away.
By moving to hybrids and electrics, we actually decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and make our cars greener per mile driven. This is why it is the answer and diesel isn't.
I am not advocating that we all switch to diesel. Nor do I want to get rid of the gasoline engine (especially in performance cars!). But the USA has an unecessary obsession with the gasoline-engined car. We need diesel serial hybrids for starters, and more hybrids and diesel-engined cars of all types. There is no one solution. If tens of thousands of people in the US started buying diesel Cruzes, it would not destroy the world's energy infrastructure.
But come on - "energy devastation"?
the argument for that silent agreement ? they don't want "a horsepower arms race"... look how well that has turned out
Indeed. Same with the Japanese and their 280hp/180 km/h limit. Some of the cars made under this "agreement" were considerably faster/more powerful than was officially admitted, and anyway they did away with that a number of years ago.
There is twice as much gasoline refined from a barrel of sweet crude than diesel.
Can you quote a source on that? As far as I'm aware, that is not necessarily true (http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2174). It all depends on what is in highest demand. Diesel can be refined into gasoline, and gasoline is what people in the US want at the moment. I will try to find some more citeable links than this (http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/26624/Maximum-gallons-of-diesel-from-a-barrel-of-crude-oil), but my impression is that a single barrel of crude always potentially contains more diesel fuel than gasoline. This is a very market-driven process. Refineries make what people want to buy.
It's also worth pointing out that a lot of gasoline has ethanol and other compounds in it that diesel does not have, and that stuff had to be refined before being added - increasing the engery cost of refining gasoline. Regular unleaded gasoline also has more sulphur in it than the now mandatory-for-passenger-cars ULSD fuel.
For a long time, and in many places people that drove diesel vehicles did so because of the tax advantages. The taxes were kept lower in order to make commercial usage cheaper.
Diesel may be cheaper in Europe due to tax structures, but the same could be said about gasoline here. It doesn't have to be that way in either case. On a purely technical level, gasoline should actually cost more because it takes more energy to refine.
It is not greener to go diesel. It takes that resource from other parts of the economy and puts it into cars. Cars do just fine with gasoline. They are relatively clean and there is twice as much of the stuff in a gallon of oil. They don't get better mileage except in volume of stuff. Which is not the correct measurement. If cars became more diesel, then diesel would become dramatically more expensive, affecting the overall livelihood of everyone, dramatically increase the cost of oil and bring about energy devastation much faster than anyone could imagine.
Diesel takes less energy to refine, contains more energy per unit of volume, emits less CO2, you get potentially more of it out of a barrel of crude and diesel engines are always more fuel efficient than equivalent gasoline engines. Where's the problem?
I can't see how you are going to argue that it is necessary for us to drive gasoline-engined cars in order to prevent "energy devastation". Most other countries already use a much larger proportion of diesel and they seem just fine. We could make a lot more diesel with the crude we are currently extracting, and the market for gasoline will never go away.
By moving to hybrids and electrics, we actually decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and make our cars greener per mile driven. This is why it is the answer and diesel isn't.
I am not advocating that we all switch to diesel. Nor do I want to get rid of the gasoline engine (especially in performance cars!). But the USA has an unecessary obsession with the gasoline-engined car. We need diesel serial hybrids for starters, and more hybrids and diesel-engined cars of all types. There is no one solution. If tens of thousands of people in the US started buying diesel Cruzes, it would not destroy the world's energy infrastructure.
But come on - "energy devastation"?
the argument for that silent agreement ? they don't want "a horsepower arms race"... look how well that has turned out
Indeed. Same with the Japanese and their 280hp/180 km/h limit. Some of the cars made under this "agreement" were considerably faster/more powerful than was officially admitted, and anyway they did away with that a number of years ago.
FearNo1
Apr 23, 10:42 AM
No, I did not mean the traditional GPS. I was referring to the one that the 911 system uses. I don't think that can be turned off. IOW, if you have any modern cell phone, you can be tracked. The difference is that with the iphone, the info is stored on the phone itself.
you can turn off the GPS in a phone and most people assume that when you do it stops tracking you yet as it already been shown it just starts storing info base the cell towers.
I just do not like the fact you can not opt out of it. It just feels wrong to me.
you can turn off the GPS in a phone and most people assume that when you do it stops tracking you yet as it already been shown it just starts storing info base the cell towers.
I just do not like the fact you can not opt out of it. It just feels wrong to me.
asdf542
Apr 12, 09:49 PM
Well I really can't judge it until I'm actually able to touch and use it myself, but from the looks, they've gone consumer. *here's hoping for the best* I really want it to work... but Adobe is looking better by the day.
They've gone consumer because the UI is something modern and not something ripped out of the 90's like the last Final Cut was? :rolleyes:
They've gone consumer because the UI is something modern and not something ripped out of the 90's like the last Final Cut was? :rolleyes:
DMann
Jan 13, 01:38 PM
Air = composed of nitrogen, oxygen, carbon dioxide, trace gases.
So the 4 products are
Macbook NITRO
Macbook OXYO
Macbook C02
Macbook GAS
not to mention:
MacBook OZONE
MacBook CO (monoxide)
MacBook ARGON
MacBook METHANE
MacBook HYDROGEN
MacBook XENON
MacBook NEON
MacBook KRYPTON
So the 4 products are
Macbook NITRO
Macbook OXYO
Macbook C02
Macbook GAS
not to mention:
MacBook OZONE
MacBook CO (monoxide)
MacBook ARGON
MacBook METHANE
MacBook HYDROGEN
MacBook XENON
MacBook NEON
MacBook KRYPTON
Chef Medeski
Jul 14, 11:31 AM
I just saw this and though it was pretty interesting:
Sony also introduced their own small-format 90.0 � 94.0 mm disk, similar to the others but somewhat simpler in construction than the AmDisk. The first computer to use this format was the HP-150 of 1983, and Sony also used them fairly widely on their line of MSX computers. Other than this the format suffered from a similar fate as the other new formats; the 5�-inch format simply had too much market share. Things changed dramatically in 1984 when Apple Computer selected the format for their new Macintosh computers. By 1989 the 3�-inch was outselling the 5�-inch.
Here is the source:
Sony's 3.5" Floppy Disk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floppy_drive#The_3.C2.BD-inch_microfloppy_diskette)
Yeah, but wasn't that also when Apple had something like 50% of the consumer market share. I mean... I think its a very different situation even if its the same names.
Sony also introduced their own small-format 90.0 � 94.0 mm disk, similar to the others but somewhat simpler in construction than the AmDisk. The first computer to use this format was the HP-150 of 1983, and Sony also used them fairly widely on their line of MSX computers. Other than this the format suffered from a similar fate as the other new formats; the 5�-inch format simply had too much market share. Things changed dramatically in 1984 when Apple Computer selected the format for their new Macintosh computers. By 1989 the 3�-inch was outselling the 5�-inch.
Here is the source:
Sony's 3.5" Floppy Disk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floppy_drive#The_3.C2.BD-inch_microfloppy_diskette)
Yeah, but wasn't that also when Apple had something like 50% of the consumer market share. I mean... I think its a very different situation even if its the same names.
KnightWRX
Apr 27, 09:55 AM
Capitalization wasn't the point. It's the context in which a term or _name_ is used.
Context doesn't impact a trademark either. The only thing that would permit anyone to use the "App Store" trademark if it was granted would be outside of Apple's selected field of trade.
I could call my restaurant "App Store" because Apple did not trademark App Store as it relates to restoration and food. I could call my new Car model the "GM App Store", as it does not relate to the field in which Apple trademarked it.
I can't however call my store that sells Applications "App Store" or use "App Store" in a portion of its name, or for the slogan "KnightMarket : The best darn App Store!"
That is why descriptive trademarks aren't usually awarded and granted. Because it gives too much power to a single entity in a certain field of trade. We'll see how the USPTO decides this when they hand in their final decision in Apple's request, especially now that Microsoft filed in the opposition phase (which is exactly why the USPTO has an opposition phase to begin with).
Context doesn't impact a trademark either. The only thing that would permit anyone to use the "App Store" trademark if it was granted would be outside of Apple's selected field of trade.
I could call my restaurant "App Store" because Apple did not trademark App Store as it relates to restoration and food. I could call my new Car model the "GM App Store", as it does not relate to the field in which Apple trademarked it.
I can't however call my store that sells Applications "App Store" or use "App Store" in a portion of its name, or for the slogan "KnightMarket : The best darn App Store!"
That is why descriptive trademarks aren't usually awarded and granted. Because it gives too much power to a single entity in a certain field of trade. We'll see how the USPTO decides this when they hand in their final decision in Apple's request, especially now that Microsoft filed in the opposition phase (which is exactly why the USPTO has an opposition phase to begin with).
miloblithe
Sep 6, 09:30 AM
Comparing the prices of the new iMacs and the Mac mini is absurd. The killer
feature of the mini is its form factor. Wake me up when you can use an iMac
as a file/download server placed in your desk drawer.
Fair enough, but what about those of us who want to buy a general purpose computer? (Probably most people)
feature of the mini is its form factor. Wake me up when you can use an iMac
as a file/download server placed in your desk drawer.
Fair enough, but what about those of us who want to buy a general purpose computer? (Probably most people)
mrapplegate
Apr 3, 05:48 PM
I have the same thing happens with my safari in full screen where you hover your mouse over the top and the menubar slide down it is a bug because it the bar serve no function right now -that definitely did happen in DP!
Although Safari has not crashed yet where it crash several time a day in DP1
I don't think it is a bug. It allows more screen to show when using full screen mode. The menubar re-appears when needed. Preview auto hides the menubar as when in full screen mode.
Although Safari has not crashed yet where it crash several time a day in DP1
I don't think it is a bug. It allows more screen to show when using full screen mode. The menubar re-appears when needed. Preview auto hides the menubar as when in full screen mode.
inkswamp
Aug 6, 09:53 PM
Blah, it should read "Mac OS X Leopard, introducing Panter 2.0"
No offense, my friend, but I'm glad Apple isn't taking any marketing cues from readers of MacRumors. ;)
No offense, my friend, but I'm glad Apple isn't taking any marketing cues from readers of MacRumors. ;)
Lesser Evets
Apr 26, 01:54 PM
App is a generic.
Store is a generic.
Appstore is a generic.
Simple.
Example: Grocery Store, Book Store, Appliance Store.
Store is a generic.
Appstore is a generic.
Simple.
Example: Grocery Store, Book Store, Appliance Store.
Tmelon
Mar 31, 04:53 PM
Umm i hope the hell you can change it back? if not well ill no longer be using ical ill find something else.
The color really means that much to you?
The color really means that much to you?
ctsport1234
Sep 1, 02:08 PM
This is awsome news! :D
If Apple does make a 23'' imac, I will definately be getting one! (albeit when Leopard is released) :D
If Apple does make a 23'' imac, I will definately be getting one! (albeit when Leopard is released) :D
quagmire
Mar 1, 01:34 PM
that the US car makers still sells trucks, pickups etc. without diesel options is simply a complete lack of any common sense. diesel engines are practically made to be perfect for pulling and towing in commercial vehicles
for it's south american Amarok pick up VW simply took the 2.0 I4 TDI from the golf/jetta and set up the engine slightly different in regards to the power/torque band and ends up with an engine which was very likely cheaper to develop, cheaper to build had less weight and still achieves 400nm of torque
GM had the 4.5 liter Duramax in development for their half-ton trucks, but the economy and their situation canned that. Ford also was working on a baby Powerstroke and Cummins was working on a baby I-6 for Dodge. But, those as well have been canned.
for it's south american Amarok pick up VW simply took the 2.0 I4 TDI from the golf/jetta and set up the engine slightly different in regards to the power/torque band and ends up with an engine which was very likely cheaper to develop, cheaper to build had less weight and still achieves 400nm of torque
GM had the 4.5 liter Duramax in development for their half-ton trucks, but the economy and their situation canned that. Ford also was working on a baby Powerstroke and Cummins was working on a baby I-6 for Dodge. But, those as well have been canned.
r.j.s
Mar 20, 01:41 PM
I assume the mushroom is from the initial warhead explosion, and the rest is the resultant exploding ammunition.
Probably. Dust and debris fills the void created by the pressure from the initial explosion to form the mushroom. The rest is from the primary charge or secondary explosions, e.g. fuel.
Probably. Dust and debris fills the void created by the pressure from the initial explosion to form the mushroom. The rest is from the primary charge or secondary explosions, e.g. fuel.
jbelkin
Nov 28, 01:32 PM
The problem with the Amazon chart is you can guess a Thursday at 5 PM ranking is better than a Sunday at 4 AM ranking but it's hard to tell exactly if one means sales of 1,000 and one means sales of 18 - last time I checked, the Zune was 48 with a couple ipod cases selling better but of course, it's better to crowd the top 10.
Yea, MS still thinks it's 1992. Notice how they trumped the Zune would be in 30,000 stores versus 10,000 for the ipod? Does anyoen want to point out the internet to MS? That no matter what town I live in, in 1992 I might've had 1 choice in buying consumer electronics but now I can be in Middle Nowhere, North Dakota and literally have 100,000 stores + eBay at my fingertips? And where Ms counts on - no choice but ours to buy - the default choice - iPods on the other hand are not at Walgreens or 7-11 but people still find them ... amazing what world class hardware, software and online store will do for you.
Ms doesn't understand why when consumers have a real choice, they seldom choose MS products (webtv, talking barney's, watch OS or Melinda Gates' last MS project - the answer to OS7, MS Bob).
Looks like Steve ballmer's stock holdings are going to need some more propping up.
Yea, MS still thinks it's 1992. Notice how they trumped the Zune would be in 30,000 stores versus 10,000 for the ipod? Does anyoen want to point out the internet to MS? That no matter what town I live in, in 1992 I might've had 1 choice in buying consumer electronics but now I can be in Middle Nowhere, North Dakota and literally have 100,000 stores + eBay at my fingertips? And where Ms counts on - no choice but ours to buy - the default choice - iPods on the other hand are not at Walgreens or 7-11 but people still find them ... amazing what world class hardware, software and online store will do for you.
Ms doesn't understand why when consumers have a real choice, they seldom choose MS products (webtv, talking barney's, watch OS or Melinda Gates' last MS project - the answer to OS7, MS Bob).
Looks like Steve ballmer's stock holdings are going to need some more propping up.
eric55lv
Jan 12, 05:53 PM
Intriguing.
Maybe the �Air� branding is taking a que from the sucess of one of Apple's international partners, O2.
It's certainly something different from the obvious nano/mini/thin branding that people are expecting.
it might be because it so light
Maybe the �Air� branding is taking a que from the sucess of one of Apple's international partners, O2.
It's certainly something different from the obvious nano/mini/thin branding that people are expecting.
it might be because it so light
twoodcc
Apr 16, 09:07 PM
congrats to SciFrog for 6 million points! (with MR team)
steve jr.
Jun 22, 06:13 PM
Hmmm, I see this being the next step for the iPad, not an iMac. A few people here have said the iPad needs more productivity - programming, word processing, etc, and I think this is it.
About it being too difficult to make the Mac OS completely touch ready, ehh, it's all tap, just a lot of elements to make tap ready.
End of the Mac? Not hardly! They're looking to make portable computers more powerful - not replace really awesome machines with less productive ones. The desktop will always exist in some form (with the nintendo 3DS - they achieved a "3D" holographic display that doesn't require glasses - my prediction, the next Mac UI), just how we use portable machines is changing because they are becoming more powerful.
About it being too difficult to make the Mac OS completely touch ready, ehh, it's all tap, just a lot of elements to make tap ready.
End of the Mac? Not hardly! They're looking to make portable computers more powerful - not replace really awesome machines with less productive ones. The desktop will always exist in some form (with the nintendo 3DS - they achieved a "3D" holographic display that doesn't require glasses - my prediction, the next Mac UI), just how we use portable machines is changing because they are becoming more powerful.