Leet Apple
Feb 27, 05:51 PM
Changed it up a bit.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5054/5483768370_423466b4b2_b.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5260/5483175217_83c32f59b9_b.jpg
You Should Clean your iPhone Screen ;)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5054/5483768370_423466b4b2_b.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5260/5483175217_83c32f59b9_b.jpg
You Should Clean your iPhone Screen ;)
Unspeaked
Nov 28, 11:33 AM
I know that it's not quite fair to compare the two right out of the launch (a baby product versus a mature one), but MS didn't help themselves by setting up this product to compete directly with the iPod. If they had tried to target a different market (maybe primarily video as opposed to music), they might have more success, and let the hype build from there. But the way they seem to be playing it now, they're going to just throw a lot of money into something that will be in Apple's shadow. It'll offer a compelling alternative to some, but will not necessarily convince too many to become switchers. :p
Wow. Substitute "Mac OS" for "Zune" and "Windows" for "iPod" and that could have been any random post on Mac Rumors from the last five years!
;)
Wow. Substitute "Mac OS" for "Zune" and "Windows" for "iPod" and that could have been any random post on Mac Rumors from the last five years!
;)
Play Ultimate
Sep 1, 03:00 PM
Apple used to have all-in-ones, consumer towers, pro towers, etc. Remember the PowerMac 6400? Too many products is too confusing for the consumer. If that means that a couple of people can't get the exact configuration they want, so be it.
Many of the people on this thread are too new to remember the Performa fiascos of the early 90's. More than anything, Steve simplified the computer product line into 4 distinct quadrants. The only aberration to this is the Mac Mini.
re: The iMac being more powerful than the Pro Laptop. IMO, this is a non-issue. Their respective markets are different. If somebody needs laptop, they need a laptop. And the relative processing capability of the iMac will not necesarily change that individuals mind. The true iMac and MacBook Pro competition comes from Dell,HP, etc. Apple's job is to make computers that are competitive to the marketplace and, I feel, they would be ecstatic regardless of which APPLE computer you bought.
Many of the people on this thread are too new to remember the Performa fiascos of the early 90's. More than anything, Steve simplified the computer product line into 4 distinct quadrants. The only aberration to this is the Mac Mini.
re: The iMac being more powerful than the Pro Laptop. IMO, this is a non-issue. Their respective markets are different. If somebody needs laptop, they need a laptop. And the relative processing capability of the iMac will not necesarily change that individuals mind. The true iMac and MacBook Pro competition comes from Dell,HP, etc. Apple's job is to make computers that are competitive to the marketplace and, I feel, they would be ecstatic regardless of which APPLE computer you bought.
1984
Aug 29, 12:30 PM
World Class CLIO Material? It's just another iPod/iTunes ad.
Tomorrow
Apr 20, 03:46 PM
Were your other cars manual? The Camaro isn't helping your argument any more than the Lotus is helping mine.
;)
What argument? My main point is that I hate driving, and a manual transmission doesn't help me enjoy it any more than an automatic.
;)
What argument? My main point is that I hate driving, and a manual transmission doesn't help me enjoy it any more than an automatic.
yg17
Mar 24, 12:02 PM
No trying to substitute facts and history with your own beliefs. Homosexuality is not natural, there is no natural way for reproduction which is the whole purpose of sex or the "reproduction system" as it may be classified.
So someone who is sterile due to medical reasons shouldn't be allowed to marry either? There's no natural way for them to reproduce.
So someone who is sterile due to medical reasons shouldn't be allowed to marry either? There's no natural way for them to reproduce.
whoooaaahhhh
Jul 14, 09:54 AM
Good post, sums up the current situation very nicely.
Given that dual layer 50GB blu-ray discs cant even be produced yet, i think the 200GB claim is complete vaporware.
I hope HD-DVD wins this war soon, as it is out of the gates first, and thus far a far superior format. If Blu-Ray were to give up now, i dont think many people would be sad. One format is better for everyone.
NO.
First of all, Blu-Ray discs are a completely new material and fabrication process, so highlighting the fact that they've only made 25GB discs (which were stable-ly created long before almost ANY HD-DVD's) and can't produce a disk which is far above the specs of the competition, is like saying screw the russians cuz they're space program hasn't sent a man to mars (nobody's done it yet, anyway). You can't blame Blu-Ray for not being able to deliver 50 GB yet, the meat of the war is just beginning anyway.
Secondly, what was said about the VC-1 codec is very wrong. Microsoft's VC-1 codec is far worse and more difficult to work with than MPEG 2 or MPEG 4 that sony will probably offer in later versions of Blu-Ray. All this malarky about artifacts doesn't really make sense when you consider that we've been USING MPEG2 IN DVD'S FOR YEARS NOW! There's no way that the algorithim could be to blame for the artifacts! Sure it's fatter, but it's a lighter compression, and as Sony has shown with their PCM Audio on Blu-Ray, sometimes light compression on a bigger disk is better than heavy compression on smaller disks. It will be a lot easier to change to a more efficient codec down the line (which is what we've done with computers time and time again, as well as professional video) so we can get Ultra HD on Blu Ray when it comes out as well.
I'm sorry, I understand people really want HD-DVD to win because it's easier and cheaper right now, but since when has the easiest option been the best? If Blu-Ray doesn't win this war we'll have another short life-span format, this version of HD will not be enough for the professional industry much longer, take it from a video guy. I've written a frickin' paper on this very subject.
IMHO I'd like to see a Blu-Ray with the Mac Pro's to help solidify the consumer base into purchasing a better product, because that's how you standardize something in the market...sales...But I don't know that it will happen. Although remember DVD-RAM? Apple seemed to like that for awhile...that died...
I also don't want microsoft handling my video codec, anybody remember the wonderous creation of WMV/WMA? The one that like none of us can use on macs? HD-DVD's codec is a derivation of the WMV-HD codec. Welcome to the Microsoft reality. They really like controlling proprietary codecs. Also...MPEG was created by a group of companies and people working together, Microsoft created WMV, so they've got almost complete say in how that plays out.
Given that dual layer 50GB blu-ray discs cant even be produced yet, i think the 200GB claim is complete vaporware.
I hope HD-DVD wins this war soon, as it is out of the gates first, and thus far a far superior format. If Blu-Ray were to give up now, i dont think many people would be sad. One format is better for everyone.
NO.
First of all, Blu-Ray discs are a completely new material and fabrication process, so highlighting the fact that they've only made 25GB discs (which were stable-ly created long before almost ANY HD-DVD's) and can't produce a disk which is far above the specs of the competition, is like saying screw the russians cuz they're space program hasn't sent a man to mars (nobody's done it yet, anyway). You can't blame Blu-Ray for not being able to deliver 50 GB yet, the meat of the war is just beginning anyway.
Secondly, what was said about the VC-1 codec is very wrong. Microsoft's VC-1 codec is far worse and more difficult to work with than MPEG 2 or MPEG 4 that sony will probably offer in later versions of Blu-Ray. All this malarky about artifacts doesn't really make sense when you consider that we've been USING MPEG2 IN DVD'S FOR YEARS NOW! There's no way that the algorithim could be to blame for the artifacts! Sure it's fatter, but it's a lighter compression, and as Sony has shown with their PCM Audio on Blu-Ray, sometimes light compression on a bigger disk is better than heavy compression on smaller disks. It will be a lot easier to change to a more efficient codec down the line (which is what we've done with computers time and time again, as well as professional video) so we can get Ultra HD on Blu Ray when it comes out as well.
I'm sorry, I understand people really want HD-DVD to win because it's easier and cheaper right now, but since when has the easiest option been the best? If Blu-Ray doesn't win this war we'll have another short life-span format, this version of HD will not be enough for the professional industry much longer, take it from a video guy. I've written a frickin' paper on this very subject.
IMHO I'd like to see a Blu-Ray with the Mac Pro's to help solidify the consumer base into purchasing a better product, because that's how you standardize something in the market...sales...But I don't know that it will happen. Although remember DVD-RAM? Apple seemed to like that for awhile...that died...
I also don't want microsoft handling my video codec, anybody remember the wonderous creation of WMV/WMA? The one that like none of us can use on macs? HD-DVD's codec is a derivation of the WMV-HD codec. Welcome to the Microsoft reality. They really like controlling proprietary codecs. Also...MPEG was created by a group of companies and people working together, Microsoft created WMV, so they've got almost complete say in how that plays out.
cleanup
Nov 27, 05:09 PM
Gift for my mom. She rides her bike 10 miles to and from work a few times a week:
http://img227.imageshack.us/img227/8065/appleipodnano6thgenerat.jpg
I cycle to work and school daily (except in the coming winter months) and I gotta tell you, cyclists who listen to music while they ride are clearly not very concerned for their own or anyone else's safety! No offense, but for your mother's sake, I hope she keeps the volume REALLY low, or doesn't use the iPod at all. It's rather dangerous, IMHO.
Haven't started Christmas shopping yet (unlike Surely) so I haven't got any good karma, but nevertheless picked up a new pair of jeans for myself. D'oh. :(
http://images.asos.com/inv/s/15/95/525822/dripdry/image1xl.jpg
http://img227.imageshack.us/img227/8065/appleipodnano6thgenerat.jpg
I cycle to work and school daily (except in the coming winter months) and I gotta tell you, cyclists who listen to music while they ride are clearly not very concerned for their own or anyone else's safety! No offense, but for your mother's sake, I hope she keeps the volume REALLY low, or doesn't use the iPod at all. It's rather dangerous, IMHO.
Haven't started Christmas shopping yet (unlike Surely) so I haven't got any good karma, but nevertheless picked up a new pair of jeans for myself. D'oh. :(
http://images.asos.com/inv/s/15/95/525822/dripdry/image1xl.jpg
reflex
Aug 25, 01:51 PM
And Apple doesn't like to be selling historical artifacts any longer than they must
So that's why they stuck with G3s in iBooks for so long? :p
So that's why they stuck with G3s in iBooks for so long? :p
cbrain
Jan 12, 03:05 AM
I'm not that keen on the name "MacBook Air" personally.
(1).jpg "Justin Bieber stopped by the")
sauer228
Apr 19, 11:59 AM
Just in time for the back to school promo!
vnle
Nov 27, 12:05 PM
Black Friday Goodies :D
Samsung LCD TV 40"
Black Wii
WD MyBook Elite 1.5 TB
Ikea Mount
Samsung LCD TV 40"
Black Wii
WD MyBook Elite 1.5 TB
Ikea Mount
Erwin-Br
May 2, 05:28 PM
No, Microsoft have not got it right. There should be no need for a specific tool to uninstall applications. applications should be self-contained and be deletable with the press of a button�
Many applications work this way on Mac, some developers still put related files into various other locations though unfortunately...
Uhm, not every app can be self-contained, and it's even in Apple's documentation that you need to store your plists OUTSIDE of the App container and in the Library folder instead.
And that makes sense, because for example, there are apps that need to save settings. If you store these settings inside the app, the next time your user updates it the settings are overwritten.
I hate it how dragging a Mac App to the trashcan leaves plists and other files scattered around.
Many applications work this way on Mac, some developers still put related files into various other locations though unfortunately...
Uhm, not every app can be self-contained, and it's even in Apple's documentation that you need to store your plists OUTSIDE of the App container and in the Library folder instead.
And that makes sense, because for example, there are apps that need to save settings. If you store these settings inside the app, the next time your user updates it the settings are overwritten.
I hate it how dragging a Mac App to the trashcan leaves plists and other files scattered around.
andrewbecks
May 2, 08:40 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
As I'm sure others have noted, this jus seems less efficient than CMD-delete. I suppose more options are good, and I get this is a transition towards a more pervasive touch interface, but for computers with physical keyboards, this leaves me cold.
I always wanted a CMD-delete action for Dashboard; this seems like a step back.
Agreed. I prefer Command + Delete, but I suppose it's nice to have options. Personally, I'm not much of a fan of the launchpad for OS X idea, but I'm sure it appeals to some people.
As I'm sure others have noted, this jus seems less efficient than CMD-delete. I suppose more options are good, and I get this is a transition towards a more pervasive touch interface, but for computers with physical keyboards, this leaves me cold.
I always wanted a CMD-delete action for Dashboard; this seems like a step back.
Agreed. I prefer Command + Delete, but I suppose it's nice to have options. Personally, I'm not much of a fan of the launchpad for OS X idea, but I'm sure it appeals to some people.
Pentad
Mar 24, 01:24 PM
I think this is good news. Now, good Apple, could you optimize your drivers to be on par with their Windows counterparts?
kiddig
Feb 22, 12:28 PM
Here is my setup. Old but do the job
20" iMac
13" MacBook
And my iPhone 3GS
missing from the pictures are my iPad and my ipods
http://pic50.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1635/8478158/19686294/395286276.jpg
http://pic50.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1635/8478158/19686294/395286270.jpg
http://pic50.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1635/8478158/19686294/395286272.jpg
20" iMac
13" MacBook
And my iPhone 3GS
missing from the pictures are my iPad and my ipods
http://pic50.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1635/8478158/19686294/395286276.jpg
http://pic50.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1635/8478158/19686294/395286270.jpg
http://pic50.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1635/8478158/19686294/395286272.jpg
macquariumguy
Mar 18, 09:03 AM
Oh boy, another war. :(
eemsTV
Apr 19, 01:15 PM
oh joy:D, wondering what the high-end iMac will look like (since that's the one I'm planning on getting!)
rdowns
Mar 22, 01:26 PM
So I guess I can't be in the guard or reserve...
Not at all, provided you meet the requirements. I was merely pointing out that a Director of IT posted on a Mac forum asking how to remotely access his network.
Based on your posts, I question if you meet the age requirements of this forum.
Not at all, provided you meet the requirements. I was merely pointing out that a Director of IT posted on a Mac forum asking how to remotely access his network.
Based on your posts, I question if you meet the age requirements of this forum.
PowerFullMac
Jan 12, 09:56 AM
Subtract keyboard. Add multi-touch and WiMax. Thin as an iPhone.
Nope, more powerfull with real OS X.
Nope, more powerfull with real OS X.
Erwin-Br
Apr 21, 12:30 PM
If this were Google or M$ you apologists would be foaming at the mouth.
The anti-Google folks on this forum have used the privacy issue as ammunition against Google for quite some time now. To my surprise (or not really) all of the sudden privacy is not important to then anymore.
At least with Google you KNOW data is collected.
The anti-Google folks on this forum have used the privacy issue as ammunition against Google for quite some time now. To my surprise (or not really) all of the sudden privacy is not important to then anymore.
At least with Google you KNOW data is collected.
r.j.s
Jan 2, 07:24 PM
You call that snow? PFFT. lol
We don't get a whole lot here, and I lived in Texas and Arizona for the past 8 years, but I'm originally from northern PA, so I grew up with Lake Effect snow.
We don't get a whole lot here, and I lived in Texas and Arizona for the past 8 years, but I'm originally from northern PA, so I grew up with Lake Effect snow.
miloblithe
Aug 31, 02:23 PM
You know what the difference in cost is between a Combo Drive and a Superdrive?
About $5
Well, that may be, but Apple likes nice round even numbers.
About $5
Well, that may be, but Apple likes nice round even numbers.
iEvolution
Mar 22, 09:15 PM
Nice! Best news I've heard for a long time.
I will be updating to the 220GB just for video output..would be nice if they would add high definition output.
I love the people that act like 220GB is a ridiculous amount, with the file sizes always increasing (FYI, the estimate of 40,000 songs with the current 160GB is a miscalculation, how many things are still selling 128kbps songs and how many people are still using that bit rate?) an increase in capacity is ALWAYS welcome.
Further, add videos to the classic and 220GB would be considered small.
I will be updating to the 220GB just for video output..would be nice if they would add high definition output.
I love the people that act like 220GB is a ridiculous amount, with the file sizes always increasing (FYI, the estimate of 40,000 songs with the current 160GB is a miscalculation, how many things are still selling 128kbps songs and how many people are still using that bit rate?) an increase in capacity is ALWAYS welcome.
Further, add videos to the classic and 220GB would be considered small.
No comments:
Post a Comment