neko girl
Mar 3, 11:17 PM
no one is preventing you from living with the person you love or having sex with him
A bit of delay in my response because I had to look it up, but thanks for letting us have this right for 7 years now..
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0e/Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg/400px-Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg.png
Red = Sodomy Laws struck down by the US Supreme Court in 2003
A bit of delay in my response because I had to look it up, but thanks for letting us have this right for 7 years now..
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0e/Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg/400px-Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg.png
Red = Sodomy Laws struck down by the US Supreme Court in 2003
Tundraboy
Apr 27, 10:11 AM
Hilarious!!!!! We're not tracking you but we're going to provide a patch soon.......typical Apple response......just DENY!!!!!
There is no antenna issue with the iPhone 4 but we'll give you a free bumper for a limited time, act quickly while supplies last LMAO!!!!!
There is no antenna issue with the iPhone 4 but we'll give you a free bumper for a limited time, act quickly while supplies last LMAO!!!!!
ehoui
Apr 27, 05:35 PM
It's just like kings, innit?
Probably has more to do with trying to avoid the label "Junior" than pretending to be a king.
In any event, I think Obama shouldn't have release anything. There was no need.
Probably has more to do with trying to avoid the label "Junior" than pretending to be a king.
In any event, I think Obama shouldn't have release anything. There was no need.
dwd3885
Mar 31, 04:24 PM
what is this bash apple competitors day?
Erasmus
Aug 26, 07:36 PM
not trying to start a war or anything but...isn't that what the mac pro is for? isn't the iMac considered consumer grade while the mbp is considered professional grade??? i think it is badass that the mbp is faster than the imac.
Yes, but Conroe processors are less expensive than Merom for faster clocks, faster bus speeds, but increased power consumption, but considering iMacs used to house G5's, and they don't rely on battery power, Conroe is the logical choice for the iMac.
Obviously the MBP should get the 2.16 and 2.33 Ghz Meroms, as you couldn't put a Conroe in one, but the MBP should not limit the speed of the iMac, just because it's not "Pro", and I would personally consider the iMac at least "semiPro" because it is damn fast. I've said before that there is much too much of a price and capability gap between iMac and Mac Pro, which could easily be filled with a "Pizza Box" or more likely, and probably more favourable in my opinion, a "fullPro" larger version of iMac (upgradeable of course) which I designate iMac Ultra, cos it's a cool name.
There are good gradients between Mac Mini and iMac, MB and MBP, but not between iMac and MP.
An appropriately maxed (RAM and GPU) 20" iMac costs AU$3169.
A "comparable" MP (20" ACD, 2Ghz, 2Gb RAM) costs AU$5148
That's 60% more. Enough to buy a Macbook to take to Uni. Apple needs a ~AU$4000 option to fill the gap, ie. with a bigger screen, upgradeable, better GPU, better CPU, and I will be very happy. :rolleyes:
Yes, but Conroe processors are less expensive than Merom for faster clocks, faster bus speeds, but increased power consumption, but considering iMacs used to house G5's, and they don't rely on battery power, Conroe is the logical choice for the iMac.
Obviously the MBP should get the 2.16 and 2.33 Ghz Meroms, as you couldn't put a Conroe in one, but the MBP should not limit the speed of the iMac, just because it's not "Pro", and I would personally consider the iMac at least "semiPro" because it is damn fast. I've said before that there is much too much of a price and capability gap between iMac and Mac Pro, which could easily be filled with a "Pizza Box" or more likely, and probably more favourable in my opinion, a "fullPro" larger version of iMac (upgradeable of course) which I designate iMac Ultra, cos it's a cool name.
There are good gradients between Mac Mini and iMac, MB and MBP, but not between iMac and MP.
An appropriately maxed (RAM and GPU) 20" iMac costs AU$3169.
A "comparable" MP (20" ACD, 2Ghz, 2Gb RAM) costs AU$5148
That's 60% more. Enough to buy a Macbook to take to Uni. Apple needs a ~AU$4000 option to fill the gap, ie. with a bigger screen, upgradeable, better GPU, better CPU, and I will be very happy. :rolleyes:
iJohnHenry
Mar 20, 10:21 AM
This should all go public.
But they have worked so hard, all these decades, to diminish the "one man, one vote" to something much less than that.
Won't you think of their children, and reconsider?
:rolleyes:
But they have worked so hard, all these decades, to diminish the "one man, one vote" to something much less than that.
Won't you think of their children, and reconsider?
:rolleyes:
Willis
Jul 28, 04:27 PM
Okay, I did some tinkering myself, just for kicks, and here's what I came up with. I thought that we were talking about a computer that was somewhere between a Mac Mini and a Mac Pro (Power Mac), so I thought, maybe the style should be a combination of the two. Let me know what you think.
It's not a Mac Plus... It's a Mac++!
http://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++1.PNGhttp://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++2.PNG
can you say "G4 Cube"?
It's not a Mac Plus... It's a Mac++!
http://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++1.PNGhttp://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++2.PNG
can you say "G4 Cube"?
dmunz
Apr 8, 06:03 AM
I wonder if this has more to do with reward zone coupons and 18 month no interest financing. I always buy at Best Buy for these two reasons. Yes they are sleezeballs with cable pricing etc, but for the informed consumer, thier price/financing deals put them ahead on price controlled inventory like Apple stuff.
FWIW
DLM
FWIW
DLM
kdarling
Apr 6, 03:01 PM
But he then said after how well it would work on the phone, they put the tablet project on the shelf and focused on the phone as it was more important. Which means it was a tablet and no just a touch screen device in the beginning.
Sure, it could've been a full tablet. It just didn't have iOS, is my point.
People misremember a lot. You know how it goes: a story always gets better as time goes by :)
For example, in the later tablet version we are told that seeing kinetic scrolling on the demo made him want for Apple to build a touch phone:
“I had this idea about having a glass display, a multitouch display you could type on with your fingers. I asked our folks: could we come up with a multitouch display that we could type on? And six months later, they came back with this prototype display. And I gave it to one of our really brilliant UI guys and he called me back a few weeks later and had intertial scrolling working and I thought, ‘my God, we can build a phone with this!’ So we put the tablet on the shelf… and we went to work on the iPhone.”
Yet, years before in one of the first iPhone articles in we were told that kinetic scrolling came later on:
"At one point, Mr. Jobs got a call from one of the iPhone engineers with an idea: Why not allow iPhone users to navigate through both song collections and contacts stored on the device by simply flicking their fingers up and down across the surface of the touch-screen? The engineer gave Mr. Jobs a demonstration of the technology, and the Apple chief executive signed off on it immediately, according to a person familiar with the process."
I'd love one day for a definitive history to come out, so we can know the full timing, and also credit those unsung engineers who actually invented it all.
Sure, it could've been a full tablet. It just didn't have iOS, is my point.
People misremember a lot. You know how it goes: a story always gets better as time goes by :)
For example, in the later tablet version we are told that seeing kinetic scrolling on the demo made him want for Apple to build a touch phone:
“I had this idea about having a glass display, a multitouch display you could type on with your fingers. I asked our folks: could we come up with a multitouch display that we could type on? And six months later, they came back with this prototype display. And I gave it to one of our really brilliant UI guys and he called me back a few weeks later and had intertial scrolling working and I thought, ‘my God, we can build a phone with this!’ So we put the tablet on the shelf… and we went to work on the iPhone.”
Yet, years before in one of the first iPhone articles in we were told that kinetic scrolling came later on:
"At one point, Mr. Jobs got a call from one of the iPhone engineers with an idea: Why not allow iPhone users to navigate through both song collections and contacts stored on the device by simply flicking their fingers up and down across the surface of the touch-screen? The engineer gave Mr. Jobs a demonstration of the technology, and the Apple chief executive signed off on it immediately, according to a person familiar with the process."
I'd love one day for a definitive history to come out, so we can know the full timing, and also credit those unsung engineers who actually invented it all.
jettredmont
Apr 10, 05:47 PM
A bit of selective hearing on the part of MacRumors with the quotes they chose to use. At first the video sounds great, dude is hyping what he saw from Apple. But later he gets called out from another speculating Apple is making a very significant change and distancing Final Cut from the real 'pro' users, dumbing it down, etc, and the guy who has seen it gets real quiet.. He is asked if he will update his editing studio's workflow to the new Final Cut, and he basically danced around the question, pleaded the 5th, and made it pretty clear that he is holding back some reservations about how the industry will adapt to the changes.
I'm assuming you've never dealt with Apple, or probably any NDA situation. In "leaking" this information, I'm sure he thought very carefully about what he was going to say and how, in order to stay within his NDA and on the "good side" of Apple. He rehearsed that (I'm sure the quotes weren't summoned on the spot), and presented what he'd rehearsed. This approach makes sure you get the most cool information out there without stepping over bounds. However, it leaves nothing for Q&A, as you see here. No, he won't say he'll commit to a new FCP workflow because he's not sure if he should acknowledge any kind of new workflow. He can't talk about if the interface has been "dumbed down" because discussing that intelligently ("dumbing down" is not exactly a precisely defined term) would require going into details on the interface he was likely expressly forbidden from discussing.
Personally I'm very interested to see what they do, I'm sure it will have huge improvements on real time rendering and performance, sounds like the whole thing is being rewritten. But it does worry me that the program could become more for mass audience and no longer the pro application it has been for the past decade.
No sense in debating before it's revealed, but I'd welcome a few "mass audience" nods so long as they enhance existing workflows. The last couple releases have had several features which catered to the "mass audience" more than to the "FCP Expert" audience, and I think they've made a much stronger product. IMHO, what is needed here is really a deep-down codebase cleanout, but any interface improvements would be nice.
I'm assuming you've never dealt with Apple, or probably any NDA situation. In "leaking" this information, I'm sure he thought very carefully about what he was going to say and how, in order to stay within his NDA and on the "good side" of Apple. He rehearsed that (I'm sure the quotes weren't summoned on the spot), and presented what he'd rehearsed. This approach makes sure you get the most cool information out there without stepping over bounds. However, it leaves nothing for Q&A, as you see here. No, he won't say he'll commit to a new FCP workflow because he's not sure if he should acknowledge any kind of new workflow. He can't talk about if the interface has been "dumbed down" because discussing that intelligently ("dumbing down" is not exactly a precisely defined term) would require going into details on the interface he was likely expressly forbidden from discussing.
Personally I'm very interested to see what they do, I'm sure it will have huge improvements on real time rendering and performance, sounds like the whole thing is being rewritten. But it does worry me that the program could become more for mass audience and no longer the pro application it has been for the past decade.
No sense in debating before it's revealed, but I'd welcome a few "mass audience" nods so long as they enhance existing workflows. The last couple releases have had several features which catered to the "mass audience" more than to the "FCP Expert" audience, and I think they've made a much stronger product. IMHO, what is needed here is really a deep-down codebase cleanout, but any interface improvements would be nice.
Ivan P
Apr 8, 02:25 AM
Well right now I'm looking at both their online stores. Both sites have the Apple TV @ $99, so... uh.. Lol.
Wait ... I don't think I mentioned Best Buy paying customers to buy Apple products. I don't fully understand your post :/
I think what they're saying is it costs Best Buy (and I guess other resellers) $90 for each AppleTV unit they order in - and they sell it for Apple's set price of $99, meaning they make a measly $9 profit from the sale of one unit. They didn't mean that they are selling the unit to the consumer themselves for $90.
Edit. Original poster replied saying the exact same thing
Wait ... I don't think I mentioned Best Buy paying customers to buy Apple products. I don't fully understand your post :/
I think what they're saying is it costs Best Buy (and I guess other resellers) $90 for each AppleTV unit they order in - and they sell it for Apple's set price of $99, meaning they make a measly $9 profit from the sale of one unit. They didn't mean that they are selling the unit to the consumer themselves for $90.
Edit. Original poster replied saying the exact same thing
GoodWatch
Apr 6, 02:16 PM
Topics like this one are just a showcase for Apple's dominating brilliance (but they don't need this) and a watering hole for Apple fanboys. Buzzwords: Apple great, competition crappy and MS :p
Dan==
Jul 27, 02:29 PM
While I like your thinking, your mock-up is wrong. If Apple are going to release a mid-Tower it has to appeal to both gamers and those looking for a headless iMac. They would really have to bring out about three main models, one which was basically an upgradable iMac spec for a couple to few hundred bucks less than the real deal and two higher spec conroes, (short of Mac Pro though). From what I can see, yours looks too small to easily customise, which would appeal to gamers.
Single optical, single HD (2nd slot free), assume better specs will mainly lie with graphics and ram.
I'm not much of a gamer, so take this with a healthy grain of salt...
Gamers seem to like to do a few things:
Justin Bieber Reveals New
Single optical, single HD (2nd slot free), assume better specs will mainly lie with graphics and ram.
I'm not much of a gamer, so take this with a healthy grain of salt...
Gamers seem to like to do a few things:
neko girl
Mar 5, 03:18 AM
From what I understand:
Justin+ieber+new+haircut+
Now 2011 Justine Beiber wanted
Justin Bieber#39;s New Haircut
Short haircutjustin bieber
Justin+ieber+new+haircut+
iJohnHenry
Mar 5, 07:35 PM
That's (sadly) believable. See, now you're talking. I knew you didn't always pop round just to throw a cheeky non sequitur into the works. ;)
Yes, but actual critical thinking is no where near as much fun. :p
Yes, but actual critical thinking is no where near as much fun. :p
jmbear
Nov 29, 12:39 PM
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
jeanlain
Apr 12, 04:22 AM
I'm on a 2006 Mac Pro 2.66GHz.
I never set up QMaster. It's installed, but I never touched it. Mpeg2 (highest quality double pass) saturates all cores.
EDIT: sending to compressor from the timeline doesn't change. FCP and compressor together use 350% CPU (400% max).
I never set up QMaster. It's installed, but I never touched it. Mpeg2 (highest quality double pass) saturates all cores.
EDIT: sending to compressor from the timeline doesn't change. FCP and compressor together use 350% CPU (400% max).
brayhite
Apr 25, 01:59 PM
I'm not from the US so if someone with some legal background over there could point out to me how this would work..? Where I'm from you have to have suffered damages in order to sue someone, otherwise a government regulator would just impose a fine on the company or require them to stop what they are doing..? How have these people (who are suing apple) suffered losses as a result of this apparent spying technology..?
IANAL, but AFAIK, here in America, having rights infringed upon is reason for sueing. That, in itself, is a "damage". Hence why Apple is being sued. They apparently are infringing upon the consumers' rights to privacy.
IANAL, but AFAIK, here in America, having rights infringed upon is reason for sueing. That, in itself, is a "damage". Hence why Apple is being sued. They apparently are infringing upon the consumers' rights to privacy.
DeathChill
Aug 5, 05:41 PM
Kevin Rose (?) usually reveals all the proper stuff a day or so before, no? Wonder if he'll have it this time~
SuperSnake2012
Aug 5, 11:42 PM
Here, let me show you the art and science of rumoring (http://www.misterbg.org/AppleProductCycle/), Apple-style.
The funny thing is that the website is almost spot on with everything. :D
The funny thing is that the website is almost spot on with everything. :D
skunk
Feb 28, 06:33 PM
I acknowledge that I misspoke. Opinions like this should be checked. Carry on.Got me on "ignore", have you? :p
mccldwll
Apr 27, 08:50 AM
No it's not.
And I think MOST people aren't blowing anything out of proportion. Being concerned about tracking information/privacy issues is important. Most people (stop generalizing just because some on this board are) are NOT over-reacting but were calling for deeper investigation into the issue.
Yes, it is. It's hardly tracking if distant towers are also logged. It's a minor issue. Logs need to be deleted after a short period of time. It will be done.
And I think MOST people aren't blowing anything out of proportion. Being concerned about tracking information/privacy issues is important. Most people (stop generalizing just because some on this board are) are NOT over-reacting but were calling for deeper investigation into the issue.
Yes, it is. It's hardly tracking if distant towers are also logged. It's a minor issue. Logs need to be deleted after a short period of time. It will be done.
TripHop
Jun 9, 08:53 PM
Okay.. well I guess I wont be taking my chances at RadioShack. If they let me preorder, would I be good to go on launch day? Or could i still encounter problemsLooks like it will be no problem to lock in an iP4 for launch morning as long as we pre-order next Tuesday morning. It's sort of like 2 launch days - pre order next Tuesday the 15th for a $50 advance (in the form of a gift card) and receive the 24th. The Shack is much handier than any other launch store for me. :)
Popeye206
Apr 19, 02:11 PM
x2
Everything is just a development of something else.
There is no absolute originality.
This is a stupid waste of time and effort.
But I guess when you get all big and high and mighty then why not throw some of the spare cash at a silly law suit if for no other reason than getting more publicity.
You obviously don't work in software or product development with statements like this.
Everything is just a development of something else.
There is no absolute originality.
This is a stupid waste of time and effort.
But I guess when you get all big and high and mighty then why not throw some of the spare cash at a silly law suit if for no other reason than getting more publicity.
You obviously don't work in software or product development with statements like this.