flottenheimer
Mar 26, 12:12 PM
Very, very, very nice.
For a split second it almost convinced me to sell the family WII. Unfortunately my kids would miss Mario, Kirby, Klonoa and all the other Nintendo heroes way too much if I did that.
For a split second it almost convinced me to sell the family WII. Unfortunately my kids would miss Mario, Kirby, Klonoa and all the other Nintendo heroes way too much if I did that.
pedidoc
Jan 11, 11:28 PM
Its a hydrogen fuel-cell powered notebook!
herenow
Aug 20, 06:29 AM
im conisdering buying a 4gb nano tomorrow - however, i hear there could be an update coming soon: does anybody know when?
WildGuess
Apr 2, 09:16 PM
This edition will be forever known as the light bleed model. Mine has it, only slightly annoying. But it certainly knocks down the resale value, almost forcing me to consider exchanging it. Also slightly annoying.
rasmasyean
Mar 19, 04:56 PM
(Jesus,BBC reporting septics have fired 110 Tomahawks already at $1 million each,Raytheon shares will be on the up soon).
Damn those bastards! That batch cost the Americans 35 cents each! (110/308)
Oh well, at least the rich ones can make it up at Ratheon's next dividend payout. :D
Damn those bastards! That batch cost the Americans 35 cents each! (110/308)
Oh well, at least the rich ones can make it up at Ratheon's next dividend payout. :D
donlphi
Sep 6, 07:26 PM
CAN YOU SAY, "HERBIE FULLY LOADED IS THE #1 DOWNLOAD ON ITUNES MOVIE STORE"?
IF YOU CAN'T, GET READY, BECAUSE THAT WILL BE THE ONLY MOVIE AVAILABLE... ugh... that and Mary Poppins... geeze...
56781
IF YOU CAN'T, GET READY, BECAUSE THAT WILL BE THE ONLY MOVIE AVAILABLE... ugh... that and Mary Poppins... geeze...
56781
SactoGuy18
Nov 29, 10:14 PM
Folks,
The reason why the Zune sells poorly comes down to these factors:
1) The software to interface with the Zune leaves much to be desired in terms of ease of use. Every reviewer expresses concern about the unneccessary complications of the Zune software copying media files to the player.
2) Microsoft blew it by going to a new digital rights management system, one totally different than the DRM system used in conjunction with Windows Media Player 10/11 with its Play for Sure initiative.
Technically, while the Zune is larger than it needs to be, most reviewers do laud the interface on the player itself. I think once Microsoft improves the interface software for the Zune acceptance of the device will climb dramatically. After all, when Apple started selling iPods for Windows users it didn't become really popular until the iPod switched to the USB 2.0 connection and iTunes became available in a Windows version.
The reason why the Zune sells poorly comes down to these factors:
1) The software to interface with the Zune leaves much to be desired in terms of ease of use. Every reviewer expresses concern about the unneccessary complications of the Zune software copying media files to the player.
2) Microsoft blew it by going to a new digital rights management system, one totally different than the DRM system used in conjunction with Windows Media Player 10/11 with its Play for Sure initiative.
Technically, while the Zune is larger than it needs to be, most reviewers do laud the interface on the player itself. I think once Microsoft improves the interface software for the Zune acceptance of the device will climb dramatically. After all, when Apple started selling iPods for Windows users it didn't become really popular until the iPod switched to the USB 2.0 connection and iTunes became available in a Windows version.
macidiot
Jul 21, 07:07 PM
Your summation is a leap of faith, check your market history what I said has STRONG historical backing yours does NOT.
The USA President has a HUGE effect day to day ON THE WORLD scene and that effects the value of the dollar and thus everything else especially foreign investment which is THE BIGGEST money flow.
And Jimmy Carter is the BEST EXAMPLE of a disaster of foreign confidence.
I YOU believe THIS then you believe everything else he says and you are not paying any attention to WHAT HE DOES :eek:
Duuu !!
Without any doubt the President can and does, by WHO he appoints to the position of Fed Chairman.
Presidents that have a clue also have HUGE control over the money supply by how they fine tune and enforce immigration law, the demographics of entrepreneurialism is hugely effected in a relatively short time by emigration from europe since the average age of those emigrants is around 35.
The Feds money supply adjustments are diluted by this immigration which has a BIG effect on economic growth and the job market, although I don't expect you to understand this.
��� I AM NOT SURPRISED !!!
You just like to argue !
Your dreaming. The only thing a president can directly do to a market is provide a psychological boost, like when Reagan took office. The president can pass laws that make things favorable for the economy and stock market. However, this takes years to see the effects. And in case you don't know, the president can NOT pass laws by himself.
Again, since you clearly have no idea about government or economics, the market did well during the 80's because the overall economy was doing well. Which was normal, considering the country was in recession during the Carter administration. Oh, and the economy did poorly during the BUsh administration. Then did well during Clinton. It's called the business cycle. Which you obviously have no idea what that is. If you did, you would understand what the Fed does.
WTF does foreign confidence have to due with domestic economy? Carter was a failure economically because he was ineffective. And this was due to Congress. And AGAIN, there is something called the business cycle. You should study your history. The value of the dollar has little effect on day to day matters. Additionally, the foreign investment you speak of is important to debt, in the form of bonds and t-bills. It has far less effect on the stock market. You should study how world markets work.
While the president does appoint reserve board members, again your completely wrong. When Bush came into office, Greenspan was Chairman. So obviously, Bush did not appoint him. In fact, Ronald Reagan appointed him. Additionally, the governers serve for a time long enough to effectively keep them independent (14 years). So tell me, how does the President instruct the Fed to adjust the money supply? Oh that's right, he can't.
Basically, what you are saying is that the President also completely controls the Supreme court since the president also nominates justices? Whatever.
Immigration from Europe? What century are you living in? You think that effects the US economy? Puh-lease. Europe is in decline. Economically, the US pays attention to China and the far east. Not Europe. The money supply is diluted by immigration? WTF. And the President controls the money supply through immigration law? Those statements are absurd. In fact, they have to be some of the dumbest things I've heard in a long time.
I am guessing your living in Europe. Which would explain your euro-centric, myopic, and ill-informed opinions about how the US government and economy works.
The USA President has a HUGE effect day to day ON THE WORLD scene and that effects the value of the dollar and thus everything else especially foreign investment which is THE BIGGEST money flow.
And Jimmy Carter is the BEST EXAMPLE of a disaster of foreign confidence.
I YOU believe THIS then you believe everything else he says and you are not paying any attention to WHAT HE DOES :eek:
Duuu !!
Without any doubt the President can and does, by WHO he appoints to the position of Fed Chairman.
Presidents that have a clue also have HUGE control over the money supply by how they fine tune and enforce immigration law, the demographics of entrepreneurialism is hugely effected in a relatively short time by emigration from europe since the average age of those emigrants is around 35.
The Feds money supply adjustments are diluted by this immigration which has a BIG effect on economic growth and the job market, although I don't expect you to understand this.
��� I AM NOT SURPRISED !!!
You just like to argue !
Your dreaming. The only thing a president can directly do to a market is provide a psychological boost, like when Reagan took office. The president can pass laws that make things favorable for the economy and stock market. However, this takes years to see the effects. And in case you don't know, the president can NOT pass laws by himself.
Again, since you clearly have no idea about government or economics, the market did well during the 80's because the overall economy was doing well. Which was normal, considering the country was in recession during the Carter administration. Oh, and the economy did poorly during the BUsh administration. Then did well during Clinton. It's called the business cycle. Which you obviously have no idea what that is. If you did, you would understand what the Fed does.
WTF does foreign confidence have to due with domestic economy? Carter was a failure economically because he was ineffective. And this was due to Congress. And AGAIN, there is something called the business cycle. You should study your history. The value of the dollar has little effect on day to day matters. Additionally, the foreign investment you speak of is important to debt, in the form of bonds and t-bills. It has far less effect on the stock market. You should study how world markets work.
While the president does appoint reserve board members, again your completely wrong. When Bush came into office, Greenspan was Chairman. So obviously, Bush did not appoint him. In fact, Ronald Reagan appointed him. Additionally, the governers serve for a time long enough to effectively keep them independent (14 years). So tell me, how does the President instruct the Fed to adjust the money supply? Oh that's right, he can't.
Basically, what you are saying is that the President also completely controls the Supreme court since the president also nominates justices? Whatever.
Immigration from Europe? What century are you living in? You think that effects the US economy? Puh-lease. Europe is in decline. Economically, the US pays attention to China and the far east. Not Europe. The money supply is diluted by immigration? WTF. And the President controls the money supply through immigration law? Those statements are absurd. In fact, they have to be some of the dumbest things I've heard in a long time.
I am guessing your living in Europe. Which would explain your euro-centric, myopic, and ill-informed opinions about how the US government and economy works.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 1, 05:11 PM
That could be true, but I can't verify it - simply because I don't really see any of those around here....
A friend of mine owns a 2009 Jetta TDI, and another friend owns a 2003(ish) Golf TDI. The new Jetta is significantly better than the Golf with the older generation diesel, but even the Golf's engine is much more refined than a diesel truck engine.
I live out in the country (horse and cattle farms), and about half the pickups out here are 3/4 ton and 1 ton diesels, mostly Chevys and Fords. Following one down the highway it's hard to hear them, but if you're behind one you can damn sure smell it - and yes, I'm talking about the new ones, too.
I live in Alaska, and they love their big diesel trucks here. I can agree that pretty much all of them stink awfully when you drive behind them. Also, performance modifications are pretty popular, so that with re-tuned ECUs and free-flowing exhausts, the damned things are positively deafening and noxious. The older trucks are definitely much worse than the newest models though.
Can't speak to the new DPF-equipped trucks, I haven't had enough experience with them. Hopefully, the increasingly stringent economy and pollution regulations will continue to make pickup diesels less and less similar to the dumptruck, semi and bulldozer engines we currently associate them with.
Still, the bottom line is, passenger car diesel engines from Germany and Italy in particular are excellent and nothing like the big clunkers in American trucks. If a diesel Cruze makes it here, it will be very smooth and quiet by comparison.
A friend of mine owns a 2009 Jetta TDI, and another friend owns a 2003(ish) Golf TDI. The new Jetta is significantly better than the Golf with the older generation diesel, but even the Golf's engine is much more refined than a diesel truck engine.
I live out in the country (horse and cattle farms), and about half the pickups out here are 3/4 ton and 1 ton diesels, mostly Chevys and Fords. Following one down the highway it's hard to hear them, but if you're behind one you can damn sure smell it - and yes, I'm talking about the new ones, too.
I live in Alaska, and they love their big diesel trucks here. I can agree that pretty much all of them stink awfully when you drive behind them. Also, performance modifications are pretty popular, so that with re-tuned ECUs and free-flowing exhausts, the damned things are positively deafening and noxious. The older trucks are definitely much worse than the newest models though.
Can't speak to the new DPF-equipped trucks, I haven't had enough experience with them. Hopefully, the increasingly stringent economy and pollution regulations will continue to make pickup diesels less and less similar to the dumptruck, semi and bulldozer engines we currently associate them with.
Still, the bottom line is, passenger car diesel engines from Germany and Italy in particular are excellent and nothing like the big clunkers in American trucks. If a diesel Cruze makes it here, it will be very smooth and quiet by comparison.
SplinterCell
Nov 28, 12:33 PM
Heh.
Suck it, Microsoft :cool:
I watched a television show on the history of video games a couple of weeks ago. I forget what channel it was on...History or Discovery or something like that, but I specifically remember them saying that Microsoft lost a lot of money on the xbox, but that they didn't care...they just wanted to get their foot in the door.
I think it was this show:
http://games.ign.com/articles/744/744878p1.html
Just last week I was watching Larry King interview Bill Gates & one the topics was the first gen xbox & Bill Gates said they broke even on the xbox but still considered it a success because they had a good position in the market.
Suck it, Microsoft :cool:
I watched a television show on the history of video games a couple of weeks ago. I forget what channel it was on...History or Discovery or something like that, but I specifically remember them saying that Microsoft lost a lot of money on the xbox, but that they didn't care...they just wanted to get their foot in the door.
I think it was this show:
http://games.ign.com/articles/744/744878p1.html
Just last week I was watching Larry King interview Bill Gates & one the topics was the first gen xbox & Bill Gates said they broke even on the xbox but still considered it a success because they had a good position in the market.
islanders
Dec 27, 10:33 PM
I'm waiting for one format or the other to win, and I don't have an HD set anyway.
You're comparing apples to oranges now. A cable box is a tuner and a self-contained unit. As far as we know, iTV will not have a tuner. Its only known function at this time is to stream content from a Mac, so that makes iTV like a Slingbox, not a cableco DVR. And Slingboxes don't have hard drives.
I wouldn't hold my breath on the word processing and web surfing. WebTV showed surfing the internet on a TV sucked because trying to read normal-sized text from six feet away was hard, and bumping the text size up would goof up the page layout generally. Same reason word processing would be silly.
I'm predicting a price around $400, but I'm also expecting a streaming device.
What bandwidth? The stuff you watch is downloaded to your Mac first, or even the iTV itself. They don't stream it every time you want to watch it. The iTunes Store is open for business for movies. The bandwidth problem has already been addressed.
That's lack of competition caused by effects of previous government sanctioned monopolies. And some "cooperation" by the different players in the industry. Kinda like how airline tickets and auto insurance are all pretty much the same.
Ok, I don�t know what a slingbox is� and I thought it was going to stream or operate like a TiVo, where it downloads while you are asleep, so it would need a harddrive.
Also, I�m not sure what you mean by TV? Do you mean a CRT with an aspect of 4:3? And, I would assume you don�t mean a flat panel LCD or Plasma, which now outsells tube tvs? A small HD plasma is 42�� and cost about $1000. I just got a Panny 9UK HD Plasma and it works quite will with a mac mini.
And when you download from the iTunes store this does go to a harddrive? So you think I�m going to buy both a new computer and the iTV, and pay $20 to download a few movies?
I already know I�m an idiot, thanks, but this still doesn�t make sense to me.
My point about price fixing was a wild hope that Apple might step in with iDish and offer a service without all the commercials, but I also said that I think this will be a HD movie download service, and web serfer, video server... like a mac mini, TiVo with streaming abilities from iTV.
The bandwidth limitation will be an issue if iTV wants to go past a download service.
You're comparing apples to oranges now. A cable box is a tuner and a self-contained unit. As far as we know, iTV will not have a tuner. Its only known function at this time is to stream content from a Mac, so that makes iTV like a Slingbox, not a cableco DVR. And Slingboxes don't have hard drives.
I wouldn't hold my breath on the word processing and web surfing. WebTV showed surfing the internet on a TV sucked because trying to read normal-sized text from six feet away was hard, and bumping the text size up would goof up the page layout generally. Same reason word processing would be silly.
I'm predicting a price around $400, but I'm also expecting a streaming device.
What bandwidth? The stuff you watch is downloaded to your Mac first, or even the iTV itself. They don't stream it every time you want to watch it. The iTunes Store is open for business for movies. The bandwidth problem has already been addressed.
That's lack of competition caused by effects of previous government sanctioned monopolies. And some "cooperation" by the different players in the industry. Kinda like how airline tickets and auto insurance are all pretty much the same.
Ok, I don�t know what a slingbox is� and I thought it was going to stream or operate like a TiVo, where it downloads while you are asleep, so it would need a harddrive.
Also, I�m not sure what you mean by TV? Do you mean a CRT with an aspect of 4:3? And, I would assume you don�t mean a flat panel LCD or Plasma, which now outsells tube tvs? A small HD plasma is 42�� and cost about $1000. I just got a Panny 9UK HD Plasma and it works quite will with a mac mini.
And when you download from the iTunes store this does go to a harddrive? So you think I�m going to buy both a new computer and the iTV, and pay $20 to download a few movies?
I already know I�m an idiot, thanks, but this still doesn�t make sense to me.
My point about price fixing was a wild hope that Apple might step in with iDish and offer a service without all the commercials, but I also said that I think this will be a HD movie download service, and web serfer, video server... like a mac mini, TiVo with streaming abilities from iTV.
The bandwidth limitation will be an issue if iTV wants to go past a download service.
AidenShaw
Aug 25, 03:18 PM
What I am really hoping is that there will be an add-on base module in a similar form factor to turn any Mini into a full-blown HD/Audio media centre.
A second white plastic box with some wires connected to a MiniMac for the media centre? That would be tacky...
Instead, I'd expect The New Form-Factor Conroe Mini-Tower/Pizza-Box to be in a single black cabinet the size and shape of a DVD-player or other media component.
The would leave room for two 3.5" drives (1500 GB today), the TV tuner and compressors, and room for good cooling with some very quiet fans.
Would you expect anything less than great styling for the Apple media centre ?
A second white plastic box with some wires connected to a MiniMac for the media centre? That would be tacky...
Instead, I'd expect The New Form-Factor Conroe Mini-Tower/Pizza-Box to be in a single black cabinet the size and shape of a DVD-player or other media component.
The would leave room for two 3.5" drives (1500 GB today), the TV tuner and compressors, and room for good cooling with some very quiet fans.
Would you expect anything less than great styling for the Apple media centre ?
georgerussos
Sep 20, 04:13 PM
Ah, I got a nice silicon one and a nice polycarbonate one, then I will wait for Griffins. I also got a Zagg Shield :) My iPod is going to be shiny as new!!
DouchGod
Nov 27, 05:00 AM
Swatch New Gent "black Rebel"
Seagate Momentus XT 500Gb 32Mb Cache 4Gb "SSD"
http://www.yugatech.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/seagate-momentus-xt.jpg
What do you think of this drive?
Seagate Momentus XT 500Gb 32Mb Cache 4Gb "SSD"
http://www.yugatech.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/seagate-momentus-xt.jpg
What do you think of this drive?
Clive At Five
Nov 28, 02:15 PM
Because they fear the iPod... and its ecosystem...
This is key for sure. The success of the iPod is directly attributed to its integrated "ecosystem" as you put it. iTS, iTunes, iPod.
Slowly but surely, with movies, photos and games - and MUCH talk of cell phone syncing with iCal, Address Book and iApps - Apple is attempting to tie iLife & OS X into the equation... making it a critical and integral part of that ecosystem.
If people wanted the full iPod experience, they NEEDED iTunes... so they adopted it. In the future, with product XYZ, people will NEED OS X for the full experience... and they will adopt it.
THAT is what MS fears about Apple/iPod. They could give a rat's ass about the portable music/media market. They just want desperately to kill the iPod and what it means for MS's future.
In my opinion, they should've undersold by $50+/unit. At their current rate, they'll never penetrate the market.
-Clive
This is key for sure. The success of the iPod is directly attributed to its integrated "ecosystem" as you put it. iTS, iTunes, iPod.
Slowly but surely, with movies, photos and games - and MUCH talk of cell phone syncing with iCal, Address Book and iApps - Apple is attempting to tie iLife & OS X into the equation... making it a critical and integral part of that ecosystem.
If people wanted the full iPod experience, they NEEDED iTunes... so they adopted it. In the future, with product XYZ, people will NEED OS X for the full experience... and they will adopt it.
THAT is what MS fears about Apple/iPod. They could give a rat's ass about the portable music/media market. They just want desperately to kill the iPod and what it means for MS's future.
In my opinion, they should've undersold by $50+/unit. At their current rate, they'll never penetrate the market.
-Clive
Lord Blackadder
Mar 3, 01:39 PM
Volvo has recently launched a diesl hybrid (V60 Hybrid) with a claimed 124 US mpg
http://www.volvocars.com/uk/campaigns/hybrid/Pages/default.aspx
Also note seeing as we are an apple related board
http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/motorshows/geneva-motor-show/264535/volvo_v60_diesel_plugin_hybrid.html
Very cool, a very impressive car - outstanding economy without sacrificing anything (except that it will be pretty expensive). 99% chance it won't make it here. :o
There have been plenty of diesel hybrids prototyped over the last few years, but they are just not making it to market. Hopefully that is beginning to change.
i haven't seen either in the flesh yet to be honest... GM selling the cruze in europe without a hatchback version for 2 years simply was a mistake
if you want to be successful in europe as mass car maker you have to:
1. offer a diesel
2. offer a hatchback if its a small car/ offer a station wagon if it's a large one
3. combine rule 1 and rule 2
4. offer them within 3 months of release
We'll see how the Jetta sells. I'm hoping I'm wrong about it moving downmarket, but it's a lot cheaper than the old one so it remains to be seen how they kept the quality up.
Here in the US, the sedan (saloon) is king, even on smaller cars like the Focus and Corolla. That is slowly beginning to change, but Americans still like three-box cars over hatchbacks. Personally I prefer hatchbacks and wagons, though larger cars still look good as sedans.
The major difference between US and European car buyers is that Europeans are willing to buy an expensive small car, and Americans still associate size with price and quality. Small cars should be cheap and sparsely appointed, big cars are expensive and more feature-filled. This idea is changing, but only slowly.
By the way, I do like the Volvo C30 - it's a bit of an ageing design now but it still looks good and has a lot of power in T5 form. Kind of a yuppie-mobile though.
http://www.volvocars.com/uk/campaigns/hybrid/Pages/default.aspx
Also note seeing as we are an apple related board
http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/motorshows/geneva-motor-show/264535/volvo_v60_diesel_plugin_hybrid.html
Very cool, a very impressive car - outstanding economy without sacrificing anything (except that it will be pretty expensive). 99% chance it won't make it here. :o
There have been plenty of diesel hybrids prototyped over the last few years, but they are just not making it to market. Hopefully that is beginning to change.
i haven't seen either in the flesh yet to be honest... GM selling the cruze in europe without a hatchback version for 2 years simply was a mistake
if you want to be successful in europe as mass car maker you have to:
1. offer a diesel
2. offer a hatchback if its a small car/ offer a station wagon if it's a large one
3. combine rule 1 and rule 2
4. offer them within 3 months of release
We'll see how the Jetta sells. I'm hoping I'm wrong about it moving downmarket, but it's a lot cheaper than the old one so it remains to be seen how they kept the quality up.
Here in the US, the sedan (saloon) is king, even on smaller cars like the Focus and Corolla. That is slowly beginning to change, but Americans still like three-box cars over hatchbacks. Personally I prefer hatchbacks and wagons, though larger cars still look good as sedans.
The major difference between US and European car buyers is that Europeans are willing to buy an expensive small car, and Americans still associate size with price and quality. Small cars should be cheap and sparsely appointed, big cars are expensive and more feature-filled. This idea is changing, but only slowly.
By the way, I do like the Volvo C30 - it's a bit of an ageing design now but it still looks good and has a lot of power in T5 form. Kind of a yuppie-mobile though.
peharri
Jul 18, 09:32 AM
...but why on Earth would Jobs announce this at a developer's conference?
WWDC showcases the new hardware and software, but this isn't either, it's a product of little or no interest to developers. It's the wrong audience.
A more realistic possibility is a seperate, unrelated, keynote. The iTunes Music Store was announced at a special event, and I'd imagine any "movie download service" would be announced similarly.
I don't think the idea is impossible. I can see a $5 fixed fee thing working quite well, with $1 going to Apple to cover their operating costs. They can probably get an hour or so of moderate, better-then-VHS-resolution, quality for 100 megabytes if they choose a reasonable codec. The system probably fits Apple better than a selling system, where questions like "I can burn my music to CD, how come I can't burn my movies to DVD" will be asked. The major issue I can forsee though is that most of us want to watch movies on a large screen. Most Mac users don't really have anything that would work for that. Perhaps a little, cheap, Firewire widget that does TV out should be in Apple's future.
WWDC showcases the new hardware and software, but this isn't either, it's a product of little or no interest to developers. It's the wrong audience.
A more realistic possibility is a seperate, unrelated, keynote. The iTunes Music Store was announced at a special event, and I'd imagine any "movie download service" would be announced similarly.
I don't think the idea is impossible. I can see a $5 fixed fee thing working quite well, with $1 going to Apple to cover their operating costs. They can probably get an hour or so of moderate, better-then-VHS-resolution, quality for 100 megabytes if they choose a reasonable codec. The system probably fits Apple better than a selling system, where questions like "I can burn my music to CD, how come I can't burn my movies to DVD" will be asked. The major issue I can forsee though is that most of us want to watch movies on a large screen. Most Mac users don't really have anything that would work for that. Perhaps a little, cheap, Firewire widget that does TV out should be in Apple's future.
FireStar
Oct 9, 06:43 PM
The hexgrip cases look slick. http://stores.ebay.com/Cimo-Cases/Soft-Gel-Cases-/_i.html?_fsub=2283659015&_sid=192097565&_trksid=p4634.c0.m322 i like the material as well.
Kinda a ridiculous price for a generic case.
Kinda a ridiculous price for a generic case.
evoluzione
Aug 6, 09:27 PM
anyone have any clues to whether the Apple retail stores are goig to be showing the keynote???
apb3
Aug 31, 10:12 AM
Blue sky on wireless? Think a device which works out presence of others, and can connect safely.
Imagine being able to *share* (not stream, but share) your tunes with others on a "I'm interested in your... can I share/get that from you).
This goes beyond fair use and would not be legal. Just because I buy a song or CD, movie whatever does not mean I can give it to all my friends. I'm sure you didn't mean that
If you want to use up all your authorized machines (what is it? 5 now?) for a few friends to listen to a few songs every once in a while - I guess that would be arguably OK, but I think it would still go beyond fair use rules.
Being on the tube/commuting for ~ 1 1/2 hours a day or so and seeing >6 ipods through glancing for white buds alone, the possiblities are huge.
What are net connections used mostly for (in terms of Mb up/down) It's P2P. There wouldn't be any roaming charges, any peak rates. You could do it in a lecture room, whilst you were studying, or having coffee with friends (sharing tunes, rather than listening )
Think one big interacting social darknet :D Think virality without PC's needed.
Someone has a cool tune, and it could replicate exponentially!
For more benefits: Linking up to USB wireless receiver chips - you can wireless move files to/from PC.
Hands free driving - using changeable function paddles/butons on the steeering wheel. Hell - You could have a HUD of iTunes on a car soon (or at the very least, hook it up to those screens in the back of those orrible 4x4s )
In terms of illegal possibilities, think discogs. The amount of music you'll bump into increases a lot, so the rarer stuff might be out there. You could strike up a friendship with someone who had say, the entire back catalogue of (insert your fave band/movie/TV series). People could be walking lossless discographies of current artists. A discog of an artist is at most probably under 10Gig, so for a >60Gig player...
Who needs radio when you can stream? You could get it to actively hunt for a MP3 id tag genre - rock/pop, or highly rated artists. You could have the function to hunt for certain artists/songs...
That's another reason why I want wireless.
All this still does not tip the scales in terms of cost/benefit. Wireless will eat up your battery. It will be clumsy and frustrating (I would really hate for the new Streets single to break off midway through because iPod girl gets off at her stop or walks out of range). Also, I would not be thrilled adding drain to my battery by engaging sharing/wireless just so a bunch of strangers can mooch off of me. If my friend wants to listen to a song I have there are many ways he can do so without adding cost to the iPod and my time by having to charge the iPod all the time to make it possible in the first place
As for wireless sync... why? My god man, if we've come to the point where putting the iPod in its base is too difficult, we're screwed. Maybe there'd be the odd time when you forgot your cable or dock on a trip but that should be a rare enough occurence. If you find you always forget your cables, get an extra. You're also not addressing that you'd need that cable or dock for charging anyway (especially since you're going to be using that wireless feature to kill your battery much more quickly).
The chance that someone with an iPod (who also happens to be willing to kill their battery for my enjoyment) will be in range long enough for me to enjoy a few x-ray specks or spacemen 3 tracks are, in my opinion, close to nil.
The car options using wireless make some degree of sense (you'd be able to charge the unit by the cig lighter at least), but this seems better addressed by car/stereo makers. They're already doing it. Theree are also adapters for sale that do this.
I don't have all I need yet in this area but hooking my iPod up to the charger/FM transmitter I have let's me use the steering wheel controls for everything except the menu/scrolling bits (I know that's a big thing but I've got it set up so the iPod in it's charger/transmitter is right next to my knee and easier to manipulate than a cell phone and no harder than using the controls on the radio that are not available on the steering column). The HUD would be cool, though, and would make me a safer driver... I always wanted a HUD for my car. I think Cadillac actually had a model with an optional HUD for the main instrument panel items a while back. I wonder why more auto makers don't do this... or do they and I am just ignorant?
All in all, I just don't see enough good in adding wireless (of whatever kind) to the iPod to justify it. Now, a non-iPod (new) product that had wireless with a limited music/photo/video feature set (iPhone?, iBerry?) might be on the horizon. That wouldn't be bad as it would give those you feel the same as you the option to get their much needed "wireless," while letting others enjoy the most elegant, easy to use media player on the market without the bloat.
Imagine being able to *share* (not stream, but share) your tunes with others on a "I'm interested in your... can I share/get that from you).
This goes beyond fair use and would not be legal. Just because I buy a song or CD, movie whatever does not mean I can give it to all my friends. I'm sure you didn't mean that
If you want to use up all your authorized machines (what is it? 5 now?) for a few friends to listen to a few songs every once in a while - I guess that would be arguably OK, but I think it would still go beyond fair use rules.
Being on the tube/commuting for ~ 1 1/2 hours a day or so and seeing >6 ipods through glancing for white buds alone, the possiblities are huge.
What are net connections used mostly for (in terms of Mb up/down) It's P2P. There wouldn't be any roaming charges, any peak rates. You could do it in a lecture room, whilst you were studying, or having coffee with friends (sharing tunes, rather than listening )
Think one big interacting social darknet :D Think virality without PC's needed.
Someone has a cool tune, and it could replicate exponentially!
For more benefits: Linking up to USB wireless receiver chips - you can wireless move files to/from PC.
Hands free driving - using changeable function paddles/butons on the steeering wheel. Hell - You could have a HUD of iTunes on a car soon (or at the very least, hook it up to those screens in the back of those orrible 4x4s )
In terms of illegal possibilities, think discogs. The amount of music you'll bump into increases a lot, so the rarer stuff might be out there. You could strike up a friendship with someone who had say, the entire back catalogue of (insert your fave band/movie/TV series). People could be walking lossless discographies of current artists. A discog of an artist is at most probably under 10Gig, so for a >60Gig player...
Who needs radio when you can stream? You could get it to actively hunt for a MP3 id tag genre - rock/pop, or highly rated artists. You could have the function to hunt for certain artists/songs...
That's another reason why I want wireless.
All this still does not tip the scales in terms of cost/benefit. Wireless will eat up your battery. It will be clumsy and frustrating (I would really hate for the new Streets single to break off midway through because iPod girl gets off at her stop or walks out of range). Also, I would not be thrilled adding drain to my battery by engaging sharing/wireless just so a bunch of strangers can mooch off of me. If my friend wants to listen to a song I have there are many ways he can do so without adding cost to the iPod and my time by having to charge the iPod all the time to make it possible in the first place
As for wireless sync... why? My god man, if we've come to the point where putting the iPod in its base is too difficult, we're screwed. Maybe there'd be the odd time when you forgot your cable or dock on a trip but that should be a rare enough occurence. If you find you always forget your cables, get an extra. You're also not addressing that you'd need that cable or dock for charging anyway (especially since you're going to be using that wireless feature to kill your battery much more quickly).
The chance that someone with an iPod (who also happens to be willing to kill their battery for my enjoyment) will be in range long enough for me to enjoy a few x-ray specks or spacemen 3 tracks are, in my opinion, close to nil.
The car options using wireless make some degree of sense (you'd be able to charge the unit by the cig lighter at least), but this seems better addressed by car/stereo makers. They're already doing it. Theree are also adapters for sale that do this.
I don't have all I need yet in this area but hooking my iPod up to the charger/FM transmitter I have let's me use the steering wheel controls for everything except the menu/scrolling bits (I know that's a big thing but I've got it set up so the iPod in it's charger/transmitter is right next to my knee and easier to manipulate than a cell phone and no harder than using the controls on the radio that are not available on the steering column). The HUD would be cool, though, and would make me a safer driver... I always wanted a HUD for my car. I think Cadillac actually had a model with an optional HUD for the main instrument panel items a while back. I wonder why more auto makers don't do this... or do they and I am just ignorant?
All in all, I just don't see enough good in adding wireless (of whatever kind) to the iPod to justify it. Now, a non-iPod (new) product that had wireless with a limited music/photo/video feature set (iPhone?, iBerry?) might be on the horizon. That wouldn't be bad as it would give those you feel the same as you the option to get their much needed "wireless," while letting others enjoy the most elegant, easy to use media player on the market without the bloat.
EscobarFilms
Mar 26, 12:30 AM
umm ok.. so why ios doesnt support full hd? will the new ios 5 will support full hd?
ftaok
Mar 25, 05:12 PM
naysayers are probably more concerned with the fact that you can't look at the tv screen while fumbling for the touch controls on the ipad; physical buttons enable the player to just feel for the controls, without having to look down and miss the action on tv. the only games that would work for this are racing games, where you just tilt the ipad.
what a world of difference some buttons would make <sigh>
Well, couldn't someone make a BT D-pad controller and develop dual screen games for the iPad2?
Other games that could work with this set-up are RPGs and strategy games where a second screen comes in handy.
what a world of difference some buttons would make <sigh>
Well, couldn't someone make a BT D-pad controller and develop dual screen games for the iPad2?
Other games that could work with this set-up are RPGs and strategy games where a second screen comes in handy.
jessica.
Feb 23, 10:13 AM
No Ikea for about 500 miles from me. They made a ton of different series from cheap crap to the really nice stuff. Mine was the middle on the line and was $179.00 on sales.
Forget about it man, that tool chest looks 1000 times cooler than ikea. :)
Forget about it man, that tool chest looks 1000 times cooler than ikea. :)
AFPoster
Mar 22, 01:10 PM
I don't believe you, that's my opinion.
I think thats why I said in the first sentence, "that's my opinion".
I think thats why I said in the first sentence, "that's my opinion".