SamEllens
Apr 12, 09:12 PM
The variety of source formats is going to continue to expand. Sure, some common standards emerge, such as hard drives and flash media, but just because in the past there was only one origination and one output format doesn't mean that this is the way the process has to work, or is somehow intrinsically superior.
By source and output I'm pretty sure he's referring to what you call the Preview/Canvas monitors in FCP, or Source/Record in AVID.
By source and output I'm pretty sure he's referring to what you call the Preview/Canvas monitors in FCP, or Source/Record in AVID.
Multimedia
Nov 17, 07:33 PM
IMO, what Apple really needs is a system between the Mac Pro and iMac. A smaller tower or cube style system with a single Kentsfield or Clovertown CPU with 2 or 3 PCI-E slots, two HDD bays, optical bay and using cheaper, more conventional RAM - like up to 8GB DDR2. Apple is ignoring an entire segment of the market and it seems like they're trying to use the small difference in price between a maxed-out 24" iMac and a relatively low-end Mac Pro as justification for nothing in the middle.I agree. Apple's view of the market is very strange. They seem to think their customers either only want an all-in-one two core solution or an extremely expensive top of the line 4 or 8 core solution. Hopefully Kentsfield will find a home in a new Mac line in 2007.
bigpics
Mar 24, 12:57 PM
Dude, I'm sorry to inform you that what you're saying is an outright lie, and there are guys from the Lossless Compression Clan, called "Apple Lossless codec", "FLAC", and "APE", standing with heavy cluebats in their hands, ready to perform a painful reality sync on anyone thinking compression ALWAYS degrades quality.
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
Stella
Aug 16, 09:33 AM
If the report is from Digitimes then it can't be true.
They are consistently full of *****.
I'm surpised this isn't on page 2.
They are consistently full of *****.
I'm surpised this isn't on page 2.
yukyuklee
Feb 25, 05:31 PM
Hey Veg,
Where did you get that lamp?
Where did you get that lamp?
*LTD*
Apr 23, 12:17 AM
Not this easy.
It's not so much about finding people at any moment, but knowing where they've been. And this file makes it dirt simple to find that out.
A guy in your terrorist cell claims he's not FBI, because he's never been to Washington DC. Even his phone contacts are all people nowhere near there. Yet what if his cache list says otherwise. He's probably dead.
By now, you also know that I always speak from personal experience when possible.
I was Military Intelligence and NSA in the heart of the Cold War. I did undercover field work at times. This kind of easy info is both priceless and dangerous. I've seen field officers compromised in almost every way imaginable. My scenarios are not stretches by any means.
Sorry, I just don't buy it. Isolated examples dependent upon a very rare set of circumstances that the average user won't encounter. I *do* believe your experience, you're very well versed when it comes to tech and no doubt well-treavelled, but this is just too much of a stretch. Yes, it's possible. But it's also possible to gain the same information in much more common and easier ways, instead of the super-spy scenario. I'm not sure how your terrorist cell example applies to anything relevant (or dangerous) for the average, everyday person.
I'm pretty sure your average FBI agent's iPhone (assuming they carry around iPhones) that has been cleared for use (and very likely modified) by the FBI can be stripped right down forensically and will have revealed absolutely nothing.
The average user who is *not* a secret agent really has nothing to be in up in arms about, provided they haven't just knocked off a bank or killed someone.
It's not so much about finding people at any moment, but knowing where they've been. And this file makes it dirt simple to find that out.
A guy in your terrorist cell claims he's not FBI, because he's never been to Washington DC. Even his phone contacts are all people nowhere near there. Yet what if his cache list says otherwise. He's probably dead.
By now, you also know that I always speak from personal experience when possible.
I was Military Intelligence and NSA in the heart of the Cold War. I did undercover field work at times. This kind of easy info is both priceless and dangerous. I've seen field officers compromised in almost every way imaginable. My scenarios are not stretches by any means.
Sorry, I just don't buy it. Isolated examples dependent upon a very rare set of circumstances that the average user won't encounter. I *do* believe your experience, you're very well versed when it comes to tech and no doubt well-treavelled, but this is just too much of a stretch. Yes, it's possible. But it's also possible to gain the same information in much more common and easier ways, instead of the super-spy scenario. I'm not sure how your terrorist cell example applies to anything relevant (or dangerous) for the average, everyday person.
I'm pretty sure your average FBI agent's iPhone (assuming they carry around iPhones) that has been cleared for use (and very likely modified) by the FBI can be stripped right down forensically and will have revealed absolutely nothing.
The average user who is *not* a secret agent really has nothing to be in up in arms about, provided they haven't just knocked off a bank or killed someone.
Full of Win
Apr 12, 08:57 PM
I thought the new iMovie was genius. I knew SO many family members who wouldn't touch the old iMovie because it was too complicated. They needed something simpler and the new iMovie gave it to them.
I really think the only people who complained about the new iMovie were people who should have been using Final Cut Express all along anyway. It's not Apple's fault that they weren't using the right program before.
It's always the users fault. :rolleyes:
I really think the only people who complained about the new iMovie were people who should have been using Final Cut Express all along anyway. It's not Apple's fault that they weren't using the right program before.
It's always the users fault. :rolleyes:
twoodcc
May 2, 08:21 PM
they're all used for DTP (AI, AP, QE, etc)
the older one (at home) needs to be paused anytime I need to do anything processor intensive (not the issue with the 09s) especially HB and the like.
The 08 wont make deadlines with the bidadv units (not after pausing it for hours at a time LOL) unfortunately, I am unable to select the number of processors it will use (like I use to <4>) so now I have to pause it.
It looks like people are aware of the user name issues over in the "F@H Widget needs testing" thread
LK
oh ok.
you know, if you use the console client, you can tell it how many cores to use - like smp 7 would only use 7, instead of 8. but i'm not sure if it would make the deadline with only 7. probably not with less than that though.
so with the 09's you can do other things while it's folding bigadv units and no problems?
the older one (at home) needs to be paused anytime I need to do anything processor intensive (not the issue with the 09s) especially HB and the like.
The 08 wont make deadlines with the bidadv units (not after pausing it for hours at a time LOL) unfortunately, I am unable to select the number of processors it will use (like I use to <4>) so now I have to pause it.
It looks like people are aware of the user name issues over in the "F@H Widget needs testing" thread
LK
oh ok.
you know, if you use the console client, you can tell it how many cores to use - like smp 7 would only use 7, instead of 8. but i'm not sure if it would make the deadline with only 7. probably not with less than that though.
so with the 09's you can do other things while it's folding bigadv units and no problems?
%25252B(FanMade%25252BSingle%25252BCover)%25252BMade%25252Bby%25252Bvinaixa67.png "Justin+ieber+fan+chat+")
andrew.gw
Apr 3, 06:30 AM
If you scroll up over the icon of a closed app in the dock you see thumbnails of those recent files. Pretty cool.
Hey, that's pretty awesome! I wish that would work with Expos�, for open applications...
Hey, that's pretty awesome! I wish that would work with Expos�, for open applications...
aquajet
Sep 6, 09:22 AM
The latest pathetic Mac Mini upgrade continues to highlight the idiocy of the decision to build a cheap 'switcher' computer using expensive notebook parts.
Sometimes it's about form over function. This is nothing new for Apple.
Sometimes it's about form over function. This is nothing new for Apple.
Benjy91
Mar 28, 02:17 AM
Again people saying you couldn't play with a touchscreen device without looking at it have no imagination or understanding. Definately within two years you will be shown to be horribly wrong on this point.
You're sure about that? Considering the next Xbox isn't due for release till about 2015, and the PS4 probably later, and I'm pretty sure those systems will ship with controllers. The Kinect being an optional extra.
And I seriously doubt the iPad will could be seen as a serious competitor to Games Consoles and PC gaming, in the same way my calculator is a competitor to my iPhone because it performs a same function, better than my iPhone does.
You're sure about that? Considering the next Xbox isn't due for release till about 2015, and the PS4 probably later, and I'm pretty sure those systems will ship with controllers. The Kinect being an optional extra.
And I seriously doubt the iPad will could be seen as a serious competitor to Games Consoles and PC gaming, in the same way my calculator is a competitor to my iPhone because it performs a same function, better than my iPhone does.
Shagrat
Nov 15, 11:18 AM
How can this get negative votes? In fact, how do a lot of perfectly benign threads get negative votes? Are there just members out there who vote negative on everything?
PC Trolls??
PC Trolls??
Earendil
Nov 27, 02:52 PM
It kills me that the least expensive Apple display is $700. I just can't justify the tax over a Dell display, and I'm amazed how others can. A Dell 2007WFP (their 20" widescreen display which uses the same panel that's found in Apple's 20") is $400. It also sports inputs for VGA, composite and S-Video. And for a Dell, the display is reasonably attractive.
The Apple displays give you a shiny aluminum bezel, firewire routing, and software display controls. Is that enough to merit a 75% markup?
So, I'm thrilled if this is true and Apple is putting out a less-expensive display option. But I'd love it if they brought the rest of their lineup into check with the competition.
It is in check with the competition...
Perhaps you don't know who Apple's competition is?
Maybe Apple should bring it's laptop line down to the $300 cheapo Dell level while we're at it :rolleyes:
The Apple displays give you a shiny aluminum bezel, firewire routing, and software display controls. Is that enough to merit a 75% markup?
So, I'm thrilled if this is true and Apple is putting out a less-expensive display option. But I'd love it if they brought the rest of their lineup into check with the competition.
It is in check with the competition...
Perhaps you don't know who Apple's competition is?
Maybe Apple should bring it's laptop line down to the $300 cheapo Dell level while we're at it :rolleyes:
dime21
Apr 20, 10:54 AM
Yep - I'm not sure that I have ever even been in an automatic!
Agreed, I've never owned an automatic car in my life. And I've owned more than a dozen cars. 4 speed, 5 speed, 6 speed, all manuals. Automatic? No thanks, not interested.
Manuals are cheaper to buy, cheaper to maintain, more reliable, longer lasting, more powerful, more fuel efficient, and offer better driver control. Automatics are for the elderly and the handicapped.
The only exception to this is the very newest DSG from VW/Audi, PDK from Porsche, and SMG from BMW. Mechanically, they are manual transmissions, but with computer-controlled shifers and no clutch pedal. Sounds complicated, but from the driver's perspective, it isn't. Put it in Drive, and go, no clutch pedal, no manual shifting - same driver controls as a traditional automatic. But with the power and fuel efficiency of a manual. Win-win.
Agreed, I've never owned an automatic car in my life. And I've owned more than a dozen cars. 4 speed, 5 speed, 6 speed, all manuals. Automatic? No thanks, not interested.
Manuals are cheaper to buy, cheaper to maintain, more reliable, longer lasting, more powerful, more fuel efficient, and offer better driver control. Automatics are for the elderly and the handicapped.
The only exception to this is the very newest DSG from VW/Audi, PDK from Porsche, and SMG from BMW. Mechanically, they are manual transmissions, but with computer-controlled shifers and no clutch pedal. Sounds complicated, but from the driver's perspective, it isn't. Put it in Drive, and go, no clutch pedal, no manual shifting - same driver controls as a traditional automatic. But with the power and fuel efficiency of a manual. Win-win.
firewood
Jun 22, 10:52 PM
I'm confident that you will not see any computers running both Mac OS and iOS.
I see one every day.
Just run a UIKit app in the iPad Simulator (from the free Developer SDK) on your iMac. There's even 3rd party code that will allow you to use the multi-touch on your iPad to control your app in the Simulator on the iMac. And some apps can run 10X faster and have a bunch more memory available when running on the Simulator.
I have a couple experimental apps that look and feel better this way than their Mac native versions.
It's even possible for a developer to package compiled Simulator apps for other people to run on their Macs, but Apple hasn't made that process easy (yet!).
I see one every day.
Just run a UIKit app in the iPad Simulator (from the free Developer SDK) on your iMac. There's even 3rd party code that will allow you to use the multi-touch on your iPad to control your app in the Simulator on the iMac. And some apps can run 10X faster and have a bunch more memory available when running on the Simulator.
I have a couple experimental apps that look and feel better this way than their Mac native versions.
It's even possible for a developer to package compiled Simulator apps for other people to run on their Macs, but Apple hasn't made that process easy (yet!).
Dont Hurt Me
Aug 27, 06:26 PM
This is the $64K question. Does anyone know when the X3000 is due to be released?True, with it the mini is a solid little machine, without it it still lacks graphics. Its coming soon because Intel wants to take away $$$ from nvidia & ati.
Laslo Panaflex
Mar 18, 09:17 AM
I read your petition, and I didn't sign it. I really don't think that a mac that hooks up to a TV is a good idea, look at webtv, it failed miserably. I agree with you that they need to get it down to 500 - 600 dollar price range, and maybe they will soon since the iPod is bringing in the dough. But really, apple is not going to overtake M$ and x86 computers, not anytime soon at least. Plus apple has always made there money on hardware, they pretty much give there software away, where as M$ makes money on software.
Cougarcat
Apr 12, 08:42 PM
Also the guy who took a nice iMovie and made it unusable. I hope he doesn't fsck up FCP. Even iMovie had background rendering until he stripped it out.
From what I understand that was Steve Job's doing. The guy made a separate simple movie app, and Jobs liked it so much he decided to make it the new iMovie.
From what I understand that was Steve Job's doing. The guy made a separate simple movie app, and Jobs liked it so much he decided to make it the new iMovie.
Goldfinger
Aug 31, 03:07 PM
Knowing that Apple doesn't pay listed prices, it's not unreasonable to assume that Apple could get the Yonah chips for less than Merom ones.
But the same is true for Merom chips. It's not that they aren't getting volume discounts just because the chip is new..
Also, Apple has historically liked to scale its product lineup to encourage buying then next item up the scale. Some have even referred to it as "crippling" the lower machines.
True.
But the same is true for Merom chips. It's not that they aren't getting volume discounts just because the chip is new..
Also, Apple has historically liked to scale its product lineup to encourage buying then next item up the scale. Some have even referred to it as "crippling" the lower machines.
True.
screensaver400
Apr 2, 10:35 PM
The book being read in iBooks is Kook: What Surfing Taught Me About Love, Life, and Catching the Perfect Wave, by Peter Heller.
BornAgainMac
Jan 11, 07:07 PM
I am still hoping the laptop is a tablet. Whenever I replay the Keynote about the secret features, I think those features were just not implemented in Leopard. The iphone was the secret hardware feature.
chrismacguy
Feb 27, 08:32 PM
hahaha, a true collector collects what is obsoleat for the simply fact of owning it. if i had more mony my room would be a mac musum :D
Trust me, when you hit 10 or so, you begin to start creating innovative methods of Mac Storage... (Yes, I have 15 of them, and yes, I am not done...) before you start collecting I recommend buying either a lot of shelves, or a lot of storage units...
Trust me, when you hit 10 or so, you begin to start creating innovative methods of Mac Storage... (Yes, I have 15 of them, and yes, I am not done...) before you start collecting I recommend buying either a lot of shelves, or a lot of storage units...
Sped
Jan 1, 12:06 AM
I don't think HD content is going to make it unless Apple compresses the mess out of it like DirecTV does. You may get 1080i but it will pixelate with any quick movement. That's one of the problems with digital media. It can be manipulated in so many ways that many consumers won't realize they're getting junk because one measure of performance like resolution will be stellar.
leomac08
Apr 11, 01:57 PM
I drive a 2011 Toyota Venza, but it has the manual option to upshift and downshift, with no clutch, which is fun :D
Although I do know how to drive stick, the logic is easy once you get the hand of it....
Driving stick in traffic especially in LA is horrible!! :eek:
Although I do know how to drive stick, the logic is easy once you get the hand of it....
Driving stick in traffic especially in LA is horrible!! :eek: