marksman
Mar 27, 11:36 PM
It is amazing how limited in vision some people are...
Seriously people stuck with this idea that the future of gaming is going to be non-portable systems with game controllers forever are going to be very disappointed in the future.
Ultimately gesture based movements and other mechanisms will be used for gaming, not a freaking glorified joystick. It is silly to believe otherwise.
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 keep believing the future of gaming is going to remain in the hands of traditional 8 year console development cycles... It is not going to happen.
It would be like saying you can't play any real game on a console, you need a pc for it. I certainly can do much more in terms of controlling and playing a game on a computer than I can do with any console controller.
Seriously people stuck with this idea that the future of gaming is going to be non-portable systems with game controllers forever are going to be very disappointed in the future.
Ultimately gesture based movements and other mechanisms will be used for gaming, not a freaking glorified joystick. It is silly to believe otherwise.
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 keep believing the future of gaming is going to remain in the hands of traditional 8 year console development cycles... It is not going to happen.
It would be like saying you can't play any real game on a console, you need a pc for it. I certainly can do much more in terms of controlling and playing a game on a computer than I can do with any console controller.
AFPoster
Mar 22, 11:37 AM
I love how "gays" freak out when non-homosexual people do something. But yet when "gays" want to do something extreme it's because we don't accept them, so when they get in trouble it's a huge ordeal.
To me this is like the people that don't support war. If a veteran was killed in action and a funeral is happening they can picket the funeral all day long (talk about bull ****!) But yet if we don't let them picket they freak out scream free rights free rights. Well guess what those veterans (me included since I serve) gave them that freedom to stand there in picket.
Gays are the same way. I have no issue with gays, I don't agree with it but if your gay, be gay. Just don't expect the world to conform to your way of life, especially a country (United States) founded on Christianity. If anything go to a foreign country and complain then see how bad it really is to come out, unless it's Amsterdam, Iraq or Afghan they'll love your butt over there.
To me this is like the people that don't support war. If a veteran was killed in action and a funeral is happening they can picket the funeral all day long (talk about bull ****!) But yet if we don't let them picket they freak out scream free rights free rights. Well guess what those veterans (me included since I serve) gave them that freedom to stand there in picket.
Gays are the same way. I have no issue with gays, I don't agree with it but if your gay, be gay. Just don't expect the world to conform to your way of life, especially a country (United States) founded on Christianity. If anything go to a foreign country and complain then see how bad it really is to come out, unless it's Amsterdam, Iraq or Afghan they'll love your butt over there.
ghostlyorb
Mar 25, 04:49 PM
I might actually buy that adaptor now....
PowerFullMac
Jan 12, 11:35 AM
You never know. The same thing happened with the fat Nano rumor:
True! People can spectulate all they like, but no one knows what Apple are planning! The "daft" Nano rocks! And so will this MacBook Air if it comes out, Apple NEVER fails to amaze! :D
True! People can spectulate all they like, but no one knows what Apple are planning! The "daft" Nano rocks! And so will this MacBook Air if it comes out, Apple NEVER fails to amaze! :D
skunk
Mar 20, 01:39 PM
The mushroom is just a by-product of the explosion. Most explosions form a small mushroom like that - usually, they dissipate quickly though.I assume the mushroom is from the initial warhead explosion, and the rest is the resultant exploding ammunition.
PurrBall
Apr 1, 01:03 PM
Pretty sure this is new. Not sure why they put it in Appearance preferences, though.
279257
279257
spyderracer393
Nov 27, 02:34 PM
Wow, for the first time ever I actually beat MacRumors: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=3095478#post3095478
I think a 17" model would be a good idea for Apple. It'll stop people buying Minis from getting their LCD fix from elsewhere to some extent and won't cost Apple a bean in R&D costs since they already use 17" panels in the iMac and have all the internals ready because of the 20" and 23" ACDs. It would only need a different sized chassis to be designed.
dude you may have "beaten them" by getting on the front page, but I sent this tip in this morning at 8 AM and it was not from digitimes, it was from industry resources and factories in Asia so HA I beat you.
I think a 17" model would be a good idea for Apple. It'll stop people buying Minis from getting their LCD fix from elsewhere to some extent and won't cost Apple a bean in R&D costs since they already use 17" panels in the iMac and have all the internals ready because of the 20" and 23" ACDs. It would only need a different sized chassis to be designed.
dude you may have "beaten them" by getting on the front page, but I sent this tip in this morning at 8 AM and it was not from digitimes, it was from industry resources and factories in Asia so HA I beat you.
zac4mac
Sep 6, 10:01 AM
It may have been introduced then, but that wasn't the last time it was refreshed . See here which is actually on May 16th.
Wrong, all they did then was drop the bottom config. Top speed is STILL 2.16GHz, as it was the day the 15"MBP started shipping in Feb. - I have a 2.0 that I received Feb28. The ONLY speed bump the MBP has gotten was before they started shipping.
Z
Wrong, all they did then was drop the bottom config. Top speed is STILL 2.16GHz, as it was the day the 15"MBP started shipping in Feb. - I have a 2.0 that I received Feb28. The ONLY speed bump the MBP has gotten was before they started shipping.
Z
sappy1
Sep 15, 12:03 PM
I don't see how. I saw it being reported on the national evening newscasts and on the front pages of newspapers. How much more reporting could there possibly have been?
On TV, everyone was reporting that the antenna was affected only if you touched it at the black stripes. For me, touching the antenna almost anywhere made the signal go down.
On TV, everyone was reporting that the antenna was affected only if you touched it at the black stripes. For me, touching the antenna almost anywhere made the signal go down.
exabytes18
Jul 18, 03:36 AM
With such big files readily available to the public, I want to see so many people decide to rent a movie that the ISPs struggle with their oversold services. :D
Multimedia
Nov 22, 10:45 PM
Quad-core chips (and octo-core systems) are available now from the other top tier Intel vendors. Apple not included.Typical. Are they 2.33 and 2.66GHz models Aiden? Got links?
SideNote: The Madonna Concert in HD on NBC tonight is groundbreaking broadcast television. One of the most amazing telecasts I have ever seen-heard. I am a huge Madonna fan though. :D Tony Bennett's special last night also on NBC was an amazing HD composition as well.
SideNote: The Madonna Concert in HD on NBC tonight is groundbreaking broadcast television. One of the most amazing telecasts I have ever seen-heard. I am a huge Madonna fan though. :D Tony Bennett's special last night also on NBC was an amazing HD composition as well.
Storm9
Oct 13, 10:54 PM
Thanks! I'll try it on my work computer, its a quad.
yac_moda
Jul 21, 06:16 PM
IMO the President has very little direct effect. Since the President barely affects the economy, there really isn't much he can do to the stock market. Anything he might do in the form of stimulus packages... tax cuts, credits, etc. take years to work it's way into the economy. That said, there can definitely be a long term effect from a president's actions.
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.
However, the Fed does not care about the stock market per se.
I YOU believe THIS then you believe everything else he says and you are not paying any attention to WHAT HE DOES :eek:
The Fed is interested in controlling inflation and the economy, avoiding overheating and softening downturns. Essentially, the Fed tries to "tune" the economy.
Duuu !!
The President can not restrict money supply. What you've seen over the past 25 years was basically 3 administrations (Reagan/Bush, Clinton, Bush Jr.) that essentially transitioned during downturns in the business cycle. Coincidence.
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.
And I have no idea what "hyper ww competition from the internet" means.
��� I AM NOT SURPRISED !!!
You just like to argue !
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.
However, the Fed does not care about the stock market per se.
I YOU believe THIS then you believe everything else he says and you are not paying any attention to WHAT HE DOES :eek:
The Fed is interested in controlling inflation and the economy, avoiding overheating and softening downturns. Essentially, the Fed tries to "tune" the economy.
Duuu !!
The President can not restrict money supply. What you've seen over the past 25 years was basically 3 administrations (Reagan/Bush, Clinton, Bush Jr.) that essentially transitioned during downturns in the business cycle. Coincidence.
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.
And I have no idea what "hyper ww competition from the internet" means.
��� I AM NOT SURPRISED !!!
You just like to argue !
mrkramer
Mar 18, 08:35 AM
You know it. I would even go so far as to say it's ridiculous! :rolleyes:
In full disclosure, I've had a borderline man-crush on Obama since he announced he was running for POTUS... but when I heard about this UN resolution, my heart just sank. Eight years of Bush "forcefully spreading the gospel of democracy 'round the world" idiocy and we appear to have learned nothing. Nothing. :(
this isn't forcefully spreading democracy like Bush did, the difference between here and Iraq is that the Iraqis weren't asking for us to come but the Libian rebels are. Plus we aren't sending in a ground force to occupy the country if we did that I would have a problem with it.
In full disclosure, I've had a borderline man-crush on Obama since he announced he was running for POTUS... but when I heard about this UN resolution, my heart just sank. Eight years of Bush "forcefully spreading the gospel of democracy 'round the world" idiocy and we appear to have learned nothing. Nothing. :(
this isn't forcefully spreading democracy like Bush did, the difference between here and Iraq is that the Iraqis weren't asking for us to come but the Libian rebels are. Plus we aren't sending in a ground force to occupy the country if we did that I would have a problem with it.
Chef Medeski
Jul 14, 11:49 AM
The real deal about codecs from Wikepedia:
HD DVD:
the same video compression techniques: MPEG-2, Video Codec 1 (VC1) and H.264/MPEG-4 AVC.
HD DVD can be mastered with up to 7.1 channel surround sound using the linear (uncompressed) PCM, Dolby Digital and DTS formats also used on DVDs. In addition, it also supports Dolby Digital Plus and the lossless formats Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD.
BD:
decode at least the following codecs: MPEG-2, the standard used for DVDs; MPEG-4's H.264/AVC codec; and VC-1, a codec based on Microsoft's Windows Media 9. Realistically, when using MPEG-2, quality considerations would limit the publisher to around two hours of high-definition content on a single-layer BD-ROM. The two more advanced video codecs can typically attain four hours of high quality video.
For audio, BD-ROM supports up to 7.1 channel surround sound using the linear (uncompressed) PCM, Dolby Digital and DTS formats also used on DVDs. In addition, it also supports Dolby Digital Plus and the lossless formats Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD.
So, easily seen. The employ the exact same codecs. The only difference is:
BD:
Stricter DRM control
Much More Scratch Resistant
Greater future capacites
HD-DVD:
Cheaper to manufacture
And if Toshiba can make a 6-layer disc... well then that means a 90GB HD-DVD..... not bad. That would pull it in right above the total capacity of my PB HD.
HD DVD:
the same video compression techniques: MPEG-2, Video Codec 1 (VC1) and H.264/MPEG-4 AVC.
HD DVD can be mastered with up to 7.1 channel surround sound using the linear (uncompressed) PCM, Dolby Digital and DTS formats also used on DVDs. In addition, it also supports Dolby Digital Plus and the lossless formats Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD.
BD:
decode at least the following codecs: MPEG-2, the standard used for DVDs; MPEG-4's H.264/AVC codec; and VC-1, a codec based on Microsoft's Windows Media 9. Realistically, when using MPEG-2, quality considerations would limit the publisher to around two hours of high-definition content on a single-layer BD-ROM. The two more advanced video codecs can typically attain four hours of high quality video.
For audio, BD-ROM supports up to 7.1 channel surround sound using the linear (uncompressed) PCM, Dolby Digital and DTS formats also used on DVDs. In addition, it also supports Dolby Digital Plus and the lossless formats Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD.
So, easily seen. The employ the exact same codecs. The only difference is:
BD:
Stricter DRM control
Much More Scratch Resistant
Greater future capacites
HD-DVD:
Cheaper to manufacture
And if Toshiba can make a 6-layer disc... well then that means a 90GB HD-DVD..... not bad. That would pull it in right above the total capacity of my PB HD.
roland.g
Nov 28, 09:56 AM
The only iPod behind the Zune on the list that Apple still makes is the U2 SE. All the others are discontinued models.
crap freakboy
Jul 18, 04:03 AM
Until they at least come close to matching the model that Mac The Ripper, Toast and Blockbuster 3 dvd postal rental gives me, I'll have to decline the Studios kind offer regarding rental rather than ownership.;)
davester
Oct 24, 01:03 AM
Since when have Apple used the Optima font family for their copy? :rolleyes:
Edit: lol ok, thought you were serious about this for a moment.
Edit: lol ok, thought you were serious about this for a moment.
Manic Mouse
Aug 19, 07:08 AM
Apple should take a leaf out of Sony's book and make the new iPod a mini palm-Mac like the MYLO. A slide out QWERTY keyboard in the style of the Macbook and a large touch screen would make it capable of running anything: Safari, Mail, iCal, iChat etc. It would make the iPod revolutionary (to an extent) again, and more than a mere music device: You could surf the net, write emails, watch movies and listen to music on it. Were it to run a mini-OSX the possibilities would be endless. It would also make people more interested in buying Macs because they can see how good the OS is.
Imagine, on your couch (or in starbucks) reading your email, IMing while listening to your tunes. Bliss. It would also make the WiFi functionality actually useful rather than a gimmick if it's merely a music/video player.
If Apple merely release a new media player they will have missed out on revolutionising the market again like they did when they first released the ipod. Sony have already gone half way there with the MYLO, if Apple go the rest of the way they will blow away the competition!
Imagine, on your couch (or in starbucks) reading your email, IMing while listening to your tunes. Bliss. It would also make the WiFi functionality actually useful rather than a gimmick if it's merely a music/video player.
If Apple merely release a new media player they will have missed out on revolutionising the market again like they did when they first released the ipod. Sony have already gone half way there with the MYLO, if Apple go the rest of the way they will blow away the competition!
odyssey924
Apr 13, 12:16 AM
Here's the deal...(and I just realized that the way this is written might make it look like I have earlier posts in this thread. I don't. I'm jumping in right here.)
The reason that I think pros fear "dumbed down" isn't so much because they want something that is difficult to use, but rather because sometimes making difficult things easy makes things that were previously easy difficult, or impossible.
So just this week I had to help somebody with an iMovie problem. There was a part where they had 3 overlapping audio tracks. Movie audio, voiceover, and music. Try as they might, and try as I might, we could not get the movie audio to actually go away -- even though we had set it's volume level to "0%."
Oh...and did I mention that they're on a white iBook? Fine machine, but a little slow. So I copy their iMovie stuff onto an external drive so we can look at it on my Core i7 iMac instead.
Except iMovie on my iMac won't recognize the project on an external drive. I know that supposedly iMovie is supposed to...but it won't work. So I have to copy the files onto my iMac, and then iMovie magically sees them...because they're in the spot that iMovie wants files to be in.
Well the only way to get the clips to work right that I could come up with, was to actually run all their clips through Quicktime 7 and just delete the audio track off them. Voila! No audio track for iMovie to play, when it's not supposed to.
My point is that I spent 30 minutes dinking around with the "Easy" iMovie to do what would have taken me 10 seconds to do in Final Cut. (Select audio. Delete.)
And that's pretty much my experience every time I get lulled into trying to run a quick project through iMovie. Everything seems to be going well, I'm even sort of enjoying myself (Don't tell anyone), then I hit a snag or a wall...bump up into some limitation of iMovie that there isn't a very good work-around to...and wish that I'd just used Final Cut to begin with.
So while I agree that there are those who want pro tools to be difficult simply for the sake of having a high barrier of entry...
...I also think there are a ton of us that are just afraid that the cost of these new and handy features will be that some of the things we rely on doing, especially things that are a little "hackish," will become difficult/impossible. In the name of simplicity.
It's like my iPhone. I love it to pieces, and I don't plan to have any other type of phone any time soon, but sometimes I wish for a few more advanced features...features that are available (Usually through third-party tools) on Android. Instead I'm stuck hoping and wishing and praying that Apple will implement them.
+1 here. Every time I've tried to use iMovie for a "quick" edit it always ends in disasters like this. In my case, I was trying to move some music around and time my edits with the music. It was really infuriating trying to do this in iMovie compared to how fast I could have done it in FCP. I guess we'll have wait till Apple posts more info or we get it in our hands to really tell if it can be run like the current FCP.
The reason that I think pros fear "dumbed down" isn't so much because they want something that is difficult to use, but rather because sometimes making difficult things easy makes things that were previously easy difficult, or impossible.
So just this week I had to help somebody with an iMovie problem. There was a part where they had 3 overlapping audio tracks. Movie audio, voiceover, and music. Try as they might, and try as I might, we could not get the movie audio to actually go away -- even though we had set it's volume level to "0%."
Oh...and did I mention that they're on a white iBook? Fine machine, but a little slow. So I copy their iMovie stuff onto an external drive so we can look at it on my Core i7 iMac instead.
Except iMovie on my iMac won't recognize the project on an external drive. I know that supposedly iMovie is supposed to...but it won't work. So I have to copy the files onto my iMac, and then iMovie magically sees them...because they're in the spot that iMovie wants files to be in.
Well the only way to get the clips to work right that I could come up with, was to actually run all their clips through Quicktime 7 and just delete the audio track off them. Voila! No audio track for iMovie to play, when it's not supposed to.
My point is that I spent 30 minutes dinking around with the "Easy" iMovie to do what would have taken me 10 seconds to do in Final Cut. (Select audio. Delete.)
And that's pretty much my experience every time I get lulled into trying to run a quick project through iMovie. Everything seems to be going well, I'm even sort of enjoying myself (Don't tell anyone), then I hit a snag or a wall...bump up into some limitation of iMovie that there isn't a very good work-around to...and wish that I'd just used Final Cut to begin with.
So while I agree that there are those who want pro tools to be difficult simply for the sake of having a high barrier of entry...
...I also think there are a ton of us that are just afraid that the cost of these new and handy features will be that some of the things we rely on doing, especially things that are a little "hackish," will become difficult/impossible. In the name of simplicity.
It's like my iPhone. I love it to pieces, and I don't plan to have any other type of phone any time soon, but sometimes I wish for a few more advanced features...features that are available (Usually through third-party tools) on Android. Instead I'm stuck hoping and wishing and praying that Apple will implement them.
+1 here. Every time I've tried to use iMovie for a "quick" edit it always ends in disasters like this. In my case, I was trying to move some music around and time my edits with the music. It was really infuriating trying to do this in iMovie compared to how fast I could have done it in FCP. I guess we'll have wait till Apple posts more info or we get it in our hands to really tell if it can be run like the current FCP.
SciFrog
Dec 1, 12:49 PM
thanks! i hope so.
and congrats to you, whiterabbit, for hitting 3 million!
And congrats on the #7 spot, you crushed me... I should reclaim it in a month or so...
and congrats to you, whiterabbit, for hitting 3 million!
And congrats on the #7 spot, you crushed me... I should reclaim it in a month or so...
dscuber9000
Mar 20, 11:15 PM
Wow, that is a shocker.
The U.S. Congress passed a law to prohibit any attempt to assassinate any foreign leader.
Why, I don't know, but there it is. :confused:
I saw on CNN that our intention was to cripple the opposition, and if it so happens that Qaddafi is in that building then that is purely coincidental. :rolleyes: :D
Isn't it funny that the world acts like a bunch of 10-year-olds when it comes to war? Did I say funny? I meant sad, dangerous, and catastrophic.
The U.S. Congress passed a law to prohibit any attempt to assassinate any foreign leader.
Why, I don't know, but there it is. :confused:
I saw on CNN that our intention was to cripple the opposition, and if it so happens that Qaddafi is in that building then that is purely coincidental. :rolleyes: :D
Isn't it funny that the world acts like a bunch of 10-year-olds when it comes to war? Did I say funny? I meant sad, dangerous, and catastrophic.
NATO
Aug 16, 10:47 AM
Apple has apparently denied this rumour... unusual for them, but I reckon it's probably something they're working on
The Register - Apple Wireless iPod Denial (http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/08/16/apple_denies_wireless_ipod_claim/)
The Register - Apple Wireless iPod Denial (http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/08/16/apple_denies_wireless_ipod_claim/)
MacRumors
Nov 27, 01:08 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Digitimes claims (http://www.digitimes.com/displays/a20061127PD208.html) that Apple is planning on launching a 17" Widescreen LCD" monitor "by year-end or the first quarter of 2007".
According to vendors cited by the article, 17" widescreen monitors will not necessarily be more expensive than the current 17" 4:3 models.
Apple previously had sold a 17" 4:3 ratio LCD until June when it revamped (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2004/06/20040628150739.shtml) their monitor line to what it stands today:
� 20" Cinema (1680x1050) - $699
� 23" Cinema HD (1920x1200) - $999
� 30" Cinema HD (2560x1600) - $1999
A 17" Widescreen LCD would fall in the bottom end of the monitor line. While intriguing, the report comes from Digitimes whose rumor reports have been historically inaccurate.
Digitimes claims (http://www.digitimes.com/displays/a20061127PD208.html) that Apple is planning on launching a 17" Widescreen LCD" monitor "by year-end or the first quarter of 2007".
According to vendors cited by the article, 17" widescreen monitors will not necessarily be more expensive than the current 17" 4:3 models.
Apple previously had sold a 17" 4:3 ratio LCD until June when it revamped (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2004/06/20040628150739.shtml) their monitor line to what it stands today:
� 20" Cinema (1680x1050) - $699
� 23" Cinema HD (1920x1200) - $999
� 30" Cinema HD (2560x1600) - $1999
A 17" Widescreen LCD would fall in the bottom end of the monitor line. While intriguing, the report comes from Digitimes whose rumor reports have been historically inaccurate.