Otto J
May 3, 01:36 AM
So... In 6 pages of comments, _noone_ sees this as a build-up to a touch-screen imac?
longsilver
Sep 5, 08:21 AM
Well, the US store is down anyways. UK and Ireland are still up. Anyone checked any others?
Riemann Zeta
Apr 2, 01:32 PM
As far as I know, Snow Leopard "fixed" what Leopard started. Mac OS X Lion is a completely new OS with new features, most of which are not present in Snow Leopard.
haha, no chance. Tons of new features here. I can see Apple charging less than $129 if they go the App Store route, but if boxed retail is released I'm sure it'll be $129.
Snow Leopard was a bigger upgrade than most people assumed--but only in an under-the-hood sense. The switch to a real 64bit system (with pure x64 kernel and extensions) was a big deal, albeit an invisible one. All the system core revisions, a 64bit finder and a $29 price made Snow Leopard a worthwhile update.
As for all these "tons" of new features that would make Lion worth $129: I just don't see it. Smaller window controls, iOS buttons and scrollbars and a few other iOS-derived tweaks and features just don't seem like that massive of an upgrade. Auto-saving, application 'resuming' and iOS-like state-suspention don't make a whole lot of sense for a desktop OS (perhaps if a machine is all SSD-based, with no physical discs, these features will allow Apple to eliminate swap/VM). So all-in-all, Lion feels a whole lot like Snow Leopard: a collection of refinements and nice, subtle improvements.
haha, no chance. Tons of new features here. I can see Apple charging less than $129 if they go the App Store route, but if boxed retail is released I'm sure it'll be $129.
Snow Leopard was a bigger upgrade than most people assumed--but only in an under-the-hood sense. The switch to a real 64bit system (with pure x64 kernel and extensions) was a big deal, albeit an invisible one. All the system core revisions, a 64bit finder and a $29 price made Snow Leopard a worthwhile update.
As for all these "tons" of new features that would make Lion worth $129: I just don't see it. Smaller window controls, iOS buttons and scrollbars and a few other iOS-derived tweaks and features just don't seem like that massive of an upgrade. Auto-saving, application 'resuming' and iOS-like state-suspention don't make a whole lot of sense for a desktop OS (perhaps if a machine is all SSD-based, with no physical discs, these features will allow Apple to eliminate swap/VM). So all-in-all, Lion feels a whole lot like Snow Leopard: a collection of refinements and nice, subtle improvements.
DoFoT9
Mar 21, 04:17 PM
I guess I'm number 1 on the team now :cool:
your electricity bill must be outrageous!
what do you do?
your electricity bill must be outrageous!
what do you do?
Eraserhead
Mar 31, 03:23 PM
Admittedly, the Brits aren't very good at letting it go either.
We did more history coverage of WW2 than India and China combined.
We did more history coverage of WW2 than India and China combined.
joe.cavers
Feb 23, 03:53 AM
No idea what film that is, but I do spy Handbrake on the MacBook, which looks identical to the one that I just retired. My optical drive in that machine was starting to go, I think. Only thing I've used the one in the new MacBook Pro for is to reinstall the OS after I got it...
Handbrake comes VERY close to destroying my Macbook ha ha, the CPU goes up close to 90 degrees celsius! Terrifying!
Handbrake comes VERY close to destroying my Macbook ha ha, the CPU goes up close to 90 degrees celsius! Terrifying!
dguisinger
Aug 7, 03:35 AM
Have you tried rubyonrails? I've done some webservices for testing, and this is very slick.
Just give it a testdrive (www.rubyonrails.com)
Not really what I'm looking for, I'm trying to connect a Cocoa-app to a web service with minimal work; Rubyonrails looks like its primarily for developing web applications. But thanks anyways.
Just give it a testdrive (www.rubyonrails.com)
Not really what I'm looking for, I'm trying to connect a Cocoa-app to a web service with minimal work; Rubyonrails looks like its primarily for developing web applications. But thanks anyways.
sthpark7791
Jan 2, 08:54 PM
Apprently, the keynote is going to be 2 hours long!
http://digg.com/apple/Steve_Jobs_Keynote_Slated_to_be_2_Hours_Long
http://digg.com/apple/Steve_Jobs_Keynote_Slated_to_be_2_Hours_Long
milo
Jul 20, 04:47 PM
That's funny that is not what they told us when I worked for Aldus, although there was one time that we could not trade.
I think the blackout period is only for execs and VPs, most of the time.
Although that could be because we were in San Diego and not Seatle, companies with lots of remote offices would probably be the same.
Probably depends on the company. It's still very dicey to make transactions right before an announcement, since accusations could easily be made of insider trading. I suppose at McDonalds they don't enforce a blackout period for the guys flipping burgers...
I think the blackout period is only for execs and VPs, most of the time.
Although that could be because we were in San Diego and not Seatle, companies with lots of remote offices would probably be the same.
Probably depends on the company. It's still very dicey to make transactions right before an announcement, since accusations could easily be made of insider trading. I suppose at McDonalds they don't enforce a blackout period for the guys flipping burgers...
SeaFox
Dec 28, 01:52 AM
anything is possible minus 1 thing: the option to dock and iPod simply is so out of place that I do not know why it keeps getting brought up. iTV is focused on streaming content from your computer, not your iPod.
I think an iPod dock is a great idea. It would be nice to be able to use your iTV for something without a computer running. Hey, take your iPod to a friend's house and you can all watch a movie at their house from your collection, just like taking your entire video library with you.
There are two problems with this:
1) HD content takes up a huge amount of space. So if Apple did offer HD movies, the copy iTunes will transfer to your iPod would be reduced quality.
2) iTunes purchases would not be playable on the component outputs on the iTV. The movie studios would require you use an HDMI connection or something else that supported HDCP to ensure you didn't copy the movie out of the iTunes ecosphere.
As several of us have discussed before, my hope is that iTV will be able to stream all forms of content on my computer, but with particular emphasis on digital media. So if I want to bring a word doc up and type or a movie I am working on in final cut pro, I can do so. Similarly, and with more fully developed components all my digital media can be run on my tv. The goal is to make this experience integrate all the entertainment features we love, but throughout our homes. Quality preservation is essential and I think they will work to ensure that takes place.
The issue here is you're asking your iTV to open other files, in other words, you're asking it to be a regular computer. That isn't going to work because it makes the OS/interface more complicated. A home entertainment component needs to be simple and fast. This is where Apple's embedded OSX rumors would be coming in. Everyone read that and thought about the Apple Phone because that was the hot topic of the week and the was the notion of a PDA Apple phone. But an embedded real-time operating system is just what the iTV needs.
People need to stop comparing the iTV to a Mac Mini, they should thinking of it the same way you think of an XBox compared to a Windows PC. Yeah, they're both made by Microsoft, but the XBox doesn't run Windows, it runs a smaller GUI on top of what is mostly a DirectX back end.
What's funny is the reason people keep thinking of the Mini is because what consumers really want is an Apple DVR, a Mac Mini with a little stronger hardware, no external power supply, and a built in tuner. Add PVR functionality to Front Row and maybe a little bit more expansive remote and you'd have that. But since the Mini isn't expandable, it isn't even possible for a consumer to cobble together the solution themselves from a PCI tuner card and DVR software available, the closest they can do has lots of "extra parts" lying around from the ElGato external tuner, a monitor adapter to give them the connection they need, and the Mini's power supply, and it still would not be as easy to navigate since a keyboard would probably be needed at some point.
So a MacMini wont download and play a HD movie or display a word doc, and you need the iTV to accomplish this basic task?
No, it will do those things, but a MacMini costs $600. Not everyone wants to keep their main computer hooked up to the TV. The iTV allows them to watch their iTunes Store-purchased movies on a larger screen than their regular monitor without moving their computer.
Also, most people don’t need final cut pro or photo shop. So, that’s why I was thinking this could be a basic computer. If not you will need the mac mini to go with it, and why not simply include the iTV with the Mac Mini so you don’t have two devises in a limited shelf space.
The iTV is meant to be an add-on to an existing Macintosh household. Not a self-contained entertainment product like a CableCo box or a PS2.
The idea is the iTV would support more common TV connection methods out of the box, be designed to fit in better aesthetically with home entertainment components, offer better video performance, overall stability, and lower power usage than a MacMini for less.
Is the problem the iTV will address processing the images or scaling them?
I hope so. Maybe it will be upconverting for watching current iTunes movies on an HDTV?
I think an iPod dock is a great idea. It would be nice to be able to use your iTV for something without a computer running. Hey, take your iPod to a friend's house and you can all watch a movie at their house from your collection, just like taking your entire video library with you.
There are two problems with this:
1) HD content takes up a huge amount of space. So if Apple did offer HD movies, the copy iTunes will transfer to your iPod would be reduced quality.
2) iTunes purchases would not be playable on the component outputs on the iTV. The movie studios would require you use an HDMI connection or something else that supported HDCP to ensure you didn't copy the movie out of the iTunes ecosphere.
As several of us have discussed before, my hope is that iTV will be able to stream all forms of content on my computer, but with particular emphasis on digital media. So if I want to bring a word doc up and type or a movie I am working on in final cut pro, I can do so. Similarly, and with more fully developed components all my digital media can be run on my tv. The goal is to make this experience integrate all the entertainment features we love, but throughout our homes. Quality preservation is essential and I think they will work to ensure that takes place.
The issue here is you're asking your iTV to open other files, in other words, you're asking it to be a regular computer. That isn't going to work because it makes the OS/interface more complicated. A home entertainment component needs to be simple and fast. This is where Apple's embedded OSX rumors would be coming in. Everyone read that and thought about the Apple Phone because that was the hot topic of the week and the was the notion of a PDA Apple phone. But an embedded real-time operating system is just what the iTV needs.
People need to stop comparing the iTV to a Mac Mini, they should thinking of it the same way you think of an XBox compared to a Windows PC. Yeah, they're both made by Microsoft, but the XBox doesn't run Windows, it runs a smaller GUI on top of what is mostly a DirectX back end.
What's funny is the reason people keep thinking of the Mini is because what consumers really want is an Apple DVR, a Mac Mini with a little stronger hardware, no external power supply, and a built in tuner. Add PVR functionality to Front Row and maybe a little bit more expansive remote and you'd have that. But since the Mini isn't expandable, it isn't even possible for a consumer to cobble together the solution themselves from a PCI tuner card and DVR software available, the closest they can do has lots of "extra parts" lying around from the ElGato external tuner, a monitor adapter to give them the connection they need, and the Mini's power supply, and it still would not be as easy to navigate since a keyboard would probably be needed at some point.
So a MacMini wont download and play a HD movie or display a word doc, and you need the iTV to accomplish this basic task?
No, it will do those things, but a MacMini costs $600. Not everyone wants to keep their main computer hooked up to the TV. The iTV allows them to watch their iTunes Store-purchased movies on a larger screen than their regular monitor without moving their computer.
Also, most people don’t need final cut pro or photo shop. So, that’s why I was thinking this could be a basic computer. If not you will need the mac mini to go with it, and why not simply include the iTV with the Mac Mini so you don’t have two devises in a limited shelf space.
The iTV is meant to be an add-on to an existing Macintosh household. Not a self-contained entertainment product like a CableCo box or a PS2.
The idea is the iTV would support more common TV connection methods out of the box, be designed to fit in better aesthetically with home entertainment components, offer better video performance, overall stability, and lower power usage than a MacMini for less.
Is the problem the iTV will address processing the images or scaling them?
I hope so. Maybe it will be upconverting for watching current iTunes movies on an HDTV?
JRM PowerPod
Aug 7, 05:26 AM
Mac Pro
Mac Prostitute
hmmmm............
sounds a bit contentious to me
Mac Prostitute
hmmmm............
sounds a bit contentious to me
vincebio
Oct 23, 07:07 AM
superb...im travelling to states this week, and could pick one up at the apple store 5th avenue for much cheaper than here in uk..
its gottta come out sometime...
its gottta come out sometime...
Cheffy Dave
Jun 24, 01:38 AM
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/80/211502142_db3000b150.jpg?v=0
damn Son, very nicely done!:cool:
damn Son, very nicely done!:cool:
iris_failsafe
Jul 13, 11:10 PM
I think is too early for either HDDVD or Blue-Ray, maybe have it as a built to order option?
It makes more sense than to put it as standard equipment
It makes more sense than to put it as standard equipment
Ravich
Mar 20, 05:07 PM
And like I said, they dont have to be worried because homeopathy is not directly harmful to people. Ex-gay therapy is. This is not just an app based on christianity. Exodus International is an organization dedicated specifically to ex-gay therapy.
Veg
Feb 28, 04:19 PM
What's it made out of? And I presume there's a third leg holding the back of the iMac foot up? Otherwise I'd be rather concerned about it falling out of balance during an intense typing session :o
You know what this forum needs? The ability to tag items in photos, sort of like how you tag people in FaceBook.
And I hate FaceBook.
We constructed it out of aluminum, it's the perfect material and looks great. Correct, it has a foot extending from the back that just barely stretches pass end of the stand.
Ha agreed.
You know what this forum needs? The ability to tag items in photos, sort of like how you tag people in FaceBook.
And I hate FaceBook.
We constructed it out of aluminum, it's the perfect material and looks great. Correct, it has a foot extending from the back that just barely stretches pass end of the stand.
Ha agreed.
zeppiecr
Sep 6, 07:39 AM
Pricing Now Starts at Just $999; New 24-inch Model Added
Tech Wallpapers: Mac OS
Mac OS Building
FireStar
Oct 29, 08:37 PM
Hi everyone, I just recently purchased an Ipod Touch 4G to replace my aging 1G, and have decided to buy a case to help protect my investment (to resell at a later time) this time to avoid the massive damage my 1G went through (long story...it's not pretty anymore, but hey, it does work).
My requirements are as follows:
-It MUST protect the glass on the front if it were to fall face-down onto a hard surface. Now, I'm not expecting miracles here, but it has to offer some protection for this (if you're wondering, this is what happened to my 1G...).
-It must protect the back from scratches and whatnot, but I assume most cases do this by default...
-It must not compromise any ports/buttons at all.
-It must not be too bulky.
-This isn't a major thing, but I'd like to be able to open it up without too much of a hassle if the need arises.
-I'm looking to spend between $20-25 at most.
Right now, I've narrowed it down to the Griffen Reveal, Switcheasy Colors, and the iFrogz Luxe due to their overall positive reputations. Does anyone have any thoughts on the above 3? Does anyone have any other recommendations that I missed? Thanks.
Griffin Reveal seems nice, plus very customizable. Switcheasy Colors, i love Switcheasy, but the silicone, I just don't like silicone. The Luxe is probably the same protection as the Griffin.
Out of the three, I would suggest the Griffin.
I am waiting for something else from Switcheasy, maybe a TRIM or Rebel.
My requirements are as follows:
-It MUST protect the glass on the front if it were to fall face-down onto a hard surface. Now, I'm not expecting miracles here, but it has to offer some protection for this (if you're wondering, this is what happened to my 1G...).
-It must protect the back from scratches and whatnot, but I assume most cases do this by default...
-It must not compromise any ports/buttons at all.
-It must not be too bulky.
-This isn't a major thing, but I'd like to be able to open it up without too much of a hassle if the need arises.
-I'm looking to spend between $20-25 at most.
Right now, I've narrowed it down to the Griffen Reveal, Switcheasy Colors, and the iFrogz Luxe due to their overall positive reputations. Does anyone have any thoughts on the above 3? Does anyone have any other recommendations that I missed? Thanks.
Griffin Reveal seems nice, plus very customizable. Switcheasy Colors, i love Switcheasy, but the silicone, I just don't like silicone. The Luxe is probably the same protection as the Griffin.
Out of the three, I would suggest the Griffin.
I am waiting for something else from Switcheasy, maybe a TRIM or Rebel.
MacMan86
Apr 23, 11:44 AM
for all your defending of this feature ... can you give me even one positive reason this is good for the average person that out-weighs the negative ones ... just one
Well that's easy - it seems the purpose of this file is to help you find your location quickly. Without this cache you'd waste bandwidth, time and battery power to look up information that was fixed (cell tower locations). It also means your phone can find your location when you don't have GPS signal, or simply not bother to turn GPS on, which is a win because it consumes so much power. Seems like a pretty compelling use to me. Read this for more info: http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12432603&postcount=16
Well that's easy - it seems the purpose of this file is to help you find your location quickly. Without this cache you'd waste bandwidth, time and battery power to look up information that was fixed (cell tower locations). It also means your phone can find your location when you don't have GPS signal, or simply not bother to turn GPS on, which is a win because it consumes so much power. Seems like a pretty compelling use to me. Read this for more info: http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12432603&postcount=16
AppliedVisual
Nov 16, 11:19 AM
The bandwidth of DIMMs doesn't really change with their capacity (assuming their timings are the same). It is the number of active channels that gives you the increase in memory bandwidth.
Usually true, but with FB-DIMMs the 256MB and 512MB only use one of the onboard buffer channels (as in buffer channels on the module itself). Whiel the timings and I/O speeds are the same as other larger capacity modules, they are only capable of sustaining 1/2 the full bandwidth load. OTOH, the latency is a bit lower with 256MB and 512MB modules as the modules' onboard memory controller only has to deal with a single channel buffer.
Anyway, If you can live with 2GB in a Mac Pro, then 4x512MB wouldn't be a bad deal. I'm not sure if you really could get by with only 2GB in one of these... If so, you probably don't need a Mac Pro and that's a whole different discussion.
But If you're going with 4GB or more, you definitely will want 1GB or 2GB modules to capitalize on the increased bandwidth abilities and I wouldn't recommend mixing half gate buffer and full gate buffer modules within the same system.
Usually true, but with FB-DIMMs the 256MB and 512MB only use one of the onboard buffer channels (as in buffer channels on the module itself). Whiel the timings and I/O speeds are the same as other larger capacity modules, they are only capable of sustaining 1/2 the full bandwidth load. OTOH, the latency is a bit lower with 256MB and 512MB modules as the modules' onboard memory controller only has to deal with a single channel buffer.
Anyway, If you can live with 2GB in a Mac Pro, then 4x512MB wouldn't be a bad deal. I'm not sure if you really could get by with only 2GB in one of these... If so, you probably don't need a Mac Pro and that's a whole different discussion.
But If you're going with 4GB or more, you definitely will want 1GB or 2GB modules to capitalize on the increased bandwidth abilities and I wouldn't recommend mixing half gate buffer and full gate buffer modules within the same system.
xenotaku
Jan 3, 07:12 PM
i am really hoping for a 12" model.
Multimedia
Sep 6, 07:21 PM
I agree that the lower end 17" iMac is a better deal than the mini.Now that iMac is Core 2 Duo, the Academic $899 17" iMac is a mini killer config.
WeegieMac
Apr 2, 02:39 AM
As far as I know, Snow Leopard "fixed" what Leopard started. Mac OS X Lion is a completely new OS with new features, most of which are not present in Snow Leopard.
See, I would have to disagree with that.
All of the framework, the underlaying core system changes, were done in Leopard and then refined in Snow Leopard.
All Lion is adding, from what I've seen, is interface changes and some new features that, lets be honest, not every user is going to bother with. Sure, Launchpad looks nice, even in it's frame rate lacking beta form, and Mission Control is a new take on Expose, but other than that it's iOS inspired UI changes, a new version of Safari, and some application interface changes (Mail & iCal come to mind).
I don't think Lion will be a �29/$29 upgrade, but I think given that it'll launch on the Mac App Store, it will follow the example of iLife and Aperture and be cheaper to purchase online than it is off the shelf in a box.
See, I would have to disagree with that.
All of the framework, the underlaying core system changes, were done in Leopard and then refined in Snow Leopard.
All Lion is adding, from what I've seen, is interface changes and some new features that, lets be honest, not every user is going to bother with. Sure, Launchpad looks nice, even in it's frame rate lacking beta form, and Mission Control is a new take on Expose, but other than that it's iOS inspired UI changes, a new version of Safari, and some application interface changes (Mail & iCal come to mind).
I don't think Lion will be a �29/$29 upgrade, but I think given that it'll launch on the Mac App Store, it will follow the example of iLife and Aperture and be cheaper to purchase online than it is off the shelf in a box.
CIA
Apr 12, 09:11 PM
What the hell are you talking about? I use iMovie for home videos and I use Final Cut at work. If you don't use something then you shouldn't be bitching about it.
This all started just because I said I hope Final Cut doesn't turn into iMovie. Somehow that turned into iMovie is pro and Final Cut is the Model T of editing.
This all started just because I said I hope Final Cut doesn't turn into iMovie. Somehow that turned into iMovie is pro and Final Cut is the Model T of editing.
