Play Ultimate
Sep 10, 09:34 AM
Apple's current line up is as follows:
Mac mini - Core Duo (Yonah)
iMac - Core 2 Duo (Merom)
MacBook - Core Duo (Yonah)*
MacBook Pro - Core Duo (Yonah)*
Mac Pro - Xeon (Woodcrest)
Xserve - Xeon (Woodcrest)
* Unlike the other models, the MacBook and MacBook Pro have not seen updates (http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/) for 4-5 months. As a result, many are speculating that they will see updates soon.
Sure is a different world for Apple when 4-5 months without a product update is a long time. ;)
Mac mini - Core Duo (Yonah)
iMac - Core 2 Duo (Merom)
MacBook - Core Duo (Yonah)*
MacBook Pro - Core Duo (Yonah)*
Mac Pro - Xeon (Woodcrest)
Xserve - Xeon (Woodcrest)
* Unlike the other models, the MacBook and MacBook Pro have not seen updates (http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/) for 4-5 months. As a result, many are speculating that they will see updates soon.
Sure is a different world for Apple when 4-5 months without a product update is a long time. ;)
seaweeds
Mar 29, 11:18 AM
I call (early) April Fool's joke. The figures don't make any sense, and they're being given by Llamas.
Lorenzo Llamas?
Lorenzo Llamas?
Cjm1
Apr 25, 06:08 PM
Yes. Time for a new change in the design. I am a small majority who really hate the current design due to high prices in repairs. Carbon fiber would be a good addition instead of the aluminium :apple:
Mac Fly (film)
Sep 14, 01:58 PM
New Aperture, New MacBook's, and hopefully New MacBook Pro's with the magnetic latch, and that fabulous magnetic keyboard.
HecubusPro
Sep 14, 09:25 AM
My 2 cents worth of predictions as to what will be announced at this event
Apterture update (going out on a limb there)
iSight update (since ship times have slipped to October, it seem like Photokina would be a logical place to announce new iSight cameras)
new Cinema Displays (they were discounted at WWDC over a month ago, so perhaps that's an inventory clearance strategy to make room for new, larger displays that might incorporate built in, adjustable iSights)
As usual, I'm probably wrong.
Apterture update (going out on a limb there)
iSight update (since ship times have slipped to October, it seem like Photokina would be a logical place to announce new iSight cameras)
new Cinema Displays (they were discounted at WWDC over a month ago, so perhaps that's an inventory clearance strategy to make room for new, larger displays that might incorporate built in, adjustable iSights)
As usual, I'm probably wrong.
Freg3000
Nov 13, 04:05 PM
Just like every other copyright, you don't have the right to breech. If Apple doesn't defend their copyright, then they can lose it, so they HAVE to fight for it.
I believe you are mistaken. As far as I know, there is no risk of losing a copyright if you failed to defend against previous infringers. If I were to guess, I think you are talking about trademark law, which is different.
There are many classic examples, but currently Adobe has a policy where it seeks to prevent people from using "Photoshop" in a generalized way, since if it solidly becomes a synonym for digital photo manipulation in the language, they will lose their trademark. If Adobe is shown to not go after those who use Photoshop in a generalized manner, in the future they will be less able to defend against it in the future.
As far as I know, this has no relevancy to the current situation, since we are talking about copyright, not trademarks.
I believe you are mistaken. As far as I know, there is no risk of losing a copyright if you failed to defend against previous infringers. If I were to guess, I think you are talking about trademark law, which is different.
There are many classic examples, but currently Adobe has a policy where it seeks to prevent people from using "Photoshop" in a generalized way, since if it solidly becomes a synonym for digital photo manipulation in the language, they will lose their trademark. If Adobe is shown to not go after those who use Photoshop in a generalized manner, in the future they will be less able to defend against it in the future.
As far as I know, this has no relevancy to the current situation, since we are talking about copyright, not trademarks.
suzerain
Sep 26, 08:41 AM
There are vast areas that Verizon and Sprint don't cover in the US, too. It's that way with every single cell phone company in the US.
Apple would have to make at least 2 different phones for that to work. There are two primary cellular networks in the US: GSM and CDMA. If Apple makes just a GSM phone, they're also making a phone that can be used in almost every other country in the world. Europe and Asia are the real cell phone markets, not the US.
Yeah, but not if it's locked. I had to call up my provider and beg for my unlock code so that I could use *my* phone in Asia, and then they said yes, and never sent it to me. Call them back, and...well..rinse, repeat.
What about people like me who travel a lot and want to pop in SIM cards in other places? I'm sick and tired of the U.S. market and all of its stupid contract / vendor lock-in ********.
Pity to see Apple on that bandwagon; I hope they just sell the phone in the Apple Store unlocked, and let us choose the carrier we want.
Apple would have to make at least 2 different phones for that to work. There are two primary cellular networks in the US: GSM and CDMA. If Apple makes just a GSM phone, they're also making a phone that can be used in almost every other country in the world. Europe and Asia are the real cell phone markets, not the US.
Yeah, but not if it's locked. I had to call up my provider and beg for my unlock code so that I could use *my* phone in Asia, and then they said yes, and never sent it to me. Call them back, and...well..rinse, repeat.
What about people like me who travel a lot and want to pop in SIM cards in other places? I'm sick and tired of the U.S. market and all of its stupid contract / vendor lock-in ********.
Pity to see Apple on that bandwagon; I hope they just sell the phone in the Apple Store unlocked, and let us choose the carrier we want.
iLunar
Oct 12, 05:34 PM
Why do they always use the smaller sized iPods for the special editions?
I wanted the U2 iPod, but it was not the 60 gig.
I would like a red iPod, but want the 8 gig!
USE THE BEST MODEL... ESPECIALLY SINCE ITS GOING TO CHARITY!!!!!!!
I think its probably an issue of volume. The smaller sizes sell more. Just a guess, I don't have actual numbers.
I wanted the U2 iPod, but it was not the 60 gig.
I would like a red iPod, but want the 8 gig!
USE THE BEST MODEL... ESPECIALLY SINCE ITS GOING TO CHARITY!!!!!!!
I think its probably an issue of volume. The smaller sizes sell more. Just a guess, I don't have actual numbers.
Lone Deranger
Mar 30, 01:29 PM
They are bothered because they want to be able to describe their app store. They want to be able to say:
"We have this thing called Marketplace. What is it? Well, it's a place where you can by apps. Think of it as a grocery store for apps. You know, an app store."
But MS never consistently used the term App to describe any part of their business. Sure it pops up occasionally here and there, almost at random, but that's about it. Historically they've always used 'Programs'. So to use your example, why couldn't they say: "We have this thing called Marketplace. What is it? Well, it's a place where you can buy programs.....". Why are they not happy with that? It will line up so much better with their software genealogy.
I suspect the truth of the matter is they now want to start using 'App' for everything (instead of Programs), because Apple has popularized the term. Its on everybody's tongue now. And MS wants in on it. They want their stuff to be associated with the buzz that Apple created. That's borderline parasitic to me.
"We have this thing called Marketplace. What is it? Well, it's a place where you can by apps. Think of it as a grocery store for apps. You know, an app store."
But MS never consistently used the term App to describe any part of their business. Sure it pops up occasionally here and there, almost at random, but that's about it. Historically they've always used 'Programs'. So to use your example, why couldn't they say: "We have this thing called Marketplace. What is it? Well, it's a place where you can buy programs.....". Why are they not happy with that? It will line up so much better with their software genealogy.
I suspect the truth of the matter is they now want to start using 'App' for everything (instead of Programs), because Apple has popularized the term. Its on everybody's tongue now. And MS wants in on it. They want their stuff to be associated with the buzz that Apple created. That's borderline parasitic to me.
Porco
Oct 28, 07:31 PM
Good idea, but mine is grayed out, any ideas on how to fix that?
Sure; you just need to click in something in which you can enter text (so you have a blue outline in the box, and a cursor awaiting your input). Try going to reply to this, click in the reply box and then take a look in the Edit menu again, it should be available. :)
Sure; you just need to click in something in which you can enter text (so you have a blue outline in the box, and a cursor awaiting your input). Try going to reply to this, click in the reply box and then take a look in the Edit menu again, it should be available. :)
TheNightPhoenix
Sep 12, 06:10 PM
OK Please play on computer and get info - Command i - while playing to know for certain it is 640x480 H.264. On the bottom it says Normal Size: What numbers are there? In Format: it will say H.264 if it was encoded that way. Also what is the FPS Number playing? Should be 30.
Thank you.
picture attached
Edit: Tested on Three iPods now. One bought days after the first 5G was realsed right up to one bought in july... all work with itunes purchase and home encoded content.
Thank you.
picture attached
Edit: Tested on Three iPods now. One bought days after the first 5G was realsed right up to one bought in july... all work with itunes purchase and home encoded content.
LagunaSol
Apr 4, 01:01 PM
In Virginia Tech for instance there was heroics. The professor held his body agains the door and prevented the gunmen from entering and killing more people. The bullets passed through the door and killed the professor but he was a hero Or does he need a gun to be a hero?
"Heroics???" Who cares about heroics if you're dead??? This isn't a video game. The obvious best-case situation would have been a student pulling a pistol from his backpack and shooting the shooter in the head after the first couple of murders.
Tell you what - you hold your body against the door, I'll use my gun. :rolleyes:
There would have been no preventing that guy from killing. Sure he might have been killed. But he would have killed before people got their guns out to shoot back. And If there had been more people carrying guns there likely would have been cross fire from incompetent gun toters.
Wow, your logic processor needs calibration. Of course he would have killed some. Would he have killed that many? NO.
And notice I keep saying "armed and trained." You don't buy a handgun at the 7-11 and throw it in your pack. To use your quote, "It doesn't work that way."
It is a fantasy story you concoct. But keep dreaming.
I think the only fantasy here is the one playing out in your head.
Perhaps someday you'll get to be the hero. Lets hope you don't wet yourself in the process.
Based on your commentary, I'm sure I'm far more prepared than you. (And being a "hero" has nothing to do with it.)
"Heroics???" Who cares about heroics if you're dead??? This isn't a video game. The obvious best-case situation would have been a student pulling a pistol from his backpack and shooting the shooter in the head after the first couple of murders.
Tell you what - you hold your body against the door, I'll use my gun. :rolleyes:
There would have been no preventing that guy from killing. Sure he might have been killed. But he would have killed before people got their guns out to shoot back. And If there had been more people carrying guns there likely would have been cross fire from incompetent gun toters.
Wow, your logic processor needs calibration. Of course he would have killed some. Would he have killed that many? NO.
And notice I keep saying "armed and trained." You don't buy a handgun at the 7-11 and throw it in your pack. To use your quote, "It doesn't work that way."
It is a fantasy story you concoct. But keep dreaming.
I think the only fantasy here is the one playing out in your head.
Perhaps someday you'll get to be the hero. Lets hope you don't wet yourself in the process.
Based on your commentary, I'm sure I'm far more prepared than you. (And being a "hero" has nothing to do with it.)
davelanger
Mar 30, 01:39 PM
Yes, you know what an "app store" means if you know what an "app" means.
Does an "app" mean an Apple program?
It's doesn't matter what MS calls it. There's a class of programs everywhere called "applications". There's no other name for it.
Applications are a strict subset of programs.
Apple didnt TM application or app they TM appstore.
I dont see why people are trying to argue the wrong point.
MS can call it something, I and others have given different names they could use. MS has the marketplace, hell that is a generic name as well. Should apple sue them for that?
Does an "app" mean an Apple program?
It's doesn't matter what MS calls it. There's a class of programs everywhere called "applications". There's no other name for it.
Applications are a strict subset of programs.
Apple didnt TM application or app they TM appstore.
I dont see why people are trying to argue the wrong point.
MS can call it something, I and others have given different names they could use. MS has the marketplace, hell that is a generic name as well. Should apple sue them for that?
rtdunham
Mar 23, 06:10 PM
... Honestly, do you think someone who is Drunk is going to be checking the app for the checkpoints? Its just an excuse to get rid of these apps from the store and increase revenue (by ticketing more DUI drivers)....
Your argument's inconsistent: If drunk drivers won't be checking the app, then they'd be ticketed at the checkpoint whether or not the apps exist, so pulling the apps neither increases or decreases revenue, does it? Your argument (revenue generation) ONLY works if it increases the number of drivers ticketed because those drivers use the apps.
Now, IF some drivers do check the app, it increases the likelihood they can avoid the checkpoint and being taken off the road. Remember, most drunks don't think they are. So they might use the app to avoid what they think is an unfair stop. But if the stop shows they are over the particular state's alcohol content level, then the system's sorted them out and done a favor for the rest of us, no?
Your argument's inconsistent: If drunk drivers won't be checking the app, then they'd be ticketed at the checkpoint whether or not the apps exist, so pulling the apps neither increases or decreases revenue, does it? Your argument (revenue generation) ONLY works if it increases the number of drivers ticketed because those drivers use the apps.
Now, IF some drivers do check the app, it increases the likelihood they can avoid the checkpoint and being taken off the road. Remember, most drunks don't think they are. So they might use the app to avoid what they think is an unfair stop. But if the stop shows they are over the particular state's alcohol content level, then the system's sorted them out and done a favor for the rest of us, no?
Multimedia
Jul 17, 04:16 PM
That's horrible news for me. I Don't know how much longer I will be able to use my iMac for. But I don't want to order a MBP and 3 weeks later, a new one comes out.Alternative temporary plan is buy the refurb 1.83 GHz MacBook for $949 now then sell it for about the same when the 2.33 GHz Merom MacBook Pros ships. I would think any almost new MacBook will sell for the same price as refurb or worst case $50 less until the Merom MacBooks ship - which could be at the same time as the MBP but more likely by November. :)
applebro24
Mar 22, 01:19 PM
Come on Mac Mini update; well overdue for a refresh. That Core 2 Duo is keeping me from buying.
juicedropsdeuce
Apr 25, 01:29 PM
...and you think most people who buy a MBP won't swap out the drive for a 7200RPM drive or an SSD and max out their memory?
Intelligent...no genius level thinking!
Great. Since Apple puts that crap hard drive in there, instead of simply using the computer someone has to go through all that trouble to get what they paid for (i7 processor)? Are you for real? That sounds great. I'm sure all those random people who buy from the Apple Store also buy the Apple torx screwdriver kit and get to work when they get home. :rolleyes:
Intelligent...no genius level thinking!
Great. Since Apple puts that crap hard drive in there, instead of simply using the computer someone has to go through all that trouble to get what they paid for (i7 processor)? Are you for real? That sounds great. I'm sure all those random people who buy from the Apple Store also buy the Apple torx screwdriver kit and get to work when they get home. :rolleyes:
Meandmunch
Apr 25, 07:08 PM
Other than shaving a few millimeters of the case, a few grams of weight what amount of change isn't incremental at this point?
WildPalms
Aug 23, 09:56 PM
I hope this eventually leads to Sound Blaster support for macs.
Wtf? Why? Do you have something against digital audio?
Wtf? Why? Do you have something against digital audio?
MattyMac
Sep 13, 09:01 PM
Holy Guacamole!
That is Sick!
They need to come out with that right now!
That is Sick!
They need to come out with that right now!
Lightivity
Oct 5, 03:16 AM
Being 16x9 encoded is not the same thing as being anaporphically encoded.
Being 16x9 encoded just means that the video is meant to be viewed at a 16x9 ratio. Yes, the movies (that I have bought, anyway,) are 16x9. Specifically, Good Will Hunting is 640x344.
Anamorphically encoded refers to the act of 'stretching' 16x9 source to the height of 4x3; so that you effectively get 33% more 'vertical' data than horizontal. The TV is then supposed to 'squish' the video back to 16x9. So, for example, if you tell your DVD player that you have a '16x9 anamorphic' TV, it will output the widescreen video to fill the entire 720x480 resolution. If you tell it you have a '16x9 non-anamorphic', it will still be outputting 720x480, but will add black bars on the top and bottom, to achive a 'video' resolution of 720x405.
My TV, for example, has a special '16x9 anamorphic' mode where it actually re-aims its electron beam so that it's only drawing in the 16x9 area, but at a higher vertical density than it normally would. Meaning that I no longer have square pixels. Instead, I have pixels that are 1.33 times wider than tall. (More data packed in height-wise.)
If iTunes movies were sold as anamorphic, then Good Will Hunting would be 640x372, and rely on the TV to 'squish' the 372 high into the height that 344 should be. Thereby displaying more vertical information in the same space.
I know exactly what 'anamorphic' means, and it was precisely what I meant when saying "16x9-encoded", with the exception that 'anamorphic' is a totally confusing and natively incorrect term.
Why? Because nothing is ever stretched or squashed in digital video. The anamorphic concept has unfortunately been transfered from the celluloid world where light truly is pressed together on a 35-mm film frame only to be expanded in the theater. Now, maybe I should have added the word "enhanced for widescreen" after "16x9-encoded" but it doesn't matter: All 16x9-videomaterial is encoded so that all 720x480 pixels carry the approximate dimension of 16x9 with the aim of fitting a television that holds a display with 1.78:1 proportions. That is the very definition of 16x9. It is not anamorphical. It is not sqeezed. It is just 16x9 pixels spread across a compatible display.
Ehurtley, what I think you thought I meant, was aspect ratio. But that is something completely else. The aspect ratio is the proportions of the frame the director intended the action to be shown in, and there are several. One is 2.35:1, but the most common is 1.85:1, which most closely resembles the 1.78:1 frame that 16x9-encoded video fits right into. The only ones using the 1:78:1 aspect ratio is tv-productions. Film productions rarely use it (they stick to conventional 2.35:1 and 1.85:1).
Don't confuse the 1.78:1 aspect ratio which -- together with 1.85:1 and 2.35:1 -- is the artistic concept of framing action, with 16x9-encoding which is the technical solution of using a standard pixel resolution in a widescreen setup.
So, my question remains: is there any 16x9-encoded film content on iTunes Store?
Being 16x9 encoded just means that the video is meant to be viewed at a 16x9 ratio. Yes, the movies (that I have bought, anyway,) are 16x9. Specifically, Good Will Hunting is 640x344.
Anamorphically encoded refers to the act of 'stretching' 16x9 source to the height of 4x3; so that you effectively get 33% more 'vertical' data than horizontal. The TV is then supposed to 'squish' the video back to 16x9. So, for example, if you tell your DVD player that you have a '16x9 anamorphic' TV, it will output the widescreen video to fill the entire 720x480 resolution. If you tell it you have a '16x9 non-anamorphic', it will still be outputting 720x480, but will add black bars on the top and bottom, to achive a 'video' resolution of 720x405.
My TV, for example, has a special '16x9 anamorphic' mode where it actually re-aims its electron beam so that it's only drawing in the 16x9 area, but at a higher vertical density than it normally would. Meaning that I no longer have square pixels. Instead, I have pixels that are 1.33 times wider than tall. (More data packed in height-wise.)
If iTunes movies were sold as anamorphic, then Good Will Hunting would be 640x372, and rely on the TV to 'squish' the 372 high into the height that 344 should be. Thereby displaying more vertical information in the same space.
I know exactly what 'anamorphic' means, and it was precisely what I meant when saying "16x9-encoded", with the exception that 'anamorphic' is a totally confusing and natively incorrect term.
Why? Because nothing is ever stretched or squashed in digital video. The anamorphic concept has unfortunately been transfered from the celluloid world where light truly is pressed together on a 35-mm film frame only to be expanded in the theater. Now, maybe I should have added the word "enhanced for widescreen" after "16x9-encoded" but it doesn't matter: All 16x9-videomaterial is encoded so that all 720x480 pixels carry the approximate dimension of 16x9 with the aim of fitting a television that holds a display with 1.78:1 proportions. That is the very definition of 16x9. It is not anamorphical. It is not sqeezed. It is just 16x9 pixels spread across a compatible display.
Ehurtley, what I think you thought I meant, was aspect ratio. But that is something completely else. The aspect ratio is the proportions of the frame the director intended the action to be shown in, and there are several. One is 2.35:1, but the most common is 1.85:1, which most closely resembles the 1.78:1 frame that 16x9-encoded video fits right into. The only ones using the 1:78:1 aspect ratio is tv-productions. Film productions rarely use it (they stick to conventional 2.35:1 and 1.85:1).
Don't confuse the 1.78:1 aspect ratio which -- together with 1.85:1 and 2.35:1 -- is the artistic concept of framing action, with 16x9-encoding which is the technical solution of using a standard pixel resolution in a widescreen setup.
So, my question remains: is there any 16x9-encoded film content on iTunes Store?
jofarmer
Sep 12, 05:31 PM
And we FAIL to get ability to load 640x480 H.264 Baseline encoded video "...because it cannot be played on this 11month "old" iPod." What a crock! It's a load of bullocks I tell ya!
I take it that your conversion is over and the old iPod cannot play "Hi-Res H.264" and my asumptions prior in this thread where right :/
And as I already pointed out, that owners of "old" iPod 5G will have to reconvert movies and TV series and EVERYTHING they download from this day an, since all movies and tv episodes will be in 640x480 from now on.
Geez. Unlike M$ Apple has never been to much concerned with backwards compatibility, users without at least 10.3 Panther don't get much new fun these days. But like this....?
I take it that your conversion is over and the old iPod cannot play "Hi-Res H.264" and my asumptions prior in this thread where right :/
And as I already pointed out, that owners of "old" iPod 5G will have to reconvert movies and TV series and EVERYTHING they download from this day an, since all movies and tv episodes will be in 640x480 from now on.
Geez. Unlike M$ Apple has never been to much concerned with backwards compatibility, users without at least 10.3 Panther don't get much new fun these days. But like this....?
shecky
Sep 14, 10:08 AM
So is this a stevenote or not? i think that might hint at what caliber of goodies are coming
curious about that myself. historically, have there been "special events" like this without a stevenote? (or a philnote, for that matter)
i think that just aperture would not justify a stevenote, but more than just aperture might (tho aperture would be the primary subject)
curious about that myself. historically, have there been "special events" like this without a stevenote? (or a philnote, for that matter)
i think that just aperture would not justify a stevenote, but more than just aperture might (tho aperture would be the primary subject)
wizard
Sep 9, 11:38 AM
Sounds like a set of chips to me ;)
dave
There is no "Napa chipset". Like I said, Napa is a hardware-platfom, composed to CPU (Yonah), chipset (Intel Express 945) and WLAN ()Intel PRO/Wireless). The amount of RAM might be limited due to timing-issues and the like.
dave
There is no "Napa chipset". Like I said, Napa is a hardware-platfom, composed to CPU (Yonah), chipset (Intel Express 945) and WLAN ()Intel PRO/Wireless). The amount of RAM might be limited due to timing-issues and the like.
0 comments:
Post a Comment