thedarkhorse
Apr 12, 06:09 PM
http://twitter.com/#!/fcpsupermeet
There's supposed to be live updates on that twitter feed.
There's supposed to be live updates on that twitter feed.
jonnysods
Mar 31, 02:43 PM
Suckaz. What a mess.
RebootD
Mar 25, 11:47 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_0 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7A341 Safari/528.16)
If this is a standard $129 upgrade I don't see anything here worth that price sadly. That is unless somehow my 2009 mac pro will run 2x as fast but I am not keeping my fingers crossed.
If this is a standard $129 upgrade I don't see anything here worth that price sadly. That is unless somehow my 2009 mac pro will run 2x as fast but I am not keeping my fingers crossed.
Piggie
Apr 25, 02:33 PM
Perhaps this is like CCTV systems in the workplace.
You are allowed by law to fit them, however staff must be told they are there.
Perhaps it's just that the public need to be made away this is being done, and not done secretly. If people knew, then this would be a non story in the 1st place.
You are allowed by law to fit them, however staff must be told they are there.
Perhaps it's just that the public need to be made away this is being done, and not done secretly. If people knew, then this would be a non story in the 1st place.
relimw
Aug 6, 04:02 PM
The internet didn't exist in 1988. He was probably a local business.
::blink::
<sarcasm>
I beg to differ, just because Al Gore didn't invent the internet until 1988 doesn't mean it didn't exist before then :)
</sarcasm>
But this is totally off topic, back to the rumors...
Apple wows world with intermodalnet! Now you really can take the internet with you!
::blink::
<sarcasm>
I beg to differ, just because Al Gore didn't invent the internet until 1988 doesn't mean it didn't exist before then :)
</sarcasm>
But this is totally off topic, back to the rumors...
Apple wows world with intermodalnet! Now you really can take the internet with you!
notabadname
Mar 31, 06:35 PM
What a concept, Apple should consider this concept, for a more consistent and stable OS . . .
oh, they do
oh, they do
HiRez
Sep 18, 11:57 PM
The aluminum design has been been pretty good (although I personally like the Titanium design better, with the dark keys that don't get glared when light is shining on them). But, the Mac pro laptop line is in dire need on a system refresh. The design is getting a little stale.
Here's what I'd like to see:
-- How about some new textures for the case, such as brushed copper? I think that would look sharp. Or tinted aluminum, including brushed black metal. The brushings could even have subtle anisotropic patterns visible when tilted into and away from light sources, like circular rings, houndstooth, herringbone, starburst, etc. Imagine a blue-greenish "surfer" MBP with a "wave" pattern brushed into it, or a Boston Celtics green or two-toned wood-colored model with a brushed parquet pattern. This would be some real cutting-edge design that no other laptop vendor could easily copy.
-- 256 MB graphics, Radeon X1800 Mobility or better
-- HDMI output
-- SDI input and dual SDI video output (fill + key). Yes, input. This would be fantastic for mobile video professionals.
-- 1920x1200 resolution on the 17" model (this will become important with the resolution-independent UI in Leopard)
-- 1680x1050 resolution on the 15" model
-- 12"-13" model with 1440x900 resolution and backlit keyboard
-- Dual Firewire ports on separate controllers, with no shared bandwidth. One 400 Mbps, one 400/800?
-- Three USB2 ports on separate controllers.
Here's what I'd like to see:
-- How about some new textures for the case, such as brushed copper? I think that would look sharp. Or tinted aluminum, including brushed black metal. The brushings could even have subtle anisotropic patterns visible when tilted into and away from light sources, like circular rings, houndstooth, herringbone, starburst, etc. Imagine a blue-greenish "surfer" MBP with a "wave" pattern brushed into it, or a Boston Celtics green or two-toned wood-colored model with a brushed parquet pattern. This would be some real cutting-edge design that no other laptop vendor could easily copy.
-- 256 MB graphics, Radeon X1800 Mobility or better
-- HDMI output
-- SDI input and dual SDI video output (fill + key). Yes, input. This would be fantastic for mobile video professionals.
-- 1920x1200 resolution on the 17" model (this will become important with the resolution-independent UI in Leopard)
-- 1680x1050 resolution on the 15" model
-- 12"-13" model with 1440x900 resolution and backlit keyboard
-- Dual Firewire ports on separate controllers, with no shared bandwidth. One 400 Mbps, one 400/800?
-- Three USB2 ports on separate controllers.
KnightWRX
Apr 12, 07:02 PM
The coverage and cost obviously.
Because if Apple release an iPhone 5 with LTE, it will cost more and won't be backwards compatible... right... :rolleyes:
Obviously not a factor.
Because if Apple release an iPhone 5 with LTE, it will cost more and won't be backwards compatible... right... :rolleyes:
Obviously not a factor.
maclaptop
Apr 12, 07:41 AM
Again I am amazed at how many people here think a 4" screen is the wave of the future. It is not.
A 4" display is already the standard size.
Just because Apple has not progressed is no indicator of their plans for the upcoming model. To continue to lag behind the rest of the pack with a little display would be sad.
A 4" display is already the standard size.
Just because Apple has not progressed is no indicator of their plans for the upcoming model. To continue to lag behind the rest of the pack with a little display would be sad.
rjheys
Mar 26, 05:57 AM
I still don't get it, why do we apple users have to pay for os updates? The hardware is already expensive as hell.
You know the best version of Windows 7 costs nearly 10x the price of the best version of OS X. ~$300 compared to $29. Thats a big difference.
You know the best version of Windows 7 costs nearly 10x the price of the best version of OS X. ~$300 compared to $29. Thats a big difference.
HecubusPro
Aug 27, 09:56 AM
What makes you say Nintendo sucks so much?
-Zadillo
Because, just as there are Mac fanboys, there are also Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony fanboys. As much as we'd like to think our platform of choice is clearly the best, in all actually, each one has something unique to offer that the other may lack.
Whether we like to believe it or, the same goes for PC vs. Mac, OSX vs. Windows, ATI vs. Nvidia, etc. I've had macs off and on since I was a kid. I've also had several other types of computers other than Windows machines (mostly Commodore systems--man I loved my Amiga 500 with it's upgrade to 1 whole MB of ram :cool:.)
I was first in line to buy the original iMac. I bought it day one. I upgraded it's graphics card, which supposedly was not supposed to be upgradable, so I could play Unreal. Then I began to religiously follow the tragic saga of the Half-Life port to the Mac OS. The guy who was doing it (yes, a one man team), after months of receiving very little support from anyone, eventually threw his hands in the air and gave up. I was distraught, and, as a huge gamer (not fat, just a video game fan :p ), that's when I decided I needed to get a PC with Windows. It was a tough choice, but I knew I had to do it if I wanted to play the latest, greatest PC games. Apple has sorely lacked in porting games to their OS's.
While I did eventually buy a used iBook about 4 or 5 years ago (which I recently sold to help fund my new MBP), I always promised, "I will buy a mac again when I can play any games that a PC can play." Well, now I'm putting my money where my mouth is. I'm jumping head first into the mac market once more, and I thank the Intel switch for allowing it to happen.
While I know I probably won't be able to respectably play games like Crysis and Unreal Tournament 2007 on my MBP, I've become content with having console systems (Xbox 360, soon Wii, much later PS3 when price drops ;).) At this point in my life, I'm trying to simplify. I'm tired of having the huge tower system and massive monitor taking up so much room in my life, so I decide to go with the MBP. I want to be able to move from my desk to the living room, from the house to work, from state to state, etc. with ease and with all I need computer-wise.
So I'm back and I'm happy to be here. Of course, how I managed to get off on a self-rant from someone responding to a perceived Nintendo insult I have no idea. Sorry about that. :D
Did I say I can't wait to get my MBP? :o
-Zadillo
Because, just as there are Mac fanboys, there are also Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony fanboys. As much as we'd like to think our platform of choice is clearly the best, in all actually, each one has something unique to offer that the other may lack.
Whether we like to believe it or, the same goes for PC vs. Mac, OSX vs. Windows, ATI vs. Nvidia, etc. I've had macs off and on since I was a kid. I've also had several other types of computers other than Windows machines (mostly Commodore systems--man I loved my Amiga 500 with it's upgrade to 1 whole MB of ram :cool:.)
I was first in line to buy the original iMac. I bought it day one. I upgraded it's graphics card, which supposedly was not supposed to be upgradable, so I could play Unreal. Then I began to religiously follow the tragic saga of the Half-Life port to the Mac OS. The guy who was doing it (yes, a one man team), after months of receiving very little support from anyone, eventually threw his hands in the air and gave up. I was distraught, and, as a huge gamer (not fat, just a video game fan :p ), that's when I decided I needed to get a PC with Windows. It was a tough choice, but I knew I had to do it if I wanted to play the latest, greatest PC games. Apple has sorely lacked in porting games to their OS's.
While I did eventually buy a used iBook about 4 or 5 years ago (which I recently sold to help fund my new MBP), I always promised, "I will buy a mac again when I can play any games that a PC can play." Well, now I'm putting my money where my mouth is. I'm jumping head first into the mac market once more, and I thank the Intel switch for allowing it to happen.
While I know I probably won't be able to respectably play games like Crysis and Unreal Tournament 2007 on my MBP, I've become content with having console systems (Xbox 360, soon Wii, much later PS3 when price drops ;).) At this point in my life, I'm trying to simplify. I'm tired of having the huge tower system and massive monitor taking up so much room in my life, so I decide to go with the MBP. I want to be able to move from my desk to the living room, from the house to work, from state to state, etc. with ease and with all I need computer-wise.
So I'm back and I'm happy to be here. Of course, how I managed to get off on a self-rant from someone responding to a perceived Nintendo insult I have no idea. Sorry about that. :D
Did I say I can't wait to get my MBP? :o
aohus
Apr 19, 02:56 PM
Apple mastered the GUI that Xerox gave it to them.In other words, my mother means much more to me than God.
Apple may have expanded upon existing GUI elements, but it didn't invent the GUI. Very big difference there.
Apple may have expanded upon existing GUI elements, but it didn't invent the GUI. Very big difference there.
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 01:11 PM
Fair enough. Now let's move along. ;)
You guys move on without me, please. I regret that I posted to this thread, because I said I wanted to post about technical topics only. It's best for me to post where I can do plenty of good. So I'll go back to the Mac Programming forum where I won't react emotionally.
You guys move on without me, please. I regret that I posted to this thread, because I said I wanted to post about technical topics only. It's best for me to post where I can do plenty of good. So I'll go back to the Mac Programming forum where I won't react emotionally.
gkarris
Nov 29, 11:04 AM
To those saying they'll boycott, I'd just like to point out...
...Universal is by far the largest record label in the world, and those of you that say you don't listen to anyone of their artists might need to dig deeper into their subsidiaries, as just a few of the musicians in their stable are:
So I'm sure there's someone in that last that nearly all of us listen to regularly...
You posted a list of artist people will start to illegally copy if Universal starts to tax iPods....
...Universal is by far the largest record label in the world, and those of you that say you don't listen to anyone of their artists might need to dig deeper into their subsidiaries, as just a few of the musicians in their stable are:
So I'm sure there's someone in that last that nearly all of us listen to regularly...
You posted a list of artist people will start to illegally copy if Universal starts to tax iPods....
cjkihlbom
Aug 15, 11:54 AM
I'm so glad I ordered the 3 Ghz, almost as fast as the Quad G5 in Photoshop is insane!
Thex1138
Apr 19, 07:37 PM
It's a Samsung Galaxy Tab.
Ridiculous nit-picking. http://kr.engadget.com/tag/samsung+galaxy+tab/ it's in Korean, but I'm sure you get the idea.
@kdarling: look up.. up... 4 posts up.. There you go.
I saw that too.. a chick in our office loves her GaxTab... but that's a definite iBooks cloner...
I also had to joke about her reason for buying it,.... to back up her PC files and transport them from office to home n vice-versa... ;)
Ridiculous nit-picking. http://kr.engadget.com/tag/samsung+galaxy+tab/ it's in Korean, but I'm sure you get the idea.
@kdarling: look up.. up... 4 posts up.. There you go.
I saw that too.. a chick in our office loves her GaxTab... but that's a definite iBooks cloner...
I also had to joke about her reason for buying it,.... to back up her PC files and transport them from office to home n vice-versa... ;)
shawnce
Jul 20, 11:43 AM
Strike:
- release date of 10.5 revealed - possibly more stuff revealed
Insert:
-release of 10.5
Sorry I don't see that happening... Apple has basically always given developers a few months (to several months) lead time with the next major version of Mac OS X. That has taken place yet... so I don't see it being released at WWDC 2006.
- release date of 10.5 revealed - possibly more stuff revealed
Insert:
-release of 10.5
Sorry I don't see that happening... Apple has basically always given developers a few months (to several months) lead time with the next major version of Mac OS X. That has taken place yet... so I don't see it being released at WWDC 2006.
jmbear
Nov 29, 12:39 PM
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
Popeye206
Apr 11, 02:26 PM
That's why god created the internet.......:D
Yeah.... but it sure is fun to go to the Mall and see all the stores with just a few shoppers each until you hit the Apple store which is almost always packed with people. :)
Yeah.... but it sure is fun to go to the Mall and see all the stores with just a few shoppers each until you hit the Apple store which is almost always packed with people. :)
daneoni
Aug 25, 03:52 PM
Another person who can never be satisfied.:rolleyes:
What is that even supposed to mean?
What is that even supposed to mean?
kresh
Sep 19, 11:34 AM
The thing is Apple is shooting itself in the foot because it knows that all the Prosumers research enough that they know there is better available. Apple is losing alot of sales by not being prepared. I would think that Apple would get 2nd priority to Dell on shipments so they should have a good stock of C2D.
Where's your proof that Apple is losing a lot of sales by not being prepared?
If everone that ever visited MacRumors got mad and purchased a Dell, that would not be a lot.
Are you just making this up?
Where's your proof that Apple is losing a lot of sales by not being prepared?
If everone that ever visited MacRumors got mad and purchased a Dell, that would not be a lot.
Are you just making this up?
ZoomZoomZoom
Sep 19, 02:19 AM
What is wrong with you people? Meroms in other brands of laptops haven't, or are only *just* starting to ship, and you people wail that Apple is doomed, when in the worst case scenario, they'll be a few days behind Dell. If they don't ship by next month, then sure, complain, but really, most of those who moan that Apple is "OMG SO OUTDATED MEROM MBPS SHOULD HAVE BEEN RELEASED 2 MONTHS AGO!!!" are out of touch with reality.
Except that:
(1) Meroms in other brands of laptops have been shipping for nearly 3 weeks. A quick Google shows that some people have been receiving them on their doorstep by the first day of September.
(2) Those of us that buy Macbook Pros are throwing down $2500+ for top-of-the-line laptops. Sub-$1000 laptops have had a better processor than Apple's flagship laptops for nearly a month now. If you can still defend Apple after this, do a reality check on the fanboyism.
Except that:
(1) Meroms in other brands of laptops have been shipping for nearly 3 weeks. A quick Google shows that some people have been receiving them on their doorstep by the first day of September.
(2) Those of us that buy Macbook Pros are throwing down $2500+ for top-of-the-line laptops. Sub-$1000 laptops have had a better processor than Apple's flagship laptops for nearly a month now. If you can still defend Apple after this, do a reality check on the fanboyism.
moochermaulucci
Apr 6, 05:05 PM
Or...
It could be considered being close minded and afraid of new things.
Just saying, you know?
Yes, it could...
...and then again, maybe not. Brilliant deduction. Great, now we're no further along than we were three posts ago.
It could be considered being close minded and afraid of new things.
Just saying, you know?
Yes, it could...
...and then again, maybe not. Brilliant deduction. Great, now we're no further along than we were three posts ago.
bryanc
Jul 27, 03:46 PM
Well it's back to the future for all of us. Remember when the Mac was going 64-bit with the introduction of the G5 PowerMac on June 23, 2003? :rolleyes: Only more thanthree years later and we're doing it all over again thanks to Yonah's 7 month retrograde.
Just so long as Steve doesn't say we'll be at 3 GHz in a year. :eek:
Cheers
Just so long as Steve doesn't say we'll be at 3 GHz in a year. :eek:
Cheers