thejazzman10
Mar 19, 07:20 PM
im not really a big fan of that kind of TV-box stuff, seems kinda pointless :rolleyes:
woodbine
Apr 21, 11:39 AM
WTF are bad actors? I can think of several, nay hundreds of bad actors...but I wouldn't necessarily put them in the same sentence with criminals.
Is this an "american thang"
Me British :cool:
Is this an "american thang"
Me British :cool:
Galaxas0
Apr 2, 11:37 PM
Here's a pic of the content width changed in Safari.
kepner
Mar 31, 01:30 AM
Are you able to download System Voices in DP2?
No, unfortunately.
No, unfortunately.
ranviper
Jan 5, 12:21 AM
My jeep is currently in shop getting
1) new tires
2) oil and filter change
3) new brakes
4) inspection
It's an 05' Liberty 4WD and I love the thing. Ill clean it up and post some pics tomorrow. :cool:
1) new tires
2) oil and filter change
3) new brakes
4) inspection
It's an 05' Liberty 4WD and I love the thing. Ill clean it up and post some pics tomorrow. :cool:
MrCrowbar
Aug 24, 06:29 PM
One day I'll buy a mini - they look so sweet. And with a C2D they'll go sweet too!
Maybe dual optical drives like the Mac pro. This is getting standard on Macs obviously.
:p
Maybe dual optical drives like the Mac pro. This is getting standard on Macs obviously.
:p
BRLawyer
Apr 19, 02:23 PM
I said nothing about wanting to use a slower interface. That would be silly.
Do you think all future USB 3 peripherals will be compatible with TB via an adapter?
That would be great, but why come out with USB 3 on a Mac at all?
Or do you think Apple will skip a USB 3 port altogether?
They will either skip it altogether or perhaps replace all USB 2 ports with USB 3 ones (thus keeping TB as the "advanced" FW equivalent)...
Do you think all future USB 3 peripherals will be compatible with TB via an adapter?
That would be great, but why come out with USB 3 on a Mac at all?
Or do you think Apple will skip a USB 3 port altogether?
They will either skip it altogether or perhaps replace all USB 2 ports with USB 3 ones (thus keeping TB as the "advanced" FW equivalent)...
diamond.g
Mar 24, 01:54 PM
It would be very well possible. Remember, Thunderbolt is derived from LightPeak. One of the reasons to develop LightPeak was to transmit data at very fast rates over a distance. Essentially, not have everything so closed together.
In other words, you can the CPU in room A and the RAM in room B which is 20 feet away and get the same result. This is one of the reasons Intel developed LightPeak. There are many other reasons for development obviously.
However, Thunderbolt in its current stage is not suited for such lengthy exchange due to its copper nature. However, say you have a GFX cradle on your desk, you could well use Thunderbolt's current implementation to feed data. However, you'd need multiple implementations of Thunderbolt in order for it to work great. Currently, many GFX solutions use PCIe x16 interface which pretty much uses 8 GB/s bandwidth so one Thunderbolt interface will do fine and still have a nice 2GB/s overhead. However, the newer PCIe 3.0 interface pushes 16GB/s now so you'd need two Thunderbolt interfaces.
The one thing I wonder about is DRM. As it is now the connection to the display (and through DP) are protected (with either HDCP or DPCP). Do we know if LP/TB supports that protection (especially since the DP stream is actually separate from the PCIe stream)?
In other words, you can the CPU in room A and the RAM in room B which is 20 feet away and get the same result. This is one of the reasons Intel developed LightPeak. There are many other reasons for development obviously.
However, Thunderbolt in its current stage is not suited for such lengthy exchange due to its copper nature. However, say you have a GFX cradle on your desk, you could well use Thunderbolt's current implementation to feed data. However, you'd need multiple implementations of Thunderbolt in order for it to work great. Currently, many GFX solutions use PCIe x16 interface which pretty much uses 8 GB/s bandwidth so one Thunderbolt interface will do fine and still have a nice 2GB/s overhead. However, the newer PCIe 3.0 interface pushes 16GB/s now so you'd need two Thunderbolt interfaces.
The one thing I wonder about is DRM. As it is now the connection to the display (and through DP) are protected (with either HDCP or DPCP). Do we know if LP/TB supports that protection (especially since the DP stream is actually separate from the PCIe stream)?
mrapplegate
Apr 3, 06:28 PM
^ I don't about you, guys, but is there a way to make the address bar auto-hide when in FS mode? Logically, you don't wanna see anything but page content when in FS mode, no?
Not that I'm aware of currently, but you know that will be an extension as soon as it is released.
Not that I'm aware of currently, but you know that will be an extension as soon as it is released.
KnightWRX
May 2, 06:04 PM
LOL! Yeah... and I remember crashing faster than you click your mouse on those systems. Windows 3.0 and 3.1 were a mess. But of course... most things were back then. how far we've come.
Uh ? You say the crashing is somehow related to pre-emptive multi-tasking and yet you talk about Windows 3.0 and 3.1 which had... cooperative multi-tasking ? :confused:
I was talking about Unix systems on 386s (think BSD, think SCO UnixWare, think early Linux). Those had true pre-emptive multi-tasking and they didn't "crash faster than you click your mouse". (heck, my first DOS computer had no mouse and I don't think it ever crashed).
Crashing has nothing to do with the type of multi-tasking.
I think what he is saying is that programs that are actually doing work in the background can continue running, while those that aren't can suspend iOS style. That is how Lion works. It brings the benefits of both iOS & Mac OS.
What's working ? Is a program that's sitting in its idle loop waiting on a listen() operation not working ? Is a program that's firing a heartbeat every X seconds not working ?
Are we that ressource limited that we need to suspend these programs and have system level services to do these tasks, which the programs will register with on launch ? What's the benefit of a system level service vs the program doing it itself ?
Let's face it, it's not like a program sitting in the background is digging into the CPU much with a idle loop...
Uh ? You say the crashing is somehow related to pre-emptive multi-tasking and yet you talk about Windows 3.0 and 3.1 which had... cooperative multi-tasking ? :confused:
I was talking about Unix systems on 386s (think BSD, think SCO UnixWare, think early Linux). Those had true pre-emptive multi-tasking and they didn't "crash faster than you click your mouse". (heck, my first DOS computer had no mouse and I don't think it ever crashed).
Crashing has nothing to do with the type of multi-tasking.
I think what he is saying is that programs that are actually doing work in the background can continue running, while those that aren't can suspend iOS style. That is how Lion works. It brings the benefits of both iOS & Mac OS.
What's working ? Is a program that's sitting in its idle loop waiting on a listen() operation not working ? Is a program that's firing a heartbeat every X seconds not working ?
Are we that ressource limited that we need to suspend these programs and have system level services to do these tasks, which the programs will register with on launch ? What's the benefit of a system level service vs the program doing it itself ?
Let's face it, it's not like a program sitting in the background is digging into the CPU much with a idle loop...
Chupa Chupa
Apr 3, 09:19 AM
I feel like Apple could be saving some money here. Supplies are strained and there is a several week wait to get one. Do you really need more commercials right now?
Of course they are making billions of dollars, so I am sure they know what they are doing. :D
That is precisely why you have to run ads like this now... to remind people they want the iPad, even if they have to wait a few weeks, versus buying some other readily available tablet, which, on paper, looks as good or better than the iPad.
It's the old adage... out of sight, out of mind. With supplies constrained gotta keep the iPad2 in people's heads.
Of course they are making billions of dollars, so I am sure they know what they are doing. :D
That is precisely why you have to run ads like this now... to remind people they want the iPad, even if they have to wait a few weeks, versus buying some other readily available tablet, which, on paper, looks as good or better than the iPad.
It's the old adage... out of sight, out of mind. With supplies constrained gotta keep the iPad2 in people's heads.
Prom1
Nov 29, 10:05 PM
Imagine this if you will for a moment....
iPHONE in hand you snap a photo. take a video, update a contact or just want to send the video to your blog or .MAC Account.....
You do so with ONE click or 2 but no more than 3 for a FLICKR account.
BUT wait. Your .MAC account is integrated to your Mac so not only does your .MAC account have the video but so does your Mac! Now you get home and can use iMovie to edit that video. :D
Or better yet use a nice easy Menu system to "Remotely USE iMovie" to edit that movie you've just recorded, and uploaded to your .MAC or to your Mac (via iTV) or just show a preview to those at home - kinda like file sharing or say to other Macurmors.com members!!!
That would KILL ANYTHING out on the market!
iPHONE in hand you snap a photo. take a video, update a contact or just want to send the video to your blog or .MAC Account.....
You do so with ONE click or 2 but no more than 3 for a FLICKR account.
BUT wait. Your .MAC account is integrated to your Mac so not only does your .MAC account have the video but so does your Mac! Now you get home and can use iMovie to edit that video. :D
Or better yet use a nice easy Menu system to "Remotely USE iMovie" to edit that movie you've just recorded, and uploaded to your .MAC or to your Mac (via iTV) or just show a preview to those at home - kinda like file sharing or say to other Macurmors.com members!!!
That would KILL ANYTHING out on the market!
macman2790
Nov 27, 01:19 PM
this would be cool. It would even be better if someone other than the digitimes discovered it.
mozmac
Jul 18, 02:56 PM
The more I think about this, the more I like it. Apple has a lot of potential here. If they offered a rent and rent to own service, that would be optimal.
leekohler
Mar 22, 12:43 PM
Our Founding Fathers believed in God, proof alone is the pledge of allegiance "under god". Yes our country was founded on christian belief. Hate to say it, but it's true!
Wow- you really need to brush up on your history. "Under God" was added to the pledge in the 50's by people like you. And some of the founding fathers believed in a god, not all.
We do work to make things better in the US that's why everyone always wants to come to America. What I am saying is if Gays really want to complain about an App being created or anything else being done in the US then go to another country and see how much support you will actually get.
What happens in other countries is not my concern. What happens in this one is, because this is where I live. But actually, many other countries would, and do give us more support.
Gays freak out over the considered "normal" person rights, but yet when we give gay's rights you say it's never enough, when will Gays be content with what is given, and realize it takes time to give you everything. Signing a sheet of paper doesn't fix everything, nor was Rome built in a day so don't expect Gays to have = rights asap.
We'll be content when we have all the rights everyone else has. There's your answer. I said it before. Until then, we'll keep screaming. Either deal with it or ignore it.
Wow- you really need to brush up on your history. "Under God" was added to the pledge in the 50's by people like you. And some of the founding fathers believed in a god, not all.
We do work to make things better in the US that's why everyone always wants to come to America. What I am saying is if Gays really want to complain about an App being created or anything else being done in the US then go to another country and see how much support you will actually get.
What happens in other countries is not my concern. What happens in this one is, because this is where I live. But actually, many other countries would, and do give us more support.
Gays freak out over the considered "normal" person rights, but yet when we give gay's rights you say it's never enough, when will Gays be content with what is given, and realize it takes time to give you everything. Signing a sheet of paper doesn't fix everything, nor was Rome built in a day so don't expect Gays to have = rights asap.
We'll be content when we have all the rights everyone else has. There's your answer. I said it before. Until then, we'll keep screaming. Either deal with it or ignore it.
QuantumLo0p
Mar 7, 12:41 PM
As with most things :D I do have an opinion on that. I am very interested in diesel, but I am in the minority as far as that is concerned. When I mention the benefits of diesel to my friends, most of them say something like "Really, you're kidding, if they are superior in areas such as mileage then why doesn't the car companies make and sell them?" I believe the answer is because of the ridiculous emissions standards placed on the manufacturers by agencies such as the EPA. I believe that our government knows the benefits of diesel technology, but that too many powerful people are bought and paid for by giant corporations. You can call me a tin-hat wearing conspiracy theorist is you want to, but I really do think that is why many good things are being suppressed here.
I agree. Case in point; I believe one of the Aptera prototypes was rear drive and used batteries in conjunction with a diesel generator. At full charge the car would run off batteries and as they depleted the generator would contribute more and more electricity. Aptera's fuel efficiency figures were impressive, leaving EVER?THING currently offered in the dust. Sorry I can't quote data but if you look at archived site pages you can probably still find it; I did while back.
As fate would have it the diesel generator Aptera prototype has yet to make it into production and now they seem to offer only a total-loss battery car. I don't recall the range being very impressive which relegates it as an urban novelty and not in contention for serious real-world commuting.
:(
I agree. Case in point; I believe one of the Aptera prototypes was rear drive and used batteries in conjunction with a diesel generator. At full charge the car would run off batteries and as they depleted the generator would contribute more and more electricity. Aptera's fuel efficiency figures were impressive, leaving EVER?THING currently offered in the dust. Sorry I can't quote data but if you look at archived site pages you can probably still find it; I did while back.
As fate would have it the diesel generator Aptera prototype has yet to make it into production and now they seem to offer only a total-loss battery car. I don't recall the range being very impressive which relegates it as an urban novelty and not in contention for serious real-world commuting.
:(
MarkMS
Mar 30, 09:17 PM
Don't know about you guys, but this new iCal is killing me. Just doesn't look right. :confused:
three
Feb 6, 03:57 PM
It has been fairly nice lately so perfect time to get her clean again. Nothing much has changed since the last time I posted, installed a Fujita F5 CAI not too long ago though. I plan on getting BC coils, and new (non fake) wheels fairly soon.
http://www.imgur.com/OmeHh.jpg
http://www.imgur.com/OmeHh.jpg
OllyW
Mar 22, 05:17 PM
The big problem with hard drives is that they're slow.
They are plenty fast enough to play my music. :D
Waiting hopefully for the 220GB classic.
They are plenty fast enough to play my music. :D
Waiting hopefully for the 220GB classic.
Stridder44
Sep 7, 04:17 AM
Holy eff. What if they changed iMovie's purpose? For managing content (music & movies): iTunes and iMovie. For creating/editing content: Garageband and "Showtime" (or whatever speculated new name that was).
It makes so much more sense, even if it would be confusing at first.
It makes so much more sense, even if it would be confusing at first.
timmillwood
Oct 23, 07:49 AM
sorry to quote myself, but i just realized that the UK Mac Expo is this week, and that would be a good venue for releasing new MBPs
so my prediction is Oct 26 at the UK MacExpo.
cheers
i think they will stick with Tuesday then just show it off at the EXPO, this will be a silent update because no invites have been sent so there is no reason to wait for friday when they can do it Monday.
I hope to have it order Tuesday and delivered by the end of the week?
Any chance?
so my prediction is Oct 26 at the UK MacExpo.
cheers
i think they will stick with Tuesday then just show it off at the EXPO, this will be a silent update because no invites have been sent so there is no reason to wait for friday when they can do it Monday.
I hope to have it order Tuesday and delivered by the end of the week?
Any chance?
La Porta
Mar 25, 08:35 PM
At the very least, the "It doesn't have 1GB RAM=FAIL/512MB RAM isn't good enough" crowd maybe can keep quiet now. Apparently, this thing can do some amazing things even while "crippled" by your expectations. Apparently, numbers aren't everything.
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?
iEvolution
Mar 23, 02:29 PM
The chance that the iPod Classic is updated to 220GB is zero. Apple has no plans to ever update a hard drive based non-touch portable device (they would not waste their time), and they've shown even less interest in increasing the capacity of any device beyond even 64GB flash.
Tony
Yeah man, because it would be just so much effort to swap the 160GB for the 220GB..it would just cost WAYY too much money and too much time.
What a ignorant post.:rolleyes:
The COST is the issue with beyond 64GB flash at this point.
Tony
Yeah man, because it would be just so much effort to swap the 160GB for the 220GB..it would just cost WAYY too much money and too much time.
What a ignorant post.:rolleyes:
The COST is the issue with beyond 64GB flash at this point.
No comments:
Post a Comment