rjohnstone
Apr 26, 01:31 PM
It mostly has to do with if it is confusing. Apple has a trade mark on "App Store" to sell applications through an online store. Amazon is using "Appstore" and is selling applications through an online store. Apple has a pretty strong case that Amazon is infringing on their trademark. If Amazon used "Appstore" for a chain of tire rotating store, Amazon could probably be in the clear. As it stands they are too close in intended use. Microsofts strategy is to invalidate the trademark. It's up to the USPTO to decide on the trademark.
Apple doesn't have the trademark yet.
It's still in the opposition phase. ;)
Apple doesn't have the trademark yet.
It's still in the opposition phase. ;)
Lord Blackadder
Mar 1, 10:09 PM
Wikipedia states the Toyota Prius 3rd Gen gets a combined AFE of 50 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Prius#Third_generation_.28XW30.3B_2009.E2.80.93present.29) mpg (4.7L US gallons) if the diesel Cruze gets 37/48, that would give it a median AFE of 42.5 — 85% of what the Prius gets.
Against this you have to factor in the presumably lower cost of the Cruze, somewhat higher performance, lower cost to maintain, and lack of the battery pack with all it's complexity, carbon footprint, and cost.
Against this you have to factor in the presumably lower cost of the Cruze, somewhat higher performance, lower cost to maintain, and lack of the battery pack with all it's complexity, carbon footprint, and cost.
balamw
Sep 6, 06:27 PM
Personally, I wouldn't want to DL a large movie file without the option of being able to burn it to DVD so I can have that tangible hard copy that makes me feel safe and warm. Then I wouldn't have a problem deleting it off of my hard drive.
What's stopping you from doing that now?
I know I have all of my iTMS video backed up to data DVDs...
I know I won't be spending $10-$15 for anything less than DVD quality though, so I hope there's either a rental model or at least 480p.
B
What's stopping you from doing that now?
I know I have all of my iTMS video backed up to data DVDs...
I know I won't be spending $10-$15 for anything less than DVD quality though, so I hope there's either a rental model or at least 480p.
B
LumbermanSVO
Apr 12, 09:02 PM
I drive a non-syncronised 10-speed stick with a hellacious clutch pedal 6-days a week, or about 105k miles a year. Even the worst backing situations, where I'm feathering the clutch a LOT, aren't enough to get my leg tired anymore. The clutch pedals in most cars feels like stepping on a rotten plumb to me now.
With enough time you can learn to float the gears(clutchless shifting) with any manual transmission, yes, even the synchronized ones. Once you learn it you'll find that it takes less force to get it in gear than when you use the clutch. Most of my missed shifts in the big truck or the car are from my hand slipping off the lever from having too loose of a grip on.
Even after all the time in the big truck I still prefer my personal vehicles to have a manual. I did just buy a car with an auto though, but at $825 you can't be too picky about what trans it has. :D
With enough time you can learn to float the gears(clutchless shifting) with any manual transmission, yes, even the synchronized ones. Once you learn it you'll find that it takes less force to get it in gear than when you use the clutch. Most of my missed shifts in the big truck or the car are from my hand slipping off the lever from having too loose of a grip on.
Even after all the time in the big truck I still prefer my personal vehicles to have a manual. I did just buy a car with an auto though, but at $825 you can't be too picky about what trans it has. :D
ipadfanatic
Oct 21, 08:39 PM
Not sure who mentioned the Switcheasy cases first but thank you. I ordered two color cases on Monday night, they shipped from San Francisco on Tuesday and I received them in Maryland today.
Fit is nice and the screen guard looks and feels great.
Fit is nice and the screen guard looks and feels great.
MrFirework
Nov 15, 10:25 AM
How long before it ends up in the MacBook Pro?
(joking)
Thank GOD that "joking" is in there.
::to myself:: calm... calm... 1-2-3-4-5-4-3-2-1.... calm...
(joking)
Thank GOD that "joking" is in there.
::to myself:: calm... calm... 1-2-3-4-5-4-3-2-1.... calm...
UnreaL
Sep 7, 06:44 AM
Well I ordered the new lower model Mac Mini, this will be my first Mac (and its not even for me! For sister..)
1) CPU being Core Duo not really a problem, sims & firefox etc are not going to strain it!
2) 512mb memory is a let down, but im not waiting or paying the amount extra for 1GB as again she wont use it.
3) No superdrive is a let down, I would have spent the amount extra to upgrade if it was there, but I'm not buying the model with better GPU and slightly bigger harddrive and anyway she doesnt use DVD's.
Basically Bootcamp caused me to convert, without it I would have kept her on PC
Well we'll have to see.
Got it for �360 from the Apple higher education store, cant wait :D
1) CPU being Core Duo not really a problem, sims & firefox etc are not going to strain it!
2) 512mb memory is a let down, but im not waiting or paying the amount extra for 1GB as again she wont use it.
3) No superdrive is a let down, I would have spent the amount extra to upgrade if it was there, but I'm not buying the model with better GPU and slightly bigger harddrive and anyway she doesnt use DVD's.
Basically Bootcamp caused me to convert, without it I would have kept her on PC
Well we'll have to see.
Got it for �360 from the Apple higher education store, cant wait :D
HecubusPro
Sep 6, 06:06 PM
Personally, I wouldn't want to DL a large movie file without the option of being able to burn it to DVD so I can have that tangible hard copy that makes me feel safe and warm. Then I wouldn't have a problem deleting it off of my hard drive.
I could be wrong, but I don't see them dealing with rentals. Most people still don't have fast enough connections to warrant downloading a big movie file when they can just have it delivered to their door via Netflix or they can head down to their local Blockbuster and have it right away. Same goes for purchases. I like having the retail box. It just makes me a little bit happier. :) Now, if they offered HD downloads, I'd definitely be interested in that, even if it is a super big file.
I could be wrong, but I don't see them dealing with rentals. Most people still don't have fast enough connections to warrant downloading a big movie file when they can just have it delivered to their door via Netflix or they can head down to their local Blockbuster and have it right away. Same goes for purchases. I like having the retail box. It just makes me a little bit happier. :) Now, if they offered HD downloads, I'd definitely be interested in that, even if it is a super big file.
%25252Bwallpapers%25252BHQ%25252BHD%25252BWide%25252Bscreen%25252Bwallpapers%25252Bmicrosoft%25252Bsurface%25252Bwallpapers.jpg "wallpaper hd windows 7. of")
Danksi
Nov 29, 02:45 PM
So long as iTV can reliably pull all of our media content from our PC/Mac, without it overloading iTunes/iPhoto, we'll be happy.
It may just be what's needed for us to finally replace our decaying 19inch TV for a widescreen 26inch LCD TV. :)
Since our DVD player's pretty knackered too, I was thinking it'd be nice to stick a DVD in my MacPro and have iTV stream it to the front room, one less box to worry about. Built-in DVR would be sweet, no more VHS machine, but it'd need a Canadian TV-Guide.
It may just be what's needed for us to finally replace our decaying 19inch TV for a widescreen 26inch LCD TV. :)
Since our DVD player's pretty knackered too, I was thinking it'd be nice to stick a DVD in my MacPro and have iTV stream it to the front room, one less box to worry about. Built-in DVR would be sweet, no more VHS machine, but it'd need a Canadian TV-Guide.
aLoC
Nov 17, 12:09 PM
FB-DIMM are likely the future... it will truly start to will shine when they make available more channels out of the memory controllers allowing bandwidth to scale and it hides memory specifics from the memory controller allowing advancements in DIMMs to remain compatible with existing systems.
It's not the future... these kind of over-architected solutions never win. I predict CPUs, memory and memory controllers will become more tightly integrated over time, not less. FB-DIMM will be gone is a few years.
It's not the future... these kind of over-architected solutions never win. I predict CPUs, memory and memory controllers will become more tightly integrated over time, not less. FB-DIMM will be gone is a few years.
DavidLeblond
Aug 7, 07:23 AM
Heh, not only is that tag-line funny, but it's funny 'cause it's true. "Hasta la vista, vista"? That's great too. Paul's obviously irritated by it, and also annoyed by the fact that Apple marketshare is in fact growing, despite his disbelief in its ability ever to do so.
Paul's not a bad guy, in fact sometimes I think he's on the fence about what product to support. Look at the crap he writes. He'll praise Mac OS but then say something completely assinine such as "That feature's great, too bad they stole it from Longhorn!"
Then he'll praise the innovativeness of Vista, and in the next breath talk about how much of a piece of crap it is.
My favorite is when he says how awesome IE7 is... but he won't actually USE it, he uses Firefox. And he'll praise Ubuntu any chance he gets. I'm sure that REALLY steams Microsoft's shorts!
He gets paid to write about Windows, so of course he's going to issue it more praise and talk trash about Apple more. But pay close attention to the bad things he says about Mac OS and the bad things he said about Windows... he has a lot more bad things to say about Windows... his arguments about Mac OS are usually the stupid things like making fun of their marketshare. *yawn*
Paul's not a bad guy, in fact sometimes I think he's on the fence about what product to support. Look at the crap he writes. He'll praise Mac OS but then say something completely assinine such as "That feature's great, too bad they stole it from Longhorn!"
Then he'll praise the innovativeness of Vista, and in the next breath talk about how much of a piece of crap it is.
My favorite is when he says how awesome IE7 is... but he won't actually USE it, he uses Firefox. And he'll praise Ubuntu any chance he gets. I'm sure that REALLY steams Microsoft's shorts!
He gets paid to write about Windows, so of course he's going to issue it more praise and talk trash about Apple more. But pay close attention to the bad things he says about Mac OS and the bad things he said about Windows... he has a lot more bad things to say about Windows... his arguments about Mac OS are usually the stupid things like making fun of their marketshare. *yawn*
redAPPLE
Aug 7, 01:06 AM
Notice in the banner picture how the PowerMac G5 Tower is showing only it's side?!
Anyone think it's maybe actually a MacPro's side...therefore they wouldn't show its front or back (dual optical drives, reconfigured back)?
actually, i think the mac pro will have the same side, but a slimmer front...
Anyone think it's maybe actually a MacPro's side...therefore they wouldn't show its front or back (dual optical drives, reconfigured back)?
actually, i think the mac pro will have the same side, but a slimmer front...
Uragon
Apr 21, 12:03 PM
no, all politicians wave the "privacy" banner... they don't want their employers (i.e. you and me) to know where they've been.
+1...., the best
+1...., the best
xterm
Jul 14, 09:21 AM
As purely a data storage format, obviously Blu-ray has the potential to store more data than HD DVD.
However, as someone who has been following the whole BD vs. HD DVD consumer video format war, and as someone who has bought an HD DVD player (and, until recently, had a BD video player on order), at this (albeit early) stage of the game, HD DVD is the superior video format.
HD DVD has 30gb dual layer discs available (almost all the latest video releases on HD DVD are 30gb dual layer.) There are many more titles available for HD DVD right now (probably because it's been out longer and the discs themselves are easier to manufacture.) HD DVD uses a more efficient codec (Microsoft's VC-1, which is akin to H.264, in that it's much much more efficient than MPEG-2.) HD DVD titles have either Dolby Digital Plus (a higher bit-rate multichannel audio codec) and Dolby TruHD (a lossless multichannel audio codec).
BD only has 25gb single layer discs available now. Apparently the 50gb dual layer discs are hard to manufacture and the yields are not ready for prime time. No BD retail video discs are above 25gb single layer. No timetable for 50gb discs has been announced. The video is MPEG-2, meaning it takes up more space on the disc. And, the most recent BD releases all suffer from more MPEG artifacts than any HD DVD releases. BD audio is either standard Dolby Digital or space consuming uncompressed PCM audio (which sucks up even more disc space, leaving even less for video.)
The current Samsung BD player actually has the same (Broadcom) chip that the current Toshiba HD DVD player has in terms of outputing video... and it only outputs 1080i. The Samsung player tacks on another (Faroudja) chip to deinterlace it, so it outputs 1080p (so BD can say "we output 1080p!"), except, that chip apparently stinks and makes the picture somewhat soft. In reality, any HDTV worth its salt can easily deinterlace 1080i signals, so the whole "we output 1080p" is a false advantage anyway. Both BD and HD DVD discs store the video as 1080p, by the way.
So, what you have, on the video front, BD has a smaller capacity disk with less efficient video and audio codecs (that look and sound worse). And it is TWICE the price ($500 vs. $1000). And has less titles. And is late.
If you read any reports on BD video quality vs. HD DVD video quality on boards like AVSforum.com, HD DVD beats BD hands down.
Who knows how this video format war will shake out, but Blu-ray is way behind right now.
-Terry
Good post, sums up the current situation very nicely.
Given that dual layer 50GB blu-ray discs cant even be produced yet, i think the 200GB claim is complete vaporware.
I hope HD-DVD wins this war soon, as it is out of the gates first, and thus far a far superior format. If Blu-Ray were to give up now, i dont think many people would be sad. One format is better for everyone.
However, as someone who has been following the whole BD vs. HD DVD consumer video format war, and as someone who has bought an HD DVD player (and, until recently, had a BD video player on order), at this (albeit early) stage of the game, HD DVD is the superior video format.
HD DVD has 30gb dual layer discs available (almost all the latest video releases on HD DVD are 30gb dual layer.) There are many more titles available for HD DVD right now (probably because it's been out longer and the discs themselves are easier to manufacture.) HD DVD uses a more efficient codec (Microsoft's VC-1, which is akin to H.264, in that it's much much more efficient than MPEG-2.) HD DVD titles have either Dolby Digital Plus (a higher bit-rate multichannel audio codec) and Dolby TruHD (a lossless multichannel audio codec).
BD only has 25gb single layer discs available now. Apparently the 50gb dual layer discs are hard to manufacture and the yields are not ready for prime time. No BD retail video discs are above 25gb single layer. No timetable for 50gb discs has been announced. The video is MPEG-2, meaning it takes up more space on the disc. And, the most recent BD releases all suffer from more MPEG artifacts than any HD DVD releases. BD audio is either standard Dolby Digital or space consuming uncompressed PCM audio (which sucks up even more disc space, leaving even less for video.)
The current Samsung BD player actually has the same (Broadcom) chip that the current Toshiba HD DVD player has in terms of outputing video... and it only outputs 1080i. The Samsung player tacks on another (Faroudja) chip to deinterlace it, so it outputs 1080p (so BD can say "we output 1080p!"), except, that chip apparently stinks and makes the picture somewhat soft. In reality, any HDTV worth its salt can easily deinterlace 1080i signals, so the whole "we output 1080p" is a false advantage anyway. Both BD and HD DVD discs store the video as 1080p, by the way.
So, what you have, on the video front, BD has a smaller capacity disk with less efficient video and audio codecs (that look and sound worse). And it is TWICE the price ($500 vs. $1000). And has less titles. And is late.
If you read any reports on BD video quality vs. HD DVD video quality on boards like AVSforum.com, HD DVD beats BD hands down.
Who knows how this video format war will shake out, but Blu-ray is way behind right now.
-Terry
Good post, sums up the current situation very nicely.
Given that dual layer 50GB blu-ray discs cant even be produced yet, i think the 200GB claim is complete vaporware.
I hope HD-DVD wins this war soon, as it is out of the gates first, and thus far a far superior format. If Blu-Ray were to give up now, i dont think many people would be sad. One format is better for everyone.
bigpics
Mar 24, 12:57 PM
Dude, I'm sorry to inform you that what you're saying is an outright lie, and there are guys from the Lossless Compression Clan, called "Apple Lossless codec", "FLAC", and "APE", standing with heavy cluebats in their hands, ready to perform a painful reality sync on anyone thinking compression ALWAYS degrades quality.
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
skinniezinho
Nov 27, 11:59 AM
first pair of decent headphones.
grado sr60i
http://www.opticaudio.co.uk/images/Grado%20SR60I-2.jpg
Good choice!I have the Alessandro MS1i (http://www.alessandro-products.com/headphones.html) wich are +- a mix of grado models and love them!
grado sr60i
http://www.opticaudio.co.uk/images/Grado%20SR60I-2.jpg
Good choice!I have the Alessandro MS1i (http://www.alessandro-products.com/headphones.html) wich are +- a mix of grado models and love them!
kerryb
Apr 26, 01:01 PM
Wheres FullOfWin when you need him?
The Windows 7 wallpaper is
provides hd widescreen jul
benjayman2
Feb 28, 01:57 PM
First attempt to get everything in one shot.
http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/6433/img0390ko.jpg (http://img141.imageshack.us/i/img0390ko.jpg/)
Gave up and started taking pics of parts of our new room.
http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/3861/img0392y.jpg (http://img651.imageshack.us/i/img0392y.jpg/)
Digital and Analog entertainment
http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/4808/img0394m.jpg (http://img193.imageshack.us/i/img0394m.jpg/)
Second attempt to get everything in one shot.
http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/9025/img0396ki.jpg (http://img87.imageshack.us/i/img0396ki.jpg/)
Pic from the window bay.
http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/1438/img0398p.jpg (http://img84.imageshack.us/i/img0398p.jpg/)
The only pic that I thought turned out decent.
http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/1701/img0386of.jpg
Hardware in the sig
http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/6433/img0390ko.jpg (http://img141.imageshack.us/i/img0390ko.jpg/)
Gave up and started taking pics of parts of our new room.
http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/3861/img0392y.jpg (http://img651.imageshack.us/i/img0392y.jpg/)
Digital and Analog entertainment
http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/4808/img0394m.jpg (http://img193.imageshack.us/i/img0394m.jpg/)
Second attempt to get everything in one shot.
http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/9025/img0396ki.jpg (http://img87.imageshack.us/i/img0396ki.jpg/)
Pic from the window bay.
http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/1438/img0398p.jpg (http://img84.imageshack.us/i/img0398p.jpg/)
The only pic that I thought turned out decent.
http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/1701/img0386of.jpg
Hardware in the sig
VPrime
Jan 5, 01:58 AM
To the BMW guys, how reliable is the E46 325i?
I have a chance to pick one up for a fairly low cost (Less than $6,000 canadian). It is pretty much mint and VERY well maintained.
Car has a bit higher miles (~125,000 miles/ 205,000km), but I am guessing well maintained they will last quite a while?
I really enjoyed my brothers E36, and I just got rid of my project cars so I figure this would be a nice change.
I have a chance to pick one up for a fairly low cost (Less than $6,000 canadian). It is pretty much mint and VERY well maintained.
Car has a bit higher miles (~125,000 miles/ 205,000km), but I am guessing well maintained they will last quite a while?
I really enjoyed my brothers E36, and I just got rid of my project cars so I figure this would be a nice change.
hunkaburningluv
Mar 26, 08:28 AM
If someone had come out with a console allowing for full-color 1024x768 touchscreen controllers the other consoles would be scrambling to catch up. Even if that controller cost $499.
While there are some nits here (30fps isn't exactly ideal performance, the dongle connection seems too flimsy for real gameplay, etc) I think this is a huge step forward in gaming.
Nintendo and Microsoft should be shaking in their boots right now.
As a rather casual gamer, I'd love to see the bastard love-child of this and kinect.
you think? I think no none would buy the $499 controller as it's too expensive for a controller.
Ninty and M$ have nothing to worry about anything that apple does in relation to games will supplement the market as it is.
Not really. Properly designed controls on touch screen will be just fine... You will see...
Anyone who thinks that the long-term viability of the IOS ecosystem as a significant home game player because of the lack of hard controls is just missing the picture.
I can't figure out why some people think you have to look at the screen of a touchscreen device to use it to manipulate things in a game world. Between rotation and movement of the device itself with properly placed buttons you can do a lot with it, none of it requiring looking at the touch screen.
I suspect most people could distinguish between the lower left corner of their device and the upper right corner, for instance, without looking at the screen.
There is still a vast difference in the tactility (sp) and force feed back that hardcore gamers won't take too - as much as I don't like modern warfare, but I doubt the metric crapload of players would prefer to play with touch controls
but when you remove the need for look at a touch screen, then why need it? A simple touch pad would suffice. By removing the need to look at the screen, you remove the point of it.
Hardcore gaming will never change to the extent it doesn't need a controller and as such the market isn't going to change. Sure I can't wait until I play starcraft or the like on an ipad, but I won't be ditching any of my consoles.
While there are some nits here (30fps isn't exactly ideal performance, the dongle connection seems too flimsy for real gameplay, etc) I think this is a huge step forward in gaming.
Nintendo and Microsoft should be shaking in their boots right now.
As a rather casual gamer, I'd love to see the bastard love-child of this and kinect.
you think? I think no none would buy the $499 controller as it's too expensive for a controller.
Ninty and M$ have nothing to worry about anything that apple does in relation to games will supplement the market as it is.
Not really. Properly designed controls on touch screen will be just fine... You will see...
Anyone who thinks that the long-term viability of the IOS ecosystem as a significant home game player because of the lack of hard controls is just missing the picture.
I can't figure out why some people think you have to look at the screen of a touchscreen device to use it to manipulate things in a game world. Between rotation and movement of the device itself with properly placed buttons you can do a lot with it, none of it requiring looking at the touch screen.
I suspect most people could distinguish between the lower left corner of their device and the upper right corner, for instance, without looking at the screen.
There is still a vast difference in the tactility (sp) and force feed back that hardcore gamers won't take too - as much as I don't like modern warfare, but I doubt the metric crapload of players would prefer to play with touch controls
but when you remove the need for look at a touch screen, then why need it? A simple touch pad would suffice. By removing the need to look at the screen, you remove the point of it.
Hardcore gaming will never change to the extent it doesn't need a controller and as such the market isn't going to change. Sure I can't wait until I play starcraft or the like on an ipad, but I won't be ditching any of my consoles.
mrapplegate
Apr 1, 08:42 AM
Two *major* bugs:
1) TextEdit crashes on launch (tried trashing the prefs file - nothing)
2) cmd+left/right no longer goes to the start/end of the line :O wtf!
Anyone else experiencing these?
TextEdit launches fine for me.
cmd+left/right moves the cursor to the front or the end of the line.
Sorry, but looks like bug report time.
1) TextEdit crashes on launch (tried trashing the prefs file - nothing)
2) cmd+left/right no longer goes to the start/end of the line :O wtf!
Anyone else experiencing these?
TextEdit launches fine for me.
cmd+left/right moves the cursor to the front or the end of the line.
Sorry, but looks like bug report time.
Hellhammer
Apr 21, 03:50 PM
I'd welcome HellHammer's thoughts on this as he generally has a well informed perspective on these things.
I have made my predictions and I still stand behind them. I don't really follow this thread though so if someone has me a question, you may be better off PMing me.
1199$ 21.5" iMac
Intel Core i3-2100 (3.1GHz)
AMD 6490M with 256MB GDDR5
500GB HD
2x2GB RAM; option for 4x2GB
1499$ 21.5" iMac
Intel Core i5-2400S (2.5/3.3GHz); option for Core i5-2500S (2.7/3.7GHz)
AMD 6750M with 512MB GDDR5
1TB HD; option for 2TB
2x2GB RAM: option for 4x2GB
1699$ 27" iMac
Intel Core i5-2400 (3.1/3.4GHz)
AMD 6750M with 512MB GDDR5; option for AMD 6950M with 1024MB GDDR5
1TB HD; option for 2TB
2x2GB RAM; options for 4x2GB, 2x4GB and 4x4GB
1999$ 27" iMac
Intel Core i7-2600 (3.4/3.8GHz)
AMD 6950M with 1024MB GDDR5
1TB HD; option for 2TB
2x4GB RAM; option for 4x4GB
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=11688279&postcount=26
I'm sure it's been done to death, but I spent some time actually thinking about realistic-ish speculations of what the new line could look like. I think they're going to get rid of one SKU ( the step up 27" without the quad i7), because it's kind of redundant, and for the $100 price difference, I can't imagine anyone NOT spending the extra modey to get the quad core). The only spec that is more of a wishful thinking piece is the inclusion of the HD6800M 1GB card in the 27" quad i7. THAT would be a beast!
Common Upgrades
1. Thunderbolt port
2. HDMI out
3. Sandybridge
Now, here's the model breakdown:
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.2 GHz i3 processor
4 GB RAM
500 GB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1199.99
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.5 GHz i3 processor
8 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1499.99
27" (2560x1440) display
2.8 GHz i5 processor
4 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 5870 (512MB)
HDMI out
$1699.99
27" (2560x1440) display
3.2 GHz quad i7 processor
8 GB RAM
2 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 6970 (1 GB)
HDMI out
$1999.99
ATI 4870M has TDP of 65W, there is no way it is going to fit in 21.5". Also, it makes absolutely no sense to use three different generations as that, if something, would confuse consumers a big time. The only possibility I see is that the low-end gets ATI 5670 (aka 5730M) like Apple did in previous update. Other models will very likely feature AMD 6000M-series graphics.
I also doubt that Apple will use i3 in other than the low-end iMac. All MBPs have i5 or better, even the 1199$ one. Using i3 in 1499$ iMac sounds stupid because in the end, the consumer thinks that i5 is better because 5 is greater than 3, even though that doesn't really mean that when comparing desktop and mobile CPUs. Moreover, there is no 3.5GHz i3 either.
HDMI doesn't sound too likely, seeing that only Mac Mini has it. Thunderbolt or mDP can provide the same functionality and much more.
I have made my predictions and I still stand behind them. I don't really follow this thread though so if someone has me a question, you may be better off PMing me.
1199$ 21.5" iMac
Intel Core i3-2100 (3.1GHz)
AMD 6490M with 256MB GDDR5
500GB HD
2x2GB RAM; option for 4x2GB
1499$ 21.5" iMac
Intel Core i5-2400S (2.5/3.3GHz); option for Core i5-2500S (2.7/3.7GHz)
AMD 6750M with 512MB GDDR5
1TB HD; option for 2TB
2x2GB RAM: option for 4x2GB
1699$ 27" iMac
Intel Core i5-2400 (3.1/3.4GHz)
AMD 6750M with 512MB GDDR5; option for AMD 6950M with 1024MB GDDR5
1TB HD; option for 2TB
2x2GB RAM; options for 4x2GB, 2x4GB and 4x4GB
1999$ 27" iMac
Intel Core i7-2600 (3.4/3.8GHz)
AMD 6950M with 1024MB GDDR5
1TB HD; option for 2TB
2x4GB RAM; option for 4x4GB
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=11688279&postcount=26
I'm sure it's been done to death, but I spent some time actually thinking about realistic-ish speculations of what the new line could look like. I think they're going to get rid of one SKU ( the step up 27" without the quad i7), because it's kind of redundant, and for the $100 price difference, I can't imagine anyone NOT spending the extra modey to get the quad core). The only spec that is more of a wishful thinking piece is the inclusion of the HD6800M 1GB card in the 27" quad i7. THAT would be a beast!
Common Upgrades
1. Thunderbolt port
2. HDMI out
3. Sandybridge
Now, here's the model breakdown:
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.2 GHz i3 processor
4 GB RAM
500 GB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1199.99
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.5 GHz i3 processor
8 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1499.99
27" (2560x1440) display
2.8 GHz i5 processor
4 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 5870 (512MB)
HDMI out
$1699.99
27" (2560x1440) display
3.2 GHz quad i7 processor
8 GB RAM
2 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 6970 (1 GB)
HDMI out
$1999.99
ATI 4870M has TDP of 65W, there is no way it is going to fit in 21.5". Also, it makes absolutely no sense to use three different generations as that, if something, would confuse consumers a big time. The only possibility I see is that the low-end gets ATI 5670 (aka 5730M) like Apple did in previous update. Other models will very likely feature AMD 6000M-series graphics.
I also doubt that Apple will use i3 in other than the low-end iMac. All MBPs have i5 or better, even the 1199$ one. Using i3 in 1499$ iMac sounds stupid because in the end, the consumer thinks that i5 is better because 5 is greater than 3, even though that doesn't really mean that when comparing desktop and mobile CPUs. Moreover, there is no 3.5GHz i3 either.
HDMI doesn't sound too likely, seeing that only Mac Mini has it. Thunderbolt or mDP can provide the same functionality and much more.
KeriJane
Apr 9, 04:56 PM
Yes, I can drive manual.
My father was too cheap to buy an automatic car and the cars I could afford when I was younger were all manual.
I didn't actually start with a car. My first motor vehicle was a Yamaha 60, which was a full-sized motorcycle with a 60cc engine and a... manual transmission!
1st car= 1968 SAAB 96 with 3 cylinders and a manual transmission! It was loads of fun and sounded like nothing else except maybe a very angry snowmobile.
Nowdays, 2 of my last 3 Toyota Tercels were automatics. I wish for manual a lot as the autos are a bit sluggish and not as economical.
Have Fun,
Keri
PS. I may have a really fun manual car pretty soon.
My father was too cheap to buy an automatic car and the cars I could afford when I was younger were all manual.
I didn't actually start with a car. My first motor vehicle was a Yamaha 60, which was a full-sized motorcycle with a 60cc engine and a... manual transmission!
1st car= 1968 SAAB 96 with 3 cylinders and a manual transmission! It was loads of fun and sounded like nothing else except maybe a very angry snowmobile.
Nowdays, 2 of my last 3 Toyota Tercels were automatics. I wish for manual a lot as the autos are a bit sluggish and not as economical.
Have Fun,
Keri
PS. I may have a really fun manual car pretty soon.
*LTD*
May 2, 09:26 PM
I think this is the wrong way to go!
Its pulling apart mac os into a waterd down version of itself they will continue to add this stuff untill there is no difference between iOS and Mac OS!
What we'll be left with is a powerfull but waterd down mac iOS/hybrid platform with downloads through the app store like the iphone and ipad killing the powerfull features we have but running on every apple device!
I personally think apple will kill the ability to download any content through safari in the future in mac os!
So all apps will be vetted by apple and all music/films we HAVE to be made through itunes no popping on to amazon or whever to make a purchase through a browser on your imac or macbook!
I hate the direction this is going they are building a walled garden around mac os slowly and dont be supprised the ports start disapearing on the macbook soon for a 30pin dock!
Bad move apple!
"powerful but watered down."
So in other words: "powerful but much easier to use for everyone."
Sounds good to me. Go iOS.
However, if we take your sentence in full:
"What we'll be left with is a powerfull but waterd down mac iOS/hybrid platform with downloads through the app store like the iphone and ipad killing the powerfull features we have but running on every apple device!"
Then it's just nonsense! LOL
Its pulling apart mac os into a waterd down version of itself they will continue to add this stuff untill there is no difference between iOS and Mac OS!
What we'll be left with is a powerfull but waterd down mac iOS/hybrid platform with downloads through the app store like the iphone and ipad killing the powerfull features we have but running on every apple device!
I personally think apple will kill the ability to download any content through safari in the future in mac os!
So all apps will be vetted by apple and all music/films we HAVE to be made through itunes no popping on to amazon or whever to make a purchase through a browser on your imac or macbook!
I hate the direction this is going they are building a walled garden around mac os slowly and dont be supprised the ports start disapearing on the macbook soon for a 30pin dock!
Bad move apple!
"powerful but watered down."
So in other words: "powerful but much easier to use for everyone."
Sounds good to me. Go iOS.
However, if we take your sentence in full:
"What we'll be left with is a powerfull but waterd down mac iOS/hybrid platform with downloads through the app store like the iphone and ipad killing the powerfull features we have but running on every apple device!"
Then it's just nonsense! LOL
No comments:
Post a Comment