Counter
Nov 18, 09:29 AM
iTunes saw much less improvements?
Christ.
iTunes runs perfectly well on a G4 400mhz.
8-Cores ain't for anything remotely normal, let alone listening to music.
Christ.
iTunes runs perfectly well on a G4 400mhz.
8-Cores ain't for anything remotely normal, let alone listening to music.
whoooaaahhhh
Jul 14, 09:54 AM
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.
NO.
First of all, Blu-Ray discs are a completely new material and fabrication process, so highlighting the fact that they've only made 25GB discs (which were stable-ly created long before almost ANY HD-DVD's) and can't produce a disk which is far above the specs of the competition, is like saying screw the russians cuz they're space program hasn't sent a man to mars (nobody's done it yet, anyway). You can't blame Blu-Ray for not being able to deliver 50 GB yet, the meat of the war is just beginning anyway.
Secondly, what was said about the VC-1 codec is very wrong. Microsoft's VC-1 codec is far worse and more difficult to work with than MPEG 2 or MPEG 4 that sony will probably offer in later versions of Blu-Ray. All this malarky about artifacts doesn't really make sense when you consider that we've been USING MPEG2 IN DVD'S FOR YEARS NOW! There's no way that the algorithim could be to blame for the artifacts! Sure it's fatter, but it's a lighter compression, and as Sony has shown with their PCM Audio on Blu-Ray, sometimes light compression on a bigger disk is better than heavy compression on smaller disks. It will be a lot easier to change to a more efficient codec down the line (which is what we've done with computers time and time again, as well as professional video) so we can get Ultra HD on Blu Ray when it comes out as well.
I'm sorry, I understand people really want HD-DVD to win because it's easier and cheaper right now, but since when has the easiest option been the best? If Blu-Ray doesn't win this war we'll have another short life-span format, this version of HD will not be enough for the professional industry much longer, take it from a video guy. I've written a frickin' paper on this very subject.
IMHO I'd like to see a Blu-Ray with the Mac Pro's to help solidify the consumer base into purchasing a better product, because that's how you standardize something in the market...sales...But I don't know that it will happen. Although remember DVD-RAM? Apple seemed to like that for awhile...that died...
I also don't want microsoft handling my video codec, anybody remember the wonderous creation of WMV/WMA? The one that like none of us can use on macs? HD-DVD's codec is a derivation of the WMV-HD codec. Welcome to the Microsoft reality. They really like controlling proprietary codecs. Also...MPEG was created by a group of companies and people working together, Microsoft created WMV, so they've got almost complete say in how that plays out.
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.
NO.
First of all, Blu-Ray discs are a completely new material and fabrication process, so highlighting the fact that they've only made 25GB discs (which were stable-ly created long before almost ANY HD-DVD's) and can't produce a disk which is far above the specs of the competition, is like saying screw the russians cuz they're space program hasn't sent a man to mars (nobody's done it yet, anyway). You can't blame Blu-Ray for not being able to deliver 50 GB yet, the meat of the war is just beginning anyway.
Secondly, what was said about the VC-1 codec is very wrong. Microsoft's VC-1 codec is far worse and more difficult to work with than MPEG 2 or MPEG 4 that sony will probably offer in later versions of Blu-Ray. All this malarky about artifacts doesn't really make sense when you consider that we've been USING MPEG2 IN DVD'S FOR YEARS NOW! There's no way that the algorithim could be to blame for the artifacts! Sure it's fatter, but it's a lighter compression, and as Sony has shown with their PCM Audio on Blu-Ray, sometimes light compression on a bigger disk is better than heavy compression on smaller disks. It will be a lot easier to change to a more efficient codec down the line (which is what we've done with computers time and time again, as well as professional video) so we can get Ultra HD on Blu Ray when it comes out as well.
I'm sorry, I understand people really want HD-DVD to win because it's easier and cheaper right now, but since when has the easiest option been the best? If Blu-Ray doesn't win this war we'll have another short life-span format, this version of HD will not be enough for the professional industry much longer, take it from a video guy. I've written a frickin' paper on this very subject.
IMHO I'd like to see a Blu-Ray with the Mac Pro's to help solidify the consumer base into purchasing a better product, because that's how you standardize something in the market...sales...But I don't know that it will happen. Although remember DVD-RAM? Apple seemed to like that for awhile...that died...
I also don't want microsoft handling my video codec, anybody remember the wonderous creation of WMV/WMA? The one that like none of us can use on macs? HD-DVD's codec is a derivation of the WMV-HD codec. Welcome to the Microsoft reality. They really like controlling proprietary codecs. Also...MPEG was created by a group of companies and people working together, Microsoft created WMV, so they've got almost complete say in how that plays out.
Queso
Jul 21, 08:20 AM
So we are still not back upto Q1 2000 numbers? :eek:
Except of course that Q1 is the Christmas quarter, not April to June :rolleyes:
Except of course that Q1 is the Christmas quarter, not April to June :rolleyes:
Travis Bickle
Mar 24, 01:34 PM
Probably a daft question but i'll ask anyhows so forgive my techie noobness!
With the advent of thunderbolt and its high bandwidth, will it possible for a gfx card to be sited externally in some kind of cradle and be used as the main gfx card or wouldn't the internal "plumbing" allow it to happen ?
/noob mode off
;)
With the advent of thunderbolt and its high bandwidth, will it possible for a gfx card to be sited externally in some kind of cradle and be used as the main gfx card or wouldn't the internal "plumbing" allow it to happen ?
/noob mode off
;)
Surely
Nov 24, 12:41 AM
Not really, The reason I spent the money on Oakleys is because from what I've read and seen, Oakley's are tough and will last you years. But also if I travel and don't wish to wear them I want to put them somewhere where they will not be crushed, or drowned, or broken.
I'm also planning on going into the Coast Guard, So if/when I travel or etc, I want to take great care of my equipment & personal belongings.
I got that size because it was the smallest water proof size, I also plan on getting another pair someday.
When I spend $200.00 on a pair of sunglasses, When they are not on my head, I want them put away.
Totally overkill for a pair of Oakley's, but hey, that's your choice. They're not our sunglasses.
For the first visit i had to pay 154.00 when i broke my toe 4 weeks ago. This time I had insurance so I don't know how much it will be. i've been going to this guy for 13 years im sure they have me on some discount program hahah.
That just makes me sad.
������
Moar of these:
http://www.singleservecoffee.com/pictures/IMGP3839.jpg x 50
I'm also planning on going into the Coast Guard, So if/when I travel or etc, I want to take great care of my equipment & personal belongings.
I got that size because it was the smallest water proof size, I also plan on getting another pair someday.
When I spend $200.00 on a pair of sunglasses, When they are not on my head, I want them put away.
Totally overkill for a pair of Oakley's, but hey, that's your choice. They're not our sunglasses.
For the first visit i had to pay 154.00 when i broke my toe 4 weeks ago. This time I had insurance so I don't know how much it will be. i've been going to this guy for 13 years im sure they have me on some discount program hahah.
That just makes me sad.
������
Moar of these:
http://www.singleservecoffee.com/pictures/IMGP3839.jpg x 50
MicroByte
Sep 12, 06:19 PM
I got Night Sky (very dark blue).
Man, I would have picked that one up immediately! I cannot believe those were the only 3 colors mine had, I'm gonna try the other BB tomorrow.
So how do you like it? Does it seem like it would last?
Man, I would have picked that one up immediately! I cannot believe those were the only 3 colors mine had, I'm gonna try the other BB tomorrow.
So how do you like it? Does it seem like it would last?
Platform
Jul 13, 11:42 PM
So, how long till it comes to laptops? :D
And on top of that, its only going to be a viewer, right? I mean have they created any Blu-ray burners, yet?
I really don't want to buy a Macbook Pro until it has Merom, 802.11n, and blue-ray, cause I know those are all going to be standard in less than a year and I can't afford to have a crippled laptop for 3 yrs.
Hopefully it won't be too far, I've saved enough cash.
Not long, as others have said its for sale for the desktops and I know that HP or someone has put and HD DVD player in a laptop ;)
Edit: Sony is selling VAIO laptops with Blue Ray players !
And on top of that, its only going to be a viewer, right? I mean have they created any Blu-ray burners, yet?
I really don't want to buy a Macbook Pro until it has Merom, 802.11n, and blue-ray, cause I know those are all going to be standard in less than a year and I can't afford to have a crippled laptop for 3 yrs.
Hopefully it won't be too far, I've saved enough cash.
Not long, as others have said its for sale for the desktops and I know that HP or someone has put and HD DVD player in a laptop ;)
Edit: Sony is selling VAIO laptops with Blue Ray players !
Yahgo
Sep 8, 02:58 PM
This sure is starting to sound like MOVIEBEAM... and who owns that???
Walt Disney Owns MOVIEBEAM.
Walt Disney Owns MOVIEBEAM.
Macnoviz
Jul 18, 06:02 AM
I was trying to avoid the whining, but now that you bring it up... when is apple going to bring the video content to other coutries?
In Belgium, we were promised video downloads in 2006
Yeah, if it's $9.99 to rent, it's going to fail. $1.99, might be worth it. I'm sure a lot of people will be happy, then a lot of people will complain. Both with have good points, but the rest of us won't care.
Yeah, $2 seems right for a movie (in twisted Apple calculations this is 2,49 euros) I normally watch movies only once, so rental would be better, especially with a modest hard drive
We can always hope that they also want to make business outside US.
Amen
Surely the TV Shows issue is because the US shows are sold on to European TV Stations, usually after the show has aired in the states. These TV Stations aren't going to be too pleased if they've shelled out a bucketload of money for the UK premier of 24 for example, only to have it show up on iTunes before they've even aired it.
The only way it can work is if iTunes waits until after all the channels have aired it first. In the UK you'd find 24 showing up on something like E4, then Channel 4, then some of the scrubbers like Channel 5 or Bravo would likely have a deal, then it could show up on iTunes. By then the show is so old that there's no point. Hence, I imagine, why we don't get iTunes TV Shows here.
The shows would probably be different in the international stores, like here in Belgium we will have to split, one for Flanders (Dutch subtitles, although a lot of people also know English, like me) and one for Wallon (French dubbing/subtitles)
And there would probably be an offer of Belgian TV shows, along with international ones that have already aired here. I do hope we will have the chance to buy some more shows that, won't come out in Belgium, at least not on DVD.
In Belgium, we were promised video downloads in 2006
Yeah, if it's $9.99 to rent, it's going to fail. $1.99, might be worth it. I'm sure a lot of people will be happy, then a lot of people will complain. Both with have good points, but the rest of us won't care.
Yeah, $2 seems right for a movie (in twisted Apple calculations this is 2,49 euros) I normally watch movies only once, so rental would be better, especially with a modest hard drive
We can always hope that they also want to make business outside US.
Amen
Surely the TV Shows issue is because the US shows are sold on to European TV Stations, usually after the show has aired in the states. These TV Stations aren't going to be too pleased if they've shelled out a bucketload of money for the UK premier of 24 for example, only to have it show up on iTunes before they've even aired it.
The only way it can work is if iTunes waits until after all the channels have aired it first. In the UK you'd find 24 showing up on something like E4, then Channel 4, then some of the scrubbers like Channel 5 or Bravo would likely have a deal, then it could show up on iTunes. By then the show is so old that there's no point. Hence, I imagine, why we don't get iTunes TV Shows here.
The shows would probably be different in the international stores, like here in Belgium we will have to split, one for Flanders (Dutch subtitles, although a lot of people also know English, like me) and one for Wallon (French dubbing/subtitles)
And there would probably be an offer of Belgian TV shows, along with international ones that have already aired here. I do hope we will have the chance to buy some more shows that, won't come out in Belgium, at least not on DVD.
imnotatfault
Aug 19, 07:16 AM
Except at a lot of Starbucks that internet functionality comes at a cost, which is my point.
May be bliss, but not until we have a sound infrastructure. And I have been on some really shoddy networks, which ends up becoming far more frustrating than worthwhile, to the point where I just slam my PDA into my pocket and curse inaudibly.
May be bliss, but not until we have a sound infrastructure. And I have been on some really shoddy networks, which ends up becoming far more frustrating than worthwhile, to the point where I just slam my PDA into my pocket and curse inaudibly.
topicolo
Mar 28, 10:01 PM
They could do alot more.......That's all I'm going to say cause Im going to work...
Please sign the petition
P.S The point i'm trying to make is that Apple will always be a small company who thinks they affect the PC industry. The same thing happens every time, Apple makes something cool - The PC world makes the profit
My advice to you is to let this petition die. It's obvious that the most of the people don't agree with your ideas on the petition. How do you expect to convince apple if you have to convince people to sign your petition? You're interest in the well-being of apple is commendable, but this petition isn't going to work.
Please sign the petition
P.S The point i'm trying to make is that Apple will always be a small company who thinks they affect the PC industry. The same thing happens every time, Apple makes something cool - The PC world makes the profit
My advice to you is to let this petition die. It's obvious that the most of the people don't agree with your ideas on the petition. How do you expect to convince apple if you have to convince people to sign your petition? You're interest in the well-being of apple is commendable, but this petition isn't going to work.
aswitcher
Jan 13, 06:04 PM
Maybe it's not as cool as having ZERO ports but Apple did patent the idea of collapsible ports:
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2007/08/16/connecting_350.gif
http://www.macrumors.com/2007/08/16/ultraportable-connecting-system/
Which would be absolutely awesome in a small form factor machine.
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2007/08/16/connecting_350.gif
http://www.macrumors.com/2007/08/16/ultraportable-connecting-system/
Which would be absolutely awesome in a small form factor machine.
Cygnus311
Sep 7, 10:17 AM
Low priced rentals only for me please. Not paying the same price for a movie as I can get the DVD for in stores, not to mention it needs to be playable on people's big HDTV's (which I'm sure they're aware of).
catracho
Mar 24, 08:27 PM
Do you think that the support of these 5xxxx cards could mean the return of the 24" iMac?
Too many cards for only 2 models (21" and 27")....
Too many cards for only 2 models (21" and 27")....
quagmire
Jan 6, 04:43 PM
That's all that matters, no? I'm not gonna be going around Fred Flintstone-ing my bimmer...
There is the electronics that control the engine, etc. You will probably have to do some engine work along the way as well. My dads old E46 had to replace the water pump at 45,000 miles because it blew up( warranty), replace a pulley as it began to squeal at 65,000 miles( wasn't cheap, but forgot the exact amount it cost), and started to run roughly at 70,000 miles when idling. Dealer said it was due to my dad putting 87 in the tank when BMW recommends 91/93. Though when my brother got the car and replaced the spark plugs, the engine smoothed out again. Right now at 150,000 miles I believe my brother stated he thinks the crankcase is starting to go.
BMW( or any German vehicle) is going to be expensive to maintain. There is no getting around it.
There is the electronics that control the engine, etc. You will probably have to do some engine work along the way as well. My dads old E46 had to replace the water pump at 45,000 miles because it blew up( warranty), replace a pulley as it began to squeal at 65,000 miles( wasn't cheap, but forgot the exact amount it cost), and started to run roughly at 70,000 miles when idling. Dealer said it was due to my dad putting 87 in the tank when BMW recommends 91/93. Though when my brother got the car and replaced the spark plugs, the engine smoothed out again. Right now at 150,000 miles I believe my brother stated he thinks the crankcase is starting to go.
BMW( or any German vehicle) is going to be expensive to maintain. There is no getting around it.
AppliedVisual
Oct 23, 10:52 PM
There is no way I am buying a MBP without NAND.
Weird... While the NAND flash/cache would be nifty, it's hardly a feature I would consider to be vital. FW800 and DL DVD writer on the 15" MBP are much more worthy causes. ...I doubt we'll get those features either. :( You won't see NAND with this update - probably not until spring/summer '07.
Weird... While the NAND flash/cache would be nifty, it's hardly a feature I would consider to be vital. FW800 and DL DVD writer on the 15" MBP are much more worthy causes. ...I doubt we'll get those features either. :( You won't see NAND with this update - probably not until spring/summer '07.
twoodcc
Apr 21, 05:57 AM
7 mil; I remember those days, not so long ago... Grats!
thanks. hopefully this weekend i can get some things straightened out
thanks. hopefully this weekend i can get some things straightened out
SeaFox
Dec 28, 12:38 AM
Your the one who said a TV wouldn�t even work as a monitor.
Uh, I said no such thing. Feel free to quote the sentence where I said that.
Back on post 127 (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=3185268&postcount=127) of this thread you said:
"Ok, I don�t know what a slingbox is� and I thought it was going to stream or operate like a TiVo, where it downloads while you are asleep, so it would need a harddrive."
The point is it is going to stream, but not over the internet, it's going to stream from your Macs on your home network (Airport or otherwise), and TiVo doesn't download anything while you sleep, except an interactive TV guide.
Here's the homepage (http://www.slingmedia.com/indexa.php) of Slingbox's makers. A Slingbox is made to transmit a signal from a digital cable or satellite receiver over the internet, and allow a person to control the receiver. This would allow you to watch your service anywhere conceivably.
then you said:
"Also, I�m not sure what you mean by TV? Do you mean a CRT with an aspect of 4:3? And, I would assume you don�t mean a flat panel LCD or Plasma, which now outsells tube tvs? A small HD plasma is 42�� and cost about $1000. I just got a Panny 9UK HD Plasma and it works quite will with a mac mini."
Why would you assume I don't mean a Plasma or LCD? They are types of TV's as well. I don't have n HDTV but if I did I would probably get a tube-based HDTV because of the lower cost and better picture (less image ghosting, better color). Plus you stated Plasma and LCD TV's outsell tube-based, which I don't believe. Sounds like a line the TV salesmen gave you.
You consistently rearrange some of my post where I�m just speculating. And at the same time you avoid my main points.
I don't rearrange anything. I separate your posts into separate thoughts. I did split ONE sentence on the last reply. Each portion of your replies appear in the same order they did in your original post. Yes, I have cut material out, but the purpose of quoting a previous post isn't to repeat it in it's entirety.
I also realize by streaming a movie we would just be renting it, but as a BluRay cost $1000, and if iTV is significantly less to watch the same movie in HD, this would be a reasonable solution. You also said you were waiting for the battle to be settled and that�s consistent to what I was pointing out that HD iTV would have a niche.
Except Apple doesn't offer movies in HD. HD is still a niche itself until there is wider adoption of HD sets. It's a chicken and the egg problem. There's no rush to buy an HD set untill there is lots of exclusive programming for HDTV owners. But there will be little if any programming available in HD that is not available in SD as well untill more people buy HD sets, because advertisers want their message getting in front of as many eyes as possible. There's a reason cablecos only offer a dozen or so stations of HD out of the 250+ channels they offer.
The price of HD-DVD and BluRay players both will fall soon. Just as the price of HDTV's is going to fall through the floor in the U.S. after analog broadcasting gets pulled in 2009. Digital TV (and by extension, HD) will no longer be a luxury service for the wealthy.
You could also buy a PS3, a BluRay player for as low as $600. :D
Uh, I said no such thing. Feel free to quote the sentence where I said that.
Back on post 127 (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=3185268&postcount=127) of this thread you said:
"Ok, I don�t know what a slingbox is� and I thought it was going to stream or operate like a TiVo, where it downloads while you are asleep, so it would need a harddrive."
The point is it is going to stream, but not over the internet, it's going to stream from your Macs on your home network (Airport or otherwise), and TiVo doesn't download anything while you sleep, except an interactive TV guide.
Here's the homepage (http://www.slingmedia.com/indexa.php) of Slingbox's makers. A Slingbox is made to transmit a signal from a digital cable or satellite receiver over the internet, and allow a person to control the receiver. This would allow you to watch your service anywhere conceivably.
then you said:
"Also, I�m not sure what you mean by TV? Do you mean a CRT with an aspect of 4:3? And, I would assume you don�t mean a flat panel LCD or Plasma, which now outsells tube tvs? A small HD plasma is 42�� and cost about $1000. I just got a Panny 9UK HD Plasma and it works quite will with a mac mini."
Why would you assume I don't mean a Plasma or LCD? They are types of TV's as well. I don't have n HDTV but if I did I would probably get a tube-based HDTV because of the lower cost and better picture (less image ghosting, better color). Plus you stated Plasma and LCD TV's outsell tube-based, which I don't believe. Sounds like a line the TV salesmen gave you.
You consistently rearrange some of my post where I�m just speculating. And at the same time you avoid my main points.
I don't rearrange anything. I separate your posts into separate thoughts. I did split ONE sentence on the last reply. Each portion of your replies appear in the same order they did in your original post. Yes, I have cut material out, but the purpose of quoting a previous post isn't to repeat it in it's entirety.
I also realize by streaming a movie we would just be renting it, but as a BluRay cost $1000, and if iTV is significantly less to watch the same movie in HD, this would be a reasonable solution. You also said you were waiting for the battle to be settled and that�s consistent to what I was pointing out that HD iTV would have a niche.
Except Apple doesn't offer movies in HD. HD is still a niche itself until there is wider adoption of HD sets. It's a chicken and the egg problem. There's no rush to buy an HD set untill there is lots of exclusive programming for HDTV owners. But there will be little if any programming available in HD that is not available in SD as well untill more people buy HD sets, because advertisers want their message getting in front of as many eyes as possible. There's a reason cablecos only offer a dozen or so stations of HD out of the 250+ channels they offer.
The price of HD-DVD and BluRay players both will fall soon. Just as the price of HDTV's is going to fall through the floor in the U.S. after analog broadcasting gets pulled in 2009. Digital TV (and by extension, HD) will no longer be a luxury service for the wealthy.
You could also buy a PS3, a BluRay player for as low as $600. :D
wordoflife
Feb 19, 09:44 PM
crapy iphone pics
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y52/ObeyHK/photo.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y52/ObeyHK/photo-1.jpg
Beautiful view!
Holy crap! That is a nice view!
I'm jealous!
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y52/ObeyHK/photo.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y52/ObeyHK/photo-1.jpg
Beautiful view!
Holy crap! That is a nice view!
I'm jealous!
newagemac
May 3, 09:02 AM
But my iPhone is far more limited than my first Windows PC in that regard. Even with Windows 95 I could go from one app to another while letting the other on load in the background. iOS freezes everything. If I want a video to upload on Facebook, I have no choice but to keep the app open until it's done. On my PC, I can start the upload and then move on to other things while the process is completing.
I find moving to non-true multitasking as a step backward, not a step forward. As you said, out systems capabilites are able to do so much more. I can be playing a computer game, hit the Windows key, and open a media player and never see a drop in performance. Why limit your computer to one task at a time? Kind of defeats the point of multi-core processors.
Uh, this comment is entirely wrong. With iOS, you can download something and move to another app and it will continue downloading in the background. The multitasking APIs have all the obvious backgrounding tasks covered and will likely include more if needed. Basically the goal is to allow background tasks when needed and when not needed let the app suspend and release resources to the apps you actually need. This method in iOS has proven to work far better than traditional operating systems like Mac OS X and Windows. That's why they are bringing it "Back to the Mac OS". The best parts of what they developed in iOS are being added in Lion.
I think most people's problem is that they mistakenly viewed iOS as inferior in every way to Mac OS X but in many ways it is cutting edge and far better than OS X and Windows have ever been. The way iOS multitasking works is the reason very powerful and memory hungry apps like iMove and GarageBand for iPad work so surprisingly well on such a limited memory device. The apps get to use a much larger percentage of the CPU, GPU, and RAM than they do on traditional OSes under normal usage where you have multiple apps open.
Right now I have a bunch of tabs open in Safari on my Mac and it's consuming a little over 1GB of RAM and lots of CPU. If I switch to Photoshop, Safari is still going to be using up all that RAM and CPU I really need for Photoshop when I don't plan on using Safari again until later today. And I don't want to shut it down because I have a bunch things in these tabs that I want to get back to later today including partially typed forum replies, halfway read articles, etc. On the iPad, Safari would suspend and release the RAM and CPU to my currently used RAM/CPU hungry app. That's what they need to bring to Lion.
I find moving to non-true multitasking as a step backward, not a step forward. As you said, out systems capabilites are able to do so much more. I can be playing a computer game, hit the Windows key, and open a media player and never see a drop in performance. Why limit your computer to one task at a time? Kind of defeats the point of multi-core processors.
Uh, this comment is entirely wrong. With iOS, you can download something and move to another app and it will continue downloading in the background. The multitasking APIs have all the obvious backgrounding tasks covered and will likely include more if needed. Basically the goal is to allow background tasks when needed and when not needed let the app suspend and release resources to the apps you actually need. This method in iOS has proven to work far better than traditional operating systems like Mac OS X and Windows. That's why they are bringing it "Back to the Mac OS". The best parts of what they developed in iOS are being added in Lion.
I think most people's problem is that they mistakenly viewed iOS as inferior in every way to Mac OS X but in many ways it is cutting edge and far better than OS X and Windows have ever been. The way iOS multitasking works is the reason very powerful and memory hungry apps like iMove and GarageBand for iPad work so surprisingly well on such a limited memory device. The apps get to use a much larger percentage of the CPU, GPU, and RAM than they do on traditional OSes under normal usage where you have multiple apps open.
Right now I have a bunch of tabs open in Safari on my Mac and it's consuming a little over 1GB of RAM and lots of CPU. If I switch to Photoshop, Safari is still going to be using up all that RAM and CPU I really need for Photoshop when I don't plan on using Safari again until later today. And I don't want to shut it down because I have a bunch things in these tabs that I want to get back to later today including partially typed forum replies, halfway read articles, etc. On the iPad, Safari would suspend and release the RAM and CPU to my currently used RAM/CPU hungry app. That's what they need to bring to Lion.
gugy
Sep 6, 05:53 PM
Bring It On!
But hopefully these are a better resolution than the current TV show on Itunes. It should be at least DVD quality, If not these price model will bomb IMHO.
But hopefully these are a better resolution than the current TV show on Itunes. It should be at least DVD quality, If not these price model will bomb IMHO.
stcanard
Nov 30, 10:47 AM
Another way to ask this question: If Apple decided to compete head-to-head with this feature, what should they do differently?
Here's the funny thing, I can tell you a feature is poorly thought out, even if I can't necessarily tell you how to solve it :) The fact that we don't have an answer is probably a good start on why the iPod doesn't already do it.
First thing I can say is this: Dump the idea of restrictions on non-DRM'd songs. If "the guy with guitar" wants to beam you his own song he should be allowed to decide that you can keep it as long as you want and send it to as many people as you want.
This goes back to the root of the problem with these devices and online stores: The record labels aren't worried about piracy, they're worried about all the guys on the street being able to bypass them by advertising virally then selling their own burned CDs. Sure it's only one or two now people now, but then it starts to grow, and some band ends up hitting it big and getting radio play, then everybody starts doing it, and then gradually the RIAA loses their money train.
Here's the funny thing, I can tell you a feature is poorly thought out, even if I can't necessarily tell you how to solve it :) The fact that we don't have an answer is probably a good start on why the iPod doesn't already do it.
First thing I can say is this: Dump the idea of restrictions on non-DRM'd songs. If "the guy with guitar" wants to beam you his own song he should be allowed to decide that you can keep it as long as you want and send it to as many people as you want.
This goes back to the root of the problem with these devices and online stores: The record labels aren't worried about piracy, they're worried about all the guys on the street being able to bypass them by advertising virally then selling their own burned CDs. Sure it's only one or two now people now, but then it starts to grow, and some band ends up hitting it big and getting radio play, then everybody starts doing it, and then gradually the RIAA loses their money train.
azentropy
Sep 15, 08:34 AM
Right, and what Apple has proposed doing is very reasonable. They have a product that works well for the majority of users.
CR disagrees. So if a product works most of the time for most people that is good enough to recommend? They are saying they don't recommend it.
Meanwhile they are going to alter the design of the phone so that even this issue will go away for future models.
Which does not affect this model, so they should change their recommendation based on what future models may or may not fix?
What does CR want? A total recall? For what? Most people have no issue, there is no danger, the few people who have the issue get a free solution, what would be the point of doing it any other way?
In order for them to recommend it, yes. Or at least include the case at time of purchase. They have stated this.
Auto manufacturers publicize the issue, make a solution possible, but it's up to the car's owner to approach the dealership to get that free solution. CR sez this is a good thing.
Apple publicizes the issue, makes a solution possible, but it's up to the phone's owner to approach Apple to get that free solution. CR sez this is unacceptable.
No, you are missing the point. Yes auto manufactures have recalls all the time and yes the customer has to come in to get it fixed on previous purchases. HOWEVER, they also fix all NEW automobiles before continue to sell to new customers. Apple isn't doing that, and that is CR's complaint.
CR disagrees. So if a product works most of the time for most people that is good enough to recommend? They are saying they don't recommend it.
Meanwhile they are going to alter the design of the phone so that even this issue will go away for future models.
Which does not affect this model, so they should change their recommendation based on what future models may or may not fix?
What does CR want? A total recall? For what? Most people have no issue, there is no danger, the few people who have the issue get a free solution, what would be the point of doing it any other way?
In order for them to recommend it, yes. Or at least include the case at time of purchase. They have stated this.
Auto manufacturers publicize the issue, make a solution possible, but it's up to the car's owner to approach the dealership to get that free solution. CR sez this is a good thing.
Apple publicizes the issue, makes a solution possible, but it's up to the phone's owner to approach Apple to get that free solution. CR sez this is unacceptable.
No, you are missing the point. Yes auto manufactures have recalls all the time and yes the customer has to come in to get it fixed on previous purchases. HOWEVER, they also fix all NEW automobiles before continue to sell to new customers. Apple isn't doing that, and that is CR's complaint.
daneoni
Mar 24, 01:08 PM
Bye bye Nvidia. Twas interesting whilst it lasted.