BlizzardBomb
Aug 29, 01:51 PM
you can be certain that the price-difference is there. since merom and yonah are 1:1 compatible, why would anyone use yonah istead of merom? but since the two will be sold side-by-side, yonah obviously has some benefits that merom does not have. and that benefit is most likely price.
I've got hard facts to back up my claim. Do you have any for yours? :)
I've got hard facts to back up my claim. Do you have any for yours? :)
BC2009
Mar 25, 04:11 PM
iPad 1 does not support HDMI out, so I'm assuming no, it doesn't work.
iPad 1 does support HDMI out, just not the video mirroring. This means that an app must support the standard "video out" mechanism to be used with the HDMI adapter with iPad 1.
What I would like to see is this same thing using AirPlay :)
iPad 1 does support HDMI out, just not the video mirroring. This means that an app must support the standard "video out" mechanism to be used with the HDMI adapter with iPad 1.
What I would like to see is this same thing using AirPlay :)
caliguy
Jul 18, 01:48 AM
If I'm going to spend all that time downloading a movie, I should at least be able to keep it. Bah.
I'd rather them just be streamed if it is indeed going to be rentals.
I'd rather them just be streamed if it is indeed going to be rentals.
ojwk
Jan 12, 07:29 AM
People here seem to want to condone ANY decision Apple may wish to make. Already people seem to be defensive on the "MacBook Air" name which is probably just a rumor and also seem to be defensive of Apple's decision to remove the optical drive - something we don't even know will happen! People are defensive of Apple's decision to ship the new Mac Pros with the 8800GT and not something of higher spec, people are defensive of Apple's decision not to release a mid-tower.
I'm a big Apple fan myself but sometimes I do see the point many anti-Mac people make that many Apple 'fanboys' will simply defend any decision Apple may or may not make! It doesn't show loyalty or devotion to the brand but a sheep like quality that really isn't desirable.
If you can't formulate your own opinions on stuff then that really doesn't corroborate with the Apple marketing and ethos. "Think Different" etc..
Say what? It may have a higher melting point than plastic, but it's the most recyclable material out there. Plastic often can't even be used in the same application multiple times, and ends up being "downcycled" into something completely different. Wikipedia says recycling aluminum is 95% more efficient than making it from ore; recycling plastic is only 70% more efficient than making it new.
Very good point.
Plastic is incredibly hard to recycle as there are many different types that need to be sorted and lots of those can't even be recycled. An example of this is the caps on plastic bottles of Coke etc. This material cannot be recycled - at least my local refuse authority refuses to deal with it.
Aluminum on the other hand is definitely one of the most recyclable materials out there. It is a simple process of melting it down, purification and formation into ingots of aluminum.
I'm a big Apple fan myself but sometimes I do see the point many anti-Mac people make that many Apple 'fanboys' will simply defend any decision Apple may or may not make! It doesn't show loyalty or devotion to the brand but a sheep like quality that really isn't desirable.
If you can't formulate your own opinions on stuff then that really doesn't corroborate with the Apple marketing and ethos. "Think Different" etc..
Say what? It may have a higher melting point than plastic, but it's the most recyclable material out there. Plastic often can't even be used in the same application multiple times, and ends up being "downcycled" into something completely different. Wikipedia says recycling aluminum is 95% more efficient than making it from ore; recycling plastic is only 70% more efficient than making it new.
Very good point.
Plastic is incredibly hard to recycle as there are many different types that need to be sorted and lots of those can't even be recycled. An example of this is the caps on plastic bottles of Coke etc. This material cannot be recycled - at least my local refuse authority refuses to deal with it.
Aluminum on the other hand is definitely one of the most recyclable materials out there. It is a simple process of melting it down, purification and formation into ingots of aluminum.
SaMaster14
Jan 4, 09:18 AM
My pride and joy.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3038/3118434529_012ae33259.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/30820359@N08/3118434529/)
Side (http://www.flickr.com/photos/30820359@N08/3118434529/) by ljcarrD300 (http://www.flickr.com/people/30820359@N08/), on Flickr
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3315/3179882976_ba29866369.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/30820359@N08/3179882976/)
Front side 1 (1) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/30820359@N08/3179882976/) by ljcarrD300 (http://www.flickr.com/people/30820359@N08/), on Flickr
Love the looks of the C-class... I'm just surprised they made it so slow in comparison to the competition. Definitely a luxurious car and smooth-riding, but just no power to back it up (obviously except for the C63).
Thanks :) Manufacturer claims it's low 5's, but I think it's closer to 5.5 (stock). Whilst I've got some mods on it (intake/exhaust), I recently detuned it because the aftermarket tune I was running was misfiring when WOT (might've been cool to teenagers watching from the side of the road but scared the heck out of me as I don't want engine trouble!).
Haha, makes sense. And thats about the same as my Infiniti's 0-60. Stock says around 5.5, but it seems a bit faster to me (its an automatic car, but I always drive in DS manual mode (paddleshifters) and it definitely gets to 60 faster than when letting the car shift).
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3038/3118434529_012ae33259.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/30820359@N08/3118434529/)
Side (http://www.flickr.com/photos/30820359@N08/3118434529/) by ljcarrD300 (http://www.flickr.com/people/30820359@N08/), on Flickr
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3315/3179882976_ba29866369.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/30820359@N08/3179882976/)
Front side 1 (1) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/30820359@N08/3179882976/) by ljcarrD300 (http://www.flickr.com/people/30820359@N08/), on Flickr
Love the looks of the C-class... I'm just surprised they made it so slow in comparison to the competition. Definitely a luxurious car and smooth-riding, but just no power to back it up (obviously except for the C63).
Thanks :) Manufacturer claims it's low 5's, but I think it's closer to 5.5 (stock). Whilst I've got some mods on it (intake/exhaust), I recently detuned it because the aftermarket tune I was running was misfiring when WOT (might've been cool to teenagers watching from the side of the road but scared the heck out of me as I don't want engine trouble!).
Haha, makes sense. And thats about the same as my Infiniti's 0-60. Stock says around 5.5, but it seems a bit faster to me (its an automatic car, but I always drive in DS manual mode (paddleshifters) and it definitely gets to 60 faster than when letting the car shift).
QuarterSwede
Apr 9, 11:51 PM
I've never owned an automatic. I'm addicted to driving a sports car with a manual gearbox.
After owning several I simply cannot imagine anything else. I enjoy driving too much to drive an automatic sedan.
You probably aren't carting around kids.
After owning several I simply cannot imagine anything else. I enjoy driving too much to drive an automatic sedan.
You probably aren't carting around kids.
EricNau
Jul 18, 02:01 AM
Whether buying or renting, I hope these movies will be better quality than the current videos on the iTunes Music Store. I wouldn't pay a dime for a video that wasn't at least DVD quality.
It's good that iTunes is gaining more features that will help keep it ahead of Microsoft.
It's good that iTunes is gaining more features that will help keep it ahead of Microsoft.
apb3
Aug 16, 10:06 AM
This would entail an entire re-think on the part of apple and how the iPod is used. Now they do not want you to be able to transfer both ways between your iPod and your iTunes lib (you can but they don't want you to...).
If they were to add the ability to download on the fly, you'd need to sync both ways and that would HAVE to be a supported Apple way of using the iPod and iTunes. I've a feeling this might also upset the music companies as I'm sure the one-way sync was one feel-good/selling point for anti-piracy concerns.
For that reason (and the fact that I cannot remember digitimes ever being correct), I just don't see this unless the wireless is just to sync with your computer which makes no sense from a cost/benefit analysis.
edit:
and making it basically an iPod w/ airtunes makes no sense as it would cannibalize the sales thereof.
If they were to add the ability to download on the fly, you'd need to sync both ways and that would HAVE to be a supported Apple way of using the iPod and iTunes. I've a feeling this might also upset the music companies as I'm sure the one-way sync was one feel-good/selling point for anti-piracy concerns.
For that reason (and the fact that I cannot remember digitimes ever being correct), I just don't see this unless the wireless is just to sync with your computer which makes no sense from a cost/benefit analysis.
edit:
and making it basically an iPod w/ airtunes makes no sense as it would cannibalize the sales thereof.
babyj
Nov 29, 06:11 PM
Whilst I'm not Microsofts biggest fan, their Media Centre is pretty good, actually its a lot more than pretty good - even I'm tempted. Once you've got Media Centre running on your PC, you can hook up a �200 Xbox 360 to access all the content (music, video, digital tv etc). The PVR side of Media Centre is excellent as well.
If the iTV is going to cost �100, it will need to do something pretty special to be a success - everything that Microsoft offerings can do at the very least.
If the iTV is going to cost �100, it will need to do something pretty special to be a success - everything that Microsoft offerings can do at the very least.
freebooter
Sep 1, 12:13 PM
Call the 23" iMac Pro, paint it black, give it a glossy screen, charge 30% more, awright!! The prestige!!
Joking.
I think a 23" iMac would be close in price to a standard MacPro tower...it would make my next upgrade a tougher decision than otherwise would be the case. I'd probably go for the 23 if she had 4GB ram (easily acquirable ram) potential and a decent GPU. God! I'd have a 19" + 23" setup!! Holy Mother of Jesus!! I think I just soiled myself.
Oh, I think disposing of the chin would be desirable and might be possible.
Joking.
I think a 23" iMac would be close in price to a standard MacPro tower...it would make my next upgrade a tougher decision than otherwise would be the case. I'd probably go for the 23 if she had 4GB ram (easily acquirable ram) potential and a decent GPU. God! I'd have a 19" + 23" setup!! Holy Mother of Jesus!! I think I just soiled myself.
Oh, I think disposing of the chin would be desirable and might be possible.
akkkmed
Jan 8, 10:42 AM
2008 Pontiac G6. Lease is up soon...
(Not my picture)
http://carphotos.cardomain.com/ride_images/3/3048/3101/32619050002_large.jpg
(Not my picture)
http://carphotos.cardomain.com/ride_images/3/3048/3101/32619050002_large.jpg
MacSA
Aug 29, 09:00 AM
I think it's ridiculous to not put a Core 2 Duo chip into the Mini. While I'm not waiting for Merom, to upgrade one of your machines with a faster version of the same soon-to-be-out-of-date chip is silly.
But this IS Apple were talking about lol. Anyway the article doesnt mention which 1.66/1.83 chips they will use. Probably Core Duo (Yonah) though. If that were the case, they could, but i'm sure they won't, cut the prices a little further now that Core 2 Duo is out.
But this IS Apple were talking about lol. Anyway the article doesnt mention which 1.66/1.83 chips they will use. Probably Core Duo (Yonah) though. If that were the case, they could, but i'm sure they won't, cut the prices a little further now that Core 2 Duo is out.
swingerofbirch
Jul 18, 02:45 AM
I think there already are online download rental sites, presumably for WMP a la Windows.
Rental makes more sense if the quality is comparable to the current shows they offer. Plus if you buy a movie, with the restrictions the way they are, you most likely won't be able to burn it to a DVD to watch on the plasmas everyone seems to be getting.
And if this truly is a service for some sort of iPod, then they won't be offering HD movies unless of course by some miracle they have an HD screen in the iPod (although HD at any conceivably sized iPod screen would be a waste).
I actually would like a subscription service for both movies and TV shows. I have spent way more than I care to think about on TV series, and honestly I can only watch them but so many times. What do I do with them now? I "own" them, but as we all know, I can't sell them.
Rental makes more sense if the quality is comparable to the current shows they offer. Plus if you buy a movie, with the restrictions the way they are, you most likely won't be able to burn it to a DVD to watch on the plasmas everyone seems to be getting.
And if this truly is a service for some sort of iPod, then they won't be offering HD movies unless of course by some miracle they have an HD screen in the iPod (although HD at any conceivably sized iPod screen would be a waste).
I actually would like a subscription service for both movies and TV shows. I have spent way more than I care to think about on TV series, and honestly I can only watch them but so many times. What do I do with them now? I "own" them, but as we all know, I can't sell them.
jrbdmb
Apr 19, 03:33 PM
I read through a bunch of these posts and I agree with some of you who think the iPod Classic is the best one, based on capacity alone. But the screen is too small now. I too also like to travel with my entire music library and videos - I never know what I'll be in the mood to listen to or watch. That said, if I could offer advice to Apple, I'd say give us the 160GB or 220GB capacity with an iPod Touch interface. Make it as thick as the current iPod Classic if you have to, but give me a larger screen and the same icon-driven interface of the iPhone and iPod Touch. Keep the price at $249 or $299 even, and I'll wait in line for it.
I'd buy that. Touch style interface is much faster (for me) when managing large libraries of music. Give me an iPod Touch with the newest high capacity hard drive.
I'd buy that. Touch style interface is much faster (for me) when managing large libraries of music. Give me an iPod Touch with the newest high capacity hard drive.
bobbleheadbob
Apr 2, 07:53 PM
Of the 4 in my family, none of these issues exists. Try again?
No problems here either. I love my new iPad 2. (black, 64 gb, ATT.)
No problems here either. I love my new iPad 2. (black, 64 gb, ATT.)
aiqw9182
Mar 24, 02:38 PM
AMD Fusion is a better CPU because it does true OpenCL in the GPU, not like Intel's alpha OpenCL which runs on the CPU side.
Fusion is DirectX 11 class. Intel is DirectX 10.1 class.
Uhh, no bro. The CPU and GPU are two separate things, and Sandy Bridge smokes Fusion on the CPU side. If you want to argue OpenCL for all of the zero current day applications it currently has then be my guest and do so. Fusion is DX11? Wow, more vaporware that rarely gets added in modern games due to wanting to be backwards compatible, how exciting!
Once again, run Sandy Bridge and a discrete GPU if you are really looking for performance. There's your OpenCL and DX11 support that you need so badly. It will smoke anything AMD has to offer.
Fusion is DirectX 11 class. Intel is DirectX 10.1 class.
Uhh, no bro. The CPU and GPU are two separate things, and Sandy Bridge smokes Fusion on the CPU side. If you want to argue OpenCL for all of the zero current day applications it currently has then be my guest and do so. Fusion is DX11? Wow, more vaporware that rarely gets added in modern games due to wanting to be backwards compatible, how exciting!
Once again, run Sandy Bridge and a discrete GPU if you are really looking for performance. There's your OpenCL and DX11 support that you need so badly. It will smoke anything AMD has to offer.
Michael383
Apr 16, 10:28 PM
I learned how to drive with a stick shift car. Although I had access to an automatic transmission vehicle, I found a stick shift more fun to drive.
My current car has an automatic transmission, but a manual would be my first choice for a sports car.
My current car has an automatic transmission, but a manual would be my first choice for a sports car.
danvdr
Oct 23, 06:42 PM
Along with the macbook and MB pro getting updates, for $14.95 you can download an ipod nano or ipod patch/software that lets you listen to FM radio without having to purchase the radio remote. Interface is the same as with the remote.
Cool beans. Where can you get this download?
Cool beans. Where can you get this download?
apb3
Aug 16, 10:06 AM
This would entail an entire re-think on the part of apple and how the iPod is used. Now they do not want you to be able to transfer both ways between your iPod and your iTunes lib (you can but they don't want you to...).
If they were to add the ability to download on the fly, you'd need to sync both ways and that would HAVE to be a supported Apple way of using the iPod and iTunes. I've a feeling this might also upset the music companies as I'm sure the one-way sync was one feel-good/selling point for anti-piracy concerns.
For that reason (and the fact that I cannot remember digitimes ever being correct), I just don't see this unless the wireless is just to sync with your computer which makes no sense from a cost/benefit analysis.
edit:
and making it basically an iPod w/ airtunes makes no sense as it would cannibalize the sales thereof.
If they were to add the ability to download on the fly, you'd need to sync both ways and that would HAVE to be a supported Apple way of using the iPod and iTunes. I've a feeling this might also upset the music companies as I'm sure the one-way sync was one feel-good/selling point for anti-piracy concerns.
For that reason (and the fact that I cannot remember digitimes ever being correct), I just don't see this unless the wireless is just to sync with your computer which makes no sense from a cost/benefit analysis.
edit:
and making it basically an iPod w/ airtunes makes no sense as it would cannibalize the sales thereof.
pavelbure
Apr 12, 09:20 PM
To be more exact, "You wait while I use 2 of your 8 cores to render"
Ty that's what I thought it was. I know on fce that irritated me.
Ty that's what I thought it was. I know on fce that irritated me.
newrigel
Nov 16, 11:03 PM
That really depends on the program, on how "parallelizable" the application is.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
CONTENT CREATION PRO'S will see the benefit! Like DAW's host running multiple plugins and virtual instruments etc. Video guy's that are rendering in the background while doing a file format conversion task while @ the same time doing a cut copy paste edit on some video... Any processes that are CONCURRENT! THESE are the things that will take advantage of multiple cores... the kids on myspace farting around on the net emailing and such are really useless for multiple cores and us pro guy's NEED this multitasking power... BRING IT ON!
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
CONTENT CREATION PRO'S will see the benefit! Like DAW's host running multiple plugins and virtual instruments etc. Video guy's that are rendering in the background while doing a file format conversion task while @ the same time doing a cut copy paste edit on some video... Any processes that are CONCURRENT! THESE are the things that will take advantage of multiple cores... the kids on myspace farting around on the net emailing and such are really useless for multiple cores and us pro guy's NEED this multitasking power... BRING IT ON!
daneoni
Mar 24, 01:08 PM
Bye bye Nvidia. Twas interesting whilst it lasted.
bob_hearn
Oct 23, 08:30 AM
Of course, we all know exactly what this rumor really means.
It means, simply, that the "Full Laptop Refresh By Holidays?" thread will stop short of 4000.
It means, simply, that the "Full Laptop Refresh By Holidays?" thread will stop short of 4000.
MikeDTyke
Nov 30, 07:31 AM
If the iTV is going to cost £100, it will need to do something pretty special to be a success - everything that Microsoft offerings can do at the very least.
The quoted price is $299 which nominally translates to £157 + Apple stiff a brit tax + Government screw yer countryman tax.
I'm expecting £199.
If you think the iTV will do everything that a media centre pc circa(£800) does then i want to know what you are smoking?
It'll be a highly focused 1st release ie, everything in the Sept presentation + RSS feeds rebranded as clever channels, delivering usual junk off YouTube and Google video.
Games, ichat, online imovie editing, they'll be in patch releases, when you buy iTV 2 or never, cos Steve thinks those things suck ass on a TV.
The quoted price is $299 which nominally translates to £157 + Apple stiff a brit tax + Government screw yer countryman tax.
I'm expecting £199.
If you think the iTV will do everything that a media centre pc circa(£800) does then i want to know what you are smoking?
It'll be a highly focused 1st release ie, everything in the Sept presentation + RSS feeds rebranded as clever channels, delivering usual junk off YouTube and Google video.
Games, ichat, online imovie editing, they'll be in patch releases, when you buy iTV 2 or never, cos Steve thinks those things suck ass on a TV.