rockthecasbah
Nov 28, 06:37 PM
There's a reason and i pay for my music and don't just steal off of P2P sites!!! I doubt this would ever happen since the iTunes Music Store / Apple is so powerful that having Universal not be hosted would hurt them more than Apple. Record labels are just sickening. Someone who buys an iPod isn't even necessarily going to buy music in general (or at least from Universal) anyway, so their idea that they are entitled to a cut of the profits is just unfounded.
Amazing Iceman
Apr 25, 01:36 PM
I would bet anything that these two "customers" happen to also be lawyers.
They just can't earn clean money, always have to rip some one to earn it.
They just can't earn clean money, always have to rip some one to earn it.
Tomaz
Aug 7, 03:40 PM
The top secret features better be REALLY good, this was disappointing and nothing was really new! Cupertino started it's photocopiers.... (The Vista banners are an actual joke after this keynote) :(
Micjose
Apr 25, 01:45 PM
lol, i think the people are just cashing in ;)
andrewsd
Mar 31, 02:27 PM
Say What I thought a closed system was bad..hahahhaahahahah
jicon
Aug 17, 02:11 AM
A lot of folks are waiting for game benchmarks...bring 'em on!
Does anyone seriously believe games today will show any significant improvement on a Mac Pro?
1. The video cards are underclocked compared to their PC equivalents on the Mac.
2. Generally, you are limited to a framerate of 60Hz anyway.
3. Most games are old ports, and need to run thru Rosetta.
When playing a game on a PC, you have DirectX to take full advantage of the hardware, and your processor is usually tagged consuming any and all cycles it can for the game. On a Mac, multithreading, and sharing the processor among apps seems to be the flow of the computing experience.
I'd predict a single Core2 Duo Extreme would still outdo a dual processor 3.0 Ghz Xeon Mac Pro when memory timings are nearly half of the Xeon on the Core2.
Does anyone seriously believe games today will show any significant improvement on a Mac Pro?
1. The video cards are underclocked compared to their PC equivalents on the Mac.
2. Generally, you are limited to a framerate of 60Hz anyway.
3. Most games are old ports, and need to run thru Rosetta.
When playing a game on a PC, you have DirectX to take full advantage of the hardware, and your processor is usually tagged consuming any and all cycles it can for the game. On a Mac, multithreading, and sharing the processor among apps seems to be the flow of the computing experience.
I'd predict a single Core2 Duo Extreme would still outdo a dual processor 3.0 Ghz Xeon Mac Pro when memory timings are nearly half of the Xeon on the Core2.
aswitcher
Aug 5, 09:24 PM
WWDC = World Wide Developer Conference.
= Not Consumer Stuff.
It's been mentioned before... :rolleyes:
Umm, iSight came out at a WWDC - given free to all attendees...
= Not Consumer Stuff.
It's been mentioned before... :rolleyes:
Umm, iSight came out at a WWDC - given free to all attendees...
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 01:11 PM
Fair enough. Now let's move along. ;)
You guys move on without me, please. I regret that I posted to this thread, because I said I wanted to post about technical topics only. It's best for me to post where I can do plenty of good. So I'll go back to the Mac Programming forum where I won't react emotionally.
You guys move on without me, please. I regret that I posted to this thread, because I said I wanted to post about technical topics only. It's best for me to post where I can do plenty of good. So I'll go back to the Mac Programming forum where I won't react emotionally.
whatever
Nov 29, 12:42 PM
I'm certainly not on the record label's side on this, and I'm someone who almost never downloads anything online (not even free, MP3 of the week type tracks), but I think two important things we're glossing over are:
1 It is illegal to pirate music, regardless of whether or not a label gives their artists their fair share of profits.
2 Like it or not, most of the music on most people's portable music players is downloaded off of P2P. We "affluent" Mac users, who stay on the cutting edge of technology and come to places like MacRumors for heated exchanges about Apple news are not a typical cross section of music consumers.
I'd reckon most iPods are owned by the under 21 crowd, who've grown up with P2P as an ever-present option for music, and who swap songs with friends without thinking twice about it.
And as this generation gets older, things will only get worse for the labels, I figure.
On the other hand, at some point in time, this same generation will be in our courtrooms running the judicial system and in our capitol running our government, so it could be that some of these antiquated laws get modified for the digital age, but until then, refer back to Points 1 and 2 above and realize that despite how we may feel about the issue, it's illegal to download music freely and most people are doing it...
For starters, it's not illegal to download music freely. There are quite a few artists that allow free downloads of their music, so the first part of your statement "it's illegal to download music freely" is not correct. The second half of your statement ".... people are doing it....", assumes that everyone is guilty until they prove themselves innocent. Which is wrong.
I've been re-thinking my stance here. And if Apple decides to give a portion of their future iPod revenue to the music industry, then let them. I personally would never do it, but again, we're only talking a couple of dollars per iPod. Would Apple raise their prices on current models, most likely not. I would rather have Apple pay the iPod tax, instead of changing the iTunes Music Store's pricing model.
1 It is illegal to pirate music, regardless of whether or not a label gives their artists their fair share of profits.
2 Like it or not, most of the music on most people's portable music players is downloaded off of P2P. We "affluent" Mac users, who stay on the cutting edge of technology and come to places like MacRumors for heated exchanges about Apple news are not a typical cross section of music consumers.
I'd reckon most iPods are owned by the under 21 crowd, who've grown up with P2P as an ever-present option for music, and who swap songs with friends without thinking twice about it.
And as this generation gets older, things will only get worse for the labels, I figure.
On the other hand, at some point in time, this same generation will be in our courtrooms running the judicial system and in our capitol running our government, so it could be that some of these antiquated laws get modified for the digital age, but until then, refer back to Points 1 and 2 above and realize that despite how we may feel about the issue, it's illegal to download music freely and most people are doing it...
For starters, it's not illegal to download music freely. There are quite a few artists that allow free downloads of their music, so the first part of your statement "it's illegal to download music freely" is not correct. The second half of your statement ".... people are doing it....", assumes that everyone is guilty until they prove themselves innocent. Which is wrong.
I've been re-thinking my stance here. And if Apple decides to give a portion of their future iPod revenue to the music industry, then let them. I personally would never do it, but again, we're only talking a couple of dollars per iPod. Would Apple raise their prices on current models, most likely not. I would rather have Apple pay the iPod tax, instead of changing the iTunes Music Store's pricing model.
tumblebird
Nov 29, 10:23 AM
Anyone interested in creating an Universal blacklist of albums then?
YES AND YES... oh, wait, I don't listen to any of their artists. But YES anyways. Has anyone bought a domain name yet?
YES AND YES... oh, wait, I don't listen to any of their artists. But YES anyways. Has anyone bought a domain name yet?
fivepoint
Mar 17, 10:33 AM
Back in Ron Paul warned us about Barack Obama and the fact that his foreign policy would almost certainly essentially mirror that of the Democrats and Neo-Cons for the past 60 years.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ez5robAWmu4
�Change� means nothing. It�s just a word, and it�s a clich�. If you just repeat it it has no meaning. You have to say, what are you going to change, and I would argue, you offer no change. You have the same foreign policy, you want more troops in Afghanistan, you�re not talking about only going to war with a declaration, you don�t want to deal with the monetary/financial crisis in this country, you want to keep the system together for the benefit of the banks and the big corporations and the politicians. What kind of change you have on social policy? Do you care about sick people using using Marijuana, have you come out for that? [...]
[Obama] doesn�t want change, he wants the status quo. [...] If you want change, what you need is someone who�s going to make sure you�re never going to have a draft, and we�re going to bring our troops home, we�re going to balance the budget, we�re going have sound money� [Obama] never talks about any of that.
Since that day, Obama has failed to close Guantanamo, failed to end the war in Iraq, escalated the war in Afghanistan, promoted and maintained the Patriot Act, and today stands as the worlds' most powerful advocate for American military involvement in Libya!
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/03/17/seeks-resolution-authorizing-wide-range-strikes-libya/
The Obama administration is seeking a UN Security Council resolution authorizing a wide range of possible strikes against the regime of Libyan leader Col. Muammar al-Qaddafi, The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday.
The move comes as Qaddafi forces have made "significant strides" in Libya, the State Department said.
The Obama administration and other supporters of action against Qaddafi were pushing for a Thursday vote on a draft resolution. Russia and China have expressed doubts about the U.N. and other outside powers getting involved.
The U.S. wants the Security Council to approve planes, troops or ships to stop attacks by Qaddafi on the rebels, according to a diplomat familiar with closed-door negotiations Wednesday.
The Obama administration said it would not act without Security Council authorization, did not want to put U.S. ground troops into Libya, and insists on broad international participation, especially by Arab states, the diplomat said.
Yet another war, yet another military action which will inevitably cause 'blow-back', started by a man who sold himself to you as a military dove. When will the people realize that there's essentially no difference between the two parties? One advocates bigger government, but they both vote for it. One advocates for bigger military, but they both vote for it, there's no difference between them... and the end result is a trillion + of dollars in annual deficit, a failing economy, and a debt hole so large we may never be able to dig ourselves out.
When you voted for 'change' in you really voted for more of the same. Expansion of the government, expansion of the Military Industrial Complex, and the direct and indirect reduction in personal liberty. There was only one candidate in 2008 and will likely be only one candidate in 2012 who ACTUALLY stood for REAL change... and that is Ron Paul.
The difference between Ron Paul and Barack Obama (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVKSfwfy0h8)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ez5robAWmu4
�Change� means nothing. It�s just a word, and it�s a clich�. If you just repeat it it has no meaning. You have to say, what are you going to change, and I would argue, you offer no change. You have the same foreign policy, you want more troops in Afghanistan, you�re not talking about only going to war with a declaration, you don�t want to deal with the monetary/financial crisis in this country, you want to keep the system together for the benefit of the banks and the big corporations and the politicians. What kind of change you have on social policy? Do you care about sick people using using Marijuana, have you come out for that? [...]
[Obama] doesn�t want change, he wants the status quo. [...] If you want change, what you need is someone who�s going to make sure you�re never going to have a draft, and we�re going to bring our troops home, we�re going to balance the budget, we�re going have sound money� [Obama] never talks about any of that.
Since that day, Obama has failed to close Guantanamo, failed to end the war in Iraq, escalated the war in Afghanistan, promoted and maintained the Patriot Act, and today stands as the worlds' most powerful advocate for American military involvement in Libya!
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/03/17/seeks-resolution-authorizing-wide-range-strikes-libya/
The Obama administration is seeking a UN Security Council resolution authorizing a wide range of possible strikes against the regime of Libyan leader Col. Muammar al-Qaddafi, The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday.
The move comes as Qaddafi forces have made "significant strides" in Libya, the State Department said.
The Obama administration and other supporters of action against Qaddafi were pushing for a Thursday vote on a draft resolution. Russia and China have expressed doubts about the U.N. and other outside powers getting involved.
The U.S. wants the Security Council to approve planes, troops or ships to stop attacks by Qaddafi on the rebels, according to a diplomat familiar with closed-door negotiations Wednesday.
The Obama administration said it would not act without Security Council authorization, did not want to put U.S. ground troops into Libya, and insists on broad international participation, especially by Arab states, the diplomat said.
Yet another war, yet another military action which will inevitably cause 'blow-back', started by a man who sold himself to you as a military dove. When will the people realize that there's essentially no difference between the two parties? One advocates bigger government, but they both vote for it. One advocates for bigger military, but they both vote for it, there's no difference between them... and the end result is a trillion + of dollars in annual deficit, a failing economy, and a debt hole so large we may never be able to dig ourselves out.
When you voted for 'change' in you really voted for more of the same. Expansion of the government, expansion of the Military Industrial Complex, and the direct and indirect reduction in personal liberty. There was only one candidate in 2008 and will likely be only one candidate in 2012 who ACTUALLY stood for REAL change... and that is Ron Paul.
The difference between Ron Paul and Barack Obama (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVKSfwfy0h8)
Chaszmyr
Jul 27, 10:04 AM
Rule 1 of Apple Events:
You never get all the marbles.
Very, very true. You usually only get half the things you expect... the real gem is when you get something you didn't expect.
You never get all the marbles.
Very, very true. You usually only get half the things you expect... the real gem is when you get something you didn't expect.
MacRumors
Jul 20, 08:05 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
While Apple hasn't yet released its first Intel-based professional model desktop machine, many users are actively watching Intel's future roadmap for hints as to what may next appear in Apple's second revision Mac Pro and XServe machines. CNet News.com reported yesterday afternoon (http://news.com.com/2100-1006_3-6096192.html) that Intel's quad-core desktop chip (Kentsfield) and Xeon-class chip (Cloverton) have been bumped up and should arrive before year's end.
Educated speculation would therefore indicate that Apple's second revision Mac Pro workstation will feature 8 cores, and other models will all become "Quad" machines. Most recent rumors (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060711225142.shtml) have indicated that the Mac Pro will use Apple's Xeon-class chips over "desktop" models such as Core 2 Duo "Conroe" and Kentsfield. With Conroe perhaps landing in a future iMac, further speculation would indicate that iMacs down the pipe will feature the 4-core Kentsfield processor.
While Apple hasn't yet released its first Intel-based professional model desktop machine, many users are actively watching Intel's future roadmap for hints as to what may next appear in Apple's second revision Mac Pro and XServe machines. CNet News.com reported yesterday afternoon (http://news.com.com/2100-1006_3-6096192.html) that Intel's quad-core desktop chip (Kentsfield) and Xeon-class chip (Cloverton) have been bumped up and should arrive before year's end.
Educated speculation would therefore indicate that Apple's second revision Mac Pro workstation will feature 8 cores, and other models will all become "Quad" machines. Most recent rumors (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060711225142.shtml) have indicated that the Mac Pro will use Apple's Xeon-class chips over "desktop" models such as Core 2 Duo "Conroe" and Kentsfield. With Conroe perhaps landing in a future iMac, further speculation would indicate that iMacs down the pipe will feature the 4-core Kentsfield processor.
Amazing Iceman
Mar 31, 05:21 PM
Apple realized long time ago that it is bad if the cell service provider has too much freedom, puts too much **** on the phone and customizes it in ways that it is no longer maintainable ... they got bashed as being too closed.
But now people finally realize they were right:
- android is getting too fragmented because service providers are either too slow to provide updates or refuse to update at all for current phones
- microsoft just realed an update to their mobile7 - guess what: service providers are too slow to update the brand new phones - weeks after the MS release they still need many more weeks to 'test' and 'adjust' for their phones
What good is it to have an OS that claims to be 'open' but you still can't get updates because the openess was abused by service providers who struggle to re-adding their ****.
The problem that has always existed, not just with Android, is that the carriers customize the OS, release it with a phone, and you can forget about getting any updates for it. Maybe one update for the lifetime of the device, if you are lucky. My HTC TouchPro 2 has only seen in almost 2 years just one update to WM 6.5, and it was not even close to the most current revision at that time.
This just shows that carriers and manufacturers don't want to keep maintaining their phones. They want to sell and forget, and push a new model out the door.
Sad, but true... :(
But now people finally realize they were right:
- android is getting too fragmented because service providers are either too slow to provide updates or refuse to update at all for current phones
- microsoft just realed an update to their mobile7 - guess what: service providers are too slow to update the brand new phones - weeks after the MS release they still need many more weeks to 'test' and 'adjust' for their phones
What good is it to have an OS that claims to be 'open' but you still can't get updates because the openess was abused by service providers who struggle to re-adding their ****.
The problem that has always existed, not just with Android, is that the carriers customize the OS, release it with a phone, and you can forget about getting any updates for it. Maybe one update for the lifetime of the device, if you are lucky. My HTC TouchPro 2 has only seen in almost 2 years just one update to WM 6.5, and it was not even close to the most current revision at that time.
This just shows that carriers and manufacturers don't want to keep maintaining their phones. They want to sell and forget, and push a new model out the door.
Sad, but true... :(
barkomatic
Mar 31, 03:58 PM
At a glance your statement sounds fine. But that logic can be used for following logics:
1. I don't care what US does to rest of world as long as I as an american can live nice, prosperous life.
but i digress...
You're comparing a phone or a tablet to U.S. foreign policy? I'm sorry, I don't think gadgets are as important as that but apparently you do. I think you need a check on your perspective.
1. I don't care what US does to rest of world as long as I as an american can live nice, prosperous life.
but i digress...
You're comparing a phone or a tablet to U.S. foreign policy? I'm sorry, I don't think gadgets are as important as that but apparently you do. I think you need a check on your perspective.
ccrandall77
Aug 11, 04:10 PM
No, not really. You see, mobile phone is cheaper to use than landline in many countries, especially for mobile to mobile calls. And when everyone else has a mobile phone, if you want to be connected you're better off buying a mobile.
OK, as skeptical as I am, I'll concede. And I envy you that your cell service is as cheap as it is.
OK, as skeptical as I am, I'll concede. And I envy you that your cell service is as cheap as it is.
Hellhammer
Apr 9, 11:04 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
But in the case of the Sb quad core the figure seems to be in excess of 50%, not 20%
CPU isnt the only component drawing power. AMD 6750M has higher TDP compared to 330M as well
But in the case of the Sb quad core the figure seems to be in excess of 50%, not 20%
CPU isnt the only component drawing power. AMD 6750M has higher TDP compared to 330M as well
rwilliams
Jun 8, 09:22 PM
Hell yeah. There's a Radio Shack about 5 minutes from my house. This should keep me from having to stand in ridiculously long lines at the Apple Store. I hope that Best Buy does this too, if only because I've never had a bad phone activation experience there, and I can rack up the Reward Zone points.
halhiker
Apr 6, 01:43 PM
That's actually more than I expected.
Hellhammer
Apr 9, 11:04 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
But in the case of the Sb quad core the figure seems to be in excess of 50%, not 20%
CPU isnt the only component drawing power. AMD 6750M has higher TDP compared to 330M as well
But in the case of the Sb quad core the figure seems to be in excess of 50%, not 20%
CPU isnt the only component drawing power. AMD 6750M has higher TDP compared to 330M as well
Chris Bangle
Aug 11, 11:43 AM
I agree at least since the iPod. As an investor, I hope Apple executes their plan well. The mobile phone business is getting crowded all of a sudden e.g. Best Buy, Disney, ESPN etc. I think it will come down to design e.g. Razr.
Cinch
I think the main reason the razr's such a sucess is beacuse it soo cheap. It so easy to get one free with your contract in the UK. Not only does it look alrite but its massivly affordable
Cinch
I think the main reason the razr's such a sucess is beacuse it soo cheap. It so easy to get one free with your contract in the UK. Not only does it look alrite but its massivly affordable
samh004
Nov 28, 07:14 PM
I was under the assumption that the money paid to Universal was to allow the streaming of music from one device to another. I assumed that was the real reason behind the payment.
Seeing as Apple does not stream music to random devices, they shouldn't have to pay a royalty.
I don't think I voiced my opinion about this last time it was brought up, but I reckon although the iPod makes enough profit so as not to pass that royalty onto the consumer (in price), I would still feel like I was paying that royalty, were I to buy an iPod.
If I felt like I paid a royalty, and was already downloading songs legally from iTunes anyway, I'd want to download more stuff illegally than I have before, just to make use of that royalty.
That's what I will do if I have to buy an iPod in the future with a pre-paid royalty. You heard me... this tactic will only encourage more piracy. Stupid really !
Seeing as Apple does not stream music to random devices, they shouldn't have to pay a royalty.
I don't think I voiced my opinion about this last time it was brought up, but I reckon although the iPod makes enough profit so as not to pass that royalty onto the consumer (in price), I would still feel like I was paying that royalty, were I to buy an iPod.
If I felt like I paid a royalty, and was already downloading songs legally from iTunes anyway, I'd want to download more stuff illegally than I have before, just to make use of that royalty.
That's what I will do if I have to buy an iPod in the future with a pre-paid royalty. You heard me... this tactic will only encourage more piracy. Stupid really !
grue
Apr 12, 12:56 AM
I like Motion, just wish the timeline was a little better.
People actually use Motion, for actual work?
Motion is a lot like After Effects, if After Effects' mom got drunk, did some crank and tossed herself down a flight of stairs every Friday night during her pregnancy, and then delivered a breech baby with the cord wrapped around its neck.
and then dropped it.
twice.
People actually use Motion, for actual work?
Motion is a lot like After Effects, if After Effects' mom got drunk, did some crank and tossed herself down a flight of stairs every Friday night during her pregnancy, and then delivered a breech baby with the cord wrapped around its neck.
and then dropped it.
twice.
DavidLeblond
Apr 27, 07:59 AM
I actually thought looking at a history of where my phone has been on a map was kinda cool. Bummer.
