wonderspark
Apr 5, 05:20 PM
Nobody's using Blu-Ray, in my experience. It's just another way of sucking money out of home consumers. Everything's done online in terms of delivery...
I respectfully disagree. Most of the film festivals we submitted our movie to prefer Blu-ray. That way they get the same quality for previewing as they do for projection, should they accept it. We haven't even had to make an HDCAM copy yet.
I respectfully disagree. Most of the film festivals we submitted our movie to prefer Blu-ray. That way they get the same quality for previewing as they do for projection, should they accept it. We haven't even had to make an HDCAM copy yet.
faroZ06
Apr 27, 08:54 AM
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704123204576283580249161342.html
Ah, I see. I wasn't checking the WSJ, only Macrumors.
Ah, I see. I wasn't checking the WSJ, only Macrumors.
The Beatles
Apr 25, 03:16 PM
Asinine
how did they think the location based features on any app worked? This is just a cashed file for those purposes.
And what about all the location based advertising? So it takes this to make people understand that the world has changed? This is old news and ridiculous that people are now making a scene about it. How about signing electronically at a credit card purchase machine. How about giving someone a check with your account number on the bottom of it. How about electronically giving your personal and sensitive info over the internet.
This is how it is people. You bought in to it a long time ago. Its what it takes to move forward. And the only reason why this is a bad thing is because people fail to police themselves. Including the people that attain this info, and thats why we will eventually have some negative repercussion from this collection of data.
But to pin point apple and create a federal case out of something that the government already new was happening is ridiculous.
how did they think the location based features on any app worked? This is just a cashed file for those purposes.
And what about all the location based advertising? So it takes this to make people understand that the world has changed? This is old news and ridiculous that people are now making a scene about it. How about signing electronically at a credit card purchase machine. How about giving someone a check with your account number on the bottom of it. How about electronically giving your personal and sensitive info over the internet.
This is how it is people. You bought in to it a long time ago. Its what it takes to move forward. And the only reason why this is a bad thing is because people fail to police themselves. Including the people that attain this info, and thats why we will eventually have some negative repercussion from this collection of data.
But to pin point apple and create a federal case out of something that the government already new was happening is ridiculous.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 05:50 PM
Here we have an article laying out the case for non intervention (http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/03/2011322135442593945.html) by a Princeton law professor (emeritus) published by Al Jazeera. A worthy read, and here are two exerpts I've commented on.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
macpross
Aug 6, 11:28 PM
Great joke, thanks very much...in the same line as Tiger Computer Dealers, right?
We already have a Mac Pro line of products, we are also the owners of AppleLocks, and MacMice. The Tiger thing was silly.
We already have a Mac Pro line of products, we are also the owners of AppleLocks, and MacMice. The Tiger thing was silly.
HecubusPro
Aug 26, 12:01 PM
The best way to let a company know that you're not satisfied with them is to drop their product and go with a competitor. That's one of the reasons why I'm switching from PC to Mac (not that Bill Gates really cares :) )
The worst way to let a company know you're not satisfied with them is to gripe about it on a web board that they don't read (i.e. not their support site.)
If you're dissatisfied, go with something else. I know that's hard for a lot of the followers of the cult of Mac, but if you're that upset, drop Apple and go with a competitor. If it's not that bad, then we'll just have to deal with it whether it improves or not.
Macs and the Mac OS still are the superior products and system. Hopefully Apple will step up to the challenge of a larger user base sooner than later and fix their broken support system.
The worst way to let a company know you're not satisfied with them is to gripe about it on a web board that they don't read (i.e. not their support site.)
If you're dissatisfied, go with something else. I know that's hard for a lot of the followers of the cult of Mac, but if you're that upset, drop Apple and go with a competitor. If it's not that bad, then we'll just have to deal with it whether it improves or not.
Macs and the Mac OS still are the superior products and system. Hopefully Apple will step up to the challenge of a larger user base sooner than later and fix their broken support system.
Kabeyun
Mar 22, 01:03 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
...and last, at least as far as the spec war argument goes. You're grafting a computer-shopping mentality onto a tablet market, and people don't think of tablets as computers. People don't buy tablets based on specs, and the spec difference between current or impending offerings it not what will define the user experience.
...and last, at least as far as the spec war argument goes. You're grafting a computer-shopping mentality onto a tablet market, and people don't think of tablets as computers. People don't buy tablets based on specs, and the spec difference between current or impending offerings it not what will define the user experience.
�algiris
Mar 31, 02:30 PM
This is a smart move. It had to happen sooner or later.
John Gruber would eat Steve Job's ***** if he could. His opinion is extremely biased.
Doesn't mean he's not right on this one.
John Gruber would eat Steve Job's ***** if he could. His opinion is extremely biased.
Doesn't mean he's not right on this one.
thworple
Sep 12, 11:19 AM
Its good to know that you will be able to drop in the new processors into an exisiting Mac Pro.
Expensive.... but good to know.
Expensive.... but good to know.
aafuss1
Aug 6, 07:48 PM
Dashcode-will be included, one banner shows some new icons. HDMI-for owners of Bravias and home theatre equipment (via a $29 adaptor for Mac Pro's and minis).
Canon-universal binary for its scanners and cameras.
Canon-universal binary for its scanners and cameras.
RedTomato
Sep 13, 12:36 PM
I read the link above about the ZFS filesystem.
Hmm this could remove a lot of the pain I currently have juggling disks on the cheap.
(I hold a lot of footage of deaf people signing for a project, and don't really have any budget to pay for disk storage. I currently have about 200 GB left on a 1 TB RAID5 system inside a Powermac G3)
It seems the concept of individual volumes will vanish, and instead ZFS creates a common pool of filespace and looks after the checksums etc itself. New drives can just be thrown into the array and ZFS will look after optimising the array I/O.
Mixing 15k rpm speed demon drives with 5400rpm storage hog drives mmmm...
I look forwards to being able to buy a cheap chassis with just a power unit and space for 10 drives, and being able to put that next to my G3, and having ZFS sort out what to do with the 8-9 drives in there.
Something like that hooked up to a Cloverton should give significant HD speedup. Not as much as a ramdisk tho :)
One thing, the article says ZFS can cope with drives being removed from the pool. I'd like to see more detail on that. It surely copes with 1 out of 4 drives failing - what about 3 out of 4? What if 3 x 20GB 15k rpm drives fail and the 1x750GB 5400rpm drive is still up?
Hmm this could remove a lot of the pain I currently have juggling disks on the cheap.
(I hold a lot of footage of deaf people signing for a project, and don't really have any budget to pay for disk storage. I currently have about 200 GB left on a 1 TB RAID5 system inside a Powermac G3)
It seems the concept of individual volumes will vanish, and instead ZFS creates a common pool of filespace and looks after the checksums etc itself. New drives can just be thrown into the array and ZFS will look after optimising the array I/O.
Mixing 15k rpm speed demon drives with 5400rpm storage hog drives mmmm...
I look forwards to being able to buy a cheap chassis with just a power unit and space for 10 drives, and being able to put that next to my G3, and having ZFS sort out what to do with the 8-9 drives in there.
Something like that hooked up to a Cloverton should give significant HD speedup. Not as much as a ramdisk tho :)
One thing, the article says ZFS can cope with drives being removed from the pool. I'd like to see more detail on that. It surely copes with 1 out of 4 drives failing - what about 3 out of 4? What if 3 x 20GB 15k rpm drives fail and the 1x750GB 5400rpm drive is still up?
PhantomPumpkin
Apr 25, 04:29 PM
You aren't being tracked by Apple, you aren't being tracked to the meter. You can opt out, just switch off location services.
And by the way even if you do switch off location services your location is still being tracked by the mobile phone companies everytime your phone makes a connection with one of their masts, which happens everytime you move cell. Oh and this happens with every phone, otherwise they wouldn't work.
Stop being a paranoid sheep and start reading the facts of this case not the media hype.
Dig deeper Watson. Turning off location services DOES NOT disable this feature. It is still logged, even with location services off. That's the whole issue the smart people have. There's no way to auto-truncate the file, and there's no way to turn it off.
And by the way even if you do switch off location services your location is still being tracked by the mobile phone companies everytime your phone makes a connection with one of their masts, which happens everytime you move cell. Oh and this happens with every phone, otherwise they wouldn't work.
Stop being a paranoid sheep and start reading the facts of this case not the media hype.
Dig deeper Watson. Turning off location services DOES NOT disable this feature. It is still logged, even with location services off. That's the whole issue the smart people have. There's no way to auto-truncate the file, and there's no way to turn it off.
DakotaGuy
Aug 11, 02:39 PM
It is more like 81% of the world market.
MS Windows has about 95% of the world market...doesn't mean the technology is better.:)
MS Windows has about 95% of the world market...doesn't mean the technology is better.:)
itsmemuffins
Mar 22, 08:15 PM
'nuff said (http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/22/samsung-galaxy-tab-8-9-and-new-galaxy-tab-10-1-thinner-than-the/).
nuff said what?
Did you miss the bit where they say the software walkthrough is on the older device?
nuff said what?
Did you miss the bit where they say the software walkthrough is on the older device?
NJRonbo
Jun 14, 09:26 AM
Just returned from Radio Shack.
I turned in my 32GB 3GS (with all accessories)
which was in almost excellent condition except
for a chip and a scratch and received a $247 credit.
They handed my SIMM card back to me so essentially
the phone is rendered useless.
That falls between what their website pays for
a pristine phone ($301) and a moderate wear ($226).
So, not bad, a $247 credit off of iPhone 4.
Radio Shack is taking preorders starting Thursday.
Essentially, they special order the phone for you.
That pretty much guarantees you a phone on opening day.
All you need to do is leave a $50 deposit when ordering.
They are not certain if they will have the phone
accessories or not.
I turned in my 32GB 3GS (with all accessories)
which was in almost excellent condition except
for a chip and a scratch and received a $247 credit.
They handed my SIMM card back to me so essentially
the phone is rendered useless.
That falls between what their website pays for
a pristine phone ($301) and a moderate wear ($226).
So, not bad, a $247 credit off of iPhone 4.
Radio Shack is taking preorders starting Thursday.
Essentially, they special order the phone for you.
That pretty much guarantees you a phone on opening day.
All you need to do is leave a $50 deposit when ordering.
They are not certain if they will have the phone
accessories or not.
T-Reese
Aug 5, 03:38 PM
cant wait... merom book pros cmon!!!!
kcmac
Apr 10, 10:34 AM
Oh boo hoo about the companies being "booted" from sponsorships. The company I work for goes to trade shows. The time invested is actually quite small and most of the materials are in inventory anyway. The presentations are usually based on the same script. I bet the companies aren't that disappointed. In fact they would like to be there and see what Apple is up to more than anyone else. So I bet they'll send the same presenter staff there to view and record anything of note to send back to their company.
Businesses deal with things by contract and those contracts have terms and conditions. No company would just break a contract so I'm sure everything wad handled quite smoothly behind the scenes. So I think this idea that Apple bullied or pushed people is silly.
There are a few times I have made presentations at a conference when I would have loved to have let someone takeover the podium!
Businesses deal with things by contract and those contracts have terms and conditions. No company would just break a contract so I'm sure everything wad handled quite smoothly behind the scenes. So I think this idea that Apple bullied or pushed people is silly.
There are a few times I have made presentations at a conference when I would have loved to have let someone takeover the podium!
Chip NoVaMac
Apr 8, 12:43 AM
Can't you also get them from AT&T? Also, the Apple Store in Santa Monica never has a line for new iPhones or iPads for some reason. I guess they work fast?
I meant last year when the iPhone 4 was released....
I meant last year when the iPhone 4 was released....
relimw
Aug 6, 04:02 PM
The internet didn't exist in 1988. He was probably a local business.
::blink::
<sarcasm>
I beg to differ, just because Al Gore didn't invent the internet until 1988 doesn't mean it didn't exist before then :)
</sarcasm>
But this is totally off topic, back to the rumors...
Apple wows world with intermodalnet! Now you really can take the internet with you!
::blink::
<sarcasm>
I beg to differ, just because Al Gore didn't invent the internet until 1988 doesn't mean it didn't exist before then :)
</sarcasm>
But this is totally off topic, back to the rumors...
Apple wows world with intermodalnet! Now you really can take the internet with you!
iFry
Jul 31, 12:28 PM
Sure, it may be more expensive than a custom-built Intel machine, but it will run OS X like a charm, and that's ultimately the most important factor in my computer purchase. But access to Windows games and Mac OS X, that's a dream come true for this mac fanatic. I'm just keeping my fingers crossed that virtualization makes big enough strides that I never have to leave OS X to play Windows-based games.
my thoughts exactly... MacBook Pro in two weeks :D
wish i had that Core 2 goin in it...
my thoughts exactly... MacBook Pro in two weeks :D
wish i had that Core 2 goin in it...
dustinsc
Mar 22, 12:53 PM
Assuming this gets out of vaporware status, it looks pretty good. The custom interface also looks good. Apple better have some improvements to the UI (ahem, notifications) in iOS 5
technicolor
Sep 19, 08:49 PM
DailyTech (http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=4217) has a mention of the Core 2 Quadro processors.
Pricing mentioned was a little lower than I expected, but it's processors in the Conroe line rather than the Xeon. Having said that, the 3GHz Xeon is slightly cheaper than the 2.93GHz Conroe.
As expected, the highest rated speed mentioned is 2.67Ghz. This intel crap updates far too frequently...ugh
:mad:
Pricing mentioned was a little lower than I expected, but it's processors in the Conroe line rather than the Xeon. Having said that, the 3GHz Xeon is slightly cheaper than the 2.93GHz Conroe.
As expected, the highest rated speed mentioned is 2.67Ghz. This intel crap updates far too frequently...ugh
:mad:
misterniall
Nov 29, 07:10 AM
Perhaps we should all get a rebate for every crappy album ever released by Universal. I really want some of the stuff that these record execs are smoking, on top law suits and strong arm tactics now they expect to get money from every iPod not because the have provided any service or contributed in anyway to the product. Rather, they just want it. Hell, who doesn't ... I would also like to get in on this deal. Please Apple/Microsoft/SanDisk I would like to get $0.50 for every unit you sell. Sign me up. I think it is time that artists really evaluated the balance of power. I think it is time that artists should reevaluate the distrubution of wealth in the recording industry. Perhaps that lost money isn't due to pirating like the execs want you to think.
Free money always welcome.
Free money always welcome.
Squire
Jul 15, 06:29 PM
The gap between Mac mini/iMac and PowerMac is simply too large for many people. :cool:
You could even take it a step further and say that the gap between the Mac mini and the (rumored) Mac Pro is too large. Why exclude the iMac? Well, for the consumer with a nice 20" LCD on his/her desk, the iMac is simply not an option.
Give us a Conroe-based tower, please. They could even keep the same basic case design across the board. Call the upper end ones "Mac Pro Extreme" or something. (I like the idea of offering a black anodized aluminum case to differentiate between Conroe- and Woodcrest-based systems.)
-Squire
You could even take it a step further and say that the gap between the Mac mini and the (rumored) Mac Pro is too large. Why exclude the iMac? Well, for the consumer with a nice 20" LCD on his/her desk, the iMac is simply not an option.
Give us a Conroe-based tower, please. They could even keep the same basic case design across the board. Call the upper end ones "Mac Pro Extreme" or something. (I like the idea of offering a black anodized aluminum case to differentiate between Conroe- and Woodcrest-based systems.)
-Squire
No comments:
Post a Comment