benjs
Apr 12, 10:05 PM
Well i'll tell you this FCP 5 (floating around in places i won't mention) is around 1.5 GB so If it is on the App store It will be 1 BIG download for me.
(3 Mbps cable line here)
The App Store should really harness the power of torrent technology for files like this.
(3 Mbps cable line here)
The App Store should really harness the power of torrent technology for files like this.
tablo13
Sep 16, 04:39 PM
Got these from eBay for $1 each, good quality.
Link (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item;=290471004347&ssPageName;=STRK:MEWNX:IT#ht_3465wt_913)
The Incipio DermaSHOT would have better quality, right?
Link (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item;=290471004347&ssPageName;=STRK:MEWNX:IT#ht_3465wt_913)
The Incipio DermaSHOT would have better quality, right?
RaceTripper
Jan 10, 07:50 PM
So very sad but true. F1 fan here, and rally if I can ever find time to watch it. I might not be a F1 fan for much longer though if they keep making "the ultimate racing machine" slower and slower by limiting the technology :mad: I understand the safety reasons, but its getting to be worse than the bicycle world:eek:
I was a big F1 fan, but once the USGP got cancelled my wife and I became huge ALMS fans. Evey year we go to the 12 Hours of Sebring, Road America, and Petit Le Mans. The racing is much better than in F1, and the series is far more fan friendly. I've even started working in the hot pits doing IMSA pit notes during races, in addition to the race photography I have been doing for fun.
One point to consider about F1 rules changes. Slowing the cars down could improve the on track action. Right now they are so fast they get too spread out and it becomes a parade of cars with the action being how the gaps change. When you slow the cars down they start to bunch together again and force some wheel to wheel battles. The turbo 4-bangers coming in a few years could prove to add some excitement back to F1, even if it does cost us the terrific sound of high revving V8 engines. The rule changes aren't so much about safety as they are about trying to get a race to ensue.
I was a big F1 fan, but once the USGP got cancelled my wife and I became huge ALMS fans. Evey year we go to the 12 Hours of Sebring, Road America, and Petit Le Mans. The racing is much better than in F1, and the series is far more fan friendly. I've even started working in the hot pits doing IMSA pit notes during races, in addition to the race photography I have been doing for fun.
One point to consider about F1 rules changes. Slowing the cars down could improve the on track action. Right now they are so fast they get too spread out and it becomes a parade of cars with the action being how the gaps change. When you slow the cars down they start to bunch together again and force some wheel to wheel battles. The turbo 4-bangers coming in a few years could prove to add some excitement back to F1, even if it does cost us the terrific sound of high revving V8 engines. The rule changes aren't so much about safety as they are about trying to get a race to ensue.
EagerDragon
Oct 23, 06:16 PM
At this rate the PowerBook G5 will be here before the Merom.
twoodcc
Feb 8, 09:54 PM
Thanx!
Never thought I'd ever get to this point when I started folding (almost) 4 years ago
;)
yeah i never thought i'd even get to 1 million. much less 5. keep it up!
On a side note, I have reached #977 overall with 6.4 mio units! I didn't think it was possible before the bigadv units...
mio?
Never thought I'd ever get to this point when I started folding (almost) 4 years ago
;)
yeah i never thought i'd even get to 1 million. much less 5. keep it up!
On a side note, I have reached #977 overall with 6.4 mio units! I didn't think it was possible before the bigadv units...
mio?
faroZ06
Apr 3, 02:15 AM
I just realized how bad "magical" sounded in that!!!
Way to ruin the ad, whoever wrote that into the script :mad:
Anyway I never see Apple ads on TV, and I don't know which channels they are on :confused:
Way to ruin the ad, whoever wrote that into the script :mad:
Anyway I never see Apple ads on TV, and I don't know which channels they are on :confused:
.jpg "wallpaper-wallpaper cantik")
Donnacha
Nov 27, 04:14 PM
I'd just like to agree with those who have pointed out that the main thing Apple's monitor division should be worrying about is price, not new sizes - the Apple logo can bear a certain price premium but not that much, especially as they don't yet include Apple-specific goodness such as integrated isight etc.
In October, I considered a 23" ACD at �848 inc. VAT, delivery and 3yrs of Applecare cover.
Instead, I phoned Dell and got the 24" 2407WP for �549.08 inc. VAT, delivery and 4yrs next business day swap-out cover. For the Apple, I would have had to pay a premium of 55% and got 1yr less cover.
Now, as it happens, Dell were running a 25% off special on the 24% in October but these offers are in continual rotation; at the moment, if you ask, you can get:
The 30" 3007WFP for just under a grand inclusive and 4yrs cover, compared to �1,618 for the 30" Apple and 3yrs cover (a premium of 62% and 1yr less cover)
and
The 20" 2007WFP for �316 inc. and 4yrs cover, compared to �598 for the 20" Apple with 3yrs cover (a premium of 89% and 1yr less cover).
As for quality, I know monitors and the one I've got is top-notch - while it isn't Apple, the subtle styling is impressive and the stand's tilting and pivoting are the best I've ever seen. The consensus among reviewers seems to agree.
I'm not posting this to annoy Apple fans, I'm a huge fan myself and, yes, I would have paid a premium for that cute little apple logo but, frankly, it wouldn't have been worth that extra 55% - at Apple prices, I might never have made the jump to 24" but I'm glad I did, I'm even thinking about getting a second one.
With the move to Intel, Apple have done a great job of competing on PC pricing, why are they still in fantasyland when it comes to monitor pricing?
In October, I considered a 23" ACD at �848 inc. VAT, delivery and 3yrs of Applecare cover.
Instead, I phoned Dell and got the 24" 2407WP for �549.08 inc. VAT, delivery and 4yrs next business day swap-out cover. For the Apple, I would have had to pay a premium of 55% and got 1yr less cover.
Now, as it happens, Dell were running a 25% off special on the 24% in October but these offers are in continual rotation; at the moment, if you ask, you can get:
The 30" 3007WFP for just under a grand inclusive and 4yrs cover, compared to �1,618 for the 30" Apple and 3yrs cover (a premium of 62% and 1yr less cover)
and
The 20" 2007WFP for �316 inc. and 4yrs cover, compared to �598 for the 20" Apple with 3yrs cover (a premium of 89% and 1yr less cover).
As for quality, I know monitors and the one I've got is top-notch - while it isn't Apple, the subtle styling is impressive and the stand's tilting and pivoting are the best I've ever seen. The consensus among reviewers seems to agree.
I'm not posting this to annoy Apple fans, I'm a huge fan myself and, yes, I would have paid a premium for that cute little apple logo but, frankly, it wouldn't have been worth that extra 55% - at Apple prices, I might never have made the jump to 24" but I'm glad I did, I'm even thinking about getting a second one.
With the move to Intel, Apple have done a great job of competing on PC pricing, why are they still in fantasyland when it comes to monitor pricing?
LimeiBook86
Nov 27, 03:56 PM
A 17" LCD screen made by Apple would be a good deal for people buying Mac Minis but, the price woul
d have to be just right in order for people to actually thing of buying an Apple LCD rather than another brand LCD that they can get cheaper. Also I don't think Apple would want to cannibalize their sales for the iMac. The Mac Mini with a 17" LCD screen (maybe a built-in iSight, although that would raise the price) is roughly the same specs as a 17" iMac ($1,199 model). Except the iMac has a dedicated ATI Graphics Chipset, a larger Hard Drive, and a few more add-ons (Keyboard, Mouse etc)
If Apple were to do this they would have to be pretty careful. I can't see Apple doing this in the near future, although I do agree a 20" LCD screen as a starting size is a bit high, and so is the price. But, don't get me wrong, I love the 20" LCD panel in my iMac. I just think Apple might see a demand for a smaller size, cheaper LCD screen. :)
d have to be just right in order for people to actually thing of buying an Apple LCD rather than another brand LCD that they can get cheaper. Also I don't think Apple would want to cannibalize their sales for the iMac. The Mac Mini with a 17" LCD screen (maybe a built-in iSight, although that would raise the price) is roughly the same specs as a 17" iMac ($1,199 model). Except the iMac has a dedicated ATI Graphics Chipset, a larger Hard Drive, and a few more add-ons (Keyboard, Mouse etc)
If Apple were to do this they would have to be pretty careful. I can't see Apple doing this in the near future, although I do agree a 20" LCD screen as a starting size is a bit high, and so is the price. But, don't get me wrong, I love the 20" LCD panel in my iMac. I just think Apple might see a demand for a smaller size, cheaper LCD screen. :)
ipodG8TR
Aug 16, 11:19 AM
Actually, you can get Sirius in Canada and are able to stream Sirius anywhere in the world IF you have an account registered in the US. I've heard of many international customers setting up accounts to listen abroad.
I'm just saying that I think the two would compliment each other nicely. You could use the service as just an ipod, a receiver for Sirius or BOTH.
I'm just saying that I think the two would compliment each other nicely. You could use the service as just an ipod, a receiver for Sirius or BOTH.
osxhero
Apr 12, 09:31 PM
People detection or NSA spoofer code. People should have the right to turn this stuff off. Hope FCP doesn't impose it without an option to disable.
cube
Mar 24, 05:00 PM
OpenGL is much more like Direct3D. A part of DirectX. DirectX is just a collection of multiple API's. DirectSound is like OpenAL for example.
You seem to think that DirectX 10.1 cards can't support OpenCL. Well newsflash, they can. DirectX is irrelevant in this conversation not only because it has nothing to do with Mac OS X but because it also has nothing to do with what you're associating it with. The equivalent to OpenCL is DirectCompute.
I am talking about graphics capabilities now.
You seem to think that DirectX 10.1 cards can't support OpenCL. Well newsflash, they can. DirectX is irrelevant in this conversation not only because it has nothing to do with Mac OS X but because it also has nothing to do with what you're associating it with. The equivalent to OpenCL is DirectCompute.
I am talking about graphics capabilities now.
zync
Aug 6, 10:41 PM
100,00 users!
Yikes! I wonder how many this year....
I bet it's 500,000+
Arn has a LOT of bandwidth.
I bet he could walk thorough his internet connection without bumping his head.
March a whole army thorough there. Three abreast.
*goose step*
*goose step*
*goose step*
*goose step*
*goose step*
*goose step*
I don't know if anyone has said it yet, but it's because he has a team of messengers on horses that are able to run through the tubes :D
Yikes! I wonder how many this year....
I bet it's 500,000+
Arn has a LOT of bandwidth.
I bet he could walk thorough his internet connection without bumping his head.
March a whole army thorough there. Three abreast.
*goose step*
*goose step*
*goose step*
*goose step*
*goose step*
*goose step*
I don't know if anyone has said it yet, but it's because he has a team of messengers on horses that are able to run through the tubes :D
rasmasyean
Mar 19, 05:32 PM
That's why the US shouldn't have invaded Iraq.
I don't think so. Gaddafi willingly traded Libya's oil, currently no oil at all is traded, and I don't think the rebels (unorganized as they are) will do a good job at it anytime soon. The nations now supporting the air strikes against Gaddafi would have been better off quietly sending him weapons to mute the rebels if they wanted oil.
Even if it didn't directly affect the oil trade, I wouldn't be surprised if yet another US base or two somehow gets negotiated into the aftermath. That's also "securing the oil". If we one day figure out how to do fusion, and make electric cars work or something, we wouldn't give a crap about which leader kills eachother there.
I don't think so. Gaddafi willingly traded Libya's oil, currently no oil at all is traded, and I don't think the rebels (unorganized as they are) will do a good job at it anytime soon. The nations now supporting the air strikes against Gaddafi would have been better off quietly sending him weapons to mute the rebels if they wanted oil.
Even if it didn't directly affect the oil trade, I wouldn't be surprised if yet another US base or two somehow gets negotiated into the aftermath. That's also "securing the oil". If we one day figure out how to do fusion, and make electric cars work or something, we wouldn't give a crap about which leader kills eachother there.
Yakuza
Nov 24, 10:08 AM
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41C0o2GAJGL._SS500_.jpg
Props if anyone knows who used that bag.
i would say Indidana Jones, but i'm not sure
Props if anyone knows who used that bag.
i would say Indidana Jones, but i'm not sure
.jpg "Wallpaper-Wallpaper Cantik")
e28
Aug 17, 11:40 AM
I don't really see the demand behind adding wireless functionality into the iPod. I think wireless is the buzz word right now and investment managers and industry analysts don't even know what it means.
Bluetooth headphones, if they sound good, and bluetooth syncing is the only function people might use out of this. However, most people charge as they sync, so they would need to connect the iPod to the computer anyway. Bluetooth headphones would need to be charged too, and that is a nuisance.
The only thing semi-useful out of 802.11 is sending audio to airport express. But I use my laptop for that already, so does this really add any functionality? No one I know will be typing in a 256-bit WPA key into their iPod so they can play their iPod music over their friend's airport express, either. At work, I can view and sample my coworker's library on my computer - even when they leave for lunch. And if I like it, I can buy it on iTunes right there. Again, where is the usefulness of a wireless iPod?
I can see how XM radio might be useful to many, even though it doesn't appeal to me. However, I would think Apple would want an exclusive deal if they were to offer this feature.
Bluetooth headphones, if they sound good, and bluetooth syncing is the only function people might use out of this. However, most people charge as they sync, so they would need to connect the iPod to the computer anyway. Bluetooth headphones would need to be charged too, and that is a nuisance.
The only thing semi-useful out of 802.11 is sending audio to airport express. But I use my laptop for that already, so does this really add any functionality? No one I know will be typing in a 256-bit WPA key into their iPod so they can play their iPod music over their friend's airport express, either. At work, I can view and sample my coworker's library on my computer - even when they leave for lunch. And if I like it, I can buy it on iTunes right there. Again, where is the usefulness of a wireless iPod?
I can see how XM radio might be useful to many, even though it doesn't appeal to me. However, I would think Apple would want an exclusive deal if they were to offer this feature.
SchneiderMan
Sep 9, 07:47 PM
Incipio is now shipping DermaSHOT cases
Rodimus Prime
Mar 22, 04:16 PM
honestly I do not consider it worth much. No plans can change and SJ is marketing first. He is in it for the money.
As long as they can turn a good profit off of them they will keep selling them. For me the space of the classic is over kill for my needs.
Does Apple still have Hard drive mode on the classic where you can use it as a removable drive and save put files in.
As long as they can turn a good profit off of them they will keep selling them. For me the space of the classic is over kill for my needs.
Does Apple still have Hard drive mode on the classic where you can use it as a removable drive and save put files in.
fastlane1588
Sep 5, 08:37 AM
come on mbp!
ecoons
Jan 11, 10:43 PM
Electromagnetic fields decrease with the cube of the distance (I think- might be square, but someone smarter than I can correct me). You would need to keep the charger within a few inches while charging. Frankly, if I'm going to carry a charger with me when I travel, I really don't care if it's plugged in directly or just has to be really close.
What if there was a universal (yikes, what IS truly universal nowadays) way of transmitting electrical power, where your physical desk-top, kitchen counter, tray tables in airplanes, glove boxes (or cup holders for phones), nightstand in a hotel room, etc could charge your electronic gadgets just when you set them on the surface. That would mean they would be "just a few inches away" or less. There's no need to be charging devices 100% of the time, but as long as you can set them down on a "recharging surface" when they get low, then you have a cordless charging system.
What if there was a universal (yikes, what IS truly universal nowadays) way of transmitting electrical power, where your physical desk-top, kitchen counter, tray tables in airplanes, glove boxes (or cup holders for phones), nightstand in a hotel room, etc could charge your electronic gadgets just when you set them on the surface. That would mean they would be "just a few inches away" or less. There's no need to be charging devices 100% of the time, but as long as you can set them down on a "recharging surface" when they get low, then you have a cordless charging system.
skinniezinho
Nov 27, 07:38 AM
Where did you buy that watch and for how much? I really like it :o
I bought it on a friend's store@45eur but it is available @50eur on almost every watch store.
Check it here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtSP6Qj8PDk).
I bought it on a friend's store@45eur but it is available @50eur on almost every watch store.
Check it here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtSP6Qj8PDk).
MattDell
Sep 6, 08:29 PM
Renting would never fly. It's far too easy to just burn the movie to DVD if it's already in digital format. The movie executives would flip. It would take some impressive coding to prevent users from doing this, and even then... somebody will figure out a way around it.
So, no. I don't think any movie corporation will allow digital movie rentals.
-Matt
So, no. I don't think any movie corporation will allow digital movie rentals.
-Matt
anim8or
Sep 6, 08:52 AM
Does anyone think that as we have seen the Mac Mini's update was just a speed bump, that the MacBook will only see a speed bump too.
There has been a debate as to whether the MacBook will see 'merom' this year, i think that the evidence speaks for itself... ...not til next year.
Here is how i see it;
Mac Mini, MacBook White - Consumer models - Core Duo til late this year or early next
iMac, MacBook Black - Bridge between consumer and pro - Core 2 Duo (Possibly not in the BlackBook but perhaps as an option?)
Mac Pro, MacBook Pro - Pro Models - Core 2 Duo
Just my opinion... ...what does everyone else think?
There has been a debate as to whether the MacBook will see 'merom' this year, i think that the evidence speaks for itself... ...not til next year.
Here is how i see it;
Mac Mini, MacBook White - Consumer models - Core Duo til late this year or early next
iMac, MacBook Black - Bridge between consumer and pro - Core 2 Duo (Possibly not in the BlackBook but perhaps as an option?)
Mac Pro, MacBook Pro - Pro Models - Core 2 Duo
Just my opinion... ...what does everyone else think?
nagromme
Sep 14, 11:57 AM
Consumer Reports is making five mistakes:
1. Not doing full-scale testing of the kind antenna engineers have called them out on. They’ve done informal testing—quick and easy, but not the full useful facts their readers deserve. Yes, that kind of testing would need some really expensive facilities and lots of time. So they should at least point out that their tests are very limited and may be misleading.
2. Not publishing stats on how many users actually lose calls over this. They do surveys all the time—how about one comparing the iPhone 4 to other phones in actual use? (Most of the iPhone 4 antenna complaints seem to come from people who don’t own one!)
3. Criticizing only the iPhone, not other phones, for losing signal when gripped wrong. (Which all phones clearly do. Some more, some less. Many of them tell you right in the manual not to “hold it that way!")
4. Exaggerating the problem. Putting a very rare and minor issue, that affects so few, ahead of so many positives that affect everyone: benefits no other phone can touch. How are their flaws (which no case can fix) vs. the iPhone acceptable? And does CR clearly state that they DO recommend the iPhone for case users—which is a huge (maybe the largest) group of phone users?
5. Standing on their ego (or worrying misguidedly about their reputation) and not refining their position when that is clearly called for. Black-and-white controversial simplicity sells mindshare and magazines. But it doesn’t reflect reality, and CR readers deserve better. CR should be willing to back down when they’ve gone too far. Example: “The iPhone 4’s antenna flaws are rarely an issue and it’s the best smartphone we reviewed. But because we don’t know what each buyer will experience, we are only able to fully recommend the iPhone 4 if you also use a case. Luckily, Apple will continue to supply one free of charge on request, so this antenna issue need not affect your calls nor your wallet."
I only trust CR’s large-scale survey data (they seem to be good at that) not their editorial content. They’ve consitently failed to note Apple’s legitimate strengths over the years (ever see an article helping the everyday buyer choose between OS X and Windows?) but never fail to make something out the negatives. That’s not helping an uninformed reader become informed. And it really does seem like an anti-Apple bias sometimes.
That is precisely what auto manufacturers do. They send a letter to every owner, and fix the problem, whether or not the owner has reported it.
And that kind of preventive mass action makes sense for a product that holds peoples’ lives in its hands every moment of use.
It’s absurd to suggest that Apple should “fix” a problem as though it were widespread, when it’s not. Fixing it when it IS a problem is all that is necessary. And then let the non-iPhone users continue to moan about how bad Apple is treating us contented iPhone users :D They believe a blog wildfire over actual user experience—or at least they enjoy fanning the wildfire?
1. Not doing full-scale testing of the kind antenna engineers have called them out on. They’ve done informal testing—quick and easy, but not the full useful facts their readers deserve. Yes, that kind of testing would need some really expensive facilities and lots of time. So they should at least point out that their tests are very limited and may be misleading.
2. Not publishing stats on how many users actually lose calls over this. They do surveys all the time—how about one comparing the iPhone 4 to other phones in actual use? (Most of the iPhone 4 antenna complaints seem to come from people who don’t own one!)
3. Criticizing only the iPhone, not other phones, for losing signal when gripped wrong. (Which all phones clearly do. Some more, some less. Many of them tell you right in the manual not to “hold it that way!")
4. Exaggerating the problem. Putting a very rare and minor issue, that affects so few, ahead of so many positives that affect everyone: benefits no other phone can touch. How are their flaws (which no case can fix) vs. the iPhone acceptable? And does CR clearly state that they DO recommend the iPhone for case users—which is a huge (maybe the largest) group of phone users?
5. Standing on their ego (or worrying misguidedly about their reputation) and not refining their position when that is clearly called for. Black-and-white controversial simplicity sells mindshare and magazines. But it doesn’t reflect reality, and CR readers deserve better. CR should be willing to back down when they’ve gone too far. Example: “The iPhone 4’s antenna flaws are rarely an issue and it’s the best smartphone we reviewed. But because we don’t know what each buyer will experience, we are only able to fully recommend the iPhone 4 if you also use a case. Luckily, Apple will continue to supply one free of charge on request, so this antenna issue need not affect your calls nor your wallet."
I only trust CR’s large-scale survey data (they seem to be good at that) not their editorial content. They’ve consitently failed to note Apple’s legitimate strengths over the years (ever see an article helping the everyday buyer choose between OS X and Windows?) but never fail to make something out the negatives. That’s not helping an uninformed reader become informed. And it really does seem like an anti-Apple bias sometimes.
That is precisely what auto manufacturers do. They send a letter to every owner, and fix the problem, whether or not the owner has reported it.
And that kind of preventive mass action makes sense for a product that holds peoples’ lives in its hands every moment of use.
It’s absurd to suggest that Apple should “fix” a problem as though it were widespread, when it’s not. Fixing it when it IS a problem is all that is necessary. And then let the non-iPhone users continue to moan about how bad Apple is treating us contented iPhone users :D They believe a blog wildfire over actual user experience—or at least they enjoy fanning the wildfire?
LimeiBook86
Nov 27, 03:56 PM
A 17" LCD screen made by Apple would be a good deal for people buying Mac Minis but, the price would have to be just right in order for people to actually thing of buying an Apple LCD rather than another brand LCD that they can get cheaper. Also I don't think Apple would want to cannibalize their sales for the iMac. The Mac Mini with a 17" LCD screen (maybe a built-in iSight, although that would raise the price) is roughly the same specs as a 17" iMac ($1,199 model). Except the iMac has a dedicated ATI Graphics Chipset, a larger Hard Drive, and a few more add-ons (Keyboard, Mouse etc)
If Apple were to do this they would have to be pretty careful. I can't see Apple doing this in the near future, although I do agree a 20" LCD screen as a starting size is a bit high, and so is the price. But, don't get me wrong, I love the 20" LCD panel in my iMac. I just think Apple might see a demand for a smaller size, cheaper LCD screen. :)
If Apple were to do this they would have to be pretty careful. I can't see Apple doing this in the near future, although I do agree a 20" LCD screen as a starting size is a bit high, and so is the price. But, don't get me wrong, I love the 20" LCD panel in my iMac. I just think Apple might see a demand for a smaller size, cheaper LCD screen. :)
