freedevil
Nov 14, 12:31 PM
Boo Hoo Rogue Amoeba. How stupid? Devs need to grow up.
ezekielrage_99
Sep 4, 07:00 PM
If the rumor is right or wrong the reality is that it has been over 10 months since the last iPod and iTunes event and therefore we will have to see some sort of an update or event to the iPod lines and more content on the iTunes store.
Personally I would love to see a 60GB or 120GB iPod video made out of the same stuff the MacBook Pro is made out of that would be sweet :cool:
Personally I would love to see a 60GB or 120GB iPod video made out of the same stuff the MacBook Pro is made out of that would be sweet :cool:
calculus
Oct 28, 03:23 AM
something to do with the magna carte
Does Magna Carta mean nothing to you? Did she die in vain!
...sorry, couldn't resist.:)
Does Magna Carta mean nothing to you? Did she die in vain!
...sorry, couldn't resist.:)
mac yahh!!!
Sep 1, 09:12 AM
Invites are suppose to go out today or Monday.
It is definately iTunes related. It is suppose to be adding movies to iTunes.
apperently though there going to be a bit expensive when compared to the tv shows "supposedly"- http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/home-entertainment/itunes-movie-store-details-emerge-1499-per-new-movie-198140.php
It is definately iTunes related. It is suppose to be adding movies to iTunes.
apperently though there going to be a bit expensive when compared to the tv shows "supposedly"- http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/home-entertainment/itunes-movie-store-details-emerge-1499-per-new-movie-198140.php
Gem�tlichkeit
Apr 20, 01:22 PM
Wasn't this the same info they told us about when they were collecting signal information?
Location and signal strength.
Location and signal strength.
zweigand
Apr 25, 12:12 AM
Fun and games till it's not.
SethEarl
Sep 13, 12:18 AM
Does anyone else think something more might be coming? With the price drop of both models and the lack of drastic changes ie the rumored full screen, bluetooth, and virtual click wheel?
Could there be a "one more thing..." next week?
Could there be a "one more thing..." next week?
BRLawyer
Sep 9, 07:58 PM
No, not at all.
An affinity mask sets the set of CPUs that can be scheduled. A job won't be run on another CPU, even if the assigned CPUs are at 100% and other idle CPUs are available.
And that, by the way, is why setting affinity is usually a bad idea. Let the system dynamically schedule across all available resources -- or you might have some CPUs very busy, and others idle.
Win2k3 also has "soft" affinity masks, which define a preferred set of CPUs. If all of the preferred CPUs are busy, and other CPUs are idle, then soft affinity allows the system to run the jobs on the idle CPUs - even though the idle CPUs aren't in the preferred affinity mask.
But I am pretty sure the newest developer tools can cope with that, considering that multicore chips are a rather new thing in the mainstream market...
Try the Processor Preferences app contained in the Apple CHUD tools, for instance...
An affinity mask sets the set of CPUs that can be scheduled. A job won't be run on another CPU, even if the assigned CPUs are at 100% and other idle CPUs are available.
And that, by the way, is why setting affinity is usually a bad idea. Let the system dynamically schedule across all available resources -- or you might have some CPUs very busy, and others idle.
Win2k3 also has "soft" affinity masks, which define a preferred set of CPUs. If all of the preferred CPUs are busy, and other CPUs are idle, then soft affinity allows the system to run the jobs on the idle CPUs - even though the idle CPUs aren't in the preferred affinity mask.
But I am pretty sure the newest developer tools can cope with that, considering that multicore chips are a rather new thing in the mainstream market...
Try the Processor Preferences app contained in the Apple CHUD tools, for instance...
Prof.
Mar 23, 04:54 PM
Always one in a bunch who brings up a personal experience to shock people into shutting up. My sister was eaten by a hyena. No hyena jokes please.
:mad:If MacRumors didn't have a rule stating no personal attacks, I'd ream you a new *******.
:mad:If MacRumors didn't have a rule stating no personal attacks, I'd ream you a new *******.
psimac
Mar 23, 07:13 PM
This is bogus. Next thing you know, our Gov'mint will start asking companies to stop selling radar detectors, because people will speed and kill others. Drunks go around these stops anyway--they're not effective. All they do is cause good citizens to be held up. How about the day I rolled through one of these and ended up paying a huge late fee to kid's daycare? The run them at 9PM, when no one is drunk! I'm going to download these apps just out of convenience so I don't have to be slowed down and I should be able to have this information available to me.
jafd
Apr 25, 03:02 PM
Those having glossy screens sure will need an automated screen wiper to go with their new laptops. They've got no touch screens and we take care to not touch them, but eventually the screens get dusted and/or fingerprinted all over.
Look at this iPad. Isn't it disgusting?
http://www.tema.ru/jjj/apple-2.jpg
Sure it's not how it looks in ads. It's a real thing in real use.
I also expect a screen wiper in iPad 3, by the way. Screw the liquid metal and gimme the ol' good wiper, please. Or make it matte/Pixel Qi, for heaven's sake.
Look at this iPad. Isn't it disgusting?
http://www.tema.ru/jjj/apple-2.jpg
Sure it's not how it looks in ads. It's a real thing in real use.
I also expect a screen wiper in iPad 3, by the way. Screw the liquid metal and gimme the ol' good wiper, please. Or make it matte/Pixel Qi, for heaven's sake.
AaronEdwards
Apr 20, 12:03 PM
I read a good tweet about this:
Password protect your phone. Password protect your computer. Nothing has changed.
The iPhone is sold on how easy it is to use and that you don't have to fiddle with things. But it's shown time and time again that despite everything they do to keep it as simple and user friendy as possible, it's not true.
Most iPhone users won't have a clue about how to do this. If Apple had actually encrypted the file this wouldn't have been this huge problem.
Password protect your phone. Password protect your computer. Nothing has changed.
The iPhone is sold on how easy it is to use and that you don't have to fiddle with things. But it's shown time and time again that despite everything they do to keep it as simple and user friendy as possible, it's not true.
Most iPhone users won't have a clue about how to do this. If Apple had actually encrypted the file this wouldn't have been this huge problem.
LOLaMac
Mar 29, 02:55 PM
using the keyboard, how quaint
Far faster than using the mouse. Mac OS X is very good at providing keyboard shortcuts, far better than Windows, although that may have changed with Windows 7.
I don't even get the point of your snarky comment. You know damn well that the functions are also available via the menus and right mouse button too.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092007/
Far faster than using the mouse. Mac OS X is very good at providing keyboard shortcuts, far better than Windows, although that may have changed with Windows 7.
I don't even get the point of your snarky comment. You know damn well that the functions are also available via the menus and right mouse button too.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092007/
clintob
Oct 12, 03:49 PM
You do realize HIV effects women differently than men? It also effects children differently than adults.
Do yourself a favor and do a quick google on how much money has been spent on HIV research and prevention for children and women, compare that to men with HIV. Then do a search on children/women with HIV and mortality rates compared to men w/HIV.
We live in a very sexist society. HIV research was never funded or taken seriously by society at large until heterosexual white men started to develop AIDS.
I don't want to pick a fight, because that wasn't the intention of my post, but I'm sorry - this statement is, if not patently false, at very least highly misguided and irresponsible.
The mortality rate of HIV is far higher in men than in women - and it always has been. You look this up very easily all over the web, on the CDC's website, and any number of other places... it's very clear. But if you really want to go there, here's an empirical medical fact: at its worst levels of infection (in the mid 1990s), HIV mortality rates were nearly 30 per 100,000 for men, and barely over 5 per 100,000 in women. Look it up.
As for the disease affecting men/women/children differently, sure that's true, but it's true for pretty much every disease. Children's mortality rates are almost always higher than healthy adults. They are smaller, weaker, and have less developed immune systems. That's got nothing to do with HIV.
And as for when HIV research was taken seriously, I think to make a sexist claim against that is pretty unfounded. You can certainly make the heterosexual part of the argument - that's been well documented. But to say that science discriminates between male and female disease affliction rates is completely irresponsible. Our society is sexist in many ways, no argument there, but to say that scientific research is based on the proportion of male afflictions to female afflictions is insane. If that were true, breast cancer (which, by the way, affects FAR less women than prostate cancer does men) wouldn't be on every commercial and in every fundraiser known to man.
Do yourself a favor and do a quick google on how much money has been spent on HIV research and prevention for children and women, compare that to men with HIV. Then do a search on children/women with HIV and mortality rates compared to men w/HIV.
We live in a very sexist society. HIV research was never funded or taken seriously by society at large until heterosexual white men started to develop AIDS.
I don't want to pick a fight, because that wasn't the intention of my post, but I'm sorry - this statement is, if not patently false, at very least highly misguided and irresponsible.
The mortality rate of HIV is far higher in men than in women - and it always has been. You look this up very easily all over the web, on the CDC's website, and any number of other places... it's very clear. But if you really want to go there, here's an empirical medical fact: at its worst levels of infection (in the mid 1990s), HIV mortality rates were nearly 30 per 100,000 for men, and barely over 5 per 100,000 in women. Look it up.
As for the disease affecting men/women/children differently, sure that's true, but it's true for pretty much every disease. Children's mortality rates are almost always higher than healthy adults. They are smaller, weaker, and have less developed immune systems. That's got nothing to do with HIV.
And as for when HIV research was taken seriously, I think to make a sexist claim against that is pretty unfounded. You can certainly make the heterosexual part of the argument - that's been well documented. But to say that science discriminates between male and female disease affliction rates is completely irresponsible. Our society is sexist in many ways, no argument there, but to say that scientific research is based on the proportion of male afflictions to female afflictions is insane. If that were true, breast cancer (which, by the way, affects FAR less women than prostate cancer does men) wouldn't be on every commercial and in every fundraiser known to man.
Zimmy
Sep 14, 06:21 AM
Um how about to send a text? i used the nokia with the scroll thing to write a text, dam it takes too long..
Steve needs a world wide acceptable design, and not included a keypad, or call, hang up buttons, the phone is gonna have to have it. .
zim
Steve needs a world wide acceptable design, and not included a keypad, or call, hang up buttons, the phone is gonna have to have it. .
zim
valiar
Sep 22, 03:14 AM
Not sure if anyone will read my post after 8 pages...
But, sheesh!
Why all the excitement at all? I would never ever even considering paying any money for something like that (and I consider myself to be insanely rich).
$10. Or more.
For the privilege of downloading a DRMed-through-the nose file.
Which you don't get to "own" in the same sense as you would own a disk (and you also get nice cover art with the disk!).
For all this money, you don't even get the benefit of being able to redownload the said DRMed file in case your har drive crashes... No sir! Even though iTMS keeps record of everuthing you buy, to download your stuff again, you will need to pay again.
Basically, the content providers try to milk you twice. They want that DRMed download to be treated as a physical object for certain purposes, and a licensed piece of intellectual property for the other purposes.
And everyone's favorite company, Apple, is complicit in this big scam. :mad:
Yes, I do think iTMS is a big scam - and I will not ever spend a cent there.
You can flame my post all you want, but this is the hard truth.
All of those DRMed services suck because they do not provide the extra value for me to even consider to buy into all this locked in crap.
And, yes, I do have a video iPod.
I prefer to fill it up on AllOfMP3.com, or by ripping DVDs.
But, sheesh!
Why all the excitement at all? I would never ever even considering paying any money for something like that (and I consider myself to be insanely rich).
$10. Or more.
For the privilege of downloading a DRMed-through-the nose file.
Which you don't get to "own" in the same sense as you would own a disk (and you also get nice cover art with the disk!).
For all this money, you don't even get the benefit of being able to redownload the said DRMed file in case your har drive crashes... No sir! Even though iTMS keeps record of everuthing you buy, to download your stuff again, you will need to pay again.
Basically, the content providers try to milk you twice. They want that DRMed download to be treated as a physical object for certain purposes, and a licensed piece of intellectual property for the other purposes.
And everyone's favorite company, Apple, is complicit in this big scam. :mad:
Yes, I do think iTMS is a big scam - and I will not ever spend a cent there.
You can flame my post all you want, but this is the hard truth.
All of those DRMed services suck because they do not provide the extra value for me to even consider to buy into all this locked in crap.
And, yes, I do have a video iPod.
I prefer to fill it up on AllOfMP3.com, or by ripping DVDs.
Cameront9
Aug 23, 05:44 PM
I agree as it is the only common sense system, but the argument is negated by the patent. That was for a portable music device with Hierarchal menu display/navigation system, (HFS is a file system Apple has used and not used in Creative's players).
The courts could have said prior art, case dismissed or patent stands, Apple owes Creative $10 for every iPod sold since day 1. Apple didn't want to take any risks and settled. Good all round as far as I can see, even if I do agree it is a stupid patent award.
Oh, I agree that Apple did the sensible thing. But it just makes me angry that they should be in the situation in the first place.
The courts could have said prior art, case dismissed or patent stands, Apple owes Creative $10 for every iPod sold since day 1. Apple didn't want to take any risks and settled. Good all round as far as I can see, even if I do agree it is a stupid patent award.
Oh, I agree that Apple did the sensible thing. But it just makes me angry that they should be in the situation in the first place.
guet
Nov 14, 01:53 AM
You can go to church and pray instead of going to court, if you'd like, but for those of us that believe in the legal system, we take solace in the fact that things really aren't black and white, and yet there is a framework in place that let's us try and figure these things out.
Congratulations on responding cogently to the trollish insults from 'aristotle' (a strange choice of name given his beliefs and style of argument).
It is not "streaming" the icon data, it is copied over and displayed superimposed on another icon which is presumably an internal OS X bundle.
You clearly have no idea what you're talking about here, and I see you've now shifted the argument over to app icons rather than computer images. App icons are also used in many many places outside of an app - if they are used to portray that app in some way, most people see that as fair.
Following your argument to its logical conclusion, Apple is infringing by using icons in the dock, or the display of running applications, and many other desktop apps which use the icon of another program for informational purposes are also infringing other people's copyright. I'd call that fair use, and useful for the customer as well, most developers would agree.
It's possible some copyright troll could try to sue someone for it, as in spite of your protestations, it is a grey area, however I feel as a customer and developer that it is wrong for Apple to abuse their position of power and try to dictate petty little rules like this to developers. The development experience on the iPhone is great, but having experienced the approval process for iPhone, I can say it is an unmitigated failure, on its own terms. That is all.
PS Please stop trying to argue about law with a lawyer, and trying to claim the English legal system (which has nothing to do with this judgment) is based on 'Judeo-christian' law - it is not.
I'm not going to defend Apple because NO BODY on this forum knows the exact circumstances of the situation.
Given the myriad other examples of Apple's woeful treatment of app store developers, I think it's fair to discuss this one as yet another example of them messing their developers around. It also has important consequences for Apple and iPhone users.
Congratulations on responding cogently to the trollish insults from 'aristotle' (a strange choice of name given his beliefs and style of argument).
It is not "streaming" the icon data, it is copied over and displayed superimposed on another icon which is presumably an internal OS X bundle.
You clearly have no idea what you're talking about here, and I see you've now shifted the argument over to app icons rather than computer images. App icons are also used in many many places outside of an app - if they are used to portray that app in some way, most people see that as fair.
Following your argument to its logical conclusion, Apple is infringing by using icons in the dock, or the display of running applications, and many other desktop apps which use the icon of another program for informational purposes are also infringing other people's copyright. I'd call that fair use, and useful for the customer as well, most developers would agree.
It's possible some copyright troll could try to sue someone for it, as in spite of your protestations, it is a grey area, however I feel as a customer and developer that it is wrong for Apple to abuse their position of power and try to dictate petty little rules like this to developers. The development experience on the iPhone is great, but having experienced the approval process for iPhone, I can say it is an unmitigated failure, on its own terms. That is all.
PS Please stop trying to argue about law with a lawyer, and trying to claim the English legal system (which has nothing to do with this judgment) is based on 'Judeo-christian' law - it is not.
I'm not going to defend Apple because NO BODY on this forum knows the exact circumstances of the situation.
Given the myriad other examples of Apple's woeful treatment of app store developers, I think it's fair to discuss this one as yet another example of them messing their developers around. It also has important consequences for Apple and iPhone users.
TheKrillr
Aug 28, 04:08 PM
Well, assuming they announced and shipped about the same time as the PC companies, there's really not that much to complain about. Don't forget, they did it with the MPB as well.
And if people are really unwilling to wait a couple weeks, nothing is stopping them from buying the yonah models.
Some of us don't have time to wait, my friend. Some of us need these things for school, which starts shortly. Very shortly. And a customized MacBook already takes 1-2 weeks to get to you. Which means I need to order by september 5th at the latest.
And if people are really unwilling to wait a couple weeks, nothing is stopping them from buying the yonah models.
Some of us don't have time to wait, my friend. Some of us need these things for school, which starts shortly. Very shortly. And a customized MacBook already takes 1-2 weeks to get to you. Which means I need to order by september 5th at the latest.
pezmannen
Apr 11, 09:38 AM
Finally!
Now I will be able to send Spotify from my ipad to my stereo connected mac-mini!
Now I will be able to send Spotify from my ipad to my stereo connected mac-mini!
Multimedia
Sep 9, 01:11 PM
It also depends if you can run multiple instances of that application. A little help here Multimedia? I know you've used multiple instances of Toast. Care to enlighten us on what other applications we can do the same? Maybe we should make a guide on it...Preemble clarification: I use Toast (http://www.roxio.com/enu/products/toast/titanium/overview.html) in a highly unorthodox way - nothing to do with writing DVDs or CDs. I use it most of the time to write DVD IMAGES that Handbrake (http://handbrake.m0k.org/) understands how to make priistine mp4 files from. I am able to reduce a 4.3GB original EyeTV HD broadcast recording down to 351MB using this method. The result is an excellent, albeit soft, version of the original that can go on an iPod or two on a CD and when played on an analog TV from the iPod looks just like a DVD. On a HD monitor it still looks great. Just a little soft. Sound quality is identical to the original.
I haven't explored what else we can run simultaneously beyond Toast (http://www.roxio.com/enu/products/toast/titanium/overview.html) and Handbrake (http://handbrake.m0k.org/). I can run as many instances of those as I like. But I run out of cores even just running both of them because they will each use more than two cores given the chance to run alone. Running them simultaneously even with a second Handbrake running third, still gets all the jobs done faster than waiting for two to run and then running the third. Handbrake will process up to about 150-160 fps when two copies are running while it will process only about 93-100 fps alone.
Handbrake FPS readings vary a lot between the analysis pass and the writing pass - much slower writing on the second pass than studying-planning the writing scheme on the first pass on both the Quad and the Mac Pro. On the Mac Pro, Toast will use almost all 4 cores given no competition. But so far I'm not convinced it is encoding EyeTV recordings for DVD images much faster than it does on teh Quad - yes 7.1 UB. I need to go back and exact time some encodes on the Mac Pro then compare that here on the Quad to tell.
Just tried to launch a second copy of EyeTV and it's a no go. Maybe if I have another liscense with another tuner like the new hybrid it will work with a second copy - don't know yet. Probably getting an EyeTV hybrid tuner (http://www.elgato.com/index.php?file=products_eyetvhybridna) soon so I can record two HD shows at once.
A Multi-Instance and Multi-Core Usage Guide would be a great help. Does someone with authorization want to start a thread on this subject? I am not authorized to create new threads. But I would be happy to contribute to it. If someone with new thread creation permission does it, please post a link to it here. Thank you.
I haven't explored what else we can run simultaneously beyond Toast (http://www.roxio.com/enu/products/toast/titanium/overview.html) and Handbrake (http://handbrake.m0k.org/). I can run as many instances of those as I like. But I run out of cores even just running both of them because they will each use more than two cores given the chance to run alone. Running them simultaneously even with a second Handbrake running third, still gets all the jobs done faster than waiting for two to run and then running the third. Handbrake will process up to about 150-160 fps when two copies are running while it will process only about 93-100 fps alone.
Handbrake FPS readings vary a lot between the analysis pass and the writing pass - much slower writing on the second pass than studying-planning the writing scheme on the first pass on both the Quad and the Mac Pro. On the Mac Pro, Toast will use almost all 4 cores given no competition. But so far I'm not convinced it is encoding EyeTV recordings for DVD images much faster than it does on teh Quad - yes 7.1 UB. I need to go back and exact time some encodes on the Mac Pro then compare that here on the Quad to tell.
Just tried to launch a second copy of EyeTV and it's a no go. Maybe if I have another liscense with another tuner like the new hybrid it will work with a second copy - don't know yet. Probably getting an EyeTV hybrid tuner (http://www.elgato.com/index.php?file=products_eyetvhybridna) soon so I can record two HD shows at once.
A Multi-Instance and Multi-Core Usage Guide would be a great help. Does someone with authorization want to start a thread on this subject? I am not authorized to create new threads. But I would be happy to contribute to it. If someone with new thread creation permission does it, please post a link to it here. Thank you.
nitynate
Sep 12, 02:53 PM
Dear Apple,
I appoligise for my earlier outburst.
I really do love you.
Well.... In a creepy-ish kind of way. THATS NOT THE POINT!!!!!
I want the 8GB nano in green.
Love,
Nathan
I appoligise for my earlier outburst.
I really do love you.
Well.... In a creepy-ish kind of way. THATS NOT THE POINT!!!!!
I want the 8GB nano in green.
Love,
Nathan
anthonymoody
Aug 28, 03:12 PM
With the switch to Intel, Apple may have to provide timely upgrades to remain competitive with Windows-based PC manufacturers.
Aint that the understatement of the year!
TM
Aint that the understatement of the year!
TM
vincenz
Mar 29, 01:37 PM
I bet these same analysts can predict lottery numbers for the next 4 years too.