Al Coholic
Apr 25, 06:55 PM
Well crap.
I suppose this new design will be shaped like an onion dicer a.k.a. "Air" style. I hate the "wedgie" look. If so, looks like the OD will go as well.
Double crap.
But I don't like change in general. (They changed the label on my bourbon bottle 10 years ago and it hasn't tasted the same since :()
I suppose this new design will be shaped like an onion dicer a.k.a. "Air" style. I hate the "wedgie" look. If so, looks like the OD will go as well.
Double crap.
But I don't like change in general. (They changed the label on my bourbon bottle 10 years ago and it hasn't tasted the same since :()
iMouse
Apr 20, 10:03 AM
Looks as if the data is more or less for AT&T's purposes than for Apple's. A lot of the data is in a grid form on the map, possibly using tower triangulation to determine signal issues in a given area.
The dates coincide with the release of iOS 4 for sure.
Still not cool that this is being pushed to backups and appears to keep a never-ending history on the device unless restored and set up as new.
The dates coincide with the release of iOS 4 for sure.
Still not cool that this is being pushed to backups and appears to keep a never-ending history on the device unless restored and set up as new.
iSpartan
Apr 22, 11:22 AM
As my first post to macrumors, I just purchased a 13" refurb 30 min ago. Oh well, still good technology. I can finally sell my 2007 macbook.
Porco
Oct 28, 04:55 AM
I am very concerned about the environment, but I think it sounds like Greenpeace did go too far. I am actually dubious of the methodology used to say that Apple is ranked so poorly in terms of the environment, because as others have said, I think Mac users tend to hang on to their machines more, or else they do seem to have a better time being resold on e-bay etc, they hold their value well. So even if an individual Mac contained, say 10% more dangerous stuff (guesstimate - ) in it than a Dell or something, if it has two owners or is used for twice as long then does that really still make them so bad?
That said, I do wish Apple would improve upon meeting their environmental responsibilities, there's no good reason for them not to. Their name and company logo is a piece of fruit that grows on trees, so the tree-hugging comments aren't quite so irrelevant, are they? :p
Edit: Apple can you also put a spell check into Safari please :)
If you're running Tiger, it does already - system-wide actually, just choose Edit>Spelling>Check Spelling as You Type whilst using anything you can enter text in (a forum reply box would work for example) :)
That said, I do wish Apple would improve upon meeting their environmental responsibilities, there's no good reason for them not to. Their name and company logo is a piece of fruit that grows on trees, so the tree-hugging comments aren't quite so irrelevant, are they? :p
Edit: Apple can you also put a spell check into Safari please :)
If you're running Tiger, it does already - system-wide actually, just choose Edit>Spelling>Check Spelling as You Type whilst using anything you can enter text in (a forum reply box would work for example) :)
baryon
Apr 22, 02:20 AM
I have no idea how this would be useful. Buffer times, connection loss, no WiFi around, these are all problems that will prevent this from working.
What's wrong with storing music on hard drives locally?
What's wrong with storing music on hard drives locally?
lmalave
Oct 27, 10:12 AM
Exactly. There was no violence, no rowdiness. This is how the current mindf*cks work. People hear that a group or activist with views counter to the needs of govenrment and big business and their heads immediately fills with images of extreme millitancy. As I said - they handed out leaflets. That's it.
It's the same when the intelligence services and police stage 'terror raids' on houses where the inhabitants have no connection to terror. People immediately think 'Ahh, they've got those terrorist scum...' When the suspects are released without charge no one asks how zero evidence can possibly lead to an armed raid.
No, in the case of Greenpeace, most people's experience is probably formed from *first-hand* experience of being approached on city streets. I've certainly been approached dozens of times here in NYC. Personally, Greenpeace doesn't bother me. But Greenpeace reps usually *are* quite insistent, and that behavior is legal on a city street, but does not have to be tolerated on private property.
I mean, it's easy for me to brush people off here in NYC because I'm used to it (constantly get approached by panhandlers, palm readers, political activists, etc.). But at a convention, people whoe weren't used to that probably allowed themselves to be stopped and then had their ears talked off for a few minutes, because they were just too nice to brush off a pretty young girl (which most Greenpeace reps are because they know that people will be much nicer to them on average than to, say, a young punk-ass male). So these people probably didn't say anything to the Greenpeace rep's face, but then turned around and noted a complaint with MacExpo. MacExpo probably received a few of these complaints and decided enough was enough...
It's the same when the intelligence services and police stage 'terror raids' on houses where the inhabitants have no connection to terror. People immediately think 'Ahh, they've got those terrorist scum...' When the suspects are released without charge no one asks how zero evidence can possibly lead to an armed raid.
No, in the case of Greenpeace, most people's experience is probably formed from *first-hand* experience of being approached on city streets. I've certainly been approached dozens of times here in NYC. Personally, Greenpeace doesn't bother me. But Greenpeace reps usually *are* quite insistent, and that behavior is legal on a city street, but does not have to be tolerated on private property.
I mean, it's easy for me to brush people off here in NYC because I'm used to it (constantly get approached by panhandlers, palm readers, political activists, etc.). But at a convention, people whoe weren't used to that probably allowed themselves to be stopped and then had their ears talked off for a few minutes, because they were just too nice to brush off a pretty young girl (which most Greenpeace reps are because they know that people will be much nicer to them on average than to, say, a young punk-ass male). So these people probably didn't say anything to the Greenpeace rep's face, but then turned around and noted a complaint with MacExpo. MacExpo probably received a few of these complaints and decided enough was enough...
manu chao
Apr 11, 11:44 AM
This makes no sense. Not everyone needs or desires an Airport Express. I never asked Apple for free hardware.
And not everybody needs the free WiFi router you got from your ISP.
Do they license Airplay technology to software developers? I don't think so.
Show me an app on the Mac App Store (or wherever) that acts like an Airport Express and i'll buy it at once.
As said 100 times already, Airfoil Speakers. Yes, you need the Airfoil app but to me that is close enough to acting like an Airport Express unless you want to stream music from your iPad to your iPhone.
What you should think about is: How hard is for a Mac to act like an Airport Express with the proper software? It shouldn't.
Why it there no software like this? Apple does not want to.
Again, what scenario cannot be solved with either the remote app, plugging in your or some guest's iOS device or iPod or connecting to guest's iTunes library via Home Sharing?
Let's see, a guest's iOS device or iPod would have to 'controlled' from your Mac and not from the device itself, ditto for a laptop (though the trial version of Airfoil should transmit a song or two without problems for free wirelessly from anybody's computer to your computer).
And not everybody needs the free WiFi router you got from your ISP.
Do they license Airplay technology to software developers? I don't think so.
Show me an app on the Mac App Store (or wherever) that acts like an Airport Express and i'll buy it at once.
As said 100 times already, Airfoil Speakers. Yes, you need the Airfoil app but to me that is close enough to acting like an Airport Express unless you want to stream music from your iPad to your iPhone.
What you should think about is: How hard is for a Mac to act like an Airport Express with the proper software? It shouldn't.
Why it there no software like this? Apple does not want to.
Again, what scenario cannot be solved with either the remote app, plugging in your or some guest's iOS device or iPod or connecting to guest's iTunes library via Home Sharing?
Let's see, a guest's iOS device or iPod would have to 'controlled' from your Mac and not from the device itself, ditto for a laptop (though the trial version of Airfoil should transmit a song or two without problems for free wirelessly from anybody's computer to your computer).
MarcelV
Sep 2, 08:37 PM
....but can't find anywhere hard evidence for September 12. Macbidouille is referencing conformation from sources, but don't have a date. Hardmac has a copy of a meeting invite for the 19th. So, will there be a September 12 meeting? I really hope so, as I will be in Vegas that day, and don't mind to pick up some stuff at the Apple store. :)
xlii
Apr 14, 11:52 AM
Now that it's part of the platform Apple has no excuse for not including it. However, it wouldn't surprise me to see a MBP with this platform that still only has 2.0 connectors.
Well, it would surprise me. USB3.0 and Thunderbolt will come included in Intel''s Ivy Bridge. Apple would have to add more hardware and disable USB 3.0 to make it 2.0 only. Makes zero cents.
Well, it would surprise me. USB3.0 and Thunderbolt will come included in Intel''s Ivy Bridge. Apple would have to add more hardware and disable USB 3.0 to make it 2.0 only. Makes zero cents.
Mikael
Sep 9, 10:21 AM
The fact that the new iMacs can't address more than 3Gb of memory and are therefore operating on a 32bit logic-board makes me doubtful as to whether or not these systems are really 64-bit capable... It seems like some kind of hybrid 32/64bit system.
Will the C2D iMacs be able to run 64bit code, despite not having the 64bit address space (and being able to access over 4Gb or RAM)?
I've searched for address bus width for the Core 2 line, but haven't found anything. It is, however, not likely that Intel downgraded the width from the previous models, which would mean either a 36 or a 40 bit bus. Also note that AMD's K8 (Athlon 64, Sempron and Opteron) also feature a 40 bit address bus and not 64 as someone might think. I also think that the G5 uses a 40 or 42 bit address bus, so it's pretty much the same there too.
So, if Core 2 has a 40 bit bus (which is likely) you end up with 1TB of addressable memory space.
Also, Core 2 CPUs are fully capable of running 64 bit code. Whether the address bus is 64 bits wide or not hasn't got anything to do with the width of the internal data path and execution unit width.
Will the C2D iMacs be able to run 64bit code, despite not having the 64bit address space (and being able to access over 4Gb or RAM)?
I've searched for address bus width for the Core 2 line, but haven't found anything. It is, however, not likely that Intel downgraded the width from the previous models, which would mean either a 36 or a 40 bit bus. Also note that AMD's K8 (Athlon 64, Sempron and Opteron) also feature a 40 bit address bus and not 64 as someone might think. I also think that the G5 uses a 40 or 42 bit address bus, so it's pretty much the same there too.
So, if Core 2 has a 40 bit bus (which is likely) you end up with 1TB of addressable memory space.
Also, Core 2 CPUs are fully capable of running 64 bit code. Whether the address bus is 64 bits wide or not hasn't got anything to do with the width of the internal data path and execution unit width.
Nomadski
Apr 13, 07:07 AM
MagnusVonMagnum -
- Sonos is not "way better quality" (AppleTV2 output is DIGITAL and so the "quality" depends entirely on the stereo you connect it to. So sorry but you have no point there.
Unless you've purchased / converted music in Apple lossless format it IS way better quality. Im making the comparison of my situation listening to FLAC vs the masses who purchase mp3s on iTunes. You could rip your music in Apple Lossless for sure, but then your hooked into iTunes, cant play on WMP or most other mp3s other than iPods. Like with a lot of stuff iTunes related, if you go that route, your stuck. Even the all inclusive Sonos S5 sounds better than the best iPod dock on the market (Bose 10 / Zeppelin whichever grabs your boat the most).
- It may not be better quality, but it IS "way more expensive". AppleTV2 costs $99 (same price as an Airport Express which is "audio only" like Sonos). Sonos OTOH costs $349 for a basic receiver which then still requires to either be connected directly to a router (wired) OR you have to pay ANOTHER $99 for a "bridge" to send a separate wireless signal off your router just for Sonos devices (waste of bandwidth and clutters the band with more wireless signals instead of just using your existing wireless router, which most people already have (how many used a wired only router and if you did you cannot use the Sonos wireless for anything else). So already you are at LEAST $450 in the hole for a single room with Sonos and you have ONLY AUDIO capability.
Sonos isnt cheap for sure, but that is why I said people who have no shortage of money at the start of my thread. Some people have massive Mac systems, those people shouldn't skimp when it comes to music, if they like music, or video for that matter.
One of the big features of Sonos which you obviously arent aware of is that Sonos DOESNT hog your bandwidth. It uses its own Mesh network which works independantly of your home wireless network, hence no bandwidth constraints, which is why you can have up to 32 Sonos units all working AT THE SAME TIME on the same or different sources whilst not affecting the bandwidth capability of your home network. Try using even 2 AppleTV2s at the same time and see how much of your bandwidth is left.
Also, if you live in a large house, or one with thick walls, or you want to listen outside, because Sonos recreates its own Mesh network each time it hits a Sonos unit strength signal on the opposite side of the house to the router is still very high, each Zone Player acts like a new Sonos signal source.
Yup its expensive but I bought my first Sonos bit of kit in 2006. Since then ive added 3 more units, 2 of which were new redesigned units released a couple of years ago. Ive also added a second controller when they moved to touchscreen 2 years ago. And you know what? It all works seamlessly with each other. Old hardware, new hardware, built up over time. New features added over time (for free) seamlessly updated into even the oldest bit of hardware with a firmware update, they even added full Touch, iPhone and iPad control options so I could use any of them to control the audio around the house. Can you integrate AppleTV2 with 1? Can you honestly say in 5 years time your money spent will still work with the rest of your AppleTV system as they upgrade and add new features? When 3 year old sounddocks wont even charge new ipods I would hazard a guess...no.
-But then I would be forgetting you need a SOURCE of music. You tout the use of an NAS, but most NAS devices aren't exactly cheap or anything. For all intensive purposes they are a just a headless computer and most run Linux. AppleTV2 is out of the box a PITA if you don't want to leave a computer on, but you can put XBMC on it which will use any NAS or networked source. You then have the same functionality as Sonos BUT you also have full video capability. You could instead get a cheap Netbook for $250 (cheaper than most NAS devices) and connect a hard drive to that and run iTunes and the full Apple interface if you'd like and still have XBMC available as well. Personally, I just use an old PPC G4 PowerMac as a server and 24/7 Internet terminal. Intel machines can also be set to Wake On Lan, so you can have your machine sleep while AppleTV is not in use. In short, NAS isn't as great as you make it sound (most are also dog slow compared to a real computer) and there are alternative options even with Apple software like a cheap Netbook as a server.
NAS or WHS arent cheap but youve just contradicted yourself.
Sonos will also play from any networked PC, MAC, External hard drive on Airport, netbook. To use a NAS you dont have to install XBMC on it, it works out of the box from any source you want. That PPC G4 would also work with Sonos, or you could play Last.FM, or Pandora, or Spotify, or Napster, or unlimited internet radio (you can even add your own internet radio addresses).
Best of all, you DONT have to use iTunes. You can if you want, but you dont have to.
Sonos also gives you multi room grouping. Group 2 or more zones together and enjoy synced music wherever you want it. Not miliseconds out syncing like Sony or Logitech but 100% synced. Dropping zones can be done at the flick of the controller.
Read a review of a new album in the newspaper? Listen to it 5 seconds later on Sonos.
So the kids can listen to their own music streamed in their rooms upstairs, my wife can be listening to the TV, or some music in the living room, and I can be in my little den listening to my music whilst enjoying near full speed wireless capability on my pc or mac, or maybe my wife likes a song shes hearing upstairs and links zones so she can hear it downstairs.
You can buy a standalone unit which sounds better than the B&W Zeppelin, or get the amped unit for attaching to any speaker system you want, or get the small unit for use (as you do) with your existing stereo system. You can add these anytime you want, building up your Sonos system over time, without the fear it will be redundant over time.
Its a high end multi room music system vs a limited single streaming unit.
-Now I come to the heart of the matter...VIDEO. You suggest a Popcorn Hour in ADDITION to the already out of this world priced Sonos system. They start at $179 and go up to $299. That brings your total minimum price for a wireless system for a single room to $629 AND you have to switch between two separate devices to listen to audio and/or watch videos. With AppleTV you have all your movies, tv shows, photos, music, music videos, YouTube and Internet Radio (plus the options of XBMC with a quick hack including non-Apple formats) and your TOTAL COST for **one** room wireless using an existing wireless router is $99. $629 versus $99...Hmmmmmm. And then there's the matter of Popcorn Hour's crappy interface versus Apple's polished one. XBMC makes Popcorn Hour look bad as well. Bugs or popcorn? :confused:
Cost seems to be the big issue with you, so I wonder if you own a mac mini as opposed to 3 macbook pros, an imac, apple tv2 etc etc as many posters here have? If so, Sonos etc wont be for you. If you do own multiple Apple systems why are you so concerned with price? If you want the best you got to pay for it.
With Apple TV you DONT have all your movies or music or internet radio. you have limited experiences with all 3. No 1080p, no DVD images (Popcorn will load your dvd image in exactly the same way your dvd player would), wont play .mp4 .m4v .mkv .wmv .avi .aac .divx, doesnt have full support for all subtitle formats, wont play FLAC or anything else outside of your iTunes library audio wise and its internet radio function is gimped.
Its sure nice to have it in one box, but *it* is very very limited. Dedicated systems will always trump jack of all trade systems.
The interface is nice on AppleTV2 for sure, my popcorn looks better though with my skin on it. The default layout looks boring ill agree.
So for the price of your ONE room audio and video, I could have SIX rooms using AppleTV2 with both video and audio and still have $29 to spare
Except you couldnt do that could you? Your wireless network would be crippled with half that many running at the same time. I can assure you I can play a 1080P movie AND have 3 other Sonos units streaming at the same time. Try that sometime with 4 AppleTVs...
With XBMC installed, it can play any format (just like Popcorn Hour).
No, no it cant. DVD isos? All subtitle formats? 1080P? Also your slightly expanded feature set (not out of the box) is achieved by essentially hacking your AppleTV 2, so good luck on the next firmware update.
Hell, I can even buy a cheap 3.5" internal hard drive and slot that into my popcorn hour if I want to store the films locally, what sized hard drive does Apple TV2 have? Oh wait.
Your not seeing the advantages with zero configuration audio system, and a play all with no hassles video system? The only mucking about in my system is if you want a nice shinier interface with Popcorn Hour. You have to convert audio, replace (essentially) the OS to XBMC, have a linux system and a Crystal card to play 1080p on an OLDER Apple TV (your not factoring in this stuff with your price or integrated system arguments are you?) and you STILL have a far more limited setup.
Reading thru your post I guarantee you your costs are higher than $99 and in about 2 years time your system will be redundant.
Im not saying the AppleTV 2 is useless for everyone, for many of the dumb masses who are locked into iTunes already its probably the best thing since sliced bread, and really its only advantage is a cheap price and movie rentals, in glorious 720P, but if I want to feed my 42" 1080p plasma with subpar 720P video I could use the xbox or PS3 sitting under the TV, which I also dont bother with. For audiophiles or moviephiles it doesn't cut it.
- Sonos is not "way better quality" (AppleTV2 output is DIGITAL and so the "quality" depends entirely on the stereo you connect it to. So sorry but you have no point there.
Unless you've purchased / converted music in Apple lossless format it IS way better quality. Im making the comparison of my situation listening to FLAC vs the masses who purchase mp3s on iTunes. You could rip your music in Apple Lossless for sure, but then your hooked into iTunes, cant play on WMP or most other mp3s other than iPods. Like with a lot of stuff iTunes related, if you go that route, your stuck. Even the all inclusive Sonos S5 sounds better than the best iPod dock on the market (Bose 10 / Zeppelin whichever grabs your boat the most).
- It may not be better quality, but it IS "way more expensive". AppleTV2 costs $99 (same price as an Airport Express which is "audio only" like Sonos). Sonos OTOH costs $349 for a basic receiver which then still requires to either be connected directly to a router (wired) OR you have to pay ANOTHER $99 for a "bridge" to send a separate wireless signal off your router just for Sonos devices (waste of bandwidth and clutters the band with more wireless signals instead of just using your existing wireless router, which most people already have (how many used a wired only router and if you did you cannot use the Sonos wireless for anything else). So already you are at LEAST $450 in the hole for a single room with Sonos and you have ONLY AUDIO capability.
Sonos isnt cheap for sure, but that is why I said people who have no shortage of money at the start of my thread. Some people have massive Mac systems, those people shouldn't skimp when it comes to music, if they like music, or video for that matter.
One of the big features of Sonos which you obviously arent aware of is that Sonos DOESNT hog your bandwidth. It uses its own Mesh network which works independantly of your home wireless network, hence no bandwidth constraints, which is why you can have up to 32 Sonos units all working AT THE SAME TIME on the same or different sources whilst not affecting the bandwidth capability of your home network. Try using even 2 AppleTV2s at the same time and see how much of your bandwidth is left.
Also, if you live in a large house, or one with thick walls, or you want to listen outside, because Sonos recreates its own Mesh network each time it hits a Sonos unit strength signal on the opposite side of the house to the router is still very high, each Zone Player acts like a new Sonos signal source.
Yup its expensive but I bought my first Sonos bit of kit in 2006. Since then ive added 3 more units, 2 of which were new redesigned units released a couple of years ago. Ive also added a second controller when they moved to touchscreen 2 years ago. And you know what? It all works seamlessly with each other. Old hardware, new hardware, built up over time. New features added over time (for free) seamlessly updated into even the oldest bit of hardware with a firmware update, they even added full Touch, iPhone and iPad control options so I could use any of them to control the audio around the house. Can you integrate AppleTV2 with 1? Can you honestly say in 5 years time your money spent will still work with the rest of your AppleTV system as they upgrade and add new features? When 3 year old sounddocks wont even charge new ipods I would hazard a guess...no.
-But then I would be forgetting you need a SOURCE of music. You tout the use of an NAS, but most NAS devices aren't exactly cheap or anything. For all intensive purposes they are a just a headless computer and most run Linux. AppleTV2 is out of the box a PITA if you don't want to leave a computer on, but you can put XBMC on it which will use any NAS or networked source. You then have the same functionality as Sonos BUT you also have full video capability. You could instead get a cheap Netbook for $250 (cheaper than most NAS devices) and connect a hard drive to that and run iTunes and the full Apple interface if you'd like and still have XBMC available as well. Personally, I just use an old PPC G4 PowerMac as a server and 24/7 Internet terminal. Intel machines can also be set to Wake On Lan, so you can have your machine sleep while AppleTV is not in use. In short, NAS isn't as great as you make it sound (most are also dog slow compared to a real computer) and there are alternative options even with Apple software like a cheap Netbook as a server.
NAS or WHS arent cheap but youve just contradicted yourself.
Sonos will also play from any networked PC, MAC, External hard drive on Airport, netbook. To use a NAS you dont have to install XBMC on it, it works out of the box from any source you want. That PPC G4 would also work with Sonos, or you could play Last.FM, or Pandora, or Spotify, or Napster, or unlimited internet radio (you can even add your own internet radio addresses).
Best of all, you DONT have to use iTunes. You can if you want, but you dont have to.
Sonos also gives you multi room grouping. Group 2 or more zones together and enjoy synced music wherever you want it. Not miliseconds out syncing like Sony or Logitech but 100% synced. Dropping zones can be done at the flick of the controller.
Read a review of a new album in the newspaper? Listen to it 5 seconds later on Sonos.
So the kids can listen to their own music streamed in their rooms upstairs, my wife can be listening to the TV, or some music in the living room, and I can be in my little den listening to my music whilst enjoying near full speed wireless capability on my pc or mac, or maybe my wife likes a song shes hearing upstairs and links zones so she can hear it downstairs.
You can buy a standalone unit which sounds better than the B&W Zeppelin, or get the amped unit for attaching to any speaker system you want, or get the small unit for use (as you do) with your existing stereo system. You can add these anytime you want, building up your Sonos system over time, without the fear it will be redundant over time.
Its a high end multi room music system vs a limited single streaming unit.
-Now I come to the heart of the matter...VIDEO. You suggest a Popcorn Hour in ADDITION to the already out of this world priced Sonos system. They start at $179 and go up to $299. That brings your total minimum price for a wireless system for a single room to $629 AND you have to switch between two separate devices to listen to audio and/or watch videos. With AppleTV you have all your movies, tv shows, photos, music, music videos, YouTube and Internet Radio (plus the options of XBMC with a quick hack including non-Apple formats) and your TOTAL COST for **one** room wireless using an existing wireless router is $99. $629 versus $99...Hmmmmmm. And then there's the matter of Popcorn Hour's crappy interface versus Apple's polished one. XBMC makes Popcorn Hour look bad as well. Bugs or popcorn? :confused:
Cost seems to be the big issue with you, so I wonder if you own a mac mini as opposed to 3 macbook pros, an imac, apple tv2 etc etc as many posters here have? If so, Sonos etc wont be for you. If you do own multiple Apple systems why are you so concerned with price? If you want the best you got to pay for it.
With Apple TV you DONT have all your movies or music or internet radio. you have limited experiences with all 3. No 1080p, no DVD images (Popcorn will load your dvd image in exactly the same way your dvd player would), wont play .mp4 .m4v .mkv .wmv .avi .aac .divx, doesnt have full support for all subtitle formats, wont play FLAC or anything else outside of your iTunes library audio wise and its internet radio function is gimped.
Its sure nice to have it in one box, but *it* is very very limited. Dedicated systems will always trump jack of all trade systems.
The interface is nice on AppleTV2 for sure, my popcorn looks better though with my skin on it. The default layout looks boring ill agree.
So for the price of your ONE room audio and video, I could have SIX rooms using AppleTV2 with both video and audio and still have $29 to spare
Except you couldnt do that could you? Your wireless network would be crippled with half that many running at the same time. I can assure you I can play a 1080P movie AND have 3 other Sonos units streaming at the same time. Try that sometime with 4 AppleTVs...
With XBMC installed, it can play any format (just like Popcorn Hour).
No, no it cant. DVD isos? All subtitle formats? 1080P? Also your slightly expanded feature set (not out of the box) is achieved by essentially hacking your AppleTV 2, so good luck on the next firmware update.
Hell, I can even buy a cheap 3.5" internal hard drive and slot that into my popcorn hour if I want to store the films locally, what sized hard drive does Apple TV2 have? Oh wait.
Your not seeing the advantages with zero configuration audio system, and a play all with no hassles video system? The only mucking about in my system is if you want a nice shinier interface with Popcorn Hour. You have to convert audio, replace (essentially) the OS to XBMC, have a linux system and a Crystal card to play 1080p on an OLDER Apple TV (your not factoring in this stuff with your price or integrated system arguments are you?) and you STILL have a far more limited setup.
Reading thru your post I guarantee you your costs are higher than $99 and in about 2 years time your system will be redundant.
Im not saying the AppleTV 2 is useless for everyone, for many of the dumb masses who are locked into iTunes already its probably the best thing since sliced bread, and really its only advantage is a cheap price and movie rentals, in glorious 720P, but if I want to feed my 42" 1080p plasma with subpar 720P video I could use the xbox or PS3 sitting under the TV, which I also dont bother with. For audiophiles or moviephiles it doesn't cut it.
dime21
Apr 19, 11:21 AM
Apple HAS to file a lawsuit in this case.
If they did not, then they open the door to not being able to protect their assets in court down the road if someone else tries to copy anything Apple offers.
Non-issue here people. Just playing by the rules of the game.
actually, this is true. at least in the US, if you fail to defend your copyrights or trademarks in court, that constitutes abandonment of said copyrights and trademarks, which then legally entitles anyone to freely use them. so yes, apple is required to sue anyone who makes a suspiciously similar looking product.
If they did not, then they open the door to not being able to protect their assets in court down the road if someone else tries to copy anything Apple offers.
Non-issue here people. Just playing by the rules of the game.
actually, this is true. at least in the US, if you fail to defend your copyrights or trademarks in court, that constitutes abandonment of said copyrights and trademarks, which then legally entitles anyone to freely use them. so yes, apple is required to sue anyone who makes a suspiciously similar looking product.
Andras5soul
Apr 25, 02:36 PM
Here's hoping my pre-unibody mbp lasts me until then!
IJ Reilly
Aug 24, 10:20 AM
Ummm, Apple didn't lose. Settling is not "losing" in any legal sense.
No, but they lost in every other sense that matters. I am really failing to understand why some people are having such a tough time comprehending this. Apple capitulated on the patent challenge, Apple paid a huge sum of money to Creative so Apple could continue business as usual. Apple lost. That's all, folks.
No, but they lost in every other sense that matters. I am really failing to understand why some people are having such a tough time comprehending this. Apple capitulated on the patent challenge, Apple paid a huge sum of money to Creative so Apple could continue business as usual. Apple lost. That's all, folks.
mr.suff
Sep 18, 04:45 PM
By definition, 10MP phone cannot be as grainy as a 3MP phone. You do realize when someone says 10MegaPixel phone what they mean right?.
10 million pixels per square inch (before the tech police come out, this is a basic definition. I am aware an image does not have to be a square).
its not 10 million pixels per square inch. 10 million pixels is the overall size of the image ie x by y, at about 150-300 dpi, i think, but its defo not 10mp per inch^2
but anything above 3-5 mp in a phone becomes a useless waste because the sensor is stupid small.
matt
10 million pixels per square inch (before the tech police come out, this is a basic definition. I am aware an image does not have to be a square).
its not 10 million pixels per square inch. 10 million pixels is the overall size of the image ie x by y, at about 150-300 dpi, i think, but its defo not 10mp per inch^2
but anything above 3-5 mp in a phone becomes a useless waste because the sensor is stupid small.
matt
andiwm2003
Sep 19, 01:37 PM
1mio for 125000 movies. so they make an avaerage of $8 per movie. iTS sells them for about $10-$12.
so it seems apple makes about 2-3 bucks per movie (minus the bandwith/server cost).
i wonder if the movie business is profitable for apple or if it's merely to promote iPod's iTV and Mac's.
so it seems apple makes about 2-3 bucks per movie (minus the bandwith/server cost).
i wonder if the movie business is profitable for apple or if it's merely to promote iPod's iTV and Mac's.
gkarris
Mar 29, 02:49 PM
all current symbian users go to win
no webOS factor (other than "other") ?
i have to believe that a couple of these platforms will surprise us
rooting for iOS
I had a few Nokia phones back in the day and they were all awesome.
A few Nokia users I know are going to either get an iPhone or Android phone. Most are upset that they went with Windows Mobile instead of Android.
Surprise, surprise...
no webOS factor (other than "other") ?
i have to believe that a couple of these platforms will surprise us
rooting for iOS
I had a few Nokia phones back in the day and they were all awesome.
A few Nokia users I know are going to either get an iPhone or Android phone. Most are upset that they went with Windows Mobile instead of Android.
Surprise, surprise...
Mr. Retrofire
May 3, 01:51 PM
24 threads > 8 threads
Really? Proof?
;)
Really? Proof?
;)
Maxx Power
Oct 27, 09:36 AM
But this particular crap from Greenpeace has already been debunked.
They have gone from a respectable environmentalist group to a militant anti-business lobby.
I am Green, but I am not Greenpeace!
link at /. where this has been gone over a while ago, what a bogus Greenpeace report: http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=198431&cid=16258305
I don't know if you can call that debunking. I see a lot of greenpeace arguments as well that are valid. If anything, I'd say the author and the posts go so far as to trivialize what greenpeace had to point out, but not invalidating it. You can't invalidate environmental risks that occur sometime down the road by purely using data from now.
Same thing with global warming, which should be renamed into a non-misleading term "global weather change" since strictly speaking some regions will warm up, others will cool down (like europe, right now, with the gulf stream cut short, they've been getting snow in Germany and France for example, consistently over the last few years where there wasn't any before), we know for a fact we can affect our weather, we know for a fact that in many regions (mine for example), the weather has been consistently warming up and gradually changing on the yearly scale (last year the temp record in winter was broken again by 1 degree, and has been since the beginning of records), so it's not a debate about whether or not global warming is an observable fact, it should be a debate about how much it is caused by us and to what extent it'll affect us and what can we actively do about it. Anymore debate into its existence is a stall of time and a waste of effort.
I think that any argument against greenpeace implying that "artificial chemicals, when dumped into our ecosystem, will not do harm as long as we don't observe it" can be safely ignored. If you put it this way, the scientific industry that does this kind of environmental research doesn't even close to the funding that R&D gets, and that it isn't revenue generating. There isn't nearly as big of a chance that the eco-scientists will catch problems as fast as they are made.
They have gone from a respectable environmentalist group to a militant anti-business lobby.
I am Green, but I am not Greenpeace!
link at /. where this has been gone over a while ago, what a bogus Greenpeace report: http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=198431&cid=16258305
I don't know if you can call that debunking. I see a lot of greenpeace arguments as well that are valid. If anything, I'd say the author and the posts go so far as to trivialize what greenpeace had to point out, but not invalidating it. You can't invalidate environmental risks that occur sometime down the road by purely using data from now.
Same thing with global warming, which should be renamed into a non-misleading term "global weather change" since strictly speaking some regions will warm up, others will cool down (like europe, right now, with the gulf stream cut short, they've been getting snow in Germany and France for example, consistently over the last few years where there wasn't any before), we know for a fact we can affect our weather, we know for a fact that in many regions (mine for example), the weather has been consistently warming up and gradually changing on the yearly scale (last year the temp record in winter was broken again by 1 degree, and has been since the beginning of records), so it's not a debate about whether or not global warming is an observable fact, it should be a debate about how much it is caused by us and to what extent it'll affect us and what can we actively do about it. Anymore debate into its existence is a stall of time and a waste of effort.
I think that any argument against greenpeace implying that "artificial chemicals, when dumped into our ecosystem, will not do harm as long as we don't observe it" can be safely ignored. If you put it this way, the scientific industry that does this kind of environmental research doesn't even close to the funding that R&D gets, and that it isn't revenue generating. There isn't nearly as big of a chance that the eco-scientists will catch problems as fast as they are made.
Eidorian
Apr 14, 05:54 PM
After thinking about this some more, I have come to believe this is just damage control over AMD's recent chipset certification (http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/mainboards/display/20110413152041_AMD_First_to_Certify_USB_3_0_Supporting_Chipset.html) from the USB-IF.
They are just reassuring their support of USB 3.0. I still believe that Thunderbolt will require its additional controller and will not be supported directly on the chipset for Panther Point. (Intel 7 Series, excluding X79)
They are just reassuring their support of USB 3.0. I still believe that Thunderbolt will require its additional controller and will not be supported directly on the chipset for Panther Point. (Intel 7 Series, excluding X79)
AppleScruff1
Apr 20, 10:21 PM
At least try to make rational arguments about the topic at hand. "Apple ripped off the Beatles" and "People here claim Steve Jobs is God" are just annoyingly feeble attempts to add a contrarian view.
But Apple did copy the Beatles and the Beatles sued them multiple times. Why is that statement irrational? What's good for the goose should be good for the gander, no? And as an aside, I think that Apple makes some very nice products.
But Apple did copy the Beatles and the Beatles sued them multiple times. Why is that statement irrational? What's good for the goose should be good for the gander, no? And as an aside, I think that Apple makes some very nice products.
MarcelV
Aug 31, 03:09 PM
Iand who has been feverishly building bandwidth and capability to deliver full length full resolution movies...Google has.
Google is buying up Dark Fiber. That means no end points into homes like Verizons FIOS has. The bottleneck for full length high resolution movies will be from decentralized distribution centers to the homes. Dark Fiber is helping, but not by much.
Google is buying up Dark Fiber. That means no end points into homes like Verizons FIOS has. The bottleneck for full length high resolution movies will be from decentralized distribution centers to the homes. Dark Fiber is helping, but not by much.
Ugg
Sep 19, 06:32 PM
I thought TV shows in iTunes won't be a hit, why would any one need to pay $1.99 for the stuff, that is already available in cable, sat, Tivo, DVD's, Block buster, feely on the air in SDTV/HDTV, etc.. and all viewable on big screen TV.:confused:
I don't have cable and have no desire to get it. But for the roughly $50 a month that cable costs, I can buy 20 televsion shows on the iTMS, to me that's a good deal. Why spend money every month for something I'd rarely if ever use?
I don't have cable and have no desire to get it. But for the roughly $50 a month that cable costs, I can buy 20 televsion shows on the iTMS, to me that's a good deal. Why spend money every month for something I'd rarely if ever use?
Neuroguy
Oct 12, 08:15 PM
Screw this "Red ipod" and all the "do-gooder" photo ops.
Bring us a Merom Mac Book Pro!!!
Neuroguy
Bring us a Merom Mac Book Pro!!!
Neuroguy