Moonlight
Aug 26, 08:14 PM
I just called Apple support, I was on hold for over 20 minutes, then I was disconnected. No wonder people are unhappy :mad: :( :confused:
aaronsullivan
Apr 11, 11:43 AM
To me this means 4G and Verizon/AT&T hardware convergence. Both, good news.
My biggest concern is the next iOS version. Will it be delayed to coincide with the hardware? With little info, I'd guess/hope no. If it's impressive enough it can fight competition using software enhanced iPhone 4 for awhile. Without the big iOS update seems a long stretch to 2012.
Either way, I'll personally be sticking with my iPhone 4 'til late June 2012 anyway for contract reasons.
How about this for the iPhone 5
5 4 3 2 1
iPhone 5, 4G (4 cameras), 3D, 2 carriers, 1 easy choice.
Yeah, that's why I'm not in marketing. :o/
My biggest concern is the next iOS version. Will it be delayed to coincide with the hardware? With little info, I'd guess/hope no. If it's impressive enough it can fight competition using software enhanced iPhone 4 for awhile. Without the big iOS update seems a long stretch to 2012.
Either way, I'll personally be sticking with my iPhone 4 'til late June 2012 anyway for contract reasons.
How about this for the iPhone 5
5 4 3 2 1
iPhone 5, 4G (4 cameras), 3D, 2 carriers, 1 easy choice.
Yeah, that's why I'm not in marketing. :o/
bretm
Apr 11, 07:56 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Go get yourself an Atrix or HTC and see if you like it better. You won't. We have an Atrix in our house. And it's dual processor still is slower than the iPhone 4. Heck, just interface snappiness and smoothness is still a lesser experience to the original iPhone.
Go get yourself an Atrix or HTC and see if you like it better. You won't. We have an Atrix in our house. And it's dual processor still is slower than the iPhone 4. Heck, just interface snappiness and smoothness is still a lesser experience to the original iPhone.
nostrum
Aug 8, 04:38 AM
Pretty underwhelmed by Leopard to be honest. Time Machine looks like the best new feature, but i doubt that I'll even use it that much. But does it really matter? OS X is the best OS out there, its still a significantly better than anything MS can produce. Its stable, doesn't crash, freeze, lock up. Its secure. It does everything you want without the hassle you get from XP. In truth it doesn't even need to be updated. It works and thats the most important thing to me as a user.
I'm happy with Tiger and unless there's something significant that will be in Leopard, i doubt that I'll upgrade unless I get a new Intel Mac.
I'm happy with Tiger and unless there's something significant that will be in Leopard, i doubt that I'll upgrade unless I get a new Intel Mac.
Bill Gates
Aug 6, 01:53 PM
Domain Name: MAC-PRO.COM
Actors-of-Harry-Potter
The Harry Potter cast.
Grown-up Harry Potter walks
harry potter cast pictures.
Harry Potter and his cast have
harry potter cast pictures.
quot;Harry Potterquot; cast all grow
Ginevra Weasley - Harry Potter
harry potter cast pictures.
to the Harry Potter cast
-harry-potter-cast
Pictures of Harry Potter Cast
Harry Potter stars will
Harry Potter cast
Prom1
Aug 6, 03:28 AM
My Predictions:
Mac Pro:
-Fastest pro Mac ever shipped
-Hard drives, BTO 750gb, perpendicular recording
-New displays with HDMI, iSight & IR, even brighter
-Wireless-WiMax or 802.11n-whatever's ready first, otherwise BT 2.0+EDR, AE
-Multiple graphics card in a SLI/Crossfire like mode for extremely powerful graphics and stereo 3D, Quadro FX5500 and maybe also first Mac to be supported by the new Quadro Plex. 256MB std, 512MB BTO
-HD Audio
Isight on displays built-in but I only want that with higher resolution with Auto Focus ability.
> New displays with a thinner bezel around the LCD; higher contrast ratio 1200:1 minimum; denser pixel count, DLP technology with LEDs or with Zenon technology for the DLP; but more richer BLACK!
> BTO Bluetooth 2.0+EDR has been on the PowerBooks for at least 2 generations & on the MB+MBP!
> WiMax although sweet its long away; HUGE battery gobbler. 2 years minimum.
> I'd love for the MacBookPRO lineup to be more PRO with DUAL HDD configuration but without creating more heat.
> THe MBP should be equal in computing & graphical performance as the cheapest MacPro!
Mac Pro:
-Fastest pro Mac ever shipped
-Hard drives, BTO 750gb, perpendicular recording
-New displays with HDMI, iSight & IR, even brighter
-Wireless-WiMax or 802.11n-whatever's ready first, otherwise BT 2.0+EDR, AE
-Multiple graphics card in a SLI/Crossfire like mode for extremely powerful graphics and stereo 3D, Quadro FX5500 and maybe also first Mac to be supported by the new Quadro Plex. 256MB std, 512MB BTO
-HD Audio
Isight on displays built-in but I only want that with higher resolution with Auto Focus ability.
> New displays with a thinner bezel around the LCD; higher contrast ratio 1200:1 minimum; denser pixel count, DLP technology with LEDs or with Zenon technology for the DLP; but more richer BLACK!
> BTO Bluetooth 2.0+EDR has been on the PowerBooks for at least 2 generations & on the MB+MBP!
> WiMax although sweet its long away; HUGE battery gobbler. 2 years minimum.
> I'd love for the MacBookPRO lineup to be more PRO with DUAL HDD configuration but without creating more heat.
> THe MBP should be equal in computing & graphical performance as the cheapest MacPro!
ergle2
Sep 20, 03:51 PM
Umm. What happened in here?
Can we reurn to some common respect please? This spat isn't constructive.
True enough.
I ... well, I won't go there, too likely to throw more fuel on the fire.
I'll drop it if she does, fair enough?
Can we reurn to some common respect please? This spat isn't constructive.
True enough.
I ... well, I won't go there, too likely to throw more fuel on the fire.
I'll drop it if she does, fair enough?
marksman
Apr 11, 01:20 PM
The iPhone 4 is still the best smartphone in the market, so not surprising.
As for people expecting a 4" screen on the next iPhone dream on. They are not going to make an iPhone with a bigger screen.]]
The people who are saying this is bad for apple are clearly spec chasers.. Which is not what 99% of all iPhone customers are.... They buy into apple for the experience of the UI, the device and the ecosystem. None of that changes or goes away... None of that experience stops existing because some sucky android phone has a better CPU.
The iPhone 4 runs everything that is available for it really well... That some commodity android handset maker has to beef up their spec sheet because they can't compete where it really counts doesn't matter.
The reality is the iPhone doesn't get surpassed until the next iPhone comes out...
Again I am amazed at how many people here think a 4" screen is the wave of the future. It is not.
As for people expecting a 4" screen on the next iPhone dream on. They are not going to make an iPhone with a bigger screen.]]
The people who are saying this is bad for apple are clearly spec chasers.. Which is not what 99% of all iPhone customers are.... They buy into apple for the experience of the UI, the device and the ecosystem. None of that changes or goes away... None of that experience stops existing because some sucky android phone has a better CPU.
The iPhone 4 runs everything that is available for it really well... That some commodity android handset maker has to beef up their spec sheet because they can't compete where it really counts doesn't matter.
The reality is the iPhone doesn't get surpassed until the next iPhone comes out...
Again I am amazed at how many people here think a 4" screen is the wave of the future. It is not.
KnightWRX
Apr 6, 03:33 PM
I don't mean to say that with a 27" iMac at home, one couldn't be happily mobile with a 13" MacBook Air if they so desired, I just don't think it has enough going for it to make it worthy of being stand-alone to anyone who isn't either (a) bat-**** crazy about about the MacBook Air or (b) very simple in their computing needs.
I think you need to define very simple, because the MBA can run about everything. Lets face it, computers have been capable of running pretty much anything for the last decade, the upgrades stopped being as meaningful as they used to be quite some time ago.
I'm a Unix sysadmin, the MBA is my only computer. I do casual gaming on it, I use it to do graphics for my website using CS5, I use it for my work (using a VM), I use it to do my hobby coding, I use it to watch TV series and Anime in 720p. It has the upside of being light and small, so carrying it around on the motorcycle for when I'm on stand-by is less of a pain than 15" MBP or even a 13" MBP (which I had before, when it was called the Unibody Macbook).
Call me bat-**** crazy or my needs "simple", but it works for me as a stand-alone computer.
I think you need to define very simple, because the MBA can run about everything. Lets face it, computers have been capable of running pretty much anything for the last decade, the upgrades stopped being as meaningful as they used to be quite some time ago.
I'm a Unix sysadmin, the MBA is my only computer. I do casual gaming on it, I use it to do graphics for my website using CS5, I use it for my work (using a VM), I use it to do my hobby coding, I use it to watch TV series and Anime in 720p. It has the upside of being light and small, so carrying it around on the motorcycle for when I'm on stand-by is less of a pain than 15" MBP or even a 13" MBP (which I had before, when it was called the Unibody Macbook).
Call me bat-**** crazy or my needs "simple", but it works for me as a stand-alone computer.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 01:02 AM
I agree. The Democrats will, of course, push Obama for a second-term and thus our opposition candidates are all GOP, none of whom are serious contenders for improving our present situation.
Obama is far from perfect. But all of the known GOP contenders (Huckabee, Palin, Bachmann, Romney, Paul etc etc) are completely unacceptable.
If I read the Obama administration correctly, the US involvement will be very limited and while "advisors" are certainly on the ground
At this stage I doubt we have any boots on the ground. Communication with the opposition leadership is still patchy but they have made it clear they do not want foreign soldiers in-country. It will be best if the situation can be resolved without further foreign military intervention.
Obama is far from perfect. But all of the known GOP contenders (Huckabee, Palin, Bachmann, Romney, Paul etc etc) are completely unacceptable.
If I read the Obama administration correctly, the US involvement will be very limited and while "advisors" are certainly on the ground
At this stage I doubt we have any boots on the ground. Communication with the opposition leadership is still patchy but they have made it clear they do not want foreign soldiers in-country. It will be best if the situation can be resolved without further foreign military intervention.
skunk
Feb 28, 07:12 PM
2) okay, they can pretend to get marriedNo, you are absolutely wrong., They can get married like any other couple where the laws allow. Marriage is not a special preserve of any religion. You cannot just commandeer it.
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
suneohair
Sep 13, 06:05 PM
Sorry to burst your reality distortion field, but see my previous post. I ran a dual processor Pentium II NT setup ten years ago and Windows handled it just fine THEN -- back when Apple barely supported it with a hack to its cooperatively-multitasked OS and required specially written applications with special library support.
BTW my 2 year old Smithfield handles 4 processors fine (Dual Core Pentium Extreme with hyperthreading = 4 cores).
The only limit with Windows is they keep the low end XP home to 2 processors on the same die. There is probably an architectural limit on both OSX and XP and if it's not 8 it's 16. It's probably 8.
Didn't you get the memo, Hyperthreading was a joke.
On to this post. The current Mac Pro is not going to be upgraded. Nor will Quad be making its debut, at least at the current price points, anytime soon. It may be offered as a very expensive upgrade but thats about it looking ahead a year.
So for those who bought now, it was a good choice. When the time comes and cost is low they can take that next step and upgrade.
BTW my 2 year old Smithfield handles 4 processors fine (Dual Core Pentium Extreme with hyperthreading = 4 cores).
The only limit with Windows is they keep the low end XP home to 2 processors on the same die. There is probably an architectural limit on both OSX and XP and if it's not 8 it's 16. It's probably 8.
Didn't you get the memo, Hyperthreading was a joke.
On to this post. The current Mac Pro is not going to be upgraded. Nor will Quad be making its debut, at least at the current price points, anytime soon. It may be offered as a very expensive upgrade but thats about it looking ahead a year.
So for those who bought now, it was a good choice. When the time comes and cost is low they can take that next step and upgrade.
Mr. Gates
Jun 8, 11:20 PM
You mean "The Shack"
They are pretty much ONLY a phone store now
They lost the Mojo
Boycott them
They are pretty much ONLY a phone store now
They lost the Mojo
Boycott them
BaldiMac
Mar 22, 02:42 PM
Display playbook = 7"
Display iPad = 9.7"
That's not half the size.
The diagonal is not the only way to measure a screen. I provided you with the numbers for the area of the screen to prove my claim.
Display iPad = 9.7"
That's not half the size.
The diagonal is not the only way to measure a screen. I provided you with the numbers for the area of the screen to prove my claim.
mcgillmaine
Jun 22, 10:32 AM
I just got off the phone with a radio shack in the area I live in (Raleigh-Durham, NC). The guy (Alex) seemed to be well informed on what's going to happen in the next few days. This is a sum of what was told to me.
Our area sent out 251 pin request (or something like that). And only got back 96. Which leaves each store at about 3-5 phones. So he went on and talked about the "pre order" list that didn't really mean you would have one on the 24h and said it's about a 1-50 chance most people will get there phone on Thursday. Not good news for me. I hope this can help!!
Our area sent out 251 pin request (or something like that). And only got back 96. Which leaves each store at about 3-5 phones. So he went on and talked about the "pre order" list that didn't really mean you would have one on the 24h and said it's about a 1-50 chance most people will get there phone on Thursday. Not good news for me. I hope this can help!!
Multimedia
Aug 23, 12:49 AM
Yeah im not surprised. I went to my local store today and saw one in all its glory attached to a 30" ACD. It was VERY fast, system prefs launched in micro seconds, a meaty FCP project opened in less than 5 seconds same for Aperture & Logic, 1080p HD trailers were chewed and spit out using less than 10% of processing power. Totally amazing and best part...its very quiet. I played with a Quad G5 once and it sounded like a jet engine taking off.
I defo want one but it'll cost me an arm and leg. Sigh...My Quad G5 is dead silent all the time. Those noisy Quads should have been sent off for repair. I was told the Quad in the Santa Clara Apple Store was also very loud. That is not normal. Properly serviced they run very silent.
I defo want one but it'll cost me an arm and leg. Sigh...My Quad G5 is dead silent all the time. Those noisy Quads should have been sent off for repair. I was told the Quad in the Santa Clara Apple Store was also very loud. That is not normal. Properly serviced they run very silent.
unicorn025
Mar 31, 08:36 PM
It's because of the Buy One Get One option. Nothing more. People choose that option because it makes financial sense and if they don't really care about the OS or the phone, they will choose the one that fits their check books. If Apple was to OK ATT and VZ to do a Buy One Get One on the iPhone, there would be no comparison. It would be game over for Android.
-LanPhantom
but you can by a older iphone for 99 dollars
-LanPhantom
but you can by a older iphone for 99 dollars
blahblah100
Mar 31, 03:54 PM
It's because of the Buy One Get One option. Nothing more. People choose that option because it makes financial sense and if they don't really care about the OS or the phone, they will choose the one that fits their check books. If Apple was to OK ATT and VZ to do a Buy One Get One on the iPhone, there would be no comparison. It would be game over for Android.
-LanPhantom
Ironically, most of the people on this forum said iPhone on Verizon would be game over for Android.
This 'game over for Android' reminds me a lot of the 'this is the year of desktop linux' stuff that has been said every year for the last 9.
-LanPhantom
Ironically, most of the people on this forum said iPhone on Verizon would be game over for Android.
This 'game over for Android' reminds me a lot of the 'this is the year of desktop linux' stuff that has been said every year for the last 9.
dsnort
Apr 6, 02:33 PM
..I'd rather drive a BMW, I guess you're all happy with the Hondas :)
Your BMW looks a lot like a Yugo to me.
I kid, I kid!
Your BMW looks a lot like a Yugo to me.
I kid, I kid!
EagerDragon
Aug 25, 07:36 PM
Kind of a rude reply to someone who is just posting their experience with Apple.
Without criticism there would never be a reason to improve anything.
100% agree, there are manufactoring mistakes, the man should have a right to complain, lets not be rude. Sorry about that, people should not treat you like that.
Without criticism there would never be a reason to improve anything.
100% agree, there are manufactoring mistakes, the man should have a right to complain, lets not be rude. Sorry about that, people should not treat you like that.
tipt
Apr 10, 06:47 PM
This is simple, folks. I predict the introduction of AirEdit, to go with AirPlay and AirPrint.
What do we currently have in place?
Q Master
Logic Nodes
AirPlay
OS X server (now bundled in lion)
iPad multitouch UI tablet with the power to stream A/V over a network
AppleTV to stream media over a mac network to an HDTV
iTunes as a hub for media
Now, how could FCP utilize all of that? How could all these little pieces add up to one large, powerful network for editing and distributing media throughout a home or office?
I'll bet the iPad will be able to control the FCP UI and take advantage of a cluster of Mac Pro's (or a single mac) to do a lot of the editing, compressing, etc, and then use the iPad to stream that footage to any HDTV with an AppleTV or mac connected to it.
I'm sure there will be a new UI and we can always sit at the workstation if we please, but imagine being able to make edits, compress, and stream rough drafts across the country/world. You can be editing on your xserve cluster from the airport while your waiting for your flight. With in air wifi, you could probably even work from the plane...without the bulk of a laptop.
The guy in the video mentioned thunderbolt and that Apple knew what the competition was up to. Something to that effect. Must be a reason for point that out specifically.
What do we currently have in place?
Q Master
Logic Nodes
AirPlay
OS X server (now bundled in lion)
iPad multitouch UI tablet with the power to stream A/V over a network
AppleTV to stream media over a mac network to an HDTV
iTunes as a hub for media
Now, how could FCP utilize all of that? How could all these little pieces add up to one large, powerful network for editing and distributing media throughout a home or office?
I'll bet the iPad will be able to control the FCP UI and take advantage of a cluster of Mac Pro's (or a single mac) to do a lot of the editing, compressing, etc, and then use the iPad to stream that footage to any HDTV with an AppleTV or mac connected to it.
I'm sure there will be a new UI and we can always sit at the workstation if we please, but imagine being able to make edits, compress, and stream rough drafts across the country/world. You can be editing on your xserve cluster from the airport while your waiting for your flight. With in air wifi, you could probably even work from the plane...without the bulk of a laptop.
The guy in the video mentioned thunderbolt and that Apple knew what the competition was up to. Something to that effect. Must be a reason for point that out specifically.
bedifferent
Apr 27, 08:50 AM
I don't get it. If the usual haters of "our overlord" hate Apple so much, why are they here and why do they use Apple products? There are dozens if not hundreds of alternatives, get a Droid and stop b****ing on an Apple based site about Apple. :rolleyes:
eMagius
Aug 8, 07:31 AM
hmmm, most of the features are already in windows? what version of windows do you have?
2003.
2003.
NJRonbo
Jun 16, 06:18 PM
Raiders -
Do you think perhaps you may get a shipment of
iPhone 4s for the general public without pins prior
to July 24th?
You think that is possible or do you think Apple is
just going to cut RS out of the iPhone 4 equation altogether?
Do you think perhaps you may get a shipment of
iPhone 4s for the general public without pins prior
to July 24th?
You think that is possible or do you think Apple is
just going to cut RS out of the iPhone 4 equation altogether?
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق