samh004
Nov 28, 07:14 PM
I was under the assumption that the money paid to Universal was to allow the streaming of music from one device to another. I assumed that was the real reason behind the payment.
Seeing as Apple does not stream music to random devices, they shouldn't have to pay a royalty.
I don't think I voiced my opinion about this last time it was brought up, but I reckon although the iPod makes enough profit so as not to pass that royalty onto the consumer (in price), I would still feel like I was paying that royalty, were I to buy an iPod.
If I felt like I paid a royalty, and was already downloading songs legally from iTunes anyway, I'd want to download more stuff illegally than I have before, just to make use of that royalty.
That's what I will do if I have to buy an iPod in the future with a pre-paid royalty. You heard me... this tactic will only encourage more piracy. Stupid really !
Seeing as Apple does not stream music to random devices, they shouldn't have to pay a royalty.
I don't think I voiced my opinion about this last time it was brought up, but I reckon although the iPod makes enough profit so as not to pass that royalty onto the consumer (in price), I would still feel like I was paying that royalty, were I to buy an iPod.
If I felt like I paid a royalty, and was already downloading songs legally from iTunes anyway, I'd want to download more stuff illegally than I have before, just to make use of that royalty.
That's what I will do if I have to buy an iPod in the future with a pre-paid royalty. You heard me... this tactic will only encourage more piracy. Stupid really !
Ahheck01
Apr 12, 05:00 PM
BTW, apparently this site is doing live blogging:
http://www.finalcutmtl.org/2011/04/10/supermeet-live-sur-final-cut-mtl
That's about all I could find.
And for you english-only forum members, here's the translated version:
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&u=http://www.finalcutmtl.org/2011/04/10/supermeet-live-sur-final-cut-mtl&ei=rsmkTfiKLsL-rAHd44WGCw&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCEQ7gEwAA&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dhttp://www.finalcutmtl.org/2011/04/10/supermeet-live-sur-final-cut-mtl%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26prmd%3Divns
http://www.finalcutmtl.org/2011/04/10/supermeet-live-sur-final-cut-mtl
That's about all I could find.
And for you english-only forum members, here's the translated version:
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&u=http://www.finalcutmtl.org/2011/04/10/supermeet-live-sur-final-cut-mtl&ei=rsmkTfiKLsL-rAHd44WGCw&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCEQ7gEwAA&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dhttp://www.finalcutmtl.org/2011/04/10/supermeet-live-sur-final-cut-mtl%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26prmd%3Divns
robwormald
Mar 22, 02:18 PM
What I'm looking forward to the most is playing with the web browsers on these machines. Our internal business applications run either in a JRE or in a web browser - on iPads we run them as full screen web apps. Works great.
Unfortunately Apple saw fit not to allow full screen web-apps to use the Nitro JS engine, so we're not seeing the same performance bumps there.
I demo'ed a Xoom for a few days - the web app support is frankly atrocious and was basically unusable - unfortunate as we're a Google Apps shop and the integration would have been nice. I don't hold out much hope for the other Honeycomb based tablets.
However, the reviews on the Playbook and WebOS tablets have been pretty stellar about the web browser - so I'm excited to see how webapps work on these (especially WebOS!)
Unfortunately Apple saw fit not to allow full screen web-apps to use the Nitro JS engine, so we're not seeing the same performance bumps there.
I demo'ed a Xoom for a few days - the web app support is frankly atrocious and was basically unusable - unfortunate as we're a Google Apps shop and the integration would have been nice. I don't hold out much hope for the other Honeycomb based tablets.
However, the reviews on the Playbook and WebOS tablets have been pretty stellar about the web browser - so I'm excited to see how webapps work on these (especially WebOS!)
dougny
Nov 29, 03:50 PM
I only registered to respond to this idiot "dougny". I usually just lurk and read what everyone else has to say on here.
You have no clue what your talking about, all your statistics are wrong and I feel really sorry for whatever artists you represent.
Your a f_ck_ng moran.
Anyway, to everyone else....
Here is the deal. The money Universal got Microsoft never EVER touched the hands of any artists.. it went straight into some very deep pockets. This is exactly what is going to happen with Apple's loot if this little deal goes through.
Total revenues in the MI (music industry) have actually been UP, and consistently so. More people are going to concerts than ever before, download sales are so large that they are numbing, and BEST OF ALL indie labels are thriving. Yes, people do still buy CD's, and DVD's.
Wow, you logged on just to show everyone you are an idiot. You actually think because paid downloads are on the rise that record companies are making more money? You are flat out wrong. Also, record companies don't share in concert ticket sales (which are also down BTW).
Dumbass
You have no clue what your talking about, all your statistics are wrong and I feel really sorry for whatever artists you represent.
Your a f_ck_ng moran.
Anyway, to everyone else....
Here is the deal. The money Universal got Microsoft never EVER touched the hands of any artists.. it went straight into some very deep pockets. This is exactly what is going to happen with Apple's loot if this little deal goes through.
Total revenues in the MI (music industry) have actually been UP, and consistently so. More people are going to concerts than ever before, download sales are so large that they are numbing, and BEST OF ALL indie labels are thriving. Yes, people do still buy CD's, and DVD's.
Wow, you logged on just to show everyone you are an idiot. You actually think because paid downloads are on the rise that record companies are making more money? You are flat out wrong. Also, record companies don't share in concert ticket sales (which are also down BTW).
Dumbass
yg17
Apr 27, 08:45 AM
And now Trump is demanding to see Obama's educational records. It's not going to end. If Obama releases those, then what will Trump demand?
When this whole birther bullcrap started back before the election, I said that if he ever releases the long form, they'll claim it's fake and then demand more proof. Looks like I'm right.
When this whole birther bullcrap started back before the election, I said that if he ever releases the long form, they'll claim it's fake and then demand more proof. Looks like I'm right.
.jpg "Prince William, Prince Harry")
mcrain
Mar 22, 10:09 AM
The hypocrisy coming from the left in the media on this issue is palpable...
I was stewing about this, and went to the Google News page, more "liberal" sites like the Huffington Post or MSNBC, my local paper, FoxNews and in every case, there were stories that were either critical or were about the criticism or the reasons for the criticism of the Libya action. (Stories about Senator XYZ saying coalition has issues vs. a story about the issues with the coaltion). So, it's pretty obvious that the mainstream media are covering this story, and reporting both the white house story and providing analysis and criticism.
I'm confused by what you think is so hypocritical or who you think is being such.
Are you talking about hipocracy from "the left in the media" or the left?" Do you expect every story to be critical of President Obama and Libya? Do you think every story that came out during the GWB administration was critical of Afghanistan or Iraq? Especially in the first days? Do you think every story from certain media outlets is liberal? I mean, is a story automatically liberal because it comes from NPR, or say, MSNBC or Huffington Post? Someone critiqued your using Fox News as a source, but what you quoted was mainly just facts. I think Fox News often inserts more of their spin into stories than their competitors (and as a result, their news reporting often appears tainted or is assumed tainted), and they are always supportive of the GOP, but that doesn't mean that I think the facts they report are any less fact. Is critique of the President from MSNBC any less critique because its coming from MSNBC? Are you suspicious of their criticism? Do you think they are using kid gloves? Would you expect a hypothetical neutral news site (if it exists) to be more critical? Would it be as critical and partisan as Fox News?
On the other hand, are you talking about hipocracy by those on the left, in the media? I mean, you quoted the President and what he said. If so, it really hasn't got anything to do with the media, right? Also, doesn't it seem like President Obama got pushed into this conflict? There were allies and some organizations clamoring for involvement, unlike prior to Iraq. The President was making statements that indicated reluctance to get involved. The military was saying it would not be simple, would involve real attacks, and it may be too late. But, there was pushing by our allies, human rights groups, etc... Plus, aren't we on the hook to have our allies backs? I mean, isn't the US on the hook to pay back a lot of favors to the Iraq/Afghanistan coalitions?
Unlike Iraq where the President was actively trying to sell the public on a conflict he, and a small group of insiders, wanted. Using evidence that was weak at best, and we now know was false. This salesmanship initially received pretty positive reporting, which only turned really sour as the evidence of betrayal and lies started coming out.
I was stewing about this, and went to the Google News page, more "liberal" sites like the Huffington Post or MSNBC, my local paper, FoxNews and in every case, there were stories that were either critical or were about the criticism or the reasons for the criticism of the Libya action. (Stories about Senator XYZ saying coalition has issues vs. a story about the issues with the coaltion). So, it's pretty obvious that the mainstream media are covering this story, and reporting both the white house story and providing analysis and criticism.
I'm confused by what you think is so hypocritical or who you think is being such.
Are you talking about hipocracy from "the left in the media" or the left?" Do you expect every story to be critical of President Obama and Libya? Do you think every story that came out during the GWB administration was critical of Afghanistan or Iraq? Especially in the first days? Do you think every story from certain media outlets is liberal? I mean, is a story automatically liberal because it comes from NPR, or say, MSNBC or Huffington Post? Someone critiqued your using Fox News as a source, but what you quoted was mainly just facts. I think Fox News often inserts more of their spin into stories than their competitors (and as a result, their news reporting often appears tainted or is assumed tainted), and they are always supportive of the GOP, but that doesn't mean that I think the facts they report are any less fact. Is critique of the President from MSNBC any less critique because its coming from MSNBC? Are you suspicious of their criticism? Do you think they are using kid gloves? Would you expect a hypothetical neutral news site (if it exists) to be more critical? Would it be as critical and partisan as Fox News?
On the other hand, are you talking about hipocracy by those on the left, in the media? I mean, you quoted the President and what he said. If so, it really hasn't got anything to do with the media, right? Also, doesn't it seem like President Obama got pushed into this conflict? There were allies and some organizations clamoring for involvement, unlike prior to Iraq. The President was making statements that indicated reluctance to get involved. The military was saying it would not be simple, would involve real attacks, and it may be too late. But, there was pushing by our allies, human rights groups, etc... Plus, aren't we on the hook to have our allies backs? I mean, isn't the US on the hook to pay back a lot of favors to the Iraq/Afghanistan coalitions?
Unlike Iraq where the President was actively trying to sell the public on a conflict he, and a small group of insiders, wanted. Using evidence that was weak at best, and we now know was false. This salesmanship initially received pretty positive reporting, which only turned really sour as the evidence of betrayal and lies started coming out.
Dark K
Jun 22, 03:24 PM
Nevermind my previous post, I just pass by my local Radioshack, and I think that every Radioshack will be getting the iPhones, why? I do not live in the states, I live in Puerto Rico, and by that being said, one of the sellers told me that they already receive the phones, just like Walmart, he even told me that the store has 8 (6 16GB black and 2 32GB black) iPhone 4s. Now is just a matter of time and wait.
Amazing Iceman
Mar 22, 10:31 PM
Microsoft Office 2007 (Windows) and 2011 (Mac) are not slow.
They may be slow in your super �ber Mac from which uses the super �ber Core 2 Duo, but it's certainly not in my sister's Core i3 notebook.
Your machine is outdated. I hope you're not using it as a reference to judge Microsoft Office performance.
Are you having PMS (no offense to the ladies) or something like that?
I didn't say it ran slow on my MAC. Even FCP and CS5 run great. Otherwise I would have already purchased a new one. Unlike you, I can afford it. I'm going to buy the new 17" MBP, but because it has issues I decided to wait until these get solved, but that's not your business.
Also, your ignorance and arrogance didn't let you understand my point. Every new version of Office, specially the Windows version, requires a bigger and faster computer to run. And when you compare features, there's no real gain from one version to the next, just nice looking colors and animations, which are a waste of processor speed.
Go learn some manners, and mature at least a little. Idiots like you shouldn't be allowed in these forums.
They may be slow in your super �ber Mac from which uses the super �ber Core 2 Duo, but it's certainly not in my sister's Core i3 notebook.
Your machine is outdated. I hope you're not using it as a reference to judge Microsoft Office performance.
Are you having PMS (no offense to the ladies) or something like that?
I didn't say it ran slow on my MAC. Even FCP and CS5 run great. Otherwise I would have already purchased a new one. Unlike you, I can afford it. I'm going to buy the new 17" MBP, but because it has issues I decided to wait until these get solved, but that's not your business.
Also, your ignorance and arrogance didn't let you understand my point. Every new version of Office, specially the Windows version, requires a bigger and faster computer to run. And when you compare features, there's no real gain from one version to the next, just nice looking colors and animations, which are a waste of processor speed.
Go learn some manners, and mature at least a little. Idiots like you shouldn't be allowed in these forums.
epitaphic
Aug 18, 06:09 AM
A whole 9 months? Those systems are supposed to last four years.
William and Prince Harry
prince harry william.
prince harry vs william.
William and Prince Harry
prince harry and william
William and Prince Harry.
prince harry and william at
Prince Harry Prince William
Prince Harry, Prince William,
William and Prince Harry
citizenzen
Mar 22, 08:19 PM
It is obvious the UN has taken sides here, no doubt about it. Do you disagree with that decision?
The U.N. Security Council perhaps, but not the entire assembly. It would have been interesting to open that issue up to debate and seen how all the members would have voted.
What I always wonder is what diplomatic efforts were used to pressure Qaddafi? There were no (as far as I know) threats of economic embargoes, freezing of assets, or other less violent methods to coerce Qaddafi. We didn't need to convince him to step dow. We simply needed to convince him that he needed to tone down, defend himself against the armed insurrection, but not cast a wider and violent campaign against innocent civilians.
I need a clearer demonstration that serious steps were taken before resorting to war. War should be used as the last resort and only when it's clear that all other options have failed.
The U.N. Security Council perhaps, but not the entire assembly. It would have been interesting to open that issue up to debate and seen how all the members would have voted.
What I always wonder is what diplomatic efforts were used to pressure Qaddafi? There were no (as far as I know) threats of economic embargoes, freezing of assets, or other less violent methods to coerce Qaddafi. We didn't need to convince him to step dow. We simply needed to convince him that he needed to tone down, defend himself against the armed insurrection, but not cast a wider and violent campaign against innocent civilians.
I need a clearer demonstration that serious steps were taken before resorting to war. War should be used as the last resort and only when it's clear that all other options have failed.
nukiduz
Aug 7, 05:15 PM
From Vista Help:
"Previous versions of files and folders are copies that Windows automatically saves as part of a restore point. Any file or folder that was modified since the last restore point was made (usually 24 hours earlier) is saved and made available as a previous version. You can use previous versions of files to restore files that you accidentally modified or deleted, or that were damaged."
I can use this now but without childish animations. Simple right-click the folder and select "restore previous versions".
For me the Leopard preview was a big disappointment. No innovative features but silly Vista bashing all the time. Come on, Apple!
What about flash drives? Meta data organisation in Finder? Media streams over local networks? Better window management? Spaces is the next answere to the incomplete Dockbar-conception (Expos� was the first and Time Maschine is a next interface ornateness).
Preview and network-wide search in Spotlight? Who is copying here?
I can't believe that: but now Vista looks innovativ!
i completely agree. just hope that the top secret thing makes us think other way.
"Previous versions of files and folders are copies that Windows automatically saves as part of a restore point. Any file or folder that was modified since the last restore point was made (usually 24 hours earlier) is saved and made available as a previous version. You can use previous versions of files to restore files that you accidentally modified or deleted, or that were damaged."
I can use this now but without childish animations. Simple right-click the folder and select "restore previous versions".
For me the Leopard preview was a big disappointment. No innovative features but silly Vista bashing all the time. Come on, Apple!
What about flash drives? Meta data organisation in Finder? Media streams over local networks? Better window management? Spaces is the next answere to the incomplete Dockbar-conception (Expos� was the first and Time Maschine is a next interface ornateness).
Preview and network-wide search in Spotlight? Who is copying here?
I can't believe that: but now Vista looks innovativ!
i completely agree. just hope that the top secret thing makes us think other way.
j26
Nov 29, 06:23 AM
Apple has sold what, 70m (ish) iPods since launch. What's it running at now about 10 a year? That's about $10m in revenue Universal could get a year.
If they walk they are losing a share in over 1bn songs translating to a whatever share they can get (say 10%), which would translate to $65m in revenue (2/3 of 10% of 1bn)**
Universal would be killing the golden goose if they were to try to force Apples hand, and Apple said "feck off then and take yer shite music with ye"
Apple on the other hand only stand to lose maybe $4-5m.
** the assumptions may be way off, but it's illustrative anyway. Feel free to correct the numbers
If they walk they are losing a share in over 1bn songs translating to a whatever share they can get (say 10%), which would translate to $65m in revenue (2/3 of 10% of 1bn)**
Universal would be killing the golden goose if they were to try to force Apples hand, and Apple said "feck off then and take yer shite music with ye"
Apple on the other hand only stand to lose maybe $4-5m.
** the assumptions may be way off, but it's illustrative anyway. Feel free to correct the numbers
shawnce
Nov 28, 06:52 PM
Many years ago a media levy was passed in the United States that applies a "tax" to "consumer digital audio" media (CD-R blanks, DAT, etc.) with the proceeds going to music industry/artists. The justification was to offset losses due to illegal copying of music in digital form (generational loseless copies). This to date hasn't been expanded to include devices like the iPod (at least I don't recall that taking place).
This appears to be an attempt to expand that levy...
Note in Canada they have a similar levy that "taxes" all digital media that could store audio (not just "consumer digital audio" media) but IIRC it fell short of being applied to the iPod as well. Also many many other countries have similar laws.
In my opinion these types of levies should never have been enacted into law... they presume customers will engage in criminal activity and punish them before hand. :(
To bad the wrong precedent was set...
This appears to be an attempt to expand that levy...
Note in Canada they have a similar levy that "taxes" all digital media that could store audio (not just "consumer digital audio" media) but IIRC it fell short of being applied to the iPod as well. Also many many other countries have similar laws.
In my opinion these types of levies should never have been enacted into law... they presume customers will engage in criminal activity and punish them before hand. :(
To bad the wrong precedent was set...
�algiris
Apr 27, 08:51 AM
Why did it take so long for Apple to release a statement?
Because they hoped people will grow up and educate themselfs. That never happened obviously.
Because they hoped people will grow up and educate themselfs. That never happened obviously.
citizenzen
Mar 22, 01:52 PM
The big difference between Libya and Iraq is that in Iraq there wasn't a large insurgence controlling a decent proportion of the country before the troops went in.
Good point.
Good point.
shamino
Jul 20, 09:37 AM
But as some already pointed out, many applications can't use multiple cores, therefore you won't get any performance improvements with multi cores.
A single application, if not multithreaded, won't see any performance boost.
But if you're running multiple applications at once, your overall system performance will definitely improve.
Also note that many of Apple's system facilities (like Core Image) are internally multithreaded. So apps that use these system services will see performance boosts even if the application developer didn't write any multithreading code into the app.
I am also certain that we'll see more and more developers using multithreading, now that all but the cheapest systems sold will have at least two cores. Especially with those apps that are CPU-intensive, and could therefore gain the most from multiprocessing.
(Gee, it seems like it was only a few short years ago that we were having this same discussion about AltiVec :) )
A single application, if not multithreaded, won't see any performance boost.
But if you're running multiple applications at once, your overall system performance will definitely improve.
Also note that many of Apple's system facilities (like Core Image) are internally multithreaded. So apps that use these system services will see performance boosts even if the application developer didn't write any multithreading code into the app.
I am also certain that we'll see more and more developers using multithreading, now that all but the cheapest systems sold will have at least two cores. Especially with those apps that are CPU-intensive, and could therefore gain the most from multiprocessing.
(Gee, it seems like it was only a few short years ago that we were having this same discussion about AltiVec :) )
SevenInchScrew
Nov 24, 11:55 PM
Oh I forgot. Still no qualifying/race weekends. LAME
I don't know how far you are into the game, but I've read that qualifying is used later in the game for some of the bigger, championship races. I don't know this for sure, so don't hold me to it. But, you might get to qualify for SOME races... at some point.... maybe. :confused:
I don't know how far you are into the game, but I've read that qualifying is used later in the game for some of the bigger, championship races. I don't know this for sure, so don't hold me to it. But, you might get to qualify for SOME races... at some point.... maybe. :confused:
evilgEEk
Aug 11, 03:58 PM
I'm eligible for a new phone in just five days. As of right now I'm going to get the Chocolate because I like the style. Couldn't really care less about listening to music on my phone, that's what my iPod's for. ;)
But...but...if Apple does release a phone and I've already bought the Chocolate then I'll be kicking myself to no end. But on the other hand, how likely is it that the iPhone will even work on Verizon?
Bah! I need a new phone! :(
But...but...if Apple does release a phone and I've already bought the Chocolate then I'll be kicking myself to no end. But on the other hand, how likely is it that the iPhone will even work on Verizon?
Bah! I need a new phone! :(
fabian9
Apr 11, 01:08 PM
"the 3GS also adds support for 7.2 Mbit/s HSDPA allowing faster downlink speeds"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone_3GS
Technically he's right.
Technically, I'm right, you can't "add" 3GS, because 3GS isn't a standard. :p
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone_3GS
Technically he's right.
Technically, I'm right, you can't "add" 3GS, because 3GS isn't a standard. :p
Padraig
Aug 12, 04:13 AM
If there is a phone on the way i'm guessing that we can be sure of few things.
1) Can't see it being a clamshell. Perhaps a slider, but in all likelyhood it will be a candybar - fits in with apple designs aesthetic, simple, elegant design.
2) It will have to be GSM, UMTS being included as well. There is no way Apple is releasing a CDMA only phone, the market is tiny.
3) I'm sure Apple will release this by themselves, rather than partnering up with a specific carrier. This would allow people who are already tied into contracts to purchase the phone, without having to switch networks. Also couldn't invisage Apple agreeing to something like Vodafone's software.
1) Can't see it being a clamshell. Perhaps a slider, but in all likelyhood it will be a candybar - fits in with apple designs aesthetic, simple, elegant design.
2) It will have to be GSM, UMTS being included as well. There is no way Apple is releasing a CDMA only phone, the market is tiny.
3) I'm sure Apple will release this by themselves, rather than partnering up with a specific carrier. This would allow people who are already tied into contracts to purchase the phone, without having to switch networks. Also couldn't invisage Apple agreeing to something like Vodafone's software.
supmango
Mar 22, 12:56 PM
I might have to get my hands on one of these. Hopefully the store demos will work. I love my new iPad, so it will be a hard sell for me.
QCassidy352
Aug 15, 01:12 PM
oh WOW. Considering that a single 1.67 G4 beats a dual 2.0 core duo in photoshop when the core duo has to use rosetta, the fact that the xeon is nearly even is amazing. That thing is going to be amazing when CS3 comes out! :eek:
ZoomZoomZoom
Sep 19, 02:19 AM
What is wrong with you people? Meroms in other brands of laptops haven't, or are only *just* starting to ship, and you people wail that Apple is doomed, when in the worst case scenario, they'll be a few days behind Dell. If they don't ship by next month, then sure, complain, but really, most of those who moan that Apple is "OMG SO OUTDATED MEROM MBPS SHOULD HAVE BEEN RELEASED 2 MONTHS AGO!!!" are out of touch with reality.
Except that:
(1) Meroms in other brands of laptops have been shipping for nearly 3 weeks. A quick Google shows that some people have been receiving them on their doorstep by the first day of September.
(2) Those of us that buy Macbook Pros are throwing down $2500+ for top-of-the-line laptops. Sub-$1000 laptops have had a better processor than Apple's flagship laptops for nearly a month now. If you can still defend Apple after this, do a reality check on the fanboyism.
Except that:
(1) Meroms in other brands of laptops have been shipping for nearly 3 weeks. A quick Google shows that some people have been receiving them on their doorstep by the first day of September.
(2) Those of us that buy Macbook Pros are throwing down $2500+ for top-of-the-line laptops. Sub-$1000 laptops have had a better processor than Apple's flagship laptops for nearly a month now. If you can still defend Apple after this, do a reality check on the fanboyism.
nitynate
Nov 28, 06:29 PM
No thanks.
I pay for my music.
I pay for my music.