Kingsly
Sep 1, 02:08 AM
Well for the sake of pontificating.....
Taking pictures and movies wtih cell phones is very big right now.
But as Steve Jobs would say "it's not a great experience."
He'll show a really crappy movie made on a cell phone.
He'll talk about how the world is evolving, more bandwidth has led to sites like Youtube.
Consumers are getting way more intelligent with movies, and we pioneered desktop movies with iMovie and then added HD functionality with iMovie HD.
But we want to take this one step further.
We want to go from this (shows youtube home movie) to a really great cinematic experience.
Today Apple introduces the world's least expensive High Definition video camera. There are no tapes. It's as easy as iPod.
You just shoot in 1080p, hook it up to your supercharged Intel Mac, edit in iMovie HD, and BOOM.
Look at this. It's gorgeous. Isn't this amazing?
So we're going from this (youtube video) to this. BOOM. Wow.
ROARS OF APPLAUSE AND THUNDER.
And we're introducing the all new QuickTake (or iCam whatever) for just $599.
Do you take PayPal!?!?!?!?!?
Taking pictures and movies wtih cell phones is very big right now.
But as Steve Jobs would say "it's not a great experience."
He'll show a really crappy movie made on a cell phone.
He'll talk about how the world is evolving, more bandwidth has led to sites like Youtube.
Consumers are getting way more intelligent with movies, and we pioneered desktop movies with iMovie and then added HD functionality with iMovie HD.
But we want to take this one step further.
We want to go from this (shows youtube home movie) to a really great cinematic experience.
Today Apple introduces the world's least expensive High Definition video camera. There are no tapes. It's as easy as iPod.
You just shoot in 1080p, hook it up to your supercharged Intel Mac, edit in iMovie HD, and BOOM.
Look at this. It's gorgeous. Isn't this amazing?
So we're going from this (youtube video) to this. BOOM. Wow.
ROARS OF APPLAUSE AND THUNDER.
And we're introducing the all new QuickTake (or iCam whatever) for just $599.
Do you take PayPal!?!?!?!?!?
dudemac
Mar 23, 06:17 PM
I prefer to see the apps pulled. Some apps are best not available. Maybe we could add others, like the locations of the various whorehouses, and best corners for buying drugs.
It certainly doesn't hurt to add to Apple's No Porn standards.
This is not even close to the same as having locations of whore house or drug dealers. However I would guess the police might like to have these apps.
Where and what police are doing is a matter of public knowledge. Posting where they are is not illegal or going against some other standard.
It certainly doesn't hurt to add to Apple's No Porn standards.
This is not even close to the same as having locations of whore house or drug dealers. However I would guess the police might like to have these apps.
Where and what police are doing is a matter of public knowledge. Posting where they are is not illegal or going against some other standard.
Bubbasteve
Sep 15, 05:31 PM
If by early '07 TS means this Tuesday then yes.....early '07 it is :cool:
vega07
Aug 28, 03:49 PM
The new MBPs will be announced on 6th with the free 2-3 day shipping, so MBPs would arrive sooner than the PCs inspite of announcing a week later!
where'd you get that info...or is that your wishful thinking out loud?:rolleyes:
where'd you get that info...or is that your wishful thinking out loud?:rolleyes:
KingCrimson
Apr 28, 05:39 PM
So is that extra $.77 billion Apple made going to make a whit of difference in the end? Both companies have more cash then they know what to do with. Frankly MSFT should be less university research and more single-minded focus on products like Apple.
twostep665
Apr 4, 12:23 PM
I'm amazed that so many people are basing their judgment of the "head shot" on 3rd person shooter games and CSI. In the real world, anyone with training will always be aiming for the center of mass, and where he actually hits depends more on luck than anything else.
In other words, just because the criminal was hit in the head, doesn't mean that the security guard was aiming for his head. A mall security guard with a pistol shooting at a moving target during a gunfight doesn't have the accuracy of a Marine sniper shooting a sniper rifle at a stationary target.
THANK YOU! It is hard enough making a head shot from 15 yards on the pistol range!
In other words, just because the criminal was hit in the head, doesn't mean that the security guard was aiming for his head. A mall security guard with a pistol shooting at a moving target during a gunfight doesn't have the accuracy of a Marine sniper shooting a sniper rifle at a stationary target.
THANK YOU! It is hard enough making a head shot from 15 yards on the pistol range!
milo
Sep 6, 07:52 AM
This is what I had anticipated a while back, but Apple went and invested in the Mini as the quasi-set-top-box. I'm not saying it's not possible, but I wonder if they would change horses mid stream, as it were. I think the video AE would be cool, but it's not quite mainstream enough for regular folk. The Mini, on the other hand, would be sufficiently mainstream if Apple cut the price a little bit and made Front Row a little more robust (and included a DVI to HDMI cable ;)).
The mini isn't really any more of a set top box than any other mac, other than it being small. I don't see going with an airport as a change in direction, they've been pretty adamant that it's not a set top box all along. For a TV unit to become mainstream, it would have to be $200 tops, and even that is pretty high. A mini will never get that cheap - and even if it was, it would still be a waste to have a whole computer used for just TV when a cheap, simple streaming device would do the job.
I agree with everyone here who says that when Apple starts their own movie store they should also release a new Application along with it.
Playing video in iTunes is pretty bad.
They don't need a new app, they just need to fix iTunes.
I guess I was thinking if they up the resolution too much on the movie it may look better on the big screen, but it will no longer be compatible on the ipod.
I don't think the problem would be fixable in the firmware either. How big are we going to make these files?
Right now, I can rip a DVD (that I own of course) and crunch it down to my iPOD's size 320x240 (roughly 600MB for a couple of hours) . Now... it supports up to 640x480, but that turns it into a pretty hefty file.
I don't see apple changing the resolution for movies unless you want rediculous download times. Just downloading some of these HD trailers takes forever, and they look terrible on the displays at the apple store (tried it there only because I thought it was my computer, not the technology).
I guess I would rather see an on demand viewing solution for the hi-def stuff, which I can already do through comcast, and stick to low res for my iPod Video when I am traveling.
Either way... like I said in another post... you are going to see an updated iPod Nano, upgraded processors for some of models still using the first generation intel chips, and a worthless video streamer that lets you feed your video to a TV without hooking your computer up to it lo res (which will look terrible on a 1080p television)... oh and the Movie downloads - probably from Disney Pixar only at first.
This would suck for me because the last thing I want to do is tie up my computer so somebody in my house can watch INCREDIBLES with bad picture and average sound in my living room.
My guess would be that they'd offer two versions of the movie, one for TV and one for iPod (either giving the user a choice or letting them have both). If download time is an issue, another option is having the user's computer render out the smaller version, if the machine is fast enough.
They pretty much have to up the quality if they want to sell movies and promote them for watching on a TV. I assume they'll go NTSC and not HD, the size for that is still managable for people with high speed connections.
I disagree that the airport will be "worthless", because I don't think they will ship one that is low rez. NTSC (dvd quality) at minimum. I don't think low rez is even an option for TV viewing, apple wouldn't release something they'd know was doomed to fail.
The mini isn't really any more of a set top box than any other mac, other than it being small. I don't see going with an airport as a change in direction, they've been pretty adamant that it's not a set top box all along. For a TV unit to become mainstream, it would have to be $200 tops, and even that is pretty high. A mini will never get that cheap - and even if it was, it would still be a waste to have a whole computer used for just TV when a cheap, simple streaming device would do the job.
I agree with everyone here who says that when Apple starts their own movie store they should also release a new Application along with it.
Playing video in iTunes is pretty bad.
They don't need a new app, they just need to fix iTunes.
I guess I was thinking if they up the resolution too much on the movie it may look better on the big screen, but it will no longer be compatible on the ipod.
I don't think the problem would be fixable in the firmware either. How big are we going to make these files?
Right now, I can rip a DVD (that I own of course) and crunch it down to my iPOD's size 320x240 (roughly 600MB for a couple of hours) . Now... it supports up to 640x480, but that turns it into a pretty hefty file.
I don't see apple changing the resolution for movies unless you want rediculous download times. Just downloading some of these HD trailers takes forever, and they look terrible on the displays at the apple store (tried it there only because I thought it was my computer, not the technology).
I guess I would rather see an on demand viewing solution for the hi-def stuff, which I can already do through comcast, and stick to low res for my iPod Video when I am traveling.
Either way... like I said in another post... you are going to see an updated iPod Nano, upgraded processors for some of models still using the first generation intel chips, and a worthless video streamer that lets you feed your video to a TV without hooking your computer up to it lo res (which will look terrible on a 1080p television)... oh and the Movie downloads - probably from Disney Pixar only at first.
This would suck for me because the last thing I want to do is tie up my computer so somebody in my house can watch INCREDIBLES with bad picture and average sound in my living room.
My guess would be that they'd offer two versions of the movie, one for TV and one for iPod (either giving the user a choice or letting them have both). If download time is an issue, another option is having the user's computer render out the smaller version, if the machine is fast enough.
They pretty much have to up the quality if they want to sell movies and promote them for watching on a TV. I assume they'll go NTSC and not HD, the size for that is still managable for people with high speed connections.
I disagree that the airport will be "worthless", because I don't think they will ship one that is low rez. NTSC (dvd quality) at minimum. I don't think low rez is even an option for TV viewing, apple wouldn't release something they'd know was doomed to fail.
arkmannj
Apr 25, 06:52 PM
awesome... maybe they'll update the Mac Mini's too I'm thinking of doing "http://macminicolo.net" and a nicer mini would fit the ticket.
WannaGoMac
Apr 11, 07:45 AM
Been wanting this for a while. I have a windows PC just doing nothing, if I can turn it into an Airport Express like device, can have music going throughout the house.
I am confused. If your Mac is networked, why not just share your music folder on your network so any computer etc can play the music from the shared music folder on the mac?
I am confused. If your Mac is networked, why not just share your music folder on your network so any computer etc can play the music from the shared music folder on the mac?
andiwm2003
Aug 28, 12:08 PM
not that it really matters. but they stole apples thunder.
and since steve compared osx to windows and the mac pro to dell and made lot's of fun about both they'd better stay on top of the game.
and since steve compared osx to windows and the mac pro to dell and made lot's of fun about both they'd better stay on top of the game.
jofarmer
Sep 12, 05:31 PM
And we FAIL to get ability to load 640x480 H.264 Baseline encoded video "...because it cannot be played on this 11month "old" iPod." What a crock! It's a load of bullocks I tell ya!
I take it that your conversion is over and the old iPod cannot play "Hi-Res H.264" and my asumptions prior in this thread where right :/
And as I already pointed out, that owners of "old" iPod 5G will have to reconvert movies and TV series and EVERYTHING they download from this day an, since all movies and tv episodes will be in 640x480 from now on.
Geez. Unlike M$ Apple has never been to much concerned with backwards compatibility, users without at least 10.3 Panther don't get much new fun these days. But like this....?
I take it that your conversion is over and the old iPod cannot play "Hi-Res H.264" and my asumptions prior in this thread where right :/
And as I already pointed out, that owners of "old" iPod 5G will have to reconvert movies and TV series and EVERYTHING they download from this day an, since all movies and tv episodes will be in 640x480 from now on.
Geez. Unlike M$ Apple has never been to much concerned with backwards compatibility, users without at least 10.3 Panther don't get much new fun these days. But like this....?
thedude110
Sep 13, 09:05 PM
At least something to keep the rumor mill buzzing ...
Maybe "one more thing" comes later in the week, then.
Maybe "one more thing" comes later in the week, then.
mazola
Aug 31, 03:19 PM
Here comes Leather iPod Sock -- version 2.0!
thedbp
Oct 12, 08:20 PM
Valentine's Day.
A red iPod will make a KILLING for Valentine's Day.
Eat it up, capitalists!
A red iPod will make a KILLING for Valentine's Day.
Eat it up, capitalists!
cube
Mar 30, 01:21 PM
Apple popularized the term "App" instead of "Application" (ugh!).
How come they don't have a trademark on the word "App"? (That would solve the problem.)
How come they don't have a trademark on the word "App"? (That would solve the problem.)
TheManOfSilver
Sep 4, 08:01 PM
If you're like me, you don't have your Mac right next to your TV. Not only would I have to string a DVI/HDMI cable aaaall the way across the room, I would also have to get an equally long digital audio cable. Probably end up costing about the same as a video AirPort Express (if they keep the prices the same) but with the added hassle of getting those cables across the room.
This would be a lot less expensive than buying a Mac mini, especially if you already have a powerful desktop just waiting to play some HD videos...
Exactly! I think other potential twists would include a video Airport Express with a built-in TV tuner (to stream tv content back to your iMac/Mac Pro for recording, or an optional built-in HD for local storage when you don't have your Mac on or something.
This would be a lot less expensive than buying a Mac mini, especially if you already have a powerful desktop just waiting to play some HD videos...
Exactly! I think other potential twists would include a video Airport Express with a built-in TV tuner (to stream tv content back to your iMac/Mac Pro for recording, or an optional built-in HD for local storage when you don't have your Mac on or something.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 19, 09:06 AM
They should respond with an original product line.
And yes there will be people who say "apple isn't the first to come up with idea X". Nonsense. Apple takes several new ideas (some their own making, others not) and brings them together to make a new product. Apple takes a risk that their large investment will pay off and that a new product line will emerge. They do not do small production runs with these new products.
No one else made a tablet with the bells and whistles of the ipad that came together with the user experience one expects now on a tablet and produced it in such large quantities hoping a new market would emerge with great demand.
Apple could have simply said netbooks are the safe bet, lets do that. But they didn't.
Going forward, every tablet is going to be similar. That is fair enough. But when I look at the samsung devices, I feel like there is nothing really new about the user experience. It looks very similar to the ipad; more than one would expect. Creative companies would at least try to do something original.
And yes there will be people who say "apple isn't the first to come up with idea X". Nonsense. Apple takes several new ideas (some their own making, others not) and brings them together to make a new product. Apple takes a risk that their large investment will pay off and that a new product line will emerge. They do not do small production runs with these new products.
No one else made a tablet with the bells and whistles of the ipad that came together with the user experience one expects now on a tablet and produced it in such large quantities hoping a new market would emerge with great demand.
Apple could have simply said netbooks are the safe bet, lets do that. But they didn't.
Going forward, every tablet is going to be similar. That is fair enough. But when I look at the samsung devices, I feel like there is nothing really new about the user experience. It looks very similar to the ipad; more than one would expect. Creative companies would at least try to do something original.
iGary
Sep 9, 05:34 PM
Why does it say "MacCentral" when MacWorld did the benchmarks? :confused:
cozmot
Mar 21, 02:16 PM
The point is that MisterMe said nothing that your response would have fit. You can infer all you want, but it's very clear that MisterMe was talking about the market share myth, and was not inferring that Macs are immune to malware.
No, I just took the first example you posted and saw that it didn't prove your point at all.
That's quite true.
Using your STD example, I have zero need for protection if my wife and I are exclusive with each other, as we are. Likewise, protection isn't currently necessary for a Mac if the user exercises reasonable care and caution. If you want to run AV on your Mac, it's perfectly within your right. It's just not needed for protection.
You alone have the power to stop reading or posting in this thread.
It's not turning a mountain into a mole hill to stand by accurate, factual statements when they're challenged. It's not a "status-quo"; it's the current reality in the Mac computing world. No one is saying that it couldn't change in the future. It just hasn't yet.
You have no idea what attitude "most Mac users" have, unless you've interviewed the many millions of them. If I exercise the reasonable care that I've already described, it can't happen to me, in the current computing environment. If that situation ever changes, such as the introduction of a true Mac virus into the wild, any antivirus app I may have installed today will provide no protection from that event.
It's called "profit motive", which any successful company has.
Again, a personal opinion. Like millions of others, I find their hardware options perfectly acceptable and I don't have a problem with their pricing. If that weren't true, I and millions of others simply wouldn't buy from them.
No one is suggesting that you shouldn't be careful. In fact, that's exactly what we've been saying: if you're careful, you don't need antivirus software to protect your Mac from malware.
I think GGJstudios answered MagnusVonMagnum's contentions, misrepresentations and straw-man arguments perfectly. And Magnus, I hope that you're truly sick of this thread, because I am too with your belaboring the same points, putting words in peoples' mouths and contributing nothing to this thread. Really, enough already! Quit reading and posting here, and get well soon.
No, I just took the first example you posted and saw that it didn't prove your point at all.
That's quite true.
Using your STD example, I have zero need for protection if my wife and I are exclusive with each other, as we are. Likewise, protection isn't currently necessary for a Mac if the user exercises reasonable care and caution. If you want to run AV on your Mac, it's perfectly within your right. It's just not needed for protection.
You alone have the power to stop reading or posting in this thread.
It's not turning a mountain into a mole hill to stand by accurate, factual statements when they're challenged. It's not a "status-quo"; it's the current reality in the Mac computing world. No one is saying that it couldn't change in the future. It just hasn't yet.
You have no idea what attitude "most Mac users" have, unless you've interviewed the many millions of them. If I exercise the reasonable care that I've already described, it can't happen to me, in the current computing environment. If that situation ever changes, such as the introduction of a true Mac virus into the wild, any antivirus app I may have installed today will provide no protection from that event.
It's called "profit motive", which any successful company has.
Again, a personal opinion. Like millions of others, I find their hardware options perfectly acceptable and I don't have a problem with their pricing. If that weren't true, I and millions of others simply wouldn't buy from them.
No one is suggesting that you shouldn't be careful. In fact, that's exactly what we've been saying: if you're careful, you don't need antivirus software to protect your Mac from malware.
I think GGJstudios answered MagnusVonMagnum's contentions, misrepresentations and straw-man arguments perfectly. And Magnus, I hope that you're truly sick of this thread, because I am too with your belaboring the same points, putting words in peoples' mouths and contributing nothing to this thread. Really, enough already! Quit reading and posting here, and get well soon.
gnasher729
Jul 14, 09:33 AM
Why does the high-end Conroe cost more than the high-end Woodcrest?
Because Intel is trying to maximise their profit.
Conroes will be in relatively affordable computers, and there will be some people who spend hundreds of dollars extra for the fastest graphics card possible, and hundreds for the fastest processor possible. It will be sold to people who are willing to pay over the top for highest performance.
Woodcrest will be sold in expensive servers to businesses, who will _not_ pay for bragging rights, but only as much as the extra performance is worth.
Two relatively slow Woodcrests could be used to build a system that is faster and possibly cheaper than the Conroe Extreme Edition.
Because Intel is trying to maximise their profit.
Conroes will be in relatively affordable computers, and there will be some people who spend hundreds of dollars extra for the fastest graphics card possible, and hundreds for the fastest processor possible. It will be sold to people who are willing to pay over the top for highest performance.
Woodcrest will be sold in expensive servers to businesses, who will _not_ pay for bragging rights, but only as much as the extra performance is worth.
Two relatively slow Woodcrests could be used to build a system that is faster and possibly cheaper than the Conroe Extreme Edition.
OdduWon
Sep 13, 09:34 PM
this is definitely a style over functionality....how da heck do you dial a number with clickwheel?
kaneda
Aug 31, 09:16 PM
new ipod celphone.....celphone w/ a hard drive...w/ widescreen...sync w/ your itunes, iphotos, imovie, address book, mobile ichat...:)
Time to get a new cel-phone..499 for 60gb...
Time to get a new cel-phone..499 for 60gb...
macsnjets
Sep 12, 02:18 PM
Now what do I do, I've been waiting since Christmas and this is what I get..UGGGHHHH ? Where is my widescreen iPod Steve ?
AppleScruff1
Apr 22, 11:36 AM
I wonder if it will include the tracking software? :D