Dagless
Jun 22, 07:47 PM
Ah yes. A porn free, tightly censored, code controlled desktop machine. That's what everyone wants right? :rolleyes:
If that becomes the future (it is starting to feel that way a bit), then I'll be switching back to Windows full time.
If that becomes the future (it is starting to feel that way a bit), then I'll be switching back to Windows full time.
bigpics
Mar 24, 12:57 PM
Dude, I'm sorry to inform you that what you're saying is an outright lie, and there are guys from the Lossless Compression Clan, called "Apple Lossless codec", "FLAC", and "APE", standing with heavy cluebats in their hands, ready to perform a painful reality sync on anyone thinking compression ALWAYS degrades quality.
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
Roessnakhan
Feb 19, 08:31 PM
Hasn't changed too much this time around
How do you like the Dash? Saw one on woot the other day.
How do you like the Dash? Saw one on woot the other day.
razzmatazz
Aug 6, 09:41 PM
I became a hard core Mac user after Panther was released. I was wondering if Apple took stabs at Microsoft when they were introducing Panther. :confused:
tlinford
Mar 7, 08:35 AM
Diesel engines are excellent although it in worth considering one drawback and that is the freezing point of diesel fuel....
I drive a Jeep Liberty 2.8 CRD (common rail diesel) which is not available in the States so I understand. The fuel economy is great, mine in an auto and I get all round 30 mpg's in euro terms this isn't too great as most small cars do around 38-40 mpg if petrol 50+ mpg's in diesel, but these are cars that weigh nothing!
I love the Jeep, especially the diesel because it gives the truck gravitas! but diesel fuel freezes at around -15 degs C... In the UK is hardly every gets this cold (although I did have one day this winter when the Jeep wouldn't start because it was -18!)... In the UK we don't have engine block heaters in the UK, so I am not sure if it would be possible to cold proof?
just be aware!
Someone said about diesel engines coming from single sources... this is because these engines are complicated to design and build and it's cheaper for car makers to go to the experts..... the one I have in the Jeep is a VM Motori and Italian engine based on one they put in London Black cabs! bullet proof engine!
I drive a Jeep Liberty 2.8 CRD (common rail diesel) which is not available in the States so I understand. The fuel economy is great, mine in an auto and I get all round 30 mpg's in euro terms this isn't too great as most small cars do around 38-40 mpg if petrol 50+ mpg's in diesel, but these are cars that weigh nothing!
I love the Jeep, especially the diesel because it gives the truck gravitas! but diesel fuel freezes at around -15 degs C... In the UK is hardly every gets this cold (although I did have one day this winter when the Jeep wouldn't start because it was -18!)... In the UK we don't have engine block heaters in the UK, so I am not sure if it would be possible to cold proof?
just be aware!
Someone said about diesel engines coming from single sources... this is because these engines are complicated to design and build and it's cheaper for car makers to go to the experts..... the one I have in the Jeep is a VM Motori and Italian engine based on one they put in London Black cabs! bullet proof engine!
hunkaburningluv
Mar 26, 08:28 AM
If someone had come out with a console allowing for full-color 1024x768 touchscreen controllers the other consoles would be scrambling to catch up. Even if that controller cost $499.
While there are some nits here (30fps isn't exactly ideal performance, the dongle connection seems too flimsy for real gameplay, etc) I think this is a huge step forward in gaming.
Nintendo and Microsoft should be shaking in their boots right now.
As a rather casual gamer, I'd love to see the bastard love-child of this and kinect.
you think? I think no none would buy the $499 controller as it's too expensive for a controller.
Ninty and M$ have nothing to worry about anything that apple does in relation to games will supplement the market as it is.
Not really. Properly designed controls on touch screen will be just fine... You will see...
Anyone who thinks that the long-term viability of the IOS ecosystem as a significant home game player because of the lack of hard controls is just missing the picture.
I can't figure out why some people think you have to look at the screen of a touchscreen device to use it to manipulate things in a game world. Between rotation and movement of the device itself with properly placed buttons you can do a lot with it, none of it requiring looking at the touch screen.
I suspect most people could distinguish between the lower left corner of their device and the upper right corner, for instance, without looking at the screen.
There is still a vast difference in the tactility (sp) and force feed back that hardcore gamers won't take too - as much as I don't like modern warfare, but I doubt the metric crapload of players would prefer to play with touch controls
but when you remove the need for look at a touch screen, then why need it? A simple touch pad would suffice. By removing the need to look at the screen, you remove the point of it.
Hardcore gaming will never change to the extent it doesn't need a controller and as such the market isn't going to change. Sure I can't wait until I play starcraft or the like on an ipad, but I won't be ditching any of my consoles.
While there are some nits here (30fps isn't exactly ideal performance, the dongle connection seems too flimsy for real gameplay, etc) I think this is a huge step forward in gaming.
Nintendo and Microsoft should be shaking in their boots right now.
As a rather casual gamer, I'd love to see the bastard love-child of this and kinect.
you think? I think no none would buy the $499 controller as it's too expensive for a controller.
Ninty and M$ have nothing to worry about anything that apple does in relation to games will supplement the market as it is.
Not really. Properly designed controls on touch screen will be just fine... You will see...
Anyone who thinks that the long-term viability of the IOS ecosystem as a significant home game player because of the lack of hard controls is just missing the picture.
I can't figure out why some people think you have to look at the screen of a touchscreen device to use it to manipulate things in a game world. Between rotation and movement of the device itself with properly placed buttons you can do a lot with it, none of it requiring looking at the touch screen.
I suspect most people could distinguish between the lower left corner of their device and the upper right corner, for instance, without looking at the screen.
There is still a vast difference in the tactility (sp) and force feed back that hardcore gamers won't take too - as much as I don't like modern warfare, but I doubt the metric crapload of players would prefer to play with touch controls
but when you remove the need for look at a touch screen, then why need it? A simple touch pad would suffice. By removing the need to look at the screen, you remove the point of it.
Hardcore gaming will never change to the extent it doesn't need a controller and as such the market isn't going to change. Sure I can't wait until I play starcraft or the like on an ipad, but I won't be ditching any of my consoles.
iEvolution
Mar 22, 09:15 PM
Nice! Best news I've heard for a long time.
I will be updating to the 220GB just for video output..would be nice if they would add high definition output.
I love the people that act like 220GB is a ridiculous amount, with the file sizes always increasing (FYI, the estimate of 40,000 songs with the current 160GB is a miscalculation, how many things are still selling 128kbps songs and how many people are still using that bit rate?) an increase in capacity is ALWAYS welcome.
Further, add videos to the classic and 220GB would be considered small.
I will be updating to the 220GB just for video output..would be nice if they would add high definition output.
I love the people that act like 220GB is a ridiculous amount, with the file sizes always increasing (FYI, the estimate of 40,000 songs with the current 160GB is a miscalculation, how many things are still selling 128kbps songs and how many people are still using that bit rate?) an increase in capacity is ALWAYS welcome.
Further, add videos to the classic and 220GB would be considered small.
arn
Jan 11, 07:55 PM
added a line to the article...
"- It will be called the MacBook Air"
arn
"- It will be called the MacBook Air"
arn
eenu
Aug 16, 11:52 AM
Also, I think this may iimpact one of the features I use most, Lib sharing at home.
there is a destinct difference between 'sharing' and 'synching'.
there is a destinct difference between 'sharing' and 'synching'.
guzhogi
Jun 22, 11:58 AM
I wouldn't mind an iOS-type OS on an iMac as long as it had some more features of a full-fledged desktop OS. As in:
-Multiple Users
-Printing
-Some kind of file system
-More apps of a creative side (ie movie editing, word processing, programming, etc.) instead of just media consuming apps
Note: this list is not exhaustive; there are many more features I'd like that I just can't think of at the moment.
Plus, some games/apps will need to be done, specifically those that need the accelerometers. I don't think people would want to swing around a 20/30 pound computer. But that would be a good way to make more money; people keep breaking them so they'll have to pay for repairs/new ones.
Who wants to be touching a vertically standing screen all the time, that's tiring!
Maybe this is why we didn't see OS X 10.7 info because it might include support for this...
I was actually hoping to see a completely new mac Pro with new very high res screens and wireless trackpad.
I doubt 10.7 will be such an overhaul. Probably more like Mac OS X 11.0 or a totally new naming scheme.
-Multiple Users
-Printing
-Some kind of file system
-More apps of a creative side (ie movie editing, word processing, programming, etc.) instead of just media consuming apps
Note: this list is not exhaustive; there are many more features I'd like that I just can't think of at the moment.
Plus, some games/apps will need to be done, specifically those that need the accelerometers. I don't think people would want to swing around a 20/30 pound computer. But that would be a good way to make more money; people keep breaking them so they'll have to pay for repairs/new ones.
Who wants to be touching a vertically standing screen all the time, that's tiring!
Maybe this is why we didn't see OS X 10.7 info because it might include support for this...
I was actually hoping to see a completely new mac Pro with new very high res screens and wireless trackpad.
I doubt 10.7 will be such an overhaul. Probably more like Mac OS X 11.0 or a totally new naming scheme.
aiqw9182
Mar 24, 04:58 PM
I am not interested in Windows APIs. That's how the hardware capabilities are referred to. OpenGL has tended to lag in new features, so if the hardware has extra capabilities, it will probably support some future OpenGL version too.
OpenGL is much more like Direct3D. A part of DirectX. DirectX is just a collection of multiple API's. DirectSound is like OpenAL for example. The equivalent to OpenCL is DirectCompute.
You seem to think that DirectX 10.1 cards can't support OpenCL. Well newsflash, they can. DirectX is irrelevant in this conversation not only because it has nothing to do with Mac OS X but because it also has nothing to do with what you're associating it with.
OpenGL is much more like Direct3D. A part of DirectX. DirectX is just a collection of multiple API's. DirectSound is like OpenAL for example. The equivalent to OpenCL is DirectCompute.
You seem to think that DirectX 10.1 cards can't support OpenCL. Well newsflash, they can. DirectX is irrelevant in this conversation not only because it has nothing to do with Mac OS X but because it also has nothing to do with what you're associating it with.
JRM PowerPod
Aug 7, 08:03 AM
Don't taunt him too much, he might kill you once he finds out they are now 64-bit and higher speed!
what about when steve says they have a new case and the 17" has an optional blu-ray drive. and they all have hdmi output. x1800 256/512
he will kill us all
what about when steve says they have a new case and the 17" has an optional blu-ray drive. and they all have hdmi output. x1800 256/512
he will kill us all
ajkrause
Sep 1, 01:29 PM
Get some goddamned control man!
LOL If only it were that easy.
I bought the MBP because suspiciously my PB G4 decided to die on me right around that time and I, of course, rationalized and used it as an excuse with myaself... and now I kick myself in the butt for it too because 1 week after I bought my MBP, Apple released the 17" MBP for the same price I paid for my 15".**kick*
LOL If only it were that easy.
I bought the MBP because suspiciously my PB G4 decided to die on me right around that time and I, of course, rationalized and used it as an excuse with myaself... and now I kick myself in the butt for it too because 1 week after I bought my MBP, Apple released the 17" MBP for the same price I paid for my 15".**kick*
galstaph
Jul 13, 10:32 PM
imagine the data you could put onto those disks though!
RonHC
May 2, 05:04 PM
I got a another newbie question
I am planning on moving out of Windows (7) and onto MAC OS X, but I want to wait for Lion since its close to a finished product. Now my question is, if Lion comes out, would that mean every Mac (Mac Pro, iMac, iMac mini, Macbook, MB Pros, etc) would have Lion installed/packaged or is there a specific mac that will have Lion on its first day and the other macs would have to wait???
I am planning on moving out of Windows (7) and onto MAC OS X, but I want to wait for Lion since its close to a finished product. Now my question is, if Lion comes out, would that mean every Mac (Mac Pro, iMac, iMac mini, Macbook, MB Pros, etc) would have Lion installed/packaged or is there a specific mac that will have Lion on its first day and the other macs would have to wait???
Metatron
Jan 1, 05:46 PM
Whatever happend to the thin macbook? That is all I wanted this year.
iJohnHenry
Mar 19, 03:03 PM
is that why the war in afghanistan ended so successfully years ago? oh wait..... :p
Well, it is somewhat negated when you have a bordering country aiding and abetting the 'enemy'.
Well, it is somewhat negated when you have a bordering country aiding and abetting the 'enemy'.
MacinDoc
Oct 23, 09:08 PM
AppleInsider (http://appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2165) is posting new part numbers, presumably for new 15" MBPs...
Girl#39;s I Heart Justin Bieber
strabes
Apr 2, 07:15 PM
"Technology gets out of the way"
That's why I got a Mac/iPhone in the first place. Get out of my way, Windows/Android!
That's why I got a Mac/iPhone in the first place. Get out of my way, Windows/Android!
aswitcher
Jan 12, 05:23 PM
AirMac
AirMacExtreme AirMacPro
Maybe
AirMacExtreme AirMacPro
Maybe
Barnzee
Apr 12, 10:22 PM
only 300? sold
Agaetis Byrjun
Feb 21, 05:30 PM
It's finally all finished. Put the Craftsman tool chest in this weekend. It mostly hold cable and repair tools for guitars.
The white box on the front right leg of the desk is actually a Belkin remote. I've wired the desk so that when I hit that switch the 3 displays, audio monitors and all USB controllers will turn on.
I hate wires showing so I went to great lengths to hide them.
The white box on the front right leg of the desk is actually a Belkin remote. I've wired the desk so that when I hit that switch the 3 displays, audio monitors and all USB controllers will turn on.
I hate wires showing so I went to great lengths to hide them.
dmw007
Nov 15, 07:57 AM
8-Core Mac Pro! :eek:
***drool*** :D :cool:
***drool*** :D :cool:
mambodancer
Jul 18, 09:14 AM
The assumption is that the movies will be downloadable. It's entirely possible that Apple may follow a model like netflix. Have an online DB of thousands of movies that you can review online, read reviews and member comments, and then rent the movie and have it shipped to you like Netflix and Blockbuster. Return it when you have watched it. Order and buy brand new and used DVD's. Charge a monthly subscription service. Maybe Apple will buy Netflix?
Additionally, if Apple does provide the option of at once delivery via downloads then I don't think they need to provide DVD quality as a download (though resolution options and a price structure to match would be nice-being able to watch HD-DVD on my Mac would be great)*.
I like the $9.99 price point for movie downloads that you can keep if they are DVD quality and I'm sure Steve will continue to fight for this. This isn't much different than what the Columbia DVD movie club offers now when you consider the number of movies that you get - for their member offer you can buy 7 DVD's for an average price of $3.90 each. Movies sell from Columbia starting at $14.95 to $19.95 and they always have some kind of special offer-buy one at regular club prices, get your next DVD for 50% off.
This would be another step toward dropping cable TV for me altogether. The $45 a month I'm paying to rent TV and movies from Comcast is a great incentive to cancel cable. The quality of cable downloads (record to VCR) isn't so great and if I'm downloading TV I still have to deal with commercials. I'd much rather do the "movie and TV on demand" thing through my computer.
And yes, I finally got rid of my TV, CD player, amps, tape drive, DVD player, VCR and entertainment console in favor of listening and watching through my computer system. I love not having that hugh piece of furniture crammed full of electronics and cabling in my living room!
Additionally, if Apple does provide the option of at once delivery via downloads then I don't think they need to provide DVD quality as a download (though resolution options and a price structure to match would be nice-being able to watch HD-DVD on my Mac would be great)*.
I like the $9.99 price point for movie downloads that you can keep if they are DVD quality and I'm sure Steve will continue to fight for this. This isn't much different than what the Columbia DVD movie club offers now when you consider the number of movies that you get - for their member offer you can buy 7 DVD's for an average price of $3.90 each. Movies sell from Columbia starting at $14.95 to $19.95 and they always have some kind of special offer-buy one at regular club prices, get your next DVD for 50% off.
This would be another step toward dropping cable TV for me altogether. The $45 a month I'm paying to rent TV and movies from Comcast is a great incentive to cancel cable. The quality of cable downloads (record to VCR) isn't so great and if I'm downloading TV I still have to deal with commercials. I'd much rather do the "movie and TV on demand" thing through my computer.
And yes, I finally got rid of my TV, CD player, amps, tape drive, DVD player, VCR and entertainment console in favor of listening and watching through my computer system. I love not having that hugh piece of furniture crammed full of electronics and cabling in my living room!
