balamw
Sep 5, 04:43 PM
And DVD's don't have ads even if you rent them (other than trailers, which is pretty standard).
The recent Peter Jackson version of King Kong had a "special feature" that was little else but an ad for the VW Touareg. This kind of prouct-placement/cross-marketing is becoming more prevalent, and plenty of Disney movies I have bought recently come with inserts in the DVD case that are ads for minivans, junk food, books, etc... etc...
B
The recent Peter Jackson version of King Kong had a "special feature" that was little else but an ad for the VW Touareg. This kind of prouct-placement/cross-marketing is becoming more prevalent, and plenty of Disney movies I have bought recently come with inserts in the DVD case that are ads for minivans, junk food, books, etc... etc...
B
whooleytoo
Mar 30, 12:45 PM
If Apple wins this argument, obviously that would prevent MS from calling theirs the "App Store" - but can they still use the phrase descriptively? I.e. "Welcome to App Market, Microsoft's app store."
If they can't (and Microsoft, Google, Blackberry etc. all trademark the others, App Shop, App Market etc.), then how do you describe what the App Store/App Shop is? I can't think of a more generic variant which could be used to describe it. "Windows" is an OS. "Internet Explorer" is a browser. "Office" is an application suite. "App Store" is...errr... an app store.
If they can't (and Microsoft, Google, Blackberry etc. all trademark the others, App Shop, App Market etc.), then how do you describe what the App Store/App Shop is? I can't think of a more generic variant which could be used to describe it. "Windows" is an OS. "Internet Explorer" is a browser. "Office" is an application suite. "App Store" is...errr... an app store.
ksz
Jul 14, 11:35 AM
that was just noise.
Someday you might pick up the signal in that noise. :)
Either way I'll wait until the imac gets a desktop chip rather than a Laptop one.
Why?
Someday you might pick up the signal in that noise. :)
Either way I'll wait until the imac gets a desktop chip rather than a Laptop one.
Why?
MacRumors
Sep 4, 06:49 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Appleinsider reports (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2016) that Apple is ready to introduce the iTunes Movie Store at the upcoming September 12th Media Event.
They expect that Jobs will announce that movies from at least one major studio will be available at $9.99/download with additional studies following. Appleinsider, however, also claims that Apple has been working on their next killer device. Instead of a video iPod device to drive movie sales, they believe a video streaming device is in the works:
Hairstyles Pictures Long
Long Hair Styles
layered brown hair style
Pictures of Long Hair Styles
Long shag hairstyles
long hair style different
Sleek hairstyles on long
long hair styles.
long hair styles 2009
celebrity hair styles for long
Long Hair Styles 2009 2010
shannyn sossamon hairstyles
A long hair style is generally
Trendy Long Hairstyles for
Men#39;s Hairstyles – Long
Appleinsider reports (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2016) that Apple is ready to introduce the iTunes Movie Store at the upcoming September 12th Media Event.
They expect that Jobs will announce that movies from at least one major studio will be available at $9.99/download with additional studies following. Appleinsider, however, also claims that Apple has been working on their next killer device. Instead of a video iPod device to drive movie sales, they believe a video streaming device is in the works:
k2director
Apr 4, 01:01 PM
Humans are pre-programmed to take such an action hard. Some don't, usually as a result of contemplation and training before such an incident. It is, however, natural to react that way. Best for all to recognize different people may take such a grave matter very differently, and that's ok.
Personally, if humans were pre-programmed to take killing another human so hard, I think we'd see a lot less senseless murder in the world.
Personally, if humans were pre-programmed to take killing another human so hard, I think we'd see a lot less senseless murder in the world.
puma1552
Apr 22, 08:28 AM
Problems:
--Dependence on an internet connection. Deal breaker right there. Subways? Forget it.
--Buffer times
--Connection instability/loss
--Already way overstrained data networks contributing to the above
--Battery life will suffer if it's wifi
--And if it's 3G, well there's another bill in the mail every month. A recurring bill in the form of data charges to listen to my music I already paid for? No thank you. No, no, no thank you.
Since when did every device in the house need a monthly bill to go with it? AT&T provides a pretty crappy service as it is to begin with, why shuffle any more money right into their pockets?
Dependence on an internet connection and a bill in the mail are enormous deal breakers.
To the people saying "Oh, well Apple isn't taking your hard drive away", no, they aren't, but this is the first step. In 20 years hard drives will be obsolete, as everything will be cloud based, and you'll be forced into the cloud whether you want to be or not.
This service is a completely stupid idea for anyone who has an iPod with a big enough hard drive to store their stuff. I can see the appeal for those with more than 160 GB of music, but other than those people, I see literally zero benefits to be had by this, and a slew of problems/frustrations to be gained.
--Dependence on an internet connection. Deal breaker right there. Subways? Forget it.
--Buffer times
--Connection instability/loss
--Already way overstrained data networks contributing to the above
--Battery life will suffer if it's wifi
--And if it's 3G, well there's another bill in the mail every month. A recurring bill in the form of data charges to listen to my music I already paid for? No thank you. No, no, no thank you.
Since when did every device in the house need a monthly bill to go with it? AT&T provides a pretty crappy service as it is to begin with, why shuffle any more money right into their pockets?
Dependence on an internet connection and a bill in the mail are enormous deal breakers.
To the people saying "Oh, well Apple isn't taking your hard drive away", no, they aren't, but this is the first step. In 20 years hard drives will be obsolete, as everything will be cloud based, and you'll be forced into the cloud whether you want to be or not.
This service is a completely stupid idea for anyone who has an iPod with a big enough hard drive to store their stuff. I can see the appeal for those with more than 160 GB of music, but other than those people, I see literally zero benefits to be had by this, and a slew of problems/frustrations to be gained.
ro2nie
Aug 24, 07:29 AM
If you can't against them, join them
Evangelion
Sep 9, 01:18 PM
Well if it gives you 64 bit memory addressing then it certainly is a newer chip
64bit addressing arrives with the new cpu. so the point is that napa64 isn't really new, it just uses merom instead of yonah.
64bit addressing arrives with the new cpu. so the point is that napa64 isn't really new, it just uses merom instead of yonah.
seabass069
Aug 24, 04:12 AM
I think this was all part of Apple's plan to start using Creative Labs' Audigy Technology in their computers. Apple has never really had a strong audio core. Now, with all the litigation overwith, I think the teams are going to come together. It might even be possible that Apple buys out Creative.
cere
Apr 14, 02:02 PM
Yeah, it is. USB 3.0 is not that big of a step up from USB 2.0 so those that really need the extra bandwidth will not bother with it and go straight to Thunderbolt. Simple as that. Leave your rinky dink Toys R Us low bandwidth peripherals to USB and leave the big boy peripherals to Thunderbolt.
Sure you have, you've completely ignored my other post then changed the subject to reading comprehension to smokescreen the topic at hand. Oh and give me a break with your non-insult ********. You have been making jabs about short buses and taking comprehension classes over a Thunderbolt and USB discussion. If anything you are the one that needs to take some classes, maybe not on comprehension but I'm sure you get the idea.
Actually let's do a real recap:
You agree with a claim that Thunderbolt will be Mac only
I respond with an article that simply states it won't be
You respond with the reason it won't take off as manufacturers will have to add it separately
Econgeek tells you it's a completely different scenario because they don't need a license through Apple
I tell you Intel will be supporting both
You then start with your strawman argument and ignore a portion of what I stated
You also follow that up with some insults
I respond with video proof of why Thunderbolt will be popular with many devices
You ignore then respond with more insults
Honestly, can you try to post without arguing against claims I never made? That is at least 3 times now and it shows a lack of honesty or reading ability. I am not sure which.
I never said it was going to Mac only (though you have accused me of that twice). I agreed with the insinuation that it could be. I never said manufacturers would have to add it separately. I did say that the article you posted said only that it would be available to all and that it didn't say all would add it. Mainly, I said that, because you know, the article doesn't actually say that.
I think we are done. No point in debating someone that doesn't understand what he is reading and also makes up things to reply to. Arguing against someone that uses strawman arguments or misses common subtleties in language is bad enough. Arguing against someone that is making up things to argue against is pointless.
Sure you have, you've completely ignored my other post then changed the subject to reading comprehension to smokescreen the topic at hand. Oh and give me a break with your non-insult ********. You have been making jabs about short buses and taking comprehension classes over a Thunderbolt and USB discussion. If anything you are the one that needs to take some classes, maybe not on comprehension but I'm sure you get the idea.
Actually let's do a real recap:
You agree with a claim that Thunderbolt will be Mac only
I respond with an article that simply states it won't be
You respond with the reason it won't take off as manufacturers will have to add it separately
Econgeek tells you it's a completely different scenario because they don't need a license through Apple
I tell you Intel will be supporting both
You then start with your strawman argument and ignore a portion of what I stated
You also follow that up with some insults
I respond with video proof of why Thunderbolt will be popular with many devices
You ignore then respond with more insults
Honestly, can you try to post without arguing against claims I never made? That is at least 3 times now and it shows a lack of honesty or reading ability. I am not sure which.
I never said it was going to Mac only (though you have accused me of that twice). I agreed with the insinuation that it could be. I never said manufacturers would have to add it separately. I did say that the article you posted said only that it would be available to all and that it didn't say all would add it. Mainly, I said that, because you know, the article doesn't actually say that.
I think we are done. No point in debating someone that doesn't understand what he is reading and also makes up things to reply to. Arguing against someone that uses strawman arguments or misses common subtleties in language is bad enough. Arguing against someone that is making up things to argue against is pointless.
aloshka
Mar 29, 01:09 PM
Looking at the figures right now anyone can easily see that iOS is not the dominating platform. Not even the second most popular (which is Symbian), but does anyone really care ?. Same case with the Macs and Mac OS X.
I would really like to see Microsoft step up the game because in the end, we customers are the ones receiving most benefit.
I had been a loyal Windows user (up to Windows 7) when I switched to Mac last year. My take is that Windows and its creators are not technically inferior to Mac OS and Apple, but their corporate philosophy has never sported the acumen and, guess what, common sense with which Steve Jobs makes the his products so pleasant to use and look at.
I'm with you 100%, I just wish Apple would focus better on development languages, frameworks & environments. XCode4 is wonderful, but objective-c and the apple SDK libraries suck. Microsoft really wins with .NET where things are just logically placed and powerful. Apple SDK, however, you have some libraries that are in C, you have some that are in Objective-C, you have some that use a mixture of both. It feels like they glued crap together last minute, but never cleaned it up. This is actually why a lot of powerful software for the MAC is unavailable outside of already C-compiled programs like photoshop, etc. Take for instance Quicken, no good Mac alternative period. When I decided to develop it myself and make millions (joke), I realized that it would take me twice as long to develop a decent mac application because I had to design around memory management, etc that you simply don't worry about in .NET. Databases, etc, PIA. Yes, I understand it requires developers to think ahead, but it also means decent software for the mac requires teams on top of teams to develop thus software still sucks on the MAC outside of what Apple had their 10-man teams build in over a year (ie iWork, etc)
I would really like to see Microsoft step up the game because in the end, we customers are the ones receiving most benefit.
I had been a loyal Windows user (up to Windows 7) when I switched to Mac last year. My take is that Windows and its creators are not technically inferior to Mac OS and Apple, but their corporate philosophy has never sported the acumen and, guess what, common sense with which Steve Jobs makes the his products so pleasant to use and look at.
I'm with you 100%, I just wish Apple would focus better on development languages, frameworks & environments. XCode4 is wonderful, but objective-c and the apple SDK libraries suck. Microsoft really wins with .NET where things are just logically placed and powerful. Apple SDK, however, you have some libraries that are in C, you have some that are in Objective-C, you have some that use a mixture of both. It feels like they glued crap together last minute, but never cleaned it up. This is actually why a lot of powerful software for the MAC is unavailable outside of already C-compiled programs like photoshop, etc. Take for instance Quicken, no good Mac alternative period. When I decided to develop it myself and make millions (joke), I realized that it would take me twice as long to develop a decent mac application because I had to design around memory management, etc that you simply don't worry about in .NET. Databases, etc, PIA. Yes, I understand it requires developers to think ahead, but it also means decent software for the mac requires teams on top of teams to develop thus software still sucks on the MAC outside of what Apple had their 10-man teams build in over a year (ie iWork, etc)
landscapeman
Mar 23, 04:39 PM
That is ridiculous. Even if Apple pulls the app, They are not going to disappear. There is always Cydia.
Macnoviz
Sep 5, 02:28 AM
:confused:
What is this....
www.apple.com/movies
comes up with
Forbidden
You don't have permission to access /movies on this server.
What might this mean
movies.apple.com is where they keep the movies that stream on the site (like the get a mac ads)
you normally can't browse to them, but if you look at the page info using Firefox, you can see on a page where the media is located. That's how you can download those movies withouth getting quicktime pro
What is this....
www.apple.com/movies
comes up with
Forbidden
You don't have permission to access /movies on this server.
What might this mean
movies.apple.com is where they keep the movies that stream on the site (like the get a mac ads)
you normally can't browse to them, but if you look at the page info using Firefox, you can see on a page where the media is located. That's how you can download those movies withouth getting quicktime pro
Sydde
Apr 11, 08:09 PM
Is it emissions regulation or just plain laziness by the automakers?
The more paranoid might suggest that oil companies are collaborating with auto makers and the government to keep efficiency as low as they can get away with. Remember, the record for fuel economy was set in the mid 70s in a slightly modified Opel: something like 237 miles on a gallon (US) of gasoline. Highly idealized conditions no doubt, but my goodness, the average automobile today should be at least a third of the way there.
The more paranoid might suggest that oil companies are collaborating with auto makers and the government to keep efficiency as low as they can get away with. Remember, the record for fuel economy was set in the mid 70s in a slightly modified Opel: something like 237 miles on a gallon (US) of gasoline. Highly idealized conditions no doubt, but my goodness, the average automobile today should be at least a third of the way there.
dondark
Sep 13, 11:56 PM
nokia never fail in making ugly phones
Totally Agree!
Totally Agree!
acslater017
Sep 5, 05:19 PM
OK hear me out on this one - WHAT IF Apple, in all its wisdom and foresight, avoids the format war (Blu-ray vs HD-DVD) altogether by NOT using a physical format? Of course, they're backing up Blu-ray...but in order to avoid putting their eggs in that basket, and seeing that consumers are hesitant to invest in either format...they do something GENIUS like sell DOWNLOADABLE HD movies on their iTunes store and release a stream-to-TV device!
This would attract everyone because it:
1) does not require an investment in a high-def player.
2) allows for lower prices to purchase/rent movies.
3) basically lets Apple avoid having to take sides by investing millions and millions into new disc drives
4) lets consumers watch the content on their computer and TV. and if they wish to invest in a Blu-ray burner, they can. If they don't, they can still enjoy HD movies!
eh? EEEHH?
This would attract everyone because it:
1) does not require an investment in a high-def player.
2) allows for lower prices to purchase/rent movies.
3) basically lets Apple avoid having to take sides by investing millions and millions into new disc drives
4) lets consumers watch the content on their computer and TV. and if they wish to invest in a Blu-ray burner, they can. If they don't, they can still enjoy HD movies!
eh? EEEHH?
SgtPepper12
Apr 25, 04:01 PM
Do you honestly think people can't tell the difference between aluminum and steel. The metals are very different. The benefit of the liquidmetal is not in the feel per se but the strength to weight ratio. Like titanium. It is a premium for outdoor cookware because its as strong a steel but light as aluminum. If the MBP's are going to get much smaller then they need less of a body - liquidmetal would help. Also, if you've every dropped your laptop then having it bounce back would be nice.
No, I don't think people can spontaneously tell the difference between aluminium and (stainless) steel. I'm talking about people with no knowledge about metallurgy whatsoever. Believe me, they have no idea. They don't know what is lighter and what is more durable. If I told people that my macbook is made out of silver they would believe me.
And I don't doubt that Liquid Metal will offer new possibilities in matters of manufacturing, so that the macbook's body can be made thinner while keeping it's durability. But my point really is, that people here are expecting it to be some kind of magic material that will completely change the experience of using their macbook. They think it will be different from aluminium as aluminium is from plastic. It's just another kind of metal, almost indistinguishable from any other metal. I hope you understand what I mean.
No, I don't think people can spontaneously tell the difference between aluminium and (stainless) steel. I'm talking about people with no knowledge about metallurgy whatsoever. Believe me, they have no idea. They don't know what is lighter and what is more durable. If I told people that my macbook is made out of silver they would believe me.
And I don't doubt that Liquid Metal will offer new possibilities in matters of manufacturing, so that the macbook's body can be made thinner while keeping it's durability. But my point really is, that people here are expecting it to be some kind of magic material that will completely change the experience of using their macbook. They think it will be different from aluminium as aluminium is from plastic. It's just another kind of metal, almost indistinguishable from any other metal. I hope you understand what I mean.
berkleeboy210
Sep 5, 08:49 AM
If we see new macs when the store is up. then it will be clear that the upcoming event will be only iPod related. here's to mac updates this morning!:D
cmaier
Nov 14, 12:08 AM
Dude. You have a double standard. If Apple were to infringe on the copyright of someone else, you would be here pitchfork in hand screaming for blood.
If you look on other sites like macnn, you will see that the airfoil app does not only display Apple icons but rather the icon of whatever browser is configured as the main browser. They cannot make the claim that they have to right to use the Firefox, Camino or Omniweb icon in their app. It is not "streaming" the icon data, it is copied over and displayed superimposed on another icon which is presumably an internal OS X bundle. The audio is streamed but those icons are copied over and superimposed on each other on the phone. That is a clear violation of the IP of other programs in a manner that is not consistent with use on the mac it was pulled from.
Mozilla's trademark policy appears to allow this sort of use:
http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/trademarks/policy.html
More importantly, each of these companies is likely to argue for trademark infringement/unfair competition, not copyright infringement, particularly when the icon is trademarked (which is a different case than the Mac icons we are talking about).
It is permissible to use a trademark so long as there is no confusion as to source. That is, if people using the RA software are likely to think that somehow Mozilla (or the other companies) are the source of the software, this would be impermissible. It is permissible to use trademarks in a descriptive sense - i.e.: this icon means that the thing you are connecting to is the product Mozilla. There is also a fair use/non-trademark use defense. As long as the message I am sending is not "this product IS mozilla" it probably is not trademark infringement.
If you look on other sites like macnn, you will see that the airfoil app does not only display Apple icons but rather the icon of whatever browser is configured as the main browser. They cannot make the claim that they have to right to use the Firefox, Camino or Omniweb icon in their app. It is not "streaming" the icon data, it is copied over and displayed superimposed on another icon which is presumably an internal OS X bundle. The audio is streamed but those icons are copied over and superimposed on each other on the phone. That is a clear violation of the IP of other programs in a manner that is not consistent with use on the mac it was pulled from.
Mozilla's trademark policy appears to allow this sort of use:
http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/trademarks/policy.html
More importantly, each of these companies is likely to argue for trademark infringement/unfair competition, not copyright infringement, particularly when the icon is trademarked (which is a different case than the Mac icons we are talking about).
It is permissible to use a trademark so long as there is no confusion as to source. That is, if people using the RA software are likely to think that somehow Mozilla (or the other companies) are the source of the software, this would be impermissible. It is permissible to use trademarks in a descriptive sense - i.e.: this icon means that the thing you are connecting to is the product Mozilla. There is also a fair use/non-trademark use defense. As long as the message I am sending is not "this product IS mozilla" it probably is not trademark infringement.
bedifferent
Apr 22, 04:17 PM
I'm sure this has been addressed but I'm tired/wiped to read the whole thread. What about the quality of the music? If one song is stored that all users stream from, is it lossless?
Someone mentioned only having 5 authorized systems for your media. I recall a few years back that Jobs, et al stated/supported burning your iTunes media to a CD-RW then re-importing it back into iTunes, stripping any copy protection. There were scripts that ran automatically, re-writing to the same disc until the selected songs were done.
Personally, I like my media on my system and iDevice(s). I don't need all of my music on my iPhone, and I have an iPod classic 60GB in my Infiniti with all my music connected via USB. I'm more interested in MobileMe revamping.
Someone mentioned only having 5 authorized systems for your media. I recall a few years back that Jobs, et al stated/supported burning your iTunes media to a CD-RW then re-importing it back into iTunes, stripping any copy protection. There were scripts that ran automatically, re-writing to the same disc until the selected songs were done.
Personally, I like my media on my system and iDevice(s). I don't need all of my music on my iPhone, and I have an iPod classic 60GB in my Infiniti with all my music connected via USB. I'm more interested in MobileMe revamping.
cube
Apr 22, 03:06 PM
Hmm... Mobile quad core @ 45W. When are the mobile dual core coming out?
10W and 17W look very far away.
10W and 17W look very far away.
MacRumors
Apr 30, 01:08 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/30/sandy-bridge-imacs-due-next-week/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/25/122155-imacs_2010.jpg
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/25/122155-imacs_2010.jpg
MagnusVonMagnum
Apr 11, 03:28 PM
XBMC might finally be able to totally replace Apple's own software with the same basic functionality (other than rentals). The only thing it lacks really is AirTunes and video tag reading (the latter of which I gather is already supposed to appear in the next major release). An AppleTV Gen1 with a Crystal card running Linux would then be quite the system with full 1080p output and yet still be able to sync music to other speakers in the house with iTunes.
kirk26
Oct 27, 11:31 AM
Good for Apple. Get those tree hugging hippies out of there. Everytime Greenpeace complains Steve Jobs kills a baby seal.