ClimbingTheLog
Sep 26, 04:43 PM
You sound like a pain in the ass to have as a customer.
That's pretty unfair - he said he called to get a bill fixed. What is he supposed to do, give as much of his money to the cell phone company as they see fit?
If your job is dealing with cranky customers and don't much care for it you'll be much happier with a different job, trust me.
That's pretty unfair - he said he called to get a bill fixed. What is he supposed to do, give as much of his money to the cell phone company as they see fit?
If your job is dealing with cranky customers and don't much care for it you'll be much happier with a different job, trust me.
firestarter
Apr 11, 04:09 AM
The AirPlay private key wasn't made public by Apple for the same reason the FairPlay private key wasn't-- having the private key essentially gives you access to an unencrypted stream of whatever content is encrypted by AirPlay.
THIS
As you correctly highlight, the significance of this isn't that it enables others to implement 3rd party Airplay clients for innocent playback... it's that it allows Airplay-based software rippers to be constructed.
Want an un-encrypted copy of that iTMS rental movie? Stream it to an airplay-ripper you've downloaded off the 'net, and it'll be re-compressed in non-DRM form for you to play back whenever you wish.
This is the biggest worry for Apple. They can't raise lawsuits against free software apps hosted outside the US in the same way they could block the selling of non-licenced hardware in the US.
THIS
As you correctly highlight, the significance of this isn't that it enables others to implement 3rd party Airplay clients for innocent playback... it's that it allows Airplay-based software rippers to be constructed.
Want an un-encrypted copy of that iTMS rental movie? Stream it to an airplay-ripper you've downloaded off the 'net, and it'll be re-compressed in non-DRM form for you to play back whenever you wish.
This is the biggest worry for Apple. They can't raise lawsuits against free software apps hosted outside the US in the same way they could block the selling of non-licenced hardware in the US.
apolloa
Apr 25, 06:22 PM
Meh, not bothered plus I would rather keep my superdrive so I'll grab the last of the unibody's, however I don't think they will change them next year IMO.
dazzer21
May 3, 11:34 AM
...that if each Thunderbolt port can support six daisy chained pieces of kit, if each one of those was a TB-equipped 30" monitor, we could have a 27" iMac with a 13-screen setup and 387" of screen real-estate?!! I need to buy a bigger house!!!!
asdf542
Apr 22, 01:01 PM
Even the 15" Zacates have optical drives. An MBP without optical drive would look bad.
Just like all of the netbooks with optical drives make the MBA 'look bad'? :rolleyes:
Just like all of the netbooks with optical drives make the MBA 'look bad'? :rolleyes:
Sensamic
Mar 24, 03:29 PM
I have a imac late 2009 and Im very very happy with it. I dont need a bigger screen, I dont need more resolution, I dont need more disk space, I dont need thunderbolt or USB 3, I dont need Lion, I dont need more RAM, I dont need better graphics...
I dont plan on buying a new imac until they come with USB 3 and thunderbolt and SSD inside and, who knows, bluray...
Right now theres just absolutely no need to change. Only option I want is the next macbook air with core i3, since I dont have a laptop and I need one. Ill have to wait until November or so. It wouldnt be smart to buy it now since the next update sure with have core i3 and thunderbolt and 4GB RAM.
I dont plan on buying a new imac until they come with USB 3 and thunderbolt and SSD inside and, who knows, bluray...
Right now theres just absolutely no need to change. Only option I want is the next macbook air with core i3, since I dont have a laptop and I need one. Ill have to wait until November or so. It wouldnt be smart to buy it now since the next update sure with have core i3 and thunderbolt and 4GB RAM.
howard
Sep 19, 02:37 PM
You can watch while downloading.
I was able to begin about 5 minutes into download -- barely enough time to get the snacks.
really? thats sweet! I'll have to tell my friends about that.
I havn't downloaded a movie yet, I'm still kinda in limbo about which direction to go... download, or wait for hd... or what?
we need a poll now for how many videos you have bought.
I was able to begin about 5 minutes into download -- barely enough time to get the snacks.
really? thats sweet! I'll have to tell my friends about that.
I havn't downloaded a movie yet, I'm still kinda in limbo about which direction to go... download, or wait for hd... or what?
we need a poll now for how many videos you have bought.
panzerchieftain
Apr 30, 06:14 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; nl-nl) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
It's better for playing game's when you connect your console to your mac
It's better for playing game's when you connect your console to your mac
gugy
Sep 19, 03:39 PM
From what I've heard, the quality is pretty close to DVD. Have you compared the two? What is your complaint about quality?
First of all I am not complaining. So don't jump to conclusions.
I am stating the obvious. DVD frame size is better than 640x480 frame size.
I acknowledge that the itunes movies are probably good. I just saying that I rather have the DVD frame size and quality. Plus I can have a physical DVD for back up with bonus, extras etc. It's just a preference.
First of all I am not complaining. So don't jump to conclusions.
I am stating the obvious. DVD frame size is better than 640x480 frame size.
I acknowledge that the itunes movies are probably good. I just saying that I rather have the DVD frame size and quality. Plus I can have a physical DVD for back up with bonus, extras etc. It's just a preference.
petej
Aug 23, 06:51 PM
Apple can recoup a portion of its payment if Creative is successful in licensing this patent to others.
This clause in the press release is very strange. Makes me wonder what price Creative would place on a license sale to Microsoft for its Zune and what Apple would recoup. Unless Microsoft can find a way to avoid infringing this patent, it effectively means that for every Zune sold, Apple will get some cash. Haha-hehe
Look out Sandisk too.
This clause in the press release is very strange. Makes me wonder what price Creative would place on a license sale to Microsoft for its Zune and what Apple would recoup. Unless Microsoft can find a way to avoid infringing this patent, it effectively means that for every Zune sold, Apple will get some cash. Haha-hehe
Look out Sandisk too.
Benjy91
Mar 30, 12:14 PM
Here's a novel thought. Why doesn't Microsoft create something, you know, novel?
Kinect Fastest Selling Gadget Ever (http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-03/10/kinect-fastest-selling-device)
Microsoft Phone App turns normal pics into 3D models (http://www.geek.com/articles/mobile/microsoft-phone-app-turns-normal-pics-into-3d-models-20110325/)
Microsoft invent 234 inch Touch Screen (http://www.technobolt.com/2011/03/28/microsoft-created-huge-234-inch-touchscreen-display-video/)
Kinect Fastest Selling Gadget Ever (http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-03/10/kinect-fastest-selling-device)
Microsoft Phone App turns normal pics into 3D models (http://www.geek.com/articles/mobile/microsoft-phone-app-turns-normal-pics-into-3d-models-20110325/)
Microsoft invent 234 inch Touch Screen (http://www.technobolt.com/2011/03/28/microsoft-created-huge-234-inch-touchscreen-display-video/)
Lightivity
Oct 5, 03:16 AM
Being 16x9 encoded is not the same thing as being anaporphically encoded.
Being 16x9 encoded just means that the video is meant to be viewed at a 16x9 ratio. Yes, the movies (that I have bought, anyway,) are 16x9. Specifically, Good Will Hunting is 640x344.
Anamorphically encoded refers to the act of 'stretching' 16x9 source to the height of 4x3; so that you effectively get 33% more 'vertical' data than horizontal. The TV is then supposed to 'squish' the video back to 16x9. So, for example, if you tell your DVD player that you have a '16x9 anamorphic' TV, it will output the widescreen video to fill the entire 720x480 resolution. If you tell it you have a '16x9 non-anamorphic', it will still be outputting 720x480, but will add black bars on the top and bottom, to achive a 'video' resolution of 720x405.
My TV, for example, has a special '16x9 anamorphic' mode where it actually re-aims its electron beam so that it's only drawing in the 16x9 area, but at a higher vertical density than it normally would. Meaning that I no longer have square pixels. Instead, I have pixels that are 1.33 times wider than tall. (More data packed in height-wise.)
If iTunes movies were sold as anamorphic, then Good Will Hunting would be 640x372, and rely on the TV to 'squish' the 372 high into the height that 344 should be. Thereby displaying more vertical information in the same space.
I know exactly what 'anamorphic' means, and it was precisely what I meant when saying "16x9-encoded", with the exception that 'anamorphic' is a totally confusing and natively incorrect term.
Why? Because nothing is ever stretched or squashed in digital video. The anamorphic concept has unfortunately been transfered from the celluloid world where light truly is pressed together on a 35-mm film frame only to be expanded in the theater. Now, maybe I should have added the word "enhanced for widescreen" after "16x9-encoded" but it doesn't matter: All 16x9-videomaterial is encoded so that all 720x480 pixels carry the approximate dimension of 16x9 with the aim of fitting a television that holds a display with 1.78:1 proportions. That is the very definition of 16x9. It is not anamorphical. It is not sqeezed. It is just 16x9 pixels spread across a compatible display.
Ehurtley, what I think you thought I meant, was aspect ratio. But that is something completely else. The aspect ratio is the proportions of the frame the director intended the action to be shown in, and there are several. One is 2.35:1, but the most common is 1.85:1, which most closely resembles the 1.78:1 frame that 16x9-encoded video fits right into. The only ones using the 1:78:1 aspect ratio is tv-productions. Film productions rarely use it (they stick to conventional 2.35:1 and 1.85:1).
Don't confuse the 1.78:1 aspect ratio which -- together with 1.85:1 and 2.35:1 -- is the artistic concept of framing action, with 16x9-encoding which is the technical solution of using a standard pixel resolution in a widescreen setup.
So, my question remains: is there any 16x9-encoded film content on iTunes Store?
Being 16x9 encoded just means that the video is meant to be viewed at a 16x9 ratio. Yes, the movies (that I have bought, anyway,) are 16x9. Specifically, Good Will Hunting is 640x344.
Anamorphically encoded refers to the act of 'stretching' 16x9 source to the height of 4x3; so that you effectively get 33% more 'vertical' data than horizontal. The TV is then supposed to 'squish' the video back to 16x9. So, for example, if you tell your DVD player that you have a '16x9 anamorphic' TV, it will output the widescreen video to fill the entire 720x480 resolution. If you tell it you have a '16x9 non-anamorphic', it will still be outputting 720x480, but will add black bars on the top and bottom, to achive a 'video' resolution of 720x405.
My TV, for example, has a special '16x9 anamorphic' mode where it actually re-aims its electron beam so that it's only drawing in the 16x9 area, but at a higher vertical density than it normally would. Meaning that I no longer have square pixels. Instead, I have pixels that are 1.33 times wider than tall. (More data packed in height-wise.)
If iTunes movies were sold as anamorphic, then Good Will Hunting would be 640x372, and rely on the TV to 'squish' the 372 high into the height that 344 should be. Thereby displaying more vertical information in the same space.
I know exactly what 'anamorphic' means, and it was precisely what I meant when saying "16x9-encoded", with the exception that 'anamorphic' is a totally confusing and natively incorrect term.
Why? Because nothing is ever stretched or squashed in digital video. The anamorphic concept has unfortunately been transfered from the celluloid world where light truly is pressed together on a 35-mm film frame only to be expanded in the theater. Now, maybe I should have added the word "enhanced for widescreen" after "16x9-encoded" but it doesn't matter: All 16x9-videomaterial is encoded so that all 720x480 pixels carry the approximate dimension of 16x9 with the aim of fitting a television that holds a display with 1.78:1 proportions. That is the very definition of 16x9. It is not anamorphical. It is not sqeezed. It is just 16x9 pixels spread across a compatible display.
Ehurtley, what I think you thought I meant, was aspect ratio. But that is something completely else. The aspect ratio is the proportions of the frame the director intended the action to be shown in, and there are several. One is 2.35:1, but the most common is 1.85:1, which most closely resembles the 1.78:1 frame that 16x9-encoded video fits right into. The only ones using the 1:78:1 aspect ratio is tv-productions. Film productions rarely use it (they stick to conventional 2.35:1 and 1.85:1).
Don't confuse the 1.78:1 aspect ratio which -- together with 1.85:1 and 2.35:1 -- is the artistic concept of framing action, with 16x9-encoding which is the technical solution of using a standard pixel resolution in a widescreen setup.
So, my question remains: is there any 16x9-encoded film content on iTunes Store?
LagunaSol
Apr 4, 12:50 PM
I'm not a gun control advocate. I own a gun. But I laugh at the absurd notion of being a hero when threatened.
So, um...what are you going to do with your gun when threatened? :confused:
These glorified stories of what would have happened in situation X if someone had had a gun are laughable. It doesn't work like that.
How do you know?
So, um...what are you going to do with your gun when threatened? :confused:
These glorified stories of what would have happened in situation X if someone had had a gun are laughable. It doesn't work like that.
How do you know?
mdntcallr
Oct 27, 01:17 PM
well, i believe in saving the environment. but they ought to stick to the space plan for the convention.
Dont go PETA route. be nice, but get the message across
Dont go PETA route. be nice, but get the message across
Cameront9
Sep 5, 01:22 PM
My question is, will the movies have subtitles/captioning. As a hearing impaired user, that's the deal breaker for me. If they do have captioning, I can see myself purchasing a few movies once in a while (Though I'd still rather have DVDs most of the time). If not, no way.
quigleybc
Sep 15, 05:50 PM
I think the iPhone is going to beat out G5 powerbooks for the most annoying front page rumor.
mwayne85
Apr 22, 04:42 PM
Apple should produce a really light and small MacBook Air: 400 to 600 g and 7-inches. The Mac in your pocket. Always.
Apple would have to sacrifice the full-size keyboard and probably the trackpad... and according to Steve, "These are areas that you do not want to sacrifice." Making them smaller would be borderline useless.
Apple would have to sacrifice the full-size keyboard and probably the trackpad... and according to Steve, "These are areas that you do not want to sacrifice." Making them smaller would be borderline useless.
G4er?
Mar 22, 01:59 PM
My Mom needs a new iMac due to screen issues
Isn't that kind of like throwing the baby out along with the bath water? This is why an all in one seems so wasteful to me.
Isn't that kind of like throwing the baby out along with the bath water? This is why an all in one seems so wasteful to me.
hyperpasta
Sep 5, 08:37 AM
Maybe Apple wants to be ahead of the rumors. :)
http://images.apple.com/r/store/backsoon/title_backsoon.gif
Hahaha... here we gooooooo...
http://images.apple.com/r/store/backsoon/title_backsoon.gif
Hahaha... here we gooooooo...
Clive At Five
Sep 19, 02:53 PM
I am, however, starting to see why they allowed a sneak preview of iTV. Look how many of us are saying "I can't wait for iTV!" now that we've had some time to experiment with iTunes movie downloads!
I don't quite agree. I think that the preview was mostly to deter comments such as, "Why the hell would you want to pay full price for and download a full length movie that you can only watch on your computer screen or iPod."
Apple is finally using the iTS for your household, not just your iPod/computer.
Welcome to my living room, Apple. Pull up a chair.
-Clive
I don't quite agree. I think that the preview was mostly to deter comments such as, "Why the hell would you want to pay full price for and download a full length movie that you can only watch on your computer screen or iPod."
Apple is finally using the iTS for your household, not just your iPod/computer.
Welcome to my living room, Apple. Pull up a chair.
-Clive
imikem
Sep 9, 08:29 PM
The Yonah is not related to Intel's big disaster chip, the Pentium D 810, but was botched to the point that the engineers turned off EMT64!
Really? I had understood that Yonah was close architecture wise to the previous Pentium M, while Merom represents the first "true" Core architecture.
Cheers.
Really? I had understood that Yonah was close architecture wise to the previous Pentium M, while Merom represents the first "true" Core architecture.
Cheers.
Machead III
Sep 4, 04:03 AM
Oh man, this just get's more and more confusing.
Now The Register are claiming there'll be Merom's not only in the MacBook Pro, but in the MacBook too in September.
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/08/11/apple_macbook_to_get_merom/
I wish Apple'd tell us when we'll see them at least, on the 12th, but that's not going to happen :(
Now The Register are claiming there'll be Merom's not only in the MacBook Pro, but in the MacBook too in September.
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/08/11/apple_macbook_to_get_merom/
I wish Apple'd tell us when we'll see them at least, on the 12th, but that's not going to happen :(
bloodycape
Sep 9, 02:34 AM
Cant wait to see what the mbp can do with that chip. If only we could upgrade our core duo chips to the new core 2 duo easily.
adamfilip
Sep 10, 08:34 PM
I wondering how many people are now going to put off buying a Mac Pro and wait for a faster Kentsfield :confused:
The Mac Pros a fast as it is now, Kentsfield would smash the previous benchmarks but a fair margin.
Ive heard about cloverton coming all along. and have put off buying a Mac pro
id much rather have 8 cores then 4 for the work i do
The Mac Pros a fast as it is now, Kentsfield would smash the previous benchmarks but a fair margin.
Ive heard about cloverton coming all along. and have put off buying a Mac pro
id much rather have 8 cores then 4 for the work i do
