charlituna
May 2, 10:33 PM
TO ALL FANBOYS:
This is better than what we have now.
Life goes on. Live moves forward. Apple is a forward-thinking company.
Deal with it!
The best part is that it is an option. You don't have to use this or Launchpad if you don't want to. The whole Finder thing is still there for all the geeks and such
This is better than what we have now.
Life goes on. Live moves forward. Apple is a forward-thinking company.
Deal with it!
The best part is that it is an option. You don't have to use this or Launchpad if you don't want to. The whole Finder thing is still there for all the geeks and such
Squire
Jan 12, 10:57 AM
People here seem to want to condone ANY decision Apple may wish to make. Already people seem to be defensive on the "MacBook Air" name which is probably just a rumor and also seem to be defensive of Apple's decision to remove the optical drive - something we don't even know will happen!
Keep in mind the fact that this is a rumor site. People are expressing their opinions on things Apple is rumored to be doing. With respect to the name, the "MacBook Air" moniker was suggested by what the site administrators feel is a reliable source. As I mentioned previously, I don't mind the name. And, no, I'm not just saying that because I'm an Apple fan. (I did/do not like the name MacBook, for instance. It took some time to get used to. I still prefer iBook and PowerBook.)
With respect to the rumored removal of the optical drive, someone in another post put it best: Why should I have to carry around my (internal) optical drive now when I rarely use it? For a primary computer, it's pretty much essential. As a second computer with portability being a primary feature, I say get rid of it.
Again, I'm commenting on what Apple is rumored to do because, well, this particular thread relates to a rumor.
-Squire
P.S. I know where you're coming from in relation to people defending Apple's every move, even when it's unfair to the consumer. Sometimes that happens. This, however, isn't one of those cases in my opinion.
Keep in mind the fact that this is a rumor site. People are expressing their opinions on things Apple is rumored to be doing. With respect to the name, the "MacBook Air" moniker was suggested by what the site administrators feel is a reliable source. As I mentioned previously, I don't mind the name. And, no, I'm not just saying that because I'm an Apple fan. (I did/do not like the name MacBook, for instance. It took some time to get used to. I still prefer iBook and PowerBook.)
With respect to the rumored removal of the optical drive, someone in another post put it best: Why should I have to carry around my (internal) optical drive now when I rarely use it? For a primary computer, it's pretty much essential. As a second computer with portability being a primary feature, I say get rid of it.
Again, I'm commenting on what Apple is rumored to do because, well, this particular thread relates to a rumor.
-Squire
P.S. I know where you're coming from in relation to people defending Apple's every move, even when it's unfair to the consumer. Sometimes that happens. This, however, isn't one of those cases in my opinion.
Zaap
Jan 22, 11:29 AM
http://img713.imageshack.us/img713/5972/01sidelg.jpg
2011 CRV-EX
2011 CRV-EX
EricNau
Dec 27, 10:38 PM
I'm predicting a price around $400, but I'm also expecting a streaming device.
Didn't Jobs say it would be priced at $299?
Didn't Jobs say it would be priced at $299?
iToaster
Jan 12, 01:48 PM
I'm pretty sure Lord Steve is sitting back with a cup of coffee reading all this and laughing.
maflynn
May 2, 05:10 PM
the iPadification of OSX continues.
miniConvert
Aug 7, 05:11 AM
Last time we played we beat you 3-0 in England im pretty sure.
We should have won the bloody world cup.
We dominated against Italy until Grosso dived and got the most dodgy penalty in history, then we would have smashed ukraine in the quarters, then we would have been in the semi's against Germany, then anythign could have happened. Lets just say FIFA didnt want us to win, because its the one sport we 'aren't meant to dominate'. So the ref played it that way.
People should have learned not to count out an Aussie. Our spirit means we have the best in every field from sport to soldiers.
We would kick ur ass
Well, that's certainly a 'spirited' post! O_o
We should have won the bloody world cup.
We dominated against Italy until Grosso dived and got the most dodgy penalty in history, then we would have smashed ukraine in the quarters, then we would have been in the semi's against Germany, then anythign could have happened. Lets just say FIFA didnt want us to win, because its the one sport we 'aren't meant to dominate'. So the ref played it that way.
People should have learned not to count out an Aussie. Our spirit means we have the best in every field from sport to soldiers.
We would kick ur ass
Well, that's certainly a 'spirited' post! O_o
mkaake
Jan 12, 08:55 AM
I had, or rather still have in a closet, a powerbook 100. It had an external floppy drive and I did carry it around with me, kind of defeating the purpose of the smaller form factor in the first place, so I bought my wife the powerbook 145 which had the floppy onboard. I guess we're now beyond wondering how to get things on the computer without the drive, but it would make sense for a driveless mac to have some super wireless connectivity options? Perhaps connectivity with the home mac in a "go to my pc" kind of way. Apple does own the "go to my mac" domain name. Just a thought.
Having not read through 5 pages, I don't know if this has been addressed yet, but there's a lot of people talking like this (that I've heard) - but there's a big difference between now and then (I remember those days too :) ) - Back then, the floppy was your main method for moving data from one place to another. Today, your options for moving data from one machine to another are pretty huge - you can use a USB thumb drive (which is the biggest reason, IMHO, that it's finally okay to think about external disc drives again on laptops - I've used the disc drive on my lappy about 2 times since I got it 2 years ago), you can email yourself data, etc.
The times you would like to have it around would most likely be for software (either expensive software still distributed on physical media), or watching movies (or ripping new music). And while it would certainly be a pain to walk in to a store (or coffee shop, or whatever), buy a new CD, and not be able to rip it until you get near your optical drive again, I think Apple is okay with that, as they want your primary means of obtaining music / movies / media in general to be the iTMS.
So I see this as plausible. What's more, I expect other manufacturers will follow suit, and within 2-3 years, most laptops (costing more than $600, and not the desktop replacement bricks) will have external drives.
Having not read through 5 pages, I don't know if this has been addressed yet, but there's a lot of people talking like this (that I've heard) - but there's a big difference between now and then (I remember those days too :) ) - Back then, the floppy was your main method for moving data from one place to another. Today, your options for moving data from one machine to another are pretty huge - you can use a USB thumb drive (which is the biggest reason, IMHO, that it's finally okay to think about external disc drives again on laptops - I've used the disc drive on my lappy about 2 times since I got it 2 years ago), you can email yourself data, etc.
The times you would like to have it around would most likely be for software (either expensive software still distributed on physical media), or watching movies (or ripping new music). And while it would certainly be a pain to walk in to a store (or coffee shop, or whatever), buy a new CD, and not be able to rip it until you get near your optical drive again, I think Apple is okay with that, as they want your primary means of obtaining music / movies / media in general to be the iTMS.
So I see this as plausible. What's more, I expect other manufacturers will follow suit, and within 2-3 years, most laptops (costing more than $600, and not the desktop replacement bricks) will have external drives.
Eraserhead
Mar 19, 05:07 AM
Its always a tough call, if you don't go in you risk something like:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwandan_Genocide
Where over half a million people are killed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwandan_Genocide
Where over half a million people are killed.
Reverend Wally
Jan 2, 03:31 PM
On a hunch I'm calling updated MacBook Pros.
Did that not just happen ... :cool:
Did that not just happen ... :cool:
SeaFox
Dec 27, 10:02 PM
I�m waiting on buying a HD DVD or BlueRay until the price comes down, so I could see iTV offering a HD alternative, and filling that niche.
I'm waiting for one format or the other to win, and I don't have an HD set anyway.
What else could be practical? Of course it will have a hard drive� a cable box DVR has a hard drive.
You're comparing apples to oranges now. A cable box is a tuner and a self-contained unit. As far as we know, iTV will not have a tuner. Its only known function at this time is to stream content from a Mac, so that makes iTV like a Slingbox, not a cableco DVR. And Slingboxes don't have hard drives.
If it also has the ability to surf the web and run a word processor, handle video from DVR and digital camera, I�ll get one�
I wouldn't hold my breath on the word processing and web surfing. WebTV showed surfing the internet on a TV sucked because trying to read normal-sized text from six feet away was hard, and bumping the text size up would goof up the page layout generally. Same reason word processing would be silly.
That is if the price is about $500.
I'm predicting a price around $400, but I'm also expecting a streaming device.
Some unanswered questions are where are they going to get the bandwidth to do all this? You will have to have a cable subscription, perhaps just a basic subscription, but even then bandwidth is limited.
What bandwidth? The stuff you watch is downloaded to your Mac first, or even the iTV itself. They don't stream it every time you want to watch it. The iTunes Store is open for business for movies. The bandwidth problem has already been addressed.
This could be very interesting. I have often wondered why all the cable companies and satellite companies are within $5 pricing difference of each other?
That's lack of competition caused by effects of previous government sanctioned monopolies. And some "cooperation" by the different players in the industry. Kinda like how airline tickets and auto insurance are all pretty much the same.
I'm waiting for one format or the other to win, and I don't have an HD set anyway.
What else could be practical? Of course it will have a hard drive� a cable box DVR has a hard drive.
You're comparing apples to oranges now. A cable box is a tuner and a self-contained unit. As far as we know, iTV will not have a tuner. Its only known function at this time is to stream content from a Mac, so that makes iTV like a Slingbox, not a cableco DVR. And Slingboxes don't have hard drives.
If it also has the ability to surf the web and run a word processor, handle video from DVR and digital camera, I�ll get one�
I wouldn't hold my breath on the word processing and web surfing. WebTV showed surfing the internet on a TV sucked because trying to read normal-sized text from six feet away was hard, and bumping the text size up would goof up the page layout generally. Same reason word processing would be silly.
That is if the price is about $500.
I'm predicting a price around $400, but I'm also expecting a streaming device.
Some unanswered questions are where are they going to get the bandwidth to do all this? You will have to have a cable subscription, perhaps just a basic subscription, but even then bandwidth is limited.
What bandwidth? The stuff you watch is downloaded to your Mac first, or even the iTV itself. They don't stream it every time you want to watch it. The iTunes Store is open for business for movies. The bandwidth problem has already been addressed.
This could be very interesting. I have often wondered why all the cable companies and satellite companies are within $5 pricing difference of each other?
That's lack of competition caused by effects of previous government sanctioned monopolies. And some "cooperation" by the different players in the industry. Kinda like how airline tickets and auto insurance are all pretty much the same.
lordonuthin
Dec 18, 05:43 PM
i may add some more over the break
Cool, you are getting away from me again... but that's a good thing! :p
Cool, you are getting away from me again... but that's a good thing! :p
kresh
Jul 19, 07:27 PM
Such short memories...
2001-Q1 would be when the "Dot.com Bubble" burst. The whole PC industry tanked, not just Apple. Motorola was also struggling to bring faster G4 processors to market, if I remember correctly.
Ah, those were the days.
A one page web-site, drooling capital venurists, a silly name like "BoxOfRox.com", and the day of your IPO your stock was $100 a share. Set for life I tell ya.
2001-Q1 would be when the "Dot.com Bubble" burst. The whole PC industry tanked, not just Apple. Motorola was also struggling to bring faster G4 processors to market, if I remember correctly.
Ah, those were the days.
A one page web-site, drooling capital venurists, a silly name like "BoxOfRox.com", and the day of your IPO your stock was $100 a share. Set for life I tell ya.
appleguy123
Mar 20, 03:49 PM
I agree.
I think that if the App Store wasn't regulated, this app would clearly have standing to be in there, as would an app that was misogynistic, anti-semitic, or pro-flatulence.
However, Apple (and Steve Jobs in particular) has said that the App Store is meant to "protect" people from certain things (namely porn). Since Apple has the right to determine what goes into its store, I think it's fair to ask that an app that is more offensive than porn (most people disagree with this type of "therapy" and approve of homosexuality compared to the level of disagreement there is with porn) should be similarly removed from the App Store.
I think there's also a Pandora's Box in that if this App delves into trying to "cure" people of some non-existent psychosis, could Apple be guilty of aiding and abetting the practice of medicine/psychology without a license? I'm not saying there's an answer to this, but it certainly does leave the door open to more problems.
There are homeopathic apps in the AppStore. Those won't work any better than this 'pray the gay away' app, but they still are allowed in the store.
I think that if the App Store wasn't regulated, this app would clearly have standing to be in there, as would an app that was misogynistic, anti-semitic, or pro-flatulence.
However, Apple (and Steve Jobs in particular) has said that the App Store is meant to "protect" people from certain things (namely porn). Since Apple has the right to determine what goes into its store, I think it's fair to ask that an app that is more offensive than porn (most people disagree with this type of "therapy" and approve of homosexuality compared to the level of disagreement there is with porn) should be similarly removed from the App Store.
I think there's also a Pandora's Box in that if this App delves into trying to "cure" people of some non-existent psychosis, could Apple be guilty of aiding and abetting the practice of medicine/psychology without a license? I'm not saying there's an answer to this, but it certainly does leave the door open to more problems.
There are homeopathic apps in the AppStore. Those won't work any better than this 'pray the gay away' app, but they still are allowed in the store.
Small White Car
Apr 12, 10:14 PM
You realize that you'll be on Aperture 5 before you spend more money than just buying 3 outright. The upgrade from 2 to 3 cost more than just buying 3 on the app store.
Why do you want to spend more money?
If I buy Aperture 3, 4, and 5 on the app store I'll have spent $240.
Didn't it used to be $300 for 1 version? What did the upgrades cost? I feel like I'll be way past 5 before I break even.
Available on the App Store?!?
Seriously, this better come in a box.
I can't get this approved for use without probably buying it myself first, let alone using my own iTunes account, which brings up a whole lot of licensing issues at work. And before you say "create a iTunes account for work."... Tying the corporate credit card to a shared iTunes account? I'd have a better chance of having our CEO give me one of his Jaguars than that. Not to mention, IT would slaughter me for the amount of bandwidth I'd use in downloading it.
Yeah, our editing machines aren't even allowed to be on the internet.
Hopefully there's a way around this.
Why do you want to spend more money?
If I buy Aperture 3, 4, and 5 on the app store I'll have spent $240.
Didn't it used to be $300 for 1 version? What did the upgrades cost? I feel like I'll be way past 5 before I break even.
Available on the App Store?!?
Seriously, this better come in a box.
I can't get this approved for use without probably buying it myself first, let alone using my own iTunes account, which brings up a whole lot of licensing issues at work. And before you say "create a iTunes account for work."... Tying the corporate credit card to a shared iTunes account? I'd have a better chance of having our CEO give me one of his Jaguars than that. Not to mention, IT would slaughter me for the amount of bandwidth I'd use in downloading it.
Yeah, our editing machines aren't even allowed to be on the internet.
Hopefully there's a way around this.
interestedabit
Apr 19, 11:15 AM
BTW: I dont know why we believe a word out of Brian Tong's mouth. He's probably the most worthless person on CNET. Brian Cooley is where its at!
A-welcome to the forums, Brian.. :)
A-welcome to the forums, Brian.. :)
J the Ninja
Apr 12, 09:19 PM
Basically: "You Wait While I Render."
New one will apparently let you keep working while it renders in the background.
To be more exact, "You wait while I use 2 of your 8 cores to render"
New one will apparently let you keep working while it renders in the background.
To be more exact, "You wait while I use 2 of your 8 cores to render"
rdowns
Apr 12, 05:51 PM
I don't think people are pumping it up at all. I personally think that people who can't drive a standard transmission, are just lazy (and that goes for my mother, and her habit of doing her makeup while driving). People only get autos, because they don't want to have to "inconvenience" themselves with pushing down on the clutch and throwing the car into the next gear; because doing so requires them to stop shoving food down their face, or to get of the damn phone. I also hate to hear people moan about how inconvenient a standard transmission is during stop and go traffic; I mean it's not that bad, and I recently took my standard transmission accord to chicago and drove in stop and go traffic for over two hours, and it was not as annoying as some would make it out to be. People are just too willing to sacrifice the fun of driving for convenience.
-Don
The more I read the stuff you post, the more I shake my head.
-Don
The more I read the stuff you post, the more I shake my head.
bommai
Jul 18, 04:06 PM
You cannot rent an HD movie from Blockbuster or Netflix, so what makes you think "Apple has to offer HD quality". There is no need to have better quality than competitors while also providing more convenience.
What is so wrong about stereo sound? A lot of people use the speakers of their TVs for the sound of a movie. Most movie do not really take advantage of sourround sound that much, where you feel like the sound is coming from the left or from behind etc. You might as well use your 5 speakers in stereo mode.
First, couple of corrections. Netflix is already offering both HD-DVD and Bluray Disk rentals of available movies. So, technically high definition movie is for rent. I have not rented any yet because I am waiting for the prices to come down a little bit and also a victor to emerge.
Second, while it might be true that the majority of people in the general population might still be watching movies on a 4x3 non-progressive scan TV with mono/stereo sound, the distribution is quite different in the specific population that might be interested in trendy things like online downloads of movies.
In the middle to upper-middle class segment of tech-savvy market, the presence of 16x9 HD-capable displays and 5.1 surround systems are almost ubiquitous. I have several friends that all have such systems and they are also in the similar tech/economic bracket as me.
Also, it is not that expensive to own a 5.1 surround system anymore. Even though I have a system that cost several thousand dollars, you can pickup a decent Onkyo 5.1 system for $400 from the bigbox retailers. Walmart has even $99 low end systems.
About your claim that movies down take advantage of surround sound, you cannot be more wrong. Are you still watching VHS? Almost all DVDs using Dolby Digital 5.1 encoding and some better ones use DTS (which I love). These make a huge difference. Again, looking at the tech savvy customers that are early adopters, you have to think about movies like iRobot, Star Wars, War of the Worlds, Batman Begins, Spider Man 1 and 2, Bourne Supremacy, etc. These DVDs have impressive sound that cannot be expressed in stereo.
I agree that Apple's download service does not need to be HD, but it has to offer surround sound and original theatrical aspect ratio. You can probably accomplish this feat with a file size of approximately 1.5 to 2 GB per movie using H.264 encoding.
What is so wrong about stereo sound? A lot of people use the speakers of their TVs for the sound of a movie. Most movie do not really take advantage of sourround sound that much, where you feel like the sound is coming from the left or from behind etc. You might as well use your 5 speakers in stereo mode.
First, couple of corrections. Netflix is already offering both HD-DVD and Bluray Disk rentals of available movies. So, technically high definition movie is for rent. I have not rented any yet because I am waiting for the prices to come down a little bit and also a victor to emerge.
Second, while it might be true that the majority of people in the general population might still be watching movies on a 4x3 non-progressive scan TV with mono/stereo sound, the distribution is quite different in the specific population that might be interested in trendy things like online downloads of movies.
In the middle to upper-middle class segment of tech-savvy market, the presence of 16x9 HD-capable displays and 5.1 surround systems are almost ubiquitous. I have several friends that all have such systems and they are also in the similar tech/economic bracket as me.
Also, it is not that expensive to own a 5.1 surround system anymore. Even though I have a system that cost several thousand dollars, you can pickup a decent Onkyo 5.1 system for $400 from the bigbox retailers. Walmart has even $99 low end systems.
About your claim that movies down take advantage of surround sound, you cannot be more wrong. Are you still watching VHS? Almost all DVDs using Dolby Digital 5.1 encoding and some better ones use DTS (which I love). These make a huge difference. Again, looking at the tech savvy customers that are early adopters, you have to think about movies like iRobot, Star Wars, War of the Worlds, Batman Begins, Spider Man 1 and 2, Bourne Supremacy, etc. These DVDs have impressive sound that cannot be expressed in stereo.
I agree that Apple's download service does not need to be HD, but it has to offer surround sound and original theatrical aspect ratio. You can probably accomplish this feat with a file size of approximately 1.5 to 2 GB per movie using H.264 encoding.
zwida
Sep 1, 12:07 PM
Not that this matters one whit, but I think I might have to buy one of those.
Westside guy
Oct 23, 02:49 PM
I don't know if this update is imminent. apple.com store still shows macbooks and mbp as shipping within 24 hours....
Powerpage is starting to show a significant drop in availability...
http://www.pcprices.net/macbookpro.shtml
Nothing like the old days when the 15" Titanium supply went completely dry though. ;)
Powerpage is starting to show a significant drop in availability...
http://www.pcprices.net/macbookpro.shtml
Nothing like the old days when the 15" Titanium supply went completely dry though. ;)
RebootD
Apr 12, 08:28 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_0 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7A341 Safari/528.16)
This would be hilarious if there's no official announcement. Nah, they won't leave us hanging.
This would be hilarious if there's no official announcement. Nah, they won't leave us hanging.
MacBoobsPro
Aug 7, 05:11 AM
Last time we played we beat you 3-0 in England im pretty sure.
We should have won the bloody world cup.
We dominated against Italy until Grosso dived and got the most dodgy penalty in history, then we would have smashed ukraine in the quarters, then we would have been in the semi's against Germany, then anythign could have happened. Lets just say FIFA didnt want us to win, because its the one sport we 'aren't meant to dominate'. So the ref played it that way.
People should have learned not to count out an Aussie. Our spirit means we have the best in every field from sport to soldiers.
We would kick ur ass
I didnt mean the England team. They cant win anything - in my opinion because of all the media crap. I meant I would PERSONALLY KICK YOUR ASS! :D
Anyhoo... lets not get off topic. Leopard and MacPros. WOO WOO!!!!! :D
We should have won the bloody world cup.
We dominated against Italy until Grosso dived and got the most dodgy penalty in history, then we would have smashed ukraine in the quarters, then we would have been in the semi's against Germany, then anythign could have happened. Lets just say FIFA didnt want us to win, because its the one sport we 'aren't meant to dominate'. So the ref played it that way.
People should have learned not to count out an Aussie. Our spirit means we have the best in every field from sport to soldiers.
We would kick ur ass
I didnt mean the England team. They cant win anything - in my opinion because of all the media crap. I meant I would PERSONALLY KICK YOUR ASS! :D
Anyhoo... lets not get off topic. Leopard and MacPros. WOO WOO!!!!! :D
blahblah100
Apr 26, 01:15 PM
anyone else getting a little bit fed up of apples lawsuits?
Only if it's Apple being sued. Remember, when Apple sues, they are just protecting their intellectual property. Only when another company sues Apple is it frivolous and annoying and a case of where the plaintiffs are just trying to ride Apple's coattails. :rolleyes:
If you read the forums, it's very clear: lawsuits are only valid if Apple is the plaintiff.
Only if it's Apple being sued. Remember, when Apple sues, they are just protecting their intellectual property. Only when another company sues Apple is it frivolous and annoying and a case of where the plaintiffs are just trying to ride Apple's coattails. :rolleyes:
If you read the forums, it's very clear: lawsuits are only valid if Apple is the plaintiff.