bdj21ya
Oct 23, 07:14 PM
Along with the macbook and MB pro getting updates, for $14.95 you can download an ipod nano or ipod patch/software that lets you listen to FM radio without having to purchase the radio remote. Interface is the same as with the remote.
Haha! I'm sure no hardware (e.g. FM Tuner) is neccessary. Yeah Right!
Haha! I'm sure no hardware (e.g. FM Tuner) is neccessary. Yeah Right!
apb3
Aug 31, 10:12 AM
Blue sky on wireless? Think a device which works out presence of others, and can connect safely.
Imagine being able to *share* (not stream, but share) your tunes with others on a "I'm interested in your... can I share/get that from you).
This goes beyond fair use and would not be legal. Just because I buy a song or CD, movie whatever does not mean I can give it to all my friends. I'm sure you didn't mean that
If you want to use up all your authorized machines (what is it? 5 now?) for a few friends to listen to a few songs every once in a while - I guess that would be arguably OK, but I think it would still go beyond fair use rules.
Being on the tube/commuting for ~ 1 1/2 hours a day or so and seeing >6 ipods through glancing for white buds alone, the possiblities are huge.
What are net connections used mostly for (in terms of Mb up/down) It's P2P. There wouldn't be any roaming charges, any peak rates. You could do it in a lecture room, whilst you were studying, or having coffee with friends (sharing tunes, rather than listening )
Think one big interacting social darknet :D Think virality without PC's needed.
Someone has a cool tune, and it could replicate exponentially!
For more benefits: Linking up to USB wireless receiver chips - you can wireless move files to/from PC.
Hands free driving - using changeable function paddles/butons on the steeering wheel. Hell - You could have a HUD of iTunes on a car soon (or at the very least, hook it up to those screens in the back of those orrible 4x4s )
In terms of illegal possibilities, think discogs. The amount of music you'll bump into increases a lot, so the rarer stuff might be out there. You could strike up a friendship with someone who had say, the entire back catalogue of (insert your fave band/movie/TV series). People could be walking lossless discographies of current artists. A discog of an artist is at most probably under 10Gig, so for a >60Gig player...
Who needs radio when you can stream? You could get it to actively hunt for a MP3 id tag genre - rock/pop, or highly rated artists. You could have the function to hunt for certain artists/songs...
That's another reason why I want wireless.
All this still does not tip the scales in terms of cost/benefit. Wireless will eat up your battery. It will be clumsy and frustrating (I would really hate for the new Streets single to break off midway through because iPod girl gets off at her stop or walks out of range). Also, I would not be thrilled adding drain to my battery by engaging sharing/wireless just so a bunch of strangers can mooch off of me. If my friend wants to listen to a song I have there are many ways he can do so without adding cost to the iPod and my time by having to charge the iPod all the time to make it possible in the first place
As for wireless sync... why? My god man, if we've come to the point where putting the iPod in its base is too difficult, we're screwed. Maybe there'd be the odd time when you forgot your cable or dock on a trip but that should be a rare enough occurence. If you find you always forget your cables, get an extra. You're also not addressing that you'd need that cable or dock for charging anyway (especially since you're going to be using that wireless feature to kill your battery much more quickly).
The chance that someone with an iPod (who also happens to be willing to kill their battery for my enjoyment) will be in range long enough for me to enjoy a few x-ray specks or spacemen 3 tracks are, in my opinion, close to nil.
The car options using wireless make some degree of sense (you'd be able to charge the unit by the cig lighter at least), but this seems better addressed by car/stereo makers. They're already doing it. Theree are also adapters for sale that do this.
I don't have all I need yet in this area but hooking my iPod up to the charger/FM transmitter I have let's me use the steering wheel controls for everything except the menu/scrolling bits (I know that's a big thing but I've got it set up so the iPod in it's charger/transmitter is right next to my knee and easier to manipulate than a cell phone and no harder than using the controls on the radio that are not available on the steering column). The HUD would be cool, though, and would make me a safer driver... I always wanted a HUD for my car. I think Cadillac actually had a model with an optional HUD for the main instrument panel items a while back. I wonder why more auto makers don't do this... or do they and I am just ignorant?
All in all, I just don't see enough good in adding wireless (of whatever kind) to the iPod to justify it. Now, a non-iPod (new) product that had wireless with a limited music/photo/video feature set (iPhone?, iBerry?) might be on the horizon. That wouldn't be bad as it would give those you feel the same as you the option to get their much needed "wireless," while letting others enjoy the most elegant, easy to use media player on the market without the bloat.
Imagine being able to *share* (not stream, but share) your tunes with others on a "I'm interested in your... can I share/get that from you).
This goes beyond fair use and would not be legal. Just because I buy a song or CD, movie whatever does not mean I can give it to all my friends. I'm sure you didn't mean that
If you want to use up all your authorized machines (what is it? 5 now?) for a few friends to listen to a few songs every once in a while - I guess that would be arguably OK, but I think it would still go beyond fair use rules.
Being on the tube/commuting for ~ 1 1/2 hours a day or so and seeing >6 ipods through glancing for white buds alone, the possiblities are huge.
What are net connections used mostly for (in terms of Mb up/down) It's P2P. There wouldn't be any roaming charges, any peak rates. You could do it in a lecture room, whilst you were studying, or having coffee with friends (sharing tunes, rather than listening )
Think one big interacting social darknet :D Think virality without PC's needed.
Someone has a cool tune, and it could replicate exponentially!
For more benefits: Linking up to USB wireless receiver chips - you can wireless move files to/from PC.
Hands free driving - using changeable function paddles/butons on the steeering wheel. Hell - You could have a HUD of iTunes on a car soon (or at the very least, hook it up to those screens in the back of those orrible 4x4s )
In terms of illegal possibilities, think discogs. The amount of music you'll bump into increases a lot, so the rarer stuff might be out there. You could strike up a friendship with someone who had say, the entire back catalogue of (insert your fave band/movie/TV series). People could be walking lossless discographies of current artists. A discog of an artist is at most probably under 10Gig, so for a >60Gig player...
Who needs radio when you can stream? You could get it to actively hunt for a MP3 id tag genre - rock/pop, or highly rated artists. You could have the function to hunt for certain artists/songs...
That's another reason why I want wireless.
All this still does not tip the scales in terms of cost/benefit. Wireless will eat up your battery. It will be clumsy and frustrating (I would really hate for the new Streets single to break off midway through because iPod girl gets off at her stop or walks out of range). Also, I would not be thrilled adding drain to my battery by engaging sharing/wireless just so a bunch of strangers can mooch off of me. If my friend wants to listen to a song I have there are many ways he can do so without adding cost to the iPod and my time by having to charge the iPod all the time to make it possible in the first place
As for wireless sync... why? My god man, if we've come to the point where putting the iPod in its base is too difficult, we're screwed. Maybe there'd be the odd time when you forgot your cable or dock on a trip but that should be a rare enough occurence. If you find you always forget your cables, get an extra. You're also not addressing that you'd need that cable or dock for charging anyway (especially since you're going to be using that wireless feature to kill your battery much more quickly).
The chance that someone with an iPod (who also happens to be willing to kill their battery for my enjoyment) will be in range long enough for me to enjoy a few x-ray specks or spacemen 3 tracks are, in my opinion, close to nil.
The car options using wireless make some degree of sense (you'd be able to charge the unit by the cig lighter at least), but this seems better addressed by car/stereo makers. They're already doing it. Theree are also adapters for sale that do this.
I don't have all I need yet in this area but hooking my iPod up to the charger/FM transmitter I have let's me use the steering wheel controls for everything except the menu/scrolling bits (I know that's a big thing but I've got it set up so the iPod in it's charger/transmitter is right next to my knee and easier to manipulate than a cell phone and no harder than using the controls on the radio that are not available on the steering column). The HUD would be cool, though, and would make me a safer driver... I always wanted a HUD for my car. I think Cadillac actually had a model with an optional HUD for the main instrument panel items a while back. I wonder why more auto makers don't do this... or do they and I am just ignorant?
All in all, I just don't see enough good in adding wireless (of whatever kind) to the iPod to justify it. Now, a non-iPod (new) product that had wireless with a limited music/photo/video feature set (iPhone?, iBerry?) might be on the horizon. That wouldn't be bad as it would give those you feel the same as you the option to get their much needed "wireless," while letting others enjoy the most elegant, easy to use media player on the market without the bloat.
econgeek
Apr 12, 09:03 PM
The trailers in '11 were cute, but beyond that, it's not nearly good enough for polished output. If you want am, there's your option.
This is exactly what I'm talking about. You feel that you get to dictate arbitrary standards that you cannot articulate with any specifics, and then belittle those who point out that another way of doing something can lead to superior results for them.
All I'm asking is they leave final cut PRO to the pros who know how to use it and like the interface.
Pro is not a code word for "stuck in the 1940s".
This is exactly what I'm talking about. You feel that you get to dictate arbitrary standards that you cannot articulate with any specifics, and then belittle those who point out that another way of doing something can lead to superior results for them.
All I'm asking is they leave final cut PRO to the pros who know how to use it and like the interface.
Pro is not a code word for "stuck in the 1940s".
phungy
Jan 3, 08:31 PM
Found a coupon code if anyone wants to go to Macworld.
1. Go to the Macworld website and click "Register Today"
2. Enter coupon code digg
3. You can get the 4 day exhibit hall pass for free.
1. Go to the Macworld website and click "Register Today"
2. Enter coupon code digg
3. You can get the 4 day exhibit hall pass for free.
jxyama
Apr 2, 09:09 AM
You have some good points here....but the basic arguement is how to survive in the future - How to grow the business....Itms doesn't make any money for Apple, the ipod is going to have too many similar players. So why not go for the lower end of the market - eg: like they did with the old "LC"s machines. People buy software but they don't want to shell out alot of money for hardware.
no worry, people's been saying that apple's been dying since like 10 years ago. and increasing the marketshare doesn't mean it's growing and not increasing the marketshare doesn't mean its future is doomed.
look at gateway. it just acquired eMachines and "doubled" its marketshare to 7%. apple is half that. and guess which company has been more profitable recently? which company is debt free? (hint: it's not gateway) and which company had to expand beyond just selling cheap PCs to continue its operation? (another hint: it's not apple.)
i see absolutely no economic reason why apple should bother selling cheap macs.
people who know what they want will pay for Macs. if they don't know what they want, they won't care if they got a Mac.
no worry, people's been saying that apple's been dying since like 10 years ago. and increasing the marketshare doesn't mean it's growing and not increasing the marketshare doesn't mean its future is doomed.
look at gateway. it just acquired eMachines and "doubled" its marketshare to 7%. apple is half that. and guess which company has been more profitable recently? which company is debt free? (hint: it's not gateway) and which company had to expand beyond just selling cheap PCs to continue its operation? (another hint: it's not apple.)
i see absolutely no economic reason why apple should bother selling cheap macs.
people who know what they want will pay for Macs. if they don't know what they want, they won't care if they got a Mac.
whoooaaahhhh
Sep 6, 07:51 PM
Does anyone else think that Apple really really needs a rental model for the movie store? I'm against it with music but it's not the same a movies. I don't want my harddrive full of these things. I would be nice to rent one for much less, watch it and delete it. I don't see it being very successful if it is for purchase only.
This always seemed like a no-brainer to me. I have been BEGGING for a subscription model.
How many times do you listen to a CD again? A million
How many times do you watch a movie again? Maybe 10 times at most (for most customers) Maybe less
If you have high speed internet (which is getting faster and faster everyday) then you can afford to just setup a queue like Netflix and you'll get to see probably 100 movies a month if you feel like downloading that often.
Look at the success of Netflix, the company has practically exploded! People stopped going to traditional rental houses so they had to adopt a Netflix type of service. It really couldn't be more obvious.
Besides, no matter how good the quality gets, do you really have the storage space for your ENTIRE MOVIE COLLECTION? Even if I filled my new Mac Pro with 3TB of storage, there is NO WAY I COULD EVER FIT MY MOVIE COLLECTION AT DVD QUALITY!
This always seemed like a no-brainer to me. I have been BEGGING for a subscription model.
How many times do you listen to a CD again? A million
How many times do you watch a movie again? Maybe 10 times at most (for most customers) Maybe less
If you have high speed internet (which is getting faster and faster everyday) then you can afford to just setup a queue like Netflix and you'll get to see probably 100 movies a month if you feel like downloading that often.
Look at the success of Netflix, the company has practically exploded! People stopped going to traditional rental houses so they had to adopt a Netflix type of service. It really couldn't be more obvious.
Besides, no matter how good the quality gets, do you really have the storage space for your ENTIRE MOVIE COLLECTION? Even if I filled my new Mac Pro with 3TB of storage, there is NO WAY I COULD EVER FIT MY MOVIE COLLECTION AT DVD QUALITY!
chillywilly
Jan 6, 08:47 PM
At macworld 2007 Apple will announce that you can download The Beatles music on iTunes and possible there will be a Beatles branded iPod.
An all white iPod will be introduced, while the track "Revolution #9" plays in the background.... of course, who would be the surprise musical guest on stage..... Paul or Ringo? (or maybe both... nah)
An all white iPod will be introduced, while the track "Revolution #9" plays in the background.... of course, who would be the surprise musical guest on stage..... Paul or Ringo? (or maybe both... nah)
Karpfish
Jan 1, 06:04 PM
12" Mbp
Dont Hurt Me
Sep 1, 01:35 PM
Talking about the iMac chin, isn't it time for a new-look iMac? I couldn't imagine a 23" wide chin :eek:They need to get rid of the chin, it looks like crap in my view so lets hope for a all new line and no more pod looking iMacs. I admit this sounds nice but would rather see a decent consumer tower.
HecubusPro
Aug 24, 07:36 PM
nice one... was looking to buy a mini to 'integrate' into my CAR... might wait now, then pick up a core solo intel for cheap! hopefully....
http://www.kusnetz.net/prius/
I have a Prius, and when I saw this guy put a mac mini in his Prius, I nearly died with envy. I would love to do this, but I have feeling the cost/trouble would be way out of my realm, and I don't know that I would trust someone to void the warranty on my car.:)
Still it's a cool idea.
http://www.kusnetz.net/prius/
I have a Prius, and when I saw this guy put a mac mini in his Prius, I nearly died with envy. I would love to do this, but I have feeling the cost/trouble would be way out of my realm, and I don't know that I would trust someone to void the warranty on my car.:)
Still it's a cool idea.
twoodcc
Sep 1, 02:46 PM
can't wait til Sep. 12! :eek:
Consultant
Mar 25, 03:59 PM
Great news. And so thin!
iPad 1 does not support HDMI out, so I'm assuming no, it doesn't work.
Exactly.
iPad 1 does not support HDMI out, so I'm assuming no, it doesn't work.
Exactly.
lOUDsCREAMEr
Jul 19, 06:41 PM
Here are historical Mac sales by quarter.
1Q2000 - 1,377,000
2Q2000 - 1,043,000
3Q2000 - 1,016,000
4Q2000 - 1,122,000
1Q2001 - 659,000
2Q2001 - 751,000
3Q2001 - 827,000
4Q2001 - 850,000
1Q2002 - 659,000
2Q2002 - 813,000
3Q2002 - 808,000
4Q2002 - 734,000
1Q2003 - 743,000
2Q2003 - 711,000
3Q2003 - 771,000
4Q2003 - 787,000
1Q2004 - 743,000
2Q2004 - 749,000
3Q2004 - 771,000
4Q2004 - 787,000
1Q2005 - 1,046,000
2Q2005 - 1,070,000
3Q2005 - 1,182,000
4Q2005 - 1,236,000
1Q2006- 1,254,000
2Q2006- 1,112,000
3Q2006- 1,327,000
what happened exactly in between 2000-Q4 and 2001-Q1?
1Q2000 - 1,377,000
2Q2000 - 1,043,000
3Q2000 - 1,016,000
4Q2000 - 1,122,000
1Q2001 - 659,000
2Q2001 - 751,000
3Q2001 - 827,000
4Q2001 - 850,000
1Q2002 - 659,000
2Q2002 - 813,000
3Q2002 - 808,000
4Q2002 - 734,000
1Q2003 - 743,000
2Q2003 - 711,000
3Q2003 - 771,000
4Q2003 - 787,000
1Q2004 - 743,000
2Q2004 - 749,000
3Q2004 - 771,000
4Q2004 - 787,000
1Q2005 - 1,046,000
2Q2005 - 1,070,000
3Q2005 - 1,182,000
4Q2005 - 1,236,000
1Q2006- 1,254,000
2Q2006- 1,112,000
3Q2006- 1,327,000
what happened exactly in between 2000-Q4 and 2001-Q1?
skiltrip
Sep 23, 09:42 PM
Yes, it is definitely dark purple-- not those neon purple.:cool:
glad to hear it. hopefully it'll be ready for pickup by monday. though the 99 cent hong kong cases are really starting to grow on me. i have like 7 of them. lol.
glad to hear it. hopefully it'll be ready for pickup by monday. though the 99 cent hong kong cases are really starting to grow on me. i have like 7 of them. lol.
ffakr
Nov 25, 04:59 PM
Doh.. forgive this post, my safari session flipped out and I didn't realise this posted.
~Shard~
Nov 23, 11:54 AM
Yeah I was referring to the fact that it's in HD and some of the best music concert editing I have ever seen. Just amazing Emmy Award worthy editing.
The last concert I saw across the pond was a YES concert in Genoa Italy in summer of 1972. :D
Yep, I watched it myself last night as well - agreed, very cool. Cool about the YES concert as well. :) :cool:
The last concert I saw across the pond was a YES concert in Genoa Italy in summer of 1972. :D
Yep, I watched it myself last night as well - agreed, very cool. Cool about the YES concert as well. :) :cool:
suneohair
Nov 15, 09:58 AM
For some time, Handbrake didn't use more than two cores - owners of Quad G5s reported CPU usage of exactly 50 percent, then someone changed it and Quad G5s reported 100 percent CPU usage.
What we don't know: Was the code changed to use up to four processors, or as many processors as are available? Developers are usually very unwilling to ship code that they haven't been able to try out, so expect a version using eight cores about two days after the developers have access to an eight core machine.
In the case of Handbrake, encoding to MPEG4 seems already limited by the speed of the DVD drive; you can't encode faster than you can read from the DVD. H.264 is still limited by processor speed. Using eight cores is not too difficult; for example, if you encode 60 minutes of video, just give 7 1/2 minutes to each core.
Applications should be, and most likely are written to take advantage of available resources. A developer should be writing applications to take advantage of 8-cores already, they don't need an 8-core machine to do so.
What we don't know: Was the code changed to use up to four processors, or as many processors as are available? Developers are usually very unwilling to ship code that they haven't been able to try out, so expect a version using eight cores about two days after the developers have access to an eight core machine.
In the case of Handbrake, encoding to MPEG4 seems already limited by the speed of the DVD drive; you can't encode faster than you can read from the DVD. H.264 is still limited by processor speed. Using eight cores is not too difficult; for example, if you encode 60 minutes of video, just give 7 1/2 minutes to each core.
Applications should be, and most likely are written to take advantage of available resources. A developer should be writing applications to take advantage of 8-cores already, they don't need an 8-core machine to do so.
Conner36
Mar 25, 04:33 PM
I will be happy when you dont have to use the dongle but can use an AppleTV to do the processing and have the iphone/ipad/ipodtouch useable as a controller.
I Will Miss You Poems
OnceUGoMac
Nov 28, 09:56 AM
I was in FYE last night, and out of curiosity, asked the sales assistant how they were selling. They hadn't sold a single one. I guess it is too early to tell. However, we joked that to many people iPod is the name for all mp3 players, kind of like Kleenex for tissues, and Coke for soda.
robbieduncan
Apr 20, 10:57 AM
To me, driving is a necessary evil; if I'm at point A and I need to get to point B, and nobody else is going my way, then I'll drive; otherwise, I won't. I positively hate it, and I gain no joy whatsoever from it.
That's because you only have automatics to drive :p
That's because you only have automatics to drive :p
miloblithe
Sep 6, 09:35 AM
I was wondering which way it would go--I guess it's still up in the air. Basically I just see this as a $200 price drop, which is always welcome.
Except that doesn't take into account the superdrive and hard drive. It's more like a $100 price drop.
Except that doesn't take into account the superdrive and hard drive. It's more like a $100 price drop.
iJohnHenry
Feb 22, 07:19 PM
Why do Americans harbor hate for diesel? I'm not very familiar with the differences between the fuels, other than gasoline is more refined.
Perhaps it's propaganda from the auto makers?
Diesel engines last longer, as they use a lubricant as a fuel, and not a solvent.
Perhaps it's propaganda from the auto makers?
Diesel engines last longer, as they use a lubricant as a fuel, and not a solvent.
guez
Sep 7, 03:37 PM
Actually the move to Intel has opened Apple to fast depreciation - and that isnt going away.
Many here seem to 'bitch' that Mac is now in competition with the PC in the hardware stakes and sadly that damages your resale value however the benefits are immense, I am sure Apple will be able to secure lower unit costs aswell as faster processors and newer technology. Its great for apple and for us buying, just bad if you sell hardware before it looses all value completely. It also means we will see these refreshes more often and so we will be buying more up to date hardware which as a PC user is great...
This raises an interesting question. I'm not so much interested in depreciation as obsolescence. My experience has been that if you buy the right Mac (this is key), it can last 4 years, or more, and system updates/upgrades will not seriously degrade performance (sometimes there can even be an improvement, as with Panther). This is NOT my experience with Wintel. Is this going to change with Intel? Perhaps the readership of this blog does not fall in this category, but Macs have historically appealed to those who want to spend a little more money for more value (including a longer useful life)-the same people who drive a Honda Civic into the ground rather than buying a Chevy Malibu every three years (sorry, I couldn't think of another example).
Are we entering the age of the Walmart-ifation of Macs: less value, but cheaper?
Many here seem to 'bitch' that Mac is now in competition with the PC in the hardware stakes and sadly that damages your resale value however the benefits are immense, I am sure Apple will be able to secure lower unit costs aswell as faster processors and newer technology. Its great for apple and for us buying, just bad if you sell hardware before it looses all value completely. It also means we will see these refreshes more often and so we will be buying more up to date hardware which as a PC user is great...
This raises an interesting question. I'm not so much interested in depreciation as obsolescence. My experience has been that if you buy the right Mac (this is key), it can last 4 years, or more, and system updates/upgrades will not seriously degrade performance (sometimes there can even be an improvement, as with Panther). This is NOT my experience with Wintel. Is this going to change with Intel? Perhaps the readership of this blog does not fall in this category, but Macs have historically appealed to those who want to spend a little more money for more value (including a longer useful life)-the same people who drive a Honda Civic into the ground rather than buying a Chevy Malibu every three years (sorry, I couldn't think of another example).
Are we entering the age of the Walmart-ifation of Macs: less value, but cheaper?
Globe199
Mar 24, 10:14 AM
I find it hard to believe anyone keeps their music uncompressed thats just dumb and plain lazy.
Good grief. The ignorance of some postings here is just breathtaking.
Course, it IS an Apple forum :D
All I have is an iPod mini from 2005. I use it almost everyday, but the battery is fried and I need an upgrade. I'd probably go for a 220GB, but I absolutely do not need a touch screen. Someone else remarked about the click wheel being easier to use in tactile-only situations, which for me is 99% of the time I'm using it. I bike to work and don't want to take the thing out of my pocket to change the volume, skip tracks, etc.
But Apple isn't about niche products, so I don't know what sort of chance the Classic stands. Probably not good, I'm guessing.
Good grief. The ignorance of some postings here is just breathtaking.
Course, it IS an Apple forum :D
All I have is an iPod mini from 2005. I use it almost everyday, but the battery is fried and I need an upgrade. I'd probably go for a 220GB, but I absolutely do not need a touch screen. Someone else remarked about the click wheel being easier to use in tactile-only situations, which for me is 99% of the time I'm using it. I bike to work and don't want to take the thing out of my pocket to change the volume, skip tracks, etc.
But Apple isn't about niche products, so I don't know what sort of chance the Classic stands. Probably not good, I'm guessing.
No comments:
Post a Comment