^^ CoolMacLover
Mar 1, 12:03 AM
Well here is my wonderful setup :)
Stuff:
24" iMac
13" MBP
Dell XPS 15
40something" TV
xBox 360
Logitech Wireless Keyboard & Mouse
Magic Mouse
Magic Trackpad
Wireless Keyboard, I'll say its magic also :P
And a printer...
2TB Western Digital HD (iTunes library)
1TB Western Digital HD (Backup)
Nintendo DSi
(Taken with iPhone 3G [S] )
http://i1237.photobucket.com/albums/ff477/Zere-Beat/Computer%20Stuff/IMG_0096.jpg
Below my desk:
http://i1237.photobucket.com/albums/ff477/Zere-Beat/Computer%20Stuff/IMG_0099.jpg
Oh! And everyone loves such good cable management :D
http://i1237.photobucket.com/albums/ff477/Zere-Beat/Computer%20Stuff/IMG_0100.jpg
Stuff:
24" iMac
13" MBP
Dell XPS 15
40something" TV
xBox 360
Logitech Wireless Keyboard & Mouse
Magic Mouse
Magic Trackpad
Wireless Keyboard, I'll say its magic also :P
And a printer...
2TB Western Digital HD (iTunes library)
1TB Western Digital HD (Backup)
Nintendo DSi
(Taken with iPhone 3G [S] )
http://i1237.photobucket.com/albums/ff477/Zere-Beat/Computer%20Stuff/IMG_0096.jpg
Below my desk:
http://i1237.photobucket.com/albums/ff477/Zere-Beat/Computer%20Stuff/IMG_0099.jpg
Oh! And everyone loves such good cable management :D
http://i1237.photobucket.com/albums/ff477/Zere-Beat/Computer%20Stuff/IMG_0100.jpg
mkrishnan
Jan 1, 06:01 PM
not only that, but none of the rumors really pointed to MWSF for a compact Macbook.
Agreed... I lust after it, but I have very low expectation of seeing it in January....
Nice work with the summary, Arn! :D
One other thing I think are interesting... We widely expect an iLife 07, but there have been basically no rumors related to how it will differ from iLife 06. I mean there're lots of obvious speculations, but....
Agreed... I lust after it, but I have very low expectation of seeing it in January....
Nice work with the summary, Arn! :D
One other thing I think are interesting... We widely expect an iLife 07, but there have been basically no rumors related to how it will differ from iLife 06. I mean there're lots of obvious speculations, but....
res1233
Apr 12, 10:07 PM
The App Store should really harness the power of torrent technology for files like this.
People sometimes have trouble with torrenting depending on what their ISP situation is like. It would be a nice option though so long as apple provides us with at least one fast peer. It would take some of the load off their servers too.
People sometimes have trouble with torrenting depending on what their ISP situation is like. It would be a nice option though so long as apple provides us with at least one fast peer. It would take some of the load off their servers too.
gorgeousninja
Apr 20, 09:15 AM
I'll be darned! This is the first post this guy has made in months that hasn't annoyed me! This is a good sign!
+1 (though not convinced it will last);)
+1 (though not convinced it will last);)
ryanx27
Sep 6, 10:10 AM
were's my macbook core 2 duo :mad:
2007
how about a new macbook pro? :confused:
"new" as in C2D & GPU upgrade: October
"new" as in significant form factor change: 2007
2007
how about a new macbook pro? :confused:
"new" as in C2D & GPU upgrade: October
"new" as in significant form factor change: 2007
stevemiller
Apr 12, 10:07 PM
i mostly just do smaller editing projects, and obviously information is somewhat limited at this point, but i really do like what i hear. sounds like hardware will be much better utilized to let you play with your footage without as many costly timeline renders. we'll see how the potential pans out, but i'm eager to give it a test drive!
PBF
Apr 1, 09:28 PM
^ Yup, same here. A little bit annoying having to reopen the same window.
osxhero
Apr 12, 09:31 PM
People detection or NSA spoofer code. People should have the right to turn this stuff off. Hope FCP doesn't impose it without an option to disable.
SeaFox
Dec 28, 01:52 AM
anything is possible minus 1 thing: the option to dock and iPod simply is so out of place that I do not know why it keeps getting brought up. iTV is focused on streaming content from your computer, not your iPod.
I think an iPod dock is a great idea. It would be nice to be able to use your iTV for something without a computer running. Hey, take your iPod to a friend's house and you can all watch a movie at their house from your collection, just like taking your entire video library with you.
There are two problems with this:
1) HD content takes up a huge amount of space. So if Apple did offer HD movies, the copy iTunes will transfer to your iPod would be reduced quality.
2) iTunes purchases would not be playable on the component outputs on the iTV. The movie studios would require you use an HDMI connection or something else that supported HDCP to ensure you didn't copy the movie out of the iTunes ecosphere.
As several of us have discussed before, my hope is that iTV will be able to stream all forms of content on my computer, but with particular emphasis on digital media. So if I want to bring a word doc up and type or a movie I am working on in final cut pro, I can do so. Similarly, and with more fully developed components all my digital media can be run on my tv. The goal is to make this experience integrate all the entertainment features we love, but throughout our homes. Quality preservation is essential and I think they will work to ensure that takes place.
The issue here is you're asking your iTV to open other files, in other words, you're asking it to be a regular computer. That isn't going to work because it makes the OS/interface more complicated. A home entertainment component needs to be simple and fast. This is where Apple's embedded OSX rumors would be coming in. Everyone read that and thought about the Apple Phone because that was the hot topic of the week and the was the notion of a PDA Apple phone. But an embedded real-time operating system is just what the iTV needs.
People need to stop comparing the iTV to a Mac Mini, they should thinking of it the same way you think of an XBox compared to a Windows PC. Yeah, they're both made by Microsoft, but the XBox doesn't run Windows, it runs a smaller GUI on top of what is mostly a DirectX back end.
What's funny is the reason people keep thinking of the Mini is because what consumers really want is an Apple DVR, a Mac Mini with a little stronger hardware, no external power supply, and a built in tuner. Add PVR functionality to Front Row and maybe a little bit more expansive remote and you'd have that. But since the Mini isn't expandable, it isn't even possible for a consumer to cobble together the solution themselves from a PCI tuner card and DVR software available, the closest they can do has lots of "extra parts" lying around from the ElGato external tuner, a monitor adapter to give them the connection they need, and the Mini's power supply, and it still would not be as easy to navigate since a keyboard would probably be needed at some point.
So a MacMini wont download and play a HD movie or display a word doc, and you need the iTV to accomplish this basic task?
No, it will do those things, but a MacMini costs $600. Not everyone wants to keep their main computer hooked up to the TV. The iTV allows them to watch their iTunes Store-purchased movies on a larger screen than their regular monitor without moving their computer.
Also, most people don’t need final cut pro or photo shop. So, that’s why I was thinking this could be a basic computer. If not you will need the mac mini to go with it, and why not simply include the iTV with the Mac Mini so you don’t have two devises in a limited shelf space.
The iTV is meant to be an add-on to an existing Macintosh household. Not a self-contained entertainment product like a CableCo box or a PS2.
The idea is the iTV would support more common TV connection methods out of the box, be designed to fit in better aesthetically with home entertainment components, offer better video performance, overall stability, and lower power usage than a MacMini for less.
Is the problem the iTV will address processing the images or scaling them?
I hope so. Maybe it will be upconverting for watching current iTunes movies on an HDTV?
I think an iPod dock is a great idea. It would be nice to be able to use your iTV for something without a computer running. Hey, take your iPod to a friend's house and you can all watch a movie at their house from your collection, just like taking your entire video library with you.
There are two problems with this:
1) HD content takes up a huge amount of space. So if Apple did offer HD movies, the copy iTunes will transfer to your iPod would be reduced quality.
2) iTunes purchases would not be playable on the component outputs on the iTV. The movie studios would require you use an HDMI connection or something else that supported HDCP to ensure you didn't copy the movie out of the iTunes ecosphere.
As several of us have discussed before, my hope is that iTV will be able to stream all forms of content on my computer, but with particular emphasis on digital media. So if I want to bring a word doc up and type or a movie I am working on in final cut pro, I can do so. Similarly, and with more fully developed components all my digital media can be run on my tv. The goal is to make this experience integrate all the entertainment features we love, but throughout our homes. Quality preservation is essential and I think they will work to ensure that takes place.
The issue here is you're asking your iTV to open other files, in other words, you're asking it to be a regular computer. That isn't going to work because it makes the OS/interface more complicated. A home entertainment component needs to be simple and fast. This is where Apple's embedded OSX rumors would be coming in. Everyone read that and thought about the Apple Phone because that was the hot topic of the week and the was the notion of a PDA Apple phone. But an embedded real-time operating system is just what the iTV needs.
People need to stop comparing the iTV to a Mac Mini, they should thinking of it the same way you think of an XBox compared to a Windows PC. Yeah, they're both made by Microsoft, but the XBox doesn't run Windows, it runs a smaller GUI on top of what is mostly a DirectX back end.
What's funny is the reason people keep thinking of the Mini is because what consumers really want is an Apple DVR, a Mac Mini with a little stronger hardware, no external power supply, and a built in tuner. Add PVR functionality to Front Row and maybe a little bit more expansive remote and you'd have that. But since the Mini isn't expandable, it isn't even possible for a consumer to cobble together the solution themselves from a PCI tuner card and DVR software available, the closest they can do has lots of "extra parts" lying around from the ElGato external tuner, a monitor adapter to give them the connection they need, and the Mini's power supply, and it still would not be as easy to navigate since a keyboard would probably be needed at some point.
So a MacMini wont download and play a HD movie or display a word doc, and you need the iTV to accomplish this basic task?
No, it will do those things, but a MacMini costs $600. Not everyone wants to keep their main computer hooked up to the TV. The iTV allows them to watch their iTunes Store-purchased movies on a larger screen than their regular monitor without moving their computer.
Also, most people don’t need final cut pro or photo shop. So, that’s why I was thinking this could be a basic computer. If not you will need the mac mini to go with it, and why not simply include the iTV with the Mac Mini so you don’t have two devises in a limited shelf space.
The iTV is meant to be an add-on to an existing Macintosh household. Not a self-contained entertainment product like a CableCo box or a PS2.
The idea is the iTV would support more common TV connection methods out of the box, be designed to fit in better aesthetically with home entertainment components, offer better video performance, overall stability, and lower power usage than a MacMini for less.
Is the problem the iTV will address processing the images or scaling them?
I hope so. Maybe it will be upconverting for watching current iTunes movies on an HDTV?
toddybody
Mar 24, 01:48 PM
There may be space in the Macbook Pros for a non-mobile video card, but the impact to battery life would be way beyond what I think Apple would tolerate.
IMO both issues are insurmountable. Battery Life would be 15 mins. Sorry man, but no way in HELL could a desktop card (even a small GTX 560) fit in a MBP case...even WITHOUT HEATSINK+FAN. :eek:
IMO both issues are insurmountable. Battery Life would be 15 mins. Sorry man, but no way in HELL could a desktop card (even a small GTX 560) fit in a MBP case...even WITHOUT HEATSINK+FAN. :eek:
Small White Car
Apr 12, 09:36 PM
Randy Ubillos, Chief Architect, Video Applications on stage. Demo FCP X live now. Beta version. �We hope it behaves.�
Well, there goes the hope of it being for sale anytime soon!
Oh well! Worth waiting a little longer, I guess.
Well, there goes the hope of it being for sale anytime soon!
Oh well! Worth waiting a little longer, I guess.
lordonuthin
Nov 18, 07:57 PM
^yeah almost seems unfair to ppl that want to compete but dont have access to high end hardware. i guess if you look at it from an aggregate standpoint then low point crunchers make a bit of a diff.
the amount of power sucked from the wall per unit would be WAY less i would imagine. from an environmental standpoint it wouldnt make sense
That's why I dropped the G5 after I saw how little it was doing against the Mac Pro and even the low end amd's, it just wasn't worth it in terms of the electric bill.
And speaking of electric bills... I'm just kind of guessing here but I think folding is costing me about $50 a month :eek:
the amount of power sucked from the wall per unit would be WAY less i would imagine. from an environmental standpoint it wouldnt make sense
That's why I dropped the G5 after I saw how little it was doing against the Mac Pro and even the low end amd's, it just wasn't worth it in terms of the electric bill.
And speaking of electric bills... I'm just kind of guessing here but I think folding is costing me about $50 a month :eek:
Baseline
Nov 15, 08:41 AM
seriously though, how hard is it to get a program to multi-thread? (if thats the right term; being a complete programming novice, i've no idea)
That really depends on the program, on how "parallelizable" the application is.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
That really depends on the program, on how "parallelizable" the application is.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
mattcube64
Nov 24, 02:08 AM
Picked up a red Wii today at Walmart. I sold my launch system a long time ago, and have been noticing a lot of good deals on some great titles I've missed over the years. I'm all caught up on purchasing most the PC & 360 games I want, so this would give me a lot of choices for Christmas gifts. Kinda backwards... but whatever. :p
It was the last one at Walmart, so I went ahead and bought it. But I'm keeping it sealed until Friday, to see if I can snag one with a $50 gift card online. If I can, this one will be going back to the store.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4106/5203821726_514fa55e52_b.jpg
It was the last one at Walmart, so I went ahead and bought it. But I'm keeping it sealed until Friday, to see if I can snag one with a $50 gift card online. If I can, this one will be going back to the store.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4106/5203821726_514fa55e52_b.jpg
bigandy
Jul 14, 03:10 AM
a BTO option would be great.
i'd pop one in if i could afford it- it would be damn useful considering the amount of data i need to archive making films... :rolleyes:
i'd pop one in if i could afford it- it would be damn useful considering the amount of data i need to archive making films... :rolleyes:
CmdrLaForge
Sep 1, 01:33 PM
That would be really great. Even so my 20" would look small then :eek:
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.
%IMG_DESC_18%
%IMG_DESC_19%
RaceTripper
Jan 22, 09:17 PM
They make racing and sport seats
Right, Recaro makes race and sports car buckets. I doubt they make a single baby seat. They are probably licensing their name to it.
Right, Recaro makes race and sports car buckets. I doubt they make a single baby seat. They are probably licensing their name to it.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 1, 05:11 PM
That could be true, but I can't verify it - simply because I don't really see any of those around here....
A friend of mine owns a 2009 Jetta TDI, and another friend owns a 2003(ish) Golf TDI. The new Jetta is significantly better than the Golf with the older generation diesel, but even the Golf's engine is much more refined than a diesel truck engine.
I live out in the country (horse and cattle farms), and about half the pickups out here are 3/4 ton and 1 ton diesels, mostly Chevys and Fords. Following one down the highway it's hard to hear them, but if you're behind one you can damn sure smell it - and yes, I'm talking about the new ones, too.
I live in Alaska, and they love their big diesel trucks here. I can agree that pretty much all of them stink awfully when you drive behind them. Also, performance modifications are pretty popular, so that with re-tuned ECUs and free-flowing exhausts, the damned things are positively deafening and noxious. The older trucks are definitely much worse than the newest models though.
Can't speak to the new DPF-equipped trucks, I haven't had enough experience with them. Hopefully, the increasingly stringent economy and pollution regulations will continue to make pickup diesels less and less similar to the dumptruck, semi and bulldozer engines we currently associate them with.
Still, the bottom line is, passenger car diesel engines from Germany and Italy in particular are excellent and nothing like the big clunkers in American trucks. If a diesel Cruze makes it here, it will be very smooth and quiet by comparison.
A friend of mine owns a 2009 Jetta TDI, and another friend owns a 2003(ish) Golf TDI. The new Jetta is significantly better than the Golf with the older generation diesel, but even the Golf's engine is much more refined than a diesel truck engine.
I live out in the country (horse and cattle farms), and about half the pickups out here are 3/4 ton and 1 ton diesels, mostly Chevys and Fords. Following one down the highway it's hard to hear them, but if you're behind one you can damn sure smell it - and yes, I'm talking about the new ones, too.
I live in Alaska, and they love their big diesel trucks here. I can agree that pretty much all of them stink awfully when you drive behind them. Also, performance modifications are pretty popular, so that with re-tuned ECUs and free-flowing exhausts, the damned things are positively deafening and noxious. The older trucks are definitely much worse than the newest models though.
Can't speak to the new DPF-equipped trucks, I haven't had enough experience with them. Hopefully, the increasingly stringent economy and pollution regulations will continue to make pickup diesels less and less similar to the dumptruck, semi and bulldozer engines we currently associate them with.
Still, the bottom line is, passenger car diesel engines from Germany and Italy in particular are excellent and nothing like the big clunkers in American trucks. If a diesel Cruze makes it here, it will be very smooth and quiet by comparison.
diotav
Nov 25, 06:28 PM
Received my brand new MacBook Air 11" today, YAY!
http://www.onemorething.nl/uploads/community/1c20ce8280ca07d2fd0a93e2450015ca5bfa3f34_0.jpg
(1,6 GHz, 4 GB RAM, 128 GB SSD)
http://www.onemorething.nl/uploads/community/1c20ce8280ca07d2fd0a93e2450015ca5bfa3f34_0.jpg
(1,6 GHz, 4 GB RAM, 128 GB SSD)
takao
Mar 1, 03:52 PM
and VW with their darn PumpeD�se engines sure didn't help ... the PD concept was always good for saving fuel but those engines could have easily put into a tractor pulling contest
today IMHO the german carmaker diesels are leading the way only in fuel usage and torque ratings. In regards to emissions & noise/smooth running the french (PSA) and Fiat have very likely taken over
and yeah it has mostly has to do with trucks using the diesel engines.. because you know even her in europe those trucks are smelly and noisy ... even if yourself are driving in a diesel behind them ;)
today IMHO the german carmaker diesels are leading the way only in fuel usage and torque ratings. In regards to emissions & noise/smooth running the french (PSA) and Fiat have very likely taken over
and yeah it has mostly has to do with trucks using the diesel engines.. because you know even her in europe those trucks are smelly and noisy ... even if yourself are driving in a diesel behind them ;)
twoodcc
Apr 17, 09:23 AM
Hehehe no it's fine, I will post it in this thread however ;)
Just realised that 1 million is very possible for me.
ok. yes it is!
and congrats to rwh202 for 4 million points!
Just realised that 1 million is very possible for me.
ok. yes it is!
and congrats to rwh202 for 4 million points!
wmmk
Nov 27, 05:30 PM
I hope it happens. This would not only be great for Mac Mini buyers, but also laptop owners. We already have 13-17 inches of screen real estate, so 17 more sounds just about perfect! I just hope there'd be a non iSight option so that laptop users wouldn't be paying a premium for something they already paid for.
CRAZYBUBBA
Jan 11, 07:59 PM
added a line to the article...
"- It will be called the MacBook Air"
arn
worst-name-ever. i hope that it's anything but "macbook air"
"- It will be called the MacBook Air"
arn
worst-name-ever. i hope that it's anything but "macbook air"
No comments:
Post a Comment