mencles
Sep 19, 01:10 AM
If they don't update their MBs before October '06 - I see myself forced to buy a PC Laptop- because I really need one for university and I am not buying an outdated product.
NoSmokingBandit
Sep 1, 11:15 AM
Idk, that just doesnt sound right...
They have higher-res models from the GT4/GTPSP artists (everything 3d is made with super high poly counts then downgraded as the game's engine requires) so i dont understand why they would use the low poly models from GT4 when it would take just as much time to export a higher res model from Maya.
Time will tell i suppose, but it just doesnt make sense for them to gimp standard cars for no reason.
They have higher-res models from the GT4/GTPSP artists (everything 3d is made with super high poly counts then downgraded as the game's engine requires) so i dont understand why they would use the low poly models from GT4 when it would take just as much time to export a higher res model from Maya.
Time will tell i suppose, but it just doesnt make sense for them to gimp standard cars for no reason.
shawnce
Nov 28, 07:05 PM
I think it is crazy for everyone to think that the music industry is greedy when it getting squeezed out of all of their revenue streams. So, Apple makes hundreds of millions off of their back on the itunes site, and a billion off of iPod sales, and they cannot share in the wealth? Huh?
Apple pays the record labels for every song sold via iTMS, a vast majority of the "99 cents" for a song goes to the record labels (or direct to independent artist). iTMS is providing a new sales channel with effectively zero cost to the record labels (one that avoids manufacturing, shipping and stocking of physical units). This is a totally NEW revenue stream that arguable provides the record labels more bang for their buck then prior revenue streams and it is arguable more secure from copyright violations then prior revenue streams (FairPlay DRM). It also more directly connects customers with music (easy to do impulse purchases, etc.).
Now for the other half of your statement... just why should record companies get money for every iPod sold? This type of thinking is in some ways similar to demanding that paint manufactures should get a cut of the profits of every paint brush sold.
As a side note... I support the record companies/artist going after major copyright violators using legal proceedings.
Apple pays the record labels for every song sold via iTMS, a vast majority of the "99 cents" for a song goes to the record labels (or direct to independent artist). iTMS is providing a new sales channel with effectively zero cost to the record labels (one that avoids manufacturing, shipping and stocking of physical units). This is a totally NEW revenue stream that arguable provides the record labels more bang for their buck then prior revenue streams and it is arguable more secure from copyright violations then prior revenue streams (FairPlay DRM). It also more directly connects customers with music (easy to do impulse purchases, etc.).
Now for the other half of your statement... just why should record companies get money for every iPod sold? This type of thinking is in some ways similar to demanding that paint manufactures should get a cut of the profits of every paint brush sold.
As a side note... I support the record companies/artist going after major copyright violators using legal proceedings.
SRSound
Nov 28, 06:29 PM
here we go again
mediasorcerer
Mar 31, 10:41 PM
Whether they're right to start regulating or not, they're still shamless hypocrites. What happened to all the principles that they waved around in the air? Andy Rubin himself said that the "definition of open" was that anyone could download the Android source and do whatever they wanted to it. Now people have to kiss his ring?
Google are the ones who waved the bloody shirt and shrieked about how Android-vs-the-iPhone was about freedom. Just because they're forced to backtrack now doesn't mean it's not blatant hypocrisy.
it is hypocrisy,and its to be expected from google too,lets face it,they are the data miners right hand man,they went around stealing peoples wifi details recently,and were caught,what sort of a company does that i ask you?thieving personal info!!!!
ive never heard of apple doing that.
Google are the ones who waved the bloody shirt and shrieked about how Android-vs-the-iPhone was about freedom. Just because they're forced to backtrack now doesn't mean it's not blatant hypocrisy.
it is hypocrisy,and its to be expected from google too,lets face it,they are the data miners right hand man,they went around stealing peoples wifi details recently,and were caught,what sort of a company does that i ask you?thieving personal info!!!!
ive never heard of apple doing that.
Tomaz
Aug 7, 03:55 PM
Time machine isn't even similar to MS's System Restore. Time Machine is basically like having CVS or Subversion underneath the file system. It rocks. I don't believe there's ever been anything like it on a client-type computer (a similar feature was present in the server OS VMS, I believe).
You might want to do some reading about CVS and Subversion.
Edit: Now that I think about it, it wouldn't be surprising to find that CVS/Subversion code is the foundation for Time Machine.
Maybe not in a client type computer but it exists in Windows Server 2003 and it is called Volume Shadow Copy.
Of curse it doesn't look as nice !
You might want to do some reading about CVS and Subversion.
Edit: Now that I think about it, it wouldn't be surprising to find that CVS/Subversion code is the foundation for Time Machine.
Maybe not in a client type computer but it exists in Windows Server 2003 and it is called Volume Shadow Copy.
Of curse it doesn't look as nice !
dustinmagic
Mar 26, 03:46 AM
Golden Master candidate was supposed to have been released on Thursday. Will likely come out Monday. :apple:
lsvtecjohn3
Apr 19, 03:50 PM
Well Rovio (Angry Birds) thinks otherwise:
http://www.insidemobileapps.com/2011/03/13/angry-birds-android-ios/
"The company said in December that it expected to make $1 million per month from Android by the end of 2010. (...) Now that the app has seen about 100 million installs across all platforms, Rovio is not getting the same initial bump in paid download revenue from Apple’s app store. On Android, the company doesn’t offer paid Angry Birds apps, but sees recurring revenue from advertising."
So they make more money with their free Android version than they do with the paid iOS version.
Apple Has Paid $2 Billion To App Developers (And Other Key Stats)
[http://www.techspot.com/news/42006-apple-has-paid-over-2-billion-to-app-developers.html
How much has Google paid?
And how many other developers feel that way as Rovio ... a few. If marker share was the end all then why is all the new top apps coming out for iOS first then Android later? Android going to have a large market share iOS will probability have around 20- 25% market share and if people continue to keep paying for apps I don't see anything changing this.
Why I prefer iOS Development over Android, from a Java guy
http://www.jeviathon.com/2011/01/why-i-prefer-ios-development-over.html
Android is a mess, say developers
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/04/04/android-is-a-mess-say-developers/
IOS Easier For Developers Compared To Android
http://www.mobile88.com/news/read.asp?file=/2011/4/5/20110405035733&phone=iOS-easier-to-develop-Android-Symbian
http://www.insidemobileapps.com/2011/03/13/angry-birds-android-ios/
"The company said in December that it expected to make $1 million per month from Android by the end of 2010. (...) Now that the app has seen about 100 million installs across all platforms, Rovio is not getting the same initial bump in paid download revenue from Apple’s app store. On Android, the company doesn’t offer paid Angry Birds apps, but sees recurring revenue from advertising."
So they make more money with their free Android version than they do with the paid iOS version.
Apple Has Paid $2 Billion To App Developers (And Other Key Stats)
[http://www.techspot.com/news/42006-apple-has-paid-over-2-billion-to-app-developers.html
How much has Google paid?
And how many other developers feel that way as Rovio ... a few. If marker share was the end all then why is all the new top apps coming out for iOS first then Android later? Android going to have a large market share iOS will probability have around 20- 25% market share and if people continue to keep paying for apps I don't see anything changing this.
Why I prefer iOS Development over Android, from a Java guy
http://www.jeviathon.com/2011/01/why-i-prefer-ios-development-over.html
Android is a mess, say developers
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/04/04/android-is-a-mess-say-developers/
IOS Easier For Developers Compared To Android
http://www.mobile88.com/news/read.asp?file=/2011/4/5/20110405035733&phone=iOS-easier-to-develop-Android-Symbian
MattyMac
Aug 11, 11:09 AM
Yes Yes Yes
triceretops
Apr 27, 08:55 AM
That's good enough for me.
Apple's only screw up here was keeping the infinite database forever on your phone and backed up to your Mac. Their was no reason to back it up to the computer and no reason to keep the data on the phone after it was passed to Apple (encrypted, de-identified etc.) but I suspect the reason was simply "we weren't doing anything bad with it so we never even considered we should delete it later."
I guess you missed the part about the data is used in the phone to help the phone determine it's location faster and more precisely when you do want to use location apps (which I do a lot). So if you don't back the data up and you have to restore the phone (happens every time you do an update) then you would take a hit in location performance.
Apple's only screw up here was keeping the infinite database forever on your phone and backed up to your Mac. Their was no reason to back it up to the computer and no reason to keep the data on the phone after it was passed to Apple (encrypted, de-identified etc.) but I suspect the reason was simply "we weren't doing anything bad with it so we never even considered we should delete it later."
I guess you missed the part about the data is used in the phone to help the phone determine it's location faster and more precisely when you do want to use location apps (which I do a lot). So if you don't back the data up and you have to restore the phone (happens every time you do an update) then you would take a hit in location performance.
NoSmokingBandit
Dec 6, 06:39 PM
I got an 03 Lotus Elise :rolleyes:
Its a nice car, i just have no use for it. Idk if there are Lotus-only races later on so i didnt sell it yet.
I noticed in my garage that theres an option for sharing cars online. I havent read the GT5 manual so i have no idea what it does, but i assume it would allow my PSN friends to drive my cars if i'm not using them. I shared my Citroen, if someone is logged on later check the Online tab of your garage and see if its there. Just dont put too many miles on it ;)
Its a nice car, i just have no use for it. Idk if there are Lotus-only races later on so i didnt sell it yet.
I noticed in my garage that theres an option for sharing cars online. I havent read the GT5 manual so i have no idea what it does, but i assume it would allow my PSN friends to drive my cars if i'm not using them. I shared my Citroen, if someone is logged on later check the Online tab of your garage and see if its there. Just dont put too many miles on it ;)
balamw
Aug 7, 04:42 PM
Still, nothing fundamentally new, and definitely not Vista 2.0... ;)
Remember that Vista and Leopard are desktop OSes, not server OSes...
Anyhow, I'll wait until I see Vista 1.0 (not RC2) before I'm sure about that. ;)
B
Remember that Vista and Leopard are desktop OSes, not server OSes...
Anyhow, I'll wait until I see Vista 1.0 (not RC2) before I'm sure about that. ;)
B
7o7munoz7o7
Apr 27, 09:00 AM
It was never a big deal. Either you are holding it wrong or there is a misunderstanding. Apple never makes mistakes, didn't you get the memo? ;)
you own and admit you have a Nexus one, nothing serious could ever be taken from you.
you own and admit you have a Nexus one, nothing serious could ever be taken from you.
waldobushman
Mar 26, 02:30 PM
There will be some GUI changes. No big deal.
OS X Lion will merge client and server versions.
iOS will run under OS X with separate A5 emulator
New cloud/MobileMe/iTunes support and software refactoring
Java will still be included by default
Cellular hardware support in OS X
Support for untethered sync between computer and iPad/iPhone
OS X will better support headless operation and strong connectivity between OS X and iOS devices.
OS X Lion will merge client and server versions.
iOS will run under OS X with separate A5 emulator
New cloud/MobileMe/iTunes support and software refactoring
Java will still be included by default
Cellular hardware support in OS X
Support for untethered sync between computer and iPad/iPhone
OS X will better support headless operation and strong connectivity between OS X and iOS devices.
nagromme
Mar 22, 01:01 PM
Widescreen is great for movie watching, and the spec-lover in me is all over that... but it’s not very flexible for portrait use. (Which is how you hold a tablet one-handed, and is how you see the most content on a web page or scrolling document.)
A 10.1” 1280x800 screen is actually almost exactly the same screen area as an iPad: the iPad is 45.2 sq. in., and the 10.1 is 45.8 sq. in.
Held in portrait mode, the 10.1 is .75” taller... but .5” narrower than an iPad. I don’t think I’d care for that. (But with 1280x800 you do gain 32 pixels of width, and 256 pixels of height. Still not great for portrait use.)
The 8.9 display, though—which seems to save a few bucks—is an interesting option for dropping the price floor on “real” tablets. (Not that I’d settle for Android’s failings. As pointed out: specs alone don’t make a good car, nor a good computer, nor a good tablet!)
I hope these catch on enough that I can actually buy an iPad.
Ha ha :D Good thinking!
A 10.1” 1280x800 screen is actually almost exactly the same screen area as an iPad: the iPad is 45.2 sq. in., and the 10.1 is 45.8 sq. in.
Held in portrait mode, the 10.1 is .75” taller... but .5” narrower than an iPad. I don’t think I’d care for that. (But with 1280x800 you do gain 32 pixels of width, and 256 pixels of height. Still not great for portrait use.)
The 8.9 display, though—which seems to save a few bucks—is an interesting option for dropping the price floor on “real” tablets. (Not that I’d settle for Android’s failings. As pointed out: specs alone don’t make a good car, nor a good computer, nor a good tablet!)
I hope these catch on enough that I can actually buy an iPad.
Ha ha :D Good thinking!
Dave00
Aug 7, 03:50 PM
Well, looks like Apple has figured out what to do with all that extra space most of us have on our hard drives. Even though only changes are saved, it seems like this will take up an enormous amount of space, especially for multimedia files like movies, etc. Plus, if only changes are stored, it would seem that to restore a file would entail starting with the original, and applying all the changes since then - wouldn't that take quite a long time? And saving a file would probably take longer too... smells like alot of system slowdown. Still, I'll be very impressed if this actually works without a huge number of bugs - it has to be a phenomenally complicated task to keep track of everything. And it LOOKS really cool. :)
Dave
Dave
marksman
Mar 31, 03:49 PM
This is the right move for Google as Android has become a cluster...
That being said it does go directly against how they have built android up, and how they have pitched it to businesses and consumers alike. This is a very significant change.
I think this actually opens the window for Microsoft and their mobile OS now. It is not free, but now it becomes a legitimate option compared to Android for all handset makers outside of Apple and perhaps HP if they ever make handsets.
It is funny one of the first things some people here would say when Android was brought up is "It is open!". You can hem and haw all you want, but for all intents and purposes it is no longer open. Google signing off on all changes and them having no timetable for releasing Honeycomb source code is not open in any way shape or form.
That being said it does go directly against how they have built android up, and how they have pitched it to businesses and consumers alike. This is a very significant change.
I think this actually opens the window for Microsoft and their mobile OS now. It is not free, but now it becomes a legitimate option compared to Android for all handset makers outside of Apple and perhaps HP if they ever make handsets.
It is funny one of the first things some people here would say when Android was brought up is "It is open!". You can hem and haw all you want, but for all intents and purposes it is no longer open. Google signing off on all changes and them having no timetable for releasing Honeycomb source code is not open in any way shape or form.
Bubba Satori
Mar 26, 12:23 PM
Is Apple moving to close the source on more and more of OS X ?
Yes, as more and more of iOS moves into OS X.
Yes, as more and more of iOS moves into OS X.
Amazing Iceman
Apr 7, 10:50 PM
Don't be a troll :rolleyes:
Obviously you know little about trolls... :D (JK!)
Obviously you know little about trolls... :D (JK!)
Soba
Jul 28, 01:02 PM
you can't make a statement like that. that's like saying "i hate general electric air conditioners." what the heck? all CPU's (and air conditioners) do the same thing.
I'm not sure if this was intended as some kind of throwaway comment or not, but this is not even remotely true.
The original poster said he hated the P4, and honestly, the P4 was a lousy chip design from day 1. The original Pentium 4 chips released about 5 1/2 years ago were outperformed in some instances by an original Pentium chip running at 166MHz. The Pentium 4 was an awful architecture in many respects that simply could not be cleaned up enough to be viable; that would be why Intel abandoned it and based its current designs on the Pentium Pro's core (which was really a very decent server chip in the nineties).
When Apple announced last year they were going with Intel, a lot of people agreed it was a good choice based on the current state of the PowerPC architecture and based on Intel's planned chip designs. Personally, I was a bit unsure at the time, but was optimistic about the switch and figured we could scarcely do much worse than sticking with the G5, which was languishing. Turning back the clock a bit, if instead of releasing the G5, Apple had announced a switch to Intel in I would have thought they were crazy. Intel's chips were awful at that time and there wasn't much of a light at the end of the tunnel, either.
CPUs can be very, very different even if the overall system architecture is similar. And I side with the original poster. The P4 was a dog, and thankfully it is about to be buried forever.
I'm not sure if this was intended as some kind of throwaway comment or not, but this is not even remotely true.
The original poster said he hated the P4, and honestly, the P4 was a lousy chip design from day 1. The original Pentium 4 chips released about 5 1/2 years ago were outperformed in some instances by an original Pentium chip running at 166MHz. The Pentium 4 was an awful architecture in many respects that simply could not be cleaned up enough to be viable; that would be why Intel abandoned it and based its current designs on the Pentium Pro's core (which was really a very decent server chip in the nineties).
When Apple announced last year they were going with Intel, a lot of people agreed it was a good choice based on the current state of the PowerPC architecture and based on Intel's planned chip designs. Personally, I was a bit unsure at the time, but was optimistic about the switch and figured we could scarcely do much worse than sticking with the G5, which was languishing. Turning back the clock a bit, if instead of releasing the G5, Apple had announced a switch to Intel in I would have thought they were crazy. Intel's chips were awful at that time and there wasn't much of a light at the end of the tunnel, either.
CPUs can be very, very different even if the overall system architecture is similar. And I side with the original poster. The P4 was a dog, and thankfully it is about to be buried forever.
Erasmus
Aug 27, 04:16 AM
This is what we NEED:
1. Computer with no fan. Quiet. Silent. CRITICAL.
2. Modular computer to add a gorgeous Apple Cinema Display.
3. At lesat two FireWire 800 ports.
Then all the rest (power, etc).
How loud is a present day iMac, Mac Pro or Mac Mini? They're not noisy are they? I never hear my dad's 17" Powerbook. I assume it has a fan.
I wouldn't have thought modern macs would be noisy.
And fanless macs, like my Cube are absolutely huge compared to what's in them. The convectin core takes up about half the computer. Fans are good, because they allow a computer to be small. I like fans, and I expect my iMac Ultra to have lots, but still be quiet. Like the Mac Pro.
1. Computer with no fan. Quiet. Silent. CRITICAL.
2. Modular computer to add a gorgeous Apple Cinema Display.
3. At lesat two FireWire 800 ports.
Then all the rest (power, etc).
How loud is a present day iMac, Mac Pro or Mac Mini? They're not noisy are they? I never hear my dad's 17" Powerbook. I assume it has a fan.
I wouldn't have thought modern macs would be noisy.
And fanless macs, like my Cube are absolutely huge compared to what's in them. The convectin core takes up about half the computer. Fans are good, because they allow a computer to be small. I like fans, and I expect my iMac Ultra to have lots, but still be quiet. Like the Mac Pro.
Manic Mouse
Aug 27, 04:54 AM
Yup, heat is no problem. :) Cost on the other hand is. Going from a 2.4 GHz Conroe from a 1.83 GHz Yonah on the low-end is roughly a 30% increase in cost JUST for the CPU. As for your "iMac Ultra"...
$1000 - 2.93 GHz Conroe
$800 - 23" Display
$300 - X1900
$400 - Hard Drive, Optical Drive, RAM etc.
+ Build costs, marketing costs, logic board cost, casing costs etc.
+ Apple's profit margin
And you are easily looking at a $3000 machine.
I want to see:
$1000 - 2.93 GHz Conroe
$800 - 23" Display
$300 - X1900
$400 - Hard Drive, Optical Drive, RAM etc.
+ Build costs, marketing costs, logic board cost, casing costs etc.
+ Apple's profit margin
And you are easily looking at a $3000 machine.
I want to see:
zap2
Apr 29, 01:08 PM
I don't want anyone to attack anyone else. Whomever calls names, name-calling is libel or slander. I say, "Attack ideas, not people."
Not if its true. So saying "Palin is a tax lower lowering nut" can be true. Its up for debate, but you can make the argument based off factual arguments.
Doesn't mean its a good idea or helpful to the nation, but its not libel/slander if its true.
I I wasn't talking about liberals in general. I said that most of the name-callers I knew of were liberals.
But its clear what you are implying
Not if its true. So saying "Palin is a tax lower lowering nut" can be true. Its up for debate, but you can make the argument based off factual arguments.
Doesn't mean its a good idea or helpful to the nation, but its not libel/slander if its true.
I I wasn't talking about liberals in general. I said that most of the name-callers I knew of were liberals.
But its clear what you are implying
0815
Mar 31, 05:28 PM
The problem that has always existed, not just with Android, is that the carriers customize the OS, release it with a phone, and you can forget about getting any updates for it. Maybe one update for the lifetime of the device, if you are lucky. My HTC TouchPro 2 has only seen in almost 2 years just one update to WM 6.5, and it was not even close to the most current revision at that time.
This just shows that carriers and manufacturers don't want to keep maintaining their phones. They want to sell and forget, and push a new model out the door.
Sad, but true... :(
Correct - and that is what Apple realized and didn't allow and got bashed for.
This just shows that carriers and manufacturers don't want to keep maintaining their phones. They want to sell and forget, and push a new model out the door.
Sad, but true... :(
Correct - and that is what Apple realized and didn't allow and got bashed for.
No comments:
Post a Comment