Enigmac
Aug 7, 03:31 PM
Not a glimpse of the Finder...! :eek:
*cough* TOP SECRET *cough* :rolleyes:
*cough* TOP SECRET *cough* :rolleyes:
ezekielrage_99
Aug 17, 12:59 AM
This is a very dumb question but is Photoshop running under rosetta in this test?
If Photoshop is that is nuts.
If Photoshop is that is nuts.
Billy Boo Bob
Nov 28, 11:02 PM
1 Random artist finds inspiration and writes a song
2 Artist decides his song is so good that he/she records it in a professional studio (which he can rent) so the sound quality is superb
3 Artists logs into the iTMS and publishes his song
4 Artists gets $ from every song sold and the iTMS charges the artist for the distribution
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
2 Artist decides his song is so good that he/she records it in a professional studio (which he can rent) so the sound quality is superb
3 Artists logs into the iTMS and publishes his song
4 Artists gets $ from every song sold and the iTMS charges the artist for the distribution
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
happyduck42
Apr 19, 02:12 PM
According to Wikipedia It was released in Feb before the iPhone was released..
Wikipedia is wrong then; it was announced in Feb after the iPhone in January 2007.
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_f700-1849.php
Wikipedia is wrong then; it was announced in Feb after the iPhone in January 2007.
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_f700-1849.php
Willis
Aug 26, 05:43 PM
If the power consumption is the same... does that mean that the Merom and the current chips suck the same amount energy while going full throttle?
If the above is true, if you turned down the Merom to match the speed of the current chips, wouldn't the Merom be drawing 20% less power?
In other words if the Merom and the current chip were both going 60 mph down the freeway, would the Merom be drawing less power?
Am I missing something here (such as the basics of electricity, the basic way that chips work, etc.)?
512ke
no.. what it means is that the chip is 20% more efficient using the same amount of power... Some have said that the chips do run a bit cooler because they are more efficient, but until they come out in the MBP... who knows?
If the above is true, if you turned down the Merom to match the speed of the current chips, wouldn't the Merom be drawing 20% less power?
In other words if the Merom and the current chip were both going 60 mph down the freeway, would the Merom be drawing less power?
Am I missing something here (such as the basics of electricity, the basic way that chips work, etc.)?
512ke
no.. what it means is that the chip is 20% more efficient using the same amount of power... Some have said that the chips do run a bit cooler because they are more efficient, but until they come out in the MBP... who knows?
Multimedia
Aug 27, 08:57 AM
I want to see:
easter eggs coloring pages for
Easter Egg Coloring Pages
Easter Egg Plant
Easter egg coloring pages.
Easter Coloring Pages For Kids
big-easter-egg-coloring-page
ergle2
Sep 13, 07:19 PM
Obviously, since Intel is no longer creating new processors with HT.
By the way, previous poster, HT does not double the number of cores. Just the number of virtual cores. A Pentium 4 system with HT will run slower than a dual Pentium 4 system (with HT disabled) at the same clock speed.
Actually, many tasks were faster.
HyperThreading was thrown in to mask other deficiencies in the NetBurst arch by exploiting resources that were otherwise wasted.
There were a few cases where HT ran slower when HT first debuted, but with OS scheduler tweaks and BIOS updates (microcode changes, likely), HT was a net win in most cases.
Core 2 doesn't have the same design issues - mostly down to that excessively long pipeline - that Prescott had, and hence HT makes no sense.
The problem, however, lay with Netburst as a whole, rather than HT -- which offered a minor improvement in performance - a band-aid if you will.
By the way, previous poster, HT does not double the number of cores. Just the number of virtual cores. A Pentium 4 system with HT will run slower than a dual Pentium 4 system (with HT disabled) at the same clock speed.
Actually, many tasks were faster.
HyperThreading was thrown in to mask other deficiencies in the NetBurst arch by exploiting resources that were otherwise wasted.
There were a few cases where HT ran slower when HT first debuted, but with OS scheduler tweaks and BIOS updates (microcode changes, likely), HT was a net win in most cases.
Core 2 doesn't have the same design issues - mostly down to that excessively long pipeline - that Prescott had, and hence HT makes no sense.
The problem, however, lay with Netburst as a whole, rather than HT -- which offered a minor improvement in performance - a band-aid if you will.
Tones2
Apr 11, 01:39 PM
Yeah, like all those trailblazing Android tablets that are 1-2 years ahead of the iPad, right? :rolleyes:
I'm talking PHONE. Wait 2 years or so on the tablets and it'll be the same thing. Apple just got too big of a head start on tablets.
Tony
I'm talking PHONE. Wait 2 years or so on the tablets and it'll be the same thing. Apple just got too big of a head start on tablets.
Tony
Chip NoVaMac
Apr 7, 11:48 PM
You might want to look at Best Buy's pricing again.
All iPads, iPods and Macs are sold $.99 (at minimum) above Apple.
Time Capsule 1TB $334.99 at Best Buy, $299.00 at Apple
2TB $499.99, $499.00 at Apple
Airport Extreme - $189.99 at Best Buy $179.00 at Apple
Express, $109.99 at Best Buy, $99.00 at Apple
The small accessories are just as bad. And Apple isn't the only brand they mark over MSRP too. I wouldn't be surprised is Bose products were too.
Noticed this as well on some items I have looked at BB.... they seem to be counting on the uneducated consumer of late. Working retail, I hate it when folks whip out their cellphones to do a barcode search (at least at the shop I work at we are competitive most of the time) - but at BB I do it all the time now... no reason to pay more than the retail price for something to make shareholders happy....
All iPads, iPods and Macs are sold $.99 (at minimum) above Apple.
Time Capsule 1TB $334.99 at Best Buy, $299.00 at Apple
2TB $499.99, $499.00 at Apple
Airport Extreme - $189.99 at Best Buy $179.00 at Apple
Express, $109.99 at Best Buy, $99.00 at Apple
The small accessories are just as bad. And Apple isn't the only brand they mark over MSRP too. I wouldn't be surprised is Bose products were too.
Noticed this as well on some items I have looked at BB.... they seem to be counting on the uneducated consumer of late. Working retail, I hate it when folks whip out their cellphones to do a barcode search (at least at the shop I work at we are competitive most of the time) - but at BB I do it all the time now... no reason to pay more than the retail price for something to make shareholders happy....
Mr. Wonderful
Apr 12, 07:17 PM
The Final Cut page has already been updated.
arkitect
Mar 1, 05:13 AM
...
...
...
...
...
...
Fascinating as this insight into a mediaeval mind is, please do remember to use the multi-quote.
http://images.macrumors.com/vb/images/buttons/multiquote_off.gif
...
...
...
...
...
Fascinating as this insight into a mediaeval mind is, please do remember to use the multi-quote.
http://images.macrumors.com/vb/images/buttons/multiquote_off.gif
bearbear
Mar 31, 07:16 PM
Will wait to see what exactly results from this, as right now it seems like everyone is just jumping to their own (wild) conclusions.
Coloring pages index
Easter Egg Coloring Pictures
Easter egg coloring color page
Easter Eggs Coloring Pages 2.
Easter Eggs Coloring Pages 2
easter eggs coloring pages
Easter Eggs Coloring Pages 2
Ugg
Mar 22, 11:51 AM
I'm confused. :confused:
What point is 5P trying to make here?
Is the fact that one list contains more countries by count make it superior to the second? Is that the only way to judge a coalition, by count?
That seems a little too simplistic to me.
For instance, I added up these two lists (after removing duplicates) according to how much the countries spend on their military ...
� Coalition Countries - Iraq - 2003 ~ 152 billion
� Coalition - Libya - 2011 ~ 179 billion
I guess it's just how you want to look at it. :cool:
5p's posts rarely have anything to do with reason and everything to do with histrionic political bile.
We could also point out that the Arab League is backing the Allied actions and that Libya now is not Iraq then, but why bother, because he'll just take off on some irrelevant tangent praising Reagan and Paul et fils while denigrating Obama.
What point is 5P trying to make here?
Is the fact that one list contains more countries by count make it superior to the second? Is that the only way to judge a coalition, by count?
That seems a little too simplistic to me.
For instance, I added up these two lists (after removing duplicates) according to how much the countries spend on their military ...
� Coalition Countries - Iraq - 2003 ~ 152 billion
� Coalition - Libya - 2011 ~ 179 billion
I guess it's just how you want to look at it. :cool:
5p's posts rarely have anything to do with reason and everything to do with histrionic political bile.
We could also point out that the Arab League is backing the Allied actions and that Libya now is not Iraq then, but why bother, because he'll just take off on some irrelevant tangent praising Reagan and Paul et fils while denigrating Obama.
bryanc
Aug 11, 10:52 AM
I'm stuck in a contract for another year, so I'll be watching to see how this pans out. Hopefully, I'll be able to jump on a Rev B without reservations.
Given Apple's patent on the click-wheel interface, what do you think the likelihood of a virtual rotary phone interface? There are plenty of people who are now adults who've never 'dialled' a phone. It would be really slick if Apple could find a way for all of us old-farts to re-activiate our kinaesthetic memories and dial up and old friend using the click wheel on our new iPhones.
Cheers
Given Apple's patent on the click-wheel interface, what do you think the likelihood of a virtual rotary phone interface? There are plenty of people who are now adults who've never 'dialled' a phone. It would be really slick if Apple could find a way for all of us old-farts to re-activiate our kinaesthetic memories and dial up and old friend using the click wheel on our new iPhones.
Cheers
extraextra
Aug 26, 09:24 PM
The update time for Apple's store is 9am EST? I was under the impression that it was 9am PST. I'm behind the times! (pun intended, I suppose)
Is the 7-10 days for BTO iMacs? Or stock ones?
Is the 7-10 days for BTO iMacs? Or stock ones?
Apple Corps
Sep 19, 09:10 AM
Im still on for today, 4 hours and counting.
0710 PDT - no updates yet - keep counting :-(
0710 PDT - no updates yet - keep counting :-(
andiwm2003
Apr 25, 04:14 PM
How does an encrypted db aide your sense of security when the information is about publicly listed cell towers [FCC registered], and ends up at Google which profiles your activities for trends which then allows them to resell this information through their AdSense service and more?
How did your sense of security become violated when the Telcos have historically sold your contact information to third parties who flood your mail box with junk mail and get you on lists w/o your consent? Does it send you through the roof that your liberties are being violated?
Do you scream at Safeway, Albertsons, Starbucks and every other business that profiles your buying habits that it pushes you to file a class action lawsuit?
I think not.
This and all subsequent lawsuits will be thrown out. Apple is in compliance with the FCC rules and regulations set by Congress.
.................................................................................................... ............................).
You are correct in these points.
However the fact that someone with physical access to my cell phone can figure out that I visited a certain city several times and can derive easily with what client I had negotiations is a big concern. This is true for a lot of professionals.
Then there is of course the case where you told your spouse you were in Kentucky working while your cell phone shows that you were in Vegas four times this month......
This information is of course for a person who specifically targets you much easier to get through stealing your iPhone than through hacking into Google or ATT. This case is different from random data collection by Starbucks in that someone with very little resources can target you.
Case in point: My GF has a few crazy stalkers who could find out from this data base where she actually spends most of her time. They are mentally challenged creeps who have no way to do this through hacking into ATT but they could steal her stuff at her public appearances. They actually showed up there.
Therefore this location database needs to be encrypted. It seems that many of you think these concerns do not exist or are irrelevant. I'm surprised by this.
How did your sense of security become violated when the Telcos have historically sold your contact information to third parties who flood your mail box with junk mail and get you on lists w/o your consent? Does it send you through the roof that your liberties are being violated?
Do you scream at Safeway, Albertsons, Starbucks and every other business that profiles your buying habits that it pushes you to file a class action lawsuit?
I think not.
This and all subsequent lawsuits will be thrown out. Apple is in compliance with the FCC rules and regulations set by Congress.
.................................................................................................... ............................).
You are correct in these points.
However the fact that someone with physical access to my cell phone can figure out that I visited a certain city several times and can derive easily with what client I had negotiations is a big concern. This is true for a lot of professionals.
Then there is of course the case where you told your spouse you were in Kentucky working while your cell phone shows that you were in Vegas four times this month......
This information is of course for a person who specifically targets you much easier to get through stealing your iPhone than through hacking into Google or ATT. This case is different from random data collection by Starbucks in that someone with very little resources can target you.
Case in point: My GF has a few crazy stalkers who could find out from this data base where she actually spends most of her time. They are mentally challenged creeps who have no way to do this through hacking into ATT but they could steal her stuff at her public appearances. They actually showed up there.
Therefore this location database needs to be encrypted. It seems that many of you think these concerns do not exist or are irrelevant. I'm surprised by this.
daneoni
Aug 25, 04:03 PM
Kind of a rude reply to someone who is just posting their experience with Apple.
Without criticism there would never be a reason to improve anything.
Agreed, thats why i asked what that meant. I mean its a distasteful reply and im sure if iMike were in his shoes he'd be writing the same type of post....then again he might suck it up...because its almighty Apple.
Without criticism there would never be a reason to improve anything.
Agreed, thats why i asked what that meant. I mean its a distasteful reply and im sure if iMike were in his shoes he'd be writing the same type of post....then again he might suck it up...because its almighty Apple.
zoran
Oct 14, 02:50 PM
well its said that clovertown will be here early is that early/late november or early/late december, any new rumors regarding this subject?
Moonlight
Aug 26, 08:14 PM
I just called Apple support, I was on hold for over 20 minutes, then I was disconnected. No wonder people are unhappy :mad: :( :confused:
0815
Apr 25, 02:27 PM
Prove it.
Not guilty until proven guilty ... your turn to proof that they have the data. There is zero evidence for that, no matter how often you repeat the claim.
Not guilty until proven guilty ... your turn to proof that they have the data. There is zero evidence for that, no matter how often you repeat the claim.
Danksi
Aug 15, 01:16 PM
Video cards won't make a difference in FCP as of now if that's what you are asking performance wise. If you are using Motion/Games, anything that really feeds off the video card, then I'd go for the higher end video card.
Otherwise I'd go for the 2.6 ghz.
I've not really used Motion yet, just the other apps within FC-Studio.
Just been comparing their iMac 1.9 G5 results with those of the 2.66Ghz Mac Pro numbers... I don't think I'll be disappointed in the performance boost! :D
I guess my main concern is whether or not Apple integrates the individual Final Cut Studio applications more closely, so all of a sudden you'd need a better graphics card to comfortably run the 'editor', rather than just Motion as is the case at the moment.
I think I'll stick to the 2.66Ghz and standard graphics card, as FCP and compressor are more CPU intensive I believe.
Otherwise I'd go for the 2.6 ghz.
I've not really used Motion yet, just the other apps within FC-Studio.
Just been comparing their iMac 1.9 G5 results with those of the 2.66Ghz Mac Pro numbers... I don't think I'll be disappointed in the performance boost! :D
I guess my main concern is whether or not Apple integrates the individual Final Cut Studio applications more closely, so all of a sudden you'd need a better graphics card to comfortably run the 'editor', rather than just Motion as is the case at the moment.
I think I'll stick to the 2.66Ghz and standard graphics card, as FCP and compressor are more CPU intensive I believe.
PBF
Mar 25, 11:10 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8C148)
Yes, ipad3 will run os x lion! MBA will have a touch screen!!
As soon as MBA gets a multitouch display, I'm ditching my iPad. haha
Yes, ipad3 will run os x lion! MBA will have a touch screen!!
As soon as MBA gets a multitouch display, I'm ditching my iPad. haha
Popeye206
Apr 8, 08:16 AM
Hummm... I would think by them throttling the sales, they get people back into the store over and over again trying to get one. So, take their "hot product" and dish a few out everyday to keep the eager hunters coming back in day after day and hope they buy something else in the mean time.
Also, I can see from the sales incentive standpoint that if you've hit your quota for the day selling 20 ipads in an hour, but have another 40 in stock, hold them for the next day to ensure you have consecutive days of hitting your sales quota making you look better and probably getting other bonuses? I would think they compensate managers based on daily sales and consecutive days of sales above quota.
So... basically, I see BB messing with stock to manipulate their sales and Apple being mad because they are so far behind on keeping up with demand and one of their big partners is holding out and using the iPad as sales bait.
Also, I can see from the sales incentive standpoint that if you've hit your quota for the day selling 20 ipads in an hour, but have another 40 in stock, hold them for the next day to ensure you have consecutive days of hitting your sales quota making you look better and probably getting other bonuses? I would think they compensate managers based on daily sales and consecutive days of sales above quota.
So... basically, I see BB messing with stock to manipulate their sales and Apple being mad because they are so far behind on keeping up with demand and one of their big partners is holding out and using the iPad as sales bait.
No comments:
Post a Comment