elgruga
Sep 7, 01:41 AM
Reasoning goes like this:
Music costs a small amount to make - can be as low as $10k for an album.
Sell a bunch and make some profit.
Movies cost upwards of $50 million to make, often $100mil or more, so you got to rent them and sell them and do whatever you can to get that cash back.
And its got to go out the door at $25 if you are buying.
Thing is, if Apple want me to buy a movie for $15, I can rent it for $5 at the store.....and copy it if I want.
Yeah, I know thats against the law but a LOT of people do it, and anyway, if you d/l from Apple, where are you going to keep them all?
250 gig drive will hold about 30 movies. Thats not a lot of movies, and most people dont have 250 drives yet.....
Music costs a small amount to make - can be as low as $10k for an album.
Sell a bunch and make some profit.
Movies cost upwards of $50 million to make, often $100mil or more, so you got to rent them and sell them and do whatever you can to get that cash back.
And its got to go out the door at $25 if you are buying.
Thing is, if Apple want me to buy a movie for $15, I can rent it for $5 at the store.....and copy it if I want.
Yeah, I know thats against the law but a LOT of people do it, and anyway, if you d/l from Apple, where are you going to keep them all?
250 gig drive will hold about 30 movies. Thats not a lot of movies, and most people dont have 250 drives yet.....
danielwsmithee
Nov 27, 03:09 PM
I'm sorry, why is their target audience dwindling?It all comes down to how much extra you are willing to pay for the increased monitor specification. Most will pay 20% very few will pay 75%.
oracle_ab
Apr 27, 08:24 AM
"App Store" is a trademarked name of a particular store. "appstore," or "app store" in generic terms and context is a description of a particular thing. How hard is it for these companies to understand that that's possible? Just the same as "Windows" vs. "windows." Actually, I think they do get it, but they don't want "App Store" associated only w/ Apple so they can jump on the bandwagon and (continue to try to) confuse consumers.
weckart
Apr 11, 06:53 AM
That said, VW/Audi`s DSG semi auto`s are excellent.
Agreed and it has transformed my view of autos. I can't change as slickly as the DSG manages in my Audi. That being said, it still needs a bit of help coming into roundabouts or sharp bends and I miss having a biting point when stopping at traffic lights uphill. Fuel economy is as good as a manual, surprisingly enough.
Currently driving an auto Mercedes, whilst mine is in the workshop. Nowhere near as slick.
Agreed and it has transformed my view of autos. I can't change as slickly as the DSG manages in my Audi. That being said, it still needs a bit of help coming into roundabouts or sharp bends and I miss having a biting point when stopping at traffic lights uphill. Fuel economy is as good as a manual, surprisingly enough.
Currently driving an auto Mercedes, whilst mine is in the workshop. Nowhere near as slick.
Hey Jude
Apr 10, 04:25 PM
I currently drive a manual transmission car and I prefer them over automatics, but the traffic situation is pretty bad where I live, so my next car will probably be an automatic.
tedrjr03
Feb 6, 09:52 AM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5290/5299339710_547865898a.jpg
New pickup. 2002 Subaru WRX
New pickup. 2002 Subaru WRX
twoodcc
Dec 23, 09:59 AM
I was trying to watch when you hit 3 mil but you beat me to it, congrats!
thanks! :)
I had two of them (on two different machines) just stop, all eight cores using 0% CPU.
Prior to that I'd get one done about 2 days early (with killer points) on each machine.
So I've restarted the client (dumped prefs/reinstalled F@H) on each machine and now have a completion date of ~12/25 (fingers crossed) for both machines.
Congrats to twoodcc for hitting the 3 mil mark!
hopefully they will work for you this time. and thanks!:)
I've found that starting from scratch sometimes fixes things, so hopefully that will work, good luck!
yeah i agree. hopefully it'll work out this time
thanks! :)
I had two of them (on two different machines) just stop, all eight cores using 0% CPU.
Prior to that I'd get one done about 2 days early (with killer points) on each machine.
So I've restarted the client (dumped prefs/reinstalled F@H) on each machine and now have a completion date of ~12/25 (fingers crossed) for both machines.
Congrats to twoodcc for hitting the 3 mil mark!
hopefully they will work for you this time. and thanks!:)
I've found that starting from scratch sometimes fixes things, so hopefully that will work, good luck!
yeah i agree. hopefully it'll work out this time
ssspinball
Sep 14, 10:17 AM
I'm a satisfied iPhone 4 owner, but what CR is doing is perfectly reasonable/logical. Kudos to them.
milo
Sep 6, 07:38 AM
yeah hopefully by at least the 26th or the 12th. but by speculating that it's going to happen the following week hasn't worked for anyone yet
Anyone speculating it would happen before about now was on crack. Go to a site like Apple Insider, they don't make the "every week" predictions like Thinksecret does. A shipment of minis came in the fifth, my guess would be that they won't announce them at the event (but maybe I'm wrong), but will just do a press release a few days after.
Anyone speculating it would happen before about now was on crack. Go to a site like Apple Insider, they don't make the "every week" predictions like Thinksecret does. A shipment of minis came in the fifth, my guess would be that they won't announce them at the event (but maybe I'm wrong), but will just do a press release a few days after.
peakchua
Jun 23, 10:12 AM
i hope that apple will not implement touch screen **** due to other companies pressure. i would make 2 series. imac touch which has ok specs and a touch screen and imac pro which is HIGH SPECS, BEAUTIFUL DISPLAY, and cheaper. personally, i would like touch to be INTEGRATED not with ibitchos layer. (sorry kinda pissed apple is all IPHONE!!) if a touchscreen must be used, do not implement ios since its such a smartphone based os.
Giaguara
Apr 15, 10:40 AM
If I was stupid - I wouldn't speak two languages
If I was an ignorant person - I would have stayed in my home country and not learn about the ways of the world...I believe that you have spent too much time in front of you mac.
If I was a vain pretender to knowledge - Do you know who Ernest Satow was ? Do you know over 2,000 Japanese kanji characters ? Do you know how to live in another country ? You have NO IDEA
Gee... Should we be impressed?
Are you telling perhaps that the fact you [say you] speak 2 languages makes it = you can not be stupid in anything, AND the fact that you live in Japan = you can not be ignorant?
I can think of many ignorant people who speak 2 or 3 times as many languages as you, and who have lived in more than 2 countries.
If I was an ignorant person - I would have stayed in my home country and not learn about the ways of the world...I believe that you have spent too much time in front of you mac.
If I was a vain pretender to knowledge - Do you know who Ernest Satow was ? Do you know over 2,000 Japanese kanji characters ? Do you know how to live in another country ? You have NO IDEA
Gee... Should we be impressed?
Are you telling perhaps that the fact you [say you] speak 2 languages makes it = you can not be stupid in anything, AND the fact that you live in Japan = you can not be ignorant?
I can think of many ignorant people who speak 2 or 3 times as many languages as you, and who have lived in more than 2 countries.
hunkaburningluv
Mar 26, 08:28 AM
If someone had come out with a console allowing for full-color 1024x768 touchscreen controllers the other consoles would be scrambling to catch up. Even if that controller cost $499.
While there are some nits here (30fps isn't exactly ideal performance, the dongle connection seems too flimsy for real gameplay, etc) I think this is a huge step forward in gaming.
Nintendo and Microsoft should be shaking in their boots right now.
As a rather casual gamer, I'd love to see the bastard love-child of this and kinect.
you think? I think no none would buy the $499 controller as it's too expensive for a controller.
Ninty and M$ have nothing to worry about anything that apple does in relation to games will supplement the market as it is.
Not really. Properly designed controls on touch screen will be just fine... You will see...
Anyone who thinks that the long-term viability of the IOS ecosystem as a significant home game player because of the lack of hard controls is just missing the picture.
I can't figure out why some people think you have to look at the screen of a touchscreen device to use it to manipulate things in a game world. Between rotation and movement of the device itself with properly placed buttons you can do a lot with it, none of it requiring looking at the touch screen.
I suspect most people could distinguish between the lower left corner of their device and the upper right corner, for instance, without looking at the screen.
There is still a vast difference in the tactility (sp) and force feed back that hardcore gamers won't take too - as much as I don't like modern warfare, but I doubt the metric crapload of players would prefer to play with touch controls
but when you remove the need for look at a touch screen, then why need it? A simple touch pad would suffice. By removing the need to look at the screen, you remove the point of it.
Hardcore gaming will never change to the extent it doesn't need a controller and as such the market isn't going to change. Sure I can't wait until I play starcraft or the like on an ipad, but I won't be ditching any of my consoles.
While there are some nits here (30fps isn't exactly ideal performance, the dongle connection seems too flimsy for real gameplay, etc) I think this is a huge step forward in gaming.
Nintendo and Microsoft should be shaking in their boots right now.
As a rather casual gamer, I'd love to see the bastard love-child of this and kinect.
you think? I think no none would buy the $499 controller as it's too expensive for a controller.
Ninty and M$ have nothing to worry about anything that apple does in relation to games will supplement the market as it is.
Not really. Properly designed controls on touch screen will be just fine... You will see...
Anyone who thinks that the long-term viability of the IOS ecosystem as a significant home game player because of the lack of hard controls is just missing the picture.
I can't figure out why some people think you have to look at the screen of a touchscreen device to use it to manipulate things in a game world. Between rotation and movement of the device itself with properly placed buttons you can do a lot with it, none of it requiring looking at the touch screen.
I suspect most people could distinguish between the lower left corner of their device and the upper right corner, for instance, without looking at the screen.
There is still a vast difference in the tactility (sp) and force feed back that hardcore gamers won't take too - as much as I don't like modern warfare, but I doubt the metric crapload of players would prefer to play with touch controls
but when you remove the need for look at a touch screen, then why need it? A simple touch pad would suffice. By removing the need to look at the screen, you remove the point of it.
Hardcore gaming will never change to the extent it doesn't need a controller and as such the market isn't going to change. Sure I can't wait until I play starcraft or the like on an ipad, but I won't be ditching any of my consoles.
windowsblowsass
Mar 27, 11:41 AM
Sorry but I disagree - what you say here is just something you made up !!!! Safari is a good browser and Apple only made it cause MS pulled IE. Think about it. Apple may have money but it needs to do something else to kick start growth....The Ipod doesn't have long to go...Itunes will still do well but it doesn't give Apple enough money !
Don't forget - please sign the petition.....
reasons your wrong
1. he didnt make up a word of it
2. apple made safari before ms pulled ie
3.the ipod has a long time to go their not going to just say screw it when its selling
4.ITMS is making them money after the record companies are paid back for the use of the songs every cent is profit
5. less than 20 people have signed your petition and do you really think its going to get apple to change their entire strategyi can see it now steve jobs sees our online pettion and immediatly calls a meating "i just had an appihany some kid said to make a cheap computer that hooks up to your tv weve been completely wrong all theese yearsapple is now only going to make web tv type systems and nothing else my god what have i been doing"
Don't forget - please sign the petition.....
reasons your wrong
1. he didnt make up a word of it
2. apple made safari before ms pulled ie
3.the ipod has a long time to go their not going to just say screw it when its selling
4.ITMS is making them money after the record companies are paid back for the use of the songs every cent is profit
5. less than 20 people have signed your petition and do you really think its going to get apple to change their entire strategyi can see it now steve jobs sees our online pettion and immediatly calls a meating "i just had an appihany some kid said to make a cheap computer that hooks up to your tv weve been completely wrong all theese yearsapple is now only going to make web tv type systems and nothing else my god what have i been doing"
twoodcc
Mar 5, 11:23 PM
Wirelessly posted (nokia e63: Mozilla/5.0 (SymbianOS/9.2; U; Series60/3.1 NokiaE63-1/100.21.110; Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 ) AppleWebKit/413 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/413)
I've got it all running and installed, but it won't start computing! Really annoying Grr ill figure it out eventually.
post what's going on. just make a new thread, so if anyone else encounters the same issue it may help them
I've got it all running and installed, but it won't start computing! Really annoying Grr ill figure it out eventually.
post what's going on. just make a new thread, so if anyone else encounters the same issue it may help them
mautal
Oct 24, 02:35 AM
Because all the current Apple rebates and promotions in the USA (and I believe a few other places) are good only on purchases made on or before 10/24 (tuesday). 10/25 obviously places the release after that date... It also coincides better with the Apple London Expo and the Adobe Event in Vegas.
I guess we'll find out shortly, eh?
they have another promo that runs from 10/17 - 1/22/07... i sure hope they dont wait for this to expire... although that is right around MWSF
shortly it is... only 9 more hours
I guess we'll find out shortly, eh?
they have another promo that runs from 10/17 - 1/22/07... i sure hope they dont wait for this to expire... although that is right around MWSF
shortly it is... only 9 more hours
vansouza
Sep 1, 12:09 PM
Just how I feel about just what I have been waiting for... let it be...
AppliedVisual
Nov 29, 09:03 PM
I think that 17" is great - they've got'em already with the iMac. Prices to need to drop with the market. They'll still be more as the monitors are of better quality. IMHO:
17" - $399
20" - $599
23" - $899
30" - $1899
I question the validity of a 17" stand-alone widescreen. Doesn't make sense, IMO. A 20" is already fairly compact and provides little more area and takes up no more room than a 17" 4:3 display.
As for pricing, I agree on some of what you posted -- the prices definitely need to go DOWN. What I don't agree with are the prices you posted -- even if Apple keeps a 20% premium over brands like Samsung, the prices should look more like:
17" - $269
20" - $349
24" - $629
30" - $1,699
...Like I said, those would be premium prices and are a good 10 to 20% higher than the going rate for good monitors with current panels (Samsung/Dell). Also with the next monitor revision, you can expect Apple to dump the 23" in favor of a 24" panel.
17" - $399
20" - $599
23" - $899
30" - $1899
I question the validity of a 17" stand-alone widescreen. Doesn't make sense, IMO. A 20" is already fairly compact and provides little more area and takes up no more room than a 17" 4:3 display.
As for pricing, I agree on some of what you posted -- the prices definitely need to go DOWN. What I don't agree with are the prices you posted -- even if Apple keeps a 20% premium over brands like Samsung, the prices should look more like:
17" - $269
20" - $349
24" - $629
30" - $1,699
...Like I said, those would be premium prices and are a good 10 to 20% higher than the going rate for good monitors with current panels (Samsung/Dell). Also with the next monitor revision, you can expect Apple to dump the 23" in favor of a 24" panel.
newdeal
Mar 25, 06:38 PM
It makes me laugh that people are saying bad things about this when the playbook did it it was the best thing ever and the software it was displaying wasn't nearly so advanced
ojwk
Jan 12, 08:22 AM
I don't see how the external optical drive falls into the category of things to be "defended." The others, sure, because you don't have the choice of the name, the graphics card, or mid-tower. But so far the rumours suggest the external optical drive is optional (as in, buy a MacBook or MacBook Pro with built-in drive - this isn't across the product line). What I see are people hoping for a feature: a lighter notebook.
What I'm saying is that people are condoning Apple's decision to have an optional external optical drive just like everything else despite Apple from suggesting nothing of the sort. My point is that people will condone any decision Apple makes for no good reason.
What I'm saying is that people are condoning Apple's decision to have an optional external optical drive just like everything else despite Apple from suggesting nothing of the sort. My point is that people will condone any decision Apple makes for no good reason.
STidrvr
Jan 5, 12:13 AM
NICE!!! I use to have a '71 2002. Granted it had rotted rockers, faded paint and a leaking rear main seal. But the thing started on the coldest day of the year. I loved that car. I'll try to dig up pics.
admanimal
Sep 1, 02:48 PM
if it gets bigger, does it get thinner?
The only way it could get thinner is if they give it a power brick rather than an internal one. It's not like components are stacked on top of each other as it is...it's just that some individual components require a certain amount of space. Maybe the chin will shrink, but that's all I see happening as far as size goes.
The only way it could get thinner is if they give it a power brick rather than an internal one. It's not like components are stacked on top of each other as it is...it's just that some individual components require a certain amount of space. Maybe the chin will shrink, but that's all I see happening as far as size goes.
Tears Apart
Mar 22, 04:00 PM
I used to have a video 30Gb and then a Classic 160Gb and I have to say I love the specificity of this item. It needs a revamp, but I think that storage-wise 160Gb will stay since it's more than enough. My bet is that they'll make it thinner and add some cool feature which I can't guess, although it's easy to argue that the iPhone and the Touch are much more interesting than the Classic right now...
SuperCachetes
Mar 22, 12:16 PM
.
Multimedia
Nov 18, 11:04 AM
Also, some uses of a program make it easy to use multithreading, and others don't. As an example, if you use Handbrake to do H.264 encoding, it is work for the developers to use multiple cores (it has been posted here that it uses three cores) for encoding a single movie, but it would be absolutely easy to use four times as many cores to encode four movies simultaneously.
Something like that would be perfect if you want to encode four half hour movies, but awful if you want to encode a single two hour movie.I'm sorry but I don't understand what you mean. :confused: I'm kind of anti-H.264 because of how bloated the file sizes get when you use that format and because many viewers don't have H.264 players outside the Mac community. I'd rather target a file size and/or bit rate with good old fashioned universally viewable 2-pass FFmpeg encoding than not be able to do so for an H.264 encode.
My point that Handbrake could use up to 3 cores was that you could have that happening while encoding a DVD image with Toast using another 4 cores if you had an 8-core Mac without a performace-speed hit. As soon as a third process is instigated, all the programs would have to share restricted core limits but get a bunch of stuff done without us having to baby sit the queue.
I am confused by what you think about encoding 4 programs simultaneously vs. one alone. 4 simultaneously will take longer but be possilbe on the 8-core while much slower on the 4-core Macs. While one on a 4-core will do fine by itself, problem is as soon as you start doing anything else, it's speed is compromized while in an 8-core system that would-should not be the case. Does that make any sense?
Something like that would be perfect if you want to encode four half hour movies, but awful if you want to encode a single two hour movie.I'm sorry but I don't understand what you mean. :confused: I'm kind of anti-H.264 because of how bloated the file sizes get when you use that format and because many viewers don't have H.264 players outside the Mac community. I'd rather target a file size and/or bit rate with good old fashioned universally viewable 2-pass FFmpeg encoding than not be able to do so for an H.264 encode.
My point that Handbrake could use up to 3 cores was that you could have that happening while encoding a DVD image with Toast using another 4 cores if you had an 8-core Mac without a performace-speed hit. As soon as a third process is instigated, all the programs would have to share restricted core limits but get a bunch of stuff done without us having to baby sit the queue.
I am confused by what you think about encoding 4 programs simultaneously vs. one alone. 4 simultaneously will take longer but be possilbe on the 8-core while much slower on the 4-core Macs. While one on a 4-core will do fine by itself, problem is as soon as you start doing anything else, it's speed is compromized while in an 8-core system that would-should not be the case. Does that make any sense?
No comments:
Post a Comment