dethmaShine
May 2, 04:42 PM
It's not about being groundbreaking perse. It's about making the look & feel of the UI similar to iOS devices so that those who use are using iOS devices but switching to the Mac don't have a steep learning curve.
Makes sense to me.
But they could have made it much better, intuitive and easy. It doesn't mean that going from iOS to MacOSX, you are going to deal with the computers, the same old way.
People are not pointing with fingers and now they have an extra real estate. A mouse has both right click and left click which in my opinion, every computer user knows about.
For a second, forget that you have never seen iOS, but you want to delete the app from launchpad, the only way that comes to your mind is either:
holding the app and dropping into trash OR
right click -> delete
It doesn't have to be the same, seriously.
Makes sense to me.
But they could have made it much better, intuitive and easy. It doesn't mean that going from iOS to MacOSX, you are going to deal with the computers, the same old way.
People are not pointing with fingers and now they have an extra real estate. A mouse has both right click and left click which in my opinion, every computer user knows about.
For a second, forget that you have never seen iOS, but you want to delete the app from launchpad, the only way that comes to your mind is either:
holding the app and dropping into trash OR
right click -> delete
It doesn't have to be the same, seriously.
millerrh
Oct 23, 04:58 PM
I sure hope DanCosich's post is true! I just had my 12" Powerbook stolen from me last week and my insurance company is paying for an equal replacement or if one isn't available, the next thing up. Looks like a 15" MBP is the next thing up! Going from a 1.33GHz G4 to a C2D MBP is just a plain silly upgrade. I'm out $1000 from a deductible, but that's quite the upgrade for $1000. I'd say it was worth the theft except the fact that my car got busted up as well.
*crosses fingers*
*crosses fingers*
Gem�tlichkeit
Apr 12, 09:29 PM
I hope this means we will eventually see a 64bit version of iMovie ;)
japanime
Apr 3, 04:26 AM
good point, he doesn't have an ipad he is just trolling.
people don't understand that if 1,000 ipads have a problem with backlight bleeding, thats still only .01% of ipad 2s Sold.
And apple will replace any ipad with backlight bleeding
I have an original iPad. It has had backlight bleeding since the day I received it. Several months ago I brought it to an Apple Store Genius Bar and they told me it was normal and not something for which they would issue a replacement. Guess they lied to me. Oh well...
people don't understand that if 1,000 ipads have a problem with backlight bleeding, thats still only .01% of ipad 2s Sold.
And apple will replace any ipad with backlight bleeding
I have an original iPad. It has had backlight bleeding since the day I received it. Several months ago I brought it to an Apple Store Genius Bar and they told me it was normal and not something for which they would issue a replacement. Guess they lied to me. Oh well...
Hunabku
Apr 13, 01:50 AM
+1 here. Every time I've tried to use iMovie for a "quick" edit it always ends in disasters like this. In my case, I was trying to move some music around and time my edits with the music. It was really infuriating trying to do this in iMovie compared to how fast I could have done it in FCP. I guess we'll have wait till Apple posts more info or we get it in our hands to really tell if it can be run like the current FCP.
Yes i agree we have to get our hands on it to know. Which in a way negates everything you said previously. Just because the UI borrows some of the visuals from imovie does not mean that running the program and editing will be like iMovie.
This is typical of people -apple releases something radically new in a given category and everyone proclaims the sky is falling and the product is a flop. Only after time we discover that there was deep thought given to the users' experience and the end result is booming sales.
Randy has definined the vanguard of video editing software - from writing/architecting Premiere, Final Cut, iMovie and now Final Cut X. He knows how to make software for video pros so please reserve judgment until using it and respect the depth of experience here.
PS i really think that apple is powerfully positioning themselves by selling final cut so cheap. Now you can justify paying more for a Mac box because the software is so much less than the competition. Brilliant if you ask me - make software cheap, sell more macs and cost kick your competition out of the market.
Yes i agree we have to get our hands on it to know. Which in a way negates everything you said previously. Just because the UI borrows some of the visuals from imovie does not mean that running the program and editing will be like iMovie.
This is typical of people -apple releases something radically new in a given category and everyone proclaims the sky is falling and the product is a flop. Only after time we discover that there was deep thought given to the users' experience and the end result is booming sales.
Randy has definined the vanguard of video editing software - from writing/architecting Premiere, Final Cut, iMovie and now Final Cut X. He knows how to make software for video pros so please reserve judgment until using it and respect the depth of experience here.
PS i really think that apple is powerfully positioning themselves by selling final cut so cheap. Now you can justify paying more for a Mac box because the software is so much less than the competition. Brilliant if you ask me - make software cheap, sell more macs and cost kick your competition out of the market.
Lollypop
Aug 7, 02:25 AM
SOAP is a protocol that passes XML over HTTP......it basically allows client apps to access data from remote servers.
Applescript has some tools to make it easy....if you want to use applescript, but Cocoa really doesn't. You have to hard code every function in a wrapper library to make the HTTP call, get the parsed resposnes, etc
In Microsoft.NET, you add a "Web Reference" to your project, it scans the WDSL webservice description file on the internet to figure out what functions are there, and then builds a C# class that acts like its a local peice of code. You just call the functions natively from your program, and you'd never know you are talking to a remote server. If the server program changes, one click in your client project updates that stub-proxy file to the newest WDSL, click compile and bam, you have access to the latest and greatest functions from the server.
With Xcode......you really have to do alot of work by hand. We have a web service with thousands of functions to access our ecommerce system, we want to make a Mac OS native version of our client, but the shear amount of time spent making/maintaining a proxy stub in Xcode by hand would be more than the amount of work porting the user interface. I'm really hoping they automate this!
Cool! I have writen a few of applications that use the RPC mechanism in JAVA, but like I said, that was ages ago. My MS development skills ended with VB6, and even in comparison I feel XCode needs some work.
Wouldn't that mean that Adium needs the upgrade? ;-)
LOL, I does actaully ye, but if apple want to compete they desperately need to do something to iChat, especially on their own platfrom where there is another application that is far supperior to what they offer (and few will disagree with this statement), its just a shame!
Applescript has some tools to make it easy....if you want to use applescript, but Cocoa really doesn't. You have to hard code every function in a wrapper library to make the HTTP call, get the parsed resposnes, etc
In Microsoft.NET, you add a "Web Reference" to your project, it scans the WDSL webservice description file on the internet to figure out what functions are there, and then builds a C# class that acts like its a local peice of code. You just call the functions natively from your program, and you'd never know you are talking to a remote server. If the server program changes, one click in your client project updates that stub-proxy file to the newest WDSL, click compile and bam, you have access to the latest and greatest functions from the server.
With Xcode......you really have to do alot of work by hand. We have a web service with thousands of functions to access our ecommerce system, we want to make a Mac OS native version of our client, but the shear amount of time spent making/maintaining a proxy stub in Xcode by hand would be more than the amount of work porting the user interface. I'm really hoping they automate this!
Cool! I have writen a few of applications that use the RPC mechanism in JAVA, but like I said, that was ages ago. My MS development skills ended with VB6, and even in comparison I feel XCode needs some work.
Wouldn't that mean that Adium needs the upgrade? ;-)
LOL, I does actaully ye, but if apple want to compete they desperately need to do something to iChat, especially on their own platfrom where there is another application that is far supperior to what they offer (and few will disagree with this statement), its just a shame!
iToaster
Jan 12, 01:48 PM
I'm pretty sure Lord Steve is sitting back with a cup of coffee reading all this and laughing.
Silentwave
Sep 6, 05:56 PM
Really confused as to why they just didn't skip to Core2.
probably supply reasons and cost reasons.
if they bumped it to core 2, at least the base model would still have been core duo, the c2d one would have been more expensive, and i'm willing to bet we may see the 1.83 C2D in more than just the 17" imac soon.
probably supply reasons and cost reasons.
if they bumped it to core 2, at least the base model would still have been core duo, the c2d one would have been more expensive, and i'm willing to bet we may see the 1.83 C2D in more than just the 17" imac soon.
milo
Aug 29, 12:31 PM
ALL desktop machines......
Apple posted their 3rd Quarter 2006 financial results today.
http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060719164004.shtml
That was before the Pro shipped, it's a safe bet since it's released desktop numbers have gone up. And that's just one quarter, I doubt desktop numbers have been on the decline for the last twelve months.
Apple posted their 3rd Quarter 2006 financial results today.
http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060719164004.shtml
That was before the Pro shipped, it's a safe bet since it's released desktop numbers have gone up. And that's just one quarter, I doubt desktop numbers have been on the decline for the last twelve months.
reel2reel
Apr 12, 10:21 PM
Some definite improvements but I wouldn't go as far as to call it a "jaw-dropper". I was really hoping to see more about how it integrates with the rest of the suite.
Thank Larry Jordan for that "jaw-dropper" remark.
Thank Larry Jordan for that "jaw-dropper" remark.
milo
Aug 29, 09:02 AM
Incredibly underwhelming.
If they're going to stay yonah, at least bump the clock speed more than that.
The only upside to this is that it leaves a HUGE gap between the mini and Pro, could mean that apple really is planning a conroe minitower/pizzabox/mediacenter.
That, and the fact that ThinkSecret is NEVER right. EVER.
If they're going to stay yonah, at least bump the clock speed more than that.
The only upside to this is that it leaves a HUGE gap between the mini and Pro, could mean that apple really is planning a conroe minitower/pizzabox/mediacenter.
That, and the fact that ThinkSecret is NEVER right. EVER.
puma1552
Feb 5, 11:55 AM
Just put a deposit down on this '98 GT. Leather, Mach 460 stereo, premium wheels, 5 speed, 78k miles, 2 owner car. Undercarriage is absolutely spotless. Absolutely cannot wait:
http://images.autotrader.com/scaler/565/421/images/2010/12/23/290/602/18627249736.290602491.IM1.MAIN.565x421_A.562x421.jpg
http://images.autotrader.com/scaler/565/421/images/2010/12/23/290/602/18627249737.290602491.IM1.02.565x421_A.562x421.jpg
http://images.autotrader.com/scaler/565/421/images/2010/12/23/290/602/18627249741.290602491.IM1.06.565x421_A.562x421.jpg
http://images.autotrader.com/scaler/565/421/images/2010/12/23/290/602/18627249743.290602491.IM1.08.565x421_A.562x421.jpg
http://images.autotrader.com/scaler/565/421/images/2010/12/23/290/602/18627249740.290602491.IM1.05.565x421_A.562x421.jpg
http://images.autotrader.com/scaler/565/421/images/2010/12/23/290/602/18627249746.290602491.IM1.11.565x421_A.562x421.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5258/5419206732_62ec4e76d7_z.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5053/5418603231_b634fe755e_z.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5058/5419207478_75bfc720e1_z.jpg
Car's pretty dirty in the last picture.
:D:D:D
http://images.autotrader.com/scaler/565/421/images/2010/12/23/290/602/18627249736.290602491.IM1.MAIN.565x421_A.562x421.jpg
http://images.autotrader.com/scaler/565/421/images/2010/12/23/290/602/18627249737.290602491.IM1.02.565x421_A.562x421.jpg
http://images.autotrader.com/scaler/565/421/images/2010/12/23/290/602/18627249741.290602491.IM1.06.565x421_A.562x421.jpg
http://images.autotrader.com/scaler/565/421/images/2010/12/23/290/602/18627249743.290602491.IM1.08.565x421_A.562x421.jpg
http://images.autotrader.com/scaler/565/421/images/2010/12/23/290/602/18627249740.290602491.IM1.05.565x421_A.562x421.jpg
http://images.autotrader.com/scaler/565/421/images/2010/12/23/290/602/18627249746.290602491.IM1.11.565x421_A.562x421.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5258/5419206732_62ec4e76d7_z.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5053/5418603231_b634fe755e_z.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5058/5419207478_75bfc720e1_z.jpg
Car's pretty dirty in the last picture.
:D:D:D
Bigdaddyguido
Apr 26, 12:51 PM
Wirelessly posted (Iphone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
How can it be generic if no one had one before apple created there's? Suddenly everyone calls their market place an app store. There've been digital stores for years, and none were app stores.
How can it be generic if no one had one before apple created there's? Suddenly everyone calls their market place an app store. There've been digital stores for years, and none were app stores.
KnightWRX
Apr 16, 08:48 PM
That explains a lot. being 16 means he has very little real experience in driving and a pure rookie at it. The joy of driving is still in his system. Now days most of the time driving for me is a way to get from A to B.
I'm 32, still love driving, go to empty parking lots in winter to drift my Subaru around for fun (freaked out my girlfriend when I did it to her then brand new, sub-1000 km Kia Soul last January, which parking-brake drifted like a champ, even pulling a donut around another car, to much screaming and freaking out from the owner/passenger).
In the summer, I rip through country back roads for the kick of it, though nowadays, it's on my Harley rather than in my long lost loves (the 2.2L VTEC integra or the WRX) often leaving in the cold air of dawn to come back as dusk settles over the fields around my house.
You don't quit driving because you get old, you get old because you quit driving.
Driving in traffic every day like i said really made me consider going Automatic. hard to do a low speed crawl in a manual.
I find playing around with the clutch's friction point much easier than constant braking/not braking. Not to mention these days, on the motorcycle, what the hell is traffic anyhow ? You mean the obstacle course I use as a playground riding back from work to the gym ?
I'm 32, still love driving, go to empty parking lots in winter to drift my Subaru around for fun (freaked out my girlfriend when I did it to her then brand new, sub-1000 km Kia Soul last January, which parking-brake drifted like a champ, even pulling a donut around another car, to much screaming and freaking out from the owner/passenger).
In the summer, I rip through country back roads for the kick of it, though nowadays, it's on my Harley rather than in my long lost loves (the 2.2L VTEC integra or the WRX) often leaving in the cold air of dawn to come back as dusk settles over the fields around my house.
You don't quit driving because you get old, you get old because you quit driving.
Driving in traffic every day like i said really made me consider going Automatic. hard to do a low speed crawl in a manual.
I find playing around with the clutch's friction point much easier than constant braking/not braking. Not to mention these days, on the motorcycle, what the hell is traffic anyhow ? You mean the obstacle course I use as a playground riding back from work to the gym ?
macnews
Jul 20, 02:33 AM
*Most critical applications will be converted by September*
Interesting...
I found this to be most interesting. I think we could actually see some Adobe apps by Septemeber. Adobe has been going on an 18-24 month cycle and based when CS2 was released Sept/Oct would be 18 months and 24 would be April when Adobe has said basically "no later than".
Interesting...
I found this to be most interesting. I think we could actually see some Adobe apps by Septemeber. Adobe has been going on an 18-24 month cycle and based when CS2 was released Sept/Oct would be 18 months and 24 would be April when Adobe has said basically "no later than".
bigpics
Mar 24, 12:57 PM
Dude, I'm sorry to inform you that what you're saying is an outright lie, and there are guys from the Lossless Compression Clan, called "Apple Lossless codec", "FLAC", and "APE", standing with heavy cluebats in their hands, ready to perform a painful reality sync on anyone thinking compression ALWAYS degrades quality.
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
bob_hearn
Sep 1, 12:43 PM
MacOSXrumors??? There is, if anything, negative correlation between their predictions and reality.
What Apple had damn well BETTER announce then is Merom MacBook Pros. It's inexplicable that they have not done so already.
What Apple had damn well BETTER announce then is Merom MacBook Pros. It's inexplicable that they have not done so already.
Eraserhead
Mar 20, 06:22 PM
What does homeopathy achieve?
The placebo effect.
You can't even test homeopathy scientifically against a placebo because the placebo would be identical to the remedy!
The reason you test against the placebo rather than no medicine at all is that the placebo effect is non-trivial.
The placebo effect.
You can't even test homeopathy scientifically against a placebo because the placebo would be identical to the remedy!
The reason you test against the placebo rather than no medicine at all is that the placebo effect is non-trivial.
mrthieme
Nov 29, 06:00 PM
The concept of internet based content is very attractive, bandwidth issues aside. I pay too much money for too many channels I don't need/want. And I don't want to watch when NBC tells me too. A selective subscription to the media I'm interested in is just what I want. The lowered cost associated with online distribution versus a whole network of channels being pumped into every home opens the door for the little guys with very focused content to get stuff out there, just like podcasts, and hopefully make enough money to keep improving their material.
TalonFlyer
Sep 14, 10:48 AM
Does the iPhone have an inherent design issue with regards to antenna performance. The answer is, absolutely YES. Does the bumper mitigate this issue, in my experience it does, however only a marginal amount.
I have dropped calls every day, in places where I would have near full signal if I was not holding the phone. I have 3G data issues, especially in the fringe areas where I did not have an issue with my 3Gs.
The iPhone is a great device and I agree that consumer reports is splitting hairs with the antenna issue.
Apple agree's there is a problem or they would not have given away bumpers to everyone.
Fortunately, I use my iPhone as a phone only about 20% of the time, so 80% of my use is great. The other 20% is only a problem about 1 in 7 calls.
So, while it is a little inconvenient when a call drops when I hold the phone in that way, or short data interruptions on 3G from time-to-time, overall I get a lot done with the iPhone.
I do look forward to changing my iPhone to a newer device at the first reasonable opportunity, primarily because of the antenna issue.
I have dropped calls every day, in places where I would have near full signal if I was not holding the phone. I have 3G data issues, especially in the fringe areas where I did not have an issue with my 3Gs.
The iPhone is a great device and I agree that consumer reports is splitting hairs with the antenna issue.
Apple agree's there is a problem or they would not have given away bumpers to everyone.
Fortunately, I use my iPhone as a phone only about 20% of the time, so 80% of my use is great. The other 20% is only a problem about 1 in 7 calls.
So, while it is a little inconvenient when a call drops when I hold the phone in that way, or short data interruptions on 3G from time-to-time, overall I get a lot done with the iPhone.
I do look forward to changing my iPhone to a newer device at the first reasonable opportunity, primarily because of the antenna issue.
razzmatazz
Sep 6, 02:34 PM
i know this is off topic but are they ever gonna do anything about the outrageous cost of .Mac subscription?
How is it expensive? 99$ a year is $8.25 a month...thats not bad!
How is it expensive? 99$ a year is $8.25 a month...thats not bad!
Evangelion
Jul 20, 04:33 AM
I believe Nokia and Microsoft have some sort of alliance.
Not quite. Yes, Nokia did announce a while ago that they will support MS's mobile-email-thingy. But that's it. Other than that, the two are more or less mortal enemies.
Not quite. Yes, Nokia did announce a while ago that they will support MS's mobile-email-thingy. But that's it. Other than that, the two are more or less mortal enemies.
KeriJane
Apr 9, 04:56 PM
Yes, I can drive manual.
My father was too cheap to buy an automatic car and the cars I could afford when I was younger were all manual.
I didn't actually start with a car. My first motor vehicle was a Yamaha 60, which was a full-sized motorcycle with a 60cc engine and a... manual transmission!
1st car= 1968 SAAB 96 with 3 cylinders and a manual transmission! It was loads of fun and sounded like nothing else except maybe a very angry snowmobile.
Nowdays, 2 of my last 3 Toyota Tercels were automatics. I wish for manual a lot as the autos are a bit sluggish and not as economical.
Have Fun,
Keri
PS. I may have a really fun manual car pretty soon.
My father was too cheap to buy an automatic car and the cars I could afford when I was younger were all manual.
I didn't actually start with a car. My first motor vehicle was a Yamaha 60, which was a full-sized motorcycle with a 60cc engine and a... manual transmission!
1st car= 1968 SAAB 96 with 3 cylinders and a manual transmission! It was loads of fun and sounded like nothing else except maybe a very angry snowmobile.
Nowdays, 2 of my last 3 Toyota Tercels were automatics. I wish for manual a lot as the autos are a bit sluggish and not as economical.
Have Fun,
Keri
PS. I may have a really fun manual car pretty soon.
MarcelV
Sep 7, 02:19 AM
Apple was offering 14.50 wholesale for the 14.99 movies and the studio's don't agree. That's more than they receive wholesale from Wal-Mart and Best Buy. Also, collectively it looks like they are not agreeing with those prices. Looks to me as price fixing. The studio's want to set the individual prices for movies to consumers, and to me it looks like they are forcing same prices on Amazon, MovieLink, CinemaNow and iTunes. That's dangerous waters for them......
As for picture quality and HD, the market doesn't seem to be there at all. VOD on cable and satellite has become a huge market, and those aren't HD either. In addition DirecTV and DishNetwork use 'HD-Lite' (1080x1280 in stead of 1080x1920) on most if not all of their HD channels. And SD channels are heavily compressed in the digital line-up on both cable and satellite. Most consumers just don't care....
And every single person asking for 1080p, you maybe out of touch with reality. Official HD standard does not even include 1080p. 720p and 1080i are the only official HD recognized resolutions within the broadcast standards. Broadcasters don't even distribute their signal that high!
Would I love it in HD, of course :D Do I see it happen, nope.
And an additional thought just occured. Currently FrontRow already allows you to watch trailers. What if you have the same interface but you can purchase the movies that way and it will add the purchased movie into Itunes for iPod sync. (Of course, you will be able to buy it dircetly thru iTunes if you like). It would be a very nice integration, with a high degree of simplicity.... Just a thought.
As for picture quality and HD, the market doesn't seem to be there at all. VOD on cable and satellite has become a huge market, and those aren't HD either. In addition DirecTV and DishNetwork use 'HD-Lite' (1080x1280 in stead of 1080x1920) on most if not all of their HD channels. And SD channels are heavily compressed in the digital line-up on both cable and satellite. Most consumers just don't care....
And every single person asking for 1080p, you maybe out of touch with reality. Official HD standard does not even include 1080p. 720p and 1080i are the only official HD recognized resolutions within the broadcast standards. Broadcasters don't even distribute their signal that high!
Would I love it in HD, of course :D Do I see it happen, nope.
And an additional thought just occured. Currently FrontRow already allows you to watch trailers. What if you have the same interface but you can purchase the movies that way and it will add the purchased movie into Itunes for iPod sync. (Of course, you will be able to buy it dircetly thru iTunes if you like). It would be a very nice integration, with a high degree of simplicity.... Just a thought.
No comments:
Post a Comment