jmbear
Nov 29, 12:39 PM
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 internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
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..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
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..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
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.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. 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.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
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..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
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..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
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.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. 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.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
MacBoobsPro
Jul 20, 08:34 AM
It's the future, you know, soon the clock speed will be irrelevant and we'll be expressing processor speed in number of cores octocore, hexacore, tricontradicore, hexacontetracore, hecticosoctocore, and such and such
You mean its the future today? I thought it was next week! :D
You mean its the future today? I thought it was next week! :D
ccrandall77
Aug 11, 01:59 PM
As I said before GSM has 81% of the market. UMTS (W-CDMA) enable hand-over back and forth UMTS and GSM. CDMA2000 can not do hand-over between GSM and CDMA2000. (See Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W-CDMA): "The CDMA family of standards (including cdmaOne and CDMA2000) are not compatible with the W-CDMA family of standards that are based on ITU standards.")
Hence all networks that has GSM will transfer to UMTS since this decrases their initial investment as they transfer from 2/2.5G to 3G. Changing network standad is expensive, but the GSM/EDGE marketshare has been growing in US and will most likely continue to grow. At the same time CDMA is non-existant in europe.
The conclusion is simple - CDMA2000 is in the long run as dead as betamax.
If long run is 10yrs, I'll grant you that. But in the US and much of Asia (Australia maybe) where there's CDMA carriers, CDMA2000 1x-EVDx is going to be around for a while.
Actually WCDMA also inherits much of it's tech from CDMA/IS-95 and I have seen some documentation that shows that WCDMA can be compatible with CDMA2000 just like UTMS/WCDMA is compatible with GSM. But it sounds as if the upgrade path for GSM/GPRS/EDGE to WCDMA is easier than going from CDMA2000 1x to WCDMA.
But since for the next several years CDMA2000 1x-EVDO will be better than the GSM related technologies. And by the time WCDMA takes over, the iPhone will be as antiquated as the Newton.
Apple needs to create both versions as CDMA has about 5x% of the US market... and Apple has and probably will continue to cater to the US market first.
Hence all networks that has GSM will transfer to UMTS since this decrases their initial investment as they transfer from 2/2.5G to 3G. Changing network standad is expensive, but the GSM/EDGE marketshare has been growing in US and will most likely continue to grow. At the same time CDMA is non-existant in europe.
The conclusion is simple - CDMA2000 is in the long run as dead as betamax.
If long run is 10yrs, I'll grant you that. But in the US and much of Asia (Australia maybe) where there's CDMA carriers, CDMA2000 1x-EVDx is going to be around for a while.
Actually WCDMA also inherits much of it's tech from CDMA/IS-95 and I have seen some documentation that shows that WCDMA can be compatible with CDMA2000 just like UTMS/WCDMA is compatible with GSM. But it sounds as if the upgrade path for GSM/GPRS/EDGE to WCDMA is easier than going from CDMA2000 1x to WCDMA.
But since for the next several years CDMA2000 1x-EVDO will be better than the GSM related technologies. And by the time WCDMA takes over, the iPhone will be as antiquated as the Newton.
Apple needs to create both versions as CDMA has about 5x% of the US market... and Apple has and probably will continue to cater to the US market first.
M87
Mar 26, 01:54 PM
Mt. Fuji. A hat tip to Japan.
The use of the Mt. Fuji desktop picture in Lion actually pre-dates the disaster in Japan. Just a very cool coincidence.
The use of the Mt. Fuji desktop picture in Lion actually pre-dates the disaster in Japan. Just a very cool coincidence.
charlituna
Apr 6, 08:22 PM
I've posted several predictions over the past few months throughout this tread at Cinema5D:
http://cinema5d.com/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=25464
I took a look at the post and while I think your ideas are well thought out and very 'Apple' there are a few points that I disagree with.
First off the notion that Apple has to match QuickTime on Windows and Mac. I don't see that they do so I won't be shocked if they don't. Or they might do another QT Pro (but i doubt they would let you use your old QT7 key)
Also on the whole timeline issue. I don't see it as Apple changing one for the other. What I see is the user having a choice. They did this in iMovie so why not in FCS. Let folks work the way they feel is most efficient whether that is single line, flowchart etc. Same with how some of the tools function. Leave the old way and add the new one. Maybe both on the screen or perhaps a preference that allows you to use 'classic tools'.
I'm not sure I agree with the idea of them adding Aperture to the package, but I agree that they could and should have some kind of catalog program or mode. Something that could perhaps bridge the components and even perhaps output from other programs like Premiere, Maya etc even Logic Studio. It might even allow for importing and logging without having to open Final Cut and allow you to put in Meta data like location, names of people in shot, etc. Stuff that would make that iMovie People Search etc viable tools.
And while I like the idea of a plugin store I'm not sure it would be separate from the Mac App Store, particularly if this version of FCS required at least Snow Leo. even if it was its own face I could definitely see Apple putting it into that pay system.
And one thing you didn't mention that I think is plausible is incorporating FCServer into the set rather than as a stand alone sku. Perhaps not within the programs but put that disk in the box as well. if Lion is any example, Apple seems to be getting away from separating Server functionality and having that software in the box as well could help those on the fence about switching. Especially if the whole thing was no more that the current $999 (a little less would be even better)
alison brie gif of the week
alison brie gif. alison brie
#Community #gif #Alison Brie
Alison Brie Nom Nom Nom
Alison Brie, Alison Brie
Alison Brie, Alison Brie
Click through for the
alison brie gif. alison brie
alison brie community zombie
alison brie community gif.
alison brie gif. alison brie
alison brie gif community.
#Joel McHale #Alison Brie
alison brie community gif.
http://cinema5d.com/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=25464
I took a look at the post and while I think your ideas are well thought out and very 'Apple' there are a few points that I disagree with.
First off the notion that Apple has to match QuickTime on Windows and Mac. I don't see that they do so I won't be shocked if they don't. Or they might do another QT Pro (but i doubt they would let you use your old QT7 key)
Also on the whole timeline issue. I don't see it as Apple changing one for the other. What I see is the user having a choice. They did this in iMovie so why not in FCS. Let folks work the way they feel is most efficient whether that is single line, flowchart etc. Same with how some of the tools function. Leave the old way and add the new one. Maybe both on the screen or perhaps a preference that allows you to use 'classic tools'.
I'm not sure I agree with the idea of them adding Aperture to the package, but I agree that they could and should have some kind of catalog program or mode. Something that could perhaps bridge the components and even perhaps output from other programs like Premiere, Maya etc even Logic Studio. It might even allow for importing and logging without having to open Final Cut and allow you to put in Meta data like location, names of people in shot, etc. Stuff that would make that iMovie People Search etc viable tools.
And while I like the idea of a plugin store I'm not sure it would be separate from the Mac App Store, particularly if this version of FCS required at least Snow Leo. even if it was its own face I could definitely see Apple putting it into that pay system.
And one thing you didn't mention that I think is plausible is incorporating FCServer into the set rather than as a stand alone sku. Perhaps not within the programs but put that disk in the box as well. if Lion is any example, Apple seems to be getting away from separating Server functionality and having that software in the box as well could help those on the fence about switching. Especially if the whole thing was no more that the current $999 (a little less would be even better)
technicolor
Sep 19, 10:35 PM
Why should it bother you that new processors come out?
why shouldnt it?
why shouldnt it?
rayz
Aug 8, 03:08 AM
Well I for one was kind of disappointed. Leopard is sort of Apple's chance to prove they can out-Vista Vista, and I'm not really sure what we saw today does it. I've been following Vista somewhat closely, and it really does catch Windows up to OS X in terms of features and prettiness.
I really think most of the features shown off today are already present in Windows (I've definitely heard about all of them before) or will be in Vista, and it's too bad Apple didn't have anything truly innovative to show us. Hopefully those secret features are something good...
The other thing that has me a little concerned is the huge amount of Vista-bashing that went on. I feel like if Leopard at this point were truly better than Vista, they'd be silent about Vista entirely and let the new system speak for itself. That would be really slick. That's not what happened however, and instead there was a lot of "look what Vista copied from us" and "check out how much better Leopard is." What I saw today, though, makes the former statement sound whiney and the latter sound foolish, since in my eyes, in terms of features, they're about on-par with each other.
I really hope Apple pulls it together. They've got to do this right, because come next year, most of the myriad reasons for switching to a Mac will be nullified by Vista.
BTW: whoever this "Platform Experience" guy is, get him off the stage and go back to Steve.
Have to agree with you on just about everything. If MS tried to release something like this, as anything other than a service pack, their user base would (quite rightly) crucify them.
The TimeMachine mirrors the same functionality that was announced for Vista about a week ago, and everything else is an upgrade rather than anything really new. I was expecting more from the desktop switching, but I have a feeling that will look much different when it's actually released.
But since there is some other stuff planned, then it's best to wait and see what they come up with, before declaring it a dud.
Looks like a nice solid revision so far, but not much else.
.. and given the universal unpopularity of Microsoft's Flip3D interface, I was surprised to see it showing up in the UI for TimeMachine.
I really think most of the features shown off today are already present in Windows (I've definitely heard about all of them before) or will be in Vista, and it's too bad Apple didn't have anything truly innovative to show us. Hopefully those secret features are something good...
The other thing that has me a little concerned is the huge amount of Vista-bashing that went on. I feel like if Leopard at this point were truly better than Vista, they'd be silent about Vista entirely and let the new system speak for itself. That would be really slick. That's not what happened however, and instead there was a lot of "look what Vista copied from us" and "check out how much better Leopard is." What I saw today, though, makes the former statement sound whiney and the latter sound foolish, since in my eyes, in terms of features, they're about on-par with each other.
I really hope Apple pulls it together. They've got to do this right, because come next year, most of the myriad reasons for switching to a Mac will be nullified by Vista.
BTW: whoever this "Platform Experience" guy is, get him off the stage and go back to Steve.
Have to agree with you on just about everything. If MS tried to release something like this, as anything other than a service pack, their user base would (quite rightly) crucify them.
The TimeMachine mirrors the same functionality that was announced for Vista about a week ago, and everything else is an upgrade rather than anything really new. I was expecting more from the desktop switching, but I have a feeling that will look much different when it's actually released.
But since there is some other stuff planned, then it's best to wait and see what they come up with, before declaring it a dud.
Looks like a nice solid revision so far, but not much else.
.. and given the universal unpopularity of Microsoft's Flip3D interface, I was surprised to see it showing up in the UI for TimeMachine.
mwswami
Jul 22, 09:53 AM
(Cloverton or Clovertown?)
It's Clovertown.
Here is a link to description of the Intel Core Microarchitecture (http://www.intel.com/technology/architecture/coremicro/) on Intel.com. Search for Clovertown.
It's Clovertown.
Here is a link to description of the Intel Core Microarchitecture (http://www.intel.com/technology/architecture/coremicro/) on Intel.com. Search for Clovertown.
scott523
Sep 19, 12:02 PM
I hope that the MacBook with Core 2 Duo is better than the Core Duo version :)
I think it's neither worse or better. Tests showed only a slight bump in speed and reduction in energy consumption. At least it's the best 64-bit Intel mobile processor we got until the next one comes in April/May. :cool:
I think it's neither worse or better. Tests showed only a slight bump in speed and reduction in energy consumption. At least it's the best 64-bit Intel mobile processor we got until the next one comes in April/May. :cool:
bedifferent
Apr 10, 10:51 PM
Whether you think it's an issue or not is subjective. The guy I was replying to was implying that a different person worked on iMovie 08 and that same person was also behind the new Final Cut when in reality the lead architect has stayed the same throughout.
Oh I know, I was commenting on that, not you.
Oh I know, I was commenting on that, not you.
Grimes
Apr 11, 03:43 PM
If we're waiting until September for PRODUCTION, then I think we'll see something great in the late fall or early winter.
I just want a leap with iOS 5. My take on notifications:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqWO6VkJh-0
Very interesting notifications concept!
I just want a leap with iOS 5. My take on notifications:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqWO6VkJh-0
Very interesting notifications concept!
iliketyla
Mar 31, 07:05 PM
Precisely. I've been using HTC Android phones concurrently with my iPhones since I have multiple lines. I happen to like both platforms.
What the Android haters here fail to realize, is that they cannot act like adults and say I like this about my iPhone far better than Android.
Nooooo. They've got to preface it with something derogatory like "crappy Android" or worse. It shows their immaturity and inability to act intelligent. They reduce themselves to childish dolts. Idiots at best.
Maybe we can start a trend here!
As a former iPhone user who switched to Android and has been happy ever since, I will say that I was very happy with my iPhone, but my Android phone offers features that I couldn't imagine living without now.
Both iOS and Android are very nice operating systems, with their own strengths and weaknesses.
For me, Android works.
What the Android haters here fail to realize, is that they cannot act like adults and say I like this about my iPhone far better than Android.
Nooooo. They've got to preface it with something derogatory like "crappy Android" or worse. It shows their immaturity and inability to act intelligent. They reduce themselves to childish dolts. Idiots at best.
Maybe we can start a trend here!
As a former iPhone user who switched to Android and has been happy ever since, I will say that I was very happy with my iPhone, but my Android phone offers features that I couldn't imagine living without now.
Both iOS and Android are very nice operating systems, with their own strengths and weaknesses.
For me, Android works.
rtdunham
Apr 27, 09:49 AM
I'm old-fashined I guess because I have no interest in having a smartphone in the first place. I just have a standard flip-phone. By owning a smartphone, you are always going to be faced with privacy issues...
Did you know dumb phones record every call you make? That they record who you call, and how long you talk to them? That when landlines are involved, nubmers are recorded that pinpoint the location? That your phone transmits that information to your phone company? Look at your next phone bill. Your standard flip phone even records who calls YOU and tells THAT to your phone company, too. AND if you lose your phone bill--as is the case if you lose your phone--all that data's available, in unencrypted form, to anyone and everyone!
My take: Yeah, the data should've been encrypted, and prudence would have had it deleted after a short time. They're fixing that now. But it serves a purpose we all value, facilitating calling and optimizing location services when we want them. It's a glitch, nothing more, exaggerated by media attention (and i'm part of the media, so I'm not unfairly finger-pointing) just as happened with antenna-gate and the fuss over Toyotas accelerating out of control (where almost always the conclusion is someone put their foot on the accelerator instead of the brake, by mistake). Ten years from now someone will write an entertaining book about the gap between public hysteria and reality on these issues and many others (birtherism, anyone? or if your political views swing in a different way, government spending way beyond its means?)
I'm not saying the location database is operator error. Clearly not. I'm just trying to keep it in perspective. (It's not time-stamped? It's accurate sometimes only to 50 or 81 miles, as in cases reported in this thread? My phone, using the data that's recorded, consistently puts me five miles from my home, in a different county, across a river, four or five cities away, due to some oddity of cell tower location).
Look, your credit cards not only keep track of where you've been, but how much you spent there, and when, with precise geographic accuracy. Sometimes they even tell what you've bought. Just look at your next bill. Did you know your bank keeps track of every check you write, and to whom, and sends that information to you unencrypted via the mail? Did you know...
I think we should keep this situation in perspective. Too many people here see the privacy sky falling on them, when they're really swimming in it. (Did you know the device you're using to read this doesn't protect you from being victimized by horrible unencrypted metaphors...?)
Did you know dumb phones record every call you make? That they record who you call, and how long you talk to them? That when landlines are involved, nubmers are recorded that pinpoint the location? That your phone transmits that information to your phone company? Look at your next phone bill. Your standard flip phone even records who calls YOU and tells THAT to your phone company, too. AND if you lose your phone bill--as is the case if you lose your phone--all that data's available, in unencrypted form, to anyone and everyone!
My take: Yeah, the data should've been encrypted, and prudence would have had it deleted after a short time. They're fixing that now. But it serves a purpose we all value, facilitating calling and optimizing location services when we want them. It's a glitch, nothing more, exaggerated by media attention (and i'm part of the media, so I'm not unfairly finger-pointing) just as happened with antenna-gate and the fuss over Toyotas accelerating out of control (where almost always the conclusion is someone put their foot on the accelerator instead of the brake, by mistake). Ten years from now someone will write an entertaining book about the gap between public hysteria and reality on these issues and many others (birtherism, anyone? or if your political views swing in a different way, government spending way beyond its means?)
I'm not saying the location database is operator error. Clearly not. I'm just trying to keep it in perspective. (It's not time-stamped? It's accurate sometimes only to 50 or 81 miles, as in cases reported in this thread? My phone, using the data that's recorded, consistently puts me five miles from my home, in a different county, across a river, four or five cities away, due to some oddity of cell tower location).
Look, your credit cards not only keep track of where you've been, but how much you spent there, and when, with precise geographic accuracy. Sometimes they even tell what you've bought. Just look at your next bill. Did you know your bank keeps track of every check you write, and to whom, and sends that information to you unencrypted via the mail? Did you know...
I think we should keep this situation in perspective. Too many people here see the privacy sky falling on them, when they're really swimming in it. (Did you know the device you're using to read this doesn't protect you from being victimized by horrible unencrypted metaphors...?)
dante@sisna.com
Aug 18, 04:53 AM
Untill the cooling-solution starts to leak fluids, that is ;)?
Not likely to happen.
I have used liquid cooling setups in my PC's that were not nearly as well built as the AC Delco inpired Quad G5 without any problems for more than 5 years running.
Besides, my $99 a year apple care will more than cover this.
There are minimal to no reports of problems with the Quad G5 cooling system. I've run 3 of these for nearly 9 months with no problems.
DJO
Not likely to happen.
I have used liquid cooling setups in my PC's that were not nearly as well built as the AC Delco inpired Quad G5 without any problems for more than 5 years running.
Besides, my $99 a year apple care will more than cover this.
There are minimal to no reports of problems with the Quad G5 cooling system. I've run 3 of these for nearly 9 months with no problems.
DJO
shawnce
Jul 14, 06:45 PM
Agreed. I can make an argument for the consumer machines, where perhaps 512 MB is sufficient for basic users. Specifically, why force them to pay more for 1 GB if they don't need it. But when it comes to the Pro machines, as if anyone buying one of these beasts is not going to require at least 2 GB of RAM, let alone 1 GB. No one buys a quad Xeon Powermac to just surf the Internet and check their e-mail. :cool:
Personally I go the BTO route at Apple.com for my PowerMacs and downgrade all RAM to the minimum cost and buy my RAM from a trusted 3rd party vendor for a savings of at least 10% if not more so.
Personally I go the BTO route at Apple.com for my PowerMacs and downgrade all RAM to the minimum cost and buy my RAM from a trusted 3rd party vendor for a savings of at least 10% if not more so.
JM-Prod
Apr 10, 08:17 AM
Faster horses.
Hmm, you want a faster horse or did you think my comments were screaming for them?
If my expectation are met, it would be a revolution in editing.
The second since introducing digital non-linear editing in the late 80's.
Not faster horses.
Hmm, you want a faster horse or did you think my comments were screaming for them?
If my expectation are met, it would be a revolution in editing.
The second since introducing digital non-linear editing in the late 80's.
Not faster horses.
JAT
Apr 6, 04:55 PM
LOL WUT? You're honestly going to count emulated games (pirated in almost all cases) as Android games?
Besides, you can play them on iOS too, if rooted.
Besides, you can play them on iOS too, if rooted.
LondonCentral
Apr 11, 12:02 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) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
I dont want to wait :(
Tell me about it. I've just sold my iPhone 4. More fool me for expecting a Summer release.
Think I'll get a decent camera and update my Macbook for a MBA while I wait.
I dont want to wait :(
Tell me about it. I've just sold my iPhone 4. More fool me for expecting a Summer release.
Think I'll get a decent camera and update my Macbook for a MBA while I wait.
sth
Apr 12, 02:24 PM
Any news about what time the presentation will be?
twoodcc
Nov 30, 05:20 PM
so far i like this game. i haven't had time to play it alot, but i'm a level 6 right now, and i'm about 9% game complete.
AidenShaw
Mar 26, 11:23 PM
As an amateur OS X developer, I really hate this attitude because it will end up slowing Lion adoption. That really sucks, because there are a ton of awesome changes in 10.6 that I (and many, many other developers) would love to take advantage of to make their software even greater, but it's not going to be viable to go Lion-only for said features until Lion is installed on the majority of Macs out there.
Yes, we've heard of this - it's the "XP syndrome" all over again.
Yes, we've heard of this - it's the "XP syndrome" all over again.
Henri Gaudier
Aug 26, 04:34 AM
Every time I read a thread on Apple's reliability or Apple's service I rarely see my experiences mirrored but this time there seems to be a lot of disatisfied people out there. I've had nearly a dozen Macs and everyone has either died or needed something major correcting. And everytime the service from Apple has been diabolical. EVERYTIME. Often native Dutch or German centres I think. How can this be with all of these Apple are great stories? "Our customer satisfaction is very high" Schiller *****!! And as for the Indian call centre closing down as quickly as it opened remark - well that just shows you Apples attitude to workers rights doesn't it. Globalisation crap. Apple are a wank capitalist corp that designs nice products and then they get someone else to make them in the cheapest way possible. All this idolatry. There service may be good in the US for whatever reasons, pride or US consumer expectations but when they travel abroad they don't give a *****. Trust me. If only there was some way out but after the thousands I've spent on software... there's no changing.
nevir
Sep 19, 12:15 PM
My demanding you to give me a reason has about the same weight as all the people in this thread (and many others) demanding Apple provide them with the machine they think they needed yesterday.
It's more along the lines of "We see all these other laptop manufacturers releasing new CPU's in their products. We see that Apple has already recieved these chips. We feel that it is extremely likely that Apple's laptop lines will be updated with these CPU's, and soon. Finally, We don't want to buy a product that will be outdated in just a month or two.
Of course, there's those who have been waiting for more than a couple months. For those, they are looking to 'future-proof' their machine, somewhat. If you notice, more or less every new CPU model that will be coming out is 64-bit, and there's no doubt that developers will write apps that take advantage of that architecture in the coming years. So why buy a computer that has a lower likliehood of supporting all the software you'd like to run over it's lifetime?
As for "needing it yesterday", that is a product of the hype; but I think, for the most part, we feel that the laptops could have been ready earlier - and certainly would have liked Apple to have come out and said "MBP updates soonish" (of course that makes no business sense for clearing inventory though).
It's more along the lines of "We see all these other laptop manufacturers releasing new CPU's in their products. We see that Apple has already recieved these chips. We feel that it is extremely likely that Apple's laptop lines will be updated with these CPU's, and soon. Finally, We don't want to buy a product that will be outdated in just a month or two.
Of course, there's those who have been waiting for more than a couple months. For those, they are looking to 'future-proof' their machine, somewhat. If you notice, more or less every new CPU model that will be coming out is 64-bit, and there's no doubt that developers will write apps that take advantage of that architecture in the coming years. So why buy a computer that has a lower likliehood of supporting all the software you'd like to run over it's lifetime?
As for "needing it yesterday", that is a product of the hype; but I think, for the most part, we feel that the laptops could have been ready earlier - and certainly would have liked Apple to have come out and said "MBP updates soonish" (of course that makes no business sense for clearing inventory though).
portishead
Apr 5, 04:46 PM
I can't wait. Exciting times for FCP editors!