joe8232
Aug 26, 05:01 PM
I have just ordered a mbp :( It wasn't supposed to ship until Monday but it shipped early :( If the rumors are true will I be able to send it back and get the new one? Has anyone had any experience in returning unwanted stuff to apple as time is not on my side (leave for uni on the 16th Sept)
NewbieNerd
Sep 13, 12:27 PM
Your IT guy can't even spell it correctly - so how do you expect him to have a clue?
Clovertown
I think we can all read at normal size. Besides, how do you know the IT dude typed that vs. the poster just typing what he said?
Clovertown
I think we can all read at normal size. Besides, how do you know the IT dude typed that vs. the poster just typing what he said?
![download barcelona fc wallpapers. [ Download Wallpaper ]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_tsSXJcbTl6yGWNft707f9ExVqW7Y8HPbFRzoMyP1SqIFTzZ5McYOTEBa5s5-3490SDUm94ERZAA4DTL3IE345k67_ekMxlF_UW_sKiPPkvvFbFqhtS2S9tMNJ1Lj-BwQz9jKBgLwo5x5LweRRvDEtDYGGE7StecIHNwCXKVuVwAMWFc90ElxrLKE5MB_0=s0-d "[ Download Wallpaper ]")
mazola
Nov 29, 12:11 PM
Why just the other day I was thinking to myself, 'There ought to be an easier way to get my money to UMG.'
This sure beats taking out a fin, finding an envelope and stamp, digging out an address, and making the trek out to the mailbox.
Let's face it, the Universal Music Group DESERVES our money. Sure I don't listen to Ashlee Simpson, Lindsay Lohan, or the Doggy Style All Stars but who am I to say where my money should go?
And why on earth should an independent society for artist rights like ASCAP, BMI, or SOCAN be responsible for distributing money collected from what amounts to an MP3 tax? They'll just divy up the money to artists and music publishers according to boring criteria like record sales/radio play, etc.
I want my money going directly to the LABEL to do whatever they see fit with no public oversight! Maybe the artists don't need the money this month and the coke-head A&R guy needs it instead? Did you ever think of that?
Thank God UMG is FINALLY standing up for its rights and Microsoft had the good sense to listen when it agreed to implement a UMG tax in the Zune!
Apple, pay attention, or I'll just have to mail my money to UMG instead of buying an iPod!
This sure beats taking out a fin, finding an envelope and stamp, digging out an address, and making the trek out to the mailbox.
Let's face it, the Universal Music Group DESERVES our money. Sure I don't listen to Ashlee Simpson, Lindsay Lohan, or the Doggy Style All Stars but who am I to say where my money should go?
And why on earth should an independent society for artist rights like ASCAP, BMI, or SOCAN be responsible for distributing money collected from what amounts to an MP3 tax? They'll just divy up the money to artists and music publishers according to boring criteria like record sales/radio play, etc.
I want my money going directly to the LABEL to do whatever they see fit with no public oversight! Maybe the artists don't need the money this month and the coke-head A&R guy needs it instead? Did you ever think of that?
Thank God UMG is FINALLY standing up for its rights and Microsoft had the good sense to listen when it agreed to implement a UMG tax in the Zune!
Apple, pay attention, or I'll just have to mail my money to UMG instead of buying an iPod!
janstett
Sep 13, 01:11 PM
Sheesh...just when I'm already high up enough on Apple for innovating, they throw even more leaps and bounds in there to put themselves even further ahead. I can't wait 'til my broke @$$ can finally get the money to buy a Mac and chuck all my Windows machines out the door.
I'm sure we'll see similar efforts from other PC manufacturers eventually, but let's see the software use those extra cores in Windows land. Ain't gonna happen...not on the level of what Apple's doing at least.
First, this is INTEL innovating, not Apple.
Second, Apple has been the one lagging behind on multiprocessor support. Pre OSX it was a joke of a hack to support multi CPUs in Mac OS and you had to have apps written to take advantage of it with special libraries.
On Windows, the scheduler automatically handles task scheduling no matter how many processors you have, 1 or 8. Your app doesn't have to "know" it's on a single or multiple processor system or do anything special to take advantage of multiple processors, other than threading -- which you can do on a single processor system anyway. Most applications are lazy and unimaginative, and do everything in a single thread (worse, the same thread that is processing event messages from the GUI, which is why apps lock up -- when they end up in a bad state they stop processing events from the OS and won't paint, resize, etc.). But when you take advantage of multithreading, there are some sand traps but it's a cool way to code and that's how you take advantage of multiple cores without having to know what kind of system you are on. I would assume OSX, being based on BSD, is similar, but I don't know the architecture to the degree I know Windows.
In Windows, you can set process "affinity", locking it down to a fixed processor core, through Task Manager. Don't know if you can do that in OSX...
I'm sure we'll see similar efforts from other PC manufacturers eventually, but let's see the software use those extra cores in Windows land. Ain't gonna happen...not on the level of what Apple's doing at least.
First, this is INTEL innovating, not Apple.
Second, Apple has been the one lagging behind on multiprocessor support. Pre OSX it was a joke of a hack to support multi CPUs in Mac OS and you had to have apps written to take advantage of it with special libraries.
On Windows, the scheduler automatically handles task scheduling no matter how many processors you have, 1 or 8. Your app doesn't have to "know" it's on a single or multiple processor system or do anything special to take advantage of multiple processors, other than threading -- which you can do on a single processor system anyway. Most applications are lazy and unimaginative, and do everything in a single thread (worse, the same thread that is processing event messages from the GUI, which is why apps lock up -- when they end up in a bad state they stop processing events from the OS and won't paint, resize, etc.). But when you take advantage of multithreading, there are some sand traps but it's a cool way to code and that's how you take advantage of multiple cores without having to know what kind of system you are on. I would assume OSX, being based on BSD, is similar, but I don't know the architecture to the degree I know Windows.
In Windows, you can set process "affinity", locking it down to a fixed processor core, through Task Manager. Don't know if you can do that in OSX...
SevenInchScrew
Dec 11, 12:19 PM
Click to HUGE-size
http://imgur.com/ryCe3.jpg
http://imgur.com/Wtf3t.jpg
http://imgur.com/pFSJf.jpg
http://imgur.com/Tq0Qs.jpg
http://imgur.com/XHCNW.jpg
http://imgur.com/NFVE1.jpg
http://imgur.com/ryCe3.jpg
http://imgur.com/Wtf3t.jpg
http://imgur.com/pFSJf.jpg
http://imgur.com/Tq0Qs.jpg
http://imgur.com/XHCNW.jpg
http://imgur.com/NFVE1.jpg
aohus
Apr 19, 04:47 PM
Obsession can be positive or negative. Loving or hating a company is irrational.
exactly. you proved my point. obsession over one company is more of a negative. i can't really see a positive as all you're doing is deepening the pockets of their richest shareholders without rationalizing if your favorite companies' product is actually mediocre.
exactly. you proved my point. obsession over one company is more of a negative. i can't really see a positive as all you're doing is deepening the pockets of their richest shareholders without rationalizing if your favorite companies' product is actually mediocre.
azentropy
Apr 5, 04:46 PM
Hopefully there will be new iMacs to go with it. Refresh please!
and Mac Pros!
and entry level MacBook!
and Mac minis!
and ...
and Mac Pros!
and entry level MacBook!
and Mac minis!
and ...
Multimedia
Jul 27, 01:55 PM
Well it's back to the future for all of us. Remember when the Mac was going 64-bit with the introduction of the G5 PowerMac on June 23, 2003? :rolleyes: Only more than three years later and we're doing it all over again thanks to Yonah's 7 month retrograde.
Burnsey
Mar 19, 12:59 PM
When will you people realize that Obama is not in charge? You're not in charge either. Corporate interest rules the USA, Libya has 2% of the world's oil supply and a lot of companies have interests there. No one intervened militarily in Rwanda or East Timor. You guys can continue to have your little left vs right, conservative vs. liberal distraction of a debate, meanwhile the real people running the show don't give a rat's ass about any of it.
shawnce
Aug 18, 10:14 PM
So You are saying 10 seconds from OFF to the Grey Apple then 5 more seconds to the desktop? With 3 GB of New Egg + 2GB RAM? That's still very fast. Quad G5 is almost as fast as that though.
A little random trivia I learned at WWDC 06...
- When you see the Apple symbol on an Intel Mac that means EFI boot loader is active.
- When you see the spinning progress indicator that means the kernel has taken over from EFI boot loader.
- When you see the the switch to blue with progress dialog then the logininwindow is active (launchd has been loading required boot time services by this point).
If you hold down option while booting and get into the traditional boot disk selection screen on a Intel based Mac you can add and remove storage devices and they will appear/disappear automatically (EFI allows for much faster scanning and dynamic add/remove of devices). Additionally they will use the volume icon if one is found and for fun you can use your IR remote to make your boot selection.
A little random trivia I learned at WWDC 06...
- When you see the Apple symbol on an Intel Mac that means EFI boot loader is active.
- When you see the spinning progress indicator that means the kernel has taken over from EFI boot loader.
- When you see the the switch to blue with progress dialog then the logininwindow is active (launchd has been loading required boot time services by this point).
If you hold down option while booting and get into the traditional boot disk selection screen on a Intel based Mac you can add and remove storage devices and they will appear/disappear automatically (EFI allows for much faster scanning and dynamic add/remove of devices). Additionally they will use the volume icon if one is found and for fun you can use your IR remote to make your boot selection.
peharri
Jul 14, 03:11 PM
Some of this makes sense, some of it not.
I think AppleInsider is right about the case. With the exception of the MacBook, whose design has been rumoured for years and clearly was something Apple would have done even had this been the "iBook G5", Apple has made it a point with all of their Intelizations to use the same case as the predecessor, as if to say "It's business as usual, all we've changed is the processor." So from that point of view, the PowerMac G5 case being, more or less, the Mac Pro case, makes a lot of sense.
Two optical drives? No, sorry, not seeing the reasoning. The reasons given so far don't add up:
- copying DVDs - you can't legally copy 99% of DVDs anyway, if there was no need for twin CD drives, why would there suddenly be for DVDs?
- burning two at once - few people need this, and it's a great sales opportunity for a Firewire external burner anyway. Hell, why stop at TWO?
- Blu-ray - not unless they're really screwed up BR and drives with BR will be incompatible with existing media or something.
Against this, you have the confusion generated by a Mac with two optical drives. I have a Mac with two optical drives (an in-built combo drive, and a FW DVD burner), and it's not terribly elegant. It's fine when reading disks (obviously), but writing them generates some confusion. How sure am I that I'm burning to the right drive? I'm not saying you can't do it, I'm just saying this would be unbelievably un-Mac like. It'd be like the next version of iTunes coming with a menu at the top of its window.
It's also kind of easy to see where this rumour might have originated, in some garbled communication where the rumourmonger says "Two optical drive formats", or "Two bays", or "Multiple media readers" (hey, why not put an SD/CF/MS reader on the front? Pretty much everyone uses them these days, especially the prosumer-market Apple is after. Bet there are more people who'd use an SD card reader than a Firewire port.)
I've been wrong before, but I'm going to go for a traditional PowerMac G5 enclosure, and a single optical drive which may, or may not, support Blu-ray in some shape or form.
I think AppleInsider is right about the case. With the exception of the MacBook, whose design has been rumoured for years and clearly was something Apple would have done even had this been the "iBook G5", Apple has made it a point with all of their Intelizations to use the same case as the predecessor, as if to say "It's business as usual, all we've changed is the processor." So from that point of view, the PowerMac G5 case being, more or less, the Mac Pro case, makes a lot of sense.
Two optical drives? No, sorry, not seeing the reasoning. The reasons given so far don't add up:
- copying DVDs - you can't legally copy 99% of DVDs anyway, if there was no need for twin CD drives, why would there suddenly be for DVDs?
- burning two at once - few people need this, and it's a great sales opportunity for a Firewire external burner anyway. Hell, why stop at TWO?
- Blu-ray - not unless they're really screwed up BR and drives with BR will be incompatible with existing media or something.
Against this, you have the confusion generated by a Mac with two optical drives. I have a Mac with two optical drives (an in-built combo drive, and a FW DVD burner), and it's not terribly elegant. It's fine when reading disks (obviously), but writing them generates some confusion. How sure am I that I'm burning to the right drive? I'm not saying you can't do it, I'm just saying this would be unbelievably un-Mac like. It'd be like the next version of iTunes coming with a menu at the top of its window.
It's also kind of easy to see where this rumour might have originated, in some garbled communication where the rumourmonger says "Two optical drive formats", or "Two bays", or "Multiple media readers" (hey, why not put an SD/CF/MS reader on the front? Pretty much everyone uses them these days, especially the prosumer-market Apple is after. Bet there are more people who'd use an SD card reader than a Firewire port.)
I've been wrong before, but I'm going to go for a traditional PowerMac G5 enclosure, and a single optical drive which may, or may not, support Blu-ray in some shape or form.
aegisdesign
Sep 13, 12:35 PM
going out on a limb here and assuming you have a heavily cluttered desktop
Yes, I know. it takes me a couple of days to really clutter up my desktop whilst I'm working on a project and the desktop's the handiest place to stash stuff. I've also usually got 30-40 windows open too.
If I'm busy I don't have the time to de-clutter and get back teh snappy.
Yes, I know. it takes me a couple of days to really clutter up my desktop whilst I'm working on a project and the desktop's the handiest place to stash stuff. I've also usually got 30-40 windows open too.
If I'm busy I don't have the time to de-clutter and get back teh snappy.
drsmithy
Sep 14, 08:23 PM
True (today anyway; in the NT era they were indeed separate platforms though. Which brings me to my next point..)
I think you're a bit arse-about-face there. Someone else has already pointed out the differences between XP and Windows 2003 aren't trivial, so I won't go into that. However, if you're sufficient vintage, you should remember the "outrage" when someone demonstrated that you could turn NT 4 Workstation into NT 4 Server (including the boot and login screens) just by changing a few Registry settings (although the part that usually doesn't get said is that those Registry settings then triggered a whole range of different tuning settings for the scheduler, memory management, etc). NT 3.5 & 3.51 were the same, and IIRC, NT 3.1 didn't even have a "Server" version.
I think you're a bit arse-about-face there. Someone else has already pointed out the differences between XP and Windows 2003 aren't trivial, so I won't go into that. However, if you're sufficient vintage, you should remember the "outrage" when someone demonstrated that you could turn NT 4 Workstation into NT 4 Server (including the boot and login screens) just by changing a few Registry settings (although the part that usually doesn't get said is that those Registry settings then triggered a whole range of different tuning settings for the scheduler, memory management, etc). NT 3.5 & 3.51 were the same, and IIRC, NT 3.1 didn't even have a "Server" version.
jjthomps
Nov 28, 09:37 PM
When is there going to be a tell all book/movie about how the media giants are run like mafias?
Oh yeah, there won't. Nobody wants to sleep with the fishes.
So does this mean that 10 years from now your pianos will come with a $1.00 vend so that you can play a song that may have been produced by Universal, or maybe not produced by them.
These people who don't actually create anything, never lifted a brush, never sang a song, never hammered a nail, have their pale thin hands out for everything and everyway their content can be played. They have their fingers into everything. Look at the way that strores have to pay them off just to play their music over their speakers. Isn't that good old fashion advertising, and the fees should be reversed?
I'm really happy to say that I am not directly involved within such a corrupt industry.
Oh yeah, there won't. Nobody wants to sleep with the fishes.
So does this mean that 10 years from now your pianos will come with a $1.00 vend so that you can play a song that may have been produced by Universal, or maybe not produced by them.
These people who don't actually create anything, never lifted a brush, never sang a song, never hammered a nail, have their pale thin hands out for everything and everyway their content can be played. They have their fingers into everything. Look at the way that strores have to pay them off just to play their music over their speakers. Isn't that good old fashion advertising, and the fees should be reversed?
I'm really happy to say that I am not directly involved within such a corrupt industry.
epitaphic
Sep 13, 02:00 PM
I think you've misunderstood. Merom/Conroe/Woodcrest are one microarch now. That's Intel's point -- the core is essentially the same.
Conroe and its derivatives are a step away from Intel's former flagship NetBurst, but even these processors are a bit of a dying breed: during Intel's shift to 45nm, the company will no longer focus on derived microprocessor cores in favor of refined unified core architectures.
So what do you think they meant with M/C/W being a derived arch and Penryn,etc being unified archs?
From what I understood, they'll stop having different characteristics (FSB,RAM,Cache) and instead just differentiate them with MHz and core count. Hence all the stories that future Intel chips (starting with Penryn I presume) won't use FSB.
Conroe and its derivatives are a step away from Intel's former flagship NetBurst, but even these processors are a bit of a dying breed: during Intel's shift to 45nm, the company will no longer focus on derived microprocessor cores in favor of refined unified core architectures.
So what do you think they meant with M/C/W being a derived arch and Penryn,etc being unified archs?
From what I understood, they'll stop having different characteristics (FSB,RAM,Cache) and instead just differentiate them with MHz and core count. Hence all the stories that future Intel chips (starting with Penryn I presume) won't use FSB.
Littleodie914
Jul 27, 09:44 AM
So since these new mobile chips are pin-compatible with the Yonah chips (like the one in my MBP), will it be easy/possible to simply buy one and upgrade myself?
NoSmokingBandit
Dec 3, 02:56 PM
I'm think i'm a 15 A-spec, and i just started B-spec to save up money for the Ferrari and Lambo races in the Pro series. I've only done a few spec events, but i've got all gold in B and A licenses as well as 9/10 gold (one silver) in I-C license.
I find the license tests to be more fun now that they arent mandatory. They seem easier too. In GT4 it was work just to pass some of them, but in GT5 i find that i always get silver or bronze on my first attempt. Gold is a bit of work sometimes though.
I find the license tests to be more fun now that they arent mandatory. They seem easier too. In GT4 it was work just to pass some of them, but in GT5 i find that i always get silver or bronze on my first attempt. Gold is a bit of work sometimes though.
ergle2
Sep 20, 03:51 PM
Umm. What happened in here?
Can we reurn to some common respect please? This spat isn't constructive.
True enough.
I ... well, I won't go there, too likely to throw more fuel on the fire.
I'll drop it if she does, fair enough?
Can we reurn to some common respect please? This spat isn't constructive.
True enough.
I ... well, I won't go there, too likely to throw more fuel on the fire.
I'll drop it if she does, fair enough?
Banjhiyi
Mar 26, 07:14 AM
Wirelessly posted (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)
Been on Lion for the past month and I can't see myself going back to Snow Leopard.
This WILL be a landmark release for Apple and huge step forward in usability. It just ties everything together: one simple, elegant, functional, totally scalable OS. Apple will have achieved in no time at all what the competition is just beginning to attempt (and fail at constantly.)
Wirelessly posted (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)
This might explain the shambles that is 10.6.7.
Last release before Lion - semi-brick your machine to force an upgrade.
iOS 4.3, last release before iPhone 5 - murder your battery to force an upgrade.
You've guessed it, I'm not very happy with Apple at the moment. So which is it; underhand tactics, sloppy Q&A or declining standards?
I think it's artificial belly-aching on MacRumors in order to get attention.
Am I getting warmer?
Yes, absolutely. After all, I've got form for it. :rolleyes:
Been on Lion for the past month and I can't see myself going back to Snow Leopard.
This WILL be a landmark release for Apple and huge step forward in usability. It just ties everything together: one simple, elegant, functional, totally scalable OS. Apple will have achieved in no time at all what the competition is just beginning to attempt (and fail at constantly.)
Wirelessly posted (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)
This might explain the shambles that is 10.6.7.
Last release before Lion - semi-brick your machine to force an upgrade.
iOS 4.3, last release before iPhone 5 - murder your battery to force an upgrade.
You've guessed it, I'm not very happy with Apple at the moment. So which is it; underhand tactics, sloppy Q&A or declining standards?
I think it's artificial belly-aching on MacRumors in order to get attention.
Am I getting warmer?
Yes, absolutely. After all, I've got form for it. :rolleyes:
Nuck81
Dec 7, 04:20 PM
So another patch for today adding mechanical damage. Must have the newest firmware...
only online so far. It was a good fix, cuts down on the bumper cars in certain rooms...
only online so far. It was a good fix, cuts down on the bumper cars in certain rooms...
Fotek2001
Aug 7, 03:27 PM
Not a glimpse of the Finder...! :eek:
VanNess
Aug 5, 06:54 PM
You're right that there is "no reason to rush" except it would be awfully fun to beat Vista to market AGAIN.
David :cool:
Apple, in a very real sense, will beat Vista as of Monday. Microsoft execs have already gone on record recently saying that the rescheduled schedule for the revised schedule for scheduling the release of Vista now has a 20% chance of slipping. Apple, on the other hand, has earned a reputation for shipping it's OS and what it shows/promises. So what will be seen at WWDC will be as good as gold insofar as it's perception as a legitimate answer to Vista.
Microsoft is really out of time. It has to freeze it's code for Vista and debug if it stands any chance of hitting an 07 release and maintain what's left of Microsoft's credibility - which means whatever it looks like now, that's it. So there won't be any further surprises from Microsoft, just release date suspense. From a competitive, strategic point of view, it just doesn't get any better than this for Apple.
David :cool:
Apple, in a very real sense, will beat Vista as of Monday. Microsoft execs have already gone on record recently saying that the rescheduled schedule for the revised schedule for scheduling the release of Vista now has a 20% chance of slipping. Apple, on the other hand, has earned a reputation for shipping it's OS and what it shows/promises. So what will be seen at WWDC will be as good as gold insofar as it's perception as a legitimate answer to Vista.
Microsoft is really out of time. It has to freeze it's code for Vista and debug if it stands any chance of hitting an 07 release and maintain what's left of Microsoft's credibility - which means whatever it looks like now, that's it. So there won't be any further surprises from Microsoft, just release date suspense. From a competitive, strategic point of view, it just doesn't get any better than this for Apple.
Multimedia
Jul 21, 12:51 PM
All I will say is that you are not a typical user. You are not even close to typical.
OK. So maybe you need ten thousand cores and three million gigabytes of RAM. Don't think for an instant that the majority of the world shares your requirements.I may not be typical today, but in future a majority of Western Pop-Culture type users - not the world - will want to be able to archive HDTV to mp4 off their original recordings in a flash and only more cores will solve that problem.
And I never said anything about needing ten thousand cores etc. I think it is quite realistic for the majority of Western Pop-Culture Type Nationalities ONLY users to need 16 or more cores by 2010. Thank God we will begin to get them by 2008. :eek:
I don't begin to pretend we are discussing the world's users' needs here. Only Westerners with heavy Pop-Culture Multimedia type usage - Video iPods HDTV Sat Radio etc.
I believe that there is a fundamental lack of imagination on this front - because it hasn't been possible to date, therefore it isn't in the consciousness of many users yet as a possibility they would think of doing. It's not so much that I'm atypical as it is I am already thinking outside the box of how we've been doing stuff to date. Soon many will begin to see the new ways we will be able to get stuff done faster thanks to more Cores inside.
OK. So maybe you need ten thousand cores and three million gigabytes of RAM. Don't think for an instant that the majority of the world shares your requirements.I may not be typical today, but in future a majority of Western Pop-Culture type users - not the world - will want to be able to archive HDTV to mp4 off their original recordings in a flash and only more cores will solve that problem.
And I never said anything about needing ten thousand cores etc. I think it is quite realistic for the majority of Western Pop-Culture Type Nationalities ONLY users to need 16 or more cores by 2010. Thank God we will begin to get them by 2008. :eek:
I don't begin to pretend we are discussing the world's users' needs here. Only Westerners with heavy Pop-Culture Multimedia type usage - Video iPods HDTV Sat Radio etc.
I believe that there is a fundamental lack of imagination on this front - because it hasn't been possible to date, therefore it isn't in the consciousness of many users yet as a possibility they would think of doing. It's not so much that I'm atypical as it is I am already thinking outside the box of how we've been doing stuff to date. Soon many will begin to see the new ways we will be able to get stuff done faster thanks to more Cores inside.
elgruga
Nov 29, 02:27 AM
If Universal get cash as 'compensation' for stolen music, then presumably once you have paid the 'compensation' money, you can steal as much music as you like. Cool.
Apple doesnt really sell music - it sells iPods and offers the music at cost (or close to it) to support the iPod. Its a smart move , and its a pity that almost ALL of the iTunes cash goes direct to the record companies.
I used to work in the music biz, and a bigger bunch of thieving clowns you have yet to meet.
Most artists get 6-8% of the CD sales. Yes folks thats a big fifty cents or so on an average CD sale.
But because they give you an advance against royalties, which you spend on recording and PR etc. etc, only the very successful (a huge 0.5% of bands) ever make any money. Its a losing gamble and it turns music into a commodity - which it shouldnt be.
This battle will run for a while yet, but there is hope that the DEMISE of record companies is on the horizon.
With computer recording etc., its not necessary to get a record deal - good music does exist outside of the music industry machine.
Maybe Micro$oft will implode too - the zune fiasco suggests that they are up their own arses as far as common sense goes.....
Apple doesnt really sell music - it sells iPods and offers the music at cost (or close to it) to support the iPod. Its a smart move , and its a pity that almost ALL of the iTunes cash goes direct to the record companies.
I used to work in the music biz, and a bigger bunch of thieving clowns you have yet to meet.
Most artists get 6-8% of the CD sales. Yes folks thats a big fifty cents or so on an average CD sale.
But because they give you an advance against royalties, which you spend on recording and PR etc. etc, only the very successful (a huge 0.5% of bands) ever make any money. Its a losing gamble and it turns music into a commodity - which it shouldnt be.
This battle will run for a while yet, but there is hope that the DEMISE of record companies is on the horizon.
With computer recording etc., its not necessary to get a record deal - good music does exist outside of the music industry machine.
Maybe Micro$oft will implode too - the zune fiasco suggests that they are up their own arses as far as common sense goes.....