SactoGuy18
Apr 8, 06:34 AM
I think this whole mess comes down to this: there is a REAL shortage of the iPad 2, especially since Foxconn can no longer keep up with demand due to the ongoing situation in Japan with several Japanese suppliers incapable of supplying parts to Foxconn for the iPad 2. As such, Best Buy is taking advantage of this situation by deliberately holding back sales of the iPad 2, and Apple call them out on it. I would not be surprised that Apple ends up issuing a recall order to take back every iPad 2 from Best Buy and they end up being sold at Apple Stores instead.
And you wonder why Microsoft is not willing to extend their Signature program of highly-optimized Windows 7 computers (Signature PC's aren't loaded with "trialware" l like normal retail PC's are) to Best Buy, even though such a computer would work extremely well for customers and would end up being huge best sellers for Best buy.
And you wonder why Microsoft is not willing to extend their Signature program of highly-optimized Windows 7 computers (Signature PC's aren't loaded with "trialware" l like normal retail PC's are) to Best Buy, even though such a computer would work extremely well for customers and would end up being huge best sellers for Best buy.
HyperZboy
Apr 7, 01:52 PM
lol... You really think Intel is the reason Apple laptops cost what they do? Really?
I never said I considered it overpriced.
I was making a point that it's now underpowered for some users and less powerful than the previous model.
And another point... I'm not really blaming Apple. Obviously, it's Intel's fault for forcing the Intel graphics on Apple, among other companies that plan to use the new CPUs and Intel logic boards.
For many people with the current model, the new Macbook Air will be a downgrade unless you really need some of the other new features.
I never said I considered it overpriced.
I was making a point that it's now underpowered for some users and less powerful than the previous model.
And another point... I'm not really blaming Apple. Obviously, it's Intel's fault for forcing the Intel graphics on Apple, among other companies that plan to use the new CPUs and Intel logic boards.
For many people with the current model, the new Macbook Air will be a downgrade unless you really need some of the other new features.
Moyank24
Feb 28, 08:35 PM
rape and paedophilia both involve lack of consent. Although paedophilia has to do with that the mind is attracted to pre-pubescent children in the same way that homosexuality causes attraction to the same sex. Both cases are untreatable.
Huh?
Wouldn't it also, then, be like the same way that heterosexuality causes attraction to the opposite sex?
Huh?
Wouldn't it also, then, be like the same way that heterosexuality causes attraction to the opposite sex?
ekwipt
Apr 5, 08:10 PM
Final Cut needs better media management, and also Avid-like support for multiple editors on a single project. I like Final Cut a lot, but Avid has some clear advantages for a feature film. Here's hoping this next version has some big new features!
Good Post
Good Post
wmmk
Jul 14, 06:19 PM
The thing I like least about this rumor is that it specifies only a 320GB harddrive.
The current configs (quad g5) were released in October of last year, in that time harddrive capacities have increased well beyond that (320) small number.
The new machines will get 500GB drives I have to believe.
:confused:
320 would be the standard. you could upgrade to a terabyte if there are still two HDD bays.
The current configs (quad g5) were released in October of last year, in that time harddrive capacities have increased well beyond that (320) small number.
The new machines will get 500GB drives I have to believe.
:confused:
320 would be the standard. you could upgrade to a terabyte if there are still two HDD bays.
Consultant
Apr 11, 11:36 AM
We'll see in a few months.
Apple has never been one to react to competition in the recent years. They seem to do what they think is best and let others follow them.
I think they know that if they bring out the best one when it is released, they will sell as many as they can make for a long time.
Agree.
Apple has never been one to react to competition in the recent years. They seem to do what they think is best and let others follow them.
I think they know that if they bring out the best one when it is released, they will sell as many as they can make for a long time.
Agree.
miamijim
Apr 8, 01:33 AM
As best as I can figure, it works like this. Managers get good grades if they sell certain amounts of products.
I'll use low numbers here. Let's say BB corporate wants you to sell at least 5 iPads a day to make your "Quota". One day, 10 iPads come in. You sell all ten, yay, you made quota for the day.
But the next day, none get shipped to the store. So, boo, you didn't make quota, since you didn't have any to sell.
So, if you get 10 the day after that, & not knowing if more are coming tomorrow, you sell 5, make quota, and hold the other 5 for the next day when, low and behold, none get shipped to the store. You still have 5 left over to sell, which you do, and again you make quota for the day.
Basically the more days you make quota, the happier BB corporate is, and the better chance Mr. Manager gets a bonus down the road.
Mr. Manager (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4DMPmoJkJQ)
This plus...
If you sell X amount of product in the 1st quarter of this year your target for 1st quarter of the next year is based upon the previous years take, so say next year a large product is not released in the first quarter your sales year on year will be down.
By easing product out across the days and weeks the best Buy managers are securing their target figures for the following years year on year targets.
The managers bonus's are based upon % performance above sales. So if you are able to massage your sales you are effectively able to manage your expected performance against target figures.
It's called cooking the books, and technically it is illegal.
I used to be in management for HMV so I know of what I speak.
I'll use low numbers here. Let's say BB corporate wants you to sell at least 5 iPads a day to make your "Quota". One day, 10 iPads come in. You sell all ten, yay, you made quota for the day.
But the next day, none get shipped to the store. So, boo, you didn't make quota, since you didn't have any to sell.
So, if you get 10 the day after that, & not knowing if more are coming tomorrow, you sell 5, make quota, and hold the other 5 for the next day when, low and behold, none get shipped to the store. You still have 5 left over to sell, which you do, and again you make quota for the day.
Basically the more days you make quota, the happier BB corporate is, and the better chance Mr. Manager gets a bonus down the road.
Mr. Manager (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4DMPmoJkJQ)
This plus...
If you sell X amount of product in the 1st quarter of this year your target for 1st quarter of the next year is based upon the previous years take, so say next year a large product is not released in the first quarter your sales year on year will be down.
By easing product out across the days and weeks the best Buy managers are securing their target figures for the following years year on year targets.
The managers bonus's are based upon % performance above sales. So if you are able to massage your sales you are effectively able to manage your expected performance against target figures.
It's called cooking the books, and technically it is illegal.
I used to be in management for HMV so I know of what I speak.
AppliedVisual
Oct 22, 03:14 PM
I heard Leo Laporte talking about this on his KFI podcast... exciting... one question... how many softwares take advantage of multi cores? I understand that the OS can deal with it for multi tasking, but how many programs multi thread?
DD
Unfortunately not many multithreaded apps - yet. For a long time most of the multi-threaded apps were just a select few pro level things. 3D/Visualization software, CAD, database systems, etc.. Those of us who had multiprocessor systems bought them because we had a specific software in mind or group of software applications that could take advantage of multiple processors. As current CPU manufacturing processes started hitting a wall right around the 3GHz mark, chip makers started to transition to multiple CPU cores to boost power - makes sense. Software developers have been lazy for years, just riding the wave of ever-increasing MHz. Now the multi-core CPUs are here and the software is behind as many applications need to have serious re-writes done in order to take advantage of multiple processors. Intel tried to get a jump on this with their HT (Hyper Threading) implementation that essentially simulated dual-cores on a CPU by way of two virtual CPUs. Software developers didn't exactly jump on this and warm up to it. But I also don't think the software industry truly believed that CPUs would go multi-core on a mass scale so fast... Intel and AMD both said they would, don't know why the software industry doubted. Intel and AMD are uncommonly good about telling the truth about upcoming products. Both will be shipping quad-core CPU offerings by year's end.
DD
Unfortunately not many multithreaded apps - yet. For a long time most of the multi-threaded apps were just a select few pro level things. 3D/Visualization software, CAD, database systems, etc.. Those of us who had multiprocessor systems bought them because we had a specific software in mind or group of software applications that could take advantage of multiple processors. As current CPU manufacturing processes started hitting a wall right around the 3GHz mark, chip makers started to transition to multiple CPU cores to boost power - makes sense. Software developers have been lazy for years, just riding the wave of ever-increasing MHz. Now the multi-core CPUs are here and the software is behind as many applications need to have serious re-writes done in order to take advantage of multiple processors. Intel tried to get a jump on this with their HT (Hyper Threading) implementation that essentially simulated dual-cores on a CPU by way of two virtual CPUs. Software developers didn't exactly jump on this and warm up to it. But I also don't think the software industry truly believed that CPUs would go multi-core on a mass scale so fast... Intel and AMD both said they would, don't know why the software industry doubted. Intel and AMD are uncommonly good about telling the truth about upcoming products. Both will be shipping quad-core CPU offerings by year's end.
KnightWRX
Apr 7, 09:36 AM
You make it seem like intel told apple they can't use the sb chips unless they use the IGP, which is obviously false.
It's not false per say, at least not 100%. Of course, graphics in such systems are usually IGPs, but before the Core iX line of processors, anyone could license and build chipsets for these processors and include a different IGP than Intel did. Intel however refused to license this for the new processors, including the SB line and thus nVidia who was making chipsets could not produce an IGP for the new platform.
So yes, essentially Intel told Apple they had to use the 3000 HD as an IGP, where before, Apple was using nVidia's tech. There was even a massive lawsuit about all of this, between Intel and nVidia which ended with nVidia stepping out of the chipset business alltogether.
So the poster you were replying to wasn't 100% wrong at all. It is in fact a testament to Intel's incompetence how all of this was handled, since an old MBA with a 320m outpaces new SB machines that have a much more powerful CPU in graphics performance.
It's not false per say, at least not 100%. Of course, graphics in such systems are usually IGPs, but before the Core iX line of processors, anyone could license and build chipsets for these processors and include a different IGP than Intel did. Intel however refused to license this for the new processors, including the SB line and thus nVidia who was making chipsets could not produce an IGP for the new platform.
So yes, essentially Intel told Apple they had to use the 3000 HD as an IGP, where before, Apple was using nVidia's tech. There was even a massive lawsuit about all of this, between Intel and nVidia which ended with nVidia stepping out of the chipset business alltogether.
So the poster you were replying to wasn't 100% wrong at all. It is in fact a testament to Intel's incompetence how all of this was handled, since an old MBA with a 320m outpaces new SB machines that have a much more powerful CPU in graphics performance.
Chupa Chupa
Apr 8, 06:17 AM
The problem is not the number of retail-locations selling iPads, the problem is number of iPads in those stores. Now that BB is out of the picture, other retailers can receive more units. Now Apple can stop supplying BB-stores, and use those units to supply some other stores instead. You know, stores that actually sell the product to a customer?
My point is that Apple sells BB more products than the iPad. If it gets pissy about how the iPad is sold and holds units back then it's going to strain the relationship and right now Apple needs BBs floor space to show off its other products b/c there are lots of gaps in Apple Store locations.
As I said this story is fantasy and B.S.
My point is that Apple sells BB more products than the iPad. If it gets pissy about how the iPad is sold and holds units back then it's going to strain the relationship and right now Apple needs BBs floor space to show off its other products b/c there are lots of gaps in Apple Store locations.
As I said this story is fantasy and B.S.
NickUK69
Apr 11, 11:33 AM
Hi
With all the Android phones coming out and manufacturers having no specific cycle, the iPhone is really out of date already!
iPhone 1 - 2G
iPhone 2 - adds 3G
iPhone 3 - adds 3GS
Therefore the above three phones are all 'old' regarding what was released around the same time.
iPhone 4 - will be about 18 months old by the time the iPhone 5 comes out.
People will loose interest in Apple iPhones with so many other new releases coming out on a regular basis.
With all the Android phones coming out and manufacturers having no specific cycle, the iPhone is really out of date already!
iPhone 1 - 2G
iPhone 2 - adds 3G
iPhone 3 - adds 3GS
Therefore the above three phones are all 'old' regarding what was released around the same time.
iPhone 4 - will be about 18 months old by the time the iPhone 5 comes out.
People will loose interest in Apple iPhones with so many other new releases coming out on a regular basis.
Eriden
Sep 19, 11:47 AM
You know, Sony and Nintendo are just *SO* behind the curve with next gen gaming systems.
Microsoft has had it's XBox 360 out for MONTHS, while Sony and Nintendo gamers are lagging behind, barely able to function on their PS2s and GameCubes.
If Sony and Nintendo don't release the PS3 and Wii, respectively, in the next week, they'll be the laughing stocks of the industry. There's no excuse for them to release their next gen gaming systems a year after their competitor.
http://playstation3.joystiq.com/2005/07/29/kutaragi-on-ps3-itll-be-expensive/
Miley Cyrus#39; blonde
miley cyrus hair 2010. today
Miley Cyrus MMVAs 2010
Miley Cyrus snapped out and
miley cyrus style clothes
Miley Cyrus by smileymileylt;33.
Ich kann Miley Cyrus nicht
Microsoft has had it's XBox 360 out for MONTHS, while Sony and Nintendo gamers are lagging behind, barely able to function on their PS2s and GameCubes.
If Sony and Nintendo don't release the PS3 and Wii, respectively, in the next week, they'll be the laughing stocks of the industry. There's no excuse for them to release their next gen gaming systems a year after their competitor.
http://playstation3.joystiq.com/2005/07/29/kutaragi-on-ps3-itll-be-expensive/
MacsRgr8
Aug 5, 04:02 PM
Me excited too! :)
I've made plans with some ex-colleagues to follow the event live using the text-based coverage made available.
Let me thank MacRumors : Live already!
It'll be 6 pm over here, so we'll be ready with some pizzas and cokes! ;)
Then once I get home a couple of hours later, I can watch the stream! :cool:
I've made plans with some ex-colleagues to follow the event live using the text-based coverage made available.
Let me thank MacRumors : Live already!
It'll be 6 pm over here, so we'll be ready with some pizzas and cokes! ;)
Then once I get home a couple of hours later, I can watch the stream! :cool:
11thIndian
Apr 6, 08:05 AM
Yikes! Better offload my copy of the current version of FCS before it drops too low.
Any takers? :D
If you're planning on buying the new FCS at an "Upgrade" price, you can't sell your old version. You still need the serial # for installations.
Any takers? :D
If you're planning on buying the new FCS at an "Upgrade" price, you can't sell your old version. You still need the serial # for installations.
KnightWRX
Mar 26, 07:58 AM
2) $129 is too much. This one cracks me up. Apple is bundling a $500 product into the OS (and other OS based servers are far more expensive) and people think $129 is too much?
Apple is bundling a bunch of GUI management tools, akin to Webmin. Was that worth 500$ before ? Nope. Is it more expensive elsewhere ? No. Let's face it, OS X Server was always a toy Unix compared to other big-Iron Unix systems and even to Linux as far as enterprise support goes. Volume management, hello Cupertino ?
Their old archaic way of managing storage is atrocious and no, I don't necessarily want to hook up with a huge array and run Xsan, I just want to intelligently manage my local storage. No, just RAID1 volumes is not enough, I want my volumes logical and independant of my physical volumes. I want to be able to move logical extents to new physical extents without having to take down anything on the box.
And what about those GUI tools ? I can't even just do X11 tunneling over SSH to my desktop to run them, I have either run their Remote Desktop stuff or use a 3rd party solution like VNC... What good are they ? At least make them web based (HP Systems Management Homepage type stuff) and join in to what the rest of the industry got clued into years ago if you don't want to code GUI stuff over X11.
And other OS based servers are not more expensive. Solaris is free (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/downloads/index.html). I won't even bother linking to all the free distributions of Linux that are ready for the server (Fedora, OpenSuSE, Arch, Ubuntu). The BSDs. Unix server product vendors make their money off of support contracts, not the actual software itself, an arena Apple obviously wants no part of.
All the bits and pieces of server software is mostly re-packaged open source components nowadays anyhow. Most every vendor out there is using Apache and Tomcat in their web-based products, Postfix on the mail side, I've seen a lot of MySQL and PostgreSQL based products (HP uses both, MySQL I've seen in their Output Manager product, PostgreSQL in their System Fault Management, Symantec uses MySQL for Brightmail), and let's not even get into OpenSSL and OpenSSH...
Heck, even Apple does this. OS X server is just a bunch of open source components packaged up together. Apache, OpenLDAP, OpenSSH, ClamAV...
So please, pretty please, with a cherry on top, let's not call OS X Server something worth 500$ and compare it to "others that are more expensive but in actuality are free to download and run and only expensive to get vendor support for".
This rant was longer than it should have been. I love OS X as a desktop OS. I'd pay 129$ for a Lion upgrade with my eyes closed. Best of both worlds. Unix underpinnings and powerful command-line (everything is there!) with integration for all my server products yet fast and easy to setup GUI that is mostly consistent so as to attract a large user base that makes it a good proposition for commercial software vendors to port their packages to. Apple just never got really serious about the server side of it (and lets face it, it's not their business and they obviously want no part of the entreprise market) and I'm not faulting them for that. Let's not be as disingenious as to claim their selling you a 500$ product for 129$ though.
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Snow Leopard offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
See how this little change in your comment still makes it apply very much to the MacRumors crowd ? ;) The fact is, you're not really dealing with technical people on MacRumors, no matter how much some of them pretend they are. Heck, some of them still believe that HTML is a programming language and that they are web developers because their tools of choice are PhotoShop and Dreamweaver.
Apple is bundling a bunch of GUI management tools, akin to Webmin. Was that worth 500$ before ? Nope. Is it more expensive elsewhere ? No. Let's face it, OS X Server was always a toy Unix compared to other big-Iron Unix systems and even to Linux as far as enterprise support goes. Volume management, hello Cupertino ?
Their old archaic way of managing storage is atrocious and no, I don't necessarily want to hook up with a huge array and run Xsan, I just want to intelligently manage my local storage. No, just RAID1 volumes is not enough, I want my volumes logical and independant of my physical volumes. I want to be able to move logical extents to new physical extents without having to take down anything on the box.
And what about those GUI tools ? I can't even just do X11 tunneling over SSH to my desktop to run them, I have either run their Remote Desktop stuff or use a 3rd party solution like VNC... What good are they ? At least make them web based (HP Systems Management Homepage type stuff) and join in to what the rest of the industry got clued into years ago if you don't want to code GUI stuff over X11.
And other OS based servers are not more expensive. Solaris is free (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/downloads/index.html). I won't even bother linking to all the free distributions of Linux that are ready for the server (Fedora, OpenSuSE, Arch, Ubuntu). The BSDs. Unix server product vendors make their money off of support contracts, not the actual software itself, an arena Apple obviously wants no part of.
All the bits and pieces of server software is mostly re-packaged open source components nowadays anyhow. Most every vendor out there is using Apache and Tomcat in their web-based products, Postfix on the mail side, I've seen a lot of MySQL and PostgreSQL based products (HP uses both, MySQL I've seen in their Output Manager product, PostgreSQL in their System Fault Management, Symantec uses MySQL for Brightmail), and let's not even get into OpenSSL and OpenSSH...
Heck, even Apple does this. OS X server is just a bunch of open source components packaged up together. Apache, OpenLDAP, OpenSSH, ClamAV...
So please, pretty please, with a cherry on top, let's not call OS X Server something worth 500$ and compare it to "others that are more expensive but in actuality are free to download and run and only expensive to get vendor support for".
This rant was longer than it should have been. I love OS X as a desktop OS. I'd pay 129$ for a Lion upgrade with my eyes closed. Best of both worlds. Unix underpinnings and powerful command-line (everything is there!) with integration for all my server products yet fast and easy to setup GUI that is mostly consistent so as to attract a large user base that makes it a good proposition for commercial software vendors to port their packages to. Apple just never got really serious about the server side of it (and lets face it, it's not their business and they obviously want no part of the entreprise market) and I'm not faulting them for that. Let's not be as disingenious as to claim their selling you a 500$ product for 129$ though.
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Snow Leopard offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
See how this little change in your comment still makes it apply very much to the MacRumors crowd ? ;) The fact is, you're not really dealing with technical people on MacRumors, no matter how much some of them pretend they are. Heck, some of them still believe that HTML is a programming language and that they are web developers because their tools of choice are PhotoShop and Dreamweaver.
doctor-don
Apr 27, 10:43 AM
I'm glad they're fixing this "bug"
But their response is utter crap. They know it - and now everyone knows it.
As reports came out over a year ago about this - it's only after this tremendous bad press that they "found" it. Mhhhmmmm sure.
Commenting on it officially is not the same as "found" it.
But their response is utter crap. They know it - and now everyone knows it.
As reports came out over a year ago about this - it's only after this tremendous bad press that they "found" it. Mhhhmmmm sure.
Commenting on it officially is not the same as "found" it.
gnasher729
Jul 28, 06:27 AM
Ensoniq, thanks so much for the useful corrections. How significant do you think that 64-bit capability will be in the future compared to not having it(say, 2-3 years time)?
64 bit is required for applications that need more than four GB of memory. For other things, it is nice to have, but not required. If you buy a MacBook today, you wouldn't be able to put more than 4 GB of memory in it for the next few years anyway, so in that respect it doesn't matter much whether you have a Yonah or Merom chip. For everything else, 64 bit software might run a bit faster than 32 bit software on a 64 bit chip, but it is not essential. So I think applications will ship as 32 bit or as combined 32/64 bit applications for quite some time.
The question for the developers would be: If I switch to 64 bit exclusively, so my code runs ten percent faster on Core 2 Duo, but 1-2 million Macintosh users cannot use it at all, how many sales will I gain because it is faster, and how many sales will I lose because 2 million people cannot use it? Three years from now, the answer will still be that you lose more sales running 64 bit only.
64 bit is required for applications that need more than four GB of memory. For other things, it is nice to have, but not required. If you buy a MacBook today, you wouldn't be able to put more than 4 GB of memory in it for the next few years anyway, so in that respect it doesn't matter much whether you have a Yonah or Merom chip. For everything else, 64 bit software might run a bit faster than 32 bit software on a 64 bit chip, but it is not essential. So I think applications will ship as 32 bit or as combined 32/64 bit applications for quite some time.
The question for the developers would be: If I switch to 64 bit exclusively, so my code runs ten percent faster on Core 2 Duo, but 1-2 million Macintosh users cannot use it at all, how many sales will I gain because it is faster, and how many sales will I lose because 2 million people cannot use it? Three years from now, the answer will still be that you lose more sales running 64 bit only.
Marx55
Jul 15, 02:23 AM
My top 10 features (in order of preference).
1. Quiet Mac. THAT IS A MUST. If possible, no fans.
2. Modular Mac. Use any Apple cinema display with it.
3. Fast 7,200 rpm drive inside. NO SLOW DRIVES!
4. At least a maximum of 2 GB RAM (BTO).
5. FireWire 800 (2), 400 (2), USB 2 (6) and eSATA (2).
6. True 64-bit microprocessor inside.
7. True Intel virtualization microprocessor inside.
8. Two Blu-ray drives built-in (at least as a BTO).
9. Upgradeable microprocessor inside.
10. Reasonably priced. Check out current PC boxes!
1. Quiet Mac. THAT IS A MUST. If possible, no fans.
2. Modular Mac. Use any Apple cinema display with it.
3. Fast 7,200 rpm drive inside. NO SLOW DRIVES!
4. At least a maximum of 2 GB RAM (BTO).
5. FireWire 800 (2), 400 (2), USB 2 (6) and eSATA (2).
6. True 64-bit microprocessor inside.
7. True Intel virtualization microprocessor inside.
8. Two Blu-ray drives built-in (at least as a BTO).
9. Upgradeable microprocessor inside.
10. Reasonably priced. Check out current PC boxes!
scotty321
Apr 7, 10:46 PM
Anybody who knows anything about the people who work at Best Buy will tell you that they are all a bunch of untrustworthy backstabbing liars, and you can't trust a thing they do or a thing they tell you. Best Buy is the worst.
BoyBach
Nov 29, 12:56 PM
We might hate to admit it as Apple fans, but Apple needs the labels for the iTunes store to work just as much as the label needs Apple.
Not true. Apple doesn't need the iTunes Store since all iPods are full of stolen music! ;)
Not true. Apple doesn't need the iTunes Store since all iPods are full of stolen music! ;)
slackpacker
Apr 10, 07:21 PM
Can't wait for NAB
rezenclowd3
Nov 25, 09:49 PM
I hated Shift, it seemed to me to pretend to be a sim, at the same time acknowledging it was an arcade game. I can't stand AI that will try to get revenge anyway, as that should be black flagged. Race clean or gtfo IMO. If one happens to drive dirty accidentally online, do your own stop and go but let the offended gain your place. If you CAN'T pass cleanly due to skill, always get out of the way like you are being lapped, DO NOT try to defend.
jholzner
Jul 27, 11:28 AM
I read the link, and it give no mention of the speeds of the notebook chips. It only gives a range for the desktop chips. Maybe you didn't read it.
When did Apple have pentium-era chips in their machines?
They didn't. Where is this Mhz myth you are talking about? They are downplaying the use of Mhz was the point I was making.
When did Apple have pentium-era chips in their machines?
They didn't. Where is this Mhz myth you are talking about? They are downplaying the use of Mhz was the point I was making.
Multimedia
Sep 13, 08:23 PM
Hey Multimedia, Do you record HDTV with EyeTV 500 then encode to H.264 using Handbrake and then do you add it to itunes to manage and organize those shows or movies?
I think this is a neat idea with you have the spare HD room and want to keep shows or events for long time and want to access it fast and easy.I don't use H.264 because the previous max res allowed to go on an iPod with it was 320x240 which would upscale to a TV poorly. Now I will continue to not use it because the file sizes are more than twice what I can make without it.
The author of Handbrake is going to have to make some changes to it before we can use H.264 judiciously. I currently use the FFmpeg 2-pass encoding at bitrates around 750kbps for SD @ 544x400 and 1000kbps @ 624x352 for HD. These are dimensions that fall within the upper limit pixel count that will still load and play on an iPod 230,000. This way they upsacle to a TV well and still play on iPod.
I don't use iTunes much. I am burning DVDs of all these files. 12 one hour shows fit on a DVD @ 351 per 42 minute Ads edited out episode. Movies I can get to 702MB - one CD size each. Personal message me if you need more details.
I think this is a neat idea with you have the spare HD room and want to keep shows or events for long time and want to access it fast and easy.I don't use H.264 because the previous max res allowed to go on an iPod with it was 320x240 which would upscale to a TV poorly. Now I will continue to not use it because the file sizes are more than twice what I can make without it.
The author of Handbrake is going to have to make some changes to it before we can use H.264 judiciously. I currently use the FFmpeg 2-pass encoding at bitrates around 750kbps for SD @ 544x400 and 1000kbps @ 624x352 for HD. These are dimensions that fall within the upper limit pixel count that will still load and play on an iPod 230,000. This way they upsacle to a TV well and still play on iPod.
I don't use iTunes much. I am burning DVDs of all these files. 12 one hour shows fit on a DVD @ 351 per 42 minute Ads edited out episode. Movies I can get to 702MB - one CD size each. Personal message me if you need more details.