p0intblank
Jul 19, 03:46 PM
Impressive numbers! :D Intel Mac sales are actually higher than I thought they'd be. And of course, the iPod is the leader once again.
kadajawi
Sep 7, 05:56 AM
"Sin City was 40 million, Renaissance 14 million �, A Scanner Darkly 8.5 millions"
These were cheaper because they relied on digital effects to make a visual impression, rather than a couple hundred tons of actual explosives blowing up a genuine Boieng 747 as you might have in a Hollywood blockbuster.
Good to see you mentioned 2046. Great movie ^^ Wong Kar-Wai is awesome.
Right, but there were tons of artists working on the overpainting of A Scanner Darkly. And they don't blow up 747 anymore... they did such things with Tora! Tora! Tora! and other old movies, but today there is a lot of CGI involved. Remember Batman Begins and how proud they were that the car scene was without any CGI?
Initial D had a tiny budget compared to The Fast and the Furious I and II, yet it had great car scenes with lots of drifting and a nice story. I thought it was by far superior to the Fast ... movies, and it's far more stylish. But it had the Infernal Affairs directors, so that's pretty obvious.
I think big budget today means the studios think it appeals to the masses. They will try to put in a star not for the acting talent or because the star fits in the role best, but because of the name and the promo. They movie will be made for the mainstream, so there will be a bit of a love story, some action scenes, or just some obscene humor. Maybe a remake. And don't experiment. Shouldn't be intellectually challenging. Boring!
Yeah, Wong Kar-Wai is awesome, though I prefer his Chungking Express. Dunno how the budget was on that one, but I'd guess pretty much non existant.
These were cheaper because they relied on digital effects to make a visual impression, rather than a couple hundred tons of actual explosives blowing up a genuine Boieng 747 as you might have in a Hollywood blockbuster.
Good to see you mentioned 2046. Great movie ^^ Wong Kar-Wai is awesome.
Right, but there were tons of artists working on the overpainting of A Scanner Darkly. And they don't blow up 747 anymore... they did such things with Tora! Tora! Tora! and other old movies, but today there is a lot of CGI involved. Remember Batman Begins and how proud they were that the car scene was without any CGI?
Initial D had a tiny budget compared to The Fast and the Furious I and II, yet it had great car scenes with lots of drifting and a nice story. I thought it was by far superior to the Fast ... movies, and it's far more stylish. But it had the Infernal Affairs directors, so that's pretty obvious.
I think big budget today means the studios think it appeals to the masses. They will try to put in a star not for the acting talent or because the star fits in the role best, but because of the name and the promo. They movie will be made for the mainstream, so there will be a bit of a love story, some action scenes, or just some obscene humor. Maybe a remake. And don't experiment. Shouldn't be intellectually challenging. Boring!
Yeah, Wong Kar-Wai is awesome, though I prefer his Chungking Express. Dunno how the budget was on that one, but I'd guess pretty much non existant.
kungming2
Jan 12, 10:57 AM
I think 'air' would have been capitalised on the banner if it was a reference to a product name.
It might not be capitalized: Check it out, iPod touch, nano, and classic. All lowercase.
It might not be capitalized: Check it out, iPod touch, nano, and classic. All lowercase.
inkswamp
Apr 3, 02:45 PM
Isn't that a Verizon ad, not a Mototrola one?
People keep whining about the "Droid" commercials but that is Verizon's branding and line and has nothing to do with the manufacturers. Look at this Droid Incredible commercial by HTC (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNz1qfJc9z4U) (this one too (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZkcODD6Zaw)) and then see what Verizon (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwzKFDkb0MI) did to it.
I'm not so much questioning who's behind the Droid and Xoom ads, but mainly pointing out that Apple is going 180-degrees with their ads by contrast, de-geeking things and making them more accessible. Sure, the Xoom ads are really freaking cool looking but that's mainly for geeks. But for the average consumer, the ones who aren't turned on by flashy, sci-fi imagery where tablets become hovering ships and users turn into robots, which do you think is more inviting?
People keep whining about the "Droid" commercials but that is Verizon's branding and line and has nothing to do with the manufacturers. Look at this Droid Incredible commercial by HTC (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNz1qfJc9z4U) (this one too (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZkcODD6Zaw)) and then see what Verizon (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwzKFDkb0MI) did to it.
I'm not so much questioning who's behind the Droid and Xoom ads, but mainly pointing out that Apple is going 180-degrees with their ads by contrast, de-geeking things and making them more accessible. Sure, the Xoom ads are really freaking cool looking but that's mainly for geeks. But for the average consumer, the ones who aren't turned on by flashy, sci-fi imagery where tablets become hovering ships and users turn into robots, which do you think is more inviting?
LagunaSol
Apr 26, 04:34 PM
What Microsoft sells is an Operating System, not a GUI element. Apple is welcome to rename their OS to "Buttons" or "Menus" and trademark that for their OS name if they choose.
Microsoft has a trademarked OS name that is a common GUI element. They also trademarked the word "Word" for a word processing application. Where's the outrage?
Amazon could have very easily chosen a suitable name that did not exactly mirror what Apple had already chosen. Apple's other competitors have managed to do so. What would be wrong with "Amazon Apps?" Amazon picked Amazon Appstore looking for a fight.
Microsoft has a trademarked OS name that is a common GUI element. They also trademarked the word "Word" for a word processing application. Where's the outrage?
Amazon could have very easily chosen a suitable name that did not exactly mirror what Apple had already chosen. Apple's other competitors have managed to do so. What would be wrong with "Amazon Apps?" Amazon picked Amazon Appstore looking for a fight.
MacsAttack
Nov 16, 03:40 PM
I'm thinking about my future 8 core Macpro:
2 questions for you:
- Do you think the 8 core proc will produce a lot more heat than the current core duo 2 ? I'm asking because I need a very quiet computer ...
-As always: shall we expect this one in the Macpro before 2007 ?
thx !
1. Yes. Lots more heat. Also the PSU may not be sufficient to drive the CPUs, memory, video card. two optical drives, four hard disks, all the gizmos on the main board etc... Effectivly Intel fixed the problem with their CPUs being power hungry heat monsters with the Core 2 Duo - and then they made exactly the same mistake by creating a power hungry heat monster with their Core 2 Quads... All just to beat AMD to the "Quad Core"
2. My guess (just a guess mind) is Feb-March next year.
2 questions for you:
- Do you think the 8 core proc will produce a lot more heat than the current core duo 2 ? I'm asking because I need a very quiet computer ...
-As always: shall we expect this one in the Macpro before 2007 ?
thx !
1. Yes. Lots more heat. Also the PSU may not be sufficient to drive the CPUs, memory, video card. two optical drives, four hard disks, all the gizmos on the main board etc... Effectivly Intel fixed the problem with their CPUs being power hungry heat monsters with the Core 2 Duo - and then they made exactly the same mistake by creating a power hungry heat monster with their Core 2 Quads... All just to beat AMD to the "Quad Core"
2. My guess (just a guess mind) is Feb-March next year.
wolfboy
Oct 1, 02:19 AM
Assuming we got the same one, I thought so too at first. Don't try to cover the front of the screen like its a bezel I guess. Just let it wrap around the outside edges and it should stretch itself out after a couple days.
Other than that, I don't know what else you can do but get a different case.
Other than that, I don't know what else you can do but get a different case.
ssk2
Apr 3, 12:32 PM
After watching the ad 3 times, I *think* I like it. It treads just the right sign of 'schmoltzy' without going too far over. It (the device) looks gorgeous too, from a purely personal view.
It hasn't won me over (iPad v Playbook), but there's not doubting its a good ad.
It hasn't won me over (iPad v Playbook), but there's not doubting its a good ad.
gakh
Oct 23, 03:10 PM
Have they announced a mobile version of the Core 2 Quadro? I had thought that was only a desktop chip.
Not that I've read, but I don't see why there wouldn't be a notebook equivalent... some day.
Not that I've read, but I don't see why there wouldn't be a notebook equivalent... some day.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 21, 03:31 PM
I don't think there will be any conditions: at some point, effective authority will simply be seen to reside with them, rather than Daffy the Duck, and at that point, they will become the de facto recognised representatives.
That is my thinking as well. I wonder what the Arab League's stance on this will be. They certainly have little love for Gaddafi, but they dread revolutions of any kind. The Libyan opposition seem committed to a parlimentary democracy that would be popularly supported, and that is heartening. There is a real opportunity here for a reasonably good outcome from a political standpoint.
That is my thinking as well. I wonder what the Arab League's stance on this will be. They certainly have little love for Gaddafi, but they dread revolutions of any kind. The Libyan opposition seem committed to a parlimentary democracy that would be popularly supported, and that is heartening. There is a real opportunity here for a reasonably good outcome from a political standpoint.
iW00t
Jan 7, 12:45 AM
But the screen on the 17in MBP (1680x1050) by definition can't do HD (1920x1080). I don't care how well it can scale down, scaling down is not playing at true native resolution, and with most new content heading toward 1080i (and eventually 1080p), getting anything less than that now is just heading toward a dead end media wise IMO.
Why do you need HD on such a small device?
People have been watching TV on 640*480 28" TV sets for decades just fine. Likewise your Macbook Pro at 17" is doing as good as it possibly can at 17 inches, not like that extra 30 pixels vertically will make some difference.
My main concern with the Macbook Pros getting higher resolution displays is that there may be a possibility that Apple will break away from the current crop of low quality grainy displays and drop something else better in. Perhaps when Leopard is released we may even get the option to BTO in a higher resolution display.
Why do you need HD on such a small device?
People have been watching TV on 640*480 28" TV sets for decades just fine. Likewise your Macbook Pro at 17" is doing as good as it possibly can at 17 inches, not like that extra 30 pixels vertically will make some difference.
My main concern with the Macbook Pros getting higher resolution displays is that there may be a possibility that Apple will break away from the current crop of low quality grainy displays and drop something else better in. Perhaps when Leopard is released we may even get the option to BTO in a higher resolution display.
skinniezinho
Jan 12, 06:21 AM
Some pretty terrible photos of mine, all taken with my iPhone.
http://i.imgur.com/G8xcE.jpg
Thankfully I missed the worst of the snow, but it wasn't too bad in it.
Love those BMW's..and that colour is awesome!
http://i.imgur.com/G8xcE.jpg
Thankfully I missed the worst of the snow, but it wasn't too bad in it.
Love those BMW's..and that colour is awesome!
Lord Blackadder
Mar 7, 06:20 PM
Because there is not enough of it, and it will increase our need of foreign oil not lessen it.
There is twice as much gasoline refined from a barrel of sweet crude than diesel.
Can you quote a source on that? As far as I'm aware, that is not necessarily true (http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2174). It all depends on what is in highest demand. Diesel can be refined into gasoline, and gasoline is what people in the US want at the moment. I will try to find some more citeable links than this (http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/26624/Maximum-gallons-of-diesel-from-a-barrel-of-crude-oil), but my impression is that a single barrel of crude always potentially contains more diesel fuel than gasoline. This is a very market-driven process. Refineries make what people want to buy.
It's also worth pointing out that a lot of gasoline has ethanol and other compounds in it that diesel does not have, and that stuff had to be refined before being added - increasing the engery cost of refining gasoline. Regular unleaded gasoline also has more sulphur in it than the now mandatory-for-passenger-cars ULSD fuel.
For a long time, and in many places people that drove diesel vehicles did so because of the tax advantages. The taxes were kept lower in order to make commercial usage cheaper.
Diesel may be cheaper in Europe due to tax structures, but the same could be said about gasoline here. It doesn't have to be that way in either case. On a purely technical level, gasoline should actually cost more because it takes more energy to refine.
It is not greener to go diesel. It takes that resource from other parts of the economy and puts it into cars. Cars do just fine with gasoline. They are relatively clean and there is twice as much of the stuff in a gallon of oil. They don't get better mileage except in volume of stuff. Which is not the correct measurement. If cars became more diesel, then diesel would become dramatically more expensive, affecting the overall livelihood of everyone, dramatically increase the cost of oil and bring about energy devastation much faster than anyone could imagine.
Diesel takes less energy to refine, contains more energy per unit of volume, emits less CO2, you get potentially more of it out of a barrel of crude and diesel engines are always more fuel efficient than equivalent gasoline engines. Where's the problem?
I can't see how you are going to argue that it is necessary for us to drive gasoline-engined cars in order to prevent "energy devastation". Most other countries already use a much larger proportion of diesel and they seem just fine. We could make a lot more diesel with the crude we are currently extracting, and the market for gasoline will never go away.
By moving to hybrids and electrics, we actually decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and make our cars greener per mile driven. This is why it is the answer and diesel isn't.
I am not advocating that we all switch to diesel. Nor do I want to get rid of the gasoline engine (especially in performance cars!). But the USA has an unecessary obsession with the gasoline-engined car. We need diesel serial hybrids for starters, and more hybrids and diesel-engined cars of all types. There is no one solution. If tens of thousands of people in the US started buying diesel Cruzes, it would not destroy the world's energy infrastructure.
But come on - "energy devastation"?
the argument for that silent agreement ? they don't want "a horsepower arms race"... look how well that has turned out
Indeed. Same with the Japanese and their 280hp/180 km/h limit. Some of the cars made under this "agreement" were considerably faster/more powerful than was officially admitted, and anyway they did away with that a number of years ago.
There is twice as much gasoline refined from a barrel of sweet crude than diesel.
Can you quote a source on that? As far as I'm aware, that is not necessarily true (http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2174). It all depends on what is in highest demand. Diesel can be refined into gasoline, and gasoline is what people in the US want at the moment. I will try to find some more citeable links than this (http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/26624/Maximum-gallons-of-diesel-from-a-barrel-of-crude-oil), but my impression is that a single barrel of crude always potentially contains more diesel fuel than gasoline. This is a very market-driven process. Refineries make what people want to buy.
It's also worth pointing out that a lot of gasoline has ethanol and other compounds in it that diesel does not have, and that stuff had to be refined before being added - increasing the engery cost of refining gasoline. Regular unleaded gasoline also has more sulphur in it than the now mandatory-for-passenger-cars ULSD fuel.
For a long time, and in many places people that drove diesel vehicles did so because of the tax advantages. The taxes were kept lower in order to make commercial usage cheaper.
Diesel may be cheaper in Europe due to tax structures, but the same could be said about gasoline here. It doesn't have to be that way in either case. On a purely technical level, gasoline should actually cost more because it takes more energy to refine.
It is not greener to go diesel. It takes that resource from other parts of the economy and puts it into cars. Cars do just fine with gasoline. They are relatively clean and there is twice as much of the stuff in a gallon of oil. They don't get better mileage except in volume of stuff. Which is not the correct measurement. If cars became more diesel, then diesel would become dramatically more expensive, affecting the overall livelihood of everyone, dramatically increase the cost of oil and bring about energy devastation much faster than anyone could imagine.
Diesel takes less energy to refine, contains more energy per unit of volume, emits less CO2, you get potentially more of it out of a barrel of crude and diesel engines are always more fuel efficient than equivalent gasoline engines. Where's the problem?
I can't see how you are going to argue that it is necessary for us to drive gasoline-engined cars in order to prevent "energy devastation". Most other countries already use a much larger proportion of diesel and they seem just fine. We could make a lot more diesel with the crude we are currently extracting, and the market for gasoline will never go away.
By moving to hybrids and electrics, we actually decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and make our cars greener per mile driven. This is why it is the answer and diesel isn't.
I am not advocating that we all switch to diesel. Nor do I want to get rid of the gasoline engine (especially in performance cars!). But the USA has an unecessary obsession with the gasoline-engined car. We need diesel serial hybrids for starters, and more hybrids and diesel-engined cars of all types. There is no one solution. If tens of thousands of people in the US started buying diesel Cruzes, it would not destroy the world's energy infrastructure.
But come on - "energy devastation"?
the argument for that silent agreement ? they don't want "a horsepower arms race"... look how well that has turned out
Indeed. Same with the Japanese and their 280hp/180 km/h limit. Some of the cars made under this "agreement" were considerably faster/more powerful than was officially admitted, and anyway they did away with that a number of years ago.
swingerofbirch
Aug 24, 06:10 PM
finally a rumor!
after weeks of speculation on the forums, a front page rumor feels fact!
holding my thumbs for a conroe imac! (a swedish expression...i think?)
after weeks of speculation on the forums, a front page rumor feels fact!
holding my thumbs for a conroe imac! (a swedish expression...i think?)
MacBoobsPro
Aug 7, 05:19 AM
Thats interesting coming from a New Zealander. Very interesting
Thats what i thought :rolleyes:
Thats what i thought :rolleyes:
rgarjr
Mar 22, 09:17 PM
What is there to update on the classic besides capacity?
lots, Bluetooth, WIFI (for internet radio), design..
Here's my classic mockup
http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=277273&stc=1&thumb=1&d=1300734199
lots, Bluetooth, WIFI (for internet radio), design..
Here's my classic mockup
http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=277273&stc=1&thumb=1&d=1300734199
Primejimbo
Mar 22, 03:55 PM
Do people seriously have that many songs?!!! seriously?!!!
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
just because you don't want it, other people do. I have the 80GB and it's getting close to full. I have less than 10GB left and I know people who have way more.
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
just because you don't want it, other people do. I have the 80GB and it's getting close to full. I have less than 10GB left and I know people who have way more.
nilk
Mar 25, 01:50 PM
You can upgrade to the latest 5870 card if you wanted to right now. It might not be 'officially' supported but you can still do it.
Supposedly the 5870 won't work on Mac Pro 1,1 with specific firmware (MP11.005C.B08 won't work).
From a comment at store.apple.com:
With regard to the Mac Pro 1,1, it apparently depends on your system's firmware and your version of Mac OS X. If your firmware version is MP11.005C.B00 or MP11.005D.B00, it should work. If your Mac Pro's firmware version is MP11.005C.B08, it will NOT work. If you have the correct firmware, you must have at least Snow Leopard 10.6.4 to use the card to its fullest.
Supposedly the 5870 won't work on Mac Pro 1,1 with specific firmware (MP11.005C.B08 won't work).
From a comment at store.apple.com:
With regard to the Mac Pro 1,1, it apparently depends on your system's firmware and your version of Mac OS X. If your firmware version is MP11.005C.B00 or MP11.005D.B00, it should work. If your Mac Pro's firmware version is MP11.005C.B08, it will NOT work. If you have the correct firmware, you must have at least Snow Leopard 10.6.4 to use the card to its fullest.
chasingapple
Jul 13, 10:49 PM
I say no thanks. Optical storage is way too slow! Why should I pay $1000 to get a 33GB disc that is slow on accessing when I can spend WAY LESS and use another harddrive thats 300GB+ and rewritable, or buy a 100 pack of DVD-R's for $10? I for one dont see this HD-DVD / Bluray thing getting big anytime soon, and Im sure as hell not going to rebuy my DVD collection, higher res or no higher res, I mean hell... I dont even have an HD TV yet,too damn expensive!
Apple - wait on this one please. Just put superdrives in everything and leave the combo drive in the past.
Apple - wait on this one please. Just put superdrives in everything and leave the combo drive in the past.
aiqw9182
Mar 25, 12:15 PM
The SB documentation says it supports Compute Shader 4, a subset of the DirectX 11 level Compute Shader 5.
What that means in terms of OpenCL, I don't know.
Intel said they'll continue to evaluate OpenCL during 2011.
It doesn't mean anything, as I've noted about three times already.
What that means in terms of OpenCL, I don't know.
Intel said they'll continue to evaluate OpenCL during 2011.
It doesn't mean anything, as I've noted about three times already.
treblah
Aug 6, 09:46 PM
I became a hard core Mac user after Panther was released. I was wondering if Apple took stabs at Microsoft when they were introducing Panther. :confused:
They did at WWDC '04 (when Tiger was introduced) with slogans like "Redmond, Start Your Photocopiers" and the word "Longhorn" in the Spotlight search field. ;)
They did at WWDC '04 (when Tiger was introduced) with slogans like "Redmond, Start Your Photocopiers" and the word "Longhorn" in the Spotlight search field. ;)
rmwebs
Mar 22, 04:31 PM
Disk space aside, there's nothing wrong with the current iPod Classic. It doesnt need bluetooth, microphones, cameras, etc - the hint is in the name...CLASSIC.
Wany bluetooth? Get a iTouch. You arent going to be listening to your library of 50,000 song on the way to work I'm sure it wouldnt kill you to load 10,000 onto an iTouch for the car. :rolleyes:
Wany bluetooth? Get a iTouch. You arent going to be listening to your library of 50,000 song on the way to work I'm sure it wouldnt kill you to load 10,000 onto an iTouch for the car. :rolleyes:
WeegieMac
Apr 2, 02:39 AM
As far as I know, Snow Leopard "fixed" what Leopard started. Mac OS X Lion is a completely new OS with new features, most of which are not present in Snow Leopard.
See, I would have to disagree with that.
All of the framework, the underlaying core system changes, were done in Leopard and then refined in Snow Leopard.
All Lion is adding, from what I've seen, is interface changes and some new features that, lets be honest, not every user is going to bother with. Sure, Launchpad looks nice, even in it's frame rate lacking beta form, and Mission Control is a new take on Expose, but other than that it's iOS inspired UI changes, a new version of Safari, and some application interface changes (Mail & iCal come to mind).
I don't think Lion will be a �29/$29 upgrade, but I think given that it'll launch on the Mac App Store, it will follow the example of iLife and Aperture and be cheaper to purchase online than it is off the shelf in a box.
See, I would have to disagree with that.
All of the framework, the underlaying core system changes, were done in Leopard and then refined in Snow Leopard.
All Lion is adding, from what I've seen, is interface changes and some new features that, lets be honest, not every user is going to bother with. Sure, Launchpad looks nice, even in it's frame rate lacking beta form, and Mission Control is a new take on Expose, but other than that it's iOS inspired UI changes, a new version of Safari, and some application interface changes (Mail & iCal come to mind).
I don't think Lion will be a �29/$29 upgrade, but I think given that it'll launch on the Mac App Store, it will follow the example of iLife and Aperture and be cheaper to purchase online than it is off the shelf in a box.
moondog190
Feb 24, 01:19 PM
http://flic.kr/p/9kHqGM
left to right:
20" Apple Cinema Display, 1st Gen. 16gb iPod Touch, Late 2008 MacBook Pro on top of Griffin iStand controlled by an Apple wireless keyboard and Magic mouse, 1TB Seagate external HDD, 32gb Ipad wifi only, 21" Samsung display, 2cd Gen. :apple: TV, Razer Lycosa keyboard and Razer Death Adder mouse which controls a Windows XP box i built for my job(under the desk). You can barly see it but there is also a Power PC Mac Mini on top of the Windows machince which acts as a FTP server.:apple::apple::apple:
left to right:
20" Apple Cinema Display, 1st Gen. 16gb iPod Touch, Late 2008 MacBook Pro on top of Griffin iStand controlled by an Apple wireless keyboard and Magic mouse, 1TB Seagate external HDD, 32gb Ipad wifi only, 21" Samsung display, 2cd Gen. :apple: TV, Razer Lycosa keyboard and Razer Death Adder mouse which controls a Windows XP box i built for my job(under the desk). You can barly see it but there is also a Power PC Mac Mini on top of the Windows machince which acts as a FTP server.:apple::apple::apple:
No comments:
Post a Comment