Capt T
Mar 25, 03:55 PM
iPad 1 does not support HDMI out, so I'm assuming no, it doesn't work.
The iPad 1 does support HDMI out. I have the adaptor and checked it out with a movie. It doesn't support mirroring but it does support the output.
The iPad 1 does support HDMI out. I have the adaptor and checked it out with a movie. It doesn't support mirroring but it does support the output.
Blue Velvet
Mar 20, 09:02 AM
Oil reserves in Libya are the largest in Africa and the ninth largest in the world with 41.5 billion barrels (6.60�109 m3) as of 2007. Oil production was 1.8 million barrels per day (290�103 m3/d) as of giving Libya 63 years of reserves at current production rates if no new reserves were to be found. Libya is considered a highly attractive oil area due to its low cost of oil production (as low as $1 per barrel at some fields), and proximity to European markets.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves_in_Libya
The average cost of a Tomahawk missile is close to $1.5 million. But this takes into account the initial research and development costs. As a pure production cost it costs less that $500,000.
http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/11-10-2004-61475.asp
The maths doesn't lie.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves_in_Libya
The average cost of a Tomahawk missile is close to $1.5 million. But this takes into account the initial research and development costs. As a pure production cost it costs less that $500,000.
http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/11-10-2004-61475.asp
The maths doesn't lie.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 1, 02:45 PM
But the damn things are noisy, and the exhaust smells really bad.
That may be true of the huge American diesel truck engines, but go examine a new VW, BMW or Mercedes diesel and you'll see that this is just not the case anymore. They sound a little different, smell a little different, but not worse than gasoline - it's just that we are so used to gas engines that everything else is assumed to be worse somehow.
That may be true of the huge American diesel truck engines, but go examine a new VW, BMW or Mercedes diesel and you'll see that this is just not the case anymore. They sound a little different, smell a little different, but not worse than gasoline - it's just that we are so used to gas engines that everything else is assumed to be worse somehow.
jakeDude
Nov 15, 02:11 PM
Programmers should make the effort to accommodate upcoming multi-core designs into their software development cycle. Once a new system is released, it should be a minimal effort to test and tweak the software for the new system and quickly release an update, thus making their customers only wait a week or two from when the systems first ship as opposed to several weeks/months .
This is not true at all. Multi-threading often introduces more problems such as race conditions, deadlocks, pipeline starvations, memory leaks, cache coherency problems. Further more, multithreaded apps are harder and take longer to debug. Also, using threads without good reason too is not efficient (context swtiching) and can cause problems (thread priorities) with other apps running. This is because threads can not yield to other threads and block if such an undesirable condition like a deadlock exists.. Like on Windows when one app has a non responsive thread and the whole system hangs.. Or like when Finder sucks and locks everything..
Also, multithreading behaves differently on different platforms with different language environments. Java threading might behave differently than p-threads (C-based) on the same system (OS X).. I am a prfessional developer etc..
This is not true at all. Multi-threading often introduces more problems such as race conditions, deadlocks, pipeline starvations, memory leaks, cache coherency problems. Further more, multithreaded apps are harder and take longer to debug. Also, using threads without good reason too is not efficient (context swtiching) and can cause problems (thread priorities) with other apps running. This is because threads can not yield to other threads and block if such an undesirable condition like a deadlock exists.. Like on Windows when one app has a non responsive thread and the whole system hangs.. Or like when Finder sucks and locks everything..
Also, multithreading behaves differently on different platforms with different language environments. Java threading might behave differently than p-threads (C-based) on the same system (OS X).. I am a prfessional developer etc..
benjs
Apr 12, 10:05 PM
Well i'll tell you this FCP 5 (floating around in places i won't mention) is around 1.5 GB so If it is on the App store It will be 1 BIG download for me.
(3 Mbps cable line here)
The App Store should really harness the power of torrent technology for files like this.
(3 Mbps cable line here)
The App Store should really harness the power of torrent technology for files like this.
gnasher729
Nov 18, 10:09 AM
It depends on what the program does. Some programs don't lend themselves to multi-threading at all and others practically require it. It can be quite a chore to go back and multi-thread an existing program.
Also, some uses of a program make it easy to use multithreading, and others don't. As an example, if you use Handbrake to do H.264 encoding, it is work for the developers to use multiple cores (it has been posted here that it uses three cores) for encoding a single movie, but it would be absolutely easy to use four times as many cores to encode four movies simultaneously.
Something like that would be perfect if you want to encode four half hour movies, but awful if you want to encode a single two hour movie.
Also, some uses of a program make it easy to use multithreading, and others don't. As an example, if you use Handbrake to do H.264 encoding, it is work for the developers to use multiple cores (it has been posted here that it uses three cores) for encoding a single movie, but it would be absolutely easy to use four times as many cores to encode four movies simultaneously.
Something like that would be perfect if you want to encode four half hour movies, but awful if you want to encode a single two hour movie.
RebootD
Apr 12, 09:11 PM
I'm scared as to the 'how much' after all of this. I only started using Premiere because it was 64bit (and I got a cheap upgrade to Master Collection). I really miss using FCP. (Used it back in the 1.0 days)
PorterRocks
Apr 2, 07:30 PM
Did this ad make anyone else misty-eyed, or is it just me? Anyone? /s
Great ad though, Apple. :apple:
Great ad though, Apple. :apple:
Earendil
Nov 27, 09:49 PM
IMAGINED?
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
And what, exactly, is your point? Really, did you read the thread? Okay, mb not, did you read anything that I wrote? No? Did you follow the linked thread that has been used as a counter point to the FUD that is spread? No?
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
Bad apple for not offering a $400 laptop, that pressures me into getting a Dell! Bad apple for not offering me a fast car, that pressures me into buying a BMW!!
I'm sorry, but your conclusions are horrible. You aren't looking at all the "facts", and then with the few you are using (out of context) you are drawing very stretched conclusions.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck,
No, but we have little reason to believe that they aren't selling well enough, and good reason to believe they are. Why? Because if they weren't selling well, and they were highly marked up, than it wouldn't hurt apple to lower the price, and sell more units. But they haven't yet done that. So either Apple's marketing guys are complete idiots and missed business 101, or they are selling enough units to justify the price.
but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
A very interesting theory, that seems plausible. However what is more likely is that Apple is selling enough units, and that they aren't overly priced for their intended purpose and intended competition (which is NOT Dell).
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program.
News flash, any monitor on the market today will work with your Mac. I know, it's amazing. Buy a cheap monitor and slap an Apple sticker on it if you like. Or go complain that NEC is limiting your choice by not offering a monitor in your price range, or that BMW is screwing you out of a car by not offering a car at 10 grand.
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
They might do it, but it won't be a prosumer level monitor like the rest. It will use a cheaper panel so that it's in line with it's target audience (consumer budget mini buyers). There aren't many companies, if any, that sell pro specced monitors at 17" any more. And as those better panels become cheaper, there is even less reason to offer the pro guys such small screen space.
Now, would you please, for the love of knowledge, go read the first post in this thread before making another reply. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
Thank you,
~Tyler
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
And what, exactly, is your point? Really, did you read the thread? Okay, mb not, did you read anything that I wrote? No? Did you follow the linked thread that has been used as a counter point to the FUD that is spread? No?
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
Bad apple for not offering a $400 laptop, that pressures me into getting a Dell! Bad apple for not offering me a fast car, that pressures me into buying a BMW!!
I'm sorry, but your conclusions are horrible. You aren't looking at all the "facts", and then with the few you are using (out of context) you are drawing very stretched conclusions.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck,
No, but we have little reason to believe that they aren't selling well enough, and good reason to believe they are. Why? Because if they weren't selling well, and they were highly marked up, than it wouldn't hurt apple to lower the price, and sell more units. But they haven't yet done that. So either Apple's marketing guys are complete idiots and missed business 101, or they are selling enough units to justify the price.
but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
A very interesting theory, that seems plausible. However what is more likely is that Apple is selling enough units, and that they aren't overly priced for their intended purpose and intended competition (which is NOT Dell).
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program.
News flash, any monitor on the market today will work with your Mac. I know, it's amazing. Buy a cheap monitor and slap an Apple sticker on it if you like. Or go complain that NEC is limiting your choice by not offering a monitor in your price range, or that BMW is screwing you out of a car by not offering a car at 10 grand.
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
They might do it, but it won't be a prosumer level monitor like the rest. It will use a cheaper panel so that it's in line with it's target audience (consumer budget mini buyers). There aren't many companies, if any, that sell pro specced monitors at 17" any more. And as those better panels become cheaper, there is even less reason to offer the pro guys such small screen space.
Now, would you please, for the love of knowledge, go read the first post in this thread before making another reply. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
Thank you,
~Tyler
twoodcc
Oct 23, 08:38 AM
well i hope it happens this week. but i'll believe it when i see it
MattG
Nov 28, 12:05 PM
Heh.
Suck it, Microsoft :cool:
Do you have anything to support that MS lost billions on the xbox, I heard it was more like they broke even...
I watched a television show on the history of video games a couple of weeks ago. I forget what channel it was on...History or Discovery or something like that, but I specifically remember them saying that Microsoft lost a lot of money on the xbox, but that they didn't care...they just wanted to get their foot in the door.
I think it was this show:
http://games.ign.com/articles/744/744878p1.html
Suck it, Microsoft :cool:
Do you have anything to support that MS lost billions on the xbox, I heard it was more like they broke even...
I watched a television show on the history of video games a couple of weeks ago. I forget what channel it was on...History or Discovery or something like that, but I specifically remember them saying that Microsoft lost a lot of money on the xbox, but that they didn't care...they just wanted to get their foot in the door.
I think it was this show:
http://games.ign.com/articles/744/744878p1.html
J the Ninja
Apr 12, 09:27 PM
""Magnetic Timeline": audio moves vertically out of the way instead of causing a trim collision"
YEAH!
YEAH!
freebooter
Sep 1, 12:27 PM
I love my 20" iMac, so I can only imagine that with 3 more inches to love!
I detect some "latent tendecies."
I detect some "latent tendecies."
SactoGuy18
Apr 12, 09:46 PM
charlesdjones1, I think the picture you showed is a very likely new "look" for the iPod classic--the "7G" model. It will get a smaller click wheel but larger display for better viewing of video, and will up the storage capacity from 160 GB to 220 GB with the new 1.8" hard drive.
Though I'm sure Apple wants to ditch the iPod Classic in favor of a 128 GB iPod touch, the current tight constraint on flash memory production may conspire against doing this.
Though I'm sure Apple wants to ditch the iPod Classic in favor of a 128 GB iPod touch, the current tight constraint on flash memory production may conspire against doing this.
atticus18244fsa
Mar 22, 10:52 PM
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
I would buy this if it was 220gb. Great mockup
Here's my classic mockup
http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=277273&stc=1&thumb=1&d=1300734199
I would buy this if it was 220gb. Great mockup
ImAlwaysRight
Aug 29, 10:06 AM
... with Yonah they can make them cheaper again.Good observation. Would be nice to see the price point on the Mini come back down to starting at $499.
Why is everyone so hung up on Merom?
Perhaps they were daydreaming during economics class. :rolleyes:
READ MY LIPS: Merom will not appear in the MacBook or Mini during 2006.
Why is everyone so hung up on Merom?
Perhaps they were daydreaming during economics class. :rolleyes:
READ MY LIPS: Merom will not appear in the MacBook or Mini during 2006.
Chundles
Apr 3, 05:04 AM
Recent files now show in the Dock menu of closed and open apps (not sure if this is new), clicking show recents shows them as tiles like as in DP1
279465
Spotlight has smaller icons and Google and Wikipedia (been mentioned), but now has dictionary meanings again and the pronunciation
279468
Directory Utility now has an editor which is like OS X Server's Workgroup Manager. presumably as Server will be included now.
279467
- can press ctrl+up again to close Mission Control, doesnt work with ctrl-down for Expos� app windows though
- the Sites folder in home is gone (Apache and Web Sharing still there though)
overall things just seem a little quicker, animations are smoother and getting less Dock, SystemUIServer & Finder crashes. still a few crashes and UI bugs around the place.
If you scroll up over the icon of a closed app in the dock you see thumbnails of those recent files. Pretty cool.
279465
Spotlight has smaller icons and Google and Wikipedia (been mentioned), but now has dictionary meanings again and the pronunciation
279468
Directory Utility now has an editor which is like OS X Server's Workgroup Manager. presumably as Server will be included now.
279467
- can press ctrl+up again to close Mission Control, doesnt work with ctrl-down for Expos� app windows though
- the Sites folder in home is gone (Apache and Web Sharing still there though)
overall things just seem a little quicker, animations are smoother and getting less Dock, SystemUIServer & Finder crashes. still a few crashes and UI bugs around the place.
If you scroll up over the icon of a closed app in the dock you see thumbnails of those recent files. Pretty cool.
bigdaddyp
Sep 14, 11:45 AM
They DO, I don't think you have the facts. CR held Lexus' feet to the fire to get them to act on the GX - http://blogs.consumerreports.org/cars/2010/04/consumer-reports-2010-lexus-gx-dont-buy-safety-risk.html .
Follow up - Lexus fixed the problem and CR lifted their "DO NOT BUY" recommendation - http://blogs.consumerreports.org/cars/2010/05/video-lexus-gx-460-passes-retest-consumer-reports-lifts-dont-buy-label.html . CR is *NOT* the problem here, it's Apple penchant for hubris/self-involvement. I love Apple and their products, but I'm not fooling myself to expect that they'll be any more consumer-friendly and honest than they need to be to turn a profit/feed Steve's ego.
The problem I sometimes have with their recommendations is that their reports are written to assume you are a total dumba$$ with no personal responsibility.
If you are driving a 2 1/2 ton suv like its a sports car then there is a good chance that you will be forcibly yanked out of the gene pool. Ten years ago many or most large suvs would have tipped over or gone out of control in that scenario. Instead of praising the advances automakers have made they instead have a hissy fit that a large, heavy automobile can get a bit loose when driven beyond its limits.
How about reminding their readers that electronic stability control can't overcome the laws of physics and extra care needs to taken when driving large, top heavy vehicles in curves.
Yes I am glad that Toyota tweaked and improved the stability control, but I think this illustrates that Cr. feels the consumer has no or little personal responsibility for their actions.
Follow up - Lexus fixed the problem and CR lifted their "DO NOT BUY" recommendation - http://blogs.consumerreports.org/cars/2010/05/video-lexus-gx-460-passes-retest-consumer-reports-lifts-dont-buy-label.html . CR is *NOT* the problem here, it's Apple penchant for hubris/self-involvement. I love Apple and their products, but I'm not fooling myself to expect that they'll be any more consumer-friendly and honest than they need to be to turn a profit/feed Steve's ego.
The problem I sometimes have with their recommendations is that their reports are written to assume you are a total dumba$$ with no personal responsibility.
If you are driving a 2 1/2 ton suv like its a sports car then there is a good chance that you will be forcibly yanked out of the gene pool. Ten years ago many or most large suvs would have tipped over or gone out of control in that scenario. Instead of praising the advances automakers have made they instead have a hissy fit that a large, heavy automobile can get a bit loose when driven beyond its limits.
How about reminding their readers that electronic stability control can't overcome the laws of physics and extra care needs to taken when driving large, top heavy vehicles in curves.
Yes I am glad that Toyota tweaked and improved the stability control, but I think this illustrates that Cr. feels the consumer has no or little personal responsibility for their actions.
gkarris
Apr 2, 07:22 PM
Is this the same Narrator that does the Ken Burns films?
OldSkoolNJ
Sep 7, 08:28 AM
The prices in CompUSa will be dropped on Friday for what they may actually have in stock. They have been constraining them for the past couple weeks. All I have is the display core duo and one box stock core solo. Alot of the apple employees who work in the CompUSAs had extra days off this week due to the holiday (much needed) so they may not have been back into CUSA to let the staff know.
Kevin
I checked around at comp usa, best buy and even the apple store to see if the mini's they had in stock would be reduced in price because of the new ones that came out.
Best buy and Comp USA had no clue that new models were released and would not budge in price. I dont know what the apple store policy is.
Shouldnt comp usa and best buy reduce the price of the core solo minis they have left?
Kevin
I checked around at comp usa, best buy and even the apple store to see if the mini's they had in stock would be reduced in price because of the new ones that came out.
Best buy and Comp USA had no clue that new models were released and would not budge in price. I dont know what the apple store policy is.
Shouldnt comp usa and best buy reduce the price of the core solo minis they have left?
frankie
Sep 1, 03:42 PM
Many of the people on this thread are too new to remember the Performa fiascos of the early 90's. More than anything, Steve simplified the computer product line into 4 distinct quadrants. The only aberration to this is the Mac Mini.
Many of the people who bring up the Performa era are failing to remember that there were typically twenty or more Mac models at any given time. 20 is too many. 4 is too few. Many of us would be much happier if Apple offered 6-8 models (specifically, the xMac).
Many of the people who bring up the Performa era are failing to remember that there were typically twenty or more Mac models at any given time. 20 is too many. 4 is too few. Many of us would be much happier if Apple offered 6-8 models (specifically, the xMac).
ErikGrim
Apr 4, 07:36 PM
Click2Flash (the extension) seems to not work with a lot of Flash banners now. Especially on this forum. Anyone else get that?
poppe
Jul 14, 11:33 AM
UMM... of course you should base desicions on the potential of a system, of course within a timeframe. I mean the potential of my Powerbook isn't nearly as great as a MacBook Pro, so that why I wouldn't buy a Powerbook right now ;) . Its not based on cost, cause I can get a powerbook at much less, but just the fact that while the MacBook is only faster for universal apps, so really its mostly slower due to rosetta, and it has no other upgrades..... well there seems to be little advantage to pick it .... OHH WAIT it has the potential to be much faster in the future.... I forgot about that...
Right. If he is going to base a decision on potential and storage then Blue Ray and HD-DVD is not really the way to go... I find it funny everyone here is oozing for Blue Ray yet Holographic has more potential...
Right. If he is going to base a decision on potential and storage then Blue Ray and HD-DVD is not really the way to go... I find it funny everyone here is oozing for Blue Ray yet Holographic has more potential...
UnreaL
Sep 7, 03:07 PM
I have been a Mac user since 1986. I'm not a superuser or a gamer, but the one thing I have learned is to avoid models with too much built-in obsolescence (e.g. my old firewire-less, low-resolution clamshell iBook and the late-model CD-burner-less white iBook G3 that replaced it, not to mention the Powerbook 150 [agh!], Mac Classic [aaagggh!], etc.). Except for the lack of built-in DVD capability, the lampshade 700 MHZ G4 iMac has been a great investment.
So here is my question. Are the $599 mini and $999 iMac going to become obsolete much faster than the $1199 iMac? Do the dedicated video RAM and Core 2 Duo (iMacs) make much of difference? I already have an external DVD burner and plan to buy 2GB RAM.
Actually the move to Intel has opened Apple to fast depreciation - and that isnt going away.
Many here seem to 'bitch' that Mac is now in competition with the PC in the hardware stakes and sadly that damages your resale value however the benefits are immense, I am sure Apple will be able to secure lower unit costs aswell as faster processors and newer technology. Its great for apple and for us buying, just bad if you sell hardware before it looses all value completely. It also means we will see these refreshes more often and so we will be buying more up to date hardware which as a PC user is great...
To me the move to intel has made Mac a viable option, especially given Bootcamp.
So here is my question. Are the $599 mini and $999 iMac going to become obsolete much faster than the $1199 iMac? Do the dedicated video RAM and Core 2 Duo (iMacs) make much of difference? I already have an external DVD burner and plan to buy 2GB RAM.
Actually the move to Intel has opened Apple to fast depreciation - and that isnt going away.
Many here seem to 'bitch' that Mac is now in competition with the PC in the hardware stakes and sadly that damages your resale value however the benefits are immense, I am sure Apple will be able to secure lower unit costs aswell as faster processors and newer technology. Its great for apple and for us buying, just bad if you sell hardware before it looses all value completely. It also means we will see these refreshes more often and so we will be buying more up to date hardware which as a PC user is great...
To me the move to intel has made Mac a viable option, especially given Bootcamp.