Casshan
Sep 19, 03:35 PM
I thought they had 5.1 sound already in the movie downloads?
They are Dolby Surround, not Dolby Digital. Dolby Surround is just matrixed stereo audio.
They are Dolby Surround, not Dolby Digital. Dolby Surround is just matrixed stereo audio.
alent1234
Apr 29, 03:22 PM
that was in 2005 when it first came out. by now they are on a revision that costs a lot less to make and they have sold a lot of games and XBL subs to make up for it. back when the 360 first came out it had an attach rate of 8 games, higher than Sony. figure at $10 licensing per game that's $80 per console on average plus XBL. so i don't know if the isuppli numbers are accurate.
a lot of companies in the console market have been doing it like this for years. take a loss the first year or two, sell break even or small profit later in the cycle and make it up on the games. except for nintendo which is doing the opposite. make money early in the cycle and start losing money at the end of the cycle.
2011 the division will probably turn a profit of $3 to $4 billion or so due to kinect. 2010 was also profitable. if the Nokia partnership works out 2012 will be even better.
a lot of companies in the console market have been doing it like this for years. take a loss the first year or two, sell break even or small profit later in the cycle and make it up on the games. except for nintendo which is doing the opposite. make money early in the cycle and start losing money at the end of the cycle.
2011 the division will probably turn a profit of $3 to $4 billion or so due to kinect. 2010 was also profitable. if the Nokia partnership works out 2012 will be even better.
DPazdanISU
Sep 14, 09:21 AM
i heard somewhere that there was going to be a "dizzying" amount of apple events/releases in the near future. Looks like that is becoming true. Woot gimme a MacPod please:confused: :eek: :D
Funkymonk
Apr 19, 10:56 AM
Believe it or not but judging by some replies in this thread there are people THAT stupid and quite a few of them out there.
It's not even funny anymore. The age of retards is where we are.
lol yep. there's some evidence of it below :p
Apple should just buy out Samsung!
Simplistic, I know.
It's not even funny anymore. The age of retards is where we are.
lol yep. there's some evidence of it below :p
Apple should just buy out Samsung!
Simplistic, I know.
silentnite
Apr 20, 08:38 PM
Samsung, yes your honor, how do you plead? Guilty as charged:D
Hattig
Mar 29, 11:32 AM
The issue is that people don't care about Nokia phones any more.
Back in the day they had a big market in feature phones - what Symbian did quite well back in the day. However Symbian hasn't migrated to the SmartPhone era well. In that same vein, neither have Nokia's traditional customers, who have no reason to stick with Nokia if forced to get a SmartPhone.
And I think this research drastically underestimates HP's efforts with WebOS, which should start seeing results later this year.
Back in the day they had a big market in feature phones - what Symbian did quite well back in the day. However Symbian hasn't migrated to the SmartPhone era well. In that same vein, neither have Nokia's traditional customers, who have no reason to stick with Nokia if forced to get a SmartPhone.
And I think this research drastically underestimates HP's efforts with WebOS, which should start seeing results later this year.
bassfingers
Mar 30, 11:52 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)
Dear Microsoft, if you want the App Store, then you should have made the App Store
Dear Microsoft, if you want the App Store, then you should have made the App Store
clintob
Oct 13, 12:25 AM
I really can't believe some of the posts that have been made here.
To suggest that the people of Africa deserve to be wiped out by aids as they haven't evolved or kept up with the rest of the world is beyond contempt. I want to say something else but I'm just totally lost for words by your comments.
Yet another person who apparently either does not know how to read, or chooses to only read a portion of a discussion...
Nobody in their right mind would ever say that anyone deserves to be wiped out by a disease because their lifestyle and culture are different. That's a completely asinine and foolish line of reasoning. If you read closely, you'd see that the discussion was over (1) whether it is our place to impose our will, our culture, and our system of education on a society that has opposed that very idea all along, and (2) whether that imposition, if it were even possible, would solve the problem, or if the problem is instead more deeply rooted in that culture as a whole and is beyond repair by education and contraception.
It's a perfectly valid, intelligent, and reasonable discussion. It has nothing to do with approving of genocide or allowing the spread of disease. It's far more important than that.
I notice no one has commented on the Pope and the Catholic Church forbidding the use of condoms and the effect that has on spreading infection even further.
Oh boy... the Catholic Church is WAY too easy of a target. We should probably leave that one alone.
To suggest that the people of Africa deserve to be wiped out by aids as they haven't evolved or kept up with the rest of the world is beyond contempt. I want to say something else but I'm just totally lost for words by your comments.
Yet another person who apparently either does not know how to read, or chooses to only read a portion of a discussion...
Nobody in their right mind would ever say that anyone deserves to be wiped out by a disease because their lifestyle and culture are different. That's a completely asinine and foolish line of reasoning. If you read closely, you'd see that the discussion was over (1) whether it is our place to impose our will, our culture, and our system of education on a society that has opposed that very idea all along, and (2) whether that imposition, if it were even possible, would solve the problem, or if the problem is instead more deeply rooted in that culture as a whole and is beyond repair by education and contraception.
It's a perfectly valid, intelligent, and reasonable discussion. It has nothing to do with approving of genocide or allowing the spread of disease. It's far more important than that.
I notice no one has commented on the Pope and the Catholic Church forbidding the use of condoms and the effect that has on spreading infection even further.
Oh boy... the Catholic Church is WAY too easy of a target. We should probably leave that one alone.
HitchHykr
Apr 20, 12:45 PM
I thought this was an FCC mandate (to track GPS information for cellphones) after 9/11. The real issue is that this is not encrypted in anyway so anybody can get the information if they have access to the file.
The excuse wasn't that 9/11 it was 911. There were some highly publicized cases of people dialing 911 from their cell phones and the emergency personnel being unable to find them. So of course new laws were passed. :rolleyes:
The excuse wasn't that 9/11 it was 911. There were some highly publicized cases of people dialing 911 from their cell phones and the emergency personnel being unable to find them. So of course new laws were passed. :rolleyes:
firsttube
Sep 13, 09:59 PM
Here's the real iPhone:
that's a mockup by that magazine, and nice "new" headphones.
that's a mockup by that magazine, and nice "new" headphones.
tundrabuggy
Dec 30, 09:50 AM
Yes, this sticky obtrusive and uninstallable piece of junk that constantly plagues people in the PC world (not to mention it radically slows your machine down. I recently installed Flash player on the PC side and without my permission McAffe was installed....ARGGGHH. Now they want to infect the Mac world....PLEASE NO!
Bluefusion
Apr 4, 11:43 AM
Rent-a-cops have guns? And shoot people IN THE HEAD? I'm amazed.
That said, this is pretty ******. Sure, the guy was a criminal lowlife, and he certainly deserved punishment, but I don't think he deserved to get killed. Oh well.
That said, this is pretty ******. Sure, the guy was a criminal lowlife, and he certainly deserved punishment, but I don't think he deserved to get killed. Oh well.
mi5moav
Sep 14, 09:50 AM
I'm sure it's just an update to aperture along with a new aluminium skinned Apple video camera with 1/3 CCD and 100G HD. The future of video recording is on us and apple more than anyone knows about digital video. Though I'm realing hoping some sort of Leica/Zeiss/Apple announcement.
Stella
Apr 14, 12:03 PM
Any thunderbolt -> USB3 adapters out there? be useful for people who have 2011 macbooks...
( I know there's USB3 -> Thunderbolt connectors.. )
( I know there's USB3 -> Thunderbolt connectors.. )
boncellis
Sep 4, 08:55 PM
This makes sense to me, although it likely has some functionality beyond what has been described. Apple wants to move into a new forum, why reinvent the iPod when it's been done so well? The iTMS has the potential to be bigger than the iPod--big enough to drive sales of computers and a new video device as well as the iPod, it would be anathema for Apple to limit themselves.
The streaming technology is already there through iTunes, is it not? If you have a Mini hooked up to the TV, can't you just stream video to the Mini and play it there? If so, this has to be something new--something that Apple can market alongside the Mini. (Either that or Apple needs to cut the price of the Mini to make it a more realistic set-top box option--maybe Apple sees this as an improved implementation of that idea).
The streaming technology is already there through iTunes, is it not? If you have a Mini hooked up to the TV, can't you just stream video to the Mini and play it there? If so, this has to be something new--something that Apple can market alongside the Mini. (Either that or Apple needs to cut the price of the Mini to make it a more realistic set-top box option--maybe Apple sees this as an improved implementation of that idea).
samiwas
Apr 18, 04:56 PM
Of course that is ridiculous, and I totally agree there should be a line, but where do we draw it? Who gets to draw it?
Ummm...that was pretty much the point....:confused:
The line should be drawn by universal standard workers laws that prevent an employer from needlessly abusing their employees (timewise) without just compensation.
For instance, when I'm working on a union job (yeah, those awful unions protecting workers and stuff), anything over 8 hours a day is time+half. Anything between midnight and 6am is double-time. More than 40 hours in a 7-day period is time+half. Sunday is time+half. The employer has a right to decide when he wants his job done, and he can pay the price for it. The problem is that most employers choose ridiculous timelines and budgets, and the people working for them are stuck having to work the hours to complete something beyond their control. Without some sort of workers protection laws, this will only get worse and worse.
Of course, there are jobs that have to get done in a certain amount of time (as I referenced above), and some people may alter their speed and go slower to push into that overtime (of course this happens...I've seen it firsthand and abhor the practice). But that's no different than an employer dumping a new workload onto someone on Friday afternoon and saying "Yeeeaahh...I'm gonna need you to go ahead and come in tomorrow. Oh, and I almost forgot, I'm also gonna need you to go ahead and come in on Sunday, too, okay? We, uh, lost some people this week, and, uh, we have to sort of play catch up. Thanks!"
So, do you prefer a world where the employer has all the control and can make his employees do whatever he wants for whatever he wants to pay (or they can quit/be fired), or a world where employees have some sort of power to require fair compensation for extraordinary work periods? I know which I prefer, and I'm pretty sure I know which you prefer.
What about a hotshot stock trader making a killing working 80+ hours a week on salary. Should we be allowed to work this much without overtime?
I realize it is an obscure analogy, but it is valid nonetheless.
What does the hotshot trader making a killing have to do with anything? What if the trader is working 80 hours a week and not making a killing? Is the trader WANTING to work 80 hours, or is his firm requiring him to work 80 hours? Are they compensating him or is he just working for the man making the killing for his company but not really seeing the results for himself? I guess if someone WANTS to work 80 hours for free, you can let them...but it should never be a required part of the job.
Ummm...that was pretty much the point....:confused:
The line should be drawn by universal standard workers laws that prevent an employer from needlessly abusing their employees (timewise) without just compensation.
For instance, when I'm working on a union job (yeah, those awful unions protecting workers and stuff), anything over 8 hours a day is time+half. Anything between midnight and 6am is double-time. More than 40 hours in a 7-day period is time+half. Sunday is time+half. The employer has a right to decide when he wants his job done, and he can pay the price for it. The problem is that most employers choose ridiculous timelines and budgets, and the people working for them are stuck having to work the hours to complete something beyond their control. Without some sort of workers protection laws, this will only get worse and worse.
Of course, there are jobs that have to get done in a certain amount of time (as I referenced above), and some people may alter their speed and go slower to push into that overtime (of course this happens...I've seen it firsthand and abhor the practice). But that's no different than an employer dumping a new workload onto someone on Friday afternoon and saying "Yeeeaahh...I'm gonna need you to go ahead and come in tomorrow. Oh, and I almost forgot, I'm also gonna need you to go ahead and come in on Sunday, too, okay? We, uh, lost some people this week, and, uh, we have to sort of play catch up. Thanks!"
So, do you prefer a world where the employer has all the control and can make his employees do whatever he wants for whatever he wants to pay (or they can quit/be fired), or a world where employees have some sort of power to require fair compensation for extraordinary work periods? I know which I prefer, and I'm pretty sure I know which you prefer.
What about a hotshot stock trader making a killing working 80+ hours a week on salary. Should we be allowed to work this much without overtime?
I realize it is an obscure analogy, but it is valid nonetheless.
What does the hotshot trader making a killing have to do with anything? What if the trader is working 80 hours a week and not making a killing? Is the trader WANTING to work 80 hours, or is his firm requiring him to work 80 hours? Are they compensating him or is he just working for the man making the killing for his company but not really seeing the results for himself? I guess if someone WANTS to work 80 hours for free, you can let them...but it should never be a required part of the job.
wazgilbert
Apr 28, 05:46 PM
I don't know you. I do know that you have no idea what the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineers and the Project Management Institute is. I do know that you have no idea what Certified Cost Engineer, Certified Forensic Claims Consultant, and Project Management Professional certifications are.
As I mentioned, Experience or Education isn't necessary to refute the post "Microsoft is DEAD". A 3rd grade education and a tad of common sense would tell you that..
Obviously, WE all don't. My original post was not addressed to you but to Mr. BR Lawyer whose exact post was "Microsoft is DEAD"... Please go on though and tell me about how "WE ALL KNOW"....
Again, it's nonsense like this that indicates to me that you have no idea what you are talking about. I need not know about your qualifications or experience. You continue to show me how truly knowledgeable you are..
So you're saying the only reason anyone goes into business is to make profit?
It's not possible to see the breakeven point as the fundamental target?
Staying in business is not important then?
The associations that you belong to are not going to be recognised so quickly this side of the pond, but I wasn't suggesting you didn't have qualifications, I suggested waving them around was not necessary or well received in a forum where a general chat about giants of industry will not affect their business models or practices one iota.
Welcome to Macrumors by the way!
As I mentioned, Experience or Education isn't necessary to refute the post "Microsoft is DEAD". A 3rd grade education and a tad of common sense would tell you that..
Obviously, WE all don't. My original post was not addressed to you but to Mr. BR Lawyer whose exact post was "Microsoft is DEAD"... Please go on though and tell me about how "WE ALL KNOW"....
Again, it's nonsense like this that indicates to me that you have no idea what you are talking about. I need not know about your qualifications or experience. You continue to show me how truly knowledgeable you are..
So you're saying the only reason anyone goes into business is to make profit?
It's not possible to see the breakeven point as the fundamental target?
Staying in business is not important then?
The associations that you belong to are not going to be recognised so quickly this side of the pond, but I wasn't suggesting you didn't have qualifications, I suggested waving them around was not necessary or well received in a forum where a general chat about giants of industry will not affect their business models or practices one iota.
Welcome to Macrumors by the way!
mwayne85
Apr 25, 01:19 PM
I think it's almost a given that they'll do away with the superdrive. There's no need for it. And if they move to flash storage, they could make it a bit thinner and lighter. It would be like a Macbook air, but with powerful mobile processors.
What do you mean, "you people"
ROFL
What do you mean, "you people"
ROFL
rmhop81
Apr 22, 09:23 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
The best thing about listening to music on my iPod is I can listen to it wherever I am, such as in the car. Can't get wifi in the car, and no way am I tethering to my phone just to listen to music.
why would you tether to ur phone if u have an iphone?
The best thing about listening to music on my iPod is I can listen to it wherever I am, such as in the car. Can't get wifi in the car, and no way am I tethering to my phone just to listen to music.
why would you tether to ur phone if u have an iphone?
DJMastaWes
Aug 29, 07:39 AM
8:40am Est.
aeaglex07
Apr 20, 01:16 PM
Wow, this is really, really bad. I've no idea how any company would think this was acceptable. There's no way this was simply an oversight.
Absolutely unacceptable.
go buy a Droid and let Google sell your personal info:D
Absolutely unacceptable.
go buy a Droid and let Google sell your personal info:D
theking79
Apr 30, 04:46 PM
To Quote Hellhammer specs,
"1199$ 21.5" iMac
Intel Core i3-2100 (3.1GHz)
AMD 6490M with 256MB GDDR5
750GB HD
2x2GB RAM; option for 4x2GB
1499$ 21.5" iMac
Intel Core i5-2400S (2.5/3.3GHz); option for Core i5-2500S (2.7/3.7GHz)
AMD 6750M with 512MB GDDR5
1.5TB HD; option for 3TB
2x2GB RAM: option for 4x2GB
1699$ 27" iMac
Intel Core i5-2400 (3.1/3.4GHz)
AMD 6750M with 512MB GDDR5; option for AMD 6950M with 1024MB GDDR5
1.5TB HD; option for 3TB
2x2GB RAM; options for 4x2GB, 2x4GB and 4x4GB
1999$ 27" iMac
Intel Core i7-2600 (3.4/3.8GHz)
AMD 6950M with 1024MB GDDR5
1.5TB HD; option for 3TB
2x4GB RAM; option for 4x4GB"
More is here
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=943495&page=14
that top spec 27" is never going to happen, it will have 4GB RAM and a i5 processor with BTO option of a i7
"1199$ 21.5" iMac
Intel Core i3-2100 (3.1GHz)
AMD 6490M with 256MB GDDR5
750GB HD
2x2GB RAM; option for 4x2GB
1499$ 21.5" iMac
Intel Core i5-2400S (2.5/3.3GHz); option for Core i5-2500S (2.7/3.7GHz)
AMD 6750M with 512MB GDDR5
1.5TB HD; option for 3TB
2x2GB RAM: option for 4x2GB
1699$ 27" iMac
Intel Core i5-2400 (3.1/3.4GHz)
AMD 6750M with 512MB GDDR5; option for AMD 6950M with 1024MB GDDR5
1.5TB HD; option for 3TB
2x2GB RAM; options for 4x2GB, 2x4GB and 4x4GB
1999$ 27" iMac
Intel Core i7-2600 (3.4/3.8GHz)
AMD 6950M with 1024MB GDDR5
1.5TB HD; option for 3TB
2x4GB RAM; option for 4x4GB"
More is here
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=943495&page=14
that top spec 27" is never going to happen, it will have 4GB RAM and a i5 processor with BTO option of a i7
KnightWRX
Apr 23, 07:01 AM
Because people are stupid, that's why.
No one realistically games on a Macbook Air.
Thanks for calling me stupid. I play my steam bought games on my nVidia equipped Air. I don't have much choice this being my only computer.
And the SNB IGP is actually very capable. Their GMA offerings have generally always been crap but the 3000 is quite the opposite.
It's still less capable than nVidia's 320M which is what now, 2 years old ? Good job Intel! Always behind by a generation. Keep them graphics coming.
That said, the main use for the Air is as an ultraportable. And the improved battery life and lowered heat output are major advantages for an ultraportable that only a moron would ignore.
Then I'm a moron. I'd rather have the current 7 hours of battery life and current "heat" (what heat ? My MBA doesn't "heat up" at all, even compared to my old MacBook) than a downgraded GPU.
Drop the name calling. The major advantage of an ultra-portable is size and weight. This is why I bought the Air. If it didn't have a 1440x900 screen or a 320M, I wouldn't have bothered to upgrade the MacBook.
Playing Wow on 11" must be quite an experience. One must be quite an addict in order to want to play Wow on an MBA while on the go, I did hear that game was highly addicting. So, from a point of view, I understand the position of the people you call "stupid".
Why assume people want to game on the go ? I don't game on the go with my MBA, I usually use it to VPN to work on the go or to do some hobby programming. However, when home, I plug it into my external monitor and I game there. Why wouldn't people with 11" do the same ? Play some WoW/StarCraft/Civilization/Portal/Whatever at home when "docked", unplug and take the laptop on the Go for other tasks they need to do away from home ?
Are you guys so short sighted you can't see a lot of us don't have 2 computers ? What's the use when the MBA is capable of everything ?
No one realistically games on a Macbook Air.
Thanks for calling me stupid. I play my steam bought games on my nVidia equipped Air. I don't have much choice this being my only computer.
And the SNB IGP is actually very capable. Their GMA offerings have generally always been crap but the 3000 is quite the opposite.
It's still less capable than nVidia's 320M which is what now, 2 years old ? Good job Intel! Always behind by a generation. Keep them graphics coming.
That said, the main use for the Air is as an ultraportable. And the improved battery life and lowered heat output are major advantages for an ultraportable that only a moron would ignore.
Then I'm a moron. I'd rather have the current 7 hours of battery life and current "heat" (what heat ? My MBA doesn't "heat up" at all, even compared to my old MacBook) than a downgraded GPU.
Drop the name calling. The major advantage of an ultra-portable is size and weight. This is why I bought the Air. If it didn't have a 1440x900 screen or a 320M, I wouldn't have bothered to upgrade the MacBook.
Playing Wow on 11" must be quite an experience. One must be quite an addict in order to want to play Wow on an MBA while on the go, I did hear that game was highly addicting. So, from a point of view, I understand the position of the people you call "stupid".
Why assume people want to game on the go ? I don't game on the go with my MBA, I usually use it to VPN to work on the go or to do some hobby programming. However, when home, I plug it into my external monitor and I game there. Why wouldn't people with 11" do the same ? Play some WoW/StarCraft/Civilization/Portal/Whatever at home when "docked", unplug and take the laptop on the Go for other tasks they need to do away from home ?
Are you guys so short sighted you can't see a lot of us don't have 2 computers ? What's the use when the MBA is capable of everything ?
cwt1nospam
Jan 1, 07:18 PM
i think it's pretty common knowledge that Apple devices will be targeted more by virus making idiots in the future as they become more popular.
Targeting is one thing. Successfully attacking is a completely different animal. They've been targeting OS X since it came out a decade ago. Successful attacks range from barely a blip on the radar to nonexistent, depending on how you define success. There's no reason to believe that attacks on IOS will be half as successful as the pitiful attacks on OS X.
Targeting is one thing. Successfully attacking is a completely different animal. They've been targeting OS X since it came out a decade ago. Successful attacks range from barely a blip on the radar to nonexistent, depending on how you define success. There's no reason to believe that attacks on IOS will be half as successful as the pitiful attacks on OS X.
0 comments:
Post a Comment