SolRayz
Mar 23, 06:12 PM
The beautiful thing is that this is great advertisement for the app. I bet more people have downloaded this than ever before. I didn't know about this app until today, so thanks for that senator dumbfukz...
CalfCanuck
Sep 14, 07:16 PM
That'd be very nice, but I think that's too niche for Apple to get into. Although Apple does take its photography seriously, it only really produces hardware that is versatile and can be used for many different tasks - i.e. although the Mac Pro is serious photograhpy equipment, it can also be serious movie editing or CAD equipment. Infact, I can't think of any hardware made by Apple that is specifically photography directed.
Then again, there's nothing to say they won't break the habit of a lifetime.
While I have nothing to back up this idea beyond wild speculation, it makes sense if you think about it for a while.
I used the name "Aperture.iPod" just for this thread. I think the APerture features would be targeted to special audience, but even the Photo uploading features (plus integration into iPhoto) would give it the broader appeal you correctly discuss.
Several reason why this might happen:
1. Apple has had a product called the Photo iPod since October 2004. The fact that few of it's users probably use it for Photos merely points out that it failed in it's targeted market for a number of reasons (probably lack of easy uploading from cameras when not at a computer, small screen, and lack of support for RAW).
2. Apple's announcement a few days ago about the new iTunes store: (to quote Page 1) "TV shows will now be sold at 640x480 px h264. While the updated 5G iPods announced today will be able to play the new format, there has not been any indication from Apple of yet that the new shows will be playable on older 5G iPods. Apple's official knowledge-base article still states that h264-encoded movies must be 320 x 240 at 30 fps."
So why will Apple start selling a video size that isn't designed for the current iPod? While it could be for the "iTV" device, I'd image that is a bit too small a resolution to get people excited about. And even if it is, why start selling it 6 months before the device ships?
3. If Apple was to introduce a new Video iPod with a larger screen, this new larger box would allow a number of things that can''t fit on a small iPod and are perfect for both video AND photography - a large 640 x 480 screen, FW or USB2 connections, and potentially CF/SD card slots (or at least an IO for a fast adapter via the USB2 connection.)
Hence my conclusion (based on pure speculation) - all these things point to a dual use device. Handheld, but larger than normal iPods, and suitable for both consumer video playback AND photography.
What better place to introduce this than the biggest consumer photo show in the world?
Then again, there's nothing to say they won't break the habit of a lifetime.
While I have nothing to back up this idea beyond wild speculation, it makes sense if you think about it for a while.
I used the name "Aperture.iPod" just for this thread. I think the APerture features would be targeted to special audience, but even the Photo uploading features (plus integration into iPhoto) would give it the broader appeal you correctly discuss.
Several reason why this might happen:
1. Apple has had a product called the Photo iPod since October 2004. The fact that few of it's users probably use it for Photos merely points out that it failed in it's targeted market for a number of reasons (probably lack of easy uploading from cameras when not at a computer, small screen, and lack of support for RAW).
2. Apple's announcement a few days ago about the new iTunes store: (to quote Page 1) "TV shows will now be sold at 640x480 px h264. While the updated 5G iPods announced today will be able to play the new format, there has not been any indication from Apple of yet that the new shows will be playable on older 5G iPods. Apple's official knowledge-base article still states that h264-encoded movies must be 320 x 240 at 30 fps."
So why will Apple start selling a video size that isn't designed for the current iPod? While it could be for the "iTV" device, I'd image that is a bit too small a resolution to get people excited about. And even if it is, why start selling it 6 months before the device ships?
3. If Apple was to introduce a new Video iPod with a larger screen, this new larger box would allow a number of things that can''t fit on a small iPod and are perfect for both video AND photography - a large 640 x 480 screen, FW or USB2 connections, and potentially CF/SD card slots (or at least an IO for a fast adapter via the USB2 connection.)
Hence my conclusion (based on pure speculation) - all these things point to a dual use device. Handheld, but larger than normal iPods, and suitable for both consumer video playback AND photography.
What better place to introduce this than the biggest consumer photo show in the world?
Yvan256
Sep 5, 06:05 PM
OK hear me out on this one - WHAT IF Apple, in all its wisdom and foresight, avoids the format war (Blu-ray vs HD-DVD) altogether by NOT using a physical format? [...] they do something GENIUS like sell DOWNLOADABLE HD movies on their iTunes store and release a stream-to-TV device!
That's been my point of view since day one. Some kind of hardware to connect between your computer(s) and your television and you get your movies from the iTMS (iTunes Media Store).
The only thing that I'd like to see (and I'm sure I won't) is rentals. I wouldn't mind downloading 480p movies for rentals, either. It lowers the bandwidth costs, the download time, etc.
Will the "box" be an Airport Xpress (or something) or a special version of Mac mini (super-low cost, no hard drive, no optical drive, 512MB soldered on-board, not upgradable).
That's been my point of view since day one. Some kind of hardware to connect between your computer(s) and your television and you get your movies from the iTMS (iTunes Media Store).
The only thing that I'd like to see (and I'm sure I won't) is rentals. I wouldn't mind downloading 480p movies for rentals, either. It lowers the bandwidth costs, the download time, etc.
Will the "box" be an Airport Xpress (or something) or a special version of Mac mini (super-low cost, no hard drive, no optical drive, 512MB soldered on-board, not upgradable).
batchtaster
Apr 11, 08:40 AM
you seem, like so many people these days, to be wanting everything while giving nothing...
Hey Apple / music / movie /etc etc industry, why cant you just let me have whatever I want, whenever I want, all for free?
And let me moan and whinge non-stop while you're doing it.
QFT.
And not just free - employ people and sink resources into it to make it happen, so that Apple (and other companies making great products) actually pays for these things they want, like they're 5 year olds pawing through the candy in the check-out line at Walgreens, demanding one more piece. You want the candy? Buy it.
On another tack, I can't help thinking this guy has opened up a can of worms for himself, DMCA-wise.
Hey Apple / music / movie /etc etc industry, why cant you just let me have whatever I want, whenever I want, all for free?
And let me moan and whinge non-stop while you're doing it.
QFT.
And not just free - employ people and sink resources into it to make it happen, so that Apple (and other companies making great products) actually pays for these things they want, like they're 5 year olds pawing through the candy in the check-out line at Walgreens, demanding one more piece. You want the candy? Buy it.
On another tack, I can't help thinking this guy has opened up a can of worms for himself, DMCA-wise.
kfscoll
Apr 25, 06:06 PM
...which is still a bottleneck.
So what's your point? You like moderetly better bottlenecks?
I'd rather eliminate them altogether.
You're a silly man. Almost any standard SATA-II 2.5" form-factor SSD is faster than a standard MBA blade SSD. And a SATA-III 6Gbps SSD vs. the MBA SSD? Forget it.
So what's your point? You like moderetly better bottlenecks?
I'd rather eliminate them altogether.
You're a silly man. Almost any standard SATA-II 2.5" form-factor SSD is faster than a standard MBA blade SSD. And a SATA-III 6Gbps SSD vs. the MBA SSD? Forget it.
jonregler
Apr 22, 01:43 PM
Checked these out at the airport again last week and love them. Perfect timing for me, I swore I'd hold out for Lion (unless my 2007 MBP dies by then), looks like I'll reap extra benefits for my somewhat difficult patience!
topmounter
Apr 4, 12:15 PM
Maybe you're right, maybe not... I mean, I doubt the guys went in in Kevlar suit saying "we take the loot, not matter what. If someones try to stop us, we kill him". In a bank robbery maybe they would but I doubt they were ready to kill somebody only for a few iPads...
But that's just me.
Feel free to sympathize with the crooks, but this does not sound like a case of "Han shot first".
But that's just me.
Feel free to sympathize with the crooks, but this does not sound like a case of "Han shot first".
charque
Jan 15, 02:52 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; de-de) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
The big deal is that i do not want buggy, resource stealing software on my mac. Simple as that.
Do you run itunes or quicktime? Or possibly a web browser?
The big deal is that i do not want buggy, resource stealing software on my mac. Simple as that.
Do you run itunes or quicktime? Or possibly a web browser?
cube
Apr 22, 01:43 PM
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/gadgetreviews/new-asus-eee-pc-netbook-with-optical-drive/2658
The MBA looks bad as an ultraportable? L.O.L.
The MBP is for people who want a powerful notebook. People who want a laptop capable of using parts that equal 85-watts or higher.
I don't want a MacBook Air. I want a MacBook Pro without an optical drive that is slightly thinner than the current MacBook Pro.
If you think the only thing that separates the MacBook Air from the Pro is an optical drive then I'm wasting my time arguing with you. Clearly someone that thinks a 15" Zacate notebook with an optical drive makes a 15" MacBook Pro with a quad core 45 watt CPU and a 25W+ GPU without an optical drive look bad is someone that knows little about what they're talking about.
I don't see HP Envy owners complaining about their lack of an optical drive inside their machines nor do I see people knock that particular fact about the Envy.
So, ONE netbook which has an optical drive. Which makes the MBA look bad because it doesn't have one.
Actually, most netbooks make the MBA look bad because it doesn't have gigabit ethernet.
And a 15" Zacate which is not a notebook because the CPU is too weak, it's not a netbook, and it's not an ultraportable because it's too big would make an MBP without optical disk look bad because of the price, even if it has little reason to exist (unclassifiable in a bad way).
The MBA looks bad as an ultraportable? L.O.L.
The MBP is for people who want a powerful notebook. People who want a laptop capable of using parts that equal 85-watts or higher.
I don't want a MacBook Air. I want a MacBook Pro without an optical drive that is slightly thinner than the current MacBook Pro.
If you think the only thing that separates the MacBook Air from the Pro is an optical drive then I'm wasting my time arguing with you. Clearly someone that thinks a 15" Zacate notebook with an optical drive makes a 15" MacBook Pro with a quad core 45 watt CPU and a 25W+ GPU without an optical drive look bad is someone that knows little about what they're talking about.
I don't see HP Envy owners complaining about their lack of an optical drive inside their machines nor do I see people knock that particular fact about the Envy.
So, ONE netbook which has an optical drive. Which makes the MBA look bad because it doesn't have one.
Actually, most netbooks make the MBA look bad because it doesn't have gigabit ethernet.
And a 15" Zacate which is not a notebook because the CPU is too weak, it's not a netbook, and it's not an ultraportable because it's too big would make an MBP without optical disk look bad because of the price, even if it has little reason to exist (unclassifiable in a bad way).
bstpierre
Nov 13, 02:01 PM
I have to disagree. Rogue Amoeba in *no way* violated Trademark or Copyright rules with this. In fact, they used Apple's own OS X APIs.
w00master
I agree with you. If they are using an image sent by Mac OS X for just such a purpose they are not doing anything wrong.
It makes me think that maybe there are some lowly app reviewers who are letting the power go to their heads.
w00master
I agree with you. If they are using an image sent by Mac OS X for just such a purpose they are not doing anything wrong.
It makes me think that maybe there are some lowly app reviewers who are letting the power go to their heads.
deannnnn
Mar 29, 11:13 AM
Wirelessly posted (iPhone 3GS: 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)
lol. good one.
lol. good one.
EagerDragon
Sep 4, 07:03 PM
Unless it's just the 23" iMac I have been hearing about, then it's ok. But if it's a totally new iMac that'll fire me off pretty good.
Same imac with more disk space, faster processor, 23'' screen, better wireless, maybe a second disk drive, and the same price as the old 20 Incher.
Happens every 8 to 12 months, more offten now with Intel.:cool:
Same imac with more disk space, faster processor, 23'' screen, better wireless, maybe a second disk drive, and the same price as the old 20 Incher.
Happens every 8 to 12 months, more offten now with Intel.:cool:
Half Glass
Sep 9, 02:55 PM
Benchmarks look good...real good for a laptop chip! I wonder how the laptops will fare!
Loving the MacPro, and just like you guys waiting for some of the software to be seriously optimized for more than 2 cores. I've seen ~289% in spurts but not more from an app while encoding some video (I think the 289% was Handbrake). FCP seems to keep itself under 2 cores.
Bring on the truly optimized software and lets roll!
--Half Glass
Loving the MacPro, and just like you guys waiting for some of the software to be seriously optimized for more than 2 cores. I've seen ~289% in spurts but not more from an app while encoding some video (I think the 289% was Handbrake). FCP seems to keep itself under 2 cores.
Bring on the truly optimized software and lets roll!
--Half Glass
liketom
Sep 20, 09:13 AM
Interesting that you say that.
For those of us who have enjoyed videos over the years, we've had the following formats:
- Beta
- VHS
- Super VHS
- CED
- LD, and it variants
- DVD
and now HD-DVD / Bluray
Maybe the key for the format change is to line the companies pockets!
i used to love them laser discs :D wow they are still selling on ebay as well :cool:
For those of us who have enjoyed videos over the years, we've had the following formats:
- Beta
- VHS
- Super VHS
- CED
- LD, and it variants
- DVD
and now HD-DVD / Bluray
Maybe the key for the format change is to line the companies pockets!
i used to love them laser discs :D wow they are still selling on ebay as well :cool:
Doctor Q
Sep 15, 06:43 PM
Just to further clarify -- NIH syndrome is when a company chooses not to use technologies invented by other companies in its own products. They prefer to design and build the entire package themselves, in-house.
I'm not that interested in an iPhone. Apple would need to add some very unique features for me to consider buying one.What if it supported NuBus cards?
OK, that was a (bad) joke, since I think NuBus was one of those Apple-only inventions from the past.
But why would you NOT want Apple's phone, szark? Is is that you don't want a camera phone or music phone in the first place, or that you expect it to be priced too high? Without knowing more about it, how do we know it's not going to be at least as good as the phones we have now? Plus an Apple logo.
I'm not that interested in an iPhone. Apple would need to add some very unique features for me to consider buying one.What if it supported NuBus cards?
OK, that was a (bad) joke, since I think NuBus was one of those Apple-only inventions from the past.
But why would you NOT want Apple's phone, szark? Is is that you don't want a camera phone or music phone in the first place, or that you expect it to be priced too high? Without knowing more about it, how do we know it's not going to be at least as good as the phones we have now? Plus an Apple logo.
NY Guitarist
Apr 30, 05:43 PM
Those guys must not have existed before the advent of LCD monitors... what did those guys do with the big glass tubes ?
Bought monitors with anti-glare coatings. And monitor hoods.
Bought monitors with anti-glare coatings. And monitor hoods.
dime21
Apr 19, 11:21 AM
Apple HAS to file a lawsuit in this case.
If they did not, then they open the door to not being able to protect their assets in court down the road if someone else tries to copy anything Apple offers.
Non-issue here people. Just playing by the rules of the game.
actually, this is true. at least in the US, if you fail to defend your copyrights or trademarks in court, that constitutes abandonment of said copyrights and trademarks, which then legally entitles anyone to freely use them. so yes, apple is required to sue anyone who makes a suspiciously similar looking product.
If they did not, then they open the door to not being able to protect their assets in court down the road if someone else tries to copy anything Apple offers.
Non-issue here people. Just playing by the rules of the game.
actually, this is true. at least in the US, if you fail to defend your copyrights or trademarks in court, that constitutes abandonment of said copyrights and trademarks, which then legally entitles anyone to freely use them. so yes, apple is required to sue anyone who makes a suspiciously similar looking product.
1984
Oct 12, 09:38 PM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2006-10/25865863.jpg
I haven't been to an Apple Store in ages so forgive me for asking but what kind of dock is that in the lower right? I'm sure it is a display designed only for the stores but is it actually a working dock as well?
I haven't been to an Apple Store in ages so forgive me for asking but what kind of dock is that in the lower right? I'm sure it is a display designed only for the stores but is it actually a working dock as well?
Aldaris
Mar 22, 02:32 PM
I think you'll find that rumors of the Mac Pro's death are greatly exaggerated.
Thunderbolt honestly wouldn't bring very much to a Mac Pro right now. They have access via PCI expansion to drives, etc. that keep pace with and even beat Thunderbolt in some instances. As the tech matures it will outpace others and eventually find its way to the Mac Pro. Yes, the iMacs, and the iToys get more and more powerful with every generation...but then, so do the Pros...they all have a space on Apple's buffet bar.
I agree, I think it'll be great for the portable's and consumer items, to be able to customize certain peripherals to the individual needs, at the moment I have a PowerBook G4, MacBook Pro, Power Mac G4, Power Mac G5, all for certain tasks, I could solve all this with a thunderbolt equipped MacBook pro and Mini... Think of the space saving's there...
The Pro will be around for a lot longer, it just serves a Pro/sumer market, the processors they sport generally come later down the pipe anyway like sandy bridge xeons in Q3/Q4.
Thunderbolt honestly wouldn't bring very much to a Mac Pro right now. They have access via PCI expansion to drives, etc. that keep pace with and even beat Thunderbolt in some instances. As the tech matures it will outpace others and eventually find its way to the Mac Pro. Yes, the iMacs, and the iToys get more and more powerful with every generation...but then, so do the Pros...they all have a space on Apple's buffet bar.
I agree, I think it'll be great for the portable's and consumer items, to be able to customize certain peripherals to the individual needs, at the moment I have a PowerBook G4, MacBook Pro, Power Mac G4, Power Mac G5, all for certain tasks, I could solve all this with a thunderbolt equipped MacBook pro and Mini... Think of the space saving's there...
The Pro will be around for a lot longer, it just serves a Pro/sumer market, the processors they sport generally come later down the pipe anyway like sandy bridge xeons in Q3/Q4.
mKTank
Dec 31, 01:57 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!
Hurf. There was a checkbox for installing a trial version. You didn't uncheck it.
Maybe this is why you're using OSX then. It makes choices for you. Not yours, but you know...
Hurf. There was a checkbox for installing a trial version. You didn't uncheck it.
Maybe this is why you're using OSX then. It makes choices for you. Not yours, but you know...
Rocketman
Aug 31, 07:09 PM
or maybe just maybe...
Apple is bringing out a new desktop! I mean think about it they haven't really bought out a new desktop for agess all they have done is switch all products to intel.
**Edit, IMO i think its silly because whos gonna pay $14.99 for a movie on a tiny screen, and if they make it to watch on your computer then its just going to take hours and hours to download if you have a slow broadband connection
If you pay whatever price for a "lisence" to a movie it makes sense you have a lisence to a variety of resolutions for the 5 CPU's you are allowed to run them on, FOREVER (Time Machine).
Stop whining. Or not.
As for the so-called video iPod, it seems to me such a device has far more uses than a mere media replayer. It could be a remote control. It could be a PDA. It could be a 3G/4G internet portal, standalone or for an external computer, such as a, gag, MacBook.
Further, such a device is easily reprogrammable as a dictation machine, a bar code reader, a video camera, a still camera, etc, etc, etc. Some functions might need a dongle to the extent they are not implemented in Rev. 1A.
Rocketman
See ST-TNG datapads.
Apple is bringing out a new desktop! I mean think about it they haven't really bought out a new desktop for agess all they have done is switch all products to intel.
**Edit, IMO i think its silly because whos gonna pay $14.99 for a movie on a tiny screen, and if they make it to watch on your computer then its just going to take hours and hours to download if you have a slow broadband connection
If you pay whatever price for a "lisence" to a movie it makes sense you have a lisence to a variety of resolutions for the 5 CPU's you are allowed to run them on, FOREVER (Time Machine).
Stop whining. Or not.
As for the so-called video iPod, it seems to me such a device has far more uses than a mere media replayer. It could be a remote control. It could be a PDA. It could be a 3G/4G internet portal, standalone or for an external computer, such as a, gag, MacBook.
Further, such a device is easily reprogrammable as a dictation machine, a bar code reader, a video camera, a still camera, etc, etc, etc. Some functions might need a dongle to the extent they are not implemented in Rev. 1A.
Rocketman
See ST-TNG datapads.
Katharine
Oct 12, 08:24 PM
Yahoo has an article about the Red iPod and the whole charity project.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061013/ap_on_en_tv/winfrey_bono
It also looks like there will be a $25 Red Itunes Gift card.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061013/ap_on_en_tv/winfrey_bono
It also looks like there will be a $25 Red Itunes Gift card.
tyzilla
Sep 14, 10:38 PM
Not sure why people would get excited about an iCamera. There are many excellent DSLRs out now from companies that have a lot more expertise in building cameras than Apple. I'd rather have a Canon Rebel XT or maybe that new Pentax.
by the looks of the description he/she gave of the "iCamera" or "iDSLR," it was a joke. that's just my take though.
by the looks of the description he/she gave of the "iCamera" or "iDSLR," it was a joke. that's just my take though.
AAPLaday
Mar 29, 12:53 PM
What I don't get is....
Nokia = looser in smart phone market.
Microsoft = looser in smart phone OS market.
So... Looser + Looser = Winner?
I know Nokia has a huge installed base of feature phones, but they're going to have to really step it up to catch up in the smart phone market. Even the old #1 guys (RIM) can't keep up with iOS and Android.
No. Looser and looser = extra extra baggy! :D
Nokia = looser in smart phone market.
Microsoft = looser in smart phone OS market.
So... Looser + Looser = Winner?
I know Nokia has a huge installed base of feature phones, but they're going to have to really step it up to catch up in the smart phone market. Even the old #1 guys (RIM) can't keep up with iOS and Android.
No. Looser and looser = extra extra baggy! :D