andiwm2003
Sep 19, 01:37 PM
1mio for 125000 movies. so they make an avaerage of $8 per movie. iTS sells them for about $10-$12.
so it seems apple makes about 2-3 bucks per movie (minus the bandwith/server cost).
i wonder if the movie business is profitable for apple or if it's merely to promote iPod's iTV and Mac's.
so it seems apple makes about 2-3 bucks per movie (minus the bandwith/server cost).
i wonder if the movie business is profitable for apple or if it's merely to promote iPod's iTV and Mac's.
roadbloc
Mar 29, 01:17 PM
And where in the first post from the OP did they mention 'in the Finder'?
Doesn't take a genius to work out does it? I understood him, as did plenty of others. If you wish to pointlessly nitpick in hope to make OS X's lack of basic but useful features sound negligible then so be it.
Finder lacks cut and paste. It bugs me at times too.
Doesn't take a genius to work out does it? I understood him, as did plenty of others. If you wish to pointlessly nitpick in hope to make OS X's lack of basic but useful features sound negligible then so be it.
Finder lacks cut and paste. It bugs me at times too.
goron59
May 3, 10:30 AM
Isn't a single TB bus capable of driving more than one display.... so can you drive two displays from a single port?
Might need a powered hub perhaps.. Dunno.
:confused:
Might need a powered hub perhaps.. Dunno.
:confused:
HecubusPro
Sep 14, 09:39 AM
yep i smell both the aperture update,
Aperture update for sure.
Well, considering the box art for Apterture and the invitation to the event on the 24th use virtually the same picture... ya think? ;)
http://www.photographyblog.com/images/products/apple_aperture.jpg
http://guides.macrumors.com/images/1/1b/Photokina.jpg
Aperture update for sure.
Well, considering the box art for Apterture and the invitation to the event on the 24th use virtually the same picture... ya think? ;)
http://www.photographyblog.com/images/products/apple_aperture.jpg
http://guides.macrumors.com/images/1/1b/Photokina.jpg
balamw
Sep 19, 02:48 PM
My thoughts exactly.
FWIW $50M/year is ~0.2% of Disney's revenue (they made ~$30B/year for the past few years). Definitely not chicken feed, but not earth shattering either.
B
FWIW $50M/year is ~0.2% of Disney's revenue (they made ~$30B/year for the past few years). Definitely not chicken feed, but not earth shattering either.
B
ergle2
Sep 10, 01:34 AM
True, the Pentium M (Mobil Centrino) was a hudge sucess for Intel! The Pentium D (Desktop) was a dual-core disaster, pushing the old "NetBurst" Pentium 4 past all safe design limits.
Core 2 is the all new rework that saved Intel!
Core 2 isn't "all new". It's an evolutionary design based on Core tho some parts are borrowed from other Intel designs (the Memory Disambiguation tech was originally designed for the unreleased, unlamented Tejas, for example).
Other changes include a full 128-bit path to the SSE registers, meaning that all SSE instructions can now complete in a single cycle, L2 shared cache instead of separate L2's per CPU, an extra integer unit, etc.
And, of course, the 64bit extensions :)
Sure, there's enough in the way of changes/additions to render it worthy of being considered a new microarch, but those changes are evolutionary.
Ironically enough, there's a direct line from Core 2 going all the way back to P6, whereas NetBurst really was "all new"!
Core 2 is the all new rework that saved Intel!
Core 2 isn't "all new". It's an evolutionary design based on Core tho some parts are borrowed from other Intel designs (the Memory Disambiguation tech was originally designed for the unreleased, unlamented Tejas, for example).
Other changes include a full 128-bit path to the SSE registers, meaning that all SSE instructions can now complete in a single cycle, L2 shared cache instead of separate L2's per CPU, an extra integer unit, etc.
And, of course, the 64bit extensions :)
Sure, there's enough in the way of changes/additions to render it worthy of being considered a new microarch, but those changes are evolutionary.
Ironically enough, there's a direct line from Core 2 going all the way back to P6, whereas NetBurst really was "all new"!
Arcus
Mar 23, 04:18 PM
Oh god no I hope apple doesn't cave to this kind of Orwellian garbage. I feel for all of the victims of DUIs and know that I have personally called the police on a car that was very obviously had an impaired person behind the wheel but as a non drunk driver if I want to avoid being hassled I should be able to.
alent1234
Apr 22, 08:03 AM
So Apple's method could be more efficient their side, offering a spotify type model where everyone accesses the same iTunes purchased track (except this time they own it) instead of Amazon's where each indivdual track is stored in their "digital locker"?
A nice bt of foresight by Apple if so.
this is we have something called dedupe where the computer strips out redundant data in similar files. i bet every song in amazon's storage locker is unique but with dedupe they only store it once
A nice bt of foresight by Apple if so.
this is we have something called dedupe where the computer strips out redundant data in similar files. i bet every song in amazon's storage locker is unique but with dedupe they only store it once
Warbrain
Apr 20, 10:45 AM
Incorrect.
Great input.
Great input.
peharri
Sep 18, 09:00 AM
You are right. I make a call. i expect to pay for it. i dont expect the person im calling to get billed for the damn call.
The other way of looking at it is that the mobile user has made a technology choice. They shouldn't expect other people to pay for their technology choice. A system where each person pays to connect to the network and decides how they want to pay for that is inherently fairer, even if it makes it harder for people to choose to subsidize the systems of others.
(Remember too that in the majority of cases, most US users have a fixed bill because of the high number of bundled minutes coupled with the huge unmetered portions of their bills. It's not the case that we get billed for the incoming call in the majority of cases. If it's made at peak time, from a different network, then yeah, we'll use bundled minutes, but most of us end up with large amounts of bundled minutes free at the end of the month despite this. And you never have to accept an incoming call.)
and. as for pricing. yes, vodafone have a 1c/sec flat rate on calls. but. i pay $79/month and at the end of the my account has a automatic refund (of sorts) applied, so anything up to $500 in calls/txt/etc is included in the $79.
That doesn't sound like a bad plan, that's unusually good outside of the US from what I've researched, though most of my research has been limited to the UK.
i DO use my mobile for most calls. i use my landline maybe once a week, because it has a better speakerphone if im using it for a long time.
If I were back in Britain, I couldn't substitute a cellphone for a landline because of the incoming calls issue. It's simply not fair to my family or friends to make them pay through the nose to contact me. I might use one for the bulk of my outgoing calls, but for incoming calls, it wouldn't be right.
An ideal compromise, in my view, would be for the operators to provide two numbers on every phone, a caller pays and a mobile party pays (with the latter being treated as ordinary airtime, or unmetered according to a fixed monthly charge), but alas I don't think the operators would ever do something that could potentially undermine their interconnect revenues like that.
Neither solution is perfect. The US seems better at the moment because of the emphasis on unmetered usage. At least unmetered incoming calls are an option here. But the downside is the lack of a practical PAYG system.
The other way of looking at it is that the mobile user has made a technology choice. They shouldn't expect other people to pay for their technology choice. A system where each person pays to connect to the network and decides how they want to pay for that is inherently fairer, even if it makes it harder for people to choose to subsidize the systems of others.
(Remember too that in the majority of cases, most US users have a fixed bill because of the high number of bundled minutes coupled with the huge unmetered portions of their bills. It's not the case that we get billed for the incoming call in the majority of cases. If it's made at peak time, from a different network, then yeah, we'll use bundled minutes, but most of us end up with large amounts of bundled minutes free at the end of the month despite this. And you never have to accept an incoming call.)
and. as for pricing. yes, vodafone have a 1c/sec flat rate on calls. but. i pay $79/month and at the end of the my account has a automatic refund (of sorts) applied, so anything up to $500 in calls/txt/etc is included in the $79.
That doesn't sound like a bad plan, that's unusually good outside of the US from what I've researched, though most of my research has been limited to the UK.
i DO use my mobile for most calls. i use my landline maybe once a week, because it has a better speakerphone if im using it for a long time.
If I were back in Britain, I couldn't substitute a cellphone for a landline because of the incoming calls issue. It's simply not fair to my family or friends to make them pay through the nose to contact me. I might use one for the bulk of my outgoing calls, but for incoming calls, it wouldn't be right.
An ideal compromise, in my view, would be for the operators to provide two numbers on every phone, a caller pays and a mobile party pays (with the latter being treated as ordinary airtime, or unmetered according to a fixed monthly charge), but alas I don't think the operators would ever do something that could potentially undermine their interconnect revenues like that.
Neither solution is perfect. The US seems better at the moment because of the emphasis on unmetered usage. At least unmetered incoming calls are an option here. But the downside is the lack of a practical PAYG system.
mknopp
Mar 29, 11:53 AM
I will pay any attention to this when someone can show me that in 2007 that they predicted that Android would be the market share leader in smartphones in 2011.
One year projections are tricky. Four year projections in an emerging tech category are a joke. What about WebOS or Motorola's new OS for smartphones? They may not go anywhere or they might and these yahoos don't even account for them at all.
The very fact that they honestly seem to think that the only smartphone OSes that will have any sort of market share in four years are the ones that exist today tells you just how much anyone should pay attention to this.
One year projections are tricky. Four year projections in an emerging tech category are a joke. What about WebOS or Motorola's new OS for smartphones? They may not go anywhere or they might and these yahoos don't even account for them at all.
The very fact that they honestly seem to think that the only smartphone OSes that will have any sort of market share in four years are the ones that exist today tells you just how much anyone should pay attention to this.
Full of Win
Apr 4, 11:57 AM
Headshot - OUTSTANDING.
It sounds as though he was DRT, but I hope this scumbag suffered some before his dirt nap was about to begin.
It sounds as though he was DRT, but I hope this scumbag suffered some before his dirt nap was about to begin.
mi5moav
Sep 26, 07:48 AM
I don't where they get there info from but O2 was not the exclusive Europe ROKR carrier. I've been using T-mobile on my ROKR for almost a year now in Germany and that was like 2 months before my friend was able to get his on O2. I really think that T-mobile would be a better choice to start with since it seems more punks, movie stars, and hollywood ho-joes use that service then any other since when they do the jet set thing they can take their phone with them and its a lot less then with Cigular. Might have to switch to T-MO next year especially with all that bleeding EDGE network they just snapped up a few weeks back. I have a feeling if Itunes Mobile is gonna be on this phone, we need EDGE or HSDPA, half the capitals of Europe have Hi-Data and we get stuck with a war to fight, and can only bring back old models to the auto world like the Camaro,Mustang, and now the stinking Cherokee is back as the Patriot.
One thing is for sure "Designed by Apple in California" is a very important tag line and George Bush has been pushing media to sell America, Apple got on just in time. Sony designed in Osaka, Nokia designed in Finland, Samsung designed in Japan, Motorola designed in Illinois... just don't have the same ring. Even though I can't stand it CAL I FOR NI A is the place to be, right now, well at least until this surge of 80 foot water rises over our heads.
So, Jed what we gonna do?
One thing is for sure "Designed by Apple in California" is a very important tag line and George Bush has been pushing media to sell America, Apple got on just in time. Sony designed in Osaka, Nokia designed in Finland, Samsung designed in Japan, Motorola designed in Illinois... just don't have the same ring. Even though I can't stand it CAL I FOR NI A is the place to be, right now, well at least until this surge of 80 foot water rises over our heads.
So, Jed what we gonna do?
dernhelm
Sep 10, 04:53 PM
Apple, please,
BRING BACK THE MAC CUBE concept!
A small yet powerful Mac. But this this at a REASONABLE price, to be a best-seller.
Thanks.
Put a Conroe processor in a midrange headless system, and you'll have what the cube was supposed to be. The problem is that Apple just finished rationalizing a minimized line. To add something else into their lineup makes for all kinds of headaches.
Low-end (headless) - mac mini
Mid-range (all-in-one) - iMac
High-end (headless) - mac pro
Server room (headless) - xserve
In order to rationalize another product line in the mid-range (pro-sumer?) market, I think they'll need to focus it on some other feature that people need. Dropping the cube back out there just cannibalizes sales of existing product, if you are not careful with it.
Apple does not seem to believe that there is some large contingent of people who want a mid-range system that would prefer it not to have a monitor. I, however, think they are wrong, and they are missing a large segment of people who are willing to pay top dollar for a high-end well-designed machine. That market is the one for the high-end gamer.
Apple absolutely could produce a great machine aimed at high-end gamers. Produce a super-cool design aimed at that segment. Make it BTO with multiple upgradable graphics cards, fast bus speeds, fast ram, RAID 0, etc. They could leave off FW800, Bluetooth (most wireless gamer mice don't use it), and some of the other connectivity options that high-end gamers could care less about (modems, etc). Put the Conroe processors in there and crank them up as high as you can. The high end system could be liquid cooled, we already know apple can do that when needed. Most games are still not threaded all that well - but an MT OpenGL also couldn't hurt...
They could also Pre-install boot-camp as a BTO option. We all know any serious gamer is going to want windows installed - so just prep them for it. It wouldn't surprise me to see many more people buying macs to run windows on in the near future anyway.
There isn't any reason why such a machine couldn't look like the "cube" I suppose, but I'd probably prefer to see something different. The cube had a different design goal and has too much baggage associated with it anyway.
BRING BACK THE MAC CUBE concept!
A small yet powerful Mac. But this this at a REASONABLE price, to be a best-seller.
Thanks.
Put a Conroe processor in a midrange headless system, and you'll have what the cube was supposed to be. The problem is that Apple just finished rationalizing a minimized line. To add something else into their lineup makes for all kinds of headaches.
Low-end (headless) - mac mini
Mid-range (all-in-one) - iMac
High-end (headless) - mac pro
Server room (headless) - xserve
In order to rationalize another product line in the mid-range (pro-sumer?) market, I think they'll need to focus it on some other feature that people need. Dropping the cube back out there just cannibalizes sales of existing product, if you are not careful with it.
Apple does not seem to believe that there is some large contingent of people who want a mid-range system that would prefer it not to have a monitor. I, however, think they are wrong, and they are missing a large segment of people who are willing to pay top dollar for a high-end well-designed machine. That market is the one for the high-end gamer.
Apple absolutely could produce a great machine aimed at high-end gamers. Produce a super-cool design aimed at that segment. Make it BTO with multiple upgradable graphics cards, fast bus speeds, fast ram, RAID 0, etc. They could leave off FW800, Bluetooth (most wireless gamer mice don't use it), and some of the other connectivity options that high-end gamers could care less about (modems, etc). Put the Conroe processors in there and crank them up as high as you can. The high end system could be liquid cooled, we already know apple can do that when needed. Most games are still not threaded all that well - but an MT OpenGL also couldn't hurt...
They could also Pre-install boot-camp as a BTO option. We all know any serious gamer is going to want windows installed - so just prep them for it. It wouldn't surprise me to see many more people buying macs to run windows on in the near future anyway.
There isn't any reason why such a machine couldn't look like the "cube" I suppose, but I'd probably prefer to see something different. The cube had a different design goal and has too much baggage associated with it anyway.
DJMastaWes
Jul 17, 07:15 PM
So I think we may see the entire line get a revamp: mac mini gets faster chips (still Yonah), perhaps same with MB, though that may just get a price drop. MBPs/iMacs get new processors, and we get the new MPs.
All at WWDC?
All at WWDC?
milo
Mar 30, 12:34 PM
That's not true. I always find it annoying when I hear "THE App Store".
Which app store?
If that's not true, then where were you hearing the term "app store" used before apple trademarked it? No question there are multiple stores selling apps now, but if it was a generic term then there should be examples of use before the trademark filing. Example?
Which app store?
If that's not true, then where were you hearing the term "app store" used before apple trademarked it? No question there are multiple stores selling apps now, but if it was a generic term then there should be examples of use before the trademark filing. Example?
dudemac
Mar 23, 06:14 PM
I actually agree. Pull 'em. It may be censorship, but it's dangerous not to.
Freedom has a lot of risk involved. This does nothing more than negates the illegal check points. I don't care what the argument is. This is nothing more than an internal checkpoint that is illegal. If you are old enough to remember the 80's then you will probably recall how the eastern block communists countries were portrayed on TV. And we the good guys would never do things that they were doing "over there"! But alas there is no soviet union so I guess that makes it ok to do it now.
Just remember this safety while a concern can turn in to a prison that no one can get out of. Because the safest position is to have no choice. And without choice you are a slave. So enjoy your servitude.
Freedom has a lot of risk involved. This does nothing more than negates the illegal check points. I don't care what the argument is. This is nothing more than an internal checkpoint that is illegal. If you are old enough to remember the 80's then you will probably recall how the eastern block communists countries were portrayed on TV. And we the good guys would never do things that they were doing "over there"! But alas there is no soviet union so I guess that makes it ok to do it now.
Just remember this safety while a concern can turn in to a prison that no one can get out of. Because the safest position is to have no choice. And without choice you are a slave. So enjoy your servitude.
Butler Trumpet
Oct 12, 03:30 PM
I just checked my digital cable and the title of the show says "Bono's Red Campaign" So yeah I would say so
XArt@justinks.c
Sep 13, 09:01 AM
Apart from the word serach not being on 5GiPod, only the new 5GiPod has it (but seem that this is incorect, proberly some hidden option to enable).
It dose 640x480 h.264 when updated to 1.2 but still need to find out if it dose games as well as the new improved video size.
has the new iPods been givev improved ARM7 or upgraded to ARM9 for games or is it the same and just needs 1.2 for games as well as 640x480 video
It dose 640x480 h.264 when updated to 1.2 but still need to find out if it dose games as well as the new improved video size.
has the new iPods been givev improved ARM7 or upgraded to ARM9 for games or is it the same and just needs 1.2 for games as well as 640x480 video
BRLawyer
Sep 9, 10:12 AM
I don't think that there's any data yet on failure rates and problems with the new Core 2 iMacs...
He is talking about reliability data from at least the last 10 years, Aiden...data you must have no clue about, of course...after all, Macs just started doing Windows, right? :rolleyes:
He is talking about reliability data from at least the last 10 years, Aiden...data you must have no clue about, of course...after all, Macs just started doing Windows, right? :rolleyes:
Squonk
Sep 26, 09:05 AM
I'm with you. As a MVNO, Apple could kick Helio's ass. Maybe they are becoming an MVNO and they're leasing their network time from Cingular? That makes sense, don't it?
Think about it...
.Mac mobile
The cellphone connects to your .Mac mail, your iCal calendar, and your Address Book.
iChat and text messaging would become one and the same. I could use iChat to talk with a friend on his iPhone, and vice versa. The iPhone has a camera, right? Video conference from the train, anyone?
Buy ringtones at the iTunes store, or just use any song in your library as your ringtone, or write your own ringtone in Garageband.
Download your podcasts from anywhere.
(snip)
Yes, this is all conjecture, but it's the only thing that really makes a full-fledged Apple iPhone make sense to me in their overall plan for world domination.
I love the concept! The phone syncing to your .mac account (if you have one) instead of syncing the phone to your Mac directly.
AND... This would then handle the PC users. They could get a .mac account and have access to all these goodness as well.
Sadly, knowing Cingular, and the rest of the network providers, they would charge out the *ss for this capability. I like having the ability with my SE T637 that I surf for free midi files, download them to my mac, connect to the phone via bluetooth and upload the midi's - voila, free ringtones. Sure, some of them are cheesy, but I'm not paying $1 per ringtone.
I'm already (over)paying for a .mac account. I really don't want to pay more money again for a portal between my cellular account and the .mac account. Sadly, that is probably what the reality would be and probably rightfully so - technology isn't free.
Think about it...
.Mac mobile
The cellphone connects to your .Mac mail, your iCal calendar, and your Address Book.
iChat and text messaging would become one and the same. I could use iChat to talk with a friend on his iPhone, and vice versa. The iPhone has a camera, right? Video conference from the train, anyone?
Buy ringtones at the iTunes store, or just use any song in your library as your ringtone, or write your own ringtone in Garageband.
Download your podcasts from anywhere.
(snip)
Yes, this is all conjecture, but it's the only thing that really makes a full-fledged Apple iPhone make sense to me in their overall plan for world domination.
I love the concept! The phone syncing to your .mac account (if you have one) instead of syncing the phone to your Mac directly.
AND... This would then handle the PC users. They could get a .mac account and have access to all these goodness as well.
Sadly, knowing Cingular, and the rest of the network providers, they would charge out the *ss for this capability. I like having the ability with my SE T637 that I surf for free midi files, download them to my mac, connect to the phone via bluetooth and upload the midi's - voila, free ringtones. Sure, some of them are cheesy, but I'm not paying $1 per ringtone.
I'm already (over)paying for a .mac account. I really don't want to pay more money again for a portal between my cellular account and the .mac account. Sadly, that is probably what the reality would be and probably rightfully so - technology isn't free.
milo
Sep 5, 05:48 PM
In order to receive the movie from the movie store it would stream to the "box".Having a HD would allow you to save the movie.
AND!!
Later in your room you could stream it from the "Box" to your computer :-)
That makes no sense. Why wouldn't it just download straight to the computer in the first place? That's where it's stored, that's where it's streamed from. You just added an extra step and made it that much more complicated.
AND!!
Later in your room you could stream it from the "Box" to your computer :-)
That makes no sense. Why wouldn't it just download straight to the computer in the first place? That's where it's stored, that's where it's streamed from. You just added an extra step and made it that much more complicated.
HecubusPro
Sep 4, 07:56 PM
I'm confused. Movie downloads for $10?!? What happened to the whole "Jobs is hammered by the movie industry into movie rentals only" ?!? This CANNOT possibly mean renting a movie for $10!! :eek:
My bet is that it's low-res/iPod quality video for purchase. Apple/Steve Jobs have yet to get into the home theater business. So far it's been the mobile entertainment business only. Movie rentals (or purchase for that matter) at home theater quality is a whole other enchilada.
Watching 320x240 movie on my 42" plasma would sort of suck and not be competitive as others have metioned. Would I buy a $10 movie to watch on my iPod? mmm....probably a few to keep me entertained on the treadmill and my son entertained on roadtrips.
Rumors are rampant, but they do bring up a good point, as you do here. Who would want to watch a movie on an iPod? (Well, actually, I have and I do, but that's beside the point.)
The Appleinsider rumor at least makes sense from an itunes/tv/movie purchase standpoint. Renting would be sort of a PITA. Who would want to download a good quality movie, often taking hours or days, unless you have a lot of people torrenting at the same time, just to have it accessible for a week or so? Not me.
This will be a movie purchase service. You buy the movie, DL it from itunes, then do what you want to with it. Watch it on you computer, rip it to DVD and watch it on your TV, run it through an air tunes like device so you don't have to rip it if you don't want.
It sounds pretty interesting to me. We'll see when it happens. Regardless, the quality is going to have be pretty good for people to want to watch them on their TV's. Offering 700mb .avi rips just won't cut it.
My bet is that it's low-res/iPod quality video for purchase. Apple/Steve Jobs have yet to get into the home theater business. So far it's been the mobile entertainment business only. Movie rentals (or purchase for that matter) at home theater quality is a whole other enchilada.
Watching 320x240 movie on my 42" plasma would sort of suck and not be competitive as others have metioned. Would I buy a $10 movie to watch on my iPod? mmm....probably a few to keep me entertained on the treadmill and my son entertained on roadtrips.
Rumors are rampant, but they do bring up a good point, as you do here. Who would want to watch a movie on an iPod? (Well, actually, I have and I do, but that's beside the point.)
The Appleinsider rumor at least makes sense from an itunes/tv/movie purchase standpoint. Renting would be sort of a PITA. Who would want to download a good quality movie, often taking hours or days, unless you have a lot of people torrenting at the same time, just to have it accessible for a week or so? Not me.
This will be a movie purchase service. You buy the movie, DL it from itunes, then do what you want to with it. Watch it on you computer, rip it to DVD and watch it on your TV, run it through an air tunes like device so you don't have to rip it if you don't want.
It sounds pretty interesting to me. We'll see when it happens. Regardless, the quality is going to have be pretty good for people to want to watch them on their TV's. Offering 700mb .avi rips just won't cut it.
princealfie
Oct 27, 12:26 PM
Bravo... get rid of those guys... good environmentalists don't commit aggression on others.
0 comments:
Post a Comment