ciTiger
May 2, 06:06 PM
That's a very nice feature! Too bad it won't work for apps not from the app store...
TerryJ
Jul 14, 11:53 AM
So, easily seen. The employ the exact same codecs.
They CAN use the same codecs. The problem on the BD side is that... all of the Sony discs (and other studios so far) use MPEG2 for video and standard DD or PCM for audio.
Also, the current generation BD decks (Samsung and forthcoming Sony deck) cannot decode DD+, Dolby TruHD audio formats. They can only do same DD and DTS as old DVDs. HD DVD decks can decode DD+ and Dolby TruHD (TruHD can only be decoded to stereo in the current decks, though, unfortunately.) Also, the software needs to have audio encoded in DD+ and Dolby TruHD. All HD DVD discs have at least DD+. No BDs have DD+.
If Sony and other studios started using VC-1 or H.264 for video, things might look better for BD... but they aren't using it. I don't think there are any plans for Sony to author discs using VC-1... ever. It's all MPEG2 as far as I have heard.
[Warner Home Video has already released HD DVDs in VC-1... so it would stand to reason they'd just use the same encode for their BDs, but I guess we'll see if that is true.]
That's the trick. Talking pure specs, on paper, before anything was ever released, and BD seemed like it should be equal or better. Reality... I mean actual implementation, of course, is a different matter.
-Terry
They CAN use the same codecs. The problem on the BD side is that... all of the Sony discs (and other studios so far) use MPEG2 for video and standard DD or PCM for audio.
Also, the current generation BD decks (Samsung and forthcoming Sony deck) cannot decode DD+, Dolby TruHD audio formats. They can only do same DD and DTS as old DVDs. HD DVD decks can decode DD+ and Dolby TruHD (TruHD can only be decoded to stereo in the current decks, though, unfortunately.) Also, the software needs to have audio encoded in DD+ and Dolby TruHD. All HD DVD discs have at least DD+. No BDs have DD+.
If Sony and other studios started using VC-1 or H.264 for video, things might look better for BD... but they aren't using it. I don't think there are any plans for Sony to author discs using VC-1... ever. It's all MPEG2 as far as I have heard.
[Warner Home Video has already released HD DVDs in VC-1... so it would stand to reason they'd just use the same encode for their BDs, but I guess we'll see if that is true.]
That's the trick. Talking pure specs, on paper, before anything was ever released, and BD seemed like it should be equal or better. Reality... I mean actual implementation, of course, is a different matter.
-Terry
baryon
Jun 23, 07:08 AM
Okay, but I cannot live without full featured Photoshop and Final Cut Pro. Also, I can't live without extensions like Perian, applications like Transmission, Cyberduck and VLC. I don't see how those would make it into iOS, through Apple's approval system. I need custom built applications and less "official" stuff as well. I'm fine with my iPod Touch not letting me run everything I run on my Mac, but I need my computer to be able to do EVERYTHING. I'm sure Apple loves iOS and wants to deploy it everywhere they can, but I'm also sure they don't want to stop with OS X. Now Steve has said recently that PCs are like trucks and that they'll still be around but only for people who really need them. If that's the case, PCs are no longer going to be consumer devices, so they won't have the good support they have now (new features regularly, updates, etc...) So we're going to be left behind if we want to keep using a computer for what a computer really is: everything.
I love the idea of iOS but that's because it makes sense that an iPhone or iPad cannot run a conventional OS. A real desktop computer with a touch screen would have many problems such as precision. Also I can't see iOS adopting custom built drivers and applications for custom hardware and stuff like that. Yes iOS rocks for most people who only use a computer for Facebook, MSN and browsing the web. But I feel like that's totally not me, and I don't want to get left out of all the innovation. We're seeing Apple focus more and more on iOS and leaving OS X behind a bit could be one of their next moves. I don't want OS X to end up like Final Cut Pro: rarely updated and with an interface that comes from the past millennium.
There's no indication that this would be the case, but I'm sure it would work for Apple and most people.
I love the idea of iOS but that's because it makes sense that an iPhone or iPad cannot run a conventional OS. A real desktop computer with a touch screen would have many problems such as precision. Also I can't see iOS adopting custom built drivers and applications for custom hardware and stuff like that. Yes iOS rocks for most people who only use a computer for Facebook, MSN and browsing the web. But I feel like that's totally not me, and I don't want to get left out of all the innovation. We're seeing Apple focus more and more on iOS and leaving OS X behind a bit could be one of their next moves. I don't want OS X to end up like Final Cut Pro: rarely updated and with an interface that comes from the past millennium.
There's no indication that this would be the case, but I'm sure it would work for Apple and most people.
BenRoethig
Nov 27, 04:58 PM
Do you think such a display would sport a pwning! S-IPS panel as the other Cinema Displays, or would it be throttled down to a Dell style S-PVA panel?:D
I willy, willy hope for:
17" (1680x1050), S-IPS panel, 12 ms, DVI, 600:1, iSight, 400 cd/m2, alu. case, 2xUSB 2.0, 2xFireWire400 - $399.
20" (1920x1200), S-IPS panel, 12 ms, DVI, 700:1, iSight, 500 cd/m2, alu. case, 2xUSB 2.0, 2xFireWire400 - $699.
24" (some res. I can't remember), S-IPS panel, 12 ms, DVI, 700:1, iSight, 500 cd/m2, alu. case, 2xUSB 2.0, 1xFireWire400, 1xFireWire 800 - $999.
30" (some res. I can't remember), S-IPS panel, 12 ms, DVI, 700:1, iSight, 500 cd/m2, alu. case, 2xUSB 2.0, 1xFireWire400, 1xFireWire 800 - $1999.
:D :D :D
Only the most hardcore Mac user would pay those prices. The 17" and 20" models are twice the price of their rivals.
I willy, willy hope for:
17" (1680x1050), S-IPS panel, 12 ms, DVI, 600:1, iSight, 400 cd/m2, alu. case, 2xUSB 2.0, 2xFireWire400 - $399.
20" (1920x1200), S-IPS panel, 12 ms, DVI, 700:1, iSight, 500 cd/m2, alu. case, 2xUSB 2.0, 2xFireWire400 - $699.
24" (some res. I can't remember), S-IPS panel, 12 ms, DVI, 700:1, iSight, 500 cd/m2, alu. case, 2xUSB 2.0, 1xFireWire400, 1xFireWire 800 - $999.
30" (some res. I can't remember), S-IPS panel, 12 ms, DVI, 700:1, iSight, 500 cd/m2, alu. case, 2xUSB 2.0, 1xFireWire400, 1xFireWire 800 - $1999.
:D :D :D
Only the most hardcore Mac user would pay those prices. The 17" and 20" models are twice the price of their rivals.
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 29, 12:52 PM
I'm thinking something similar. 3.5x8.5x8.5. Basically a larger MacMini with a 3.5" hard drive, dedicated graphics, and video chipset similar to the Miglia TV Max.
Exactly!!!
I media center like this would sell like crazy... small, simple and elegant. Just imagine how many switchers you would get at the same time.
Exactly!!!
I media center like this would sell like crazy... small, simple and elegant. Just imagine how many switchers you would get at the same time.
treblah
Jul 19, 08:25 PM
Leopard will ROCK, is a lot faster then Tiger and has a lot of new functionality. They are not even going to show all the stuff under the hood at the presentation.
Source? :rolleyes:
Source? :rolleyes:
chinesechikn
Mar 26, 08:19 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; 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)
bigpics
Mar 24, 12:57 PM
Dude, I'm sorry to inform you that what you're saying is an outright lie, and there are guys from the Lossless Compression Clan, called "Apple Lossless codec", "FLAC", and "APE", standing with heavy cluebats in their hands, ready to perform a painful reality sync on anyone thinking compression ALWAYS degrades quality.
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
thefunkymunky
Aug 7, 08:12 AM
Man, thats not enough.... we need dual Nvidia mobile GPUs with SLI...just like Alienware has! (Each with 512MB, for a total of 1GB video ram!)
Imagine trying to keep those puppies cool.
Imagine trying to keep those puppies cool.
Lord Blackadder
Feb 22, 07:28 PM
Why do Americans harbor hate for diesel? I'm not very familiar with the differences between the fuels, other than gasoline is more refined.
In brief:
After the A5 coupe, Audi
2010 Audi A5 Sportback 3.0 TDI
Ibis White 2010 Audi A5 2.0T
2010 Audi A5 Sportback images
2010 AUDI A5 SPORTBACK 2.0 TDI
2010 Audi A5 Sportback first
White 2010 Audi A5
2010 Audi A5 Sportback 2.0
2010 Audi A5 Sportback
In brief:
~Shard~
Sep 6, 11:23 PM
...but we know that the mini-tower is inevitable....:)
Well of course, but that still doesn't excuse his hypocritical post. :D :cool:
Well of course, but that still doesn't excuse his hypocritical post. :D :cool:
macgeek18
Feb 21, 07:46 PM
Not concerned with the impending refresh? Or do you plan to return and rebuy post-refresh?
I bought an 08 MacBook Aluminum. So No i'm not concerned or care about the upcoming refresh.
I bought an 08 MacBook Aluminum. So No i'm not concerned or care about the upcoming refresh.
iJohnHenry
Apr 17, 08:56 AM
Ah, great to see another person in their 30s who still very much enjoys the freedom and pleasures of the road. :D
"in comparison".
I'm 71. ;)
"in comparison".
I'm 71. ;)
inkswamp
Aug 6, 09:53 PM
Blah, it should read "Mac OS X Leopard, introducing Panter 2.0"
No offense, my friend, but I'm glad Apple isn't taking any marketing cues from readers of MacRumors. ;)
No offense, my friend, but I'm glad Apple isn't taking any marketing cues from readers of MacRumors. ;)
A.Fairhead
Jul 18, 04:11 AM
I hope the rental thing is true--I don't want to own. I'm not with Steve Jobs on this one (assuming the rumors are true that he opposes rentals).
Owning music downloads fits my habits/needs. Owning movie downloads does NOT. The vast majority of movies I watch I never see again. And I don't want to store big movie files long-term. And I don't want to pay a higher price! Lower the price and make it short-term. I like that better.
For the few movies/shows I'd want to own, I want the discs (Blu-Ray preferred :) ) and the ability to take them to a friends' house.
Also, if it's a rental model, I can be more forgiving on quality. They'd have to be better than iPod 320x240 (except, obviously, when played ON an iPod), but if they're a little bit short of DVD quality, I'd still be bored enough to seek instant gratification and rent some. The price would have to be right, of course. Netflix rentals cost about $2.50 each on my plan. For slightly-sub-DVD quality and near-instant delivery, I'd pay maybe $2. For FULL DVD quality I'd certainly be willing to match Netlflix's price, or even pay a little more (for iTunes convenience/speed).
I agree; I watch movies a lot more than I buy movies. When I go to the cinema, I pay to watch the film, not to own it. Most people do this - owning films is something of an impulse post-viewing, in my experience. If iTMS can provide a rental service, that's great. If they end up providing purchases too, then, that's great too. Apple will be able to target 'viewing' markets as well as 'purchase' markets, if the difference is easy enough to see there.
I guess my thoughts are to not rule out rentals - I'm sure many of you work with films like I've just described :p
Owning music downloads fits my habits/needs. Owning movie downloads does NOT. The vast majority of movies I watch I never see again. And I don't want to store big movie files long-term. And I don't want to pay a higher price! Lower the price and make it short-term. I like that better.
For the few movies/shows I'd want to own, I want the discs (Blu-Ray preferred :) ) and the ability to take them to a friends' house.
Also, if it's a rental model, I can be more forgiving on quality. They'd have to be better than iPod 320x240 (except, obviously, when played ON an iPod), but if they're a little bit short of DVD quality, I'd still be bored enough to seek instant gratification and rent some. The price would have to be right, of course. Netflix rentals cost about $2.50 each on my plan. For slightly-sub-DVD quality and near-instant delivery, I'd pay maybe $2. For FULL DVD quality I'd certainly be willing to match Netlflix's price, or even pay a little more (for iTunes convenience/speed).
I agree; I watch movies a lot more than I buy movies. When I go to the cinema, I pay to watch the film, not to own it. Most people do this - owning films is something of an impulse post-viewing, in my experience. If iTMS can provide a rental service, that's great. If they end up providing purchases too, then, that's great too. Apple will be able to target 'viewing' markets as well as 'purchase' markets, if the difference is easy enough to see there.
I guess my thoughts are to not rule out rentals - I'm sure many of you work with films like I've just described :p
Multimedia
Nov 16, 01:43 PM
The bandwidth of DIMMs doesn't really change with their capacity (assuming their timings are the same). It is the number of active channels that gives you the increase in memory bandwidth.
I believe the memory controller will interleave the lower 512MB (since you have a branch populated with 512MB) of each DIMM resulting in full bandwidth access (4 channels) to that range of memory (512 x 4 = 2 GB) with the remainder of the 2 GB DIMMs (the remaining 3 GB) only getting the benefit of a single branch (two channels).
Personally I wouldn't purchase 2 GB DIMMs given their extra cost in relation to two 1 GB DIMMs... in other words use more of the memory slots you have ... unless you really want to leave room to add more RAM later.In this class of RAM the 2GB sticks are now less than two 1GB sticks. So I don't see why buying only 1GB sticks would be advisable any more.
AV was saying that the 512 sticks run half as fast as 1 and 2GB sticks. Is that not correct or did I misunderstand what he meant?
...you dont need 8 cores?? see the 4 cores Mac pro goes down in retail price.It already is the lowest.An unlikely scenario. Don't expect any price drops on mac pros for a long time after clovertown chips are in them.I agree with you 100%. Apple Mac Pro is already the lowest priced Dual Woodcrest product on the market. Dell costs a lot more. So why would you expect Clovertown to impact the price of the existing line that is already at a rock bottom price Alpinism? :confused: :eek:Thats the beauty of going Intel, you dont drop the price ? DELL, HP and the other competitors WILL.Apple started lowest and none of the other vendors followed so your premise is not turning out to be true in the real world. :rolleyes:
To rip DVD's. Why add additional, unnecessary steps?I don't rip DVDs. I rip DVD Images created with Toast from EyeTV broadcast recordings. So it's not an extra step. If you mean why not export direct to mp4 from EyeTV the answer is because they look like C**p. You want a really good looking mp4 file, Handbrake is the only way to go IMHO. And the maximum quality Toast encode to DVD image is also the best way to provide Handbrake with a superior master to rip from.
Anyway that's why what I use is ready for an 8-core Mac Pro now.
I believe the memory controller will interleave the lower 512MB (since you have a branch populated with 512MB) of each DIMM resulting in full bandwidth access (4 channels) to that range of memory (512 x 4 = 2 GB) with the remainder of the 2 GB DIMMs (the remaining 3 GB) only getting the benefit of a single branch (two channels).
Personally I wouldn't purchase 2 GB DIMMs given their extra cost in relation to two 1 GB DIMMs... in other words use more of the memory slots you have ... unless you really want to leave room to add more RAM later.In this class of RAM the 2GB sticks are now less than two 1GB sticks. So I don't see why buying only 1GB sticks would be advisable any more.
AV was saying that the 512 sticks run half as fast as 1 and 2GB sticks. Is that not correct or did I misunderstand what he meant?
...you dont need 8 cores?? see the 4 cores Mac pro goes down in retail price.It already is the lowest.An unlikely scenario. Don't expect any price drops on mac pros for a long time after clovertown chips are in them.I agree with you 100%. Apple Mac Pro is already the lowest priced Dual Woodcrest product on the market. Dell costs a lot more. So why would you expect Clovertown to impact the price of the existing line that is already at a rock bottom price Alpinism? :confused: :eek:Thats the beauty of going Intel, you dont drop the price ? DELL, HP and the other competitors WILL.Apple started lowest and none of the other vendors followed so your premise is not turning out to be true in the real world. :rolleyes:
To rip DVD's. Why add additional, unnecessary steps?I don't rip DVDs. I rip DVD Images created with Toast from EyeTV broadcast recordings. So it's not an extra step. If you mean why not export direct to mp4 from EyeTV the answer is because they look like C**p. You want a really good looking mp4 file, Handbrake is the only way to go IMHO. And the maximum quality Toast encode to DVD image is also the best way to provide Handbrake with a superior master to rip from.
Anyway that's why what I use is ready for an 8-core Mac Pro now.
arn
Sep 1, 11:50 AM
How reliable is MacOSXrumors?
In the past they haven't been particularly notable, but the Leopard reports seemed real, and so this one is given more credence. Obviously, we'll know more on Sept 12th. :)
arn
In the past they haven't been particularly notable, but the Leopard reports seemed real, and so this one is given more credence. Obviously, we'll know more on Sept 12th. :)
arn
narfed
Aug 16, 10:11 PM
I may be talking out of my ass here, but my understanding is that Sirius works via satellites in geosynchronous orbit, which means they are way way up there, "locked in" above a specific spot on the ground (they zip around the Earth once every 24 hours, which keeps them above the equatorial spot that is also zipping around a full rotation in 24 hours). It would be physically impossible for a receiver on the "other" side of the world to see a satellite above central America. Maybe Sirius has several satellites, but still if they only officially serve the US market I can't see these venturing any further East/West than the US Atlantic and Pacific coasts (maybe a little out into the Pacific to serve Hawaii better). I seriously doubt that they'd have a satellite where someone in, say, Bombay could hook in.
The other issue that comes up is angle of ascention. While it's a nice just-off-vertical and tilted south for the US customers, once you start moving east/west (or to the extreme north/south) you start making it a far more horizontal angle. Which means, living in an area without a clear horizon you will get poor results. Moreover, the smaller the angle of ascention, the more atmosphere the signal has to go through, causing connection issues.
I could be wrong. Maybe Sirius foolishly wastes its money providing satellite service to the other half of the world just for the small market of folks who are adventurous enough to open a US account just to sign on. Or, maybe they market world-wide service as a key feature for traveling businessmen (possible, but that makes me even less likely to subscribe!) Doesn't seem likely though.
He's talking about streaming over the Internet, not picking up a satellite signal.
The other issue that comes up is angle of ascention. While it's a nice just-off-vertical and tilted south for the US customers, once you start moving east/west (or to the extreme north/south) you start making it a far more horizontal angle. Which means, living in an area without a clear horizon you will get poor results. Moreover, the smaller the angle of ascention, the more atmosphere the signal has to go through, causing connection issues.
I could be wrong. Maybe Sirius foolishly wastes its money providing satellite service to the other half of the world just for the small market of folks who are adventurous enough to open a US account just to sign on. Or, maybe they market world-wide service as a key feature for traveling businessmen (possible, but that makes me even less likely to subscribe!) Doesn't seem likely though.
He's talking about streaming over the Internet, not picking up a satellite signal.
steadysignal
May 2, 07:35 PM
sounds kookie.
Mlrollin91
Mar 25, 04:14 PM
iPad 1 does support HDMI out, just not the video mirroring. This means that an app must support the standard "video out" mechanism to be used with the HDMI adapter with iPad 1.
What I would like to see is this same thing using AirPlay :)
I knew it didnt support mirroring but thats my bad. I have an iPad 2, but i was told at Apple the hdmi cable won't work with iPad 1. Guess they should read up a little bit.
What I would like to see is this same thing using AirPlay :)
I knew it didnt support mirroring but thats my bad. I have an iPad 2, but i was told at Apple the hdmi cable won't work with iPad 1. Guess they should read up a little bit.
/user/me
Mar 23, 01:38 PM
No, no one is forced to do anything. Apple is more extreme with what they will and will not allow. Others follow suit b/c they know Apple changes the world. Android market allows practically everything.
As far as I know there's three rules that have to be followed when designing an iOS app.
1. No porn
2. no flash
3. it has to be approved.
I really dont' think that's too much to ask.... especially since Apple has complete ownership of the app store. Nbody's forcing you to get their procuts... If you dont' like it, buy an Android phone.
As far as I know there's three rules that have to be followed when designing an iOS app.
1. No porn
2. no flash
3. it has to be approved.
I really dont' think that's too much to ask.... especially since Apple has complete ownership of the app store. Nbody's forcing you to get their procuts... If you dont' like it, buy an Android phone.
aznguyen316
Sep 14, 10:40 PM
The BB I got my Griffin case from also had a couple other griffin gloss ones of hard plastic in bright blue, black - although it was more smoke/gray, and I forget, one other color. You can check stock on bestbuy.com search for ipod 4th and it'll come up with a few cases and etc for it. then do check store inventory. good luck!
spicyapple
Nov 29, 07:11 AM
I can't believe that MS still holds J. Allard as a big ruling leader
There is a 40 minute podcast on Inside Home Recording that has J.Allard singing the praises of the Zune to a group of music/podcast/executive types at the 2006 Music Tech Summit. Great listening, and he explains the features of Zune media player, plus reasons for whoring with Universal Music.
podcast (http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=79061694&s=143455&i=12059569) < takes you to iTunes podcast page.
luv ya bunches! xoxoxo
There is a 40 minute podcast on Inside Home Recording that has J.Allard singing the praises of the Zune to a group of music/podcast/executive types at the 2006 Music Tech Summit. Great listening, and he explains the features of Zune media player, plus reasons for whoring with Universal Music.
podcast (http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=79061694&s=143455&i=12059569) < takes you to iTunes podcast page.
luv ya bunches! xoxoxo
Danger! Will
Feb 6, 09:07 AM
It replaced my 2001 SAAB 9-5 Aero.
0 comments:
Post a Comment