![amos lee mission bell. [Album] Mission Bell - Amos](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj5lmMPcGgrmrsG2qCOmGyt360xNmIqC5LwXZtouZCPj2WYfZAlzKyzGTdIgYESp5GhzmAq2KtcmvtITpwlsW73mWyIMEzcHtiso9yY7UB7ZYDXDrlgpy4cH557GZLTjAGBRTWdn0NS9qo8/s1600/%25255BAlbum%25255D+Mission+Bell+-+Amos+Lee.gif "[Album] Mission Bell - Amos")
MacRumors
Apr 22, 01:33 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/22/more-details-on-apples-cloud-based-music-locker/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2010/07/02/114402-itunes_devices.jpg
Apple seems (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/21/apples-cloud-based-music-service-ready-to-go/) to be getting ready to launch their cloud-based digital music "locker" service that has been rumored for many months. But contrary to an earlier Reuters report, All Things D (http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/20110421/one-difference-between-apples-music-locker-and-amazons-label-deals/) has heard that Apple has already come to terms with two of the four major record labels about the service, and that Apple's Eddy Cue will be in New York tomorrow to try to finalize the remaining deals.
The negotiating of these deals is in contrast to Amazon's music storage service (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/29/amazon-launches-cloud-based-storage-service-and-music-player/) which notably launched last month without any deals in place -- a fact that the record labels were not very happy about (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/29/us-amazon-idUSTRE72S13H20110329). Apple is said to have been "very aggressive and thoughtful about it" and "It feels like they want to go pretty soon", according to an unnamed music executive. All Things D also provides some details about how the service might work from Apple:The industry executives I've talked to haven't seen Apple’s service themselves, but say they're aware of the broad strokes. The idea is that Apple will let users store songs they’ve purchased from its iTunes store, as well as others songs stored on their hard drives, and listen to them on multiple devices.All Things D points out that having official licenses can allow Apple to store a single master copy of a song rather than storing individual copies for every user. Amazon's original argument against needing the licenses was that their service was the same as any upload storage service. This meant that users needed to upload copies of their old music to be able to stream them. With the proper deals, Apple could avoid the need to upload individual copies and simply allow users to stream off of the single master copy. This could save on significant upload time for the user and storage requirements for Apple.
Article Link: More Details on Apple's Cloud-based Music Locker (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/22/more-details-on-apples-cloud-based-music-locker/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2010/07/02/114402-itunes_devices.jpg
Apple seems (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/21/apples-cloud-based-music-service-ready-to-go/) to be getting ready to launch their cloud-based digital music "locker" service that has been rumored for many months. But contrary to an earlier Reuters report, All Things D (http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/20110421/one-difference-between-apples-music-locker-and-amazons-label-deals/) has heard that Apple has already come to terms with two of the four major record labels about the service, and that Apple's Eddy Cue will be in New York tomorrow to try to finalize the remaining deals.
The negotiating of these deals is in contrast to Amazon's music storage service (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/29/amazon-launches-cloud-based-storage-service-and-music-player/) which notably launched last month without any deals in place -- a fact that the record labels were not very happy about (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/29/us-amazon-idUSTRE72S13H20110329). Apple is said to have been "very aggressive and thoughtful about it" and "It feels like they want to go pretty soon", according to an unnamed music executive. All Things D also provides some details about how the service might work from Apple:The industry executives I've talked to haven't seen Apple’s service themselves, but say they're aware of the broad strokes. The idea is that Apple will let users store songs they’ve purchased from its iTunes store, as well as others songs stored on their hard drives, and listen to them on multiple devices.All Things D points out that having official licenses can allow Apple to store a single master copy of a song rather than storing individual copies for every user. Amazon's original argument against needing the licenses was that their service was the same as any upload storage service. This meant that users needed to upload copies of their old music to be able to stream them. With the proper deals, Apple could avoid the need to upload individual copies and simply allow users to stream off of the single master copy. This could save on significant upload time for the user and storage requirements for Apple.
Article Link: More Details on Apple's Cloud-based Music Locker (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/22/more-details-on-apples-cloud-based-music-locker/)
xlii
Apr 14, 11:52 AM
Now that it's part of the platform Apple has no excuse for not including it. However, it wouldn't surprise me to see a MBP with this platform that still only has 2.0 connectors.
Well, it would surprise me. USB3.0 and Thunderbolt will come included in Intel''s Ivy Bridge. Apple would have to add more hardware and disable USB 3.0 to make it 2.0 only. Makes zero cents.
Well, it would surprise me. USB3.0 and Thunderbolt will come included in Intel''s Ivy Bridge. Apple would have to add more hardware and disable USB 3.0 to make it 2.0 only. Makes zero cents.
muncyweb
Mar 23, 06:45 PM
I started doing like this guy (http://www.speedtrapahead.org) a while back when a revenue officer started hiding in a church parking lot near my house. As soon as the "Speed Trap Ahead" sign went up in my yard, what-d-ya-know!...no more sirens! If the people will make this their responsibility, it will no longer be as profitable for them.
dondark
Sep 14, 12:01 AM
I dont like American Tele company, they only have ugly phone to offer. I like those beautiful phones like Sharp, SonyErison or Samsung
hehe299792458
Apr 11, 07:51 AM
I am confused. If your Mac is networked, why not just share your music folder on your network so any computer etc can play the music from the shared music folder on the mac?
I think it's a matter of push streaming vs pull
I think it's a matter of push streaming vs pull
swindmill
Sep 13, 09:59 PM
I really can't imagine Apple releasing a phone that scratches as easily as an iPod. And, as someone else pointed out, a click-wheel at the bottom would make the thing easy to drop...it would require two hands to use the wheel. I hope this rumor is coming closer to reality, but I can't imagine that rendition is anywhere near what the phone will look like.
dagger01
Mar 29, 12:40 PM
"IDC Projects Windows Phone to Top iPhone in Market Share by 2015"
ROFLMFAO...hahahahahahahahaha....wait....wait.....hahahahahahahaha
And donkey's might fly out of my butt. To say that MS would overtake anything in the smartphone market at this point is utterly ludicrous. I want some of what that IDC person is smoking!
ROFLMFAO...hahahahahahahahaha....wait....wait.....hahahahahahahaha
And donkey's might fly out of my butt. To say that MS would overtake anything in the smartphone market at this point is utterly ludicrous. I want some of what that IDC person is smoking!
citizenzen
Apr 21, 09:21 PM
Dear government, at somepoint sinss the 18th centory, we've become completely incapable of taking care of owwselves.
There's actually a good reason for that. Chick it out (http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blfarm4.htm) ...
1850
Total population: 23,191,786
Farm population: 11,680,000 (estimated)
Farmers made up 64% of labor force
Number of farms: 1,449,000
Average acres: 203
1860 Farmers made up 53% of labor force
1870 Farmers made up 49% of labor force
1880 Farmers made up 49% of labor force
1890 Farmers made up 43% of labor force
1890 Farmers made up 43% of labor force
1900 Farmers made up 38% of labor force
1910 Farmers made up 31% of labor force
1920 Farmers made up 27% of labor force
1930 Farmers made up 21% of labor force
1940 Farmers made up 18% of labor force
1950 Farmers made up 12% of labor force
1960 Farmers made up 8.3% of labor force
1970 Farmers made up 4.6% of labor force
1980 Farmers made up 3.4% of labor force
1990 Farmers made up 2.6% of labor force
That trend might explain a few things.
There's actually a good reason for that. Chick it out (http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blfarm4.htm) ...
1850
Total population: 23,191,786
Farm population: 11,680,000 (estimated)
Farmers made up 64% of labor force
Number of farms: 1,449,000
Average acres: 203
1860 Farmers made up 53% of labor force
1870 Farmers made up 49% of labor force
1880 Farmers made up 49% of labor force
1890 Farmers made up 43% of labor force
1890 Farmers made up 43% of labor force
1900 Farmers made up 38% of labor force
1910 Farmers made up 31% of labor force
1920 Farmers made up 27% of labor force
1930 Farmers made up 21% of labor force
1940 Farmers made up 18% of labor force
1950 Farmers made up 12% of labor force
1960 Farmers made up 8.3% of labor force
1970 Farmers made up 4.6% of labor force
1980 Farmers made up 3.4% of labor force
1990 Farmers made up 2.6% of labor force
That trend might explain a few things.
dukebound85
Apr 11, 03:43 PM
To some extent, sure.
The big difference is that in the UK you can get cars which do 55 miles per US gallon, one that does that - the �17,345 1.6 Econetic Ford Focus does nearly 62 miles per US gallon.
And that car is made by a US company.
wtf, my bike gets in the low 40s! and it weighs 4xxlbs!
The big difference is that in the UK you can get cars which do 55 miles per US gallon, one that does that - the �17,345 1.6 Econetic Ford Focus does nearly 62 miles per US gallon.
And that car is made by a US company.
wtf, my bike gets in the low 40s! and it weighs 4xxlbs!
SBacklin
Apr 22, 09:31 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.
There is the thing about having to carry around multiple devices when one (assuming you have an iPhone) will do it all just as well.
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.
There is the thing about having to carry around multiple devices when one (assuming you have an iPhone) will do it all just as well.
MattSepeta
Apr 18, 03:37 PM
The very fact that people think they "deserve" vacation days is mind-boggling. Why should you "Deserve" to get paid a single dime you did not earn?
I work about 60% self-employed free lance, and 40% at my old "day job". Guess what. Neither one offers me "vacation days". Am I miserable? Hardly!
If I want a vacation day, I simply do not work. That also means I do not get paid. It would seem mighty pretentious of me to be expect pay for work not done.
If you want a job with more vacation days, FIND ONE! no one owes you a darn thing, certainly not pay for days off.
I work about 60% self-employed free lance, and 40% at my old "day job". Guess what. Neither one offers me "vacation days". Am I miserable? Hardly!
If I want a vacation day, I simply do not work. That also means I do not get paid. It would seem mighty pretentious of me to be expect pay for work not done.
If you want a job with more vacation days, FIND ONE! no one owes you a darn thing, certainly not pay for days off.
Number 41
Mar 23, 05:20 PM
Don't get me wrong, MAD is a very great organization, but kids aren't supposed to drink at all.
Don't be kind -- MADD is a prohibitionist organization that has moved so far away from it's original mission that even the founder no longer has anything to do with it. They've turned into a bunch of loonies who are constantly pushing to stay relevant by crusading against the legal right to drink in this country.
They've brought the per se intoxication level down to .08, and they're continuing for it to be lower.
Don't be kind -- MADD is a prohibitionist organization that has moved so far away from it's original mission that even the founder no longer has anything to do with it. They've turned into a bunch of loonies who are constantly pushing to stay relevant by crusading against the legal right to drink in this country.
They've brought the per se intoxication level down to .08, and they're continuing for it to be lower.
jz1492
Nov 13, 04:09 PM
The difference is that Apple can veto the very concept of the app, after the fact. E.g.: google voice clients, podcast receivers, etc. (the list of examples is quite long). There's a difference between requiring a late tweak and vetoing the core functionality of the app.
I agree with that. ;)
Yet, that is not the case this time, or I'd say, for the majority of rejections. Apple most of the time allows you to make the necessary changes, as odd as they may seem.
I agree with that. ;)
Yet, that is not the case this time, or I'd say, for the majority of rejections. Apple most of the time allows you to make the necessary changes, as odd as they may seem.
wovel
Apr 19, 09:21 AM
Way to bite the hand that feeds you, Steve. What an idiot. Production of Samsung Galaxy S handsets was brought to a crawl last year because of display shortages -shortages caused by tring to satify (oamong other things) Jobs' insatiable appetite for touch-sensitive screens.
Jobs should be kissing Samsung's a__, not suing it.
I suppose it's too much to hope Sammy would cut them off as a customer until this blows over. Of course, that wouldn't be in their best interests.
Why do so many people get this analogy backwards? If Samsung sued their second largest customer or say copied the design of your second largest customer, that would be biting the hand that feeds you.
There are other manufacturers, Samsung cannot replace Apple.
Jobs should be kissing Samsung's a__, not suing it.
I suppose it's too much to hope Sammy would cut them off as a customer until this blows over. Of course, that wouldn't be in their best interests.
Why do so many people get this analogy backwards? If Samsung sued their second largest customer or say copied the design of your second largest customer, that would be biting the hand that feeds you.
There are other manufacturers, Samsung cannot replace Apple.
Brandon Sharitt
Sep 26, 07:06 AM
I won't be in the market for a new phone until late next year, around August or so. Hopefully by then Cingular's exclusiveness will be over, although I'm not sure who my next carrier will be, Cingular or T-mobile.
Ingot
Mar 22, 03:11 PM
Balls! I just bought a new 27in iMac like 3-4 weeks ago! Oh well, I have been wanting replace my PC with a mac for like over a year, and I love it.
I agree! I love my ibeast fully loaded except for only 8 gb of ram. Sandy bridge will blow it out of the water. Sigh...
I agree! I love my ibeast fully loaded except for only 8 gb of ram. Sandy bridge will blow it out of the water. Sigh...
Yebot
Sep 10, 05:37 PM
What time is the Sept. 12th event taking place? Anyone know? I am going to be in school and want to know if I am going to be able to get in on the action live. I doubt it though.:(
10am Pacific time. 1pm our time.
10am Pacific time. 1pm our time.
Multimedia
Aug 28, 06:41 PM
Post #20 Page 1 Conroe cannot be dropped in to Yonah MB only merom.Not in MacBook nor MacBook Pros because they have no socket. You can only upgrade mini and iMac with Merom because only they both have compatible sockets. :rolleyes:
Keep in mind that a 2.33GHz Merom costs almost as much as a new mini. But it will run way faster. Hope the mini's cooling system can handle the higher temperature. Good luck all you brave upgraders.
Core 2 Duo Product Line
Model....Frequency........MSRP
T7600...2.33 GHz-4L2...$637
T7400...2.16 GHz-4L2...$432
T7200...2.00 GHz-4L2...$294
T5600...1.83 GHz-2L2...$241
T5500...1.66 GHz-2L2...$209
Keep in mind that a 2.33GHz Merom costs almost as much as a new mini. But it will run way faster. Hope the mini's cooling system can handle the higher temperature. Good luck all you brave upgraders.
Core 2 Duo Product Line
Model....Frequency........MSRP
T7600...2.33 GHz-4L2...$637
T7400...2.16 GHz-4L2...$432
T7200...2.00 GHz-4L2...$294
T5600...1.83 GHz-2L2...$241
T5500...1.66 GHz-2L2...$209
rtharper
Sep 14, 10:08 AM
(I'm not saying it will happen, or that I'm expecting it, but I'm just surprised it's so easily dismissed by people who comment daily on how Apple should enter the cell phone market, DVR arena, PDA front, etc and - for the most part - scoffed at the intro of a consumer music player...)
The big distinction I would draw is that those are consumer products, not professional-grade hardware. Apple could co-brand but what would everyone's question be? "So, who actually made it?"
The big distinction I would draw is that those are consumer products, not professional-grade hardware. Apple could co-brand but what would everyone's question be? "So, who actually made it?"
donlphi
Sep 5, 08:17 PM
You're assuming they won't up the resolution when they start doing movies. What makes you so sure they'll do that?
I guess I was thinking if they up the resolution too much on the movie it may look better on the big screen, but it will no longer be compatible on the ipod.
I don't think the problem would be fixable in the firmware either. How big are we going to make these files?
Right now, I can rip a DVD (that I own of course) and crunch it down to my iPOD's size 320x240 (roughly 600MB for a couple of hours) . Now... it supports up to 640x480, but that turns it into a pretty hefty file.
I don't see apple changing the resolution for movies unless you want rediculous download times. Just downloading some of these HD trailers takes forever, and they look terrible on the displays at the apple store (tried it there only because I thought it was my computer, not the technology).
I guess I would rather see an on demand viewing solution for the hi-def stuff, which I can already do through comcast, and stick to low res for my iPod Video when I am traveling.
Either way... like I said in another post... you are going to see an updated iPod Nano, upgraded processors for some of models still using the first generation intel chips, and a worthless video streamer that lets you feed your video to a TV without hooking your computer up to it lo res (which will look terrible on a 1080p television)... oh and the Movie downloads - probably from Disney Pixar only at first.
This would suck for me because the last thing I want to do is tie up my computer so somebody in my house can watch INCREDIBLES with bad picture and average sound in my living room.
I guess I was thinking if they up the resolution too much on the movie it may look better on the big screen, but it will no longer be compatible on the ipod.
I don't think the problem would be fixable in the firmware either. How big are we going to make these files?
Right now, I can rip a DVD (that I own of course) and crunch it down to my iPOD's size 320x240 (roughly 600MB for a couple of hours) . Now... it supports up to 640x480, but that turns it into a pretty hefty file.
I don't see apple changing the resolution for movies unless you want rediculous download times. Just downloading some of these HD trailers takes forever, and they look terrible on the displays at the apple store (tried it there only because I thought it was my computer, not the technology).
I guess I would rather see an on demand viewing solution for the hi-def stuff, which I can already do through comcast, and stick to low res for my iPod Video when I am traveling.
Either way... like I said in another post... you are going to see an updated iPod Nano, upgraded processors for some of models still using the first generation intel chips, and a worthless video streamer that lets you feed your video to a TV without hooking your computer up to it lo res (which will look terrible on a 1080p television)... oh and the Movie downloads - probably from Disney Pixar only at first.
This would suck for me because the last thing I want to do is tie up my computer so somebody in my house can watch INCREDIBLES with bad picture and average sound in my living room.
DavidLeblond
Sep 5, 02:12 PM
I'm hoping for iMacs because I could care less about downloading Movies. Hell the only TV I download are the free eps. Unless you can get me 5.1 surround, DVD quality for a monthly fee that is less than Netflix... well, Netflix is still king to me. :)
boxandrew
Sep 5, 12:04 PM
iLounge has received the same invitation (http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/news/comments/apple-to-hold-showtime-event-on-september-12th/)
Looks like it's now for definite going to happen. Only one week to wait...
Looks like it's now for definite going to happen. Only one week to wait...
shawmanus
Sep 10, 08:53 AM
Couple of things
Kentsfield is not replacing conroe. Its only replacing conroe xe. Intel does not see mainstream quad core for atleast 2 years when s/w gets multithreaded. So Kentsfield should atleast cost $999 and would be seen in gaming platforms and workstations.
Tigerton is new xeon mp solution to replace netburst based tulsa. It is definately not pin compatible with kentsfield. Apple currently does not have any MP ( >= 4P solutions) in their portfolio. Maybe they would create one in their xserve portfolio. Tigerton would be extremely expensive as well.
iMac currently have laptop processors having around ~30w TDP. Kentsfield will have 110w tdp and I dont see Apple redesigning iMac to accomodate it. Maybe once intel has a native quad core on 45nm with around 60w TDP we will see a quad core in iMac.
Apple should release a "headless tower" with conroe/kentsfield. That should be significantly cheaper than Macpro.
Kentsfield is not replacing conroe. Its only replacing conroe xe. Intel does not see mainstream quad core for atleast 2 years when s/w gets multithreaded. So Kentsfield should atleast cost $999 and would be seen in gaming platforms and workstations.
Tigerton is new xeon mp solution to replace netburst based tulsa. It is definately not pin compatible with kentsfield. Apple currently does not have any MP ( >= 4P solutions) in their portfolio. Maybe they would create one in their xserve portfolio. Tigerton would be extremely expensive as well.
iMac currently have laptop processors having around ~30w TDP. Kentsfield will have 110w tdp and I dont see Apple redesigning iMac to accomodate it. Maybe once intel has a native quad core on 45nm with around 60w TDP we will see a quad core in iMac.
Apple should release a "headless tower" with conroe/kentsfield. That should be significantly cheaper than Macpro.
Michaelgtrusa
Apr 4, 12:53 PM
Well done.
