aristotle
Nov 13, 11:56 PM
Come off it, cmaier has a darn good point. Apple is being utterly ridiculous in this debacle between themselves and Rogue Amoeba. There was no reason at all that such a debate should have evolved into a 3 month conflict, nor was it that it should have ended with Rogue Amoeba having to indulge their customers in a battle with Apple over icons. Having user interface unity is something Apple strives for in all of their products. By giving 3rd party developers the ninth degree over something so ingrained in this product is simply stupid. It does nothing to help the end user, ingrain the confidence of developers, or aid Apple. It just brings out end users and developers with grievances and sharpened pitchforks.
Dude. You have a double standard. If Apple were to infringe on the copyright of someone else, you would be here pitchfork in hand screaming for blood.
If you look on other sites like macnn, you will see that the airfoil app does not only display Apple icons but rather the icon of whatever browser is configured as the main browser. They cannot make the claim that they have to right to use the Firefox, Camino or Omniweb icon in their app. It is not "streaming" the icon data, it is copied over and displayed superimposed on another icon which is presumably an internal OS X bundle. The audio is streamed but those icons are copied over and superimposed on each other on the phone. That is a clear violation of the IP of other programs in a manner that is not consistent with use on the mac it was pulled from.
Dude. You have a double standard. If Apple were to infringe on the copyright of someone else, you would be here pitchfork in hand screaming for blood.
If you look on other sites like macnn, you will see that the airfoil app does not only display Apple icons but rather the icon of whatever browser is configured as the main browser. They cannot make the claim that they have to right to use the Firefox, Camino or Omniweb icon in their app. It is not "streaming" the icon data, it is copied over and displayed superimposed on another icon which is presumably an internal OS X bundle. The audio is streamed but those icons are copied over and superimposed on each other on the phone. That is a clear violation of the IP of other programs in a manner that is not consistent with use on the mac it was pulled from.
GFLPraxis
Mar 23, 04:44 PM
Im in agreement with this.
Remove them from the App Store.
It might be illegal etc.. but we must draw the line somewhere.
I actually agree. Pull 'em. It may be censorship, but it's dangerous not to.
Do it apple!!!
You're all mad. Have you read the description on applications like Trapster? They list where common speed traps and posted-by-law DUI checkpoints are.
This is setting a very dangerous precedent for app removals if it goes through.
Remove them from the App Store.
It might be illegal etc.. but we must draw the line somewhere.
I actually agree. Pull 'em. It may be censorship, but it's dangerous not to.
Do it apple!!!
You're all mad. Have you read the description on applications like Trapster? They list where common speed traps and posted-by-law DUI checkpoints are.
This is setting a very dangerous precedent for app removals if it goes through.
Susurs
Apr 22, 04:55 PM
They'd have better found a place for Nvidia or AMD GPU via PCI-E not that Thunderbolt...
Dandaman
Sep 13, 08:56 PM
hmmmm, interesting, wonder when it'll come out
MikeyTree
Apr 4, 12:20 PM
What is your firearms experience? How many times have you been shot at? Do you think the security guard make a Hollywood head shot?
I'm amazed that so many people are basing their judgment of the "head shot" on 3rd person shooter games and CSI. In the real world, anyone with training will always be aiming for the center of mass, and where he actually hits depends more on luck than anything else.
In other words, just because the criminal was hit in the head, doesn't mean that the security guard was aiming for his head. A mall security guard with a pistol shooting at a moving target during a gunfight doesn't have the accuracy of a Marine sniper shooting a sniper rifle at a stationary target.
I'm amazed that so many people are basing their judgment of the "head shot" on 3rd person shooter games and CSI. In the real world, anyone with training will always be aiming for the center of mass, and where he actually hits depends more on luck than anything else.
In other words, just because the criminal was hit in the head, doesn't mean that the security guard was aiming for his head. A mall security guard with a pistol shooting at a moving target during a gunfight doesn't have the accuracy of a Marine sniper shooting a sniper rifle at a stationary target.
Multimedia
Sep 12, 05:54 PM
just bought a music video will see the new res and if it works on "old" 5G iPods in about 5 minutesNope. I already tested it and it's a no-go. Do you know for sure you just bought a 640x480 H.264 music video?
thejakill
Oct 27, 12:28 PM
i think this whole environmental movement has been turned into a product. look at so-called environmentally-friendly cars (hybrids, flex fuel, etc). they're all using gas or resources in one way or another. but on the commercials you're told that by driving them, you're 'saving the earth'. it's all just a gimmick now.
don't throw your old ipods or computers away. give them to poor people. that's what i've done.
don't throw your old ipods or computers away. give them to poor people. that's what i've done.
WildGuess
Apr 20, 10:03 AM
This is great for my alcoholic blackouts. Fire up the program and find out where I've been. Although on my last trip to San Diego it put me across the border and into a Tijuana cat house.
ksz
Jul 14, 09:29 AM
Conroe benchmarks posted on AnandTech (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2795) are really good. I luv this statement:
As you will soon see, Intel's new Core 2 lineup has basically made all previous Intel processors worthless. The performance of the new Core 2 CPUs is so much greater, with much lower power consumption, that owners of NetBurst based processors may want to dust off the old drill bits and make some neat looking keychains.
As you will soon see, Intel's new Core 2 lineup has basically made all previous Intel processors worthless. The performance of the new Core 2 CPUs is so much greater, with much lower power consumption, that owners of NetBurst based processors may want to dust off the old drill bits and make some neat looking keychains.
Multimedia
Sep 12, 04:44 PM
Encoded H.264 Baseline Profile 640x480 Fails 2 Load On Old 5G
Bummer
Bummer
jonpwnz
Apr 4, 01:02 PM
holy crap. im surprised the guard made it through that, and to top it off killed and wounded two of them. I mean come on hes just a mall security guard. with like no training.. unless hes one of those retired navy seal type security guards.
Hastings101
Apr 25, 01:07 PM
Maybe the next design will allow you to avoid being burned while playing games on the Macbook Pro :p
FSUSem1noles
Apr 22, 05:28 AM
Great, another way to chew through our cellular data..
I can see it now, after the release of this "cloud service" the cell companies are going to scream bloody murder "our networks can't handle all this data consumption on, we have to raise rates to upgrade our infrastructure, yada, yada.."
Zooooooom, we the consumer get the shaft yet again!
I can see it now, after the release of this "cloud service" the cell companies are going to scream bloody murder "our networks can't handle all this data consumption on, we have to raise rates to upgrade our infrastructure, yada, yada.."
Zooooooom, we the consumer get the shaft yet again!
Nomadski
Apr 13, 07:07 AM
MagnusVonMagnum -
- Sonos is not "way better quality" (AppleTV2 output is DIGITAL and so the "quality" depends entirely on the stereo you connect it to. So sorry but you have no point there.
Unless you've purchased / converted music in Apple lossless format it IS way better quality. Im making the comparison of my situation listening to FLAC vs the masses who purchase mp3s on iTunes. You could rip your music in Apple Lossless for sure, but then your hooked into iTunes, cant play on WMP or most other mp3s other than iPods. Like with a lot of stuff iTunes related, if you go that route, your stuck. Even the all inclusive Sonos S5 sounds better than the best iPod dock on the market (Bose 10 / Zeppelin whichever grabs your boat the most).
- It may not be better quality, but it IS "way more expensive". AppleTV2 costs $99 (same price as an Airport Express which is "audio only" like Sonos). Sonos OTOH costs $349 for a basic receiver which then still requires to either be connected directly to a router (wired) OR you have to pay ANOTHER $99 for a "bridge" to send a separate wireless signal off your router just for Sonos devices (waste of bandwidth and clutters the band with more wireless signals instead of just using your existing wireless router, which most people already have (how many used a wired only router and if you did you cannot use the Sonos wireless for anything else). So already you are at LEAST $450 in the hole for a single room with Sonos and you have ONLY AUDIO capability.
Sonos isnt cheap for sure, but that is why I said people who have no shortage of money at the start of my thread. Some people have massive Mac systems, those people shouldn't skimp when it comes to music, if they like music, or video for that matter.
One of the big features of Sonos which you obviously arent aware of is that Sonos DOESNT hog your bandwidth. It uses its own Mesh network which works independantly of your home wireless network, hence no bandwidth constraints, which is why you can have up to 32 Sonos units all working AT THE SAME TIME on the same or different sources whilst not affecting the bandwidth capability of your home network. Try using even 2 AppleTV2s at the same time and see how much of your bandwidth is left.
Also, if you live in a large house, or one with thick walls, or you want to listen outside, because Sonos recreates its own Mesh network each time it hits a Sonos unit strength signal on the opposite side of the house to the router is still very high, each Zone Player acts like a new Sonos signal source.
Yup its expensive but I bought my first Sonos bit of kit in 2006. Since then ive added 3 more units, 2 of which were new redesigned units released a couple of years ago. Ive also added a second controller when they moved to touchscreen 2 years ago. And you know what? It all works seamlessly with each other. Old hardware, new hardware, built up over time. New features added over time (for free) seamlessly updated into even the oldest bit of hardware with a firmware update, they even added full Touch, iPhone and iPad control options so I could use any of them to control the audio around the house. Can you integrate AppleTV2 with 1? Can you honestly say in 5 years time your money spent will still work with the rest of your AppleTV system as they upgrade and add new features? When 3 year old sounddocks wont even charge new ipods I would hazard a guess...no.
-But then I would be forgetting you need a SOURCE of music. You tout the use of an NAS, but most NAS devices aren't exactly cheap or anything. For all intensive purposes they are a just a headless computer and most run Linux. AppleTV2 is out of the box a PITA if you don't want to leave a computer on, but you can put XBMC on it which will use any NAS or networked source. You then have the same functionality as Sonos BUT you also have full video capability. You could instead get a cheap Netbook for $250 (cheaper than most NAS devices) and connect a hard drive to that and run iTunes and the full Apple interface if you'd like and still have XBMC available as well. Personally, I just use an old PPC G4 PowerMac as a server and 24/7 Internet terminal. Intel machines can also be set to Wake On Lan, so you can have your machine sleep while AppleTV is not in use. In short, NAS isn't as great as you make it sound (most are also dog slow compared to a real computer) and there are alternative options even with Apple software like a cheap Netbook as a server.
NAS or WHS arent cheap but youve just contradicted yourself.
Sonos will also play from any networked PC, MAC, External hard drive on Airport, netbook. To use a NAS you dont have to install XBMC on it, it works out of the box from any source you want. That PPC G4 would also work with Sonos, or you could play Last.FM, or Pandora, or Spotify, or Napster, or unlimited internet radio (you can even add your own internet radio addresses).
Best of all, you DONT have to use iTunes. You can if you want, but you dont have to.
Sonos also gives you multi room grouping. Group 2 or more zones together and enjoy synced music wherever you want it. Not miliseconds out syncing like Sony or Logitech but 100% synced. Dropping zones can be done at the flick of the controller.
Read a review of a new album in the newspaper? Listen to it 5 seconds later on Sonos.
So the kids can listen to their own music streamed in their rooms upstairs, my wife can be listening to the TV, or some music in the living room, and I can be in my little den listening to my music whilst enjoying near full speed wireless capability on my pc or mac, or maybe my wife likes a song shes hearing upstairs and links zones so she can hear it downstairs.
You can buy a standalone unit which sounds better than the B&W Zeppelin, or get the amped unit for attaching to any speaker system you want, or get the small unit for use (as you do) with your existing stereo system. You can add these anytime you want, building up your Sonos system over time, without the fear it will be redundant over time.
Its a high end multi room music system vs a limited single streaming unit.
-Now I come to the heart of the matter...VIDEO. You suggest a Popcorn Hour in ADDITION to the already out of this world priced Sonos system. They start at $179 and go up to $299. That brings your total minimum price for a wireless system for a single room to $629 AND you have to switch between two separate devices to listen to audio and/or watch videos. With AppleTV you have all your movies, tv shows, photos, music, music videos, YouTube and Internet Radio (plus the options of XBMC with a quick hack including non-Apple formats) and your TOTAL COST for **one** room wireless using an existing wireless router is $99. $629 versus $99...Hmmmmmm. And then there's the matter of Popcorn Hour's crappy interface versus Apple's polished one. XBMC makes Popcorn Hour look bad as well. Bugs or popcorn? :confused:
Cost seems to be the big issue with you, so I wonder if you own a mac mini as opposed to 3 macbook pros, an imac, apple tv2 etc etc as many posters here have? If so, Sonos etc wont be for you. If you do own multiple Apple systems why are you so concerned with price? If you want the best you got to pay for it.
With Apple TV you DONT have all your movies or music or internet radio. you have limited experiences with all 3. No 1080p, no DVD images (Popcorn will load your dvd image in exactly the same way your dvd player would), wont play .mp4 .m4v .mkv .wmv .avi .aac .divx, doesnt have full support for all subtitle formats, wont play FLAC or anything else outside of your iTunes library audio wise and its internet radio function is gimped.
Its sure nice to have it in one box, but *it* is very very limited. Dedicated systems will always trump jack of all trade systems.
The interface is nice on AppleTV2 for sure, my popcorn looks better though with my skin on it. The default layout looks boring ill agree.
So for the price of your ONE room audio and video, I could have SIX rooms using AppleTV2 with both video and audio and still have $29 to spare
Except you couldnt do that could you? Your wireless network would be crippled with half that many running at the same time. I can assure you I can play a 1080P movie AND have 3 other Sonos units streaming at the same time. Try that sometime with 4 AppleTVs...
With XBMC installed, it can play any format (just like Popcorn Hour).
No, no it cant. DVD isos? All subtitle formats? 1080P? Also your slightly expanded feature set (not out of the box) is achieved by essentially hacking your AppleTV 2, so good luck on the next firmware update.
Hell, I can even buy a cheap 3.5" internal hard drive and slot that into my popcorn hour if I want to store the films locally, what sized hard drive does Apple TV2 have? Oh wait.
Your not seeing the advantages with zero configuration audio system, and a play all with no hassles video system? The only mucking about in my system is if you want a nice shinier interface with Popcorn Hour. You have to convert audio, replace (essentially) the OS to XBMC, have a linux system and a Crystal card to play 1080p on an OLDER Apple TV (your not factoring in this stuff with your price or integrated system arguments are you?) and you STILL have a far more limited setup.
Reading thru your post I guarantee you your costs are higher than $99 and in about 2 years time your system will be redundant.
Im not saying the AppleTV 2 is useless for everyone, for many of the dumb masses who are locked into iTunes already its probably the best thing since sliced bread, and really its only advantage is a cheap price and movie rentals, in glorious 720P, but if I want to feed my 42" 1080p plasma with subpar 720P video I could use the xbox or PS3 sitting under the TV, which I also dont bother with. For audiophiles or moviephiles it doesn't cut it.
- Sonos is not "way better quality" (AppleTV2 output is DIGITAL and so the "quality" depends entirely on the stereo you connect it to. So sorry but you have no point there.
Unless you've purchased / converted music in Apple lossless format it IS way better quality. Im making the comparison of my situation listening to FLAC vs the masses who purchase mp3s on iTunes. You could rip your music in Apple Lossless for sure, but then your hooked into iTunes, cant play on WMP or most other mp3s other than iPods. Like with a lot of stuff iTunes related, if you go that route, your stuck. Even the all inclusive Sonos S5 sounds better than the best iPod dock on the market (Bose 10 / Zeppelin whichever grabs your boat the most).
- It may not be better quality, but it IS "way more expensive". AppleTV2 costs $99 (same price as an Airport Express which is "audio only" like Sonos). Sonos OTOH costs $349 for a basic receiver which then still requires to either be connected directly to a router (wired) OR you have to pay ANOTHER $99 for a "bridge" to send a separate wireless signal off your router just for Sonos devices (waste of bandwidth and clutters the band with more wireless signals instead of just using your existing wireless router, which most people already have (how many used a wired only router and if you did you cannot use the Sonos wireless for anything else). So already you are at LEAST $450 in the hole for a single room with Sonos and you have ONLY AUDIO capability.
Sonos isnt cheap for sure, but that is why I said people who have no shortage of money at the start of my thread. Some people have massive Mac systems, those people shouldn't skimp when it comes to music, if they like music, or video for that matter.
One of the big features of Sonos which you obviously arent aware of is that Sonos DOESNT hog your bandwidth. It uses its own Mesh network which works independantly of your home wireless network, hence no bandwidth constraints, which is why you can have up to 32 Sonos units all working AT THE SAME TIME on the same or different sources whilst not affecting the bandwidth capability of your home network. Try using even 2 AppleTV2s at the same time and see how much of your bandwidth is left.
Also, if you live in a large house, or one with thick walls, or you want to listen outside, because Sonos recreates its own Mesh network each time it hits a Sonos unit strength signal on the opposite side of the house to the router is still very high, each Zone Player acts like a new Sonos signal source.
Yup its expensive but I bought my first Sonos bit of kit in 2006. Since then ive added 3 more units, 2 of which were new redesigned units released a couple of years ago. Ive also added a second controller when they moved to touchscreen 2 years ago. And you know what? It all works seamlessly with each other. Old hardware, new hardware, built up over time. New features added over time (for free) seamlessly updated into even the oldest bit of hardware with a firmware update, they even added full Touch, iPhone and iPad control options so I could use any of them to control the audio around the house. Can you integrate AppleTV2 with 1? Can you honestly say in 5 years time your money spent will still work with the rest of your AppleTV system as they upgrade and add new features? When 3 year old sounddocks wont even charge new ipods I would hazard a guess...no.
-But then I would be forgetting you need a SOURCE of music. You tout the use of an NAS, but most NAS devices aren't exactly cheap or anything. For all intensive purposes they are a just a headless computer and most run Linux. AppleTV2 is out of the box a PITA if you don't want to leave a computer on, but you can put XBMC on it which will use any NAS or networked source. You then have the same functionality as Sonos BUT you also have full video capability. You could instead get a cheap Netbook for $250 (cheaper than most NAS devices) and connect a hard drive to that and run iTunes and the full Apple interface if you'd like and still have XBMC available as well. Personally, I just use an old PPC G4 PowerMac as a server and 24/7 Internet terminal. Intel machines can also be set to Wake On Lan, so you can have your machine sleep while AppleTV is not in use. In short, NAS isn't as great as you make it sound (most are also dog slow compared to a real computer) and there are alternative options even with Apple software like a cheap Netbook as a server.
NAS or WHS arent cheap but youve just contradicted yourself.
Sonos will also play from any networked PC, MAC, External hard drive on Airport, netbook. To use a NAS you dont have to install XBMC on it, it works out of the box from any source you want. That PPC G4 would also work with Sonos, or you could play Last.FM, or Pandora, or Spotify, or Napster, or unlimited internet radio (you can even add your own internet radio addresses).
Best of all, you DONT have to use iTunes. You can if you want, but you dont have to.
Sonos also gives you multi room grouping. Group 2 or more zones together and enjoy synced music wherever you want it. Not miliseconds out syncing like Sony or Logitech but 100% synced. Dropping zones can be done at the flick of the controller.
Read a review of a new album in the newspaper? Listen to it 5 seconds later on Sonos.
So the kids can listen to their own music streamed in their rooms upstairs, my wife can be listening to the TV, or some music in the living room, and I can be in my little den listening to my music whilst enjoying near full speed wireless capability on my pc or mac, or maybe my wife likes a song shes hearing upstairs and links zones so she can hear it downstairs.
You can buy a standalone unit which sounds better than the B&W Zeppelin, or get the amped unit for attaching to any speaker system you want, or get the small unit for use (as you do) with your existing stereo system. You can add these anytime you want, building up your Sonos system over time, without the fear it will be redundant over time.
Its a high end multi room music system vs a limited single streaming unit.
-Now I come to the heart of the matter...VIDEO. You suggest a Popcorn Hour in ADDITION to the already out of this world priced Sonos system. They start at $179 and go up to $299. That brings your total minimum price for a wireless system for a single room to $629 AND you have to switch between two separate devices to listen to audio and/or watch videos. With AppleTV you have all your movies, tv shows, photos, music, music videos, YouTube and Internet Radio (plus the options of XBMC with a quick hack including non-Apple formats) and your TOTAL COST for **one** room wireless using an existing wireless router is $99. $629 versus $99...Hmmmmmm. And then there's the matter of Popcorn Hour's crappy interface versus Apple's polished one. XBMC makes Popcorn Hour look bad as well. Bugs or popcorn? :confused:
Cost seems to be the big issue with you, so I wonder if you own a mac mini as opposed to 3 macbook pros, an imac, apple tv2 etc etc as many posters here have? If so, Sonos etc wont be for you. If you do own multiple Apple systems why are you so concerned with price? If you want the best you got to pay for it.
With Apple TV you DONT have all your movies or music or internet radio. you have limited experiences with all 3. No 1080p, no DVD images (Popcorn will load your dvd image in exactly the same way your dvd player would), wont play .mp4 .m4v .mkv .wmv .avi .aac .divx, doesnt have full support for all subtitle formats, wont play FLAC or anything else outside of your iTunes library audio wise and its internet radio function is gimped.
Its sure nice to have it in one box, but *it* is very very limited. Dedicated systems will always trump jack of all trade systems.
The interface is nice on AppleTV2 for sure, my popcorn looks better though with my skin on it. The default layout looks boring ill agree.
So for the price of your ONE room audio and video, I could have SIX rooms using AppleTV2 with both video and audio and still have $29 to spare
Except you couldnt do that could you? Your wireless network would be crippled with half that many running at the same time. I can assure you I can play a 1080P movie AND have 3 other Sonos units streaming at the same time. Try that sometime with 4 AppleTVs...
With XBMC installed, it can play any format (just like Popcorn Hour).
No, no it cant. DVD isos? All subtitle formats? 1080P? Also your slightly expanded feature set (not out of the box) is achieved by essentially hacking your AppleTV 2, so good luck on the next firmware update.
Hell, I can even buy a cheap 3.5" internal hard drive and slot that into my popcorn hour if I want to store the films locally, what sized hard drive does Apple TV2 have? Oh wait.
Your not seeing the advantages with zero configuration audio system, and a play all with no hassles video system? The only mucking about in my system is if you want a nice shinier interface with Popcorn Hour. You have to convert audio, replace (essentially) the OS to XBMC, have a linux system and a Crystal card to play 1080p on an OLDER Apple TV (your not factoring in this stuff with your price or integrated system arguments are you?) and you STILL have a far more limited setup.
Reading thru your post I guarantee you your costs are higher than $99 and in about 2 years time your system will be redundant.
Im not saying the AppleTV 2 is useless for everyone, for many of the dumb masses who are locked into iTunes already its probably the best thing since sliced bread, and really its only advantage is a cheap price and movie rentals, in glorious 720P, but if I want to feed my 42" 1080p plasma with subpar 720P video I could use the xbox or PS3 sitting under the TV, which I also dont bother with. For audiophiles or moviephiles it doesn't cut it.
dondark
Sep 13, 11:56 PM
nokia never fail in making ugly phones
Totally Agree!
Totally Agree!
richard4339
Sep 12, 02:11 PM
I hope Apple releases an iPod software update so those of us who already own 5th generation iPods can take advantage of all these new features.
From what I saw in the presentation stuff, 5G iPods get everything software related; movies, gapless playback, and games.
From what I saw in the presentation stuff, 5G iPods get everything software related; movies, gapless playback, and games.
mkrishnan
Sep 19, 03:03 PM
This text from that Unbox review was ace:
You can watch the movie at home or at the office, but the license agreement prohibits you from watching it in "hotel rooms, motel rooms, hospital patient rooms, restaurants, bars, prisons, barracks, drilling rigs" and certain other locations.
:D
Although I do have to say that, based on his areas of concern, at least some of them are also going to apply to Apple. Particularly considering that, while the iTV will probably be really sweet, it doesn't actually exist yet, unlike the XBox / Media Center system.
Actually all of this video hype building up is tempting me to rip all my DVDs into .h264 using Instant Handbrake and to start keeping things I like from my DVR in that format on my iMac in iTunes using iSquint....
You can watch the movie at home or at the office, but the license agreement prohibits you from watching it in "hotel rooms, motel rooms, hospital patient rooms, restaurants, bars, prisons, barracks, drilling rigs" and certain other locations.
:D
Although I do have to say that, based on his areas of concern, at least some of them are also going to apply to Apple. Particularly considering that, while the iTV will probably be really sweet, it doesn't actually exist yet, unlike the XBox / Media Center system.
Actually all of this video hype building up is tempting me to rip all my DVDs into .h264 using Instant Handbrake and to start keeping things I like from my DVR in that format on my iMac in iTunes using iSquint....
milo
Sep 6, 08:03 AM
Either way, what are you going to do with a HD version of the movie on your computer?
HD is not going to happen, at least not next tuesday.
Worth revisiting.
The raw uncompressed bitrate for 720p = 1280*720*24bpp*30fps/(1024*1024) = 633 Mbps for 1080i it's ~711 Mbps 320x240 it's more like 53 Mbps.
720p compressed in H.264 with 5.1 sound seems to work out to about 1100 MB for your typical 45 minute drama show (i.e. compressed down to ~3 Mbps). This compares to 200 MB for the same show from iTMS in 320x240 H.264 (700 kbps). Not bad when you consider that 720p has 12X as many pixels (1280/320=4, 720/240=3)
Basically your typical movie would be about 2GB.
B
So what would be the size for a decent encoding of 480 (p or i)? Basically about DVD quality, but with a more efficient codec, which is the most likely format for release next week.
HD is not going to happen, at least not next tuesday.
Worth revisiting.
The raw uncompressed bitrate for 720p = 1280*720*24bpp*30fps/(1024*1024) = 633 Mbps for 1080i it's ~711 Mbps 320x240 it's more like 53 Mbps.
720p compressed in H.264 with 5.1 sound seems to work out to about 1100 MB for your typical 45 minute drama show (i.e. compressed down to ~3 Mbps). This compares to 200 MB for the same show from iTMS in 320x240 H.264 (700 kbps). Not bad when you consider that 720p has 12X as many pixels (1280/320=4, 720/240=3)
Basically your typical movie would be about 2GB.
B
So what would be the size for a decent encoding of 480 (p or i)? Basically about DVD quality, but with a more efficient codec, which is the most likely format for release next week.
halhiker
Mar 23, 05:07 PM
I'm simultaneously amused and saddened by the number of people who believe that drunk driving is a constitutionally protected right.
Hope you never have to see the results of the 'patriots' who would have a use for this and then kill innocent people.
This app enables murder. Rationalize all you want.
Get a clue. No one wants drunk drivers but these checkpoints have VERY little to do with that. Roving patrols do better at catching drunk drivers as does hanging out in front of bars.
The police should not be able to detain you without probable cause. PERIOD. If you are doing nothing wrong the cops should not stop you, EVER.
Hope you never have to see the results of the 'patriots' who would have a use for this and then kill innocent people.
This app enables murder. Rationalize all you want.
Get a clue. No one wants drunk drivers but these checkpoints have VERY little to do with that. Roving patrols do better at catching drunk drivers as does hanging out in front of bars.
The police should not be able to detain you without probable cause. PERIOD. If you are doing nothing wrong the cops should not stop you, EVER.
whooleytoo
Mar 30, 12:45 PM
If Apple wins this argument, obviously that would prevent MS from calling theirs the "App Store" - but can they still use the phrase descriptively? I.e. "Welcome to App Market, Microsoft's app store."
If they can't (and Microsoft, Google, Blackberry etc. all trademark the others, App Shop, App Market etc.), then how do you describe what the App Store/App Shop is? I can't think of a more generic variant which could be used to describe it. "Windows" is an OS. "Internet Explorer" is a browser. "Office" is an application suite. "App Store" is...errr... an app store.
If they can't (and Microsoft, Google, Blackberry etc. all trademark the others, App Shop, App Market etc.), then how do you describe what the App Store/App Shop is? I can't think of a more generic variant which could be used to describe it. "Windows" is an OS. "Internet Explorer" is a browser. "Office" is an application suite. "App Store" is...errr... an app store.
Ktulu
Sep 5, 07:27 AM
No, don't be so silly or literal. PS3 dollars are the money people have dedicated to buy the PS3 -- the defacto "big ticket" item this year. Apple needs a product that will compete for that money...and press converage. Everyone and their mother got an iPod last year. Apple needs to pull a fresh product out of Jobs pocket; not a storage bump or new skins for the nano. THAT is what I'm saying.
Thank you. I didn't mean to sound silly or literal. When I read your original post, that is how I interpreted it....sorry, it was late for me and I was tired.:D
Thank you. I didn't mean to sound silly or literal. When I read your original post, that is how I interpreted it....sorry, it was late for me and I was tired.:D
the_ki
Sep 26, 08:55 AM
Lame.
The only way the iPhone market even makes sense is via an Apple MVNO.
Since when does Apple NOT want to "control the whole widget"? I don't want Apple controlled by the nutjob mobile providers.
As much of an Apple fanboy as I am, I would never use Cingular. But beyond that, it signals that the Apple iPhone will be incredibly lame -- just another music phone (basically an Apple ROKR/SLVR), because that is pretty much all that Cingular trades in.
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.
The photos you shoot automatically go into your iPhoto photocast. Your videos sync up with an iTunes playlist. Everything automatically appears on your dynamically-powered iWeb. It's moblogging for the masses.
And since they'll need to sell them to Windows users, lots of folks will have .Mac mobile accounts, but they can't really use them to their full advantage unless they use iLife on a Mac, which they'll just have to buy.
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.
Your thoughts?
The only way the iPhone market even makes sense is via an Apple MVNO.
Since when does Apple NOT want to "control the whole widget"? I don't want Apple controlled by the nutjob mobile providers.
As much of an Apple fanboy as I am, I would never use Cingular. But beyond that, it signals that the Apple iPhone will be incredibly lame -- just another music phone (basically an Apple ROKR/SLVR), because that is pretty much all that Cingular trades in.
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.
The photos you shoot automatically go into your iPhoto photocast. Your videos sync up with an iTunes playlist. Everything automatically appears on your dynamically-powered iWeb. It's moblogging for the masses.
And since they'll need to sell them to Windows users, lots of folks will have .Mac mobile accounts, but they can't really use them to their full advantage unless they use iLife on a Mac, which they'll just have to buy.
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.
Your thoughts?
kjs862
Apr 22, 01:53 AM
Very grateful that I am grandfathered into ATT's unlimited data plan!
jaigo
Oct 12, 03:36 PM
why is apple wasting time, money and resources on a damn red U2 ipod? I hope the Zune becomes a big hit and takes a big chunk out of apple market share so they can focus on making a better product instead of these stupid minor updates and colors. :mad:
