gkarris
Nov 29, 10:39 AM
In the 70's:
Universal makes "Battlestar Galactica", and "Buck Rogers in the 25th Century", fun Sci-Fi shows.
In the 90's and early 00's:
USA Networks launches the Scifi Channel. They get great shows such as "Stargate SG-1" and "Farscape". USA Network has some great shows as well, "Monk", "The Dead Zone", "Peacemakers"
That was then....
This is now...
NBC has nothing but crap and gets jeleous of cable networks such as USA.
NBC/Universal buys USA Networks.
NBC/Universal cancels the last season of "Farscape", and the new western, "Peacemakers". They attempt to cancel "Monk" and "The Dead Zone", but to no avail. They also attempt to cancel "Stargate SG-1" and replace it with "Stargate Atlantis", this fails too.
NBC/Universal "retells" "Battlestar Galactica" - sorry, it's all about skin and a drunk Col. Tigh - junk.
NBC/Universal now is "cleaning up" the Scifi Channel by putting on on its own shows, "Eureka" (it is good though).
NBC/Universal is cancelling "Stargate SG-1", at a con, one of its actors did mention that "Universal did let it go on for another 5 seasons".
NBC/Universal's #1 show on the Sci-Fi channel is Wrestling....
Universal is good for what again???
(note: I might have my timing off, like the Farscape cancellation, but I think Scifi might have seen it coming with that series cancellation).
Universal makes "Battlestar Galactica", and "Buck Rogers in the 25th Century", fun Sci-Fi shows.
In the 90's and early 00's:
USA Networks launches the Scifi Channel. They get great shows such as "Stargate SG-1" and "Farscape". USA Network has some great shows as well, "Monk", "The Dead Zone", "Peacemakers"
That was then....
This is now...
NBC has nothing but crap and gets jeleous of cable networks such as USA.
NBC/Universal buys USA Networks.
NBC/Universal cancels the last season of "Farscape", and the new western, "Peacemakers". They attempt to cancel "Monk" and "The Dead Zone", but to no avail. They also attempt to cancel "Stargate SG-1" and replace it with "Stargate Atlantis", this fails too.
NBC/Universal "retells" "Battlestar Galactica" - sorry, it's all about skin and a drunk Col. Tigh - junk.
NBC/Universal now is "cleaning up" the Scifi Channel by putting on on its own shows, "Eureka" (it is good though).
NBC/Universal is cancelling "Stargate SG-1", at a con, one of its actors did mention that "Universal did let it go on for another 5 seasons".
NBC/Universal's #1 show on the Sci-Fi channel is Wrestling....
Universal is good for what again???
(note: I might have my timing off, like the Farscape cancellation, but I think Scifi might have seen it coming with that series cancellation).
Mikey7c8
Mar 31, 08:47 PM
John Gruber's take:
So here�s the Android bait-and-switch laid bare. Android was �open� only until it became popular and handset makers dependent upon it. Now that Google has the handset makers by the balls, Android is no longer open and Google starts asserting control.
Andy Rubin, Vic Gundotra, Eric Schmidt: shameless, lying hypocrites, all of them.Can't say I disagree.
I completely disagree.
Going open sounded like a great idea in the beginning. Fast forward to today, and manufacturers have used the openness against the platform by creating custom versions of android that aren't readily upgradable.
This has hurt the platform more than 'being open' helped it and google is right to start regulating what can and cannot be done.
I think we're all pretty lucky to have experienced both sides of the spectrum to be honest :)
So here�s the Android bait-and-switch laid bare. Android was �open� only until it became popular and handset makers dependent upon it. Now that Google has the handset makers by the balls, Android is no longer open and Google starts asserting control.
Andy Rubin, Vic Gundotra, Eric Schmidt: shameless, lying hypocrites, all of them.Can't say I disagree.
I completely disagree.
Going open sounded like a great idea in the beginning. Fast forward to today, and manufacturers have used the openness against the platform by creating custom versions of android that aren't readily upgradable.
This has hurt the platform more than 'being open' helped it and google is right to start regulating what can and cannot be done.
I think we're all pretty lucky to have experienced both sides of the spectrum to be honest :)
LaDirection
Jul 14, 04:36 PM
"Steve Jobs really must have been embarassed after claiming we'd have 3 ghz when we still can't even pass 2.7 ghz without a huge unstable liquid cooling system."
I think we'll see more cores per cpu before we see 3GHz. IMHO, 4,8 or more cores at 2.66 is far better than 1 or 2 cores at 3GHz.
""Steve Jobs really must have been embarassed after claiming we'd have 3 ghz when we still can't even pass 2.7 ghz without a huge unstable liquid cooling system."
IBM never produced chips that could run at 2.7GHz. In IBM was stuck at 2.2GHz instead of the 3GHz promised. Apple requested that chips be overclocked to 2.5GHz. In IBM was stuck at 2.3 GHZ, these chips were also overclocked to 2.7GHz. This year we are at Dual Cores 2.5Ghz. Even if Apple uses nothing but 2.66 GHz Dual cores, they will still be the fastest, non-overcloked chips that Apple has ever used.
"IMHO, 4,8 or more cores at 2.66 is far better than 1 or 2 cores at 3GHz."
8 cores?! Wow, maybe one day! But 2 or more cores/CPU are only good if your app can use them. Most applications, and in fact many of Apple, do not use more than 2 cores/CPUS. The Quad core G5's are a good example how the 3rd and 4th core are 98% or the time unused. A Dual 3GHz to a user would be much more usuefull than an 8 core 2.5GHz!
P.S. The number ONE problem that Apple must address in their pro line is the lack of Hard Drive bays! We need at least 4 HD, please! An internal 10,000 RPM RAID array is music to teh ears of pro video and film users.
I think we'll see more cores per cpu before we see 3GHz. IMHO, 4,8 or more cores at 2.66 is far better than 1 or 2 cores at 3GHz.
""Steve Jobs really must have been embarassed after claiming we'd have 3 ghz when we still can't even pass 2.7 ghz without a huge unstable liquid cooling system."
IBM never produced chips that could run at 2.7GHz. In IBM was stuck at 2.2GHz instead of the 3GHz promised. Apple requested that chips be overclocked to 2.5GHz. In IBM was stuck at 2.3 GHZ, these chips were also overclocked to 2.7GHz. This year we are at Dual Cores 2.5Ghz. Even if Apple uses nothing but 2.66 GHz Dual cores, they will still be the fastest, non-overcloked chips that Apple has ever used.
"IMHO, 4,8 or more cores at 2.66 is far better than 1 or 2 cores at 3GHz."
8 cores?! Wow, maybe one day! But 2 or more cores/CPU are only good if your app can use them. Most applications, and in fact many of Apple, do not use more than 2 cores/CPUS. The Quad core G5's are a good example how the 3rd and 4th core are 98% or the time unused. A Dual 3GHz to a user would be much more usuefull than an 8 core 2.5GHz!
P.S. The number ONE problem that Apple must address in their pro line is the lack of Hard Drive bays! We need at least 4 HD, please! An internal 10,000 RPM RAID array is music to teh ears of pro video and film users.
NoNothing
Apr 7, 10:24 PM
Obviously you know little about retail and accounting.
Well fill me in. Our family used to run a small local (and successful) computer store in the 80's and if we had it, we sold it.
With cost of inventory being fairly high, why would you stop if you met a "quota"?
Well fill me in. Our family used to run a small local (and successful) computer store in the 80's and if we had it, we sold it.
With cost of inventory being fairly high, why would you stop if you met a "quota"?
Prom1
Aug 7, 06:52 PM
Excellent SHOW Apple EXCELLENT!
I think I just creamed my shorts.
THATS the last straw NO MORE EXCUSES for not owning a MAC FULL Out.
the piggy bank is now gonna be frugal!
I think I just creamed my shorts.
THATS the last straw NO MORE EXCUSES for not owning a MAC FULL Out.
the piggy bank is now gonna be frugal!
hexor
Mar 26, 08:24 AM
People may not realize that Mac OS X Server will be INCLUDED with the client version of OS X Lion. This in itself was a several hundred dollar product. Not only does it make running your own server even easier for non-techies it simplifies the OS X product version choices from 2 down to 1. And licensing for that broken up into single or family pack.
How many different versions of Windows does MS sell? :p I can't even figure out the number of versions of Windows MS makes, it is at least a couple dozen while Apple provides the same equivalent functionality in only 2 (single/family pack). The overhead in managing all those different versions is mind-bongling.
How many different versions of Windows does MS sell? :p I can't even figure out the number of versions of Windows MS makes, it is at least a couple dozen while Apple provides the same equivalent functionality in only 2 (single/family pack). The overhead in managing all those different versions is mind-bongling.
11thIndian
Apr 6, 06:50 PM
I mean 3D objects with materials, textures, shaders, better lighting, better shadows, no crashing several times a day...
3D like ProAnimator FX or Kinemac at least. No plugin required.
Hey I'm always one for adding more functionality to a program, but I'm no longer naive enough to think that everything I could ever want will come bundled in the Studio. Plug-ins are an essential part of every pro product. When a developer can spend 100% of their time delivering a single feature REALLY well [and get paid for it], it will always be better than what the basic software can provide.
The best thing Apple can do is provide a solid and powerful base that developers can build their tools on.
How come no one complains that After Effects doesn't come bundled with Trapcode Particular?
As to your crashing issues. Obviously I can't say. I do have Motion crash occasionally, but it's no more or less frequent than a similarly complicated AE comp on my system.
3D like ProAnimator FX or Kinemac at least. No plugin required.
Hey I'm always one for adding more functionality to a program, but I'm no longer naive enough to think that everything I could ever want will come bundled in the Studio. Plug-ins are an essential part of every pro product. When a developer can spend 100% of their time delivering a single feature REALLY well [and get paid for it], it will always be better than what the basic software can provide.
The best thing Apple can do is provide a solid and powerful base that developers can build their tools on.
How come no one complains that After Effects doesn't come bundled with Trapcode Particular?
As to your crashing issues. Obviously I can't say. I do have Motion crash occasionally, but it's no more or less frequent than a similarly complicated AE comp on my system.
Benjy91
Mar 22, 01:07 PM
I love the way the Playbook handles Multi-tasking, and how the OS looks. But not enough to make me switch.
Infrared
Apr 11, 07:56 AM
LOL, if you think final cut is from the 90's then Avid Media Composer is from the 50's. It's horrible GUI. I wouldn't learn it, if they paid me big bucks. Well I take that back, I would, but I would hate it. Avid Looks like a POS, the graphics designers at Avid have always been behind though. Look at Protools.
No kidding!
280734
Where's Picasso when you need him? :-)
Avid image was from here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYw4vvr7Aq4
No kidding!
280734
Where's Picasso when you need him? :-)
Avid image was from here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYw4vvr7Aq4
rjohnstone
Apr 25, 03:11 PM
While I would also like to know why, I'm not sure this is a big deal as it seems to me that the remedy to going to be very simple: a) encryption is on by default, and/or b) flushing the database after, say, six months.
Oh I agree, it's not as big a deal as some are making it out to be.
I would still like to know the "why" part. If anything just to satisfy my own curiosity.
Oh I agree, it's not as big a deal as some are making it out to be.
I would still like to know the "why" part. If anything just to satisfy my own curiosity.
bibbz
Jun 15, 11:36 AM
Se after some clarification, heres the process...
We cant guarantee you a phone, but if you "reserve" and have a pin number, you will get a phone. We just cant make a promise, guarantee, or anything like that per apple.
The same still applies, if we take 10 pins, we get 10 phones.
We cant guarantee you a phone, but if you "reserve" and have a pin number, you will get a phone. We just cant make a promise, guarantee, or anything like that per apple.
The same still applies, if we take 10 pins, we get 10 phones.
penter
Jul 27, 02:06 PM
i literally let out a high pitched "aaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhh" when i saw this. Im really excited about it, yet so sad that i wont be able to enjoy it since i just bought my new mac a month ago (hence the "aaaahhhh")
this summarizes my post: :) but :(
this summarizes my post: :) but :(
cmaier
Apr 19, 10:46 PM
But App Store is like Coke, right? Of course it's ok if Apple does it. They've becoming one of the most hypocritical companies on the planet. Maybe Steve suffers from extreme paranoia?
No. "App Store" wouldn't qualify as a famous mark, I should think.
Here's a website that lists some factors:
http://www.quizlaw.com/trademarks/what_is_a_famous_trademark.php
No. "App Store" wouldn't qualify as a famous mark, I should think.
Here's a website that lists some factors:
http://www.quizlaw.com/trademarks/what_is_a_famous_trademark.php
manu chao
Apr 25, 02:00 PM
... sorry, but in what ways do I benefit by having apple track my whereabouts to the day and meter? why isn't there an opt-in (apart from the general 'eat **** or die' TOU) or at least an opt-out for this? why is it so easy to access the data?
And any cellular provider is tracking and storing your whereabouts equally.
The difference is that MSP might storing this for billing purposes or even because it is mandated by law (for use by law enforcement). If Apple has no need for these data (which they do not have if they are not transmitted to them), they should not store them.
And any cellular provider is tracking and storing your whereabouts equally.
The difference is that MSP might storing this for billing purposes or even because it is mandated by law (for use by law enforcement). If Apple has no need for these data (which they do not have if they are not transmitted to them), they should not store them.
Rafterman
Apr 27, 08:05 AM
I know of no cell tower or wifi device that works up to 100 miles away.
maelstromr
Apr 20, 10:34 AM
Where did i say I don't like how IP works buddy? Where in my post does it read 'don't like the way IP law works' ? Wipe your tears and try again... Don't make $#!t up.
the rest of your blurb about stuff in your head that I didn't event write isn't worth responding too...
My anecdote premise was pretty straight forward...
Two dudes who come from some place where they don't read tech feeds as often as the rest of us here... they go to a city shop and get sold phones that look like the ones they heard about...iPhones... the premise is not necessarily from the US... from any country on the planet where average Joes go to a tech shop to buy a smartphone... they look and feel and work in very similar ways which causes confusion.
P.S. The whole point of Apple's patent leverage is that they have... patented everything about their devices... form factor, processes, icons and interface... When you read deep into the context and content of Apple's submission which includes these comparisons and that Samsung copied everything and then applying a slight-of-hand to make it look a little different...
:rolleyes:
Like i say.. a bunch of Jawa's selling second hand Android's
So maybe I misunderstood your fist post...or your use of ":rolleyes:". If you think suggesting that people could not possibly confuse Samsung products with Apple products is silly, then we agree.
If I did misread, perhaps I should not have used your post as a quote - I stand by my point for all the other ridiculous claims that Samsung's products are not Apple clones or do not impact/infringe on Apple products/sales/market position.
the rest of your blurb about stuff in your head that I didn't event write isn't worth responding too...
My anecdote premise was pretty straight forward...
Two dudes who come from some place where they don't read tech feeds as often as the rest of us here... they go to a city shop and get sold phones that look like the ones they heard about...iPhones... the premise is not necessarily from the US... from any country on the planet where average Joes go to a tech shop to buy a smartphone... they look and feel and work in very similar ways which causes confusion.
P.S. The whole point of Apple's patent leverage is that they have... patented everything about their devices... form factor, processes, icons and interface... When you read deep into the context and content of Apple's submission which includes these comparisons and that Samsung copied everything and then applying a slight-of-hand to make it look a little different...
:rolleyes:
Like i say.. a bunch of Jawa's selling second hand Android's
So maybe I misunderstood your fist post...or your use of ":rolleyes:". If you think suggesting that people could not possibly confuse Samsung products with Apple products is silly, then we agree.
If I did misread, perhaps I should not have used your post as a quote - I stand by my point for all the other ridiculous claims that Samsung's products are not Apple clones or do not impact/infringe on Apple products/sales/market position.
barkomatic
Apr 11, 11:37 AM
If the iPhone 5 has a bigger screen and 4G connectivity it will be worth it. I can't imagine Apple will release another phone with only 3G with all these Verizon 4G phones coming onto the market.
treblah
Sep 19, 07:45 AM
The mermon G6s should be out before summer.
Fixed. :D
Fixed. :D
fatfish
Aug 7, 09:35 PM
Actually - that's the exact scenario Apple talked about. HD goes down and with TIme Machine you can get all your stuff back. It backs up the system, files, apps - everything. That's almost verbatim from Apple's mouth.
I think the people who are complaining are likely using a notebook and don't permanently attach it to an external HD. I have to say I have little sympathy with this argument, if you run a notebook you need to have some back up system in place and should be prepared to regularly connect to either an external HD or a desktop.
Personally I have a little script that ensures that when I have a wireless connection to my home network an automatic incremental back up to an external HD connected to my network is performed in the background.
I did note some mention of a sync in respect of time machine, so hopefully X.5 will take care of occasional connections to an HD or desktop.
Time machine however seems to have 2 functions, restoring deleted files and full back ups. Even if you don't have access to a desktop or external HD, Time Machine will still perform retreval of lost and deleted files within a functioning notebook.
I think the people who are complaining are likely using a notebook and don't permanently attach it to an external HD. I have to say I have little sympathy with this argument, if you run a notebook you need to have some back up system in place and should be prepared to regularly connect to either an external HD or a desktop.
Personally I have a little script that ensures that when I have a wireless connection to my home network an automatic incremental back up to an external HD connected to my network is performed in the background.
I did note some mention of a sync in respect of time machine, so hopefully X.5 will take care of occasional connections to an HD or desktop.
Time machine however seems to have 2 functions, restoring deleted files and full back ups. Even if you don't have access to a desktop or external HD, Time Machine will still perform retreval of lost and deleted files within a functioning notebook.
Vulpinemac
Apr 6, 02:51 PM
I've been going to my local Costco for the last month and they have a display kiosk on the floor with cards for sales and pick-up of the Xoom. During that time, the number of cards on the display have not dropped significantly and the majority of customers simply walk past it without looking. In fact, during my visits I've only seen one person (other than myself) take a serious look at the display's information. He walked away without taking a card.
This is why I'm far more interested in real sales numbers and not just units shipped into the market. The display holds some 100 cards and I'm willing to bet they haven't sold ten in a month.
This is why I'm far more interested in real sales numbers and not just units shipped into the market. The display holds some 100 cards and I'm willing to bet they haven't sold ten in a month.
spazzcat
Mar 22, 01:38 PM
Lack of Flash support is the achilles heel of iPad. I hope Jobs gets off his high horse and relents.
Flash is dying fast, faster then I even thought it would...
Flash is dying fast, faster then I even thought it would...
dbwie
Apr 27, 10:39 AM
They cannot pinpoint YOU because data is sent anonymously. They can roughly pinpoint A phone, but don't know whose phone it is because the data is sent anonymously (aka without identifying information)
I think it's not as bad as what the media would have you believe, BUT it is worse than what Apple wants you to think.
Sure, cell towers could be up to 100 miles away. And when I ran the mapping tool and plotted my locations, and zoom in far enough, I do indeed see a grid of cell towers as opposed to actual locations where I've been standing. All anyone could know is that I've been "somewhere" in the vicinity.
(And this isn't new. Some time ago I came upon a car crash and called 911 on my cell phone to report it. They were able to get the location to send emergency services just by where I was calling from. It wasn't 100% accurate -- they asked if I was near a major intersection and I told them it was about a block from there.)
However, if it's also tracking wifi hotspots, those can pinpoint you pretty closely. Most people stay within 30-50 feet of their wireless router, and the ones you spend the most time connected to will be the ones at home, at work, and and at your friends' houses.
I think it's not as bad as what the media would have you believe, BUT it is worse than what Apple wants you to think.
Sure, cell towers could be up to 100 miles away. And when I ran the mapping tool and plotted my locations, and zoom in far enough, I do indeed see a grid of cell towers as opposed to actual locations where I've been standing. All anyone could know is that I've been "somewhere" in the vicinity.
(And this isn't new. Some time ago I came upon a car crash and called 911 on my cell phone to report it. They were able to get the location to send emergency services just by where I was calling from. It wasn't 100% accurate -- they asked if I was near a major intersection and I told them it was about a block from there.)
However, if it's also tracking wifi hotspots, those can pinpoint you pretty closely. Most people stay within 30-50 feet of their wireless router, and the ones you spend the most time connected to will be the ones at home, at work, and and at your friends' houses.
matticus008
Nov 29, 06:13 AM
One wonders why it hasn't been used in a Court of Law.
Not really, though. There are countless ways of maneuvering around any such royalties, from framing it as an access toll to a deposit or anything in between. This added cost doesn't actually get you anywhere in litigation, most importantly because it in no way stipulates between you, the customer, and the label.
What's also interesting is that if this fee is added they have now unwittingly legimized the stolen music.
Far from it. Each tax payer contributes to fund their local DMV, and yet their services aren't free. The state collects a tax on car sales, which goes in most cases to road improvement, police departments, and the DMV (along with a truly bizarre array of other causes), but it's only part of the cost. You also pay taxes to a general fund, which is distributed to agencies and services you may never use (or even be aware of). Contributing some money cannot be construed as contributing sufficient money here.
You also pay for car insurance which protects you in the event of an accident; intentionally putting yourself in an accident is insurance fraud. There's no such thing as "music fraud" (at least in this construction), but the result is a sort of piracy insurance policy for the label. Naturally, though, the labels claim such exorbitant losses and damages from piracy that even $1 per iPod would hardly dent that figure.
If this went into effect, I would have a defense in court when I downloaded the entire Universal Label Catalog (All Their Music) off the net.
If only it worked that way...
Just to be clear, this whole idea of collecting on music players is nothing short of outrageous. But it doesn't have the legal implications or weight that have been popularized here. They CAN have their cake and eat it, too, and they know it. That's why it's important for me to ensure that these false notions don't become ingrained as part of the Internet groupthink--when you step back into the real world, you'll be equally screwed, with or without this fee.
Not really, though. There are countless ways of maneuvering around any such royalties, from framing it as an access toll to a deposit or anything in between. This added cost doesn't actually get you anywhere in litigation, most importantly because it in no way stipulates between you, the customer, and the label.
What's also interesting is that if this fee is added they have now unwittingly legimized the stolen music.
Far from it. Each tax payer contributes to fund their local DMV, and yet their services aren't free. The state collects a tax on car sales, which goes in most cases to road improvement, police departments, and the DMV (along with a truly bizarre array of other causes), but it's only part of the cost. You also pay taxes to a general fund, which is distributed to agencies and services you may never use (or even be aware of). Contributing some money cannot be construed as contributing sufficient money here.
You also pay for car insurance which protects you in the event of an accident; intentionally putting yourself in an accident is insurance fraud. There's no such thing as "music fraud" (at least in this construction), but the result is a sort of piracy insurance policy for the label. Naturally, though, the labels claim such exorbitant losses and damages from piracy that even $1 per iPod would hardly dent that figure.
If this went into effect, I would have a defense in court when I downloaded the entire Universal Label Catalog (All Their Music) off the net.
If only it worked that way...
Just to be clear, this whole idea of collecting on music players is nothing short of outrageous. But it doesn't have the legal implications or weight that have been popularized here. They CAN have their cake and eat it, too, and they know it. That's why it's important for me to ensure that these false notions don't become ingrained as part of the Internet groupthink--when you step back into the real world, you'll be equally screwed, with or without this fee.
cmaier
Apr 20, 03:27 PM
They're similar enough that an average person should be able to make a connection. Apple is filing a lawsuit against Samsung that doesn't have much chance of sticking, but that's not even the point, they want to scare Samsung into a settlement in all likelihood.
Think deeper. They're more similar than you think they are.
What makes you say it has no chance of sticking? Have you read the complaint? I have. I also read the ITC filings. They're not alike at all. The claims cover different IP, and even different TYPES of IP.
Think deeper. They're more similar than you think they are.
What makes you say it has no chance of sticking? Have you read the complaint? I have. I also read the ITC filings. They're not alike at all. The claims cover different IP, and even different TYPES of IP.
No comments:
Post a Comment