Multimedia
Sep 13, 11:20 PM
Well if the content is crap, who cares to watch? Content of TV is more important to me. I'd rather see a fascinating news show or program over rabbit ears than watch the Today Show in HD.
This wasn't clear the first time. You sounded like a crazed American Idol fan with your original post. And HD broadcasts are nothing new...This is NEW because it is on a 3 hour weekday morning telecast. That makes it NEW and NEWS. Nothing about content. I NEVER watch American Idol. You are judgemental.
Millions watch that crap so your opinion of it is irrelevant to the market forces.
This wasn't clear the first time. You sounded like a crazed American Idol fan with your original post. And HD broadcasts are nothing new...This is NEW because it is on a 3 hour weekday morning telecast. That makes it NEW and NEWS. Nothing about content. I NEVER watch American Idol. You are judgemental.
Millions watch that crap so your opinion of it is irrelevant to the market forces.
RebootD
Apr 12, 04:49 PM
The truly sad part about this is going to be when Apple doesn't deliver on our rumored promises.
I REALLY HOPE that Apple does what that article says, and does it WELL, with no bugs or issues that render the entire system useless, within a price point that's reasonable ($1500 --> $2500 for what's described).
Otherwise, it's going to make whatever update we do get for FCP moot.
Well everything outside of no tape capture option. I don't have a professional rig for video so I guess that would mean sticking with CS5. (As in I don't own a capture card, just use FW)
I REALLY HOPE that Apple does what that article says, and does it WELL, with no bugs or issues that render the entire system useless, within a price point that's reasonable ($1500 --> $2500 for what's described).
Otherwise, it's going to make whatever update we do get for FCP moot.
Well everything outside of no tape capture option. I don't have a professional rig for video so I guess that would mean sticking with CS5. (As in I don't own a capture card, just use FW)
nikhsub1
Apr 7, 10:20 PM
Wow. I bought mine at Best Buy on opening day and they sold out of them. Why in anybody's right mind would best buy not sell what they have?
Obviously you know little about retail and accounting.
Obviously you know little about retail and accounting.
halhiker
Apr 6, 01:43 PM
That's actually more than I expected.
colinbm
Apr 27, 08:27 AM
For those of you saying you found it cool, download any of the various geotagging apps and run that. You can then plot your location on a map and get the accuracy of GPS too.
Kabeyun
Mar 22, 01:03 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
...and last, at least as far as the spec war argument goes. You're grafting a computer-shopping mentality onto a tablet market, and people don't think of tablets as computers. People don't buy tablets based on specs, and the spec difference between current or impending offerings it not what will define the user experience.
...and last, at least as far as the spec war argument goes. You're grafting a computer-shopping mentality onto a tablet market, and people don't think of tablets as computers. People don't buy tablets based on specs, and the spec difference between current or impending offerings it not what will define the user experience.
nwcs
Mar 22, 01:00 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
For most people the specs don't mean squat. It's what you can do with it that matters to people. That and the name cache and in both cases rim is behind the curve. I don't think there will be an iPad killer in the conventional sense but we will see a lot of growth in android tablets and those two platforms will eventually dominate. And definitely don't discount the 1 year early mover advantage Apple has. They've reached a penetration level in industry that will really help.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
For most people the specs don't mean squat. It's what you can do with it that matters to people. That and the name cache and in both cases rim is behind the curve. I don't think there will be an iPad killer in the conventional sense but we will see a lot of growth in android tablets and those two platforms will eventually dominate. And definitely don't discount the 1 year early mover advantage Apple has. They've reached a penetration level in industry that will really help.
aimbdd
Apr 7, 11:06 PM
Just like nikon pulled their d7000 from best buy? :P
Accept they were pulled for selling them early.
Not that i minded getting it 3 days early :D
Accept they were pulled for selling them early.
Not that i minded getting it 3 days early :D
GregA
Apr 5, 06:06 PM
Would be grand if all this hype was for iMovie. :)
Apple needs to distinctly separate Final Cut Pro from consumer apps.
Personally as a Pro-sumer, I'd like to see iMovie align with the iPad version (use the timeline!) and sync to that. I'd like Final Cut Express as an option to do more advanced editing with my iMovie library - just choose which app I want. But these don't belong with NAB announcements :)
Apple needs to distinctly separate Final Cut Pro from consumer apps.
Personally as a Pro-sumer, I'd like to see iMovie align with the iPad version (use the timeline!) and sync to that. I'd like Final Cut Express as an option to do more advanced editing with my iMovie library - just choose which app I want. But these don't belong with NAB announcements :)
SuperCachetes
Mar 5, 11:39 AM
Quite true about 'continuation', but economic models probably require that we do, in order to keep the pyramid growing at the base.
Not sure what that has to do with the price of rice in China.
I seriously doubt that would be a legitimate complaint against homosexuality, much less color it as "immoral."
Nevertheless, I know several young, married (straight), professional women who have decided not ever to have children. I can't really identify with that, but it's their choice. Should I tell them they are ****ing up our economic future? :eek:
Not sure what that has to do with the price of rice in China.
I seriously doubt that would be a legitimate complaint against homosexuality, much less color it as "immoral."
Nevertheless, I know several young, married (straight), professional women who have decided not ever to have children. I can't really identify with that, but it's their choice. Should I tell them they are ****ing up our economic future? :eek:
MacRumors
Aug 16, 10:33 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Barefeats provides (http://www.barefeats.com/quad06.html) benchmarks comparing the Quad 3GHz Mac Pro (Xeon) vs the Quad G5 2.5GHz Power Mac (G5). This represents the new top of the line vs the old top of the line Mac.
They provide benchmarks for both non-Universal and Universal applications between the Mac Pro 3GHz, Mac Pro 2.66GHz and PowerMac G5 Quad 2.5GHz.
The top-end Mac Pro performed well compared to the Quad G5 with both Photoshop CS2 and After Effects 7.0 despite running under Rosetta emulation on the Mac Pro. Universal upgrades to these applications should provide additional performance boosts.
Meanwhile, Universal applications iMovie HD 6, Final Cut Pro 5, FileMaker Pro 8.5 and Cinebench 9.5 generally showed substantial improvements even in the 2.66GHz Mac Pro vs the 2.5GHz PowerMac.
There's no doubt that both versions of the Mac Pro are faster than the G5 Quad-Core running Universal Binary apps like iMovie, Final Cut Pro, etc. As you can see from the four UB tests we ran in this session, the Mac Pro 2.66GHz was as much as 62% faster than the Quad-Core G5/2.5GHz. The Mac Pro 3.0GHz was as much as 85% faster.
Barefeats provides (http://www.barefeats.com/quad06.html) benchmarks comparing the Quad 3GHz Mac Pro (Xeon) vs the Quad G5 2.5GHz Power Mac (G5). This represents the new top of the line vs the old top of the line Mac.
They provide benchmarks for both non-Universal and Universal applications between the Mac Pro 3GHz, Mac Pro 2.66GHz and PowerMac G5 Quad 2.5GHz.
The top-end Mac Pro performed well compared to the Quad G5 with both Photoshop CS2 and After Effects 7.0 despite running under Rosetta emulation on the Mac Pro. Universal upgrades to these applications should provide additional performance boosts.
Meanwhile, Universal applications iMovie HD 6, Final Cut Pro 5, FileMaker Pro 8.5 and Cinebench 9.5 generally showed substantial improvements even in the 2.66GHz Mac Pro vs the 2.5GHz PowerMac.
There's no doubt that both versions of the Mac Pro are faster than the G5 Quad-Core running Universal Binary apps like iMovie, Final Cut Pro, etc. As you can see from the four UB tests we ran in this session, the Mac Pro 2.66GHz was as much as 62% faster than the Quad-Core G5/2.5GHz. The Mac Pro 3.0GHz was as much as 85% faster.
ThunderSkunk
Apr 6, 01:31 PM
Zune.
Xoom.
DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO...
Xoom.
DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO...
shamino
Jul 21, 12:52 PM
i've just sold my dual g5 because
i plan to buy a new macpro in august.
You sold your existing computer now, so you can replace it with a system that has not yet been announced?
And what if this system doesn't ship until October or November?
I hope that G5 wasn't your only computer.
But seems that it will be already obsolate after 3 months.
"Obsolete"? Because it isn't the fastest computer in the world?
I hate to break it to you, but if you define "obsolete" as "less powerful than the best in the world", then you're going to be buying new computers every three months for the rest of your life.
So Intel is coming out with faster chips on a rapid schedule, so what? Even if Apple releases updated systems every three months, so what? Does this somehow mean the computer you buy today will suddenly become incapable of running the applications you want to run?
i plan to buy a new macpro in august.
You sold your existing computer now, so you can replace it with a system that has not yet been announced?
And what if this system doesn't ship until October or November?
I hope that G5 wasn't your only computer.
But seems that it will be already obsolate after 3 months.
"Obsolete"? Because it isn't the fastest computer in the world?
I hate to break it to you, but if you define "obsolete" as "less powerful than the best in the world", then you're going to be buying new computers every three months for the rest of your life.
So Intel is coming out with faster chips on a rapid schedule, so what? Even if Apple releases updated systems every three months, so what? Does this somehow mean the computer you buy today will suddenly become incapable of running the applications you want to run?
maclaptop
Apr 11, 04:51 PM
Where are all these bs claims coming from? Why wouldn't Apple release it in June as always?
I believe there are several factors at work causing this most likely time frame.
1) The effects of Japans disaster on parts supply.
2) Internal issues at Apple regarding more than one model being undecided.
3) Final touches being added to iOS5
Frankly I'd rather have a delay if it meant that Apple's going to make this one their best, most well debugged iPhone to date.
Their is no substitute for excellent final checks through quality control.
I believe there are several factors at work causing this most likely time frame.
1) The effects of Japans disaster on parts supply.
2) Internal issues at Apple regarding more than one model being undecided.
3) Final touches being added to iOS5
Frankly I'd rather have a delay if it meant that Apple's going to make this one their best, most well debugged iPhone to date.
Their is no substitute for excellent final checks through quality control.
Multimedia
Aug 19, 12:33 PM
And I'm not convinced this is only an application problem. When I run Handbrake on the Quad G5 alone it uses just over two cores 203% @ about 100fps analysis (1st Pass of 2) speed. If I add a Toast encode while that is happening, Handbrake takes a huge hit down to below 150% @ 70-80 fps analysis while Toast can only use about 130% instead of more alone. So the Tiger OS X seems to have difficulty managing more than one multicore application's core usage allocation up to its maximum capability - IE Tiger is not so MultiCore Enabeled as it could be IE Leopard probably will be much moreso - let's hope that is one of its TOP SECRETS.
When I ran tests on the Mac Pro at the Apple Store last Saturday between Toast and/or Handbrake, their use of more cores alone and together was much better. Handbrake alone can analyze up to around 134fps while writing at about 107 fps using about 1.5-1.75 cores. So while not yet fully optimized for Mac Pro yet, it's already outperforming the Quad G5 significantly. Handbrake would appear to analyze files about 33% faster while writing them about 15% faster while using 1.5 to 1.75 cores. Quad G5 does analysis @ about 100fps and writes about 93 fps (2nd Pass) using up to about 2.2 cores.
Toast 7.1 UB uses Mac Pro cores much more than it does Quad cores - in the range of 280 - 310% IE about 3 cores compared to only about 1.5 cores on the Quad G5 as well as on the Dual Core G5. Unfortunately I didn't have encode times for each of the sample files I brought with me from the Quad so I don't know the real time how much faster that really amounts to. Running simultaneously on the Mac Pro, Toast would use over 2.5 cores while handbrake would use only one or less than one at best.
Together simultaneously on Mac Pro 2.66 it's
Toast/Handbrake
2.7 cores/1 core best
2.5 cores/.75 core worst
Handbrake during Toast is down to as few as 60fps but sometimes up to 100fps as well. Toast meanwhile is Still consuming up to almost 3 cores with Handbrake running at the same time. So Toast would appear to be much more optimized for the Mac Pro's MultiCores than it is for the Quad G5's Multicores. Same could be said for Handbrake - especially since it is not really fully Optimized for Mac Pro yet.
When I ran tests on the Mac Pro at the Apple Store last Saturday between Toast and/or Handbrake, their use of more cores alone and together was much better. Handbrake alone can analyze up to around 134fps while writing at about 107 fps using about 1.5-1.75 cores. So while not yet fully optimized for Mac Pro yet, it's already outperforming the Quad G5 significantly. Handbrake would appear to analyze files about 33% faster while writing them about 15% faster while using 1.5 to 1.75 cores. Quad G5 does analysis @ about 100fps and writes about 93 fps (2nd Pass) using up to about 2.2 cores.
Toast 7.1 UB uses Mac Pro cores much more than it does Quad cores - in the range of 280 - 310% IE about 3 cores compared to only about 1.5 cores on the Quad G5 as well as on the Dual Core G5. Unfortunately I didn't have encode times for each of the sample files I brought with me from the Quad so I don't know the real time how much faster that really amounts to. Running simultaneously on the Mac Pro, Toast would use over 2.5 cores while handbrake would use only one or less than one at best.
Together simultaneously on Mac Pro 2.66 it's
Toast/Handbrake
2.7 cores/1 core best
2.5 cores/.75 core worst
Handbrake during Toast is down to as few as 60fps but sometimes up to 100fps as well. Toast meanwhile is Still consuming up to almost 3 cores with Handbrake running at the same time. So Toast would appear to be much more optimized for the Mac Pro's MultiCores than it is for the Quad G5's Multicores. Same could be said for Handbrake - especially since it is not really fully Optimized for Mac Pro yet.
MarkMS
Mar 31, 04:14 PM
And the Apple haters do yet another 180...
1. Macs
1995 to 2007: Don't use a Mac. Noone uses Macs.
2007 to Present: Don't use a Mac. Everyone uses a Mac.
2. Apps
1995 to 2/22/2011: Don't use Apple. There is no software and they can't do anything.
2/22 to Present: Apps? Who needs Apps as long as you have a robust UI?
3. Open
2007 to Today: Apple is a walled garden that only stupid lemmings use.
Today going forward: Controlling the OS is necessary and good for the consumer.
Exactly! I've heard every single one of those arguments, except instead of a lemming ... I'm an iSheep!
And for those of you that add "customizing/theming" as a great feature to Android, please take a look at what your peers are proud of. http://fuglyandroid.tumblr.com/
1. Macs
1995 to 2007: Don't use a Mac. Noone uses Macs.
2007 to Present: Don't use a Mac. Everyone uses a Mac.
2. Apps
1995 to 2/22/2011: Don't use Apple. There is no software and they can't do anything.
2/22 to Present: Apps? Who needs Apps as long as you have a robust UI?
3. Open
2007 to Today: Apple is a walled garden that only stupid lemmings use.
Today going forward: Controlling the OS is necessary and good for the consumer.
Exactly! I've heard every single one of those arguments, except instead of a lemming ... I'm an iSheep!
And for those of you that add "customizing/theming" as a great feature to Android, please take a look at what your peers are proud of. http://fuglyandroid.tumblr.com/
adjuster
Mar 26, 06:06 PM
There is one feature I really need--the ability to run TimeMachine on an encrypted disk. Does the full disk encryption in Lion allow Time Machine to run in real time. With Snow Leopard, Time Machine will operate only after the system is shut down.
yg17
Feb 28, 12:54 PM
A same-sex attracted person is living a "gay lifestyle" when he or she dates people of the same sex, "marries" people of the same sex, has same-sex sex, or does any combination of these things. I think that if same-sex attracted people are going to live together, they need to do that as though they were siblings, not as sex partners. In my opinion, they should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another.
Why do you care what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home?
Why do you care what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home?
rezenclowd3
Dec 7, 02:53 PM
So another patch for today adding mechanical damage. Must have the newest firmware...
Tones2
Apr 11, 01:26 PM
You guys know the average Joe don't go shopping for a new smart phone every other month?
This is a big deal to some of you guys only because you obsess over this topic almost daily.
Tell that to the million people who bought an iPad 2 about a year after the iPad 1 release.
Tony
This is a big deal to some of you guys only because you obsess over this topic almost daily.
Tell that to the million people who bought an iPad 2 about a year after the iPad 1 release.
Tony
ChickenSwartz
Aug 27, 08:24 AM
Not true.
Recent years, updates came right before the end of the promotion.
There is a strategic reason for this. Since there have been some issues with new Macs, this promotion will motivate some buyers not to wait. In the retail world waiting means there is a bigger chance the buyer will go else where (like to Dell or something). I am sure if you look at the profit on a Nano vs. a Mac you will see that if this promotion sells 1 Mac that wouldn't be sold without the promotion makes up for 5 or so Nanos that went with Macs that would have been sold anyway. This promotion is not cutting into Apple's profits; they are making more money off this.
Recent years, updates came right before the end of the promotion.
There is a strategic reason for this. Since there have been some issues with new Macs, this promotion will motivate some buyers not to wait. In the retail world waiting means there is a bigger chance the buyer will go else where (like to Dell or something). I am sure if you look at the profit on a Nano vs. a Mac you will see that if this promotion sells 1 Mac that wouldn't be sold without the promotion makes up for 5 or so Nanos that went with Macs that would have been sold anyway. This promotion is not cutting into Apple's profits; they are making more money off this.
Scottsdale
Apr 6, 11:31 AM
I'm pretty sure you are aware that Apple would use LV CPU in 13", not ULV. That bumps us to 2.3GHz plus Turbo. You have said this yourself too and I already covered the reason in my other post.
This is just a MR article and surprisingly, they don't have much idea about the TDPs. Hopefully they will correct their article so people won't live in confusion.
That isn't what this story reads, and I don't think anyone but you and I have even read the actual facts supposed here.
I actually find this one of the least accurate stories ever posted on MacRumors.com for several reasons... the OP is assuming ULV in the 13" MBA. The OP is assuming that if SB IGP is good enough for MBP it's fine for MBA. There is no rumor or timeframe listing these chips especially not in the 13" MBA. It seems like it's a blatant attempt to stir up activity without any real facts, rumors, or even common knowledge about the chips used in the MBAs.
Certainly the people haven't read the story or they're somehow focusing on the 11" MBA. Sure, this would be fine for the 11" MBA in terms of CPU clock speed but even then it's a gigantic loss in the graphics capabilities. That leads to a problem with the author saying good enough for 13" MBP than good enough for MBA. However, the IGP clock speed used in this ULV chip will be nearly a 50% drop in graphics performance. That for me doesn't equate to if this then that...
I am disappointed with MR for even writing such a poor piece of garbage. Forget that I cannot stand the SB IGP... the assumptions made here are absurd! It
definitely doesn't warrant this sort of reply from the fans of the MBA. You and I
could assume things all day, but that isn't the story written.
This is just a MR article and surprisingly, they don't have much idea about the TDPs. Hopefully they will correct their article so people won't live in confusion.
That isn't what this story reads, and I don't think anyone but you and I have even read the actual facts supposed here.
I actually find this one of the least accurate stories ever posted on MacRumors.com for several reasons... the OP is assuming ULV in the 13" MBA. The OP is assuming that if SB IGP is good enough for MBP it's fine for MBA. There is no rumor or timeframe listing these chips especially not in the 13" MBA. It seems like it's a blatant attempt to stir up activity without any real facts, rumors, or even common knowledge about the chips used in the MBAs.
Certainly the people haven't read the story or they're somehow focusing on the 11" MBA. Sure, this would be fine for the 11" MBA in terms of CPU clock speed but even then it's a gigantic loss in the graphics capabilities. That leads to a problem with the author saying good enough for 13" MBP than good enough for MBA. However, the IGP clock speed used in this ULV chip will be nearly a 50% drop in graphics performance. That for me doesn't equate to if this then that...
I am disappointed with MR for even writing such a poor piece of garbage. Forget that I cannot stand the SB IGP... the assumptions made here are absurd! It
definitely doesn't warrant this sort of reply from the fans of the MBA. You and I
could assume things all day, but that isn't the story written.
Billy Boo Bob
Nov 28, 11:02 PM
1 Random artist finds inspiration and writes a song
2 Artist decides his song is so good that he/she records it in a professional studio (which he can rent) so the sound quality is superb
3 Artists logs into the iTMS and publishes his song
4 Artists gets $ from every song sold and the iTMS charges the artist for the distribution
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
2 Artist decides his song is so good that he/she records it in a professional studio (which he can rent) so the sound quality is superb
3 Artists logs into the iTMS and publishes his song
4 Artists gets $ from every song sold and the iTMS charges the artist for the distribution
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
11thIndian
Apr 6, 08:05 AM
Yikes! Better offload my copy of the current version of FCS before it drops too low.
Any takers? :D
If you're planning on buying the new FCS at an "Upgrade" price, you can't sell your old version. You still need the serial # for installations.
Any takers? :D
If you're planning on buying the new FCS at an "Upgrade" price, you can't sell your old version. You still need the serial # for installations.
No comments:
Post a Comment