- March 2, 2011 by Jessica Boaz
- justin bieber rolling stone
- justin bieber pictures 2011.
- A justin piracy orjustin
- justin bieber haircut 2011 for
- Justin+ieber+funny+pictures+2011 Visits humane wp comp posted gif is not going to stopfrom
- justin bieber armpit hair
- funny justin bieber pictures
- Behold the face of pure pain.
- hit in Funny bieber got
- making funny faces,
- funny justin bieber edits.
- funny justin bieber edits.
- funny justin bieber pics 2011.
- Justin+ieber+face+2011
- +ieber+making+funny+faces
- justin bieber pics 2011.
- wanna Justin+ieber+face+
- justin bieber scary halloween
chutch15
Sep 12, 03:12 PM
I just picked up the Belkin Grip Vue at BestBuy in Wilmington, DE. Very pleased.
aiqw9182
Mar 24, 05:12 PM
I am talking about graphics capabilities now.
Actually, you are just confused and trying to back peddle:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12245564&postcount=105
You are talking DirectX version numbers(which already has nothing to do with what we're talking about and has no bearing under OS X) in relation to OpenCL when OpenCL has nothing to do with DirectX? Something doesn't add up here.
Actually, you are just confused and trying to back peddle:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12245564&postcount=105
You are talking DirectX version numbers(which already has nothing to do with what we're talking about and has no bearing under OS X) in relation to OpenCL when OpenCL has nothing to do with DirectX? Something doesn't add up here.
Xanderxxx
Aug 6, 09:36 PM
"Mac OS X Leopard, Introducing Vista 2.0"
"Mac OS X Leopard, Hasta la Vista, Vista"
VINCENT:
"Mac OS X Leopard, Hasta la Vista, Vista"
VINCENT:
pika2000
Oct 9, 04:36 PM
This issue seems to be mostly discussed in US centric blogs/sites/forums and US users. The iPhone 4 is shipped worldwide. So why aren't we seeing the same amount of outrage from users overseas?
SubaruNation555
Nov 24, 06:08 PM
HP ZR24w to replace my 23" Cinema Display. It seems there aren't many 24" IPS 16:10 monitors around for under $500.
http://p.gzhls.at/519550.jpg
http://p.gzhls.at/519550.jpg
ZoomZoomZoom
Sep 7, 03:28 AM
Dude, the MBP was updated in late April of this year, why would you think it'll be updated four and a half months later??
Because Apple is no longer in a hardware reality distortion field.
Because the MBP is a part of a Pro line, and the consumer iMacs have merom.
Because merom easily swaps in place of yonah at the same price.
I'm hopeful for the new MBP rev. They could have introduced C2D MBPs today - why didn't they? Maybe they're doing more than just a processor change, which might be why the iMacs got their update first. (Apart from the 24'' iMac, the rest of the iMac line is largely untouched.)
Because Apple is no longer in a hardware reality distortion field.
Because the MBP is a part of a Pro line, and the consumer iMacs have merom.
Because merom easily swaps in place of yonah at the same price.
I'm hopeful for the new MBP rev. They could have introduced C2D MBPs today - why didn't they? Maybe they're doing more than just a processor change, which might be why the iMacs got their update first. (Apart from the 24'' iMac, the rest of the iMac line is largely untouched.)
TangoCharlie
Sep 1, 11:59 AM
Wow. That would be great news. I'd think about one of those instead of a mac pro.... please make it have fw800. Then I really would take it over a pro.
That's exactly why Apple differentiates its product lines. They want you to fork out for a Pro :)
Equally, they DON'T want you to buy a Dell..... which is why I think they will introduce a "desktop" Mac.... But hey, it might not come with FW800 :(
That's exactly why Apple differentiates its product lines. They want you to fork out for a Pro :)
Equally, they DON'T want you to buy a Dell..... which is why I think they will introduce a "desktop" Mac.... But hey, it might not come with FW800 :(
MrFrankly
Oct 23, 08:12 AM
I always by my portables in America.
Don't you end up spending so much money on tax when you enter the UK again that it isn't really worth it?
Don't you end up spending so much money on tax when you enter the UK again that it isn't really worth it?
skunk
Mar 19, 08:16 PM
Heartwarming as the death and destruction being visited on the regime in Tripoli may be, the ongoing glee on the one hand and disinformation on the other being willingly retailed by the mass media is sickening. The truth is that we have absolutely no idea what is really going on. The information from Twitter appears to be wildly inaccurate, even misleading, and the information from reporters on the ground seems to be pure guesswork informed by propaganda. Truth, as ever, is the first casualty of war, and nobody seems to care as long as they can fabricate a good narrative.
razzmatazz
Aug 6, 09:49 PM
They did at WWDC '04 (when Tiger was introduced) with slogans like "Redmond, Start Your Photocopiers" and the word "Longhorn" in the Spotlight search field. ;)
Yea I remember watching that one. I thought that was pretty funny!:D
Yea I remember watching that one. I thought that was pretty funny!:D
PodPacker
Mar 26, 10:30 PM
Just got my hands on the latest DVDs and I hope to have this (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814161350&cm_re=his_6870-_-14-161-350-_-Product&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mmc=AFC-C8Junction-_-na-_-na-_-na&AID=10446076&PID=3640352&SID=skim292X457X738749bfb67cbcce684cebad603a1577) soon. I'll let you guys know how it turns out on my Mac Pro 3,1
rasmasyean
Mar 18, 08:59 AM
I don't think it (or any of the other times) really had to do much with "democracy" unless it serves the end goal. Secure the oil.
Lets put it this way.
If we let Quadafi "win" which he would, by slaughtering or not...heck it's civil war right? They have a right to kill eachother in war and then the loser will face crimes for it as usual.
If we support the "rebel government", we will get oil favors theoretically from the new regime AND, since we destroyed all Quadafi's high value military assets, we can sell "new and improved" weapons to the new regime.
As always, I think there's a deep economic angle...but this time, it's almost like it's a "wow...cool, someone is fighting again so lets try to maximize our potential future weapons sales by saying saying only ONE side is not allowed to kill ppl! ". It's almost hilarious if you think about it.
Lets put it this way.
If we let Quadafi "win" which he would, by slaughtering or not...heck it's civil war right? They have a right to kill eachother in war and then the loser will face crimes for it as usual.
If we support the "rebel government", we will get oil favors theoretically from the new regime AND, since we destroyed all Quadafi's high value military assets, we can sell "new and improved" weapons to the new regime.
As always, I think there's a deep economic angle...but this time, it's almost like it's a "wow...cool, someone is fighting again so lets try to maximize our potential future weapons sales by saying saying only ONE side is not allowed to kill ppl! ". It's almost hilarious if you think about it.
rezenclowd3
Jan 7, 12:26 AM
That's a heck of a decision! I'd sell it back though. If he built that car, there's a huge bond he's now missing. There's always a mint E30 M3 out there somewhere. ;)
Yup. I will not find a buyer that has more invested into a car than the one who did the majority of the restoration/ engine+suspension swap. Damn, I've only had the car for 6 days, and he called again today to make another hard offer. I have to put my thinking cap on, but honestly I am already tired of searching for a good DD/ AutoX car to buy. Pics to come of another car should something happen:eek: LOL.
MMMM, E30 M3. Gives me chills....
Yup. I will not find a buyer that has more invested into a car than the one who did the majority of the restoration/ engine+suspension swap. Damn, I've only had the car for 6 days, and he called again today to make another hard offer. I have to put my thinking cap on, but honestly I am already tired of searching for a good DD/ AutoX car to buy. Pics to come of another car should something happen:eek: LOL.
MMMM, E30 M3. Gives me chills....
rasmasyean
Mar 19, 12:53 PM
Umm kind of hard to do this with out the US and its military power. My understanding is the US it mostly going to provide support for it but not as much of the combat forces. The support being things like aerial refueling as we have the most of those flying gas tanks. They will circle over the Mediterranean Sea refueling planes going to and from missions. Kind of key to extend the range of the fighters and Fighter bombers.
Other thing the US I believe will provide is cruise missals as that they can launch from the Mediterranean Sea. This mostly to take out the Air Defenses. They might provide a few bombers to help take out artillery
US is not taking the lead. But is providing support. US is going to have the other countries really provide most of the planes needed for this.
Actually, the US is supplying EWar and Communications as well. The AWACS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airborne_Early_Warning_and_Control) planes themselves can be considered like "mother ships" of today and fill command and control functions.
Command craft often make the decisions and lead attack and defense tactics. It's not necessarily the ppl who have the "front line" forces are in the ones who are the major player. "Fighter planes" are just like drones with people in them. They follow orders and do not lead anything. It would be like saying the marines are the leading authority in war. They are not. They are just machine operators who pull the trigger.
It's really too early to tell what we are going to see, because they never tell you anything. Maybe with this rag tag army, you don't need $billion stealth planes to beat them up so you might not see these kind of things. Maybe later on you will see some predators or some crap only, who knows. But for now they just give the press a story and if the reporter steps out of line, they get him fired, like Geraldo Rivera during the Iraqi Freedom.
Other thing the US I believe will provide is cruise missals as that they can launch from the Mediterranean Sea. This mostly to take out the Air Defenses. They might provide a few bombers to help take out artillery
US is not taking the lead. But is providing support. US is going to have the other countries really provide most of the planes needed for this.
Actually, the US is supplying EWar and Communications as well. The AWACS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airborne_Early_Warning_and_Control) planes themselves can be considered like "mother ships" of today and fill command and control functions.
Command craft often make the decisions and lead attack and defense tactics. It's not necessarily the ppl who have the "front line" forces are in the ones who are the major player. "Fighter planes" are just like drones with people in them. They follow orders and do not lead anything. It would be like saying the marines are the leading authority in war. They are not. They are just machine operators who pull the trigger.
It's really too early to tell what we are going to see, because they never tell you anything. Maybe with this rag tag army, you don't need $billion stealth planes to beat them up so you might not see these kind of things. Maybe later on you will see some predators or some crap only, who knows. But for now they just give the press a story and if the reporter steps out of line, they get him fired, like Geraldo Rivera during the Iraqi Freedom.
newagemac
May 3, 09:02 AM
But my iPhone is far more limited than my first Windows PC in that regard. Even with Windows 95 I could go from one app to another while letting the other on load in the background. iOS freezes everything. If I want a video to upload on Facebook, I have no choice but to keep the app open until it's done. On my PC, I can start the upload and then move on to other things while the process is completing.
I find moving to non-true multitasking as a step backward, not a step forward. As you said, out systems capabilites are able to do so much more. I can be playing a computer game, hit the Windows key, and open a media player and never see a drop in performance. Why limit your computer to one task at a time? Kind of defeats the point of multi-core processors.
Uh, this comment is entirely wrong. With iOS, you can download something and move to another app and it will continue downloading in the background. The multitasking APIs have all the obvious backgrounding tasks covered and will likely include more if needed. Basically the goal is to allow background tasks when needed and when not needed let the app suspend and release resources to the apps you actually need. This method in iOS has proven to work far better than traditional operating systems like Mac OS X and Windows. That's why they are bringing it "Back to the Mac OS". The best parts of what they developed in iOS are being added in Lion.
I think most people's problem is that they mistakenly viewed iOS as inferior in every way to Mac OS X but in many ways it is cutting edge and far better than OS X and Windows have ever been. The way iOS multitasking works is the reason very powerful and memory hungry apps like iMove and GarageBand for iPad work so surprisingly well on such a limited memory device. The apps get to use a much larger percentage of the CPU, GPU, and RAM than they do on traditional OSes under normal usage where you have multiple apps open.
Right now I have a bunch of tabs open in Safari on my Mac and it's consuming a little over 1GB of RAM and lots of CPU. If I switch to Photoshop, Safari is still going to be using up all that RAM and CPU I really need for Photoshop when I don't plan on using Safari again until later today. And I don't want to shut it down because I have a bunch things in these tabs that I want to get back to later today including partially typed forum replies, halfway read articles, etc. On the iPad, Safari would suspend and release the RAM and CPU to my currently used RAM/CPU hungry app. That's what they need to bring to Lion.
I find moving to non-true multitasking as a step backward, not a step forward. As you said, out systems capabilites are able to do so much more. I can be playing a computer game, hit the Windows key, and open a media player and never see a drop in performance. Why limit your computer to one task at a time? Kind of defeats the point of multi-core processors.
Uh, this comment is entirely wrong. With iOS, you can download something and move to another app and it will continue downloading in the background. The multitasking APIs have all the obvious backgrounding tasks covered and will likely include more if needed. Basically the goal is to allow background tasks when needed and when not needed let the app suspend and release resources to the apps you actually need. This method in iOS has proven to work far better than traditional operating systems like Mac OS X and Windows. That's why they are bringing it "Back to the Mac OS". The best parts of what they developed in iOS are being added in Lion.
I think most people's problem is that they mistakenly viewed iOS as inferior in every way to Mac OS X but in many ways it is cutting edge and far better than OS X and Windows have ever been. The way iOS multitasking works is the reason very powerful and memory hungry apps like iMove and GarageBand for iPad work so surprisingly well on such a limited memory device. The apps get to use a much larger percentage of the CPU, GPU, and RAM than they do on traditional OSes under normal usage where you have multiple apps open.
Right now I have a bunch of tabs open in Safari on my Mac and it's consuming a little over 1GB of RAM and lots of CPU. If I switch to Photoshop, Safari is still going to be using up all that RAM and CPU I really need for Photoshop when I don't plan on using Safari again until later today. And I don't want to shut it down because I have a bunch things in these tabs that I want to get back to later today including partially typed forum replies, halfway read articles, etc. On the iPad, Safari would suspend and release the RAM and CPU to my currently used RAM/CPU hungry app. That's what they need to bring to Lion.
arn
Apr 12, 09:02 PM
http://s3.amazonaws.com/twitpic/photos/large/275779449.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAJF3XCCKACR3QDMOA&Expires=1302661120&Signature=nuq9DTy9AX2iOGRh%2Fy1XWUXDzaA%3D
well, in cast there was any doubt.
well, in cast there was any doubt.
k995
Apr 23, 03:17 AM
you can turn off the GPS in a phone and most people assume that when you do it stops tracking you yet as it already been shown it just starts storing info base the cell towers.
I just do not like the fact you can not opt out of it. It just feels wrong to me.
Not just wrong but probably illegal in several countries.
My own country belgium for example its illegal to store such data without consent of the person itself.
I just do not like the fact you can not opt out of it. It just feels wrong to me.
Not just wrong but probably illegal in several countries.
My own country belgium for example its illegal to store such data without consent of the person itself.
macnerdiac
Sep 8, 11:18 AM
Does anyone know of any companies making new cases to fit the size of the new ipod touch 4G?:confused:
mac4lifenyc
Apr 19, 11:23 AM
I read through a bunch of these posts and I agree with some of you who think the iPod Classic is the best one, based on capacity alone. But the screen is too small now. I too also like to travel with my entire music library and videos - I never know what I'll be in the mood to listen to or watch. That said, if I could offer advice to Apple, I'd say give us the 160GB or 220GB capacity with an iPod Touch interface. Make it as thick as the current iPod Classic if you have to, but give me a larger screen and the same icon-driven interface of the iPhone and iPod Touch. Keep the price at $249 or $299 even, and I'll wait in line for it.
toddybody
Apr 19, 02:15 PM
Seriously?! How long have you been waiting? Since last refresh?
Keep dreaming. They couldn't even get a Radeon HD 5770, let alone a 5850. The best that could be done was a 5750 in the 27", and while it's not a terrible GPU, it's certainly nowhere near pro-level.
Lulz to that. It's not like those things weren't key to the Early 2011 MacBook Pros being as critically acclaimed as they are now.
No. While Mac mini updates could be right around the corner, the two are on different release timelines and aren't always released at the same time. Essentially, it's irrelevant.
If the 5750 was the best that we got on the highest end model of current, then I'd be shocked if we got anything past 6770. We're definitely not getting cards that use up as much power as the iMac itself or require a second six-pin connector in the Desktop PCIe equivalent.
Since July 2010; not even a full year really.
Sure, but that doesn't mean it'll ever happen.
How many of those machines have you seen naked? As in, without the glass or panel with bare innards in full view? My guess is not very many. They don't have the room to engineer a better video card in the 27". It's almost a wonder they even have the room for something like the Radeon HD 5750 in what they have now. It's not like they took the design of the 21.5", gave it a larger chasis and screen and suddenly had more room to play with. Even so, as it stands, both sizes of iMac get extraordinarily hot. Sure, the 5750 in the Mid-2010 27" model draws less heat than the 4850 in the Late-2009 27" model, but that difference is negligible and even with a 6 series GPU's improvement, I doubt the difference will be substantial enough to warrant THAT much more power relative to the 6 series' lineup.
So, no, they couldn't engineer THAT much better of a card if they wanted. Not without making the iMac thicker than it already is. But it's Apple, they never do.
Source URL: https://free1image.blogspot.com/2011/05/justin-bieber-funny-faces-2011.html
Visit free image for daily updated images of art collection
Keep dreaming. They couldn't even get a Radeon HD 5770, let alone a 5850. The best that could be done was a 5750 in the 27", and while it's not a terrible GPU, it's certainly nowhere near pro-level.
Lulz to that. It's not like those things weren't key to the Early 2011 MacBook Pros being as critically acclaimed as they are now.
No. While Mac mini updates could be right around the corner, the two are on different release timelines and aren't always released at the same time. Essentially, it's irrelevant.
If the 5750 was the best that we got on the highest end model of current, then I'd be shocked if we got anything past 6770. We're definitely not getting cards that use up as much power as the iMac itself or require a second six-pin connector in the Desktop PCIe equivalent.
Since July 2010; not even a full year really.
Sure, but that doesn't mean it'll ever happen.
How many of those machines have you seen naked? As in, without the glass or panel with bare innards in full view? My guess is not very many. They don't have the room to engineer a better video card in the 27". It's almost a wonder they even have the room for something like the Radeon HD 5750 in what they have now. It's not like they took the design of the 21.5", gave it a larger chasis and screen and suddenly had more room to play with. Even so, as it stands, both sizes of iMac get extraordinarily hot. Sure, the 5750 in the Mid-2010 27" model draws less heat than the 4850 in the Late-2009 27" model, but that difference is negligible and even with a 6 series GPU's improvement, I doubt the difference will be substantial enough to warrant THAT much more power relative to the 6 series' lineup.
So, no, they couldn't engineer THAT much better of a card if they wanted. Not without making the iMac thicker than it already is. But it's Apple, they never do.
Irishman
Apr 20, 07:32 AM
I'm sure it's been done to death, but I spent some time actually thinking about realistic-ish speculations of what the new line could look like. I think they're going to get rid of one SKU ( the step up 27" without the quad i7), because it's kind of redundant, and for the $100 price difference, I can't imagine anyone NOT spending the extra modey to get the quad core). The only spec that is more of a wishful thinking piece is the inclusion of the HD6800M 1GB card in the 27" quad i7. THAT would be a beast!
Common Upgrades
1. Thunderbolt port
2. HDMI out
3. Sandybridge
Now, here's the model breakdown:
21.5" (1920x1080) display
2.8 GHz i5 processor
4 GB RAM
500 GB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1199.99
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.2 GHz i5 processor
8 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1499.99
27" (2560x1440) display
3.2 GHz i5 processor
4 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 5870 (512MB)
HDMI out
$1699.99
27" (2560x1440) display
3.5 GHz quad i7 processor
8 GB RAM
2 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 6970 (1 GB)
HDMI out
$1999.99
Common Upgrades
1. Thunderbolt port
2. HDMI out
3. Sandybridge
Now, here's the model breakdown:
21.5" (1920x1080) display
2.8 GHz i5 processor
4 GB RAM
500 GB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1199.99
21.5" (1920x1080) display
3.2 GHz i5 processor
8 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 4870 (256MB)
HDMI out
$1499.99
27" (2560x1440) display
3.2 GHz i5 processor
4 GB RAM
1 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 5870 (512MB)
HDMI out
$1699.99
27" (2560x1440) display
3.5 GHz quad i7 processor
8 GB RAM
2 TB HD
Thunderbolt
ATI Radeon HD 6970 (1 GB)
HDMI out
$1999.99
jbyun04
Jun 23, 01:37 AM
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/80/211502142_db3000b150.jpg?v=0
If anybody's seen that Date Night movie with Tina Fey and Steve Carrell, Mark Wahlberg uses custom touch screen Macs (well you can tell it's iMacs and ACDs but they made it look like a typical Spy style touch screen) in the movie and it looks a lot like that. If that's what Apple releases, I would be blown away.
If anybody's seen that Date Night movie with Tina Fey and Steve Carrell, Mark Wahlberg uses custom touch screen Macs (well you can tell it's iMacs and ACDs but they made it look like a typical Spy style touch screen) in the movie and it looks a lot like that. If that's what Apple releases, I would be blown away.
SeaFox
Dec 28, 01:52 AM
anything is possible minus 1 thing: the option to dock and iPod simply is so out of place that I do not know why it keeps getting brought up. iTV is focused on streaming content from your computer, not your iPod.
I think an iPod dock is a great idea. It would be nice to be able to use your iTV for something without a computer running. Hey, take your iPod to a friend's house and you can all watch a movie at their house from your collection, just like taking your entire video library with you.
There are two problems with this:
1) HD content takes up a huge amount of space. So if Apple did offer HD movies, the copy iTunes will transfer to your iPod would be reduced quality.
2) iTunes purchases would not be playable on the component outputs on the iTV. The movie studios would require you use an HDMI connection or something else that supported HDCP to ensure you didn't copy the movie out of the iTunes ecosphere.
As several of us have discussed before, my hope is that iTV will be able to stream all forms of content on my computer, but with particular emphasis on digital media. So if I want to bring a word doc up and type or a movie I am working on in final cut pro, I can do so. Similarly, and with more fully developed components all my digital media can be run on my tv. The goal is to make this experience integrate all the entertainment features we love, but throughout our homes. Quality preservation is essential and I think they will work to ensure that takes place.
The issue here is you're asking your iTV to open other files, in other words, you're asking it to be a regular computer. That isn't going to work because it makes the OS/interface more complicated. A home entertainment component needs to be simple and fast. This is where Apple's embedded OSX rumors would be coming in. Everyone read that and thought about the Apple Phone because that was the hot topic of the week and the was the notion of a PDA Apple phone. But an embedded real-time operating system is just what the iTV needs.
People need to stop comparing the iTV to a Mac Mini, they should thinking of it the same way you think of an XBox compared to a Windows PC. Yeah, they're both made by Microsoft, but the XBox doesn't run Windows, it runs a smaller GUI on top of what is mostly a DirectX back end.
What's funny is the reason people keep thinking of the Mini is because what consumers really want is an Apple DVR, a Mac Mini with a little stronger hardware, no external power supply, and a built in tuner. Add PVR functionality to Front Row and maybe a little bit more expansive remote and you'd have that. But since the Mini isn't expandable, it isn't even possible for a consumer to cobble together the solution themselves from a PCI tuner card and DVR software available, the closest they can do has lots of "extra parts" lying around from the ElGato external tuner, a monitor adapter to give them the connection they need, and the Mini's power supply, and it still would not be as easy to navigate since a keyboard would probably be needed at some point.
So a MacMini wont download and play a HD movie or display a word doc, and you need the iTV to accomplish this basic task?
No, it will do those things, but a MacMini costs $600. Not everyone wants to keep their main computer hooked up to the TV. The iTV allows them to watch their iTunes Store-purchased movies on a larger screen than their regular monitor without moving their computer.
Also, most people don’t need final cut pro or photo shop. So, that’s why I was thinking this could be a basic computer. If not you will need the mac mini to go with it, and why not simply include the iTV with the Mac Mini so you don’t have two devises in a limited shelf space.
The iTV is meant to be an add-on to an existing Macintosh household. Not a self-contained entertainment product like a CableCo box or a PS2.
The idea is the iTV would support more common TV connection methods out of the box, be designed to fit in better aesthetically with home entertainment components, offer better video performance, overall stability, and lower power usage than a MacMini for less.
Is the problem the iTV will address processing the images or scaling them?
I hope so. Maybe it will be upconverting for watching current iTunes movies on an HDTV?
I think an iPod dock is a great idea. It would be nice to be able to use your iTV for something without a computer running. Hey, take your iPod to a friend's house and you can all watch a movie at their house from your collection, just like taking your entire video library with you.
There are two problems with this:
1) HD content takes up a huge amount of space. So if Apple did offer HD movies, the copy iTunes will transfer to your iPod would be reduced quality.
2) iTunes purchases would not be playable on the component outputs on the iTV. The movie studios would require you use an HDMI connection or something else that supported HDCP to ensure you didn't copy the movie out of the iTunes ecosphere.
As several of us have discussed before, my hope is that iTV will be able to stream all forms of content on my computer, but with particular emphasis on digital media. So if I want to bring a word doc up and type or a movie I am working on in final cut pro, I can do so. Similarly, and with more fully developed components all my digital media can be run on my tv. The goal is to make this experience integrate all the entertainment features we love, but throughout our homes. Quality preservation is essential and I think they will work to ensure that takes place.
The issue here is you're asking your iTV to open other files, in other words, you're asking it to be a regular computer. That isn't going to work because it makes the OS/interface more complicated. A home entertainment component needs to be simple and fast. This is where Apple's embedded OSX rumors would be coming in. Everyone read that and thought about the Apple Phone because that was the hot topic of the week and the was the notion of a PDA Apple phone. But an embedded real-time operating system is just what the iTV needs.
People need to stop comparing the iTV to a Mac Mini, they should thinking of it the same way you think of an XBox compared to a Windows PC. Yeah, they're both made by Microsoft, but the XBox doesn't run Windows, it runs a smaller GUI on top of what is mostly a DirectX back end.
What's funny is the reason people keep thinking of the Mini is because what consumers really want is an Apple DVR, a Mac Mini with a little stronger hardware, no external power supply, and a built in tuner. Add PVR functionality to Front Row and maybe a little bit more expansive remote and you'd have that. But since the Mini isn't expandable, it isn't even possible for a consumer to cobble together the solution themselves from a PCI tuner card and DVR software available, the closest they can do has lots of "extra parts" lying around from the ElGato external tuner, a monitor adapter to give them the connection they need, and the Mini's power supply, and it still would not be as easy to navigate since a keyboard would probably be needed at some point.
So a MacMini wont download and play a HD movie or display a word doc, and you need the iTV to accomplish this basic task?
No, it will do those things, but a MacMini costs $600. Not everyone wants to keep their main computer hooked up to the TV. The iTV allows them to watch their iTunes Store-purchased movies on a larger screen than their regular monitor without moving their computer.
Also, most people don’t need final cut pro or photo shop. So, that’s why I was thinking this could be a basic computer. If not you will need the mac mini to go with it, and why not simply include the iTV with the Mac Mini so you don’t have two devises in a limited shelf space.
The iTV is meant to be an add-on to an existing Macintosh household. Not a self-contained entertainment product like a CableCo box or a PS2.
The idea is the iTV would support more common TV connection methods out of the box, be designed to fit in better aesthetically with home entertainment components, offer better video performance, overall stability, and lower power usage than a MacMini for less.
Is the problem the iTV will address processing the images or scaling them?
I hope so. Maybe it will be upconverting for watching current iTunes movies on an HDTV?
twoodcc
Sep 6, 12:01 PM
Remind me to never ask you for computer advice.
The parents bought a top of the line g4 iMac back when superdrives were 2x.
They still haven't used the superdrive to burn a dvd.
fine by me.....do what you will. that's them, but what about their kids? or anyone else who ever uses it? what about backing up their data?*
say what you will, but a dvd burner is always worth it
The parents bought a top of the line g4 iMac back when superdrives were 2x.
They still haven't used the superdrive to burn a dvd.
fine by me.....do what you will. that's them, but what about their kids? or anyone else who ever uses it? what about backing up their data?*
say what you will, but a dvd burner is always worth it
Source URL: https://free1image.blogspot.com/2011/05/justin-bieber-funny-faces-2011.html
Visit free image for daily updated images of art collection
