omegaphil6
Feb 8, 06:57 AM
http://www.jimmirehman.com/charger/Blackedout.jpg
2008 Dodge Charger SE
http://www.jimmirehman.com/charger/Signaturev1.jpg
2008 Dodge Charger SE
http://www.jimmirehman.com/charger/Signaturev1.jpg
lordonuthin
Mar 23, 04:50 PM
yes, congrats to designed for 1 million points!
and congrats to you, whiterabbit for 11 million points!
but why is it not showing you hit 11 million points for the team?
Thanks.
I don't know? :confused:
and congrats to you, whiterabbit for 11 million points!
but why is it not showing you hit 11 million points for the team?
Thanks.
I don't know? :confused:
rasmasyean
Mar 19, 04:06 PM
is that why the war in afghanistan ended so successfully years ago? oh wait..... :p
It looks pretty successful to me.
Justin Bieber, Katy Perry,
Justin Bieber kissed By
Rihanna. Beyonce Katy Perry
Justin Bieber gets some sugar
katy perry justin bieber,
Russell Brand, Justin Bieber
It looks pretty successful to me.
Angrisano
Sep 6, 07:40 PM
I'm a bit disappointed by this latest update as well. I'm still waiting for a headless Mac that will support my 19 inch dual monitors for under $2K. I recently built a nice Shuttle mini PC (not much bigger than the mini) with a P4 3ghz processor, 2gb ram, 250gb hard drive, 256mb graphics card and Litescribe DVD burner all for under $500.
Now I don't expect to pay so little for so much when buying a Mac. In fact I'm willing to pay double for the same specs. The trouble is, right now in Apple's line up you simply can't do it. Where is our mid-range expandable tower? I don't need all the power of the quad Xeon and my pocketbook doesn't need to pay that price.
I just want a decent middle of the road, expandable Mac for around $1K. I can build two really nice PCs for this price. Why can't I get one Mac?
Now I don't expect to pay so little for so much when buying a Mac. In fact I'm willing to pay double for the same specs. The trouble is, right now in Apple's line up you simply can't do it. Where is our mid-range expandable tower? I don't need all the power of the quad Xeon and my pocketbook doesn't need to pay that price.
I just want a decent middle of the road, expandable Mac for around $1K. I can build two really nice PCs for this price. Why can't I get one Mac?
azentropy
Apr 19, 11:13 AM
I'll put in a plug again hoping for a Matte screen option.
ZilogZ80
Apr 11, 06:54 AM
Manual (stick) shift cars are rare today and I'm wondering how many people still know how to drive them. How did you learn and do you have a desire to own one?
What a wonderfully US-centric view you have there. :)
In the UK if you pass your test in an automatic then you are only allowed to drive automatics. I've never met anyone who has done this (there must be a few out there though!)
What a wonderfully US-centric view you have there. :)
In the UK if you pass your test in an automatic then you are only allowed to drive automatics. I've never met anyone who has done this (there must be a few out there though!)
aswitcher
Jan 2, 12:40 AM
With iTV (whatever) I expect Apple to release firmware upgrades for all current model Macs to enable their 802.11N capable wireless.
I also think the Mini and Airport Extreme/Expresses will get and update to have 11N.
I also think the Mini and Airport Extreme/Expresses will get and update to have 11N.
iEvolution
Mar 23, 02:29 PM
The chance that the iPod Classic is updated to 220GB is zero. Apple has no plans to ever update a hard drive based non-touch portable device (they would not waste their time), and they've shown even less interest in increasing the capacity of any device beyond even 64GB flash.
Tony
Yeah man, because it would be just so much effort to swap the 160GB for the 220GB..it would just cost WAYY too much money and too much time.
What a ignorant post.:rolleyes:
The COST is the issue with beyond 64GB flash at this point.
Tony
Yeah man, because it would be just so much effort to swap the 160GB for the 220GB..it would just cost WAYY too much money and too much time.
What a ignorant post.:rolleyes:
The COST is the issue with beyond 64GB flash at this point.
Earendil
Nov 27, 06:02 PM
Congratulations on starting your point with not one but two violent images... clearly, you must be a real PRO.
They are figures of speech that are quite common where I live. My apologies if they were taken the wrong way by you.
And since when did I say I was a Pro?
This thread is about the possible introduction of a 17" monitor to possibly complement the Mac Mini, Apple's only headless consumer desktop.
Go Apple if they want to make a consumer monitor to compete with Dell. I'm all for it, as consumer monitors are all I have ever bought. I've already said that though, and I am not at all against Apple doing so, if you think I was, please go re-read my posts, as you might have missed my real point.
My point is that introducing a new size will do little to plug the consumer-sized hole in Apple's monitor line-up. If Apple can squeeze extra money out of some egotists who like to think of themselves as prosumers, fine, but the overwhelming majority of users aren't going to get anal about some supposed color-accuracy issues: they want a good-quality, good-looking reliable monitor and if Apple can't provide that at a decent price, Apple loses them to someone who can..
See, that is what my counter point was to. Yes, the thread is about Apple's possible entry into Consumer level LCDs. However by claiming that only "egotists" with a hankering for "supposed" statistics are the ones that buy Apple displays is just insulting. And when your comparison is with a Dell monitor, it just shows ignorance of what the Apple monitors provide.
You seem to be coming at me as if I stand on some high ground, when in fact I own (as stated in my signature) a 20" wide Dell monitor :cool:
So just trust me when I say that the difference in my Photographs, and Photo editing on my Dell vs an Apple monitor is different, and a noticeable difference not just in color, but in backlighting and change incolor based on viewing angle. When I'm surfing the web I don't notice/care, or playing games, or just about anything else. And since I don't make money on my photos, or do too much printing, I went with the Dell because the price/benafits ratio did not justify the Apple monitor. I wish Apple had provided a consumer level montior for me to buy, it would go far better with my Powerbook, but they didn't. I'm not going to discount their current line up just because I can't afford it, and I don't think you should discount it just because you don't understand it technically.
Apple could, of course, bring out two lines of monitors, one for print professionals and one to compete directly with Dell but, of course, they won't because it wouldn't take long for people to realize that there isn't really that much difference.
I think your conclusion is correct, but I think it is for different reasons. Those that buy Apple monitors either have the money to burn, or actually do want what the monitor provides over Dell. I think the reason they may not is the same reason they don't make cheap computers. Apple afaik has had quality certified monitors for a long time running. It might be confusing if they offer both, as anyone that knows that Apple only sells quality monitors may buy the new less expensive monitor and find out it doesn't do what they think it should.
However I think that it would be worth it in sales. And worth it for me :D
During the KCAs, Katy Perry
justin bieber, Katy Perry,
Give rihanna-and-katy-perry-
Rihanna and Justin Bieber
Justin+ieber+rihanna+katy
Photos: Justin Bieber, Katy
rihanna , justin bieber and
Katy+perry+and+rihanna+
RIHANNA KATY PERRY AND JUSTIN
rihanna katy perry gif,
They are figures of speech that are quite common where I live. My apologies if they were taken the wrong way by you.
And since when did I say I was a Pro?
This thread is about the possible introduction of a 17" monitor to possibly complement the Mac Mini, Apple's only headless consumer desktop.
Go Apple if they want to make a consumer monitor to compete with Dell. I'm all for it, as consumer monitors are all I have ever bought. I've already said that though, and I am not at all against Apple doing so, if you think I was, please go re-read my posts, as you might have missed my real point.
My point is that introducing a new size will do little to plug the consumer-sized hole in Apple's monitor line-up. If Apple can squeeze extra money out of some egotists who like to think of themselves as prosumers, fine, but the overwhelming majority of users aren't going to get anal about some supposed color-accuracy issues: they want a good-quality, good-looking reliable monitor and if Apple can't provide that at a decent price, Apple loses them to someone who can..
See, that is what my counter point was to. Yes, the thread is about Apple's possible entry into Consumer level LCDs. However by claiming that only "egotists" with a hankering for "supposed" statistics are the ones that buy Apple displays is just insulting. And when your comparison is with a Dell monitor, it just shows ignorance of what the Apple monitors provide.
You seem to be coming at me as if I stand on some high ground, when in fact I own (as stated in my signature) a 20" wide Dell monitor :cool:
So just trust me when I say that the difference in my Photographs, and Photo editing on my Dell vs an Apple monitor is different, and a noticeable difference not just in color, but in backlighting and change incolor based on viewing angle. When I'm surfing the web I don't notice/care, or playing games, or just about anything else. And since I don't make money on my photos, or do too much printing, I went with the Dell because the price/benafits ratio did not justify the Apple monitor. I wish Apple had provided a consumer level montior for me to buy, it would go far better with my Powerbook, but they didn't. I'm not going to discount their current line up just because I can't afford it, and I don't think you should discount it just because you don't understand it technically.
Apple could, of course, bring out two lines of monitors, one for print professionals and one to compete directly with Dell but, of course, they won't because it wouldn't take long for people to realize that there isn't really that much difference.
I think your conclusion is correct, but I think it is for different reasons. Those that buy Apple monitors either have the money to burn, or actually do want what the monitor provides over Dell. I think the reason they may not is the same reason they don't make cheap computers. Apple afaik has had quality certified monitors for a long time running. It might be confusing if they offer both, as anyone that knows that Apple only sells quality monitors may buy the new less expensive monitor and find out it doesn't do what they think it should.
However I think that it would be worth it in sales. And worth it for me :D
Greebazoid
Oct 23, 08:34 AM
Am I alone in wishing there was more effort in getting universal binaries of MS Office, photoshop and all the other stuff that slows even the fastest Mac down rather than all the effort spent in playing the Speculation Game?
Yeah, probably I am.
(I love my MBPro)
Yeah, probably I am.
(I love my MBPro)
alphaod
Mar 24, 01:25 PM
I'd love to move up on to a 6970� as long as we don't get it when the 7xxx is about to be released.
Xero910
Apr 7, 03:14 PM
The spotlight index bug is because a decimal point is in the wrong place.
Days = Hours
Hours = Minutes
Minutes = Seconds
Works fine, but displays incorrect format.
Days = Hours
Hours = Minutes
Minutes = Seconds
Works fine, but displays incorrect format.
dont24
Apr 19, 05:26 PM
Would be nice to see a 24" iMac back in the line up. 27" is just too big for my space.
I may look into a new mini with a 24" monitor, to replace my 2007 24" 2.4 iMac.
I may look into a new mini with a 24" monitor, to replace my 2007 24" 2.4 iMac.
SpiderDude
Jun 24, 12:18 PM
No chance. The ergonomics would be a disaster.
I second that. I have both an 27 iMac and the first aluminum Macbook with a Multi-Touch trackpad and touching on a screen would be quite uncomfortable. I'd rather use my macbook's Multi-Touch trackpad than the magic mouse.
:apple:
I second that. I have both an 27 iMac and the first aluminum Macbook with a Multi-Touch trackpad and touching on a screen would be quite uncomfortable. I'd rather use my macbook's Multi-Touch trackpad than the magic mouse.
:apple:
Epsilon88
Oct 23, 10:32 PM
Just subscribed online w/ Consumer Reports. I've always trusted their advice, and it's led me well.
wheezy
Nov 15, 06:37 PM
That really depends on the program, on how "parallelizable" the application is.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
What a very lovely analogy. Thank you.
For me... 8 cores for the bragging rights only... so I guess I won't get one anytime soon. I'm sure 4 would suit me fine though, I need to upgrade my 1Ghz G4!!!
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
What a very lovely analogy. Thank you.
For me... 8 cores for the bragging rights only... so I guess I won't get one anytime soon. I'm sure 4 would suit me fine though, I need to upgrade my 1Ghz G4!!!
hunkaburningluv
Mar 28, 07:17 PM
I never had a misconception about the life cycle of a console, it's when new consoles debut that has changed. I chuckle at the PS2 reference...very few survived ten years. I never owned one but replaced plenty of bad DVD drives for friends. I had an xbox that worked for three years from day one, and my friend's xbox ate itself on day three. On the other hand I went through eleven 360 consoles in the first year and a half and my friends 360 never flinched the whole time. Would have been less if I had told MS to go screw themselves and mod it sooner. Point being, life cycle is relative.
Honestly? My launch day xbox is still going strong with nothing but 2 freeze ups. And my PS2 is still going strong too - i understand some peeps have had some significant problems (60% failure rate on launch 360s).
Life cycle in relation to a platform isn't relative at all. As it stood prior to MS going for the 4 year lifecycle with the 360, it was a new platform every 5 years. With the advent of the playstation, there was significant overlap. This is what will happen again with the PS4 - hell, the PS2 has just recently been delisted by NPD - up until then they were still selling. That's the kind of overlap we are talking about - you still have the '10 year cycle' but a new platform will be released about half way through. T
I have 20/15 in my right eye and 20/20 in my left. Lasik surgery. I don't get motion sick while driving or boating...must be the refresh rate. Yes I'm sensitive. I've been gaming since I was ten years old, and over time my eyes have adjusted. I have a tendency to not blink while playing games. Maybe that has something to do with it. All I know is it was a struggle to beat Darksiders due to the constant screen tear and low framerate. Of course, not all console games are 30fps, just the majority, with the minority being <30fps and 60fps games being the little yellow bus of the industry. Even then it gets fuzzy since animations aren't always adjusted to the framerate. Sure they refresh the screen 60 times a second, doesn't mean anything else refreshes 60 times a second. I've seen what a real temporal resolution is through Silicon Graphics, so it's been night and day to me since the late 90s. And yes, I'm talking out of my arse, don't you recognize the language? Doesn't make it any less true.
Methinks the fact that you don't blink that much would probably exacerbate your issues bud.
Yeah screen tear may be problematic for you, but some people don't even experience it - I do and I'll admit it's irritating, but it's hardly an issue where it will stop the majority. All I'm going to say it must suck to be you.
That's my point. The console industry is playing some twisted bullet-time chicken game. I could have counted the bolts and rivets in both cars by now. PC's keep up because they are modular and allow competition. Right now we have TWO major game console industry giants [with a flat-out loopy like daffy duck on red bull third wheel company] holding up the whole damned evolution of console gaming. I'm fed up with the different attachments, it still feels like I'm getting reamed. All this R&D for disposables is a waste of time and money. Ask Tony Hawk how much he lost on those ridiculous board controllers (I should know since I have one). The only true way to saturate the demographic with a new form of gameplay is to make it standard with a new console at an affordable price. The rest will go the way of the 32x.
It sounds like you are a serious PC gaming fanboy and that's cool. There's plenty of room in the market. Granted, most of the PC devs are switching over as you make more money on the console side, but hey ho, you won't feel sick :rolleyes:
You are thinking the console market is like the PC market - it isn't I agree, I'd love a new gen console right about now, but they are doing some interesting things with kinect and to a slightly lesser extent, the Wii so I'll at least be amused until the new gen arrives - but that's the thing, you can't release consoles like ipods - there has to be a decent amount of time to gather pace and sales.
Ask tony hawk? don't make me laugh, that was activision's decision, Tony sold his likeness a long time ago. You are just showing how....little you know. And seriously? you bought one of those pieces of crap?
I'm sorry, but you are clearly clueless with some of your ideas. Which is fine with me, I at least am getting a laugh.
Honestly? My launch day xbox is still going strong with nothing but 2 freeze ups. And my PS2 is still going strong too - i understand some peeps have had some significant problems (60% failure rate on launch 360s).
Life cycle in relation to a platform isn't relative at all. As it stood prior to MS going for the 4 year lifecycle with the 360, it was a new platform every 5 years. With the advent of the playstation, there was significant overlap. This is what will happen again with the PS4 - hell, the PS2 has just recently been delisted by NPD - up until then they were still selling. That's the kind of overlap we are talking about - you still have the '10 year cycle' but a new platform will be released about half way through. T
I have 20/15 in my right eye and 20/20 in my left. Lasik surgery. I don't get motion sick while driving or boating...must be the refresh rate. Yes I'm sensitive. I've been gaming since I was ten years old, and over time my eyes have adjusted. I have a tendency to not blink while playing games. Maybe that has something to do with it. All I know is it was a struggle to beat Darksiders due to the constant screen tear and low framerate. Of course, not all console games are 30fps, just the majority, with the minority being <30fps and 60fps games being the little yellow bus of the industry. Even then it gets fuzzy since animations aren't always adjusted to the framerate. Sure they refresh the screen 60 times a second, doesn't mean anything else refreshes 60 times a second. I've seen what a real temporal resolution is through Silicon Graphics, so it's been night and day to me since the late 90s. And yes, I'm talking out of my arse, don't you recognize the language? Doesn't make it any less true.
Methinks the fact that you don't blink that much would probably exacerbate your issues bud.
Yeah screen tear may be problematic for you, but some people don't even experience it - I do and I'll admit it's irritating, but it's hardly an issue where it will stop the majority. All I'm going to say it must suck to be you.
That's my point. The console industry is playing some twisted bullet-time chicken game. I could have counted the bolts and rivets in both cars by now. PC's keep up because they are modular and allow competition. Right now we have TWO major game console industry giants [with a flat-out loopy like daffy duck on red bull third wheel company] holding up the whole damned evolution of console gaming. I'm fed up with the different attachments, it still feels like I'm getting reamed. All this R&D for disposables is a waste of time and money. Ask Tony Hawk how much he lost on those ridiculous board controllers (I should know since I have one). The only true way to saturate the demographic with a new form of gameplay is to make it standard with a new console at an affordable price. The rest will go the way of the 32x.
It sounds like you are a serious PC gaming fanboy and that's cool. There's plenty of room in the market. Granted, most of the PC devs are switching over as you make more money on the console side, but hey ho, you won't feel sick :rolleyes:
You are thinking the console market is like the PC market - it isn't I agree, I'd love a new gen console right about now, but they are doing some interesting things with kinect and to a slightly lesser extent, the Wii so I'll at least be amused until the new gen arrives - but that's the thing, you can't release consoles like ipods - there has to be a decent amount of time to gather pace and sales.
Ask tony hawk? don't make me laugh, that was activision's decision, Tony sold his likeness a long time ago. You are just showing how....little you know. And seriously? you bought one of those pieces of crap?
I'm sorry, but you are clearly clueless with some of your ideas. Which is fine with me, I at least am getting a laugh.
Surely
Nov 26, 05:00 PM
Link please!
....or you can, I don't know, check the image's url to determine where he bought those shirts.........
Lurchdubious, are you building a glasses case?:p
/ok, I'll stop now
....or you can, I don't know, check the image's url to determine where he bought those shirts.........
Lurchdubious, are you building a glasses case?:p
/ok, I'll stop now
eenu
Aug 16, 10:22 AM
I've a feeling this might also upset the music companies as I'm sure the one-way sync was one feel-good/selling point for anti-piracy concerns.
Though what is stopping Apple limiting it so that iTMS purchases cannot be exchanged wirelessly between pods but your own non iTMS can?
Ok thats not ideal for the music industry in terms of 'anti-piracy' but i'm sure if Apple could alleviate their fears that no iTMS music can be transfered then there is a good feature there for something like BT on your IPOD.....
Or maybe they will do the rendevous of the IPOD world and you can listen to peoples music in the vicinity to you but cant keep it and hence this would drive up music sales for the record companies.
Though what is stopping Apple limiting it so that iTMS purchases cannot be exchanged wirelessly between pods but your own non iTMS can?
Ok thats not ideal for the music industry in terms of 'anti-piracy' but i'm sure if Apple could alleviate their fears that no iTMS music can be transfered then there is a good feature there for something like BT on your IPOD.....
Or maybe they will do the rendevous of the IPOD world and you can listen to peoples music in the vicinity to you but cant keep it and hence this would drive up music sales for the record companies.
KnightWRX
Apr 21, 12:10 PM
Reports are the file isn't sent to Apple, it doesn't leave the iPhone/iTunes backup. It exists to cache the location of nearby cell towers to provide a rough location in an area with no GPS or data connection. If it wasn't persistent, it would be pointless
This explains it very well: http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12432603&postcount=16
But it doesn't need to be as persistent and as precise as it is for that to work. My history of last year is not relevent. The file should be flushed/cleaned out after a certain time. After a point, the data isn't useful to the phone.
It also shouldn't be backed-up. The device starts with a new DB when its new, no reason it shouldn't start over when you restore. That would alleviate some of the privacy concerns at least.
And if this same file isn't what is being sent to Apple, and you have information indicating this, then the summary of the article that makes it sound like it is should be fixed.
This explains it very well: http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12432603&postcount=16
But it doesn't need to be as persistent and as precise as it is for that to work. My history of last year is not relevent. The file should be flushed/cleaned out after a certain time. After a point, the data isn't useful to the phone.
It also shouldn't be backed-up. The device starts with a new DB when its new, no reason it shouldn't start over when you restore. That would alleviate some of the privacy concerns at least.
And if this same file isn't what is being sent to Apple, and you have information indicating this, then the summary of the article that makes it sound like it is should be fixed.
bigpics
Mar 24, 12:57 PM
Dude, I'm sorry to inform you that what you're saying is an outright lie, and there are guys from the Lossless Compression Clan, called "Apple Lossless codec", "FLAC", and "APE", standing with heavy cluebats in their hands, ready to perform a painful reality sync on anyone thinking compression ALWAYS degrades quality.
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
xUKHCx
Aug 7, 07:11 AM
Leopard
-Native NTFS write
[B]-Soltaire game as a dashboard widget
-PC-run Mac OS X, but only via virtualization
-Tabs in Finder and Safari be draggable, Dragon Drop style tabbed windows-like OS 9, and be easily recalled-bookmarks.
I quite like this one
http://www.apple.com/downloads/dashboard/games/mondosolitaire.html
-Native NTFS write
[B]-Soltaire game as a dashboard widget
-PC-run Mac OS X, but only via virtualization
-Tabs in Finder and Safari be draggable, Dragon Drop style tabbed windows-like OS 9, and be easily recalled-bookmarks.
I quite like this one
http://www.apple.com/downloads/dashboard/games/mondosolitaire.html
meepm00pmeep
Oct 23, 06:49 AM
i'd like to see what's inside the new MBP's, though i already bought my MBP a couple weeks ago with no regrets.. i'd still like to see what those who are waiting will get for their hard earned patience
SciFrog
Jan 23, 08:43 AM
Our PPD has dropped 20% from the peak, I lost a big unit this week due to a reboot, same old annoying problem...
Can't wait for Gulftown and GPU3...
Can't wait for Gulftown and GPU3...
No comments:
Post a Comment