NebulaClash
Sep 14, 11:06 AM
Want to know an issue that actually DOES bother me about iOS devices? No? Well I'm bored so tough.
I still want to know why I can't plug an iPhone into any computer and use it as a mass storage device for quick transfer of large files?
Android can do this, Symbian can do this, it is not difficult. The thing comes with 32GB of space and I can't dedicate even 1GB of that to a mass storage mount? Really? It's one of the biggest business uses I have for the device. I shouldn't have to carry around a USB stick anymore. Hell with Symbian3 you can even plug a USB stick/drive DIRECTLY INTO the Symbian3 phone itself to move files.
Screw you Steve. Seriously, screw you. That is one of the biggest reasons I will continue to jailbreak. That and a complete lack of quick access to my Wifi/Bluetooth/GPS/3G radio controls.
Interesting. Instead of jailbreaking, know what I do? I copy my files onto my iOS devices as a backup. No problem. I have several GB of data on both my iPod touch and my iPad.
I still want to know why I can't plug an iPhone into any computer and use it as a mass storage device for quick transfer of large files?
Android can do this, Symbian can do this, it is not difficult. The thing comes with 32GB of space and I can't dedicate even 1GB of that to a mass storage mount? Really? It's one of the biggest business uses I have for the device. I shouldn't have to carry around a USB stick anymore. Hell with Symbian3 you can even plug a USB stick/drive DIRECTLY INTO the Symbian3 phone itself to move files.
Screw you Steve. Seriously, screw you. That is one of the biggest reasons I will continue to jailbreak. That and a complete lack of quick access to my Wifi/Bluetooth/GPS/3G radio controls.
Interesting. Instead of jailbreaking, know what I do? I copy my files onto my iOS devices as a backup. No problem. I have several GB of data on both my iPod touch and my iPad.
adamjay
Apr 8, 11:18 PM
Fact is Pcs are running away from Mac and when a 500 dollar machine kicks a new $2000 Imac .
yea show me a PC Box with a 17" to 20" LCD, and comparable spec's as the imac that costs $500 total? and don't even spit some BS about framerates in Halo.
you have to be smart to be a smart-ass.
yea show me a PC Box with a 17" to 20" LCD, and comparable spec's as the imac that costs $500 total? and don't even spit some BS about framerates in Halo.
you have to be smart to be a smart-ass.
leekohler
Mar 22, 12:43 PM
Our Founding Fathers believed in God, proof alone is the pledge of allegiance "under god". Yes our country was founded on christian belief. Hate to say it, but it's true!
Wow- you really need to brush up on your history. "Under God" was added to the pledge in the 50's by people like you. And some of the founding fathers believed in a god, not all.
We do work to make things better in the US that's why everyone always wants to come to America. What I am saying is if Gays really want to complain about an App being created or anything else being done in the US then go to another country and see how much support you will actually get.
What happens in other countries is not my concern. What happens in this one is, because this is where I live. But actually, many other countries would, and do give us more support.
Gays freak out over the considered "normal" person rights, but yet when we give gay's rights you say it's never enough, when will Gays be content with what is given, and realize it takes time to give you everything. Signing a sheet of paper doesn't fix everything, nor was Rome built in a day so don't expect Gays to have = rights asap.
We'll be content when we have all the rights everyone else has. There's your answer. I said it before. Until then, we'll keep screaming. Either deal with it or ignore it.
Wow- you really need to brush up on your history. "Under God" was added to the pledge in the 50's by people like you. And some of the founding fathers believed in a god, not all.
We do work to make things better in the US that's why everyone always wants to come to America. What I am saying is if Gays really want to complain about an App being created or anything else being done in the US then go to another country and see how much support you will actually get.
What happens in other countries is not my concern. What happens in this one is, because this is where I live. But actually, many other countries would, and do give us more support.
Gays freak out over the considered "normal" person rights, but yet when we give gay's rights you say it's never enough, when will Gays be content with what is given, and realize it takes time to give you everything. Signing a sheet of paper doesn't fix everything, nor was Rome built in a day so don't expect Gays to have = rights asap.
We'll be content when we have all the rights everyone else has. There's your answer. I said it before. Until then, we'll keep screaming. Either deal with it or ignore it.
KnightWRX
Apr 26, 02:14 PM
Your point is that you cannot find such a trademark as "app store" in the standard character format because "app store" is too general right? The other person posted that "pet store" would be a ridiculous example of this.
Ok fair enough. Pet store was registered in the stylized or design format.
But your basic argument against Apple is that they cannot use app store as a trademark in the broader text format because it is too general. But this is not the only example of such a thing.
If this is the case then Apple Store will be thrown out too. It is the same type of trademark. Two words, not one and not preceded by "the".
App Store
Apple Store
Is the Apple Store a store that sells Apple ? No. It's then not descriptive. Does someone in the business of selling Apples can say their "Lakeshore Apple Store" is an "Apple Store" since they do sell apples ? Yes, because trademarks are limited in the scope. Apple's trademark on "Apple Store" would only apply in a computer/software business sense, not to the larger sense of every other business/economic field.
Just like I could then open a shoe store and call it "Apple Store". Though that wouldn't make much sense, but whatever...
You define the lexicon of the overall society?
We've been over the whole App thing in the other threads, with many people finding references to App as far back as the 80s. Want to go through it again ? It has been part of the lexicon for quite a while, ever since Application has been around, it has basically been shortened to app.
Ok fair enough. Pet store was registered in the stylized or design format.
But your basic argument against Apple is that they cannot use app store as a trademark in the broader text format because it is too general. But this is not the only example of such a thing.
If this is the case then Apple Store will be thrown out too. It is the same type of trademark. Two words, not one and not preceded by "the".
App Store
Apple Store
Is the Apple Store a store that sells Apple ? No. It's then not descriptive. Does someone in the business of selling Apples can say their "Lakeshore Apple Store" is an "Apple Store" since they do sell apples ? Yes, because trademarks are limited in the scope. Apple's trademark on "Apple Store" would only apply in a computer/software business sense, not to the larger sense of every other business/economic field.
Just like I could then open a shoe store and call it "Apple Store". Though that wouldn't make much sense, but whatever...
You define the lexicon of the overall society?
We've been over the whole App thing in the other threads, with many people finding references to App as far back as the 80s. Want to go through it again ? It has been part of the lexicon for quite a while, ever since Application has been around, it has basically been shortened to app.
jmsait19
Jul 18, 12:56 PM
A major consumer announcement at a developers conference? Not gonna happen. End of story!
ThinkSecret hasn't been right about anything since they got in trouble over leaks.
maybe so. but the lawsuit has been dropped now. maybe they are feeling ok to say the right things now...
ThinkSecret hasn't been right about anything since they got in trouble over leaks.
maybe so. but the lawsuit has been dropped now. maybe they are feeling ok to say the right things now...
afrowq
Apr 21, 12:34 PM
Performance and specifications determine whether or not it's a "Pro", not the people who use them. I'm not a professional race car driver, but my car has over 400hp. Does that mean that my car is not the high-performance sports car that the automotive world widely claims it to be?
And besides, how do you know those people aren't using heavy-duty applications? Is a thirty-second observation at Starbucks enough to justify such a statement?
Yes, a 30 second observation of people surfing FB on their Macbook (pros) is sufficient for me to assume that they are not performing complex video rendering or multi-filter Photoshop layering.
Laptops are not Pro machines. A 13" laptop with shared memory and a glossy screen is not professional. Unless your profession is being a writer. The "pro" moniker is a marketing ploy.
I realize the 15" and 17" are more powerful, but you still can't edit 4K RED footage on one, for example. But a Mac Pro? There's nothing professional you can throw at it that it can't do.
Also, regarding the car metaphor: put your 400hp car up against a NASCAR or Formula 1 vehicle and see how well it does on the racetrack against other REAL professional cars.
The car is nice, I'm sure, but is not a vehicle doing professional high performance driving. The same is true of macbook pros. They're solid machines, but they are not professional performance machines.
And besides, how do you know those people aren't using heavy-duty applications? Is a thirty-second observation at Starbucks enough to justify such a statement?
Yes, a 30 second observation of people surfing FB on their Macbook (pros) is sufficient for me to assume that they are not performing complex video rendering or multi-filter Photoshop layering.
Laptops are not Pro machines. A 13" laptop with shared memory and a glossy screen is not professional. Unless your profession is being a writer. The "pro" moniker is a marketing ploy.
I realize the 15" and 17" are more powerful, but you still can't edit 4K RED footage on one, for example. But a Mac Pro? There's nothing professional you can throw at it that it can't do.
Also, regarding the car metaphor: put your 400hp car up against a NASCAR or Formula 1 vehicle and see how well it does on the racetrack against other REAL professional cars.
The car is nice, I'm sure, but is not a vehicle doing professional high performance driving. The same is true of macbook pros. They're solid machines, but they are not professional performance machines.
MacRumors
Jul 13, 10:21 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Macworld has posted a roundup of recent analyst speculation (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/07/13/blurayapple/index.php) on the possibility of Apple using Blu-ray in forthcoming products. Most analysts seem to agree that Apple will first include the technology on its professional "Mac Pro" line before transitioning it to its consumer products.
"Apple’s past practices favor bringing new optical technologies to professional systems first,” said Jupiter Research senior analyst Joe Wilcox. “DVD-RAM and DVD-R formats are excellent examples.”
The exact timing of Blu-ray's introduction into the Mac Pro is uncertain, however.
Ross Rubin, director of analysis at market-research firm NPD Group, agrees that Apple will work with the professional machines first. However, noting that Intel-based pro desktops have yet to appear, he predicts Blu-ray drives won’t wind up in Apple systems for a few more months.
“January would be good—the timing for that would work out pretty well,” Rubin said. “It comes down to the introduction cycle, but we would see it in desktops first, no doubt.”
Blu-ray is a next-generation optical disk format that can hold up to 25 GB of data per layer compared to rival HD DVD's 15 GB per layer. In April, TDK produced a 6 layer Blu-ray disk (http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/04/28/tdk_200gb_blu-ray_disc/) that could hold up to 200 GB when the single-layer maximum was pushed to 33 GB. Currently, Blu-ray players are scarce and cost over $1000 USD, and the format has seen several delays. Much of the industry is watching Sony's Playstation 3 (http://www.us.playstation.com/PS3/default.html) game console which is expected to arrive in November 2006 and should push Blu-ray prices down.
Apple joined Blu-ray's Board of Directors (http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/03/10/bluray/index.php) in March of 2005.
Digg This (http://digg.com/apple/Mac_Pro_And_Bluray_Speculation)
Macworld has posted a roundup of recent analyst speculation (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/07/13/blurayapple/index.php) on the possibility of Apple using Blu-ray in forthcoming products. Most analysts seem to agree that Apple will first include the technology on its professional "Mac Pro" line before transitioning it to its consumer products.
"Apple’s past practices favor bringing new optical technologies to professional systems first,” said Jupiter Research senior analyst Joe Wilcox. “DVD-RAM and DVD-R formats are excellent examples.”
The exact timing of Blu-ray's introduction into the Mac Pro is uncertain, however.
Ross Rubin, director of analysis at market-research firm NPD Group, agrees that Apple will work with the professional machines first. However, noting that Intel-based pro desktops have yet to appear, he predicts Blu-ray drives won’t wind up in Apple systems for a few more months.
“January would be good—the timing for that would work out pretty well,” Rubin said. “It comes down to the introduction cycle, but we would see it in desktops first, no doubt.”
Blu-ray is a next-generation optical disk format that can hold up to 25 GB of data per layer compared to rival HD DVD's 15 GB per layer. In April, TDK produced a 6 layer Blu-ray disk (http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/04/28/tdk_200gb_blu-ray_disc/) that could hold up to 200 GB when the single-layer maximum was pushed to 33 GB. Currently, Blu-ray players are scarce and cost over $1000 USD, and the format has seen several delays. Much of the industry is watching Sony's Playstation 3 (http://www.us.playstation.com/PS3/default.html) game console which is expected to arrive in November 2006 and should push Blu-ray prices down.
Apple joined Blu-ray's Board of Directors (http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/03/10/bluray/index.php) in March of 2005.
Digg This (http://digg.com/apple/Mac_Pro_And_Bluray_Speculation)
bigandy
Nov 29, 04:02 PM
Yep, cause the media center PCs are selling hand over fist and Tivo is making more money than they know what do do with. Oh, wait...
you mean the market hasn't taken off yet because nobody's done it right. however, with apple in the ring.... hmmmm... :rolleyes:
ipod anyone?
you mean the market hasn't taken off yet because nobody's done it right. however, with apple in the ring.... hmmmm... :rolleyes:
ipod anyone?
toddybody
Apr 19, 12:24 PM
I can't wait for a white 27" model with an additional rear facing camera to shoot HD video. 3G would be cool too.
Ha ha ha ha! For like 1/2 second I was like "wha wha?". LOL
+1
Ha ha ha ha! For like 1/2 second I was like "wha wha?". LOL
+1
zap2
Apr 19, 11:09 AM
Apple should do a nice desktop refresh...at least for the consumer/prosumer grade machine, I don't follow the CPU that a Mac Pro upgrade would depend on(although I'd imagine if the lower powered chips are out, higher powered chips would also be out, but one can never be 100% sure)
But iMac and Mac mini bumps would be quite do able!
But iMac and Mac mini bumps would be quite do able!
KnightWRX
Apr 10, 03:10 PM
Harley-Davidson doesn't make automatics. I never learned to drive automatic anyhow, I wouldn't have the first clue what to do in one of them. What does P R N D 2 1 even mean ?
Horrortaxi
Apr 8, 07:39 PM
ya i know but i was talking about when i put:
It's just time for us to be mature adults and walk away from this. We know this guy is an ignoramus. We know Apple doesn't need saving. We know that as far as corporations go Apple couldn't be much healthier. We know what Apple's target market is, and that a cheap computer won't accomplish anything. Most importantly, we know we won't change iMacjapan's mind. He's stubborn and he's not listening. Why risk carpal tunnel on it? How about those NHL playoffs? I predict San Jose will take the Blues in 6 games.
It's just time for us to be mature adults and walk away from this. We know this guy is an ignoramus. We know Apple doesn't need saving. We know that as far as corporations go Apple couldn't be much healthier. We know what Apple's target market is, and that a cheap computer won't accomplish anything. Most importantly, we know we won't change iMacjapan's mind. He's stubborn and he's not listening. Why risk carpal tunnel on it? How about those NHL playoffs? I predict San Jose will take the Blues in 6 games.
AppliedVisual
Oct 23, 11:11 AM
I've read that even the current MBP supports 4gigs.
Apple just doesn't offer it in their store since the CPU can only address around 3,2gigs (like every other 32bit cpu).
Unfortunately, the current MBP is restricted to about 3.2GB because of the 32bit CPU *AND* the 32bit i945 chipset. Intel won't have a 64bit mobile chipset until they ship Crestline (the i965 mobile chipset for Santa Rosa). So, unless Crestline is ready early and Apple has some sort of exclusive agreement, the updated MBP still will not allow anyone to use more than approximately 3.2GB of RAM.
In a 32bit system, the 32bit CPUs and/or chipsets can address a total memory capacity of 4GB. But this 4GB address window must account for all memory I/O addresses, BIOS/ROM as well as video memory in addition to the actual RAM heap. That is why when you install 4GB of RAM, you essentially miss out on the last 600 to 800 MB. Also why the C2D/Merom iMac systems can only be configured with up to 3GB of RAM. Apple probably figured they didn't need to sell people RAM that they can't use. Some PC vendors still sell 4GB installed into such systems even though it can't all be used because by installing two matched 2GB modules, the dual-channel performance benefits are there, just not the last 800MB.
Apple just doesn't offer it in their store since the CPU can only address around 3,2gigs (like every other 32bit cpu).
Unfortunately, the current MBP is restricted to about 3.2GB because of the 32bit CPU *AND* the 32bit i945 chipset. Intel won't have a 64bit mobile chipset until they ship Crestline (the i965 mobile chipset for Santa Rosa). So, unless Crestline is ready early and Apple has some sort of exclusive agreement, the updated MBP still will not allow anyone to use more than approximately 3.2GB of RAM.
In a 32bit system, the 32bit CPUs and/or chipsets can address a total memory capacity of 4GB. But this 4GB address window must account for all memory I/O addresses, BIOS/ROM as well as video memory in addition to the actual RAM heap. That is why when you install 4GB of RAM, you essentially miss out on the last 600 to 800 MB. Also why the C2D/Merom iMac systems can only be configured with up to 3GB of RAM. Apple probably figured they didn't need to sell people RAM that they can't use. Some PC vendors still sell 4GB installed into such systems even though it can't all be used because by installing two matched 2GB modules, the dual-channel performance benefits are there, just not the last 800MB.
mrkramer
Jan 13, 01:52 AM
this is crap,
no one in their right mind would make something with 0 ports, you have to at a bare minimum have an audio out.
I agree that it probably won't have no ports, I think it will at least have 1 USB and 1 Firewire, but other than that everything could be done wirelessly, and if Apple wants to make the notebook thinner than the ports are then they may use their patent for collapsible ports that they made a while back.
no one in their right mind would make something with 0 ports, you have to at a bare minimum have an audio out.
I agree that it probably won't have no ports, I think it will at least have 1 USB and 1 Firewire, but other than that everything could be done wirelessly, and if Apple wants to make the notebook thinner than the ports are then they may use their patent for collapsible ports that they made a while back.
ChrisA
Sep 1, 03:09 PM
Going to 23 inches will make the imac even more UNatractive to many people. Now in a few years when you need to upgrade insted of throwing away an expensive 20" LCD screen yu will be throwing away a VERY expensive LCD screen.
What I want is a little box like the Mini but larger that has the iMac parts inside. A full sized disk, 64-bit memron, lots of RAM slots and a good GPU.
What I want is a little box like the Mini but larger that has the iMac parts inside. A full sized disk, 64-bit memron, lots of RAM slots and a good GPU.
SactoGuy18
Jan 5, 08:47 PM
At macworld 2007 Apple will announce that you can download The Beatles music on iTunes and possible there will be a Beatles branded iPod.
That may not be so far-fetched. Imagine a "true" video iPod with the Beatles brand that allows you to download A Hard Day's Night, Help!, Yellow Submarine and Let It Be onto the player for free. :)
That may not be so far-fetched. Imagine a "true" video iPod with the Beatles brand that allows you to download A Hard Day's Night, Help!, Yellow Submarine and Let It Be onto the player for free. :)
BC2009
Mar 25, 04:23 PM
I knew it didnt support mirroring but thats my bad. I have an iPad 2, but i was told at Apple the hdmi cable won't work with iPad 1. Guess they should read up a little bit.
Their retail and tech support folks are not too familiar with it yet. You have to do some reading to catch that. I tried the Digital AV Adapter with my iPad-1 and it worked for playing movies -- only problem is my HDMI TV does not support HDCP which means it registers as an unauthorized device to playback fairplay movies -- this TV was made when TV's were first starting to get 1 HDMI input -- still I think they should fix that since my Apple TV does not have a problem with that television.
Either way, since I have the Apple TV and AirPlay, I can't see using the adapter for that function.
Their retail and tech support folks are not too familiar with it yet. You have to do some reading to catch that. I tried the Digital AV Adapter with my iPad-1 and it worked for playing movies -- only problem is my HDMI TV does not support HDCP which means it registers as an unauthorized device to playback fairplay movies -- this TV was made when TV's were first starting to get 1 HDMI input -- still I think they should fix that since my Apple TV does not have a problem with that television.
Either way, since I have the Apple TV and AirPlay, I can't see using the adapter for that function.
gr8whtd0pe
Jan 19, 03:25 PM
Some pics of my Impreza after a night of freezing rain:
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5090/5366971673_6d6ab4f12e_b.jpg
awesome shot.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5090/5366971673_6d6ab4f12e_b.jpg
awesome shot.
alectheking
Mar 25, 03:42 PM
Can the new GPU even do 1080p?
No, the whole article was a written lie. You obviously didn't watch the video either.
No, the whole article was a written lie. You obviously didn't watch the video either.
MisterK
Apr 3, 11:25 AM
I loved this ad. The voiceover reminds me of old Hal Riney commercials, where there is a reverence for the product � a person with quiet confidence telling you a "truth". When the message is a simple one, it's easier to tell a compelling story. Here's the message: when you don't notice the tech the experience feels magical.
There's nothing wrong with this. Magic is what tech is at its finest. Engineers and developers become mired in the details of how to make it work and think that's the important part, and then we get awful commercials boasting specs. When we lift abstractions and technological explanations, the things we do become more fantastic. We don't visit websites, but can see all the knowledge of the world. We don't Skype; we talk face-to-face with distant loved ones. We don't use Photoshop brushes; we create images with our fingers. Why are the details of how that happens the important part?
TBWA are the marketing geniuses that have always done Apple's stuff and I'm glad they saw this nugget of truth in Apple's iPad message. This is what we have to do in the advertising business (yes, I'm in it). I've been lucky enough to work with TBWA and can say that they are the real deal. They are true MadMen who honestly look for the most beautiful truth in the products they are asked to sell and then speak that truth more eloquently than everyone else.
People who identify this as "simply advertising" are missing the point. You're not the smartest kid in the playground when you tell everyone that Santa doesn't exist. The smart ones are the kids enjoying Christmas.
There's nothing wrong with this. Magic is what tech is at its finest. Engineers and developers become mired in the details of how to make it work and think that's the important part, and then we get awful commercials boasting specs. When we lift abstractions and technological explanations, the things we do become more fantastic. We don't visit websites, but can see all the knowledge of the world. We don't Skype; we talk face-to-face with distant loved ones. We don't use Photoshop brushes; we create images with our fingers. Why are the details of how that happens the important part?
TBWA are the marketing geniuses that have always done Apple's stuff and I'm glad they saw this nugget of truth in Apple's iPad message. This is what we have to do in the advertising business (yes, I'm in it). I've been lucky enough to work with TBWA and can say that they are the real deal. They are true MadMen who honestly look for the most beautiful truth in the products they are asked to sell and then speak that truth more eloquently than everyone else.
People who identify this as "simply advertising" are missing the point. You're not the smartest kid in the playground when you tell everyone that Santa doesn't exist. The smart ones are the kids enjoying Christmas.
emaja
Apr 2, 08:49 PM
Nice ad, but I am getting sick of Apple using "magical" to describe the iPad. It just sounds silly.
odyssey924
Apr 13, 12:16 AM
Here's the deal...(and I just realized that the way this is written might make it look like I have earlier posts in this thread. I don't. I'm jumping in right here.)
The reason that I think pros fear "dumbed down" isn't so much because they want something that is difficult to use, but rather because sometimes making difficult things easy makes things that were previously easy difficult, or impossible.
So just this week I had to help somebody with an iMovie problem. There was a part where they had 3 overlapping audio tracks. Movie audio, voiceover, and music. Try as they might, and try as I might, we could not get the movie audio to actually go away -- even though we had set it's volume level to "0%."
Oh...and did I mention that they're on a white iBook? Fine machine, but a little slow. So I copy their iMovie stuff onto an external drive so we can look at it on my Core i7 iMac instead.
Except iMovie on my iMac won't recognize the project on an external drive. I know that supposedly iMovie is supposed to...but it won't work. So I have to copy the files onto my iMac, and then iMovie magically sees them...because they're in the spot that iMovie wants files to be in.
Well the only way to get the clips to work right that I could come up with, was to actually run all their clips through Quicktime 7 and just delete the audio track off them. Voila! No audio track for iMovie to play, when it's not supposed to.
My point is that I spent 30 minutes dinking around with the "Easy" iMovie to do what would have taken me 10 seconds to do in Final Cut. (Select audio. Delete.)
And that's pretty much my experience every time I get lulled into trying to run a quick project through iMovie. Everything seems to be going well, I'm even sort of enjoying myself (Don't tell anyone), then I hit a snag or a wall...bump up into some limitation of iMovie that there isn't a very good work-around to...and wish that I'd just used Final Cut to begin with.
So while I agree that there are those who want pro tools to be difficult simply for the sake of having a high barrier of entry...
...I also think there are a ton of us that are just afraid that the cost of these new and handy features will be that some of the things we rely on doing, especially things that are a little "hackish," will become difficult/impossible. In the name of simplicity.
It's like my iPhone. I love it to pieces, and I don't plan to have any other type of phone any time soon, but sometimes I wish for a few more advanced features...features that are available (Usually through third-party tools) on Android. Instead I'm stuck hoping and wishing and praying that Apple will implement them.
+1 here. Every time I've tried to use iMovie for a "quick" edit it always ends in disasters like this. In my case, I was trying to move some music around and time my edits with the music. It was really infuriating trying to do this in iMovie compared to how fast I could have done it in FCP. I guess we'll have wait till Apple posts more info or we get it in our hands to really tell if it can be run like the current FCP.
The reason that I think pros fear "dumbed down" isn't so much because they want something that is difficult to use, but rather because sometimes making difficult things easy makes things that were previously easy difficult, or impossible.
So just this week I had to help somebody with an iMovie problem. There was a part where they had 3 overlapping audio tracks. Movie audio, voiceover, and music. Try as they might, and try as I might, we could not get the movie audio to actually go away -- even though we had set it's volume level to "0%."
Oh...and did I mention that they're on a white iBook? Fine machine, but a little slow. So I copy their iMovie stuff onto an external drive so we can look at it on my Core i7 iMac instead.
Except iMovie on my iMac won't recognize the project on an external drive. I know that supposedly iMovie is supposed to...but it won't work. So I have to copy the files onto my iMac, and then iMovie magically sees them...because they're in the spot that iMovie wants files to be in.
Well the only way to get the clips to work right that I could come up with, was to actually run all their clips through Quicktime 7 and just delete the audio track off them. Voila! No audio track for iMovie to play, when it's not supposed to.
My point is that I spent 30 minutes dinking around with the "Easy" iMovie to do what would have taken me 10 seconds to do in Final Cut. (Select audio. Delete.)
And that's pretty much my experience every time I get lulled into trying to run a quick project through iMovie. Everything seems to be going well, I'm even sort of enjoying myself (Don't tell anyone), then I hit a snag or a wall...bump up into some limitation of iMovie that there isn't a very good work-around to...and wish that I'd just used Final Cut to begin with.
So while I agree that there are those who want pro tools to be difficult simply for the sake of having a high barrier of entry...
...I also think there are a ton of us that are just afraid that the cost of these new and handy features will be that some of the things we rely on doing, especially things that are a little "hackish," will become difficult/impossible. In the name of simplicity.
It's like my iPhone. I love it to pieces, and I don't plan to have any other type of phone any time soon, but sometimes I wish for a few more advanced features...features that are available (Usually through third-party tools) on Android. Instead I'm stuck hoping and wishing and praying that Apple will implement them.
+1 here. Every time I've tried to use iMovie for a "quick" edit it always ends in disasters like this. In my case, I was trying to move some music around and time my edits with the music. It was really infuriating trying to do this in iMovie compared to how fast I could have done it in FCP. I guess we'll have wait till Apple posts more info or we get it in our hands to really tell if it can be run like the current FCP.
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
valanchan
Apr 12, 10:12 PM
Just read something today to the effect that Peter Jackson is following James Cameron's lead and shooting 48fps on the "Hobbit"; gambling that enough digital theaters will upgrade to 48fps by the time the "film" arrives in a couple of years time. Guess that is the beginning of the end of the "film" look for at least action movies.
This is so that each eye receives 24fps for 3d. So finally 3d will now look like a 3d "movie" rather than a 3d flip book.
This is so that each eye receives 24fps for 3d. So finally 3d will now look like a 3d "movie" rather than a 3d flip book.