Car Modern 2011

Now see its a step in the right direction to be sure. There will be features announced which will make it more attractive

But unless they add the ability to attach a hard drive or something to hold content on then this isn't going to sell at all.

You probably forget that iTunes TV shows are not available nowhere else in the world except the US. Neither are the films for the time being. so what do we have to watch in the rest of the world? Nada!

I really want this to be better for launch. Lets see what happens eh?


Next yr is suppose to be all International titles and movies.
And I'm sure the UK will be one of the first to get them.

Well if you look at the image of the iTv it looks all concept looking.
So I would say it probably does have a HD or a CF drive. Other wise I can't see them running Front Row on the damn thing without it.

My idea is Apple releases a sys with most all media centres including a small HD. Next Apple can release add on's...like 100-200GB extra HD or a Blue Ray drive that connect via a FW800 port...or something similar.

I like Appleinsider, and I believe that they are going to be right. But since this is all speculation at this point, anything can happen. Either way Mac users win.

I turned off automatically open safe files years ago in Tiger and have migrated that setting over since.

I pray that this will not turn into another Chernobyl situation.

But can a user be considered to be a party to that agreement if they have not used iTunes to access the store - does the purchasing process still involve an agreement approval stage using this software? Presumably not.

Yes. By signing up for an account to use the iTunes Music Store, you are bound to their terms of service. Those terms only appear in the official iTunes client because that's the only source for the music. Just because those terms don't pop up on the screen if you use this PyMusique thing doesn't mean you aren't responsible for knowing. For example, if you do not receive a bill in the mail for your credit card, you are still responsible for making the payment and paying any late fees--it is your responsibility as the borrower to make the appropriate payment on time. By using the service, you are implicitly agreeing to the terms of service and use, including Apple's rights to prosecute (should they choose to) for your violation of those terms (i.e. using a non-approved client application). This is enforceable; whether Apple chooses to do anything about it remains unclear.

Also enforceable is the DMCA violation (and yes, it is a violation, because you are BYPASSING technology designed to secure DRM). Even though you paid for the songs, you also paid for the license for that song (which includes DRM), and you are breaking encryption by bypassing it. Walking through a hole in a fence is still trespassing, whether you made the hole or not. Again, from a legal perspective, this is a punishable violation.

I'm not saying that I like having my digital music locked down more vigorously than a CD I buy. But there are logical reasons for doing so. Namely, that the digital version, if un-DRMed, can be copied and transmitted with no special software or effort. If I want to share a CD, I have to burn a copy (requiring hardware and software) or extract the audio digitally and transmit it. Digital music does all that for you, and Apple's DRM gives you appropriate fair use rights. The DRM is designed to prevent casual copying that results in lower license sales.

You don't own the music you've bought, and you don't have any legal right to redistribute it because your license does not allow it. Should you be able to use it on any type of device you choose? Yes. Does DRM prevent that from happening? Often, also yes. Can you choose a different format that works with all devices (standard MP3 imported from a CD)? Yeah, but not on purchased iTunes music. Until DRM and file format technology becomes standardized, you have to deal with "early adopter syndrome" in a volatile market, which can result in purchases not being universally compatible (betamax/VHS/laser disc/DVD anyone?). Make a choice that works for you.

By purchasing AAC with Apple's DRM, you are choosing a file format with known and public limitations that will only work with a specific combination of hardware and software. You chose the delivery platform; you can't buy Windows software and then complain that it doesn't work on your Mac without buying it again. That's the way business works. Of course it would be fantastic if buying a license of Office for my PC gave me a corresponding license for all the other computer platforms I use, but that's not the case. Even say, Dreamweaver, which gives you Mac and PC installers, is only licensed to be used on one of the computers. I can install it on both, but that doesn't make it right or legal, even if I think that Macromedia is horrible (which I do).

In conclusion, breaking or bypassing DRM, while understandable on a basic level for getting compatibility with everything, is against the law. Using tools to do this which violate the iTMS terms of service is also a legal violation. The best way out of this situation is to support a universal standard that ensures compatibility with all devices and file formats. DRM isn't going away, and it shouldn't. But it should also not work against honest customers who just want iTunes songs to play on their Rio. Long post, my apologies.

You know what I hate about crap like this?

People read it, and then point their respective (washed in soap with chemical additives and toxins) fingers at Appple, because it makes them feel good. "Yeah, this Apple stuff is crap!"

Then they go drive a block down the street to get milk from a cow who's waste runoff pollutes the local river, sit down and watch their TV with power generated from a coal-spewing power plant while eating dinner from plastic packaging that came from oil that was refined at a plant that contaminates the environment.

Unless you live on an uninhabited island, catch all your own food and generate your own power, you have no room to talk. None of us do.

I know where you're coming from, but surely it's a good thing to try and get the companies we use to improve their environmental policy? If Dell does recycle more than Apple, then maybe Apple should recycle more. If Apple's stuff lasts longer, Dell should make their stuff last longer. And yes, at the same time, we should be putting pressure on companies to reduce food packaging and use less power and fuel. I don't really see it as a competition between companies, more that if one company does something environmentally better than another, the other should try and match it, you know?

The average bill for a family of four would well exceed $150 a month if everything was bought from iTunes.
Where's that number coming from?

For simplicity let's make it an even $160 and assume 4 week/month. That's $40/week of TV Shows = 20 unique shows per week = ~3 episodes/day. This assumes no season/series discounts.

Don't forget that for cable/satellite, you still pay for it regardless if the show you want to watch is a rerun, so perhaps a better way to look at it is seasons of shows. The typical weekly show has 13-26 episodes/season and thus would be available at iTMS for $25-$50/year. Assuming the typical $55 cable bill you cite, this could easily add up to 12-24 seasons of shows per year (depending on # of episodes & discounts).

At $150/month you'd be able to buy 36-72 different seasons of shows from iTunes throughout the year. That's a boatload of TV.

B

Are the action of a few countries a representative of Islam?

the actions of "a few countries" that are many miles apart (so by all rights should have different cultures) but have one thing in common, ie islam, are a representation of the effects of islam.

islam is unpleasant and, i guess for want of a better word, evil.

For those of you complaining that this update isn't "Pro" enough, please read through the list of features on this page:

Supermeet Live Blog (http://www.photographybay.com/2011/04/12/final-cut-pro-user-group-supermeet-liveblog/)

There are tons of great ideas here, and I already see a lot of things that will speed up my workflow. There are tools that I have to buy as expensive plugins which are now standard. And simple, common sense approaches to media management that I'm surprised we've worked without them this long (Video and audio LOCKED from ingest? No more sound out of sync? Yes please).

And yet, you all look at the UI and go "eh, it's iMovie Pro". Bitch, please.

And they haven't 'dropped' all the other apps, they just didn't announce (http://www.loopinsight.com/2011/04/12/apple-says-stay-tuned-for-other-final-cut-studio-apps/) anything yet.Hopefully the pricing will be competitive with the other NLE suites and those of us upgrading from the current FCS won't feel ripped off. So just be patient, wait until June and see how it all shakes out...

Bugs are flaws in the overall security model.

Bugs are flaws in the implementation, not the model, at least for those you are referring to. Unless you have a model flaw to demonstrate (like the SSL protocol of 2009 bug) you're being completely besides the point.

Part of an OSs security model includes the implementation of exploit mitigations. The best exploit mitigation is to have as few bugs as possible. Obviously, in relation to privilege escalation, OS X has far fewer bugs.

Again, this has nothing to do with the "Unix security model", only to less known bugs.

At this point, I doubt you're even interested in having a serious discussion on this issue... I think I'll just stop replying to you.

Hence the robust market for Windows anti-virus software?

(As for malware vs. virus, to the consumer it doesn't matter. Both suck.)

....yeah the anti-virus software that I don't use.

It's a clever marketing ploy.

OH MY GOD MY TEH PC COULD GET HAXORED?!?!!@2/22?

I CAN HAZ NORTON ANTI-VIRUS!?34@
OMNONNOMNNONOMNONOM

JUST IMAGINE A COMPUTER IN WHICH EACH PIXEL IS CONTROLLED BY A SINGLE PROCESSOR.

I've used one. Back in the 1980s, beginning of the 90s. The low end model had 1024 processors and the high end model 4096 processors. It was a pig to program. When drawing on the screen you split the task at hand up into many parallel threads each drawing a part of the screen. Not quite 1 CPU per pixel but you get the idea.

Calendar that automatically synch with Google calendar. No extra fees for Mobile Me..and works absolutely perfectly! Unlike Mobile Me..which I had.

Same for Gmail..instant notification!


If you don't need to access an Exchange server, you can do this with Google Sync on the iPhone.

http://www.google.com/support/mobile/bin/answer.py?answer=138740&topic=14252

EDIT: I'm not keeping track, but did they ever get around to fixing the memory storage on the droid so you can have more than 256 MB of apps? The microSD is kind of useless if you can't you know use it.

B

On a limited plan, the carriers have NO business saying how the data should be used. You pay for the data, and they do NOTHING to provide the service of tethering. But I agree that on an unlimited plan, tethering is a little like someone said, going to an all-you-can-eat-buffet, paying for one, and then sharing. Of course, you're not likely to be tethering all the time that you're paying for the service, so not exactly the same.

What the carriers should do is make tethering completely, 100% free for anyone on a capped plan, and replace the current "unlimited" plan with 2 plans - one that costs the same, but has a cap of say 2GB over the next lower plan, and another that's a true unlimited plan that adds and includes the cost of tethering.

This kind of cr*p makes me mad.

Dan

Just because a company makes you sign their TOS, it does not make the TOS a Holy Grail law. TOS are only written in the best interest of a company and they are very often faulty.

Unfortunately in some countries, people forget to use common sense and reasoning and take everything the way it is BECAUSE it was written in the TOS, as so many people keep quoting in this forum.There is no such thing as a perfect TOS and even if you sign it, it does not mean you cannot challenge it.

Just because the TOS says so and you sign it, it does not make it right or the law. If it did, a lot of legal professionals would be unemployed and a lot of average Joes/Janes would be in jail.

AT&T is in the business to make money. They will take whatever they can get and however they can get it. AT&T is just as unethical as ......(you get to fill in the blanks ;)). It is up to the consumer to challenge AT&T's faulty TOS instead of just being passive, quoting and accepting it. It is amazing and worrisome how accepting some people are in this forum. I guess they do not teach critical thinking anymore in schools and/or colleges.

The sad part is that big companies are in bed with the politicians (republicans and democrats in the US) so the government will never step in to protect the interest of consumers.:mad:

I'd love for Pokemon to be on iOS devices.

Same here. It'd be awesome to battle and trade on your iOS device. Only issue would be the fact that the DS and iOS devices can't trade/battle with each other.

This entire thread is hilarious.

May be it's time to let the Android users in on the joke:

You are all owners of iphones.

Whatever is different from a real iphone is just a cover up by Apple.

They ousted Schmitt from the board of directors and gave him the phone number for the retired dude in Mexico who was on the iphone development team.

They then promised that guy a permanent cure from "Montezuma's Revenge" (rampant in Mexico)if he would only share his expertise on the iphone.

Trouble is he doesn't remember all the iphone details, so what you get with the Android is an iphone with whatever he can remember.

Some manufacturers are trying to fill in the blanks or give these things for FREE so nobody can really complain. (They do, see my sig below)

In summary, thank you all for using iphones with different names and recognizing that ONLY APPLE put a device together you all love now .


It makes for fun reading:-)

Copy on dudes and Happy Easter!:-)


Amen, hallelujah, someone pass they Tylenol. :apple:

+1

didnt know the word tw@t was used over the pond... lol amezzin

Yes, twat is used over here quite a bit. Wank, not so much though.

However, you are unfortunately stuck in the position that if you buy the device, you are buying ATT service. As long as this continues to happen, then Apple really doesn't have any incentive to move it to other carriers. I mean, technically they do, but if there are service complaints, yet the very same people who complain still continue to purchase the new one ever year, then that's not sending a very strong message, in my opinion.

Another fallout from terrible AT&T service is that in many shops and restaurants, at least in the San Francisco area, and especially Berkeley, you can't check in using location services like Foursquare or Facebook Places since there isn't adequate coverage- eg: no service, no signal etc.

That's bad for business.

Merchants too should press AT&T and local authorities for more towers and better connections.


SJ said it takes 2 years to build a cell tower in the bay area. compared to something like 6 months in texas

This is actually my first post. Yay! Been a machead forever (using a IIgs when I was 4).

ANYWAY, regarding various posts about PCs encoding mp3s faster than macs. I am an audio engineer, and I must say the encoding algorithm is MUCH better sounding in iTunes than in Winamp, and I assume most of you are using iTunes in your comparisons. Different programs encode at vastly different rates. For example, I don't know if you recall an application called Soundjam and another called Audiocatalyst. Soundjam encoded 2.4x faster, but sounded like total junk.

Now.. I'm not part of the "MACS IS FASTR" group, because sadly, they aren't... I just wanted to point out the mp3 encoding tests weren't fair.

- Springs

I wonder how many current Mac Pro owners will just buy the new chips off pricewatch.com and pop them in.I've seen this comment on numerous posts and it sounds like people haven't read Anand's review.

It's not very easy to get to the CPUs, nothing like a simple swap.

I've built loads of PCs in the last 12+ years and even I would be a little reluctant to rip apart a $2500 to $3000 Mac Pro like anand did to swap out the chips.

It's an easy swap for Apple in the manufacturing process, but not for the consumer.

Read the report. Apple doesn't want people to be able to upgrade their CPUs

Spooky - I predicted this. Me and everyone else except a couple naysayers. I only buy laptops though, so I'm not really the target market. But I think this will be on every graphic designers desk by Xmas. Go Apple and Intel!

Obviously, Apple will freak (what else is new...), but all this does is provide a shortcut around the burn-to-CD-and-rerip shortcut that's built into iTunes. You still need to buy the music. So, at best, this makes it easier to share music, but it doesn't provide a new capability.

I think it's a great convenience. I'm just saying that the inevitable wrath-of-God response from Apple is somewhat unwarranted.

I disagree. What he's doing is illegal and unethical.

If you burn a CD and rip it back, you're losing quality. The owners of the music (mostly RIAA, but anyone who licenses it to Apple) apparently decided that they can live with that. They did NOT agree to what this guy is doing.

It's theft, pure and simple.

More like the wrath-of-Jobs! :rolleyes:

Anyway, I've never been one to agree with the Windows people that argue the security-by-obscurity for why Mac OS X is not hacked to bits like Windows, but it would seem that this adds aome serious fire to their arguement. Here in music where Apple is the most popular and widely used, they are getting hacked (semi-successfully) more often than their WMA counterpart.


There's a big difference. This is not a system security flaw. It's simply a matter of someone reverse engineering a file format. AFAIK, there isn't a single file format which has not been reverse engineered. That's actually a trivial task.

iTMS just used web service interfaces and XML over HTTP... It will be interesting to see just how they could stop an app from accessing.

What is more likely is that the iTMS servers would add in the DRM and buyer metadata before it gets downloaded. Its actually a little shocking that it wasn't designed to do that in the first place!

Yes, they could do that.

They will also easily obtain a court injunction to stop this. What he's doing is illegal from two perspectives. First, it's a violation of the iTMS terms of service (which allows only iTunes access). Second, it's a violation of DCMA.

Personally I think this is great! Any sort of DRM sucks, even if it is rather "liberal". That's like giving all your customers in your shop a pair of handcuffs to prevent theft, and saying "but these cuffs are really comfortable".


I happen to disagree - but that's because my company depends on the ability to protect our intellectual property in order to stay in business.

The music owners have the right to do whatever they want with the music. You can legally (and morally) do what they request or live without their music.

Your position is the same as a person who steals a BMW because he doesn't like the purchase terms.

This is great news - by removing the DRM I can play my music on any device I like. It is my music after all. .


No, it's not your music. The music belongs to whoever the artist sold it to (usually a member of the RIAA). They sell you a license to use the music under a given set of terms. If you violate the terms that you paid for, you're stealing.

And if the industry would sell cheaper music without DRM then P2P wouldn't be as big of a problem.


If BMW would sell cheaper 5 series cars, no one would steal them.

The music industry owns the music - and they're free to price it however they want. If you think the price is too high, your only legal and moral response is to not buy it. Not liking the price is not justification for theft.