ghostlyorb
Mar 22, 08:10 PM
So they finally are matching the iPad's pricing.. too bad they don't offer the same functionality...
wizard
Apr 6, 04:05 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
For a programmer dealing with Terminal, Xcode, Netbeans, Eclipse, etc (not graphic intensive softwares), would this macbook air be a better deal than the 13/15" Macbook pro?
Anyone?
It depends upon the programmer doesn't it?
One concern I would have is wear on the SSD. Due to that I couldn't recommend the current model with it's limited SSD size. Look at how much space your current installation uses and then multiply by 3. That ought to give you enough excess capacity to assure that wear leveling works to your advantage. Considering how my machine is set up that would mean about 350GB of SSD.
In any event why would you even ask if an rumored un released machine is suitable for your usage? There are many factors to consider and to evaluate them you need the machines real specs nit rumors.
For a programmer dealing with Terminal, Xcode, Netbeans, Eclipse, etc (not graphic intensive softwares), would this macbook air be a better deal than the 13/15" Macbook pro?
Anyone?
It depends upon the programmer doesn't it?
One concern I would have is wear on the SSD. Due to that I couldn't recommend the current model with it's limited SSD size. Look at how much space your current installation uses and then multiply by 3. That ought to give you enough excess capacity to assure that wear leveling works to your advantage. Considering how my machine is set up that would mean about 350GB of SSD.
In any event why would you even ask if an rumored un released machine is suitable for your usage? There are many factors to consider and to evaluate them you need the machines real specs nit rumors.
mobilehavoc
Apr 6, 02:38 PM
I own both the iPad and the Xoom - both do some things very well, and both do some things horribly.
I am starting to wean myself off of iOS, though. The iPad served me well as a "starter" tablet, but I constantly find myself wanting it to do more or different things, which is something Android (not the Xoom specifically, but Android as a whole) does offer.
To each his own, you know?
This is an excellent point. I still recommend the iPad to my parents, family and friends who are new to the tablet market. For those of my friends who are techy and into computers/technology, the XOOM is much more enjoyable.
This is why having competition is good. If Jobs had his way we'd all be stuck with iPads whether we wanted them or not.
I am starting to wean myself off of iOS, though. The iPad served me well as a "starter" tablet, but I constantly find myself wanting it to do more or different things, which is something Android (not the Xoom specifically, but Android as a whole) does offer.
To each his own, you know?
This is an excellent point. I still recommend the iPad to my parents, family and friends who are new to the tablet market. For those of my friends who are techy and into computers/technology, the XOOM is much more enjoyable.
This is why having competition is good. If Jobs had his way we'd all be stuck with iPads whether we wanted them or not.
Blue Velvet
Apr 27, 03:06 PM
Amazing that anyone ever wonders why conservatives never stay around these parts, your level of debate is at rock bottom.
I'm quite sure that my rare posts in this forum have little to do with what you and your army think of this forum...besides, my milkshake brings all the boys to the yard.
I saw it on Drudge
Now there's a reliable source. Instead of me taking more time to explain it to someone who hasn't got the slightest idea of what he's talking about, I'll go one better. I'll let a conservative explain it:
We have received several e-mails today calling into question the validity of the PDF that the White House released, namely that there are embedded layers in the document. There are now several other people on the case. We looked into it and dismissed it.
The PDF is composed of multiple images. That�s correct. Using a photo editor or PDF viewer of your choice, you can extract this image data, view it, hide it, etc. But these layers, as they�re being called, aren�t layers in the traditional photo-editing sense of the word. They are, quite literally, pieces of image data that have been positioned in a PDF container. They appear as text but also contain glyphs, dots, lines, boxes, squiggles, and random garbage. They�re not combined or merged in any way. Quite simply, they look like they were created programmatically, not by a human.
What�s plausible is that somewhere along the way � from the scanning device to the PDF-creation software, both of which can perform OCR (optical character recognition) � these partial/pseudo-text images were created and saved. What�s not plausible is that the government spent all this time manufacturing Obama�s birth certificate only to commit the laughably rookie mistake of exporting the layers from Photoshop, or whatever photo editing software they are meant to have used. It�s likely that whoever scanned the birth certificate in Hawaii forgot to turn off the OCR setting on the scanner. Let�s leave it at that.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/265767/pdf-layers-obamas-birth-certificate-nathan-goulding
Now are we done with this useless nonsense?
I'm quite sure that my rare posts in this forum have little to do with what you and your army think of this forum...besides, my milkshake brings all the boys to the yard.
I saw it on Drudge
Now there's a reliable source. Instead of me taking more time to explain it to someone who hasn't got the slightest idea of what he's talking about, I'll go one better. I'll let a conservative explain it:
We have received several e-mails today calling into question the validity of the PDF that the White House released, namely that there are embedded layers in the document. There are now several other people on the case. We looked into it and dismissed it.
The PDF is composed of multiple images. That�s correct. Using a photo editor or PDF viewer of your choice, you can extract this image data, view it, hide it, etc. But these layers, as they�re being called, aren�t layers in the traditional photo-editing sense of the word. They are, quite literally, pieces of image data that have been positioned in a PDF container. They appear as text but also contain glyphs, dots, lines, boxes, squiggles, and random garbage. They�re not combined or merged in any way. Quite simply, they look like they were created programmatically, not by a human.
What�s plausible is that somewhere along the way � from the scanning device to the PDF-creation software, both of which can perform OCR (optical character recognition) � these partial/pseudo-text images were created and saved. What�s not plausible is that the government spent all this time manufacturing Obama�s birth certificate only to commit the laughably rookie mistake of exporting the layers from Photoshop, or whatever photo editing software they are meant to have used. It�s likely that whoever scanned the birth certificate in Hawaii forgot to turn off the OCR setting on the scanner. Let�s leave it at that.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/265767/pdf-layers-obamas-birth-certificate-nathan-goulding
Now are we done with this useless nonsense?
PBF
Mar 25, 10:56 PM
In another news: iPad 3 is released in Fall 2011.
swingerofbirch
Aug 7, 04:25 PM
Good lord. Whatever happened to simplicity? It looked like a three ring circus up there today.
Now come on. Time machine? With a picture of outer space and stars? This looks so gimmicky. They are getting to be like Microsoft and just adding new features instead of making things easier and streamlined. Why not just improve the Backup program that comes with .Mac or include it for free? Do we really need another interface? To me it looks like form over function.
Now come on. Time machine? With a picture of outer space and stars? This looks so gimmicky. They are getting to be like Microsoft and just adding new features instead of making things easier and streamlined. Why not just improve the Backup program that comes with .Mac or include it for free? Do we really need another interface? To me it looks like form over function.
AlligatorBloodz
Apr 8, 01:47 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Weird... I think there's more involved in this than we can imagine.
One thing that comes to my mind is the possibility they were holding their stock to sell it outside the country, as there's been a high demand and higher value to sell overseas.
Or... a competitor made an arrangement with Be$t Buy to sell a minimum quota a day (well... very odd, but possible) for who knows what reason.
It's a strange concept on BB's part, but if I had a store I would sell all my stock if there's a demand for it. If I hold off, my customers would be driven away to a competitor and I would loose both present and future sales.
When Apple tv2 came out, google paid bby to not sell it so google tv could get a head start
Weird... I think there's more involved in this than we can imagine.
One thing that comes to my mind is the possibility they were holding their stock to sell it outside the country, as there's been a high demand and higher value to sell overseas.
Or... a competitor made an arrangement with Be$t Buy to sell a minimum quota a day (well... very odd, but possible) for who knows what reason.
It's a strange concept on BB's part, but if I had a store I would sell all my stock if there's a demand for it. If I hold off, my customers would be driven away to a competitor and I would loose both present and future sales.
When Apple tv2 came out, google paid bby to not sell it so google tv could get a head start
afrowq
Apr 6, 10:09 PM
I use FCP and am VERY hesitant to go back to Premiere. Haven't used it since Premiere 6.0, and definitely do NOT want to go back. I have tens of thousands of dollars invested in Apple and FCP, and it would be a huge pain to abandon them. But I absolutely will jump ship if the next update to FCP doesn't show me that Apple is still paying attention to the professional users that initially were the bread and butter of the company.
BornAgainMac
Jul 21, 07:19 AM
Now you just need to decide what color your want your new computer... (again)
kevin.rivers
Jul 14, 04:26 PM
<snipped...>I don't think you realize what you're asking for. A system that is capable of performing all possible tasks at once is just unrealistic. Nobody will ever equip a system like that, because no user will have those kinds of requirements.
Even in the PC world, where more slots are common, you almost never find a system that has actually filled all those slots with devices.
Amen. It makes me sick to see people crying foul.
"I want 4 of every port/slot there is, in a case that is no more than a foot tall, plus 2 3Ghz processors, blu-ray, dual gpus, all for $1500! And if Apple doesn't give it to me, I will never buy anything from them ever!"
Even though they will never even use them(all the ports/slots). Most people will fill the x16 and maybe an old school PCI slot. Thats about it.
Even in the PC world, where more slots are common, you almost never find a system that has actually filled all those slots with devices.
Amen. It makes me sick to see people crying foul.
"I want 4 of every port/slot there is, in a case that is no more than a foot tall, plus 2 3Ghz processors, blu-ray, dual gpus, all for $1500! And if Apple doesn't give it to me, I will never buy anything from them ever!"
Even though they will never even use them(all the ports/slots). Most people will fill the x16 and maybe an old school PCI slot. Thats about it.
Stridder44
Jul 20, 02:27 PM
I disagree. I think Apple will use Core 2 Duo (Conroe) in the iMac, and Merom in the MBP. The iMac could hold a G5, why not Conroe?
On top of that, you'll notice that a 2.16 GHz Conroe costs $70 less than the 1.83 GHz Yonah that's in the iMac now, $70 less than a 2 GHz Merom, and $200 less than a 2.16 GHz Merom, increasing Apple's profit margins on the iMac considerably or allowing a price drop- plus they can advertise it as a desktop processor.
In fact, even if Conroe was too hot (which I highly doubt, since the iMac had a G5), a 2.16 GHz Conroe underclocked to 2 GHz still saves $70 over a 2 GHz Merom.
But what about the MacBook!! *weeps*
On top of that, you'll notice that a 2.16 GHz Conroe costs $70 less than the 1.83 GHz Yonah that's in the iMac now, $70 less than a 2 GHz Merom, and $200 less than a 2.16 GHz Merom, increasing Apple's profit margins on the iMac considerably or allowing a price drop- plus they can advertise it as a desktop processor.
In fact, even if Conroe was too hot (which I highly doubt, since the iMac had a G5), a 2.16 GHz Conroe underclocked to 2 GHz still saves $70 over a 2 GHz Merom.
But what about the MacBook!! *weeps*
Rm.237
Apr 8, 08:33 AM
Just to let y'all know, unless someone else knows otherwise, Best Buy makes zero off Apple product sales (that haven't been marked up).
I read this thread and I noted that someone pointed out that BB apparently marks up some items -Airports, Time Machines, etc. I found this odd since Apple controls all the pricing, but eh, not going to question that since those are the facts I'm assuming (can't be bothered to go on a comparing spree).
Anyway, the iPad 2s aren't marked up, thus they make zero.
Each department should be meeting their budget daily. How do they do that? By selling products they make notional margin and that allows that department to meet their budget. On a slow, sh-tty day, a department may only be 70% to budget; on a fast, awesome day, a department may be 110% to budget.
But when you make zero off iPad sales, keeping them away from customers does not help notional margin. Doesn't bring them any closer to hitting budget. The only way they'd make money on that iPad sale would be selling accessories or the Black Tie protection. But that's entirely something else.
Best Buy makes zero notional margin on iPad sales, so they're not withholding stock to meet daily budgets.
I can't explain why they're doing this, but given my knowledge, I can invalidate the claim that managers are hoarding iPads so that they can meet budget every day.
Cheers! :D
Margin is not the same as the budget. On a sales graph they represent two different things entirely. Course as they say in retail margin is king. At the same time the budget is that big flashy number that everyone wants to hit.
I read this thread and I noted that someone pointed out that BB apparently marks up some items -Airports, Time Machines, etc. I found this odd since Apple controls all the pricing, but eh, not going to question that since those are the facts I'm assuming (can't be bothered to go on a comparing spree).
Anyway, the iPad 2s aren't marked up, thus they make zero.
Each department should be meeting their budget daily. How do they do that? By selling products they make notional margin and that allows that department to meet their budget. On a slow, sh-tty day, a department may only be 70% to budget; on a fast, awesome day, a department may be 110% to budget.
But when you make zero off iPad sales, keeping them away from customers does not help notional margin. Doesn't bring them any closer to hitting budget. The only way they'd make money on that iPad sale would be selling accessories or the Black Tie protection. But that's entirely something else.
Best Buy makes zero notional margin on iPad sales, so they're not withholding stock to meet daily budgets.
I can't explain why they're doing this, but given my knowledge, I can invalidate the claim that managers are hoarding iPads so that they can meet budget every day.
Cheers! :D
Margin is not the same as the budget. On a sales graph they represent two different things entirely. Course as they say in retail margin is king. At the same time the budget is that big flashy number that everyone wants to hit.
Steviejobz
Apr 8, 06:08 AM
The only reason I can think of (and I know nothing down these lines) is to push more revenue into this quarter (the last quarter just ended March 31st). Perhaps BB made their number for the quarter from Jan 1 to Mar 31 and want to get a running start on this current one.
BBY announced earnings on 3/24 - they operate on a different fiscal year so the quarter ended in February.
BBY announced earnings on 3/24 - they operate on a different fiscal year so the quarter ended in February.
cwedl
Jul 27, 09:49 AM
at last, I may be able to build a system that will run Vista well!
PhantomPumpkin
Apr 25, 04:39 PM
You are skating around the issue of user permission. If you use this app to track your location - its YOUR CHOICE. However, the issue here is that Apple is collecting the data without the option of user choice. Even turning off location services does not stop the collection and submittal to Apple of this information.
That is what is the hearty of the matter - do we, as users, have the right to opt to to the collection and submittal of location data to Apple ? With your example, you do, as you can turn off the app at will.
Please, link me any evidence this is submitted to Apple.
That is what is the hearty of the matter - do we, as users, have the right to opt to to the collection and submittal of location data to Apple ? With your example, you do, as you can turn off the app at will.
Please, link me any evidence this is submitted to Apple.
Bilbo63
Apr 19, 06:40 PM
Proof that Samsung ripped off Apple's rip off of Delicious Library?
Apple hired the young fellow that did the UI for delicious library... sadly his name escapes me at the moment. But yeah, the kid brought is book shelves with him.;)
Apple hired the young fellow that did the UI for delicious library... sadly his name escapes me at the moment. But yeah, the kid brought is book shelves with him.;)
xStep
Apr 11, 04:23 PM
Yes, its crap. The first version followed the basic principles of NLE but the new version is pathetic.
However, Randy came up with FCP for Macromedia so he has what it takes if Jobs and other consumer oriented guys can keep their ***** away from the mix.
LOL! OK, so the new generation of iMovie isn't compatible with you. I like the new iMovie. Sure it has it's quirks and a different take on the editing process, but I'm compatible with it and FCP.
Randy's experiment that turned into the new iMovie was a tool to allow him to quickly skim through his personal content for use in Final Cut. Apparently, other powers that be, when seeing it, thought it a good base for a new consumer video editor. I don't recall it being publicly shared how much influence came from others for the new iMovie. Other's influence has been assumed, except for idiots who want to personally attack Randy.
However, Randy came up with FCP for Macromedia so he has what it takes if Jobs and other consumer oriented guys can keep their ***** away from the mix.
LOL! OK, so the new generation of iMovie isn't compatible with you. I like the new iMovie. Sure it has it's quirks and a different take on the editing process, but I'm compatible with it and FCP.
Randy's experiment that turned into the new iMovie was a tool to allow him to quickly skim through his personal content for use in Final Cut. Apparently, other powers that be, when seeing it, thought it a good base for a new consumer video editor. I don't recall it being publicly shared how much influence came from others for the new iMovie. Other's influence has been assumed, except for idiots who want to personally attack Randy.
Magrathea
Apr 6, 11:23 PM
Close, but not quite right.
The Mercury Playback Engine is composed of 3 things:
1. 64 Bit Application
2. Multithreaded Application
3. Processing of some things using CUDA (an NVIDIA card)
If you don't have a CUDA based video card, you still have the Mercury Playback Engine (software) available. What you probably meant to say is that hardware acceleration for the Mercury Playback Engine is not available unless it's a CUDA card.
More info: http://blogs.adobe.com/premiereprotraining/2011/02/cuda-mercury-playback-engine-and-adobe-premiere-pro.html
Best,
Kevin
I can attest to mercury working on both my MBPs 2007 and mid 2008 (8gigs of ram) but add a fast color correction effect on AVCHD or 7D footage and you gotta render - machines grind to a halt, footage not playable at all. Transcode to Prores first and you're golden.
Of course most people will get newer quad core machines but laptop wise apple doesn't have a 1Gig CUDA card for any MBP right?
Also, I have seen tests for people with fancy Quattro 4300fx cards ($1500) NS 6 OR 8 core machines where they turn on and off the hardware acceleration and didn't see much of a difference not a 10x better / $1500 difference. Correct me if I'm wrong here.
The Mercury Playback Engine is composed of 3 things:
1. 64 Bit Application
2. Multithreaded Application
3. Processing of some things using CUDA (an NVIDIA card)
If you don't have a CUDA based video card, you still have the Mercury Playback Engine (software) available. What you probably meant to say is that hardware acceleration for the Mercury Playback Engine is not available unless it's a CUDA card.
More info: http://blogs.adobe.com/premiereprotraining/2011/02/cuda-mercury-playback-engine-and-adobe-premiere-pro.html
Best,
Kevin
I can attest to mercury working on both my MBPs 2007 and mid 2008 (8gigs of ram) but add a fast color correction effect on AVCHD or 7D footage and you gotta render - machines grind to a halt, footage not playable at all. Transcode to Prores first and you're golden.
Of course most people will get newer quad core machines but laptop wise apple doesn't have a 1Gig CUDA card for any MBP right?
Also, I have seen tests for people with fancy Quattro 4300fx cards ($1500) NS 6 OR 8 core machines where they turn on and off the hardware acceleration and didn't see much of a difference not a 10x better / $1500 difference. Correct me if I'm wrong here.
grum
Sep 19, 08:11 AM
It gets annoying. Why? Because it's true and most people don't want to admit it.
In a few cases here and there, the extra processor power/speed is going to help. But for a majority of people buying a MacBook, they're not going to be burning home-made DVD's, doing intense Music compositions, or using it for hard-core gaming. They're going to SURF and WRITE.
As for the "resale" value, again, most people who are buying a used MacBook are NOT going to ask "is it a Merom?" They're going to ask how nice the case is, how much use it's gotten, and how much it is, and that's it.
Everybody likes to play "ooo, I'm the hard-core computing whiz and I need the BEST out there", but I bet you if you took an honest poll out there of everyone who's answered this thread, you'd find at least 75% these Apple fans have no need for for the extra speed, they just want it because it's "cool" and "fast" and it's the latest thing out there.
You may be right to a certain extent, but l i assumed that most people who want a Macbook Pro are going to be using it for intensive stuff - I was under the impressions that Macs are the platform of choice for a lot of graphics professionals etc so the high end line would have a lot of those kind of ppl buying. Granted the difference in speed will probably be fairly minimal, but when you are spending a load of cash on a top-of-the line notebook, why shouldnt you expect to have the latest and greatest technology available? It also seems quite likely they might either make them cheaper, or offer more RAM on the base model etc. so buying now unless you really have to seems foolish.
Im also not sure about your point on the resale value, i would imagine pro users probably would be concerned about which processor it had in it.
In a few cases here and there, the extra processor power/speed is going to help. But for a majority of people buying a MacBook, they're not going to be burning home-made DVD's, doing intense Music compositions, or using it for hard-core gaming. They're going to SURF and WRITE.
As for the "resale" value, again, most people who are buying a used MacBook are NOT going to ask "is it a Merom?" They're going to ask how nice the case is, how much use it's gotten, and how much it is, and that's it.
Everybody likes to play "ooo, I'm the hard-core computing whiz and I need the BEST out there", but I bet you if you took an honest poll out there of everyone who's answered this thread, you'd find at least 75% these Apple fans have no need for for the extra speed, they just want it because it's "cool" and "fast" and it's the latest thing out there.
You may be right to a certain extent, but l i assumed that most people who want a Macbook Pro are going to be using it for intensive stuff - I was under the impressions that Macs are the platform of choice for a lot of graphics professionals etc so the high end line would have a lot of those kind of ppl buying. Granted the difference in speed will probably be fairly minimal, but when you are spending a load of cash on a top-of-the line notebook, why shouldnt you expect to have the latest and greatest technology available? It also seems quite likely they might either make them cheaper, or offer more RAM on the base model etc. so buying now unless you really have to seems foolish.
Im also not sure about your point on the resale value, i would imagine pro users probably would be concerned about which processor it had in it.
gnasher729
Aug 17, 05:32 AM
They are comparing a 2 generations old G5 (Dual 2,5) versus a new Intel (Quad 2,6) which is not even the fastest out there. What kind of comparison is that?
If you want to know what is the fastest Mac, the comparison is no good. If you want to know whether you should upgrade your machine, the comparison makes a lot of sense. First, the 2.66 GHz Quad has the best price/performance ratio. If you start with the 2.0 GHz, you get 666 MHz more for $300, then you get another 333 MHz for a mere $800. So if you want to upgrade, the 2.66 is _the_ machine to buy. Second, there will be much less difference between a Quad G5 and a Quad Xeon. On performance critical Rosetta applications (like Photoshop) the Quad G5 will be stronger. In that case, it doesn't matter how much stronger - you won't upgrade, that is all that matters. But if you have a dual G5, then the question whether to upgrade or not is really interesting.
And we need to know whether apps use four cores or not. In many cases, changing from two threads to four threads is very easy (that is if all the threads to the same work; it is much harder if the threads do different work), but the app uses only two threads because most machines had only two CPUs. As an example, early versions of Handbrake didn't gain anything from Quad G5s; the CPUs were 50% idle all the time. People complained, and it was changed. The same thing will happen again, especially since _all_ Mac Pros have four cores.
If you want to know what is the fastest Mac, the comparison is no good. If you want to know whether you should upgrade your machine, the comparison makes a lot of sense. First, the 2.66 GHz Quad has the best price/performance ratio. If you start with the 2.0 GHz, you get 666 MHz more for $300, then you get another 333 MHz for a mere $800. So if you want to upgrade, the 2.66 is _the_ machine to buy. Second, there will be much less difference between a Quad G5 and a Quad Xeon. On performance critical Rosetta applications (like Photoshop) the Quad G5 will be stronger. In that case, it doesn't matter how much stronger - you won't upgrade, that is all that matters. But if you have a dual G5, then the question whether to upgrade or not is really interesting.
And we need to know whether apps use four cores or not. In many cases, changing from two threads to four threads is very easy (that is if all the threads to the same work; it is much harder if the threads do different work), but the app uses only two threads because most machines had only two CPUs. As an example, early versions of Handbrake didn't gain anything from Quad G5s; the CPUs were 50% idle all the time. People complained, and it was changed. The same thing will happen again, especially since _all_ Mac Pros have four cores.
toddybody
Apr 19, 01:55 PM
BREAKING NEWS --- 1979 --
http://www.thetelemediagroup.com/images/monitors/pg5/3_ab121w.jpghttp://www.thetelemediagroup.com/images/monitors/pg5/4_gebw.jpg
RCA Launches Suit Against General Electric for infringement of 9" b&w television interface and "look and feel."
Spokesmen for RCA maintain that GE's misappropriation of the LīfLīk� Trūwūd� woodgrain finish, leading consumers to confuse the GE imitation with the RCA original.
Also note GE's nearly identical VHF and UHF controllers ... placed in the same location on the chassis as the RCA original. Even the speaker is located in the same way.
RCA patented the use of separate VHF and UHF knobs in 1958, the click-stop UHF knob in 1972, and the ergonomically efficient upper right location of tuner knobs in 1952. The characteristics are innovations that help the consumer recognize an RCA television, and any use of these unique features without RCA's explicit permission is a breach of patent, trademark and copyright.
Awww...old TV's. :o *tear
http://www.thetelemediagroup.com/images/monitors/pg5/3_ab121w.jpghttp://www.thetelemediagroup.com/images/monitors/pg5/4_gebw.jpg
RCA Launches Suit Against General Electric for infringement of 9" b&w television interface and "look and feel."
Spokesmen for RCA maintain that GE's misappropriation of the LīfLīk� Trūwūd� woodgrain finish, leading consumers to confuse the GE imitation with the RCA original.
Also note GE's nearly identical VHF and UHF controllers ... placed in the same location on the chassis as the RCA original. Even the speaker is located in the same way.
RCA patented the use of separate VHF and UHF knobs in 1958, the click-stop UHF knob in 1972, and the ergonomically efficient upper right location of tuner knobs in 1952. The characteristics are innovations that help the consumer recognize an RCA television, and any use of these unique features without RCA's explicit permission is a breach of patent, trademark and copyright.
Awww...old TV's. :o *tear
bibbz
Jun 15, 02:54 PM
We ran out of pins within an hour. Ridiculous.
BRLawyer
Aug 20, 02:02 PM
Freescale? Where does Freescale have a 64 -bit spot on their road map? (I want to know) Could this be.. really? Freescale? Now there's a twist I for one, did not see
Are they still around? I thought their business was all about embedded procs for cars and radios... :rolleyes:
Are they still around? I thought their business was all about embedded procs for cars and radios... :rolleyes:
LethalWolfe
Apr 10, 12:45 AM
I'm a little confused...why was Avid presenting at a Final Cut Pro User Group's meeting anyway? Do they just come in and are like "Hey, you've all made a mistake!" or something?
Long story short, because the people that make up the groups want it and the other companies (Adobe, Avid, Canon, AJA, Blackmagic, etc.,) don't want to pass up a chance to talk to their demographic directly. Although still FCP-centric there are many other tools that editors are interested in learning about and the user groups accommodate that. Apple hasn't really been on the ball the last few years and companies like Adobe and Avid have been stepping up their game which, in my comings and goings, has kicked up the most interest in non-Apple software by FCP users I've seen since I first bought FCP 9 years ago.
Sure, there are die-hard fanboys but most editors realize these are just tools and want the best ones for the job and right now there is more competition in the prosumer price range than ever. For example, Apple Color used the best deal in town by far for coloring grading apps but last year Blackmagic purcahsed DaVinci (the gold standard in color correction) and dropped the price to $1000 for the software-only version. Perviously the lowest point of entry to get a DaVinci was over $200,000, AFAIK. Baselight, another high-end color grading system, just announced a Baselight plug-in for FCP that'll be available this fall for "less than $1000".
Lethal
Long story short, because the people that make up the groups want it and the other companies (Adobe, Avid, Canon, AJA, Blackmagic, etc.,) don't want to pass up a chance to talk to their demographic directly. Although still FCP-centric there are many other tools that editors are interested in learning about and the user groups accommodate that. Apple hasn't really been on the ball the last few years and companies like Adobe and Avid have been stepping up their game which, in my comings and goings, has kicked up the most interest in non-Apple software by FCP users I've seen since I first bought FCP 9 years ago.
Sure, there are die-hard fanboys but most editors realize these are just tools and want the best ones for the job and right now there is more competition in the prosumer price range than ever. For example, Apple Color used the best deal in town by far for coloring grading apps but last year Blackmagic purcahsed DaVinci (the gold standard in color correction) and dropped the price to $1000 for the software-only version. Perviously the lowest point of entry to get a DaVinci was over $200,000, AFAIK. Baselight, another high-end color grading system, just announced a Baselight plug-in for FCP that'll be available this fall for "less than $1000".
Lethal
No comments:
Post a Comment