EagerDragon
Aug 25, 06:38 PM
When I read a lot of posts where people complain about Apple service, it seems that it is offten from non-US. Is this my imagination or does Apple need to kick the Arse of their international support groups?
:D
:D
QCassidy352
Apr 6, 11:43 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)
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)
I have a 13" ultimate of the current generation. The limiting factor for me is the graphics, not the processor. so going to sandy bridge with the intel 3000 would be a less appealing machine for my uses than the current model. It's really too bad the sandy bridge macs are tied to those garbage integrated graphics.
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
It's safe to say they won't outperform 13" mbp which has the same graphics and a faster processor. Which means the graphics performance will be a step back. And really, is the attitude necessary?
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)
I have a 13" ultimate of the current generation. The limiting factor for me is the graphics, not the processor. so going to sandy bridge with the intel 3000 would be a less appealing machine for my uses than the current model. It's really too bad the sandy bridge macs are tied to those garbage integrated graphics.
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
It's safe to say they won't outperform 13" mbp which has the same graphics and a faster processor. Which means the graphics performance will be a step back. And really, is the attitude necessary?
Burnsey
Apr 27, 11:00 AM
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2711155/posts?q=1&;page=101
There you have it. The birthers aren't satisfied. I knew it.
If this birth certificate said that Obama wasn't born in the US they would be singing a different tune. Heck they would be singing a different tune given the tiniest most unlikely evidence that he wasn't born in the US.
There you have it. The birthers aren't satisfied. I knew it.
If this birth certificate said that Obama wasn't born in the US they would be singing a different tune. Heck they would be singing a different tune given the tiniest most unlikely evidence that he wasn't born in the US.
Porco
Aug 6, 06:25 PM
Why sell a new keyboard for front row, if you can sell a new Mac to the same person? Including the sensor in the Cinema Displays would enable Apple to sell more of their display, on which they probably have a very good profit margin (when you compare to other manufacturers).
Because people would buy a new keyboard for some extra functionality; they wouldn't dump their entire system for one feature. And besides, my idea was a solution to the Mac Pro specific issue - therefore it would have to be available as a replacement part for the Mac Pro, making it sensible as an optional purchase for every mac owner. But regardless of that, it would be included with the new computer! If all the other macs have an integrated IR sensor, are you suggesting Apple will want people to buy an iMac rather than a Mac Pro? Really? Also, everyone needs a keyboard, it's on the low-end of the price scale as an upgradable item and it would be easy to add IR.
They could also just put it into the tower. Even if that is under the desk, it might not be that much of a problem. In my experience the sensor responds very nicely to the remote even if the line of sight between them is somewhat obstructed.
They could, but the keyboard is, I would have thought, much much more likely to be in a predictably close position to the screen in the vast majority of cases.
However the best solution I think, was suggested by someone on these forums. I don't know, whether it has been quoted here already, because I did not go through all the messages. This poster suggested to combine the sensor with an external iSight. That could be connected to any monitor and would probably have a good IR reception because of beeing on top of the monitor and thus very exposed.
Not everyone needs or wants an external iSight. Everyone uses a keyboard. I think my solution works not only because of the exposure/position, but also in the ubiquity of the item. The IR sensors in the other machines are on the machines themselves because that's where it makes sense - but they are there, accessible, whatever your set-up is, wherever you put it (with the possible exception of the mini I guess if you really wanted that hidden away). The keyboard solution would just take the most predictably accessible (and standard) element of the system for a Mac Pro and puts the IR there - a display is optional, an external iSight is optional, the keyboard that comes with every machine - well that's standard.
Because people would buy a new keyboard for some extra functionality; they wouldn't dump their entire system for one feature. And besides, my idea was a solution to the Mac Pro specific issue - therefore it would have to be available as a replacement part for the Mac Pro, making it sensible as an optional purchase for every mac owner. But regardless of that, it would be included with the new computer! If all the other macs have an integrated IR sensor, are you suggesting Apple will want people to buy an iMac rather than a Mac Pro? Really? Also, everyone needs a keyboard, it's on the low-end of the price scale as an upgradable item and it would be easy to add IR.
They could also just put it into the tower. Even if that is under the desk, it might not be that much of a problem. In my experience the sensor responds very nicely to the remote even if the line of sight between them is somewhat obstructed.
They could, but the keyboard is, I would have thought, much much more likely to be in a predictably close position to the screen in the vast majority of cases.
However the best solution I think, was suggested by someone on these forums. I don't know, whether it has been quoted here already, because I did not go through all the messages. This poster suggested to combine the sensor with an external iSight. That could be connected to any monitor and would probably have a good IR reception because of beeing on top of the monitor and thus very exposed.
Not everyone needs or wants an external iSight. Everyone uses a keyboard. I think my solution works not only because of the exposure/position, but also in the ubiquity of the item. The IR sensors in the other machines are on the machines themselves because that's where it makes sense - but they are there, accessible, whatever your set-up is, wherever you put it (with the possible exception of the mini I guess if you really wanted that hidden away). The keyboard solution would just take the most predictably accessible (and standard) element of the system for a Mac Pro and puts the IR there - a display is optional, an external iSight is optional, the keyboard that comes with every machine - well that's standard.
Foxglove9
Jul 14, 02:52 PM
If those specs are real then I'm glad I didn't hold out for the Mac Pro and bought a used G5 a few months ago. Dual optical drive slots are nice but for me not necessary.
Porchland
Aug 7, 03:23 PM
The photo templates in Mail look pretty nifty. The ability to crop and scale inside a pre-defined space would make a nice new feature for iPhoto books, so I suspect we may see more of this feature in iPhoto when iLife refreshes in January.
The improved functionality in Mail looks great!
The improved functionality in Mail looks great!
iJohnHenry
Mar 20, 10:21 AM
This should all go public.
But they have worked so hard, all these decades, to diminish the "one man, one vote" to something much less than that.
Won't you think of their children, and reconsider?
:rolleyes:
But they have worked so hard, all these decades, to diminish the "one man, one vote" to something much less than that.
Won't you think of their children, and reconsider?
:rolleyes:
DocNo
Apr 11, 09:55 AM
FCUG could have said no to Apple, but why would they? It's not a Canon Group, it's a FCU Group...
Thank you!
Thank you!
ccrandall77
Aug 11, 12:28 PM
isn't it about time you guys got in line with the rest of the world? GSM has more than 81% (http://www.gsacom.com/news/gsa_203.php4?PHPSESSID=7aa4036fa6a16fe0066d2e6dc9430727) of the world market. If you get a cdma phone you are more or less restriced to use it in US, whereas a GSM phone can be used more or less all over the planet.
Why? First of all, with CDMA2000 I get great coverage in N. America. Second, it's not like most people in N. America regularly travel to Europe. Third, CDMA2000 is a superior technology. EDGE only gave me 128Kbps for data but with EVDO I peak at 700Kbps. Fourth, with Verizon and Sprint you can get a CDMA/GSM phone if you REALLY need to travel abroad.
I could also ask why the rest of the world doesn't get with the program and move to better technology with CDMA2000 like the US and parts of Asia have?
Why? First of all, with CDMA2000 I get great coverage in N. America. Second, it's not like most people in N. America regularly travel to Europe. Third, CDMA2000 is a superior technology. EDGE only gave me 128Kbps for data but with EVDO I peak at 700Kbps. Fourth, with Verizon and Sprint you can get a CDMA/GSM phone if you REALLY need to travel abroad.
I could also ask why the rest of the world doesn't get with the program and move to better technology with CDMA2000 like the US and parts of Asia have?
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 05:13 AM
Bill, I would love to hear your explanation for the position of the male prostate.
I don't understand the question. Whatever it means, I wouldn't assume that having, say, genitals, means that I'm always morally free to have sex. If everyone with genitals were always morally free to do that, homosexually abusive pedophile priests would have been morally free to molest their victims.
IYou might say, "Bill, if the sex was consensual, maybe there nothing morally wrong with it." But people can coerce others into consenting.
A quick side note: Sexual tension is most often the cause for anger, jealousy and frustration. So, if everyone had at least one good orgasm every day, the world would be a much more relaxed and peaceful place and we wouldn't have the need for silly discussions such as these.
Most often? How many are jealous of others because the others are right, because they drive fancy cars, etc.?
Some may feel relaxed about something because they've deadened their consciences that rightly warned them against it.. In that case, a discussion such as this one may be needed, even if the participants don't feel any sexual tension.
I don't understand the question. Whatever it means, I wouldn't assume that having, say, genitals, means that I'm always morally free to have sex. If everyone with genitals were always morally free to do that, homosexually abusive pedophile priests would have been morally free to molest their victims.
IYou might say, "Bill, if the sex was consensual, maybe there nothing morally wrong with it." But people can coerce others into consenting.
A quick side note: Sexual tension is most often the cause for anger, jealousy and frustration. So, if everyone had at least one good orgasm every day, the world would be a much more relaxed and peaceful place and we wouldn't have the need for silly discussions such as these.
Most often? How many are jealous of others because the others are right, because they drive fancy cars, etc.?
Some may feel relaxed about something because they've deadened their consciences that rightly warned them against it.. In that case, a discussion such as this one may be needed, even if the participants don't feel any sexual tension.
blakbyrd
Aug 5, 04:07 PM
Reposting my prediction from another thread:
Justin Bieber Party Supplies:
and discuss Justin
justin bieber pics to print.
justin bieber bookmarks to
Justin Bieber Digital Art
Buy This Print
justin bieber bookmarks to
justin bieber pics to print.
Multimedia
Jul 23, 03:14 PM
Given the change in Clovertown schedule, I expect that at WWDC Apple will release 2 "lower end" Mac Pro configurations both with dual Woodcrests. The higher end configuration with two Clovertowns will ship early Q1 (maybe around MW'07).
I expect it will be 2.33GHz and 2.67GHz Woodcrest models with 3.0GHz as a BTO option. Conroe in Mac Pro is looking highly unlikely.
Anyone care to speculate on Intel's pricing for a 2.67GHz Clovertown? I am thinking $999.Well Swami I am going to have to call your bluff. Makes no sense to skip Conroe Dual Cores on the Mac Pro yet. This Winter 2007 with Clovertowns, perhaps post MacWorld SF. But not yet. And maybe not ever.
There are some who may never find a need for more than two cores. But therein creeps back the need for a cheaper dual core tower line in the same price range as the iMacs. Seems inevitable doesn't it? Expand the Tower line down to $999 and let it go all the way up to $3.5k. Six models instead of only 3 expensive ones.
January - March 2007
..$999 - Dual 2.13 GHz One Conroe
$1399 - Dual 2.4 GHz One Conroe
$1699 - Dual 2.67 GHz One Conroe
$1999 - Quad 2.67 GHz One Kentsfield
$2499 - Quad 3.2 GHz One Kentsfield
$3499 or more for Mac OctoPod Fastest On EARTH - 8 x 3.2 GHz
Two Clovertown later One Yorkfield for less money.
I found that word "OctoPod" in my Tiger's Oxford Dictionary. It's a REAL word.
When they get to 8 via a Yorkfield then the whole line can be based on the less expensive desktop family motherboards and chipsets except the extreeme top where pairs of Harpertown will make 16 etc etc.
You fill in the specs. I can't remember what speeds are being offered. This is all just a wild guestimate for discussion purposes. Please don't flame me.
I expect it will be 2.33GHz and 2.67GHz Woodcrest models with 3.0GHz as a BTO option. Conroe in Mac Pro is looking highly unlikely.
Anyone care to speculate on Intel's pricing for a 2.67GHz Clovertown? I am thinking $999.Well Swami I am going to have to call your bluff. Makes no sense to skip Conroe Dual Cores on the Mac Pro yet. This Winter 2007 with Clovertowns, perhaps post MacWorld SF. But not yet. And maybe not ever.
There are some who may never find a need for more than two cores. But therein creeps back the need for a cheaper dual core tower line in the same price range as the iMacs. Seems inevitable doesn't it? Expand the Tower line down to $999 and let it go all the way up to $3.5k. Six models instead of only 3 expensive ones.
January - March 2007
..$999 - Dual 2.13 GHz One Conroe
$1399 - Dual 2.4 GHz One Conroe
$1699 - Dual 2.67 GHz One Conroe
$1999 - Quad 2.67 GHz One Kentsfield
$2499 - Quad 3.2 GHz One Kentsfield
$3499 or more for Mac OctoPod Fastest On EARTH - 8 x 3.2 GHz
Two Clovertown later One Yorkfield for less money.
I found that word "OctoPod" in my Tiger's Oxford Dictionary. It's a REAL word.
When they get to 8 via a Yorkfield then the whole line can be based on the less expensive desktop family motherboards and chipsets except the extreeme top where pairs of Harpertown will make 16 etc etc.
You fill in the specs. I can't remember what speeds are being offered. This is all just a wild guestimate for discussion purposes. Please don't flame me.
macMan228
Mar 26, 08:34 AM
To my knowledge, all these features everyone is complaining about, can be disabled or just worked around, so whats the big deal?
Bring on the Lion, i can handle it :apple:
Bring on the Lion, i can handle it :apple:
Mr_Ed
Mar 31, 04:33 PM
Gruber is rarely accurate in his conclusions, and this time is no exception.
None of what is happening smacks of being a "bait-and-switch" as he claims. That would've required extremely clever pre-planning years ago on the part of Google.
Instead, it's got all the hallmarks of too little pre-planning.
Anyone with experience dealing with large projects can see that Rubin has belatedly come to realize that things were getting out of control. Now he is goofing up trying to take full control himself instead of doing the smart thing and first getting a consensus from the OHA members.
I don't think it's about planning. After all, how much "planning" do you need to do if your philosophy behind the product is basically " open it up so everyone can contribute and see where it goes"? The point most here are making is that the age-old "open" vs. "closed" ecosystem argument, which has repeatedly been used to criticize Apple over many years, is now looking more and more as if Apple was right all along. In this case what you call "lack of planning," I call lack of much thought at all. I for one don't have much faith in most things accomplished by committee, and that is the basic flaw in most "open" systems.
The "bait and switch" reference applies in that many of those who jumped on the Android bandwagon now find they don't have nearly as much control as they thought they would, as evidenced by the complaints from that community.
None of what is happening smacks of being a "bait-and-switch" as he claims. That would've required extremely clever pre-planning years ago on the part of Google.
Instead, it's got all the hallmarks of too little pre-planning.
Anyone with experience dealing with large projects can see that Rubin has belatedly come to realize that things were getting out of control. Now he is goofing up trying to take full control himself instead of doing the smart thing and first getting a consensus from the OHA members.
I don't think it's about planning. After all, how much "planning" do you need to do if your philosophy behind the product is basically " open it up so everyone can contribute and see where it goes"? The point most here are making is that the age-old "open" vs. "closed" ecosystem argument, which has repeatedly been used to criticize Apple over many years, is now looking more and more as if Apple was right all along. In this case what you call "lack of planning," I call lack of much thought at all. I for one don't have much faith in most things accomplished by committee, and that is the basic flaw in most "open" systems.
The "bait and switch" reference applies in that many of those who jumped on the Android bandwagon now find they don't have nearly as much control as they thought they would, as evidenced by the complaints from that community.
pmz
Apr 6, 10:30 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)
I have a 13" ultimate of the current generation. The limiting factor for me is the graphics, not the processor. so going to sandy bridge with the intel 3000 would be a less appealing machine for my uses than the current model. It's really too bad the sandy bridge macs are tied to those garbage integrated graphics.
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
I have a 13" ultimate of the current generation. The limiting factor for me is the graphics, not the processor. so going to sandy bridge with the intel 3000 would be a less appealing machine for my uses than the current model. It's really too bad the sandy bridge macs are tied to those garbage integrated graphics.
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
daver969
Sep 13, 11:05 AM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet. But nice to know, I guess.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
What I couldn't understand - I couldn't see it explained in the article - why is the dual core Mac Pro (i.e. with current Mac Pro with 2 cores disabled) faster in so many tests than the 4 core Mac Pro.
I think part of the reason so many people seem to be hung up on the "software doesn't utilize multiple cores" mantra is because benchmarks tend to test only one software component at a time. If a given app isn't multithreaded, then it doesn't benefit from multiple cores in these tests. But that doesn't mean that multiple cores don't affect the overall system speed.
What we need is some kind of a super benchmark: How fast is my computer when I'm watching a quicktime stream of Steve demoing the latest insanely great stuff, while ripping my CD collection to iTunes, while surfing complex Cnet.com pages (w/animation), and compiling the latest version of my Java app, every once in a while flipping over to Dashboard (dashboard seems to take up a lot of system resources every time I invoke it, not just on startup).
At this point I would rather push towards more cores than more raw speed in a single core, since I don't tend to wait on any single process. If something is taking a long time, like loading a page or compiling code, I switch to something else and come back later. I would much rather have the whole system retain its responsive feel than have one app finish its task a few seconds quicker.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
What I couldn't understand - I couldn't see it explained in the article - why is the dual core Mac Pro (i.e. with current Mac Pro with 2 cores disabled) faster in so many tests than the 4 core Mac Pro.
I think part of the reason so many people seem to be hung up on the "software doesn't utilize multiple cores" mantra is because benchmarks tend to test only one software component at a time. If a given app isn't multithreaded, then it doesn't benefit from multiple cores in these tests. But that doesn't mean that multiple cores don't affect the overall system speed.
What we need is some kind of a super benchmark: How fast is my computer when I'm watching a quicktime stream of Steve demoing the latest insanely great stuff, while ripping my CD collection to iTunes, while surfing complex Cnet.com pages (w/animation), and compiling the latest version of my Java app, every once in a while flipping over to Dashboard (dashboard seems to take up a lot of system resources every time I invoke it, not just on startup).
At this point I would rather push towards more cores than more raw speed in a single core, since I don't tend to wait on any single process. If something is taking a long time, like loading a page or compiling code, I switch to something else and come back later. I would much rather have the whole system retain its responsive feel than have one app finish its task a few seconds quicker.
davidcmc
Mar 22, 03:45 PM
Says the man who doesn't even own one.
I can assure that doubling the 256MB of the first iPad is not enough for people that need a lot of multitask, like me.
I don't need to own an iPad 2.
The competitors have 1GB RAM, iPad 2 has 512MB.
It's simple: Apple is always behind hardware-wise because they like to priorize esthetics and appearance (besides the "so wonderful OS" ad). It's been this way for Macs, it seems to be the same way for iPads.
Android phones are selling more than iPhone.
iPhone has started a market, competitors are improving it.
iPad has started a market, competitors are improving it.
If you just can't recognize how multitask works better with 1GB RAM and true background apps (QNX, Honeycomb), then you deserve to use a limited thing like an iPad.
I've only bought the first iPad because there were no competitors at that time (and I hate netbooks), but now things are different. To be honest, A LOT different.
People said that the iPhone was going to be the best phone out there, but the market is showing something different.
People say the iPad is the best tablet out there, but it seems that the market is going to show something different.
There are 2 sides: Apple fanboys and realistic people.
I like products, not brands.
I can assure that doubling the 256MB of the first iPad is not enough for people that need a lot of multitask, like me.
I don't need to own an iPad 2.
The competitors have 1GB RAM, iPad 2 has 512MB.
It's simple: Apple is always behind hardware-wise because they like to priorize esthetics and appearance (besides the "so wonderful OS" ad). It's been this way for Macs, it seems to be the same way for iPads.
Android phones are selling more than iPhone.
iPhone has started a market, competitors are improving it.
iPad has started a market, competitors are improving it.
If you just can't recognize how multitask works better with 1GB RAM and true background apps (QNX, Honeycomb), then you deserve to use a limited thing like an iPad.
I've only bought the first iPad because there were no competitors at that time (and I hate netbooks), but now things are different. To be honest, A LOT different.
People said that the iPhone was going to be the best phone out there, but the market is showing something different.
People say the iPad is the best tablet out there, but it seems that the market is going to show something different.
There are 2 sides: Apple fanboys and realistic people.
I like products, not brands.
DaveP
Aug 6, 05:34 PM
I find it amusing how optimistic Mac users are. Every once in a while Apple has an event where they really wow with product releases, but seems like 9 out of 10 people are predicting amazing releases. By the way, I'm not criticizing in any way, and being optimistic is good.
I'm predicting Steve will annouce his retirement :eek: :p
Probably about as likely as some of the wish lists we've seen, haha.
I'm predicting Steve will annouce his retirement :eek: :p
Probably about as likely as some of the wish lists we've seen, haha.
chicagdan
Aug 6, 08:33 AM
What would I like to see at WWDC? For Jobs to say "we've taken a hard look at the labor practices of our Shanghai facility and what's happened to quality control since we started manufacturing our products in China and decided that enough is enough. We're moving our manufacturing to a variety of locales on the Pacific Rim -- mostly Taiwan and Malaysia -- and increasing prices 10 percent across the board to reflect the higher costs. We're sorry about the price hike, but Apple isn't Apple when it encourages slave labor and creates beautiful products that consistently fall apart."
Northgrove
Mar 26, 11:16 AM
Since the release of Leopard, the subsequent releases haven't had the wow factor of before.
Just what I think anyway.
Releases? There's just been one release since Leopard. :p
Just what I think anyway.
Releases? There's just been one release since Leopard. :p
stormj
Aug 11, 01:45 PM
If Apple pick a carrier, I hope is not Cingular. But from past situations, that's very likely.
The ideal is a carrier free phone. That way the iphone can reach many more people and make it possible to upgrade phones without asking people to terminate their contracts.
There is no way there won't be a GSM version. Maybe you'll have to buy it in Europe or Japan, and it might not be quad band, but there will be. There are only a handful of countries besides the US where there is anything but GSM.
I predict any Apple phone will be available at apple stores, unlocked, and for GSM/UTMS.
The ideal is a carrier free phone. That way the iphone can reach many more people and make it possible to upgrade phones without asking people to terminate their contracts.
There is no way there won't be a GSM version. Maybe you'll have to buy it in Europe or Japan, and it might not be quad band, but there will be. There are only a handful of countries besides the US where there is anything but GSM.
I predict any Apple phone will be available at apple stores, unlocked, and for GSM/UTMS.
emotion
Jul 20, 09:13 AM
I wonder just how Apple would react to news that the next processor update is ahead of schedule. Presumably their plans are carefully laid out, and if a PC competitor can jump on Intel updates faster than they can without having to conform to a similar timeline, then Apple might get burned, if only slightly.
Remember Apple will be privvy to a lot more information that we as consumers are. They are probably on a level playing field at least with Intel compared with other PC vendors. They may even have a special relationship with Intel to get stuff slightly before people like Lenovo and Dell.
Remember Apple will be privvy to a lot more information that we as consumers are. They are probably on a level playing field at least with Intel compared with other PC vendors. They may even have a special relationship with Intel to get stuff slightly before people like Lenovo and Dell.
excalibur313
Jun 8, 07:33 PM
How bout Best Buy?
That is my question exactly too! I have these gift certificates from them burning a hole in my pocket. I called today and the woman said she wasn't sure when they would find out launch information about that but she put me on a list to call when she did find out.
Has anyone else heard anything? What have they done for previous iphone launches?
That is my question exactly too! I have these gift certificates from them burning a hole in my pocket. I called today and the woman said she wasn't sure when they would find out launch information about that but she put me on a list to call when she did find out.
Has anyone else heard anything? What have they done for previous iphone launches?
Billy Boo Bob
Aug 6, 08:38 PM
It won't be a live video stream. In the afternoon Apple will begin streaming a compressed HD recording of it.
I wish they would provide a full QT file download, like the movie trailers. Even if it isn't HD, but just the standard QT. Sure the file would be large, but they could BitTorrent it. Make a standalone app that uses BT, but will only download that one single file. You wouldn't even have to know that BT was under the hood... Just that you were downloading at near peak speeds (depending on when you actually grab the file).
I wish they would provide a full QT file download, like the movie trailers. Even if it isn't HD, but just the standard QT. Sure the file would be large, but they could BitTorrent it. Make a standalone app that uses BT, but will only download that one single file. You wouldn't even have to know that BT was under the hood... Just that you were downloading at near peak speeds (depending on when you actually grab the file).
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder