Peace said:In the immortal words of Spinal Tap..
Thats not designed to actually be used!..you're just supposed to look at it
Look but don't Touch.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Intel iBooks, Video iPod, Digital Entertainment in April?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Look but don't Touch.
danielle04 said:
If you have a mac, go to this site
http://howto.diveintomark.org/ipod-dvd-ripping-guide/
That is very easy and works well
maya said:
No it's not. It is the same aluminum silver that is used on the PowerBooks and MacBook Pro's. The Mac notebook in that video seems to be a Powerbook with just a colored screen enclosure. Whether it was really colored black or just digitally colored, I dunno.
maya said:
Yet they have retained the same chrome backing since 2001. If the chrome backing scratches were really a problem, Apple would have changed the backing a long time ago.
maya said:If it does become some sort of PDA gadget, I want it in anodized Al, like the iPod Mini.
Yup, I agree. Aluminum backing with possibly color options like the ipod mini's. Or maybe just all aluminum like the MacBook Pro's.
MacQuest said:
Exhibit A: Look at attached document.
You can clearly see the mirror reflection on the base of the blackbook, that looks like chrome to me.
MacQuest said:
Apple never learns from they mistakes, they had the same plastic material for the 1G and 2G iPod and change it for the 3G and 4G iPods, and the they reverted to the same 1G and 2G plastic.
People have been complaining about the Chrome since the 1G iPods, however we though they would be wise and change it when the iPod Mini was released, however not so, they kept the same thing and they solution is a "Tube" for it, WTF.
Attachments
JasonDawg18 said:
For those of us with HDTV programming supplied by a cable provider, TiVo has been dead for some time.
My SA 8300, supplied by Time-Warner cable, is a dual-tuner unit that can record HD content. Mind you, the interface is horrid, but I'm a "function over form" kinda guy.
By mid-2006, TiVo may finally release the mythical cable-ready dual-tuner unit (The Series 3 seen at NAB 2006) with Mac support for TiVoToGo, but I'm not holding my breath.
I'm still hoping that Mac Mini Media Center comes out in April.
tolly said:
OMG!!! That's April Fools day! How could we possibly have been so...
aware of the fact that Apple was founded on April 1st, 1976.
It's ok, "tolly". I see that your a "newbie", but at least now you know.
the real video iPod, that'd be sweet. i wonder what they mean by "real".
i must confess, with the transition to Intel now, i am no longer excited about upcoming Mac updates. to me, the fun of competition is gone. i mean, it's nice that Apple had finally got the G4 out of the laptop, god knows we needed a much better processor, but i still wouldn't buy the Macbook since i like FW 800
i'm kinda p****d about the iMac G5 going so fast. i hope the 20" iMac G5 doesn't disappear anytime soon. if not, then the Quad G5, oh yeah, giggity giggity.
but getting back to the non-excitement factor of Mac products, i can't seem to get behind these Intel Macs. we had the G5 announcement almost 3 years ago that rocked the world. are these new Intels 64 bit? i haven't found anything that suggests it is, i'm sure the Mac Pro will address that, maybe. it just seems like a step backwards from leading to now falling in line.
the only thing i've gotten excited about this year was the return of Sting to professional wrestling and TNA iMPACT! moving to Thursday nights starting 4/13! plus some good movies and music on the horizon. nothing Apple this year, that's never happened before
although, i hope i can run 10.4 on an AMD 64-bit computer! i would really like to get a Voodoo!
can someone explain to me why i should be excited about Intels in Macs? i'm not against it anymore, but i just don't seem to care anymore. so, help!
i must confess, with the transition to Intel now, i am no longer excited about upcoming Mac updates. to me, the fun of competition is gone. i mean, it's nice that Apple had finally got the G4 out of the laptop, god knows we needed a much better processor, but i still wouldn't buy the Macbook since i like FW 800
i'm kinda p****d about the iMac G5 going so fast. i hope the 20" iMac G5 doesn't disappear anytime soon. if not, then the Quad G5, oh yeah, giggity giggity.
but getting back to the non-excitement factor of Mac products, i can't seem to get behind these Intel Macs. we had the G5 announcement almost 3 years ago that rocked the world. are these new Intels 64 bit? i haven't found anything that suggests it is, i'm sure the Mac Pro will address that, maybe. it just seems like a step backwards from leading to now falling in line.
the only thing i've gotten excited about this year was the return of Sting to professional wrestling and TNA iMPACT! moving to Thursday nights starting 4/13! plus some good movies and music on the horizon. nothing Apple this year, that's never happened before
although, i hope i can run 10.4 on an AMD 64-bit computer! i would really like to get a Voodoo!
can someone explain to me why i should be excited about Intels in Macs? i'm not against it anymore, but i just don't seem to care anymore. so, help!
Apple DVR, the problem!
Ok, I would LOVE to see an Apple Branded DVR, but I dont know if it will ever take off. Here's why.
It's described as a "Tivo-Killer". Well, I can go and buy a Series 2 Tivo DRV for $70 (after rebate) and then tack on $250 for the registration fee and you have a DVR for $320. It plays music, displays pictures, OH and its DVR function kick but!
Now lets look at a Media Center PC or Mac. (In this case, I'll talk about a Mac) In order to handle all the DVR functions, it can't have a Core Solo running in it, so It'll have to have the Core Duo. (Especially if there is DVD ripping technology included or HD is standard.) So, basically it would have to be a headless iMac. THe lowest iMac sells for $1300. Take away the screen and it's now $1000. For a media PC/Mac to work, it has to have a wireless keyboard. So there's an extra $40. Now we are up to $1040. That's a $720 differance from the Tivo. And what extras do I get? I can surf the web on my TV. Lovely. WebTV failed if you didnt notice. That's because people want to watch TV on their TV and Compute on their computer. Heck, i like to do both at the same time.
I don't see media centers taking off in the near future. The ONLY way a Mac Media Center will compete or "kill" Tivo is if it is really stripped down no longer making i a "media center". At that point, why bother?
Obviously I knwo these are broad statments, i know that. But I think my point makes some sense, even if the numbers are off by a little.
Ok, I would LOVE to see an Apple Branded DVR, but I dont know if it will ever take off. Here's why.
It's described as a "Tivo-Killer". Well, I can go and buy a Series 2 Tivo DRV for $70 (after rebate) and then tack on $250 for the registration fee and you have a DVR for $320. It plays music, displays pictures, OH and its DVR function kick but!
Now lets look at a Media Center PC or Mac. (In this case, I'll talk about a Mac) In order to handle all the DVR functions, it can't have a Core Solo running in it, so It'll have to have the Core Duo. (Especially if there is DVD ripping technology included or HD is standard.) So, basically it would have to be a headless iMac. THe lowest iMac sells for $1300. Take away the screen and it's now $1000. For a media PC/Mac to work, it has to have a wireless keyboard. So there's an extra $40. Now we are up to $1040. That's a $720 differance from the Tivo. And what extras do I get? I can surf the web on my TV. Lovely. WebTV failed if you didnt notice. That's because people want to watch TV on their TV and Compute on their computer. Heck, i like to do both at the same time.
I don't see media centers taking off in the near future. The ONLY way a Mac Media Center will compete or "kill" Tivo is if it is really stripped down no longer making i a "media center". At that point, why bother?
Obviously I knwo these are broad statments, i know that. But I think my point makes some sense, even if the numbers are off by a little.
thanx i know im on the mac site but i actually have windows...do u know of any other softwares that would help me put dvds on a video ipod?
maya said:Exhibit A: Look at attached document.
You can clearly see the mirror reflection on the base of the blackbook, that looks like chrome to me.
Hmmm. Interesting point. Just makes me think that this really is just a digitally created mock-up.
maya said:
Again, my point is that if the chrome backing really was that big of a problem [as in people won't buy the iPod in the HUGE numbers that they have because of it] then Apple would have changed the backing.
It may be a big mistake to you, and you may have thought that Apple would've been wise to make a change. However for some reason, I think that they know what they are doing, as can be proven by the iPod AND iPod accessory sales numbers.
No matter how annoying the scratches/fingerprints are, people are still willing to buy the iPod, and accessorize it.
I'm thinking that Apple may have just kept the chrome backing in order to get 3rd party manufacturers on board to produce products like protective covers and much more.
Woah!!
TV shows (only made for TV - not movies) may have been recorded straight to NTSC resolution tapes prior to the advent of digital/HD broadcasts, but for a past several years, almost all prime time shows from network TV are recorded at 1080p or 720p and broadcast at 1080i or 720p. Take any primetime network show from present time - ALL of them are in HD, even David Letterman, Jay Leno, Conan, CSI, Law and Order, Smallville, ER, 24, ...... even saturday night live (at least from last week).
Movies on the other hand are even higher resolution. 35mm film is much higher in resolution than even 1080p that is why, the movie industry still uses film and not 1080p cameras. George Lucas shot StarWars not using a 1080p camera but a 4000p camera (big difference). These 4000p (or 4k) cameras are necessary to simulate a 35mm movie on a big movie theater. 1080p will not be enough.
Also, many older 35mm films are being digitized using the 4k scanner process. I remember a processing lab that used an array of G5 PowerMacs to do 4k scanning of the entire James Bond library, etc. Even though these are for DVDs, they wanted to do the 4k scanning now so that they can downconvert to any future digital formats (including HD-DVD, Bluray, etc).
mambodancer said:
TV shows (only made for TV - not movies) may have been recorded straight to NTSC resolution tapes prior to the advent of digital/HD broadcasts, but for a past several years, almost all prime time shows from network TV are recorded at 1080p or 720p and broadcast at 1080i or 720p. Take any primetime network show from present time - ALL of them are in HD, even David Letterman, Jay Leno, Conan, CSI, Law and Order, Smallville, ER, 24, ...... even saturday night live (at least from last week).
Movies on the other hand are even higher resolution. 35mm film is much higher in resolution than even 1080p that is why, the movie industry still uses film and not 1080p cameras. George Lucas shot StarWars not using a 1080p camera but a 4000p camera (big difference). These 4000p (or 4k) cameras are necessary to simulate a 35mm movie on a big movie theater. 1080p will not be enough.
Also, many older 35mm films are being digitized using the 4k scanner process. I remember a processing lab that used an array of G5 PowerMacs to do 4k scanning of the entire James Bond library, etc. Even though these are for DVDs, they wanted to do the 4k scanning now so that they can downconvert to any future digital formats (including HD-DVD, Bluray, etc).
Ha! The sweat from my hands has pocked the aluminum on my 'book--and I keep this thing as clean as possible with two kids and two dogs "molesting" me whilst I work in the living room.maya said:I cannot even imagine what kind of scratches will surface on the base of that blackbook.
AtHomeBoy_2000 said:
You can't compare the prices of a Media Center against TiVo, as TiVo is only a DVR, not a computer with DVR functions. Also, TiVo does not have a wireless keyboard.
What I'd like to see would be an Elgato-like peripheral that would work seamlessly with my digital HD signal from Time-Warner. It doesn't need to be a Mac; it just needs to send signals to my Mac.
rxse7en said:Ha! The sweat from my hands has pocked the aluminum on my 'book--and I keep this thing as clean as possible with two kids and two dogs "molesting" me whilst I work in the living room.
Something about your statement sounds totally wrong.
_dob_ said:
Don't forget by loosing the click wheel they would have that much extra space for a thicker battery. Then again... the LCD would probably fit that space. The thing I love about the video iPod is the idea that the only moving part would be the hard drive. I always worry about crushing my click wheel when, for instance, I'm cleaning it. As for scratches, they would probably make it out of the same [relatively strong and fingerprint resistant] materiel as palm pilots, so stop whining. It also opens up a huge world of possibilities, such as the gesture interface, a scaled down version of OSX (please call it Kitten! I would love the humor in that!) and (if they can fit it... sigh) wifi. While I'm at it lets add a phone and iSight. If anyone can pull it off, Apple can.
craigatkinson said:
That's just silly. I'm a fine-art photographer and shoot in RAW because it gives me the unaffected data from the sensor, and allows me to store the raw image without processing. The big advantage of that it allows you to 'remix' your images in the future starting from the base data.
It's nonsense to say that only commercial photographers wound be interested in RAW. Any passionate photographer who is doing more than point-and-shoot should consider shooting RAW.
maya said:Sounds like a horrible plan. Dam you Apple.
but that is very true actually...
every portable device manufacturer does so, although i doubt the idea of letting 3rd-party getting on board. i think that they are just leaving room for theemselves, whereas 3rd-party exists simply because the market is too large for apple. look at sony psp and u should know they can never meet the demand of ms duo if they don't license to sandisk and other brand. so, be prepared that apple will leave the shiny back of ipod unchanged with that easily scratched plastic face (it would be better if the video iopd really occupying the whole face. i would simply put a screen protector on it and that should be far cheaper than any case). they have been mr nice guy by including a bag in the ipod 5g package in my opinion
.i have been planning to get a ipod 5g early this week. luckily i think i can wait a bit for the april event (though not official but steve won't let the 30th anniversary to be quiet i guess). if that's good enough, i hope to see a 12" macbook pro or something widescreen (13.3" may be?) with the equivalent size. honestly, i think that 15.4" is already something too large to say "portable". ibook or macbook seems to be too less for me
.2 patents that may be combined....
... and will solve the issue of fingerprints, strikes and dirt on the screen.
Clearly, there is some mechanism to react on a 'touch' base, but I remember a different patent that combine a display with some kind of visual recognition. The screen was multi purpose and could serve as camera as well as display at the same time. Maybe here is Apple's solution. In stead of using a physical touch screen that requires more pressure, the screen recognizes the motion via a photo ccd (or whatever they developed for this patent). Therefore they can eliminate the pressure that is used in conventional touch screen displays and limit dirt and finger prints from the screen.
And where is the 3.5 inch coming from? Except for the TS rumor, 3.5 inch is only 1.5 times the current screen. If the screen would occupy the full front, it is larger than 3.5 inch OR the vPod would shrink in size. Which is another issue by itself because of the battery size.
Just some thoughts for some more rumors, discussions....
... and will solve the issue of fingerprints, strikes and dirt on the screen.
Clearly, there is some mechanism to react on a 'touch' base, but I remember a different patent that combine a display with some kind of visual recognition. The screen was multi purpose and could serve as camera as well as display at the same time. Maybe here is Apple's solution. In stead of using a physical touch screen that requires more pressure, the screen recognizes the motion via a photo ccd (or whatever they developed for this patent). Therefore they can eliminate the pressure that is used in conventional touch screen displays and limit dirt and finger prints from the screen.
And where is the 3.5 inch coming from? Except for the TS rumor, 3.5 inch is only 1.5 times the current screen. If the screen would occupy the full front, it is larger than 3.5 inch OR the vPod would shrink in size. Which is another issue by itself because of the battery size.
Just some thoughts for some more rumors, discussions....