is there really a need for the name iTunes? After all like you said, it doesn;t just play music anymore.
Great, more iTunes feature bloat. As if the thing wasn't clunky and sluggish enough already.
How good would it be if we could rip iPod and Apple TV compatible videos from Blue Ray discs using iTunes 9? Unless Apple has convinced the film industry to loosen up on DRM I do not see that happening. Still, adding BD and DVD playback functionality to iTunes would simplify things to the end-user.
I wonder what the second compelling feature of the next iMacs is supposed to be? Since it is supposed to cater to semi-professionals/prosumers my best guess is a SATA port because that would give users access to the fastest external drives.
Too all the people saying this I have something to say, if iTunes is rewritten in cocoa 64bit even if they add a lot of things to it, it will be much much faster especially on snow leopard.
for those of you that think iTunes will be playing blu-ray movies ur crazy, it will probably have blu-ray support for backing up your music duhhh
hate to break it to you kid, but they said the same thing about video support back at v6.0
wait so iTunes, does have dvd player support? or can it just play the movies you download or import?
who said anything about DVD? I said videos. Doesn;'t mean DVD.![]()
well, how can video support, be used for back up stuff... now dvd and cd's can be used, but video support has nothing to do with back stuff up, blu-rays can be used to back up ur music... because blu-ray aren't just for video, you can put all kinds data on them
for those of you that think iTunes will be playing blu-ray movies ur crazy,
That may be true but we don't if it will be 64bit. There was nothing in BGR that said as much. I hope we do see it though. iTunes is the one Mac app that is desperately in need of a performance upgrade. Going by just what was stated in the article it certainly looks like iTunes will get more bloated by unnecessary features.
and I said, people said the same thing when Apple added video support to itunes. Let see, if i',m correct with support for video being at 6.0, that was back in 2004/2005, so I was just entering high School (Fall 2004)
Pays to listen man.....
actually 720p as the name suggest is 1280x720 though most 720p tv's actually are 1366x768. but if 1366x768 was a res it would be 768p not 720p thats why most 720p's offer 1080i which the tv down reses to 1366x768 which is slightly higher then 720p.
first of all, they would have to add dvd support, to iTunes before they add Blu-ray, and that would defeat the purpose of quicktime...
and i said that blu-ray support means that they will just be able to back up with blu-ray not play blu-ray... how can u say the same thing about video support... are you saying people said that "if you think people are going to add video support your crazy, video support will just be used for backing things up in itunes"... how does that make sense
for those of you that think iTunes will be playing blu-ray movies ur crazy,
it will probably have blu-ray support for backing up your music duhhh
AHHH... Finally! Someone who realizes that before any of this bloat can truly run properly, itunes needs 64 bit support! Snow Leopard is completely based around the 64 bit architecture so it would make perfect sense for itunes 9 to be x64.BUT WHEN WILL THE MAC GET 64BIT iTUNES???
why add suppoort for backing up when it could play it also.
Actually, all TVs classified as 720p are 1366x768. It is a broadcast standard.
Actually, you are wrong. There is no ATSC standard for '768p'.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATSC_(standards)
1366x768 is just the native resolution of your display. Anything whether it be 1920x1080i, 1280x720p, or 720x480p is scaled to it.
You can buy 1440x900 720p TVs too.
All of this will be moot anyway as native 1920x1080p TVs are so commonplace now