SactoGuy18
Apr 8, 06:48 AM
While I welcome these bug fixes, do I really have to endure 600+ megabyte downloads just to have them installed? :rolleyes: That's what I went through with my 4G iPod touch and iPad 2 when iOS 4.3.1 came out.
I really hope that the upcoming iOS 5.0 will allow for incremental upgrades so you don't have to do such big downloads anymore in the future.
I really hope that the upcoming iOS 5.0 will allow for incremental upgrades so you don't have to do such big downloads anymore in the future.
Lynxpro
Jul 27, 06:26 PM
Any 1080p television worth anything can easily deinterlace the 1080i signal from the Toshiba HD DVD player with zero image degradation. There simply is no difference. The 1080p vs. 1080i thing (for HD DVD and BD) is a myth.
First, I mentioned that the outputting problem is common with both formats the existing HD-DVD AND Blu-Ray decks currently on the market because the decoder chip is just not that great. That is why people are making a big deal about the upcoming Sigma Designs decoder chip that will come standard in both formats' second generation machines. Look it up.
And deinterlacing an input signal is not as good as the outputting device outputting in progressive scan in the first place. Do you want to argue that upscaling DVD players are just as good as the current HD formats while you are at it?
Sony has not stated any plan to use H.264 encoding. No studio has stated any plans for H.264 encoding either. It's either MPEG-2 vs. VC-1, and if you've watched anything on HD DVD, you'd know it's capable of amazing results. Compared to all available Blu-Ray discs, VC-1 beats MPEG-2. A better Blu-ray deck will not make the crappy MPEG-2 discs look better, because the problem is with the disc, not the player. Even when BD50 discs are viable (some day!), they'll still use MPEG-2. Warner, who has already released VC-1 encoded HD DVDs, will be releasing the same titles on BD in... you guessed it... MPEG-2.
Nobody is arguing that VC-1 does not outperform MPEG2. However, it is nowhere near as good as H.264 MPEG4. We know it, the SMPTE knows it, and of course in their dark hearts, Microsoft knows it too. The problem currently is that the machines on the market do not have good enough decoder chips - again, referencing the problems that will be solved with the Sigma chip hits the market - to decode the H.264 codec. But once the good chips hit the market, it is doubtful that the HD-DVD format will ever back H.264 because that would cheese off Microsoft. And the success of VC-1 and iHD is crucial to Microsoft's entertainment expansion plans. If HD-DVD dies, Microsoft loses out on both VC-1 royalities as well as iHD licensing and places the Xbox360 ultimately at a competitive disadvantage.
Just because Sony hasn't announced H.264 support does not add up to much. They don't even have their own player on the market yet. And until then - as well as the PS3 launch - I doubt they will announce support. After all, currently, Sony is only interested in Blu-Ray being viable for upcoming consumers; they really do not want us buying the Samsung player currently. So no, I (also) highly doubt your assertion that Sony will still cling to MPEG2 when the higher capacity discs hit the market. Furthermore, Sony already uses H.264 on their PSP UMD titles. Obviously, the reason why they haven't done likewise on Blu-Ray discs has to do with the decoder chips, not due to any sort of conspiracy or incompetence factor that you seem to be asserting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Media_Disc
Based upon the info on that link, it is apparent that Sony is no stranger to encoding using H.264 and thus there is no logical reason to conclude that Sony won't shift to using H.264 on all of their Blu-Ray titles once their own players and the PS3 ships.
As for Warner Home Video, they have a vested interest in making sure Blu-Ray does not succeed. Warner and Toshiba both make quite a sizeable fortune off the royalties from the DVD standard. They both want HD-DVD to succeed so they can maintain those royalities. Had Sony and the rest of the Blu-Ray Disc Association agreed to preserving the Warner/Toshiba royalities, there would not be a format war currently, and Toshiba would not have prostituted itself to Microsoft over iHD and VC-1.
Furthermore, iHD is apparently much easier to develop for than BD-J. That's one reason why there are already HD DVDs with interesting new features (like the "In Movie Experience" on Bourne Supremacy) vs. no new extra features for any BD discs, nor are there any discs announced with new (BD-J) features.
Can any other posters shill the Microsoft party line more? "They" said the Sony Playstation2 was "too hard" to program for versus programming for the Microsoft Xbox. Which platform won again? Which platform had the most third-party support? That's right, the "too hard to program for" Playstation2. The reason why there are extra features on the current HD-DVD titles has to do with the fact that they are using VC-1 and the Blu-Ray titles are using the space-hungry MPEG2 codec currently. There's no room right now on Blu-Ray releases for the "extras" you are bringing up. It has nothing to do with "how hard" it is to program BD-J.
Reminds me of how Warner Bros. people started the whole "Brandon Routh is so well endowed that special effects are having to be used to tone down his crotch for *Superman Returns*" rumor that was circulating in the trades and online months before the film debuted. It was a recycled rumor that Warners had used back before the release of the original *Superman* with Christopher Reeve to generate buzz for potential female viewers. Kinda like how you are recycling/repeating the "BD-J is too hard to program for" rumor.
Let us also remember that Apple sits on the Blu-Ray Disc Association board. They could have supported either format, but they chose Blu-Ray for some reason...hmmm... Kinda like how they chose Dolby's AAC format as their "next generation" audio codec instead of Microsoft's (tin can sounding) WMA audio format. That speaks volumes.
First, I mentioned that the outputting problem is common with both formats the existing HD-DVD AND Blu-Ray decks currently on the market because the decoder chip is just not that great. That is why people are making a big deal about the upcoming Sigma Designs decoder chip that will come standard in both formats' second generation machines. Look it up.
And deinterlacing an input signal is not as good as the outputting device outputting in progressive scan in the first place. Do you want to argue that upscaling DVD players are just as good as the current HD formats while you are at it?
Sony has not stated any plan to use H.264 encoding. No studio has stated any plans for H.264 encoding either. It's either MPEG-2 vs. VC-1, and if you've watched anything on HD DVD, you'd know it's capable of amazing results. Compared to all available Blu-Ray discs, VC-1 beats MPEG-2. A better Blu-ray deck will not make the crappy MPEG-2 discs look better, because the problem is with the disc, not the player. Even when BD50 discs are viable (some day!), they'll still use MPEG-2. Warner, who has already released VC-1 encoded HD DVDs, will be releasing the same titles on BD in... you guessed it... MPEG-2.
Nobody is arguing that VC-1 does not outperform MPEG2. However, it is nowhere near as good as H.264 MPEG4. We know it, the SMPTE knows it, and of course in their dark hearts, Microsoft knows it too. The problem currently is that the machines on the market do not have good enough decoder chips - again, referencing the problems that will be solved with the Sigma chip hits the market - to decode the H.264 codec. But once the good chips hit the market, it is doubtful that the HD-DVD format will ever back H.264 because that would cheese off Microsoft. And the success of VC-1 and iHD is crucial to Microsoft's entertainment expansion plans. If HD-DVD dies, Microsoft loses out on both VC-1 royalities as well as iHD licensing and places the Xbox360 ultimately at a competitive disadvantage.
Just because Sony hasn't announced H.264 support does not add up to much. They don't even have their own player on the market yet. And until then - as well as the PS3 launch - I doubt they will announce support. After all, currently, Sony is only interested in Blu-Ray being viable for upcoming consumers; they really do not want us buying the Samsung player currently. So no, I (also) highly doubt your assertion that Sony will still cling to MPEG2 when the higher capacity discs hit the market. Furthermore, Sony already uses H.264 on their PSP UMD titles. Obviously, the reason why they haven't done likewise on Blu-Ray discs has to do with the decoder chips, not due to any sort of conspiracy or incompetence factor that you seem to be asserting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Media_Disc
Based upon the info on that link, it is apparent that Sony is no stranger to encoding using H.264 and thus there is no logical reason to conclude that Sony won't shift to using H.264 on all of their Blu-Ray titles once their own players and the PS3 ships.
As for Warner Home Video, they have a vested interest in making sure Blu-Ray does not succeed. Warner and Toshiba both make quite a sizeable fortune off the royalties from the DVD standard. They both want HD-DVD to succeed so they can maintain those royalities. Had Sony and the rest of the Blu-Ray Disc Association agreed to preserving the Warner/Toshiba royalities, there would not be a format war currently, and Toshiba would not have prostituted itself to Microsoft over iHD and VC-1.
Furthermore, iHD is apparently much easier to develop for than BD-J. That's one reason why there are already HD DVDs with interesting new features (like the "In Movie Experience" on Bourne Supremacy) vs. no new extra features for any BD discs, nor are there any discs announced with new (BD-J) features.
Can any other posters shill the Microsoft party line more? "They" said the Sony Playstation2 was "too hard" to program for versus programming for the Microsoft Xbox. Which platform won again? Which platform had the most third-party support? That's right, the "too hard to program for" Playstation2. The reason why there are extra features on the current HD-DVD titles has to do with the fact that they are using VC-1 and the Blu-Ray titles are using the space-hungry MPEG2 codec currently. There's no room right now on Blu-Ray releases for the "extras" you are bringing up. It has nothing to do with "how hard" it is to program BD-J.
Reminds me of how Warner Bros. people started the whole "Brandon Routh is so well endowed that special effects are having to be used to tone down his crotch for *Superman Returns*" rumor that was circulating in the trades and online months before the film debuted. It was a recycled rumor that Warners had used back before the release of the original *Superman* with Christopher Reeve to generate buzz for potential female viewers. Kinda like how you are recycling/repeating the "BD-J is too hard to program for" rumor.
Let us also remember that Apple sits on the Blu-Ray Disc Association board. They could have supported either format, but they chose Blu-Ray for some reason...hmmm... Kinda like how they chose Dolby's AAC format as their "next generation" audio codec instead of Microsoft's (tin can sounding) WMA audio format. That speaks volumes.
fcortese
Oct 10, 09:00 PM
From a photo I took recently in Northern CA's Redwood forests:
http://img42.imageshack.us/img42/9855/redwoods954.jpg
http://img42.imageshack.us/img42/9855/redwoods954.jpg
Kieranic
Sep 1, 02:57 AM
Great job mods.... you deleted my September 2010 Desktops thread and allow other people create it...
It's because very few countries were in September and now nearly 24 hours later, most, if not all countries, are in September.
Anyhow onto topic :)
Took this one nearly 24 hours ago. It's an awesome screenshot of Batman from the Dark Knight (which I should hopefully get on Blu-ray soon, already have the movie in my iTunes library :D)
http://img829.imageshack.us/img829/1262/batmana.jpg (http://img843.imageshack.us/img843/5894/attachmentb.jpg)
and this was taken minutes ago. It's a still of Michael Jackson doing the awesome (and famous?) anti-gravity lean :)
http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/264/screenshot20100901at753.jpg (http://img709.imageshack.us/img709/264/screenshot20100901at753.jpg)
It's because very few countries were in September and now nearly 24 hours later, most, if not all countries, are in September.
Anyhow onto topic :)
Took this one nearly 24 hours ago. It's an awesome screenshot of Batman from the Dark Knight (which I should hopefully get on Blu-ray soon, already have the movie in my iTunes library :D)
http://img829.imageshack.us/img829/1262/batmana.jpg (http://img843.imageshack.us/img843/5894/attachmentb.jpg)
and this was taken minutes ago. It's a still of Michael Jackson doing the awesome (and famous?) anti-gravity lean :)
http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/264/screenshot20100901at753.jpg (http://img709.imageshack.us/img709/264/screenshot20100901at753.jpg)
more...
Transporteur
Dec 9, 03:58 PM
Snip
Link to original please!
Link to original please!
Small White Car
Apr 27, 12:23 PM
Apple's attitude about this stuf has always been very positive. I'm totally willing to believe that all this stuff was an oversight since believing that matches what they've said in the past.
more...
macgeek18
Dec 26, 12:06 AM
As of today, I worked a full 7 hours shift and an hour of over time. By making time and a half the first 7 hours and time and a half to the time and a half for the 1 hour the next paycheck will be REALLY nice. I think I shall buy an Apple TV.
:D
:D
Hisdem
Oct 10, 10:01 AM
Where do you get those iOS icons?
more...
monke
Dec 19, 12:11 AM
Thanks
rKunda
Dec 5, 09:15 PM
My desktop:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/776367/posted/Dec-2010.png
Original: link (http://matkraken.deviantart.com/art/Esperando-la-navidad-71452949)
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/776367/posted/Dec-2010.png
Original: link (http://matkraken.deviantart.com/art/Esperando-la-navidad-71452949)
more...
ericschmerick
Jan 11, 03:21 AM
I thought it was an amazing keynote, because I truly believe the iphone will in-fact be revolutionary! Look at the UIs on almost all of today's phones and they pretty much universally stink. This is going to cause the cell phone industry to take a long hard look at their own products and push harder.
I think it's funny that many posts on these boards talk about the excellent value for the Mac Pro (decked out, costing > $4k!), but balk at a $600 phone. This after they've probably dropped $100 on thier existing phone, and $300 on their ipod. For an extra $200, wouldn't you like to have the sexiest phone on the planet. Furthermore, if you're me, your sick to death of carrying two damn devices around every day anyway.
The other thing that amazes me is just how addicted we've become to the carrier-driven cell phone business model in the US. I live in China now, and I cannot tell you how many employees I have who make < $1k / month (and these are highly paid engineers here) that carry $500 cell phones. People in many other parts of the world are USED to buying cell phones for the "real" price - very very often $300 or $400 dollars.
And for that, what do you get - a MAJOR shift in the balance of power between mfg's and carriers. The carriers are now begging and scratching for business. Consequently it is one of the LEAST complicated things you can do (in China) - get a cell phone. In 90 seconds, I can (anonymously) get a new number and a few hours of calling time for about $20. There is almost not a store I can walk into where it isn't possible to do this. Shove in the SIM card and I'm done.
Jesus I wish the US was like that (wrt cell phone service). The hoops you have to jump through to get even pre-paid service in the US are truly ridiculous. If there is a major disappointment for me about this keynote, it's that it looks like the iphone will be carrier locked at least until '08, but we'll see. I was hoping Apple would sell the phones unlocked, and start the migration in the US away from carrier subsidies.
I think it's funny that many posts on these boards talk about the excellent value for the Mac Pro (decked out, costing > $4k!), but balk at a $600 phone. This after they've probably dropped $100 on thier existing phone, and $300 on their ipod. For an extra $200, wouldn't you like to have the sexiest phone on the planet. Furthermore, if you're me, your sick to death of carrying two damn devices around every day anyway.
The other thing that amazes me is just how addicted we've become to the carrier-driven cell phone business model in the US. I live in China now, and I cannot tell you how many employees I have who make < $1k / month (and these are highly paid engineers here) that carry $500 cell phones. People in many other parts of the world are USED to buying cell phones for the "real" price - very very often $300 or $400 dollars.
And for that, what do you get - a MAJOR shift in the balance of power between mfg's and carriers. The carriers are now begging and scratching for business. Consequently it is one of the LEAST complicated things you can do (in China) - get a cell phone. In 90 seconds, I can (anonymously) get a new number and a few hours of calling time for about $20. There is almost not a store I can walk into where it isn't possible to do this. Shove in the SIM card and I'm done.
Jesus I wish the US was like that (wrt cell phone service). The hoops you have to jump through to get even pre-paid service in the US are truly ridiculous. If there is a major disappointment for me about this keynote, it's that it looks like the iphone will be carrier locked at least until '08, but we'll see. I was hoping Apple would sell the phones unlocked, and start the migration in the US away from carrier subsidies.
alixir
Feb 16, 03:53 AM
Hi all,
Had a google around and can't find much on this and wondered whether anybody has seen this before or knows why this might be happening...The file server is a 10.6.6 Snow Leopard install with Sharepoints being mapped over both AFP and Samba. As an example of the current networked environment I have the following:
User A - Computer A: Windows 7 (Office Basic 2007 installed)
User B - Computer B: Intel iMac 10.6.6 with Office 2008 installed
User C - Server Administrative Account
A 'Management' AFP/SMB share that has permissions set on the root folder:
ACL:
User A - Allow/Full Control/This Folder,Child Folder, Child Files, All Descendants
User B - Allow/Full Control/This Folder,Child Folder, Child Files, All Descendants
User C - Allow/Full Control/This Folder,Child Folder, Child Files, All Descendants
Everyone - Deny/Read (So the share is hidden to other groups and users)
POSIX:
User C - Allow/Read Write/This Folder
Staff - No Access
Others - No Access
(I'm sure wheel should be here too??? - Couldn't find a way to add it!)
Now the problem is that when User A creates any type of office document and saves it, User B can see the documents in the share but when they click on it, the file vanishes from the share! When checking the permissions on the file itself, it seems that when User A creates or edits a new or existing file that the permissions get overwritten as:
User A - Read Write
Everyone - No Access
The same happens when User B creates an Office document and User A opens or edits it!
I also have Strict Locking enabled for the SMB protocol
Have I set the permissions incorrectly or is this just a generic SMB problem??
Any help would be appreciated!!
Cheers!
Had a google around and can't find much on this and wondered whether anybody has seen this before or knows why this might be happening...The file server is a 10.6.6 Snow Leopard install with Sharepoints being mapped over both AFP and Samba. As an example of the current networked environment I have the following:
User A - Computer A: Windows 7 (Office Basic 2007 installed)
User B - Computer B: Intel iMac 10.6.6 with Office 2008 installed
User C - Server Administrative Account
A 'Management' AFP/SMB share that has permissions set on the root folder:
ACL:
User A - Allow/Full Control/This Folder,Child Folder, Child Files, All Descendants
User B - Allow/Full Control/This Folder,Child Folder, Child Files, All Descendants
User C - Allow/Full Control/This Folder,Child Folder, Child Files, All Descendants
Everyone - Deny/Read (So the share is hidden to other groups and users)
POSIX:
User C - Allow/Read Write/This Folder
Staff - No Access
Others - No Access
(I'm sure wheel should be here too??? - Couldn't find a way to add it!)
Now the problem is that when User A creates any type of office document and saves it, User B can see the documents in the share but when they click on it, the file vanishes from the share! When checking the permissions on the file itself, it seems that when User A creates or edits a new or existing file that the permissions get overwritten as:
User A - Read Write
Everyone - No Access
The same happens when User B creates an Office document and User A opens or edits it!
I also have Strict Locking enabled for the SMB protocol
Have I set the permissions incorrectly or is this just a generic SMB problem??
Any help would be appreciated!!
Cheers!
more...
forcesteeler
Apr 28, 07:32 AM
It usually comes early, i have not gotten payment
Eduardo1971
Apr 8, 08:40 AM
...Some games I would like to see now that we are seeing stuff like this pop up in the app store:
...Gauntlet
Pitfall
Defender
...Star Wars (wire frame version)
:D
I also would LOVE these games!
Add 'Paper Boy', 'Crystal Castles', and '720' I would be a happy camper.
...Gauntlet
Pitfall
Defender
...Star Wars (wire frame version)
:D
I also would LOVE these games!
Add 'Paper Boy', 'Crystal Castles', and '720' I would be a happy camper.
more...
Socratic
May 4, 06:01 PM
It's not the Red Cross. It's the FDA. Last time the policy went up for review in 2006 or so, it was voted 7 against 6 to stay in place.
And for anyone wondering, the wording is something along the lines of "if you are a man who has had sexual contact with another man, even once, since 1977, or if you are a woman who has had sexual contact with a man who has had sexual contact with another man, even once, since 1997, you are prohibited from donating blood."
I think a basic level of intelligence indicates how wrong and prejudiced this is.
http://www.avert.org/hiv-african-americans.htm
According to statistics, black men are more than 6 times more likely than white men to become infected with HIV, but you sure as hell dont see people supporting banning black people from donating blood. Why? Simply because it is more socially acceptable to be homophobic than it is to be racist.
Edit: I just wanted to make this clear: there is absolutely nothing wrong with asking for blood donations, regardless of who may or may not be present. Donating blood saves lives. There is a problematic policy in place in the US and other countries at the moment, but that never has and never will make asking for people to donate blood problematic in any way, shape, or form.
I should clarify then in light of my previous comments that I am in the UK, where the wording is very different.
And for anyone wondering, the wording is something along the lines of "if you are a man who has had sexual contact with another man, even once, since 1977, or if you are a woman who has had sexual contact with a man who has had sexual contact with another man, even once, since 1997, you are prohibited from donating blood."
I think a basic level of intelligence indicates how wrong and prejudiced this is.
http://www.avert.org/hiv-african-americans.htm
According to statistics, black men are more than 6 times more likely than white men to become infected with HIV, but you sure as hell dont see people supporting banning black people from donating blood. Why? Simply because it is more socially acceptable to be homophobic than it is to be racist.
Edit: I just wanted to make this clear: there is absolutely nothing wrong with asking for blood donations, regardless of who may or may not be present. Donating blood saves lives. There is a problematic policy in place in the US and other countries at the moment, but that never has and never will make asking for people to donate blood problematic in any way, shape, or form.
I should clarify then in light of my previous comments that I am in the UK, where the wording is very different.
NateEssex
May 3, 10:04 PM
Any ideas? I'm dying to stream this to my Apple TV.
Ditto! :apple: Do people JB their Apple TVs now?
Ditto! :apple: Do people JB their Apple TVs now?
more...
leekohler
Apr 14, 10:54 AM
You know, leekohler, I'd find this crusade you have to get respect for gay rights a lot more persuasive if you didn't make snide and deriding comments about republicans and Christians on a regular basis.
Seeing someone so passionate about respect yet so blatantly not exhibiting it himself towards other groups undermines this position so badly I am actually going to ask you to stop one of the two. Please stop either
Stupid quotes. Pretty eyes.
Stupid quotes. Pretty eyes.
Seeing someone so passionate about respect yet so blatantly not exhibiting it himself towards other groups undermines this position so badly I am actually going to ask you to stop one of the two. Please stop either
SwiftLives
Mar 24, 10:19 AM
So who gets to decide what constitutes being dressed "slutty"?
Reventon
Aug 1, 09:01 PM
My screen shot, which is of course from the ending battle between the Enterprise and the Reliant in Star Trek II.
reubs
Oct 5, 03:51 PM
It's a little early for a Halloween shot, but I'm getting a jump on it. Still hunting for a good Halloween Mail.app icon, though. Not sure what to do with trash, yet. So, I guess it's kind of a WIP desktop.
RayBarone
Mar 14, 11:54 AM
Here us mine below, lets see yours too!!
http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t69/dagger01LN/Mac002.jpg
Recent addition is the MBP 13" i7 256SSD 8gb RAM.
http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t69/dagger01LN/Mac001.jpg
iPad at work hence not in picture!
Hope other people post some pics
http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t69/dagger01LN/Mac002.jpg
Recent addition is the MBP 13" i7 256SSD 8gb RAM.
http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t69/dagger01LN/Mac001.jpg
iPad at work hence not in picture!
Hope other people post some pics
scan300
Jul 23, 09:25 AM
File creator for iMovie is: Hway
File type for iMovie is: TeXT
iMovie files are just script files.
File type for iMovie is: TeXT
iMovie files are just script files.
Gelfin
Apr 5, 07:12 PM
Your blind comparison of an 11 year old "dressing like a prostitute" and a man in a business suit to prove some point didn't work.
The preconceptions that lead you to reject it are not the same as it "not working."
The preconceptions that lead you to reject it are not the same as it "not working."
Mac7
Aug 12, 09:09 AM
am i doing something wrong? why won't my picture show up on here?
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét