stol
Apr 11, 09:36 AM
Ever heard of Home Sharing?
Well, thank you, I've heard of Home Sharing. I use it myself on my desktop and laptop. I was referring to an one-click streaming solution like Airtunes. More like "click there to stream music to my mac which is connected to my sound system" than "go to preferences, enable sharing; now wait while I browse your shared library".
So, Airport Expresses are luxury but other WiFi routers onto which an Airplay hack could be installed are not luxury?
You can rightfully slam Apple for not including Airplay into the Time Capsule and Airport Extreme but that is about it.
I think you got it completely wrong here. How is my WiFi router which was given to me for free by my internet provider a luxury? Who talked about hacking my router? How could possibly a common router provide me with audio output?
And of course Apple is getting greedy by not adding Airtunes to other wireless solutions they sell. One more reason to skip them altogether and go for a hack or other software solution. Once again, don't get me wrong, I love Apple and their products, I but there are some use cases where they just don't care or have completely other interests.
To stream between computers, you only need iTunes and Home Sharing, which is, btw, free. And you now welcome/wish for a third-party hack to stream music and then in the same breath say that installing even bonafide software like the free Airfoil Speakers or iTunes is out of the question. What is it, you could convince your friends to install a third-party hack on their computers but not iTunes or Airfoil?
Once again, my words are misinterpreted or you just don't understand.
I just wish to stream to my mac which is connected to my sound system from other Airtunes capable devices. That involves a hack only on my part and nothing at all to be done on other computers or iOS devices. Call me cheap, but that would be convenient to me and my friends.
And as I said before, I can see myself buying an Airport Express (although I would prefer the Airport Extreme, if it had an audio output) for a computer-less streaming setup, but for my current setup - which I think is the most common one - and budget I will opt for a tricky hack.
To sum up, all I want is a Banana-TV equivalent but just for audio. It looks like it's just a matter of time.
Well, thank you, I've heard of Home Sharing. I use it myself on my desktop and laptop. I was referring to an one-click streaming solution like Airtunes. More like "click there to stream music to my mac which is connected to my sound system" than "go to preferences, enable sharing; now wait while I browse your shared library".
So, Airport Expresses are luxury but other WiFi routers onto which an Airplay hack could be installed are not luxury?
You can rightfully slam Apple for not including Airplay into the Time Capsule and Airport Extreme but that is about it.
I think you got it completely wrong here. How is my WiFi router which was given to me for free by my internet provider a luxury? Who talked about hacking my router? How could possibly a common router provide me with audio output?
And of course Apple is getting greedy by not adding Airtunes to other wireless solutions they sell. One more reason to skip them altogether and go for a hack or other software solution. Once again, don't get me wrong, I love Apple and their products, I but there are some use cases where they just don't care or have completely other interests.
To stream between computers, you only need iTunes and Home Sharing, which is, btw, free. And you now welcome/wish for a third-party hack to stream music and then in the same breath say that installing even bonafide software like the free Airfoil Speakers or iTunes is out of the question. What is it, you could convince your friends to install a third-party hack on their computers but not iTunes or Airfoil?
Once again, my words are misinterpreted or you just don't understand.
I just wish to stream to my mac which is connected to my sound system from other Airtunes capable devices. That involves a hack only on my part and nothing at all to be done on other computers or iOS devices. Call me cheap, but that would be convenient to me and my friends.
And as I said before, I can see myself buying an Airport Express (although I would prefer the Airport Extreme, if it had an audio output) for a computer-less streaming setup, but for my current setup - which I think is the most common one - and budget I will opt for a tricky hack.
To sum up, all I want is a Banana-TV equivalent but just for audio. It looks like it's just a matter of time.
Drag'nGT
Apr 30, 01:58 PM
I swear, this guy never seems happy about anything. I seem to recall him saying this for other product releases... $10 says he'll say it again once the MBA is released.
I have a friend who swears Apple is gonna turn the MBP into a big MBA. He's pissed and moaned about the 15" loosing the express slot and "forced" him to get the new Sandy Bridge 17" MBP... He doesn't use the slot. He says he simply wants the comfort of knowing he has it if he ever wanted to use it. :rolleyes:
His latest rage is that the next MBP won't have a DVD slot. I forgot my Macs even had a DVD slot but I guess that's the difference between us.
USB3 is dead tech. You'll never see it on a Mac. Would be VERY surprised to see eSATA, as well.
Huh? Where are you getting the idea it's "dead tech"? We just started to see USB 3 thumb drives and HDDs.
I obviously see Thunderbolt's (I hate that new name) superiority. But that doesn't mean consumers do. They eat what they are fed. That's why I said Apple and Intel have to force Thunderbolt into the light and into their computers. If Apple does it first and is noted for having the fastest stuff because they went the extra step people/companies will follow.
I have a friend who swears Apple is gonna turn the MBP into a big MBA. He's pissed and moaned about the 15" loosing the express slot and "forced" him to get the new Sandy Bridge 17" MBP... He doesn't use the slot. He says he simply wants the comfort of knowing he has it if he ever wanted to use it. :rolleyes:
His latest rage is that the next MBP won't have a DVD slot. I forgot my Macs even had a DVD slot but I guess that's the difference between us.
USB3 is dead tech. You'll never see it on a Mac. Would be VERY surprised to see eSATA, as well.
Huh? Where are you getting the idea it's "dead tech"? We just started to see USB 3 thumb drives and HDDs.
I obviously see Thunderbolt's (I hate that new name) superiority. But that doesn't mean consumers do. They eat what they are fed. That's why I said Apple and Intel have to force Thunderbolt into the light and into their computers. If Apple does it first and is noted for having the fastest stuff because they went the extra step people/companies will follow.
Beaverman3001
Apr 22, 11:29 AM
Intel IGP ruins it for me personally :( would love a i series cpu but my C2D isn't bad enough to drop the 320M.
11thIndian
Apr 25, 01:16 PM
Hilarious to all those people who jumped on the THUNDERBOLT bandwagon. No thunderbolt devices yet and they have the hideous old case design.
:rolleyes:
Yeah... I'm just crying I didn't wait for an update that may or may not come in a year. Damn this blistering speed. Damn it!
:rolleyes:
Yeah... I'm just crying I didn't wait for an update that may or may not come in a year. Damn this blistering speed. Damn it!
citizenzen
Apr 10, 11:17 AM
Population does count.
How?
Wouldn't a greater population create more demand for a product?
If population is such an issue, how is China able to succeed?
How?
Wouldn't a greater population create more demand for a product?
If population is such an issue, how is China able to succeed?
ChristianJapan
Apr 22, 08:05 AM
If I can stream and download to a iDevice I would be a happy camper. Should be users choice based on need. Streaming in many cases will not make it.
And SJ knows soon WHAT you listen WHERE and WHEN and HOW OFTEN. I'm sure there is marketing to be done. At least when iPhone or iPad are used.
And SJ knows soon WHAT you listen WHERE and WHEN and HOW OFTEN. I'm sure there is marketing to be done. At least when iPhone or iPad are used.
stol
Apr 11, 10:59 AM
Both financially and from a space and energy consumption point of view, an Apple TV or an Airport Express is a more efficient solution for this. Apple tends to support only the efficient and simple solutions, not the cumbersome ones.
Agreed. I never said that this is the most elegant solution.
But� why should I get extra hardware (environmentally unfriendly) when I have my Mac on most of the time anyway. You know, I already have a computer (connected to speakers) so computer + Airport Express is more energy/money/space inefficient than a computer alone.
You know all well that the router is not free, you pay for through your monthly payments. The fact that your provider does not offer a cheaper service without such hardware freebies is just unfortunate.
If I renew my service, I pay the same money and of course I don't get new hardware. Hardware freebies are for new customers/connections in many services other than internet connections. Subscribe to a satellite tv service for example, get a free dish. This is beyond me anyway, it's a standard policy for all providers where I live. I just got this modem/router with my subscription and so far it works fine. No need to replace it.
Would you be happy if Apple included a free Airport Express with all Macs (but naturally increased the price for the Mac)? There is nothing free, at least in the physical world (the digital world can be very close to free, see iOS apps).
This makes no sense. Not everyone needs or desires an Airport Express. I never asked Apple for free hardware.
So, how much do think Apple is asking for licensing their Airplay technology, I'd guess at most between $5-10.
Do they license Airplay technology to software developers? I don't think so.
Show me an app on the Mac App Store (or wherever) that acts like an Airport Express and i'll buy it at once.
Is your Mac (the one connected to your sound system) really cheaper than an Airport Express?
And if this is your only Mac, you can just use the Remote app to play the music on it from your iOS device.
How can you possibly compare a Mac to� an Airport Express? I bought a Mac to have a COMPUTER not to stream music wirelessly.
What you should think about is: How hard is for a Mac to act like an Airport Express with the proper software? It shouldn't.
Why it there no software like this? Apple does not want to.
Fair enough; It's their technology. Sometimes though, people want different things. Glad to see quite a few people here want the same as me.
I have no idea what a Banana-TV is but for all that you want to do, an Airport Express it seems would do the trick. Is an Airport Express much more expensive than your Banana-TV?
Banana TV is software. It is $7.99. It makes your Mac act like an Apple TV - does not support audio only though.
It does something like: I can stream a video i just shot from my iPhone to my huge iMac screen - no AppleTV needed, no need to transfer the video to the iMac, no cables.
Now tell me this is not a better solution for casual use than having an AppleTV in terms of money, space, energy, hardware. You see, I don't even have a TV!
Agreed. I never said that this is the most elegant solution.
But� why should I get extra hardware (environmentally unfriendly) when I have my Mac on most of the time anyway. You know, I already have a computer (connected to speakers) so computer + Airport Express is more energy/money/space inefficient than a computer alone.
You know all well that the router is not free, you pay for through your monthly payments. The fact that your provider does not offer a cheaper service without such hardware freebies is just unfortunate.
If I renew my service, I pay the same money and of course I don't get new hardware. Hardware freebies are for new customers/connections in many services other than internet connections. Subscribe to a satellite tv service for example, get a free dish. This is beyond me anyway, it's a standard policy for all providers where I live. I just got this modem/router with my subscription and so far it works fine. No need to replace it.
Would you be happy if Apple included a free Airport Express with all Macs (but naturally increased the price for the Mac)? There is nothing free, at least in the physical world (the digital world can be very close to free, see iOS apps).
This makes no sense. Not everyone needs or desires an Airport Express. I never asked Apple for free hardware.
So, how much do think Apple is asking for licensing their Airplay technology, I'd guess at most between $5-10.
Do they license Airplay technology to software developers? I don't think so.
Show me an app on the Mac App Store (or wherever) that acts like an Airport Express and i'll buy it at once.
Is your Mac (the one connected to your sound system) really cheaper than an Airport Express?
And if this is your only Mac, you can just use the Remote app to play the music on it from your iOS device.
How can you possibly compare a Mac to� an Airport Express? I bought a Mac to have a COMPUTER not to stream music wirelessly.
What you should think about is: How hard is for a Mac to act like an Airport Express with the proper software? It shouldn't.
Why it there no software like this? Apple does not want to.
Fair enough; It's their technology. Sometimes though, people want different things. Glad to see quite a few people here want the same as me.
I have no idea what a Banana-TV is but for all that you want to do, an Airport Express it seems would do the trick. Is an Airport Express much more expensive than your Banana-TV?
Banana TV is software. It is $7.99. It makes your Mac act like an Apple TV - does not support audio only though.
It does something like: I can stream a video i just shot from my iPhone to my huge iMac screen - no AppleTV needed, no need to transfer the video to the iMac, no cables.
Now tell me this is not a better solution for casual use than having an AppleTV in terms of money, space, energy, hardware. You see, I don't even have a TV!
flopticalcube
Sep 9, 02:26 PM
In fact, in future, I could see where application developers let the user in preferences tell the application how many cores to be allowed to use. Give the user a choice of how many cores he/she wants a particular process to use. That would be a way cool improvement in all application preferences. Would prevent any one applicaiton from hosing the computer due to core hogging.
That would be an OS issue, would it not? It would be up to the OS to allocate cores to processes.
That would be an OS issue, would it not? It would be up to the OS to allocate cores to processes.
Unorthodox
Aug 31, 05:09 PM
Is the Pope German? :rolleyes:
I don't know.
Is he?
I thought he was Italian...
And I also thought the saying was "Is the pope Catholic?".
I don't know what I am but what are you?!?
I don't know.
Is he?
I thought he was Italian...
And I also thought the saying was "Is the pope Catholic?".
I don't know what I am but what are you?!?
Machead III
Aug 31, 01:38 PM
Alright well, it's the Movie Store, and AppleInsider are porbably right about what they have said about it.
Meaning: Disney is the only one on board from the start.
However, don't **** your pants yet, that does not means we're stuck with Bambi and Mickey Mouse for 6 months.
The Walt Disney Company is about as expansive as they come, and they're particularly devious when it comes to branding. For various PR reasons they like to set up studios with different names and "tones" so that their cuddley flagship brand isn't trodden on by gritty adult movies.
If Disney are on board, that means as well as the "Walt Disney Pictures" movies like Toy Story and Aladin etc., Touchstone Pictures and Miramax are in (and also Hollywood Studios, but that's about to merge, it's not nothing notable since The 6th Sense, and nothing notable before that).
So you've got films like The Insider, Cinderella Man, The Royal Tenenbaums, Sin City, Gangs of New York, The Hours etc. etc. right off the bat.
Probably 1/5 of an average "movie fans" diet will consist of flicks produced by a branch of The Walt Disney Company, with another 5th being from WB, another from Universal and the rest from others like Sony and independants like Lions Gate and the Sundance groups.
You really wan't Universal in there eventually, as they're the ones with the big library. And Warner are the dudes holding all the old time classics, so you wan't them too.
Lions Gate make great films but the medium sized studios like them you can probably survive without, for the beginning, though it looks like Lions are in anyway.
Sony would be nice, they often hold the key to the films responsible for the recent surge in popularity of foreign films. Particuarly in Europe, Chinese and Spanish-speaking films have become really quite popular, with Zhang Yimou's Hero and House of Flying Daggers huge hits.
Of course, I'm hoping FilmFour get in their quickly, as they are responsible for really some of the most exciting cinema in recent years; Trainspotting, The Motorcycle Diaries, the list goes on...
Meaning: Disney is the only one on board from the start.
However, don't **** your pants yet, that does not means we're stuck with Bambi and Mickey Mouse for 6 months.
The Walt Disney Company is about as expansive as they come, and they're particularly devious when it comes to branding. For various PR reasons they like to set up studios with different names and "tones" so that their cuddley flagship brand isn't trodden on by gritty adult movies.
If Disney are on board, that means as well as the "Walt Disney Pictures" movies like Toy Story and Aladin etc., Touchstone Pictures and Miramax are in (and also Hollywood Studios, but that's about to merge, it's not nothing notable since The 6th Sense, and nothing notable before that).
So you've got films like The Insider, Cinderella Man, The Royal Tenenbaums, Sin City, Gangs of New York, The Hours etc. etc. right off the bat.
Probably 1/5 of an average "movie fans" diet will consist of flicks produced by a branch of The Walt Disney Company, with another 5th being from WB, another from Universal and the rest from others like Sony and independants like Lions Gate and the Sundance groups.
You really wan't Universal in there eventually, as they're the ones with the big library. And Warner are the dudes holding all the old time classics, so you wan't them too.
Lions Gate make great films but the medium sized studios like them you can probably survive without, for the beginning, though it looks like Lions are in anyway.
Sony would be nice, they often hold the key to the films responsible for the recent surge in popularity of foreign films. Particuarly in Europe, Chinese and Spanish-speaking films have become really quite popular, with Zhang Yimou's Hero and House of Flying Daggers huge hits.
Of course, I'm hoping FilmFour get in their quickly, as they are responsible for really some of the most exciting cinema in recent years; Trainspotting, The Motorcycle Diaries, the list goes on...
daneoni
Apr 22, 12:18 PM
It doesn't happen because what they should really be putting is Blu-Ray.
Unlikely to happen except for maybe the Mac Pros. Apple wants you to get your media from iTunes.
Unlikely to happen except for maybe the Mac Pros. Apple wants you to get your media from iTunes.
iStudentUK
Apr 11, 02:55 AM
To some extent, sure.
The big difference is that in the UK you can get cars which do 55 miles per US gallon, one that does that - the �17,345 1.6 Econetic Ford Focus does nearly 62 miles per US gallon.
And that car is made by a US company.
55 miles to the gallon isn't even abnormal, a lot of standard hatchbacks/small family cars do that and more.
The big difference is that in the UK you can get cars which do 55 miles per US gallon, one that does that - the �17,345 1.6 Econetic Ford Focus does nearly 62 miles per US gallon.
And that car is made by a US company.
55 miles to the gallon isn't even abnormal, a lot of standard hatchbacks/small family cars do that and more.
Prof.
Mar 23, 04:45 PM
You should tell that to my son. Oh wait, you can't, he was murdered someone like you.
I'm terribly sorry, my deepest condolences. *hug*
I'm terribly sorry, my deepest condolences. *hug*
amin
Oct 12, 05:45 PM
I predict that Oprah will gift one to each member of her audience.
Cinch
Oct 12, 03:44 PM
I admire your commitment to the evolutionary approach. I would just like to point out that evolution has also created the compassion (or at least social conscience) that inspires this sort of effort. Perhaps this compassion is a trait that increases the survivability of our species in a way too. (I'm not suggesting that all traits increase survivability, but evolution has been going for some time now, and compassion has been a human trait for some time as well, so perhaps the two are friends for some reason).
digressing to the point of no return..:D
Compassion I think is an emergent phenomenon and I think there is an simpler explanation to your "quest" or debate here. What about individual wanting to create a nurturing environment (society) and helping others in time of need is a result of this behavior. Consequently, we construct a positive nurturing environment that is the "best" environement to raise our children (offspring). I think the new field of evolutionary psychology provides a very useful tool of looking human behavior.
digressing to the point of no return..:D
Compassion I think is an emergent phenomenon and I think there is an simpler explanation to your "quest" or debate here. What about individual wanting to create a nurturing environment (society) and helping others in time of need is a result of this behavior. Consequently, we construct a positive nurturing environment that is the "best" environement to raise our children (offspring). I think the new field of evolutionary psychology provides a very useful tool of looking human behavior.
PlaceofDis
Oct 27, 08:48 AM
I have no problem with Greenpeace being at the show as long as they back up their findings with facts and conduct themselves in a civil manner. If Microsoft stepped out of line at the show, I would expect them to be kicked out of the show as well.
agreed. Apple should work hard to be a environmentally safe company, but that should stand for all companies too. i don't see why any one single company should be singled out at this point.
agreed. Apple should work hard to be a environmentally safe company, but that should stand for all companies too. i don't see why any one single company should be singled out at this point.
DPazdanISU
Sep 14, 09:21 AM
i heard somewhere that there was going to be a "dizzying" amount of apple events/releases in the near future. Looks like that is becoming true. Woot gimme a MacPod please:confused: :eek: :D
irmongoose
Sep 13, 09:06 PM
A '?' now?
irmongoose
irmongoose
Kalach
Apr 30, 02:00 PM
no new gpu? :(
aussie_geek
May 4, 03:34 AM
I can't see how those of us wanting to hook things up to our 27" iMac could be a that small group. I'm more inclined to believe this limitation has to do with Apple protectionism. I mean, like I said in a post a few pages up, there are no industry standard input ports (HDMI/DVI...) and the TB port is limited to only a small fraction of a ppm of the input devices on the market.
Sure hoping for a way to work arond Apple on this one, without going the usual Apple route - with a gazillion adapters.
Yep- I agree. There should always be one legacy port on a device. Mini display port would be the one.
Sure hoping for a way to work arond Apple on this one, without going the usual Apple route - with a gazillion adapters.
Yep- I agree. There should always be one legacy port on a device. Mini display port would be the one.
Onimusha370
Apr 30, 02:10 PM
can't wait till people start geekbenching these things, and we get the comments of... 'WOW, THIS THING BEATS MY 2010 MAC PRO'.
gonna be very exciting indeed!
gonna be very exciting indeed!
Peace
Sep 5, 02:22 PM
I don't usually speculate, but I find it interesting "Showtime" is capitalized. Could the downloads be part of some partnership with the cable channel? Just wild speculation on my part.
-p-
Showtime is owned by Viacom,who also owns the movie channel and a cable company.
-p-
Showtime is owned by Viacom,who also owns the movie channel and a cable company.
ChazUK
Mar 29, 11:53 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.3; en-gb; Blade Build/FRG83) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)
It'll be interesting to see what the Nokia deal will do for MSFT. As things stand now I can't see this happening but you never know.
It'll be interesting to see what the Nokia deal will do for MSFT. As things stand now I can't see this happening but you never know.
DagazaGZ
Apr 30, 02:02 PM
Curious that everyone is clamoring for a thunderbolt-enabled machine, but there isn't a single thunderbolt drive available on the market.
I guess some people just need to feel like they have new stuff even if it's totally pointless.
You bring a good point... I thought there were thunderbolt drives...
I guess some people just need to feel like they have new stuff even if it's totally pointless.
You bring a good point... I thought there were thunderbolt drives...