jmbear
Nov 29, 12:39 PM
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
thebeans
Apr 27, 10:04 AM
A lot of people are upset over this. But, no one seems to care that the US Government can snoop on any electronic communication it wants for well over 10 years now: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echelon_(signals_intelligence)
Data transmissions, cell phone calls, you name it. I think we're trying to cook the wrong goose if you ask me.
When I was in college we got a new professor. He had retired from the Navy. Intelligence division actually. His job during his last years in NI was to monitor email communications. Yea, he read your email. Not literally every one of course and there were (are) many, many working on this but in a nutshell, yes the government does read your email. Do I care? Nope. Got nothing to hide and if they want to read emails of me asking my wife what she wants for supper or telling her how my day went, what do I care?
Data transmissions, cell phone calls, you name it. I think we're trying to cook the wrong goose if you ask me.
When I was in college we got a new professor. He had retired from the Navy. Intelligence division actually. His job during his last years in NI was to monitor email communications. Yea, he read your email. Not literally every one of course and there were (are) many, many working on this but in a nutshell, yes the government does read your email. Do I care? Nope. Got nothing to hide and if they want to read emails of me asking my wife what she wants for supper or telling her how my day went, what do I care?
CaoCao
Mar 1, 05:00 PM
^^ Well maybe, but the Obama administration doesn't believe that law is constitutional.
Gov't seeks to uphold DOMA in gay lawyer's lawsuit
SAN FRANCISCO
The Justice Department says a lesbian federal employee should still be denied permission to add her wife to her health insurance despite the Obama administration's refusal to defend a federal law banning recognition of same-sex marriages.
Government lawyers told a federal judge Monday in San Francisco that the administration will still enforce the Defense of Marriage Act until it is struck down by a court or repealed by Congress. They say its new position on the act's unconstitutionality is irrelevant.
Karen Golinski is a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals lawyer suing the Office of Personnel Management for not authorizing family health coverage for her wife. The circuit's chief judge has twice ordered the office to allow it.
The Justice Department says the rulings were not binding because they were made in the judge's role as Golinski's boss.
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9LMIFS80.htm
I can't help it if you live in a backward country. I was talking about civilised norms. And whatever your cockeyed definition, it is still not equality.
Right, that's why England is preventing a married couple from adopting.
Gov't seeks to uphold DOMA in gay lawyer's lawsuit
SAN FRANCISCO
The Justice Department says a lesbian federal employee should still be denied permission to add her wife to her health insurance despite the Obama administration's refusal to defend a federal law banning recognition of same-sex marriages.
Government lawyers told a federal judge Monday in San Francisco that the administration will still enforce the Defense of Marriage Act until it is struck down by a court or repealed by Congress. They say its new position on the act's unconstitutionality is irrelevant.
Karen Golinski is a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals lawyer suing the Office of Personnel Management for not authorizing family health coverage for her wife. The circuit's chief judge has twice ordered the office to allow it.
The Justice Department says the rulings were not binding because they were made in the judge's role as Golinski's boss.
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9LMIFS80.htm
I can't help it if you live in a backward country. I was talking about civilised norms. And whatever your cockeyed definition, it is still not equality.
Right, that's why England is preventing a married couple from adopting.
RichP
Sep 13, 08:19 AM
Nice! Im with iGary and others, soon as they are out, Im buying. That should correspond nicely with the release of CS3.
Im doing work in Alias these days, I can only imagine how 8 cores could do a render!
Suprised the MacPro could handle the heat of 8 cores with its 4-core heatsink design. I read the article about Kentsfield on Tom's Hardware, and that chip made ALOT of heat; these are basically the same chip.
EDIT: Who knows, the hot setup may be a refurb'ed MacPro 2.0Ghz, then drop in better CPUs!
Im doing work in Alias these days, I can only imagine how 8 cores could do a render!
Suprised the MacPro could handle the heat of 8 cores with its 4-core heatsink design. I read the article about Kentsfield on Tom's Hardware, and that chip made ALOT of heat; these are basically the same chip.
EDIT: Who knows, the hot setup may be a refurb'ed MacPro 2.0Ghz, then drop in better CPUs!
�algiris
Mar 26, 02:25 AM
Been on Lion for the past month and I can't see myself going back to Snow Leopard.
Same here. Buggy as hell, but i like what i see.
Same here. Buggy as hell, but i like what i see.
~Shard~
Aug 25, 03:07 PM
You're missing a comma. :p :D
Am I, where, exactly? :p ;)
Am I, where, exactly? :p ;)
growlf
Mar 31, 03:50 PM
I cannot help shake the feeling that some of the vitriol from certain people is the fear that a more coherent and unified Android ecosystem is an even bigger threat to the iOS platform.
First, I have a Dell Streak. Wanted to see what the fuss was about. Took a year for the official Froyo release to appear. Yeah, fragmentation exists.
(I appreciate Android on the Streak, but GOOD GOD does it feel like a laggy piece of software compared to my iPhone and iPad. It has widgets and tons of convenient apps for pirating software or games (no... I own ALL those ROMS)... but I digress.)
So, Android unifies. Google forces handset/tablet manufacturers to adopt a stock OS interface. How will they differentiate themselves? What incentive, beyond a free OS, will there be to creating "phone B" that looks just like "phone A". This is where Google will shoot itself in the foot. The less the carriers and handset manufacturers can customize, the less incentive they have to launch on Android. Heck, just emulate Android if you want the apps, right RIM?
Weren't there waves a few weeks about about Motorola wanting its own OS? I'd want to control my own destiny. This is creating a "walled garden" (Andy as caretaker) for the device manufacturers/carriers, and they're the ones that Google needs to be pushing the platform.
First, I have a Dell Streak. Wanted to see what the fuss was about. Took a year for the official Froyo release to appear. Yeah, fragmentation exists.
(I appreciate Android on the Streak, but GOOD GOD does it feel like a laggy piece of software compared to my iPhone and iPad. It has widgets and tons of convenient apps for pirating software or games (no... I own ALL those ROMS)... but I digress.)
So, Android unifies. Google forces handset/tablet manufacturers to adopt a stock OS interface. How will they differentiate themselves? What incentive, beyond a free OS, will there be to creating "phone B" that looks just like "phone A". This is where Google will shoot itself in the foot. The less the carriers and handset manufacturers can customize, the less incentive they have to launch on Android. Heck, just emulate Android if you want the apps, right RIM?
Weren't there waves a few weeks about about Motorola wanting its own OS? I'd want to control my own destiny. This is creating a "walled garden" (Andy as caretaker) for the device manufacturers/carriers, and they're the ones that Google needs to be pushing the platform.
NewSc2
Sep 19, 02:18 AM
Does it even MATTER if Apple keeps up? Do we actually WANT Apple to release a new computer every month when Intel bumps up their chips a few megahertz?
See, it's easy to get lost in the specs war. The Mac Pros came out and I was salivating, even though I have a dual 2.0GHz G5 sitting at home. And then one day, as I was editing some HD footage, it occurred ot me that my G5 here - my now outdated G5 - was editing 1080p high-def footage without so much as a flinch. It was SO fast it was not even necessary at all.
So I really have to ask - does Apple really need to get into that stupid-ass PC specs war? Is it really hurting you guys that Apple has been slow to update? Are you really doing tasks that the current computer lineup cannot do?
Hm, well my Powerbook runs barely 4 instances of Sculpture on some of my works. MacBook Pros can run about 15-17, but I've been holding off on the Rev. A because of all the heat issues. Hopefully those get cleared up.
Anyways -- yes, I think we should expect Apple to update along with everybody else on the PC front. Maybe not every small speed bump, but whenever a newly designed chip comes out.
See, it's easy to get lost in the specs war. The Mac Pros came out and I was salivating, even though I have a dual 2.0GHz G5 sitting at home. And then one day, as I was editing some HD footage, it occurred ot me that my G5 here - my now outdated G5 - was editing 1080p high-def footage without so much as a flinch. It was SO fast it was not even necessary at all.
So I really have to ask - does Apple really need to get into that stupid-ass PC specs war? Is it really hurting you guys that Apple has been slow to update? Are you really doing tasks that the current computer lineup cannot do?
Hm, well my Powerbook runs barely 4 instances of Sculpture on some of my works. MacBook Pros can run about 15-17, but I've been holding off on the Rev. A because of all the heat issues. Hopefully those get cleared up.
Anyways -- yes, I think we should expect Apple to update along with everybody else on the PC front. Maybe not every small speed bump, but whenever a newly designed chip comes out.
aohus
Apr 19, 02:35 PM
WRONG. A lot of modern GUI elements are INVENTED by Apple:
http://obamapacman.com/2010/03/myth-copyright-theft-apple-stole-gui-from-xerox-parc-alto/
WRONG! They weren't invented at Apple's Cupertino HQ, they were invented back in Palo Alto (Xerox PARC).
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/20/business/xerox-vs-apple-standard-dashboard-is-at-issue.html), which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
Apple may face special problems because of admissions made by its chairman, John Sculley, in his 1987 book, ''Odyssey,'' a chronicle of his split with Apple's co-founder, Steven P. Jobs. ''Much of the Macintosh technology wasn't invented in the building,'' he wrote. ''Indeed, the Mac, like the Lisa before it, was largely a conduit for technology developed'' at Xerox's Palo Alto Research Center.
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am saying is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Rank_Xerox_8010%2B40_brochure_front.jpg
http://obamapacman.com/2010/03/myth-copyright-theft-apple-stole-gui-from-xerox-parc-alto/
WRONG! They weren't invented at Apple's Cupertino HQ, they were invented back in Palo Alto (Xerox PARC).
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/20/business/xerox-vs-apple-standard-dashboard-is-at-issue.html), which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
Apple may face special problems because of admissions made by its chairman, John Sculley, in his 1987 book, ''Odyssey,'' a chronicle of his split with Apple's co-founder, Steven P. Jobs. ''Much of the Macintosh technology wasn't invented in the building,'' he wrote. ''Indeed, the Mac, like the Lisa before it, was largely a conduit for technology developed'' at Xerox's Palo Alto Research Center.
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am saying is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Rank_Xerox_8010%2B40_brochure_front.jpg
shelterpaw
Aug 7, 03:54 PM
i love the changes they made.
now if only they can merge ical into mail so it can fully compete against entourage and other apps.
I want my full telephone book, contact data management, with calendar in one program.
easier for me that way.
Yeah, that'd be cool. Just imagine if you could grab certain things from other apps, like that widget web clip feature and paste together your own app in whichever way you please. Would probably confuse the heck out of some novice users, but would be great for advanced users. Elastic applications.
now if only they can merge ical into mail so it can fully compete against entourage and other apps.
I want my full telephone book, contact data management, with calendar in one program.
easier for me that way.
Yeah, that'd be cool. Just imagine if you could grab certain things from other apps, like that widget web clip feature and paste together your own app in whichever way you please. Would probably confuse the heck out of some novice users, but would be great for advanced users. Elastic applications.
daneoni
Aug 27, 03:38 PM
One reason Apple switched to Intel was because they couldn't get a G5 in a notebook, they kept saying they would do this for ages so a joke that powerbook G5's coming out Tuesday emerged. This *hilarious* joke has come back for an encore now we are all Intel chips which are quicker than the G5, especially as no-one knows exactly which Tuesday (28th August / 5th September / 12th September) the Merom MB/MBP will arrive.
It isn't the G5 part that's funny about it. The whole point of the joke is to make fun of the Rumor Article --> Wild Speculation --> Guessing the Specific Release Date cycle.
Finally people who grasp it
It isn't the G5 part that's funny about it. The whole point of the joke is to make fun of the Rumor Article --> Wild Speculation --> Guessing the Specific Release Date cycle.
Finally people who grasp it
vincenz
Apr 7, 10:47 PM
Obviously you know little about retail and accounting.
Don't be a troll :rolleyes:
Don't be a troll :rolleyes:
Moyank24
Feb 28, 09:22 PM
I copy and pasted from the dictionary application that comes default installed with Macs, thank Apple for the laugh.
You have just introduced this new word "influcenes" which I can't memory match with an word I know. Assuming you mean influences which appears to match contextually, I do not know the answer, scientist do not appear to know either.
I do not know the cause, it appears scientists do not either. Since no one appears to know, what could you possibly have expected from me?
You can blame my work PC for not correcting my awful spelling. :rolleyes:
But, yes, obviously I meant influences.
Also, thank you for admitting what most people on here can see. You have no idea what you are talking about.
You have just introduced this new word "influcenes" which I can't memory match with an word I know. Assuming you mean influences which appears to match contextually, I do not know the answer, scientist do not appear to know either.
I do not know the cause, it appears scientists do not either. Since no one appears to know, what could you possibly have expected from me?
You can blame my work PC for not correcting my awful spelling. :rolleyes:
But, yes, obviously I meant influences.
Also, thank you for admitting what most people on here can see. You have no idea what you are talking about.
hobo.hopkins
Apr 25, 02:12 PM
Its none of your business what things I'm involved in and want hidden. Its my right to privacy so back off.
That's why the information is stored locally and can't be accessed by third parties. The information IS private. Unless a device of yours is stolen, in which case almost anything can be done or accessed.
That's why the information is stored locally and can't be accessed by third parties. The information IS private. Unless a device of yours is stolen, in which case almost anything can be done or accessed.
Some_Big_Spoon
Aug 15, 05:11 PM
Well, we all knew that the G5 isn't a "bad" chip necessarily.. It's older tech, and I think, wasn't really meant for this kind of work (non-server applications).
Preaching to the choir am I?
I would have thought that the Final Cut Pro benchmark would have really blown away the G5 - not so much, right?
Awesome on FileMaker and I can't wait to see how this stuff runs Adobe PS Natively.
Preaching to the choir am I?
I would have thought that the Final Cut Pro benchmark would have really blown away the G5 - not so much, right?
Awesome on FileMaker and I can't wait to see how this stuff runs Adobe PS Natively.
shartypants
Apr 6, 10:33 AM
Wow, Intel is really keeping up with the processors. Someday I imagine Apple will make a 15" MacBook Air and call it a MacBook Pro (maybe not quite as thin but thinner than current MBP).
gregorsamsa
Aug 28, 07:35 AM
OEM licensing OS X would not be a panacea. I supported NeXTSTEP/Openstep for NeXT and Apple. We had a nightmare dealing with OEMs who pushed us into the trash heap.
When the merger happened they showed no more interest knowing that we could move the OS to Intel since we had it running on Intel.
Motherboard manufacturers cut corners. OEMs cut all sorts of corners on their I/O cards.
Corralling all necessary OEMs to stick to a specific spec would be a nightmare.
Vista is a classic example of diluting your OS. Five years and counting.
Apple is both a hardware and software company.
The price for their latest Mac Pro shows how price competitive it is with the rest of the industry.
Having built several clone boxes none of them from the case design, integrated motherboard design, controller design, heat transfer requirements, etc comes close to the Mac Pro. It doesn't include Hardware RAID out of the box. Big deal.
When the clone industry can produce cases in general that compete for structural integrity, motherboards with as few cables, easily maintanable cases that are easy to keep dust free then Apple might feel concerned about it's claim to having the most complete experience.
OS X has shortcomings in areas for Engineering (CAD/CAM, FEM, etc. All 3rd party concerns), Games (3rd party concerns, OpenGL 2 concerns that Apple will fix), Vertical Solution concerns (assuming Apple wants to attack the business sectors they will have to address this lack of productivity tools for Finance & Accounting within iWorks) and some other deficiencies.
They are covering their bases and growing their base, quarter by quarter.
When ROME is finally built are we all going to whine that you can save $50 here or there with a clone?
I expect no less.
Good points, some of which I don't disagree with. Yes, "Vista is a classic example of diluting your OS," but I'll still be surprised if it doesn't achieve record sales on release. Though Apple's userbase continues to grow (& rightly so!), the crunch time for Apple in sustaining this will surely come when the shops are full of competitively-priced, Vista-enabled PCs.
Licensing out OS X wouldn't necessarily mean compromising its security; the compromise would come in some of the non-Apple hardware OS X ran on. Much has changed since the days of the original Apple clones that proved to be an expensive failure. Today, technology generally is much less expensive. Customers would appreciate the kind of choice that, after all, hasn't done too much harm to sales of Windows PCs. (I'd probably still buy Apple, but some others may buy a cheaper Dell running OS X).
Granted that the Mac Pro is competitively priced, those recent comparisons with the more expensive Dell workstation overlook that the Mac Pro graphics (Geforce 7300 GT) cost approx $100; the Dell's Nvidia graphics are closer to $1,000. (A point for objectivity's sake).
Like most Mac owners, I believe Apple are still by far the best for overall quality & service (though I think they're currently lacking at least one more consumer-aimed computer). I'm just interested in any ideas that could further expand the OS X userbase, & sustain it long-term.
PS: ROME has already been built: M$. But that empire so overreached itself it now looks as if it's beginning to crumble.
When the merger happened they showed no more interest knowing that we could move the OS to Intel since we had it running on Intel.
Motherboard manufacturers cut corners. OEMs cut all sorts of corners on their I/O cards.
Corralling all necessary OEMs to stick to a specific spec would be a nightmare.
Vista is a classic example of diluting your OS. Five years and counting.
Apple is both a hardware and software company.
The price for their latest Mac Pro shows how price competitive it is with the rest of the industry.
Having built several clone boxes none of them from the case design, integrated motherboard design, controller design, heat transfer requirements, etc comes close to the Mac Pro. It doesn't include Hardware RAID out of the box. Big deal.
When the clone industry can produce cases in general that compete for structural integrity, motherboards with as few cables, easily maintanable cases that are easy to keep dust free then Apple might feel concerned about it's claim to having the most complete experience.
OS X has shortcomings in areas for Engineering (CAD/CAM, FEM, etc. All 3rd party concerns), Games (3rd party concerns, OpenGL 2 concerns that Apple will fix), Vertical Solution concerns (assuming Apple wants to attack the business sectors they will have to address this lack of productivity tools for Finance & Accounting within iWorks) and some other deficiencies.
They are covering their bases and growing their base, quarter by quarter.
When ROME is finally built are we all going to whine that you can save $50 here or there with a clone?
I expect no less.
Good points, some of which I don't disagree with. Yes, "Vista is a classic example of diluting your OS," but I'll still be surprised if it doesn't achieve record sales on release. Though Apple's userbase continues to grow (& rightly so!), the crunch time for Apple in sustaining this will surely come when the shops are full of competitively-priced, Vista-enabled PCs.
Licensing out OS X wouldn't necessarily mean compromising its security; the compromise would come in some of the non-Apple hardware OS X ran on. Much has changed since the days of the original Apple clones that proved to be an expensive failure. Today, technology generally is much less expensive. Customers would appreciate the kind of choice that, after all, hasn't done too much harm to sales of Windows PCs. (I'd probably still buy Apple, but some others may buy a cheaper Dell running OS X).
Granted that the Mac Pro is competitively priced, those recent comparisons with the more expensive Dell workstation overlook that the Mac Pro graphics (Geforce 7300 GT) cost approx $100; the Dell's Nvidia graphics are closer to $1,000. (A point for objectivity's sake).
Like most Mac owners, I believe Apple are still by far the best for overall quality & service (though I think they're currently lacking at least one more consumer-aimed computer). I'm just interested in any ideas that could further expand the OS X userbase, & sustain it long-term.
PS: ROME has already been built: M$. But that empire so overreached itself it now looks as if it's beginning to crumble.
aswitcher
Aug 27, 04:40 AM
This is great news. Looking forward to a revamp of half the Apple line over the next month or so.
gerrycurl
Jul 14, 05:59 PM
the question still remains--will the powermacs be able to use standard, off the shelf, pc video cards?
i know that you couldn't do so in the power architecture due to the bios irregularities. now that they're using efi, does this still mean we have to buy mac based cards? because that's really the question nobody seems to ask and nobody seems to have an answer for.
what this new mac workstation will mean is the chance to upgrade your macs based on commodity parts. no more mac tax for hardware. i remember when the radeon 9700 was king, the price was around $299 for pc version and $399 for mac version.
think about this, the ability to upgrade processor, video card, and sound card without having to pay the apple tax.
that's what it really comes down to. the speculative "good" version of the mac pro has a so-so video card, but it's not really worth the $600 more just to get a 1800, i'd rather just get the 1600 and upgrade on my own.
i know that you couldn't do so in the power architecture due to the bios irregularities. now that they're using efi, does this still mean we have to buy mac based cards? because that's really the question nobody seems to ask and nobody seems to have an answer for.
what this new mac workstation will mean is the chance to upgrade your macs based on commodity parts. no more mac tax for hardware. i remember when the radeon 9700 was king, the price was around $299 for pc version and $399 for mac version.
think about this, the ability to upgrade processor, video card, and sound card without having to pay the apple tax.
that's what it really comes down to. the speculative "good" version of the mac pro has a so-so video card, but it's not really worth the $600 more just to get a 1800, i'd rather just get the 1600 and upgrade on my own.
BlizzardBomb
Aug 26, 03:58 PM
PowerBook G5 next tuesday?
Mildly funny when it first started, but my god is that an old joke.
In other news, Merom this, Merom that, just make sure you get it out on time Apple :p
Mildly funny when it first started, but my god is that an old joke.
In other news, Merom this, Merom that, just make sure you get it out on time Apple :p
Raid
Apr 29, 09:35 AM
Labelling birthers as racist, paranoid, or nutters is just pandering to the distraction of all this. The persistence of this "issue" could be more of a logical desire to belittle or erode the political power of the current president; which is akin to schoolyard gossiping, sure, but it's still strangely effective.
Now back to the birthing show!
Now back to the birthing show!
Multimedia
Aug 18, 10:31 AM
If one were to buy a mac pro now, is the processor upgradeable to Clovertown in the future, or is that not really worth it even if it is, because you would need a faster FSB, meaning a new logic board, to take advantage of its power?I'm sure you know this. But just a reminder that you would be dealing with an extremely fragile and tricky upgrade process that could destroy your motherboard or fry the processor without the latest cooling system from Apple. Just my own caution against attempting this. Not worth the risk I think. There will be a better video card with the Dual Clovertown Mac Pro as well as other changes to the system fixing bugs discovered between now and then. Too many changes in the works for me to want to fool with such a complex system.
samcraig
Apr 5, 05:48 PM
Nobody's using Blu-Ray, in my experience. It's just another way of sucking money out of home consumers. Everything's done online in terms of delivery...
A very ignorant post. Especially if you value quality. I hardly call providing the best quality video "sucking money out of home consumers"
Or are you one of those that want to insist that streaming "hd" video is just as good as blu-ray. Because if you are - you shouldn't have even weighed in here.
No need to school you on the difference here though unless you come back and tell me you still think there's no difference.
A very ignorant post. Especially if you value quality. I hardly call providing the best quality video "sucking money out of home consumers"
Or are you one of those that want to insist that streaming "hd" video is just as good as blu-ray. Because if you are - you shouldn't have even weighed in here.
No need to school you on the difference here though unless you come back and tell me you still think there's no difference.
mumbo
Aug 26, 12:49 PM
I called this week to have the mighty mouse that came with my DC 2.3 G5 replaced. The guy was helpful and my new mouse came the next day, from California to Canada. I'm pretty impressed!