shawnce
Jul 27, 04:19 PM
This may be a bit of a disappointment, but I think that Merom is still in the "past:" merom is not a 64-bit chip. None of these Core 2's are. They just have EM64T (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EM64T), which allows them to address more than 4 GB of memory directly. These are not true 64-bit processors like the G5--that is, the Core 2 Duo won't work with 64-bit applications.
You are incorrect. The Core 2 family of processors are 64 bit processors.... they support 64 bit integer math, they support load/store using 64 bit virtual addresses (also at least 40 bit of physical), sport 64 bit wide register file, they support the larger register set enabled by EM64T, etc.
They are 64 bit just like the G5 (PPC 970/FX/MP) is 64 bit (granted 64 bit support on PowerPC chips is a little more transparent).
The Itanium is a completely different type of ISA of which 64 bit support is only one feature.
You are incorrect. The Core 2 family of processors are 64 bit processors.... they support 64 bit integer math, they support load/store using 64 bit virtual addresses (also at least 40 bit of physical), sport 64 bit wide register file, they support the larger register set enabled by EM64T, etc.
They are 64 bit just like the G5 (PPC 970/FX/MP) is 64 bit (granted 64 bit support on PowerPC chips is a little more transparent).
The Itanium is a completely different type of ISA of which 64 bit support is only one feature.
Blaze3555
Apr 10, 02:16 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)
Did any One catch the quote about the puck. For a split second I got exited because I thought it was Kevin Smith. I love his podcasts. Execp he talk about only using Avid because Fcp docent have a big enough time line. But Let's all go inside! Lol
Did any One catch the quote about the puck. For a split second I got exited because I thought it was Kevin Smith. I love his podcasts. Execp he talk about only using Avid because Fcp docent have a big enough time line. But Let's all go inside! Lol
Macnoviz
Apr 12, 11:36 AM
There have been live streams in the past but last I heard Apple killed it for this meeting.
Lethal
well, if they were planning on doing a livestream, and all of the sudden they make it into a semi-stevenote, the extra traffic would probably kill the stream anyway
Lethal
well, if they were planning on doing a livestream, and all of the sudden they make it into a semi-stevenote, the extra traffic would probably kill the stream anyway
ugp
Jun 15, 07:48 PM
This has to be the worst a pre-order has ever gone in history. Better preparation needs to be made in the future to avoid these problems.
I was able to get Apples site to get to the final stage and "Place Order" but I opted not to. I am first on the list at my local Radio Shack and I will take my chances there. I am not going to be able to be home when the iPhone would deliver. If I have to wait I will wait. My friend is the Manager and he would process my ticket for me if he had to and drop it off to me if it doesn't come launch day. Otherwise I will be there the 24th in the morning at opening.
I was able to get Apples site to get to the final stage and "Place Order" but I opted not to. I am first on the list at my local Radio Shack and I will take my chances there. I am not going to be able to be home when the iPhone would deliver. If I have to wait I will wait. My friend is the Manager and he would process my ticket for me if he had to and drop it off to me if it doesn't come launch day. Otherwise I will be there the 24th in the morning at opening.
Silverfist
Apr 25, 03:43 PM
[QUOTE=killr_b;12458559]As a consumer, why should I be subjected to this risk which doesn't benefit me in the slightest? And why should this data be "backed up," secretly, to my computer?[QUOTE]
Your phone stores this so as to keep from having to re-install connection locations every time you move a few hundred feet. It's "subjecting" you to better battery life by not having to work as hard to keep you connected. Oh noes.
...And it backs up the data for the same reason it backs up EVERYTHING when you sync -- so you can restore without losing any of the data on the phone.
What, you want crappy battery life, slower speeds, and loss of data if you need to restore your phone?
.
Your phone stores this so as to keep from having to re-install connection locations every time you move a few hundred feet. It's "subjecting" you to better battery life by not having to work as hard to keep you connected. Oh noes.
...And it backs up the data for the same reason it backs up EVERYTHING when you sync -- so you can restore without losing any of the data on the phone.
What, you want crappy battery life, slower speeds, and loss of data if you need to restore your phone?
.
Macky-Mac
Mar 22, 08:32 PM
......It may have just been luck, but if so it was a remarkable piece of luck to have 4 submarines, a flagship-capable surface ship and all necessary support in the right place at the right time. These things don't travel very fast.
in the mediterranean? The US 6th fleet is permanently stationed in the mediterranean, so yes, these ships were probably all quite readily available.
6th Fleet (http://www.navysite.de/navy/fleet.htm)
Sixth Fleet, headquarterd on its command ship USS MOUNT WHITNEY (LCC 20), consists of approximately 40 ships, 175 aircraft and 21,000 people. The Sixth Fleet in the Mediterranean is the major operational component of Naval Forces Europe. The principal striking power of the Sixth Fleet resides in its aircraft carriers and the modern jet aircraft, its submarines, and its reinforced battalion of US Marines on board amphibious ships deployed in the Mediterranean.
and they've had several weeks to move them around
in the mediterranean? The US 6th fleet is permanently stationed in the mediterranean, so yes, these ships were probably all quite readily available.
6th Fleet (http://www.navysite.de/navy/fleet.htm)
Sixth Fleet, headquarterd on its command ship USS MOUNT WHITNEY (LCC 20), consists of approximately 40 ships, 175 aircraft and 21,000 people. The Sixth Fleet in the Mediterranean is the major operational component of Naval Forces Europe. The principal striking power of the Sixth Fleet resides in its aircraft carriers and the modern jet aircraft, its submarines, and its reinforced battalion of US Marines on board amphibious ships deployed in the Mediterranean.
and they've had several weeks to move them around
utahnguy
Apr 10, 10:06 PM
This is kind of ironic. My brother works in the video editing field and I was just talking about this only 5 minutes ago. He was lucky enough to "NAB" a ticket (pun fully intended) literally seconds before they sold out, and he'll be there for the presentation. He was telling me about this radical new overhaul for FCP, and I thought it was kind of weird that I hadn't seen any mention of it seeing as how I check Apple rumor blogs almost daily, so I logged onto macrumors and sure enough, it was the first story listed.
I guess there's a lot of drama among the industry about Apple's refusal to release any kind of road map for FCP, not unlike their other products, and apparently a lot of people are starting to jump ship to Adobe's offerings. Everyone is pretty worried about this new overhaul because the guy who botched iMovie is the guy now in charge of FCP. I'm not into video editing, and I've never never used FCP or any product like it, but after hearing about all the drama and excitement surrounding this new overhaul I'm pretty stoked to see what happens.
My brother is a diehard Apple guy, but he, along with a lot of other people apparently, are basically giving Apple this final shot to fix a lot of FCP's limitations, or they're going to fully move over to Adobe's offering. (I can't remember the name of heir FCP equivalent, and I'm too lazy to look it up) Tuesday can't come soon enough!
I guess there's a lot of drama among the industry about Apple's refusal to release any kind of road map for FCP, not unlike their other products, and apparently a lot of people are starting to jump ship to Adobe's offerings. Everyone is pretty worried about this new overhaul because the guy who botched iMovie is the guy now in charge of FCP. I'm not into video editing, and I've never never used FCP or any product like it, but after hearing about all the drama and excitement surrounding this new overhaul I'm pretty stoked to see what happens.
My brother is a diehard Apple guy, but he, along with a lot of other people apparently, are basically giving Apple this final shot to fix a lot of FCP's limitations, or they're going to fully move over to Adobe's offering. (I can't remember the name of heir FCP equivalent, and I'm too lazy to look it up) Tuesday can't come soon enough!
REDolution
Apr 12, 12:49 PM
This was a very good blog post.
I agree, great read
I agree, great read
�algiris
Mar 31, 03:14 PM
Ditto. Gruber is as much a blow hard as anyone can possibly be. He's such an arrogant, self-absorbing prick of a human being, without an un-biased bone in his body. He is the epitome of Apple fanboy.
He's self-loving jerk everyone knows that, but what's even worse that he's more often right than wrong. That makes fandroids go mental.
He's self-loving jerk everyone knows that, but what's even worse that he's more often right than wrong. That makes fandroids go mental.
Amazing Iceman
Mar 31, 05:21 PM
Apple realized long time ago that it is bad if the cell service provider has too much freedom, puts too much **** on the phone and customizes it in ways that it is no longer maintainable ... they got bashed as being too closed.
But now people finally realize they were right:
- android is getting too fragmented because service providers are either too slow to provide updates or refuse to update at all for current phones
- microsoft just realed an update to their mobile7 - guess what: service providers are too slow to update the brand new phones - weeks after the MS release they still need many more weeks to 'test' and 'adjust' for their phones
What good is it to have an OS that claims to be 'open' but you still can't get updates because the openess was abused by service providers who struggle to re-adding their ****.
The problem that has always existed, not just with Android, is that the carriers customize the OS, release it with a phone, and you can forget about getting any updates for it. Maybe one update for the lifetime of the device, if you are lucky. My HTC TouchPro 2 has only seen in almost 2 years just one update to WM 6.5, and it was not even close to the most current revision at that time.
This just shows that carriers and manufacturers don't want to keep maintaining their phones. They want to sell and forget, and push a new model out the door.
Sad, but true... :(
But now people finally realize they were right:
- android is getting too fragmented because service providers are either too slow to provide updates or refuse to update at all for current phones
- microsoft just realed an update to their mobile7 - guess what: service providers are too slow to update the brand new phones - weeks after the MS release they still need many more weeks to 'test' and 'adjust' for their phones
What good is it to have an OS that claims to be 'open' but you still can't get updates because the openess was abused by service providers who struggle to re-adding their ****.
The problem that has always existed, not just with Android, is that the carriers customize the OS, release it with a phone, and you can forget about getting any updates for it. Maybe one update for the lifetime of the device, if you are lucky. My HTC TouchPro 2 has only seen in almost 2 years just one update to WM 6.5, and it was not even close to the most current revision at that time.
This just shows that carriers and manufacturers don't want to keep maintaining their phones. They want to sell and forget, and push a new model out the door.
Sad, but true... :(
bedifferent
Mar 27, 01:22 AM
It never ceases to amaze me how MacRumors threads become marred with personal insults and disrespect… and over computers and OS's…
SuperCachetes
Mar 23, 04:23 PM
"Is it your position that Libya represents a larger danger to American assets/security than Iraq? If not, is it your suggestion that America should be involved in every humanitarian crisis with brutal dictators worldwide, or at least those comparable to Libya? If so, why aren't we in North Korea? Why aren't we in any number of African nations?
I think this is a fair point, and it really doesn't matter if it's the United States making the calls, or the United Nations. We are essentially playing "God" with the other nations of the world. My complaint on the first page revolved around the lack of a quantifiable threshold for intervention. We inadvertently play favorites, and the world has every right to wonder about the motivation any time the USA takes action against a sovereign state. We should either stay out of ALL interference, or else put on the damn star-spangled cape and superhero tights and get to business already. Wherever evil is, we must go and fight it! :rolleyes:
Why you keep on referring to Iraq when the scale of action in scope of resources and time isn't remotely on the size of the Iraq invasion, is a complete mystery. If you're attempting to make this Obama's 'Iraq' folly, then you will fail. This will be off the front pages of US papers in terms of US engagement within a week or two.
Quite right. So far the whole Libya affair has a lot more in common with Desert Fox (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Iraq_(December_1998)) than Iraq...
I think this is a fair point, and it really doesn't matter if it's the United States making the calls, or the United Nations. We are essentially playing "God" with the other nations of the world. My complaint on the first page revolved around the lack of a quantifiable threshold for intervention. We inadvertently play favorites, and the world has every right to wonder about the motivation any time the USA takes action against a sovereign state. We should either stay out of ALL interference, or else put on the damn star-spangled cape and superhero tights and get to business already. Wherever evil is, we must go and fight it! :rolleyes:
Why you keep on referring to Iraq when the scale of action in scope of resources and time isn't remotely on the size of the Iraq invasion, is a complete mystery. If you're attempting to make this Obama's 'Iraq' folly, then you will fail. This will be off the front pages of US papers in terms of US engagement within a week or two.
Quite right. So far the whole Libya affair has a lot more in common with Desert Fox (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Iraq_(December_1998)) than Iraq...
Northgrove
Mar 26, 11:21 AM
Damn, this was confusing. I can barely decide between the 24 versions you mentioned. Add Windows 7 Starter, a version meant only for Notebooks. Still only 4 versions.
Windows 7 is available in six editions, and three of those (bolded) are available through normal retail channels.
- Windows 7 Starter
- Windows 7 Home Basic
- Windows 7 Home Premium
- Windows 7 Professional
- Windows 7 Enterprise
- Windows 7 Ultimate
You also need to decide on the architecture before purchase, unlike OS X.
If you count those (they are packaged in different boxes after all), this brings the number up to 11. Starter doesn't come in a 64-bit edition.
Finally, this of course doesn't include the server editions of the Windows 7 kernel.
Windows 7 is available in six editions, and three of those (bolded) are available through normal retail channels.
- Windows 7 Starter
- Windows 7 Home Basic
- Windows 7 Home Premium
- Windows 7 Professional
- Windows 7 Enterprise
- Windows 7 Ultimate
You also need to decide on the architecture before purchase, unlike OS X.
If you count those (they are packaged in different boxes after all), this brings the number up to 11. Starter doesn't come in a 64-bit edition.
Finally, this of course doesn't include the server editions of the Windows 7 kernel.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 12:13 PM
Funny also that we heard a DAMN THING from the media regarding the fact that ONLY CONGRESS can declare war.
What was your beloved Reagan up to in Grenada then? :rolleyes:
What was your beloved Reagan up to in Grenada then? :rolleyes:
iphones4evry1
Jun 8, 10:51 PM
I'm wondering though, what would be the advantages/disadvantages to buying it at Radio Shack vs AT&T vs The Apple Store? Once I have the item purchased, will I notice any sort of difference what-so-ever?
Cheers.
Honestly, it shouldn't make a difference. Whenever I go into an Apple Store to get help/support with my iPhone3G, they always help me, regardless.
I purchased my iPhone3G at one Apple Store, and when it started giving me problems, I took it to a different Apple Store and they replaced it with a brand new phone. Of course, it's possible that because I had bought it at an Apple Store, it mattered, but generally, I've sensed that regardless of where you bought it, because it is an Apple product (obviously, plus your serial number in your settings menu), Apple Stores treat you like any other Apple customer. (I recommend you call your Apple Store and ask them "If I buy it at Radio Shack, will the Apple Store provide full support and replacement, as if I had purchased it at the Apple Store?")
The drawback... if you needed to get support for the phone, you'd have to drive to an Apple Store (that's a long way for you, and none of the AT&T guys around my house (about 10 AT&T stores) know anything about service/support for the iPhone - they just tell me to go to the Apple Store.
Mine began freezing within the first 15 days. Went to ATT and they gave me so much trouble when trying to exchange it. They ended up not wanting to exchange it for me and said they don't take returns ... SO then i went to apple store, even though i bought it from ATT, they quickly opened up a new one and gave me a brand new one, no questions asked (just their standard serial number checks).
Earendil, there you go. Buy it on Apple's website, and if you ever have a problem, you can hop into your car and drive 90min up to the Apple store.
.
Cheers.
Honestly, it shouldn't make a difference. Whenever I go into an Apple Store to get help/support with my iPhone3G, they always help me, regardless.
I purchased my iPhone3G at one Apple Store, and when it started giving me problems, I took it to a different Apple Store and they replaced it with a brand new phone. Of course, it's possible that because I had bought it at an Apple Store, it mattered, but generally, I've sensed that regardless of where you bought it, because it is an Apple product (obviously, plus your serial number in your settings menu), Apple Stores treat you like any other Apple customer. (I recommend you call your Apple Store and ask them "If I buy it at Radio Shack, will the Apple Store provide full support and replacement, as if I had purchased it at the Apple Store?")
The drawback... if you needed to get support for the phone, you'd have to drive to an Apple Store (that's a long way for you, and none of the AT&T guys around my house (about 10 AT&T stores) know anything about service/support for the iPhone - they just tell me to go to the Apple Store.
Mine began freezing within the first 15 days. Went to ATT and they gave me so much trouble when trying to exchange it. They ended up not wanting to exchange it for me and said they don't take returns ... SO then i went to apple store, even though i bought it from ATT, they quickly opened up a new one and gave me a brand new one, no questions asked (just their standard serial number checks).
Earendil, there you go. Buy it on Apple's website, and if you ever have a problem, you can hop into your car and drive 90min up to the Apple store.
.
SWC
Aug 7, 07:36 PM
This is interesting; how do they figure that they can get the service to a mobile phone?
Discuss!
Cheers.
Quicktime. they have had mobile phone support for a while. since h.264 i beleive.
Discuss!
Cheers.
Quicktime. they have had mobile phone support for a while. since h.264 i beleive.
toddybody
Apr 6, 11:10 AM
Shame really, because the Pro in me would like a more color accurate screen, even for a little extra Apple Tax. C'mon Apple! You can release a $3000 laptop, you know you can!
They do:D Speced out 17'' MBP.
Youre totally right though, their notebook displays have been taking backseat to the iOS train. Hell, the iPad3 is gonna have a 2048x1536 display for heavens sake...and they couldnt even give the refreshed 13'' MBP the same res as the months old 13'' MBA. FAIL.
They do:D Speced out 17'' MBP.
Youre totally right though, their notebook displays have been taking backseat to the iOS train. Hell, the iPad3 is gonna have a 2048x1536 display for heavens sake...and they couldnt even give the refreshed 13'' MBP the same res as the months old 13'' MBA. FAIL.
AngryCorgi
Apr 6, 04:16 PM
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
I'll give you some insight into their potential. The desktop i7-2600k has been benchmarked to be roughly equivalent to a 9400m in performance (assuming similar CPU).
i7-2600k GPU clock = 850/1350 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2410m (13" Mac Pro base) GPU clock = 650/1200 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2620m (13" Mac Pro upg) GPU clock = 650/1300 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2537m (theorized 11/13 MBA) GPU clock = 350/900 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2649m (theorized 13 MBA upg) GPU clock = 500/1100 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
As you can see, none of the mobile GPUs run quite as fast as the desktop, but the 13" 2.7GHz upg cpu's comes fairly close. Now, the 2.13 GHz MBA + 320m combo matched or beat out the i7-2620m in 75% of the tests (and only narrowly was defeated in 25%). There is going to be some random inconcistancy regardless, due to driver variances in different apps. The issue here is (and this can be shown in core2 vs. i5/i7 testing on the alienware m11x) the core2 duo really very rarely gets beat by the i5/i7 in gaming/video playback. This is because not many games are single-threaded anymore, and if using 2+ threads, the i5/i7 ULV won't jump the clock speed any. Further, the 2.13GHz was keeping up with and beating a 2.7GHz (27% higher clock!) in that test, because graphics are the bottleneck, not the CPU. Take into account that NONE of the ULV core-i options match the MBP 13" 2.7GHz upg GPU speed and its pretty clear that for graphics-intensive apps, the older 320m would be the way to go. Now for most everything else, the i7-2649m would overtake the core2 2.13GHz. This includes a lot of non-accelerated video playback (high-CPU-overhead).
Something you guys need to be wary of is the 1333MHz memory topic. Likely, Apple will choose to run it down at 1066MHz to conserve battery life. Memory speed hikes = gratuitous battery drain.
I for one am happy Apple is growing with the modern tech, but I hold no illusions as to the benefits/drawbacks of either system.
I'll give you some insight into their potential. The desktop i7-2600k has been benchmarked to be roughly equivalent to a 9400m in performance (assuming similar CPU).
i7-2600k GPU clock = 850/1350 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2410m (13" Mac Pro base) GPU clock = 650/1200 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2620m (13" Mac Pro upg) GPU clock = 650/1300 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2537m (theorized 11/13 MBA) GPU clock = 350/900 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2649m (theorized 13 MBA upg) GPU clock = 500/1100 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
As you can see, none of the mobile GPUs run quite as fast as the desktop, but the 13" 2.7GHz upg cpu's comes fairly close. Now, the 2.13 GHz MBA + 320m combo matched or beat out the i7-2620m in 75% of the tests (and only narrowly was defeated in 25%). There is going to be some random inconcistancy regardless, due to driver variances in different apps. The issue here is (and this can be shown in core2 vs. i5/i7 testing on the alienware m11x) the core2 duo really very rarely gets beat by the i5/i7 in gaming/video playback. This is because not many games are single-threaded anymore, and if using 2+ threads, the i5/i7 ULV won't jump the clock speed any. Further, the 2.13GHz was keeping up with and beating a 2.7GHz (27% higher clock!) in that test, because graphics are the bottleneck, not the CPU. Take into account that NONE of the ULV core-i options match the MBP 13" 2.7GHz upg GPU speed and its pretty clear that for graphics-intensive apps, the older 320m would be the way to go. Now for most everything else, the i7-2649m would overtake the core2 2.13GHz. This includes a lot of non-accelerated video playback (high-CPU-overhead).
Something you guys need to be wary of is the 1333MHz memory topic. Likely, Apple will choose to run it down at 1066MHz to conserve battery life. Memory speed hikes = gratuitous battery drain.
I for one am happy Apple is growing with the modern tech, but I hold no illusions as to the benefits/drawbacks of either system.
Eduardo1971
Apr 6, 10:26 AM
Boy this is great (**deadpan voice**).
Grr.
Want. Refreshed. iMac. NOW!!
:D
Grr.
Want. Refreshed. iMac. NOW!!
:D
ZoomZoomZoom
Aug 8, 02:13 AM
Time Machine looks to be one of those things you never use, but then one day you'll need to use it and you'll be really glad it's here. I don't like the stars and stuff in the background, though. So tacky.
I'm really interested about Spaces. I constantly have loads of windows/applications running around, and having something to manage it all would be awesome.
The new iChat features look very promising. Can't really say the same for Mail/Dashboard/iCal/Spotlight, though - not too impressed with those. Whatever is top secret had better blow all of this stuff out of the water, or else I wouldn't call Leopard "Vista 2.0".
I'm really interested about Spaces. I constantly have loads of windows/applications running around, and having something to manage it all would be awesome.
The new iChat features look very promising. Can't really say the same for Mail/Dashboard/iCal/Spotlight, though - not too impressed with those. Whatever is top secret had better blow all of this stuff out of the water, or else I wouldn't call Leopard "Vista 2.0".
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 :)
doctor-don
Apr 27, 10:45 AM
I thought looking at my location histories was interesting. I, too, have no delusions that I cannot be tracked (cell phone, credit card purchases, etc.) I wonder if all the paranoids realize that any GPS camera encodes that information in the image. Share that photo online and anyone can get the metadata with location of photograph.
You wanna be connected, you can't be truly anonymous.
You wanna be anonymous, sell you computer, smart phone, cut up credit cards, and move to an undocumented shack in the middle of nowhere with no utilities.
Images taken with my camera do not contain GPS data if I have turned off that feature.
You wanna be connected, you can't be truly anonymous.
You wanna be anonymous, sell you computer, smart phone, cut up credit cards, and move to an undocumented shack in the middle of nowhere with no utilities.
Images taken with my camera do not contain GPS data if I have turned off that feature.
Nuck81
Nov 25, 02:46 PM
Need For Speed: Shift looks better than GT5. Especially the in car Cockpit cam. The shadows of GT5 are a fickering jaggy especially in car. I'm hoping they can patch all that out. Not to mention the AI of GT5 is horrible. The cars just stay on the driving line like those old time cars at the amusement park. There is no regard to racing or competition. In Shift, the AI is trying to beat you. They bump you they pass you, they get too aggressive and make mistakes, causing wrecks and spin outs. There is no better console racer in that regard. GT5 AI only makes contact if you are in their line, not that they are actually trying to "beat" you.
The Driving feels good though after I switched the brake/gas to the triggers and off the awkward right stick. GT5 would be better to be marketing as a Driving/Time Trial game. Not a Racing/Competition game. I'll put my time into GT5. and it will be a blast trying to beat my times on the tracks with the different cars, but I won't play the game looking to win races against competition. For that, I'm looking forward to Shift 2 already...
GT5 is a 8.5 for me.
The Driving feels good though after I switched the brake/gas to the triggers and off the awkward right stick. GT5 would be better to be marketing as a Driving/Time Trial game. Not a Racing/Competition game. I'll put my time into GT5. and it will be a blast trying to beat my times on the tracks with the different cars, but I won't play the game looking to win races against competition. For that, I'm looking forward to Shift 2 already...
GT5 is a 8.5 for me.
skunk
Apr 28, 04:52 PM
that would disqualify a lot of past presidents, and disqualify Donald Trump.Surely the comb-over is enough?
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق