Astro7x
Apr 7, 02:54 PM
It's easy. The average person isn't watching blu-rays on a 27 inch or less screen. They get them for their big 50-60 inch TVs. And the sales of Macs are rising despite the lack. True professionals do what is needed to get the job done. Including buying a stand alone drive and 3rd party software if the simple menus in DVD Studio Pro are not enough
I disagree. I would argue that the reason people are not watching Blurays on their computers is because they CAN'T watch them on a computer. Blowing up a regular DVD to full screen on an Apple 27 inch cinema display looks horrible, and the alternative is a highly compressed H264 that looks amazing in comparison. I guarantee that if every Mac shipped with a Bluray drive, I'd have more clients requesting Bluray discs. Clients seem to love DVDs because they are dummy proof. Bluray? The smart ones will have to wait to watch it until they get home where they can put it on their PS3 or something. The others will stick it in their MacBook and then send me an E-mail saying that the DVD they received doesn't work.
Apple has to see financial benefits in not including Bluray in their computers. The professionals will add a drive to their MacPros so they can burn them. But consumers? Apple would no doubt take somewhat of a hit in profit for every Bluray drive that goes into a Mac. They'd also rather sell the HD media through the iTunes Store and make a profit there too. I'll admit it, one of the reasons I haven't switched completely over to buying Bluray Discs is because I can't watch them on my Laptop.
I disagree. I would argue that the reason people are not watching Blurays on their computers is because they CAN'T watch them on a computer. Blowing up a regular DVD to full screen on an Apple 27 inch cinema display looks horrible, and the alternative is a highly compressed H264 that looks amazing in comparison. I guarantee that if every Mac shipped with a Bluray drive, I'd have more clients requesting Bluray discs. Clients seem to love DVDs because they are dummy proof. Bluray? The smart ones will have to wait to watch it until they get home where they can put it on their PS3 or something. The others will stick it in their MacBook and then send me an E-mail saying that the DVD they received doesn't work.
Apple has to see financial benefits in not including Bluray in their computers. The professionals will add a drive to their MacPros so they can burn them. But consumers? Apple would no doubt take somewhat of a hit in profit for every Bluray drive that goes into a Mac. They'd also rather sell the HD media through the iTunes Store and make a profit there too. I'll admit it, one of the reasons I haven't switched completely over to buying Bluray Discs is because I can't watch them on my Laptop.
domness
Mar 26, 09:02 PM
To be fair, 10.7 on my machine is rather stable, however the features in it seem just like a small upgrade like 10.6 was, albeit I don't really like the new features as it seems a bit more dumbed down. The only thing I like is that the latest PHP version comes preinstalled and didn't have any problems installing MySQL as I did with 10.6. 'spose that comes as a bonus.
syklee26
Mar 26, 01:27 AM
I have a feeling Apple won't charge $129 for Lion. It is not going to be easy to tell users that, after charging only $29 for SL, they are back to charging $129.
I feel like Apple may charge around $49 for Lion.
This is unless Jobs is going to be at WWDC with some really awesome secret features in his sleeve, like he did with Leopard.
I feel like Apple may charge around $49 for Lion.
This is unless Jobs is going to be at WWDC with some really awesome secret features in his sleeve, like he did with Leopard.
IceMacMac
Apr 10, 08:55 PM
...and I hate having to render. I hate the various pixel aspect ratios and formats there are, including PAL and NTSC....
Steve Jobs reality distortion field must be supercharged these days, where with a new release of FCP Apple might instantly re-write broadcasting standards and give millions of people new TVs that don't require NTSC and PAL.
You aren't expecting much at all! :D
Steve Jobs reality distortion field must be supercharged these days, where with a new release of FCP Apple might instantly re-write broadcasting standards and give millions of people new TVs that don't require NTSC and PAL.
You aren't expecting much at all! :D
ergle2
Sep 19, 10:43 PM
why shouldnt it?
Ah, a mature, intelligent, well reasoned reply.
Ah, a mature, intelligent, well reasoned reply.
bibbz
Jun 14, 07:21 PM
I called all 3 corporate stores in my county and none of the managers knew about the conference call and none of them know how they're going to handle pre-orders tomorrow morning. They ASSUME it will be the way they pre-sold Evo phones which was with a $50 deposit. But they don't know anything about PIN numbers or anything else the East Texas administration or national is telling you. One manager reported there's a pre-opening conference call scheduled for California stores tomorrow morning. The other 2 didn't even report that to me. But just called my closest store and the manager says the 8:30 conference call tomorrow morning is a weekly event and nothing special for the pre-order instructions. :confused:
My district had our 8:30 conf call for tomorrow at 5pm today. There was the normal RS stuff, then all about the iphone launch. Some stores may not get the info til tomorrow bc it was communicated so late in the afternoon.
I just got off the phone with my local RadioShack. I was told that the PIN would not guarantee you a phone on launch day, but that the chances of getting one are VERY VERY good. I know the manager very well, and trust that whoever told him said the same thing. I'm assuming the calls were done on a regional, if not district level, as opposed to company wide to give people a chance to ask questions, so it seems that most likely personal interpretations came into play, causing the original message, whatever it may have been to get screwed up.
The original call was Area specific and all dms were on it. Then my DM held a call with us immediatly after the big call. Some DM's might hold this info til tomorrow. I have no idea why.
Why on earth would Radio Shack ask anyone
to stand on line tomorrow to get a PIN just
to stand on line again opening day to get a phone
for which you are not guaranteed for?
My point exactly. We wouldn't be doing it if you weren't guaranteed a phone. See my above text, and call your store again in the am.
My district had our 8:30 conf call for tomorrow at 5pm today. There was the normal RS stuff, then all about the iphone launch. Some stores may not get the info til tomorrow bc it was communicated so late in the afternoon.
I just got off the phone with my local RadioShack. I was told that the PIN would not guarantee you a phone on launch day, but that the chances of getting one are VERY VERY good. I know the manager very well, and trust that whoever told him said the same thing. I'm assuming the calls were done on a regional, if not district level, as opposed to company wide to give people a chance to ask questions, so it seems that most likely personal interpretations came into play, causing the original message, whatever it may have been to get screwed up.
The original call was Area specific and all dms were on it. Then my DM held a call with us immediatly after the big call. Some DM's might hold this info til tomorrow. I have no idea why.
Why on earth would Radio Shack ask anyone
to stand on line tomorrow to get a PIN just
to stand on line again opening day to get a phone
for which you are not guaranteed for?
My point exactly. We wouldn't be doing it if you weren't guaranteed a phone. See my above text, and call your store again in the am.
grum
Sep 19, 09:26 AM
All you people who keep whining about "But I want 64 bit!!!" need to step back and think about what possible benefit a 64-bit system will give you. Those of you who need to address more than 4 gigs of RAM are excused. The rest of you, tell me WHY you need 64-bit computing.
When they go Merom I want the MBP's and MB's to have useful, practical features. More ports, user-removable hard drive, better battery life, better video card, stuff like that. I'm waiting just as impatiently as everyone else, but the hype needs to be toned way down.
why does anyone need to justify to you why they want 64-bit computing?
When they go Merom I want the MBP's and MB's to have useful, practical features. More ports, user-removable hard drive, better battery life, better video card, stuff like that. I'm waiting just as impatiently as everyone else, but the hype needs to be toned way down.
why does anyone need to justify to you why they want 64-bit computing?
doctor-don
Apr 27, 10:41 AM
Your phone's memory / storage will be freed up when the update is issued.
Tones2
Apr 11, 01:39 PM
Yeah, like all those trailblazing Android tablets that are 1-2 years ahead of the iPad, right? :rolleyes:
I'm talking PHONE. Wait 2 years or so on the tablets and it'll be the same thing. Apple just got too big of a head start on tablets.
Tony
I'm talking PHONE. Wait 2 years or so on the tablets and it'll be the same thing. Apple just got too big of a head start on tablets.
Tony
leekohler
Mar 3, 10:30 AM
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy
No, but standing on your porch and walking to a restaurant are usually morally indifferent actions.
Lee, first, do me a favor when we correspond with each other, would you? Please don't say "feel" when you mean "believe" or "think." This conversation isn't about emotion. It's about truths and falsehoods.
Second, by the definition of sodomy at the dictionary at Dictionary.Reference.com), same-sex couples do engage in sodomy (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy).
Oh please. Can the condescension. If you know what I meant, there no reason for you to give me a dictionary link. And gee- could you be a little more insulting assuming that I don't know what sodomy is? Wow. Hey Bill, newsflash- I'm an adult- 43 years old. I went to college. I know what words mean, but I guess I should have been more clear and said "anal sex". Next time I will. I also know that people express themselves with words in different ways and that words can have several meanings due to their context. Apparently you do too. And by the way, I did mean "feel", not "believe". Your zeal on this subject is indicative of that.
Third, if the Catholic Church is right, I didn't make the rules. God did.
That's an awfully big "if" Bill- and certainly not one I'm willing to bet my life on. BTW- man made God and the Bible. You guys made your own rules.
Fourth, again, I say what I believe. Others need to chose what they'll do. I'm not their dictator. I'm not their lawgiver. But if they're doing something they shouldn't do, they may get negative consequences here or hereafter. But I won't give them them those consequences. I won't punish anyone for what he does in his bedroom. I don't have the authority to do that. And I don't want Big Brother to spy on same-sex attracted people when they're in bed together. I'm not going to ask my policeman friend Kurt to batter down your bedroom door if I think you're having sex. Moral rightness or wrongness is one thing. Whether it's prudent to outlaw some potentially immoral action is something else.
But you want to make sure Big Brother keeps us from being able to marry. You absolutely do. It's about control for you, Bill. Admit it.
Fifth, sure some opposite-sex sex is dangerous, too. Whether a man or a woman is the recipient, anal sex an cause colon leakage. Anal sex kills epithelial cells and semen suppresses the recipient's immune system. It needs to do that during vaginal sex, too, because if it didn't do it, white blood cells would attack the sperm. Vaginas are well-suited for sex partly because they contain a natural lubricant that rectums don't contain. Does anyone notice a hint of natural teleology there, hmm?
They're called condoms, Bill. Sensible people use them to protect against the very things you describe. Because ya know, we DO know about such things. Oh wait- that's against your Catholic teaching. So much so, that your religion tells people in Africa not to use them, making the AIDS epidemic even worse. Thanks for that.
Sixth, for people who think I'm trying to control them or punish them, I'll put the shoe one the other foot. How many liberals attack Beck personally when they don't even listen to him? How many try to shout down conservatives or to silence them when they say something that the shouters and the would-be silencers hate to hear? How many generalize hastily about people "like me" when they assume that anyone who thinks "gay" sex is immoral is obviously a hateful homophobe? How many would try to limit my free speech by outlawing my so-called hate speech? How many don't distinguish between condemning a person and condemning an action?
Bill- if you were sincere about this, you would support the gay rights movement and support equal marriage rights for gay people. Your examples are silly. Everyone has the right to speak out against opinions they oppose. In none of the examples you used is anyone trying to legally deny anyone anything. People are entitled to their opinions. people are NOT entitled to deny others legal rights simply because they disagree with them. No one is trying to pass a law against Glenn Beck or you. You guys ARE trying to pass laws against us.
No, but standing on your porch and walking to a restaurant are usually morally indifferent actions.
Lee, first, do me a favor when we correspond with each other, would you? Please don't say "feel" when you mean "believe" or "think." This conversation isn't about emotion. It's about truths and falsehoods.
Second, by the definition of sodomy at the dictionary at Dictionary.Reference.com), same-sex couples do engage in sodomy (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy).
Oh please. Can the condescension. If you know what I meant, there no reason for you to give me a dictionary link. And gee- could you be a little more insulting assuming that I don't know what sodomy is? Wow. Hey Bill, newsflash- I'm an adult- 43 years old. I went to college. I know what words mean, but I guess I should have been more clear and said "anal sex". Next time I will. I also know that people express themselves with words in different ways and that words can have several meanings due to their context. Apparently you do too. And by the way, I did mean "feel", not "believe". Your zeal on this subject is indicative of that.
Third, if the Catholic Church is right, I didn't make the rules. God did.
That's an awfully big "if" Bill- and certainly not one I'm willing to bet my life on. BTW- man made God and the Bible. You guys made your own rules.
Fourth, again, I say what I believe. Others need to chose what they'll do. I'm not their dictator. I'm not their lawgiver. But if they're doing something they shouldn't do, they may get negative consequences here or hereafter. But I won't give them them those consequences. I won't punish anyone for what he does in his bedroom. I don't have the authority to do that. And I don't want Big Brother to spy on same-sex attracted people when they're in bed together. I'm not going to ask my policeman friend Kurt to batter down your bedroom door if I think you're having sex. Moral rightness or wrongness is one thing. Whether it's prudent to outlaw some potentially immoral action is something else.
But you want to make sure Big Brother keeps us from being able to marry. You absolutely do. It's about control for you, Bill. Admit it.
Fifth, sure some opposite-sex sex is dangerous, too. Whether a man or a woman is the recipient, anal sex an cause colon leakage. Anal sex kills epithelial cells and semen suppresses the recipient's immune system. It needs to do that during vaginal sex, too, because if it didn't do it, white blood cells would attack the sperm. Vaginas are well-suited for sex partly because they contain a natural lubricant that rectums don't contain. Does anyone notice a hint of natural teleology there, hmm?
They're called condoms, Bill. Sensible people use them to protect against the very things you describe. Because ya know, we DO know about such things. Oh wait- that's against your Catholic teaching. So much so, that your religion tells people in Africa not to use them, making the AIDS epidemic even worse. Thanks for that.
Sixth, for people who think I'm trying to control them or punish them, I'll put the shoe one the other foot. How many liberals attack Beck personally when they don't even listen to him? How many try to shout down conservatives or to silence them when they say something that the shouters and the would-be silencers hate to hear? How many generalize hastily about people "like me" when they assume that anyone who thinks "gay" sex is immoral is obviously a hateful homophobe? How many would try to limit my free speech by outlawing my so-called hate speech? How many don't distinguish between condemning a person and condemning an action?
Bill- if you were sincere about this, you would support the gay rights movement and support equal marriage rights for gay people. Your examples are silly. Everyone has the right to speak out against opinions they oppose. In none of the examples you used is anyone trying to legally deny anyone anything. People are entitled to their opinions. people are NOT entitled to deny others legal rights simply because they disagree with them. No one is trying to pass a law against Glenn Beck or you. You guys ARE trying to pass laws against us.
Unspeaked
Nov 29, 11:10 AM
You posted a list of artist people will start to illegally copy if Universal starts to tax iPods....
Hey, what they do with the list is their business...
All I was doing was letting the thread know the breadth of Universal's stable!
;)
Hey, what they do with the list is their business...
All I was doing was letting the thread know the breadth of Universal's stable!
;)
Thex1138
Apr 19, 07:37 PM
It's a Samsung Galaxy Tab.
Ridiculous nit-picking. http://kr.engadget.com/tag/samsung+galaxy+tab/ it's in Korean, but I'm sure you get the idea.
@kdarling: look up.. up... 4 posts up.. There you go.
I saw that too.. a chick in our office loves her GaxTab... but that's a definite iBooks cloner...
I also had to joke about her reason for buying it,.... to back up her PC files and transport them from office to home n vice-versa... ;)
Ridiculous nit-picking. http://kr.engadget.com/tag/samsung+galaxy+tab/ it's in Korean, but I'm sure you get the idea.
@kdarling: look up.. up... 4 posts up.. There you go.
I saw that too.. a chick in our office loves her GaxTab... but that's a definite iBooks cloner...
I also had to joke about her reason for buying it,.... to back up her PC files and transport them from office to home n vice-versa... ;)
rdowns
Mar 24, 12:43 PM
The right pro-war machine is all but gone. The policies haven't changed, but the party color of the president has.
Fixed that for you.
Fixed that for you.
wonderspark
Apr 5, 05:18 PM
So many things that FCP / FCS can improve upon here - they need the equivalent of Adobe's Mercury Engine, leveraging Grand Central, QTX, and a full Cocoa build for all the FCS apps...
At present we have to re-encode a lot of our footage (7D / Minicam etc), and you don't need to do that in Premiere, it just plays on the timeline - however editing in that is quite frankly an exercise in sheer frustration and strange bugs.
Come on, please be true! The days of pressing CMD+R I would love to see over! Especially when you are rendering an audio effect that actual renders in a microsecond, yet won't play realtime... Sigh.
Personally, I love CS5, even on the Mac Pro with 5870/GTX285. Hopefully this won't jinx myself, but I've had no bugs or frustrations, and I edit full HD movies with it.
I'm looking forward to this version of FCS, because I've only played around in it with others' systems, and it didn't blow my skirt up. It will be nice to have both suites, if the new FCS proves worthy. I know a lot of FCS users, and I look forward to joining them, so get this thing right, Apple.
At present we have to re-encode a lot of our footage (7D / Minicam etc), and you don't need to do that in Premiere, it just plays on the timeline - however editing in that is quite frankly an exercise in sheer frustration and strange bugs.
Come on, please be true! The days of pressing CMD+R I would love to see over! Especially when you are rendering an audio effect that actual renders in a microsecond, yet won't play realtime... Sigh.
Personally, I love CS5, even on the Mac Pro with 5870/GTX285. Hopefully this won't jinx myself, but I've had no bugs or frustrations, and I edit full HD movies with it.
I'm looking forward to this version of FCS, because I've only played around in it with others' systems, and it didn't blow my skirt up. It will be nice to have both suites, if the new FCS proves worthy. I know a lot of FCS users, and I look forward to joining them, so get this thing right, Apple.
grue
Apr 12, 01:26 AM
Oh, and here's one I just ran into that reminds me:
Is it so much to ask to have it go to and from the background cleanly? Christ in a cartoon, you'd think backgrounding the application is a huge exercise in resource allocation by how long it takes to bring back all the windows sometimes, if they reappear at all. FCP is bad enough about this sometimes, but Compressor is even worse.
Minor, sure, but annoying as hell.
Is it so much to ask to have it go to and from the background cleanly? Christ in a cartoon, you'd think backgrounding the application is a huge exercise in resource allocation by how long it takes to bring back all the windows sometimes, if they reappear at all. FCP is bad enough about this sometimes, but Compressor is even worse.
Minor, sure, but annoying as hell.
Peace
Aug 5, 05:35 PM
For legal uses, BitTorrent is awesome. I tried to download NeoOffice from their website, i was getting 20K. Over BitTorrent..... almost my max bandwidth. It was sweet. BitTorrent in an OS has many great possibilities.
BitTorrent is great if you're using a cable modem or DSL with almost equal upload/download ratios.But I'm using a Satellite..Downloads are great but the uploads are only 256k
BitTorrent is great if you're using a cable modem or DSL with almost equal upload/download ratios.But I'm using a Satellite..Downloads are great but the uploads are only 256k
SevenInchScrew
Sep 1, 11:38 AM
Time will tell i suppose, but it just doesnt make sense for them to gimp standard cars for no reason.
I think "gimping" the Standard™ cars is the wrong way to look at it. To me, it looks like they just chose to spend A LOT of effort modeling the Premium™ cars, and then just reuse what they had from before for the Standard™ cars.
Ideally, we would have 1,000 Premium™ cars, but that would either take a staff of about 500 people, or we'd be waiting for GT5 until 2015. Compromises had to be made. They could have done all 1,000 cars at an average detail level, or they could do a handful of them VERY high-res, and reuse some older cars. They obviously chose the 2nd option.
I think "gimping" the Standard™ cars is the wrong way to look at it. To me, it looks like they just chose to spend A LOT of effort modeling the Premium™ cars, and then just reuse what they had from before for the Standard™ cars.
Ideally, we would have 1,000 Premium™ cars, but that would either take a staff of about 500 people, or we'd be waiting for GT5 until 2015. Compromises had to be made. They could have done all 1,000 cars at an average detail level, or they could do a handful of them VERY high-res, and reuse some older cars. They obviously chose the 2nd option.
gugy
Aug 11, 02:22 PM
All carriers suck in one way or another. If you are unhappy with one you just switch to another. There is a constant migration from carrier to carrier because of this...
The carriers dont give a crap if you leave them because there is always a group of unhappy consumers who hate the competitor and are ready to move to their service.
This is why it takes forever to cancell a cellular account, they will try as hard as possible to not let you or talk you out of it. Its their only ammunition. My wife and I spent 2 hours on the phone with Sprint last week trying to cancel our extra phone we usually give our nanny. They were giving the most rediculous excuses as to why we shoud keep it when we no longer had any use for it. They wouldnt take no for an answer. It wasnt until we threatend to cancel all three of our accounts that they "graciously" cancelled the account.
This is also why there are such high cancelation fees. apparently people are willing to pay hundreds of dollars to get away from any of the providers...
Bottom line; it doesnt matter what provider it would be, youll be screwed anyway.
It's true. I had Cingular and I hated it. Now I have Verizon, it's sucks but better than Cingular for my circumstances.
Hopefully, Apple will have a solution that will help us say goodbye to all those lame carriers.
The carriers dont give a crap if you leave them because there is always a group of unhappy consumers who hate the competitor and are ready to move to their service.
This is why it takes forever to cancell a cellular account, they will try as hard as possible to not let you or talk you out of it. Its their only ammunition. My wife and I spent 2 hours on the phone with Sprint last week trying to cancel our extra phone we usually give our nanny. They were giving the most rediculous excuses as to why we shoud keep it when we no longer had any use for it. They wouldnt take no for an answer. It wasnt until we threatend to cancel all three of our accounts that they "graciously" cancelled the account.
This is also why there are such high cancelation fees. apparently people are willing to pay hundreds of dollars to get away from any of the providers...
Bottom line; it doesnt matter what provider it would be, youll be screwed anyway.
It's true. I had Cingular and I hated it. Now I have Verizon, it's sucks but better than Cingular for my circumstances.
Hopefully, Apple will have a solution that will help us say goodbye to all those lame carriers.
Platform
Sep 13, 09:13 AM
Most people run more than one app at once.
Most are multi-threaded though and if I am not incorrect it doesn't matter for Photoshop if there are two or 72 cores...;)
Most are multi-threaded though and if I am not incorrect it doesn't matter for Photoshop if there are two or 72 cores...;)
milo
Aug 17, 09:21 AM
You're right. I'm extremely unimpressed that the fastest xeon only days old is actually slower mhz for mhz than a G5 that is pushing 4 year old technology. Really sad.
But overall it's not. Whenever you change chips, you'll probably always find a benchmark that favors the old one. Just because one app isn't faster doesn't mean the new chip is slower.
But it's not faster. Slower actually than the G5 at some apps. What's everyone looking at anyway? I'm pretty unimpressed. Other than Adobe's usage of cache (AE is a cache lover and will use all of it, hence the faster performance).
But the actual xeon processors are only as fast as the G5 processors. Look at the average specs... the 2.66 machines are only a teeny bit faster than the G5s except in a few apps like filemaker. But not in the biggies like Final Cut Pro where it actually appears that mhz for mhz the G5 is a faster machine hands down!
What are you talking about? The xeon is faster in every native benchmark, the only exception is one render where the slower xeon tied the G5. If you do indeed look at the average specs, the xeons blow away the G5.
Looks like the Xeons got killed by the G5 in Word in their tests.
Because it's running under rosetta, ram has nothing to do with it.
It's odd, seeing as Mac's are still the choice for many musicians that some kind of specs are never given that would be of interest to musicians. The released figures don't do much for me. I'd like to know the polyphony improvements say for Kontakt under both systems in Digital Performer 5.
There have been Logic benchmarks elsewhere, and they're pretty impressive. 1.4-1.5x improvements, pretty nice considering how fast the quad is already for audio plugins.
But overall it's not. Whenever you change chips, you'll probably always find a benchmark that favors the old one. Just because one app isn't faster doesn't mean the new chip is slower.
But it's not faster. Slower actually than the G5 at some apps. What's everyone looking at anyway? I'm pretty unimpressed. Other than Adobe's usage of cache (AE is a cache lover and will use all of it, hence the faster performance).
But the actual xeon processors are only as fast as the G5 processors. Look at the average specs... the 2.66 machines are only a teeny bit faster than the G5s except in a few apps like filemaker. But not in the biggies like Final Cut Pro where it actually appears that mhz for mhz the G5 is a faster machine hands down!
What are you talking about? The xeon is faster in every native benchmark, the only exception is one render where the slower xeon tied the G5. If you do indeed look at the average specs, the xeons blow away the G5.
Looks like the Xeons got killed by the G5 in Word in their tests.
Because it's running under rosetta, ram has nothing to do with it.
It's odd, seeing as Mac's are still the choice for many musicians that some kind of specs are never given that would be of interest to musicians. The released figures don't do much for me. I'd like to know the polyphony improvements say for Kontakt under both systems in Digital Performer 5.
There have been Logic benchmarks elsewhere, and they're pretty impressive. 1.4-1.5x improvements, pretty nice considering how fast the quad is already for audio plugins.
SevenInchScrew
Dec 9, 06:38 PM
GT5 is a game for people who love cars. Not people who only love fast cars. People who love all cars.
But, I DO love all types of cars. I just don't think they all have a place in a RACING game.
I'm sure you'd be happy if everyone started with a Zonda in their garage, but for people who like to drive something fresh and fun the exhaustive list in GT5 is perfect.
The game doesn't have to be only 700hp exotics, that isn't what I'm saying. There have been PLENTY of wildly varied cars throughout history that would be fun to drive, on a track, in a racing game. The VW K�belwagen and Citro�n DS, for example, aren't some of them.
But, I DO love all types of cars. I just don't think they all have a place in a RACING game.
I'm sure you'd be happy if everyone started with a Zonda in their garage, but for people who like to drive something fresh and fun the exhaustive list in GT5 is perfect.
The game doesn't have to be only 700hp exotics, that isn't what I'm saying. There have been PLENTY of wildly varied cars throughout history that would be fun to drive, on a track, in a racing game. The VW K�belwagen and Citro�n DS, for example, aren't some of them.
skellener
Mar 31, 06:47 PM
Google should have included a clause that allows anyone to re-install raw/clean Android on their phone/tablet once they have it. Basically wipe off any crud the carriers decide to install on it.
In fact, that should be the option when you first launch your device when you get it. Boot to Google Android, or Carrier/Manufacturer Android. Should be included on every device.
In fact, that should be the option when you first launch your device when you get it. Boot to Google Android, or Carrier/Manufacturer Android. Should be included on every device.
mobilehavoc
Apr 6, 02:36 PM
Your BMW looks a lot like a Yugo to me.
I kid, I kid!
:D
I don't actually drive a BMW anyway...just an Audi
I kid, I kid!
:D
I don't actually drive a BMW anyway...just an Audi
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 :)
No comments:
Post a Comment