apb3
Aug 16, 11:47 AM
Not hard for Apple to stop this with something like a digital signature allowing your pod to only sync with your library
Oh great! more DRM....I don't think that's the way to go from a PR standpoint as far as Apple is concerned and in terms of what makes iTunes and the iPod sell so well ... and not as easy as you make it seem. Also, I think this may iimpact one of the features I use most, Lib sharing at home.
Agreed but this feature could be used for you to listen to your friends ipod music if they have a song they want you to hear OR in the work place. You should be in range for at least 8 hrs of the day :p
Shared music libs already address this. And again, the cost/benefit analysis of what we need to expend to do this power-wise, price-wise, PR-wise, etc... (in my opinion) just don't cut it.
Oh great! more DRM....I don't think that's the way to go from a PR standpoint as far as Apple is concerned and in terms of what makes iTunes and the iPod sell so well ... and not as easy as you make it seem. Also, I think this may iimpact one of the features I use most, Lib sharing at home.
Agreed but this feature could be used for you to listen to your friends ipod music if they have a song they want you to hear OR in the work place. You should be in range for at least 8 hrs of the day :p
Shared music libs already address this. And again, the cost/benefit analysis of what we need to expend to do this power-wise, price-wise, PR-wise, etc... (in my opinion) just don't cut it.
akkkmed
Jan 8, 10:42 AM
2008 Pontiac G6. Lease is up soon...
(Not my picture)
http://carphotos.cardomain.com/ride_images/3/3048/3101/32619050002_large.jpg
(Not my picture)
http://carphotos.cardomain.com/ride_images/3/3048/3101/32619050002_large.jpg
vnle
Nov 27, 12:05 PM
Black Friday Goodies :D
Samsung LCD TV 40"
Black Wii
WD MyBook Elite 1.5 TB
Ikea Mount
Samsung LCD TV 40"
Black Wii
WD MyBook Elite 1.5 TB
Ikea Mount
weespeed
Apr 26, 08:16 PM
This may get sticky if MS loses the 'App Store" trademark dispute.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/04/22/microsoft-patents-apps-that-let-you-buy-things-ballmer-to-go-on
The patent here:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=7925548.PN.&OS=PN/7925548&RS=PN/7925548
According to the patent just granted to MS that was applied for in Microsoft came up with the idea of apps that let you buy things.
This is crazy.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/04/22/microsoft-patents-apps-that-let-you-buy-things-ballmer-to-go-on
The patent here:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=7925548.PN.&OS=PN/7925548&RS=PN/7925548
According to the patent just granted to MS that was applied for in Microsoft came up with the idea of apps that let you buy things.
This is crazy.
poppe
Aug 24, 11:18 PM
i was looking at dell and could not make one comparable.
thanks i'll check cnet
http://reviews.cnet.com/WinBook_Jiv_Mini/4505-3118_7-31954701.html?tag=viddet
That is some thing like the mac mini. if you watch the video it also mentions another small form factor PC.
http://reviews.cnet.com/4566-3118_7-0.html?filter=1101504_13147765_&tag=dir - Hope this helps!! -- 107 small form factore PC's to choose and compare, including G4 mini and Intel mini
thanks i'll check cnet
http://reviews.cnet.com/WinBook_Jiv_Mini/4505-3118_7-31954701.html?tag=viddet
That is some thing like the mac mini. if you watch the video it also mentions another small form factor PC.
http://reviews.cnet.com/4566-3118_7-0.html?filter=1101504_13147765_&tag=dir - Hope this helps!! -- 107 small form factore PC's to choose and compare, including G4 mini and Intel mini
dguisinger
Aug 7, 08:08 AM
I just find that the Windows Firewall gets in the way. Incredibly irritating after a while...
The OS X firewall is perfect IMHO. I've never had problems with it blocking apps I don't want it to block...
Probably because most apps that use non-standard ports are server apps (most likely not something you are using) or games (most likely not ported to OS X)
I find it comes in quite handy; I've had it many times where I didn't know an application goes online and reports something to the manufacturer and it pops up a note asking if i want to allow the program to do that. Thats not getting in the way, its keeping the programmers honest.
Sure, the firewall does its job, but users don't know how to tweak it, they barely know how to turn on a computer. A firewall that gives them feedback is a great help to helping someone understand the vulnerabilities of a system... i bet most people dont know how many programs report information about you back to the manufacturer....
The OS X firewall is perfect IMHO. I've never had problems with it blocking apps I don't want it to block...
Probably because most apps that use non-standard ports are server apps (most likely not something you are using) or games (most likely not ported to OS X)
I find it comes in quite handy; I've had it many times where I didn't know an application goes online and reports something to the manufacturer and it pops up a note asking if i want to allow the program to do that. Thats not getting in the way, its keeping the programmers honest.
Sure, the firewall does its job, but users don't know how to tweak it, they barely know how to turn on a computer. A firewall that gives them feedback is a great help to helping someone understand the vulnerabilities of a system... i bet most people dont know how many programs report information about you back to the manufacturer....
macthetiger85
Apr 26, 01:12 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Here we go again
"what about windows being generic?!"
-well Microsoft isn't actually selling window panes
"app store is generic"
-if it were 'mobile software store' or 'application store', it would definitely be generic, but 'app store' is arguable
"this is stupid, apple being such a girl"
-they've built a name with 'app store', and it would be to the competitions advantage to use it. Otherwise, they would just use something else.
"apple didn't invent the word app"
-well they made it popular
"nuh-uh, I've been using app, since blah blah..."
-congratulations (but we're talking about millions, not 1 and a few friends)
Actually "windows OS" was a generic term to describe GUI OS - that is an OS that uses windows on a desktop for organization and simplicity. Yes, Microsoft Windows has nothing to do with window panes but in this case, they did trademark a generic term with the exact same meaning.
Here we go again
"what about windows being generic?!"
-well Microsoft isn't actually selling window panes
"app store is generic"
-if it were 'mobile software store' or 'application store', it would definitely be generic, but 'app store' is arguable
"this is stupid, apple being such a girl"
-they've built a name with 'app store', and it would be to the competitions advantage to use it. Otherwise, they would just use something else.
"apple didn't invent the word app"
-well they made it popular
"nuh-uh, I've been using app, since blah blah..."
-congratulations (but we're talking about millions, not 1 and a few friends)
Actually "windows OS" was a generic term to describe GUI OS - that is an OS that uses windows on a desktop for organization and simplicity. Yes, Microsoft Windows has nothing to do with window panes but in this case, they did trademark a generic term with the exact same meaning.
elppa
Jan 11, 04:56 PM
Intriguing.
Maybe the �Air� branding is taking a que from the sucess of one of Apple's international partners, O2.
It's certainly something different from the obvious nano/mini/thin branding that people are expecting.
Maybe the �Air� branding is taking a que from the sucess of one of Apple's international partners, O2.
It's certainly something different from the obvious nano/mini/thin branding that people are expecting.
poppe
Aug 27, 01:08 AM
I still think FrontRow need to be improved drastically before it goes to a Media Center like thing. Great first attempt, but I still thing there is room for improvement...
TerryJ
Jul 14, 08:25 AM
As purely a data storage format, obviously Blu-ray has the potential to store more data than HD DVD.
However, as someone who has been following the whole BD vs. HD DVD consumer video format war, and as someone who has bought an HD DVD player (and, until recently, had a BD video player on order), at this (albeit early) stage of the game, HD DVD is the superior video format.
HD DVD has 30gb dual layer discs available (almost all the latest video releases on HD DVD are 30gb dual layer.) There are many more titles available for HD DVD right now (probably because it's been out longer and the discs themselves are easier to manufacture.) HD DVD uses a more efficient codec (Microsoft's VC-1, which is akin to H.264, in that it's much much more efficient than MPEG-2.) HD DVD titles have either Dolby Digital Plus (a higher bit-rate multichannel audio codec) and Dolby TruHD (a lossless multichannel audio codec).
BD only has 25gb single layer discs available now. Apparently the 50gb dual layer discs are hard to manufacture and the yields are not ready for prime time. No BD retail video discs are above 25gb single layer. No timetable for 50gb discs has been announced. The video is MPEG-2, meaning it takes up more space on the disc. And, the most recent BD releases all suffer from more MPEG artifacts than any HD DVD releases. BD audio is either standard Dolby Digital or space consuming uncompressed PCM audio (which sucks up even more disc space, leaving even less for video.)
The current Samsung BD player actually has the same (Broadcom) chip that the current Toshiba HD DVD player has in terms of outputing video... and it only outputs 1080i. The Samsung player tacks on another (Faroudja) chip to deinterlace it, so it outputs 1080p (so BD can say "we output 1080p!"), except, that chip apparently stinks and makes the picture somewhat soft. In reality, any HDTV worth its salt can easily deinterlace 1080i signals, so the whole "we output 1080p" is a false advantage anyway. Both BD and HD DVD discs store the video as 1080p, by the way.
So, what you have, on the video front, BD has a smaller capacity disk with less efficient video and audio codecs (that look and sound worse). And it is TWICE the price ($500 vs. $1000). And has less titles. And is late.
If you read any reports on BD video quality vs. HD DVD video quality on boards like AVSforum.com, HD DVD beats BD hands down.
Who knows how this video format war will shake out, but Blu-ray is way behind right now.
-Terry
However, as someone who has been following the whole BD vs. HD DVD consumer video format war, and as someone who has bought an HD DVD player (and, until recently, had a BD video player on order), at this (albeit early) stage of the game, HD DVD is the superior video format.
HD DVD has 30gb dual layer discs available (almost all the latest video releases on HD DVD are 30gb dual layer.) There are many more titles available for HD DVD right now (probably because it's been out longer and the discs themselves are easier to manufacture.) HD DVD uses a more efficient codec (Microsoft's VC-1, which is akin to H.264, in that it's much much more efficient than MPEG-2.) HD DVD titles have either Dolby Digital Plus (a higher bit-rate multichannel audio codec) and Dolby TruHD (a lossless multichannel audio codec).
BD only has 25gb single layer discs available now. Apparently the 50gb dual layer discs are hard to manufacture and the yields are not ready for prime time. No BD retail video discs are above 25gb single layer. No timetable for 50gb discs has been announced. The video is MPEG-2, meaning it takes up more space on the disc. And, the most recent BD releases all suffer from more MPEG artifacts than any HD DVD releases. BD audio is either standard Dolby Digital or space consuming uncompressed PCM audio (which sucks up even more disc space, leaving even less for video.)
The current Samsung BD player actually has the same (Broadcom) chip that the current Toshiba HD DVD player has in terms of outputing video... and it only outputs 1080i. The Samsung player tacks on another (Faroudja) chip to deinterlace it, so it outputs 1080p (so BD can say "we output 1080p!"), except, that chip apparently stinks and makes the picture somewhat soft. In reality, any HDTV worth its salt can easily deinterlace 1080i signals, so the whole "we output 1080p" is a false advantage anyway. Both BD and HD DVD discs store the video as 1080p, by the way.
So, what you have, on the video front, BD has a smaller capacity disk with less efficient video and audio codecs (that look and sound worse). And it is TWICE the price ($500 vs. $1000). And has less titles. And is late.
If you read any reports on BD video quality vs. HD DVD video quality on boards like AVSforum.com, HD DVD beats BD hands down.
Who knows how this video format war will shake out, but Blu-ray is way behind right now.
-Terry
oracle_ab
Apr 27, 10:15 AM
However, using the term app store to relate to any type of software market will lead to confusion between generic app stores and Apple's App Store - which makes it a trademark violation.
No one is going to confuse MS Windows with the windows in your house.
Depends, really. "Windows" can be relevant to an OS or GUIs where both relate to computers, but one can be more specific in saying that an OS underlies a GUI, thus they're two different aspects of software. One could be talking about GUIs and still say "My computer has windows." Point being, how much grey area is general vs. narrowing down to the nitty-gritty of what the trademark involves? That being said, I'm saying Apple should be granted a trademark on "App Store," but folks like us shouldn't be in violation of anything if we refer to others' stores as "app stores." That is, laypersons can do this, but two companies cannot. Thing is, if the specifics of Apple's trademark request involves a digital/electronic store-front for selling digital applications, blah blah blah, it's fine that other business shouldn't refer to theirs w/ any form of that term w/in their digital/electronic store-fronts. BlackBerry Appworld is different enough from Apple's "App Store," where Amazon's "appstore" is just too close to Apple's.
Just like Knight, I think we're saying the same thing, but maybe we're just coming across from different poles. That's not to say that we're in agreement on whether Apple should or shouldn't have the term trademarked, but that we understand what's all involved with trademarks, their usage, etc.
No one is going to confuse MS Windows with the windows in your house.
Depends, really. "Windows" can be relevant to an OS or GUIs where both relate to computers, but one can be more specific in saying that an OS underlies a GUI, thus they're two different aspects of software. One could be talking about GUIs and still say "My computer has windows." Point being, how much grey area is general vs. narrowing down to the nitty-gritty of what the trademark involves? That being said, I'm saying Apple should be granted a trademark on "App Store," but folks like us shouldn't be in violation of anything if we refer to others' stores as "app stores." That is, laypersons can do this, but two companies cannot. Thing is, if the specifics of Apple's trademark request involves a digital/electronic store-front for selling digital applications, blah blah blah, it's fine that other business shouldn't refer to theirs w/ any form of that term w/in their digital/electronic store-fronts. BlackBerry Appworld is different enough from Apple's "App Store," where Amazon's "appstore" is just too close to Apple's.
Just like Knight, I think we're saying the same thing, but maybe we're just coming across from different poles. That's not to say that we're in agreement on whether Apple should or shouldn't have the term trademarked, but that we understand what's all involved with trademarks, their usage, etc.
crashnburn
Mar 26, 03:51 PM
Awesome news, I recomend the ATI 5870. It can be found for only $200 and it more than holds it's own against the latest and greatest from Nvidia and ATI. It's only 6 percent slower than a 6950. The 6950 on the other hand can be flashed to a 6970 quite easily but it costs abot $260.
Where can I see a comparative of all cards? Or do a comparison of select cards?
Um, I believe credit for this should actually go to netkas:
http://netkas.org/?p=679
He (with rominator) reported over a week ago that the 10.6.6 build with the ThunderBook Pro's can drive PC Radeon 6xxx cards as is.
Is this confirmed or still ...?
this is AWESOME news for all the hackintosh people out there.
Although, my Radeon HD5570 isn't on this 'supported' list, I still got it to work... all resolutions including quartz extreme enabled. :D:D:D
Nice :) What version of OS are you using?
Where I see ThunderBolt being useful is in scenarios where you want to use it at your desk and have all the advantages of a desktop machine. So you put your MBP on your desk and connect via ThunderBolt:
* A drive array with several 3.5" drives, possibly in RAID configuration
* An external video card that is driving a 30" 2560x1600 display with two 1200 x 1920 displays (rotated) on each side of the 30"
You wouldn't bother to use the laptop display for this configuration (I wouldn't at least).
Though, ThunderBolt supposedly allows for daisy-chaining at least 2 monitors, in which case you could run off the laptop's internal video card, but then you need compatible monitors that allow daisy-chaining.
Personally I'd love to see external video cards compatible with ThunderBolt (I use my laptop mostly at my desk), or possibly an enclosure you can put a regular desktop video card in.
I'd like external video cards as well :)
Macrumors needs to seriously consider using this tonymacx86 as a reliable source. As I stated before he gets info from other sources, and this is often highlighted by others
See this quote ex Netkas...
6950 AND 6970 DO NOT WORK IN ANY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE VERSION OF OSX FOR MACS OR HACKS !!!!
THE NEWS STORIES THAT WERE LIFTED FROM HERE ARE INCORRECT !!!!!
DON'T BUY A 69XX CARD UNLESS YOU CAN AFFORD TO WAIT A FEW WEEKS (OR MONTHS) TO USE IT IN OSX !!!!!
OK, done my part. And if you still think they work, go ask your buddy "Tony" how to make them work.
Sad but macrumors - please take more care.
Hmm.. Interesting conflict of information.
Where can I see a comparative of all cards? Or do a comparison of select cards?
Um, I believe credit for this should actually go to netkas:
http://netkas.org/?p=679
He (with rominator) reported over a week ago that the 10.6.6 build with the ThunderBook Pro's can drive PC Radeon 6xxx cards as is.
Is this confirmed or still ...?
this is AWESOME news for all the hackintosh people out there.
Although, my Radeon HD5570 isn't on this 'supported' list, I still got it to work... all resolutions including quartz extreme enabled. :D:D:D
Nice :) What version of OS are you using?
Where I see ThunderBolt being useful is in scenarios where you want to use it at your desk and have all the advantages of a desktop machine. So you put your MBP on your desk and connect via ThunderBolt:
* A drive array with several 3.5" drives, possibly in RAID configuration
* An external video card that is driving a 30" 2560x1600 display with two 1200 x 1920 displays (rotated) on each side of the 30"
You wouldn't bother to use the laptop display for this configuration (I wouldn't at least).
Though, ThunderBolt supposedly allows for daisy-chaining at least 2 monitors, in which case you could run off the laptop's internal video card, but then you need compatible monitors that allow daisy-chaining.
Personally I'd love to see external video cards compatible with ThunderBolt (I use my laptop mostly at my desk), or possibly an enclosure you can put a regular desktop video card in.
I'd like external video cards as well :)
Macrumors needs to seriously consider using this tonymacx86 as a reliable source. As I stated before he gets info from other sources, and this is often highlighted by others
See this quote ex Netkas...
6950 AND 6970 DO NOT WORK IN ANY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE VERSION OF OSX FOR MACS OR HACKS !!!!
THE NEWS STORIES THAT WERE LIFTED FROM HERE ARE INCORRECT !!!!!
DON'T BUY A 69XX CARD UNLESS YOU CAN AFFORD TO WAIT A FEW WEEKS (OR MONTHS) TO USE IT IN OSX !!!!!
OK, done my part. And if you still think they work, go ask your buddy "Tony" how to make them work.
Sad but macrumors - please take more care.
Hmm.. Interesting conflict of information.
iTravis
Apr 26, 12:48 PM
Yes Amazon jump on the "it's generic" bandwagon. :rolleyes:
Please lets just keep this thread about the response and not "But how is it generic. . ." "Apple didn't create App. . ." "Well Amazon is right it's generic. . ."
I don't think it's generic that's my opinion and I'm sticking to it. I'm moving on.
Please lets just keep this thread about the response and not "But how is it generic. . ." "Apple didn't create App. . ." "Well Amazon is right it's generic. . ."
I don't think it's generic that's my opinion and I'm sticking to it. I'm moving on.
AlphaDogg
Feb 18, 05:07 PM
I want that poster!!! Where did you get it?
Which poster? The SJ poster?
Which poster? The SJ poster?
MacRumors
Apr 21, 11:09 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/21/senator-asks-apple-about-location-tracking-issues-as-experts-weigh-in/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/21/120742-ios_gps_location.jpg
the lack amp; white patterns
Black amp; White Folk Floral
lack and white patterns
Black amp; White Prints
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/21/120742-ios_gps_location.jpg
dextertangocci
Jul 14, 02:20 AM
HD-DVD all the way.
Why? It has worse specs than Blu-ray...
Why? It has worse specs than Blu-ray...
kainjow
Aug 16, 02:08 PM
The only wireless I want to see in an iPod is Bluetooth for wireless syncing to your computer, and that could be done with a special dock. Other than that, it's pointless and just sucks battery power.
Mike84
Apr 26, 02:29 PM
You make it sound as though this is such an obvious distinction that Apple could never get a trademark for "app store". But apparently this argument is not so strong in trademark law as Apple actually has the trademark already. If that were not the case how could they sue another entity for trademark infringement?
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
It was.
Can you please show me the trademark that was granted to Apple for App Store by the USPTO? You won't be able to find it because their trademark has not been approved. An opposition to their application was filed, if you didn't catch that from the text.
Trademark is having property rights in a trade name. Apple, or any other company, can file to protect a trademark they have been using and the USPTO decides if it is too generic to be an actual trademark. I suggest you learn about the process of how trademarks.
"How does a mark qualify for federal registration?
To register a trademark with the PTO, the mark's owner first must put it into use " in commerce that Congress may regulate." This means the mark must be used on a product or service that crosses state, national or territorial lines or that affects commerce crossing such lines--for example, a catalog business or a restaurant or motel that caters to interstate or international customers. Even if the owner files an intent-to-use (ITU) trademark application (ITU applications are discussed in the previous set of questions), the mark will not actually be registered until it is used in commerce."
Source: http://www.inc.com/articles/1999/10/14646.html
Also, take a look at the Lanham Act, which is pretty important when it comes to trademark law ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanham_Act <-- particularly Subchapters I and II.
Just because you use a mark does not mean you have been granted the trademark rights in it.
So, as you can see Apple does not have the trademark to App Store. Therefore, your argument fails on that premise alone.
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
It was.
Can you please show me the trademark that was granted to Apple for App Store by the USPTO? You won't be able to find it because their trademark has not been approved. An opposition to their application was filed, if you didn't catch that from the text.
Trademark is having property rights in a trade name. Apple, or any other company, can file to protect a trademark they have been using and the USPTO decides if it is too generic to be an actual trademark. I suggest you learn about the process of how trademarks.
"How does a mark qualify for federal registration?
To register a trademark with the PTO, the mark's owner first must put it into use " in commerce that Congress may regulate." This means the mark must be used on a product or service that crosses state, national or territorial lines or that affects commerce crossing such lines--for example, a catalog business or a restaurant or motel that caters to interstate or international customers. Even if the owner files an intent-to-use (ITU) trademark application (ITU applications are discussed in the previous set of questions), the mark will not actually be registered until it is used in commerce."
Source: http://www.inc.com/articles/1999/10/14646.html
Also, take a look at the Lanham Act, which is pretty important when it comes to trademark law ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanham_Act <-- particularly Subchapters I and II.
Just because you use a mark does not mean you have been granted the trademark rights in it.
So, as you can see Apple does not have the trademark to App Store. Therefore, your argument fails on that premise alone.
kristoffer4
May 4, 10:21 AM
But this will become confusing to some. Some will ask why can I delete some apps this way and others I have to move manually to the trash?
My girlfriend complained the other day that installing new programs is a bit of a pain. I showed her the app store and her response was but what if the programs I want is not in the app store? In this case VLC.
My girlfriend complained the other day that installing new programs is a bit of a pain. I showed her the app store and her response was but what if the programs I want is not in the app store? In this case VLC.
vartanarsen
Apr 21, 12:04 PM
great. This is exactly what I want my senators to be working on.
prady16
Sep 1, 11:47 AM
Wow......Time for replacing my desktop!
longofest
Nov 29, 01:37 PM
It's true then; Apple are releasing a toilet with an iPod dock! SWEET!!!! :eek:
Actually, I was thinking they were working on a car ;)
Actually, I was thinking they were working on a car ;)
dongmin
Sep 6, 10:08 PM
Rentals...
The studios won't go for it because people will figure out a way to record off the streams and/or rented file. You can argue that people'll figure out a way to crack the purchased movie fiels too, but at least in this case the studio has the $10 or $15 for it instead of $4. Personally, I love the Netflix model, but I don't see the studios going for it.
Burning DVDs...
The new hardware from Apple (video iPod and video-streaming Airport) will make DVD players obsolete. Really, why hassle with discs when you get just browse and play via Front Row?
As for backing up, you can easily back up the .m4v file onto a HD or DVD-R (data). Why would you need to burn a video DVD, except for the convenience of playing on a stand-alone DVD player (which I addressed above)?
The studios won't go for it because people will figure out a way to record off the streams and/or rented file. You can argue that people'll figure out a way to crack the purchased movie fiels too, but at least in this case the studio has the $10 or $15 for it instead of $4. Personally, I love the Netflix model, but I don't see the studios going for it.
Burning DVDs...
The new hardware from Apple (video iPod and video-streaming Airport) will make DVD players obsolete. Really, why hassle with discs when you get just browse and play via Front Row?
As for backing up, you can easily back up the .m4v file onto a HD or DVD-R (data). Why would you need to burn a video DVD, except for the convenience of playing on a stand-alone DVD player (which I addressed above)?
longofest
Jul 19, 03:57 PM
For those who do the digging thing: http://digg.com/apple/Apple_s_Q3_2006_Financial_Results_Are_In!_2nd_Best_In_Company_History!
