AmbitiousLemon
Nov 28, 07:43 PM
This reminds me of this article from BBspot: http://www.bbspot.com/News/2006/11/home-theater-regulations.html
MPAA Lobbying for Home Theater Regulations
By Scott Small
Los Angeles , CA - The MPAA is lobbying congress to push through a new bill that would make unauthorized home theaters illegal. The group feels that all theaters should be sanctioned, whether they be commercial settings or at home.
MPAA head Dan Glickman says this needs to be regulated before things start getting too far out of control, "We didn't act early enough with the online sharing of our copyrighted content. This time we're not making the same mistake. We have a right to know what's showing in a theater."
The bill would require that any hardware manufactured in the future contain technology that tells the MPAA directly of what is being shown and specific details on the audience. The data would be gathered using various motion sensors and biometric technology.
The MPAA defines a home theater as any home with a television larger than 29" with stereo sound and at least two comfortable chairs, couch, or futon. Anyone with a home theater would need to pay a $50 registration fee with the MPAA or face fines up to $500,000 per movie shown.
Related News
"Just because you buy a DVD to watch at home doesn't give you the right to invite friends over to watch it too. That's a violation of copyright and denies us the revenue that would be generated from DVD sales to your friends," said Glickman. "Ideally we expect each viewer to have their own copy of the DVD, but we realize that isn't always feasible. The registration fee is a fair compromise.
The bill also stipulates that any existing home theaters be retrofitted with the technology or else the owner is responsible for directly informing the MPAA and receiving approval before each viewing.
Unfortunately the BBspot article is a joke, and Reuters story isn't.
MPAA Lobbying for Home Theater Regulations
By Scott Small
Los Angeles , CA - The MPAA is lobbying congress to push through a new bill that would make unauthorized home theaters illegal. The group feels that all theaters should be sanctioned, whether they be commercial settings or at home.
MPAA head Dan Glickman says this needs to be regulated before things start getting too far out of control, "We didn't act early enough with the online sharing of our copyrighted content. This time we're not making the same mistake. We have a right to know what's showing in a theater."
The bill would require that any hardware manufactured in the future contain technology that tells the MPAA directly of what is being shown and specific details on the audience. The data would be gathered using various motion sensors and biometric technology.
The MPAA defines a home theater as any home with a television larger than 29" with stereo sound and at least two comfortable chairs, couch, or futon. Anyone with a home theater would need to pay a $50 registration fee with the MPAA or face fines up to $500,000 per movie shown.
Related News
"Just because you buy a DVD to watch at home doesn't give you the right to invite friends over to watch it too. That's a violation of copyright and denies us the revenue that would be generated from DVD sales to your friends," said Glickman. "Ideally we expect each viewer to have their own copy of the DVD, but we realize that isn't always feasible. The registration fee is a fair compromise.
The bill also stipulates that any existing home theaters be retrofitted with the technology or else the owner is responsible for directly informing the MPAA and receiving approval before each viewing.
Unfortunately the BBspot article is a joke, and Reuters story isn't.
rosalindavenue
Mar 31, 03:18 PM
Not a problem for me. HTC does a great job keeping phones updated.
Spoken like someone who never owned an Eris.
Spoken like someone who never owned an Eris.
CdnBook
Apr 5, 10:27 PM
Super stoked! It's finally coming!!
entatlrg
Apr 6, 12:38 PM
The most interesting thing here is how some people hang on every word over updates to the MacBook Air line.
Some won't touch it without a Sandy Bridge update, others want it left alone to save the NVIDIA graphics.
From dated chips, future proofing, when to buy, getting in at the right time and on and on ...
What gives?
In 90% of the tasks the average MacBook Air owner does are they really going to notice it either way?
Future proofing/saving a few hundred dollars ... there is no such thing ... just look back at the electronics you purchased in the past... how has 'future proofing' worked for you so far? lol
Like it. Buy it. Enjoy it.
Some won't touch it without a Sandy Bridge update, others want it left alone to save the NVIDIA graphics.
From dated chips, future proofing, when to buy, getting in at the right time and on and on ...
What gives?
In 90% of the tasks the average MacBook Air owner does are they really going to notice it either way?
Future proofing/saving a few hundred dollars ... there is no such thing ... just look back at the electronics you purchased in the past... how has 'future proofing' worked for you so far? lol
Like it. Buy it. Enjoy it.
H. Flower
Apr 12, 11:40 AM
The insufficient content shouldn't pop up at random, or there is a bug. It pops up when there is insufficient content for a transition. Some transitions like crossfade are centered at the end/starting point of a clip. So it expands past/before this point, hence the need of additional content in the file.
I didn't know about that multicore issue with Compressor when launched directly from the timeline. I suspect an issue with your setup. Compressor does make good use of my 4 cores on mpeg2 and I never set up Qmaster.
I get "insufficient content" when my source isn't as long as my in and outs on the timeline, which can occur fairly often. I've used 5 other edit programs in my lifetime, and each one would lay the source on the timeline starting from the in point regardless. Thus, for all intents and purposes, the message is an error.
"Cannot split a dissolve" - again, not a problem in other suites. Yes, I know there is a dissolve there. Yes, I want the program to split it. I'm the editor :)
I didn't know about that multicore issue with Compressor when launched directly from the timeline. I suspect an issue with your setup. Compressor does make good use of my 4 cores on mpeg2 and I never set up Qmaster.
I get "insufficient content" when my source isn't as long as my in and outs on the timeline, which can occur fairly often. I've used 5 other edit programs in my lifetime, and each one would lay the source on the timeline starting from the in point regardless. Thus, for all intents and purposes, the message is an error.
"Cannot split a dissolve" - again, not a problem in other suites. Yes, I know there is a dissolve there. Yes, I want the program to split it. I'm the editor :)
iAlan
Nov 28, 08:16 PM
I haven't read all the post as yet, got to around post #50 but my sentiments pretty much reflect those of most posters.
However, if there is evidence that a bulk of the royalty (and I mean more than 50%) will go to artists then I can see justification in the process (but it should not be a flat $1 per device as the cost/profit of devices varies). But at the same time, Apple should get a higher share of the 99c per track as I believe the money they get per song pretty much only covers there management of the stored data and hosting on iTunes with very little profit per song - and this is understandable as Apple can leverage the iTunes store to drive iPod sales.
If the record companies want a profitable piece of Apple�s pie (no pun intended) then Apple should be entitled to a profitable piece of the 99c download.
Same logic me thinks�
However, if there is evidence that a bulk of the royalty (and I mean more than 50%) will go to artists then I can see justification in the process (but it should not be a flat $1 per device as the cost/profit of devices varies). But at the same time, Apple should get a higher share of the 99c per track as I believe the money they get per song pretty much only covers there management of the stored data and hosting on iTunes with very little profit per song - and this is understandable as Apple can leverage the iTunes store to drive iPod sales.
If the record companies want a profitable piece of Apple�s pie (no pun intended) then Apple should be entitled to a profitable piece of the 99c download.
Same logic me thinks�
relimw
Aug 7, 01:29 PM
Oops, double posted. Delete this post.
bibbz
Jun 9, 11:00 PM
I am doing my pre-order without even walking into the Store. The perks of knowing the Manager. He is going to take care of everything for me because I know he wants that SPIFF lol.
For any of your Radio Shack employees does your store plan on opening at 6AM? My friend said for the Evo launch they opened just for Evo customers at 6AM and he doesn't see any reason they would not do this for the iPhone 4 as well.
No official word yet. The big thing with this is apple. They are very very particular with what we do at any time with the iPhone. I can't see apple letting us sell the iPhone at 6am if the apple stores don't. We should get more info in the next few days. I see apple controlling this and RadioShack, best buy, AT&T, and Wally world all starting sales at the same time.
For any of your Radio Shack employees does your store plan on opening at 6AM? My friend said for the Evo launch they opened just for Evo customers at 6AM and he doesn't see any reason they would not do this for the iPhone 4 as well.
No official word yet. The big thing with this is apple. They are very very particular with what we do at any time with the iPhone. I can't see apple letting us sell the iPhone at 6am if the apple stores don't. We should get more info in the next few days. I see apple controlling this and RadioShack, best buy, AT&T, and Wally world all starting sales at the same time.
balamw
Apr 6, 03:59 PM
Apple's iPhone debacle
debacle? The debacle that's sucking 51% of the profit in the entire smartphone industry? http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/01/31/apple-is-still-sucking-most-of-the-profit-out-of-the-mobile-phone-business/
Market share isn't everything.
B
debacle? The debacle that's sucking 51% of the profit in the entire smartphone industry? http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/01/31/apple-is-still-sucking-most-of-the-profit-out-of-the-mobile-phone-business/
Market share isn't everything.
B
janstett
Sep 13, 01:37 PM
The OS takes advantage of the extra 4 cores already therefore its ahead of the technology curve, correct? Gee, no innovation here...please move along folks. :rolleyes:
As for using a Dell, sure they could've used that. Would Windows use the extra 4 cores? Highly doubtful. Microsoft has sketchy 64 bit support let alone dual core support; I'm not saying "impossible" but I haven't read jack squat about any version of Windows working well with quad cores. You think those fools (the same idiots who came up with Genuine Advantage) actually optimized their OS to run in an 8 core setup? Please pass along what you're smoking. :rolleyes:
Sorry to burst your reality distortion field, but see my previous post. I ran a dual processor Pentium II NT setup ten years ago and Windows handled it just fine THEN -- back when Apple barely supported it with a hack to its cooperatively-multitasked OS and required specially written applications with special library support.
BTW my 2 year old Smithfield handles 4 processors fine (Dual Core Pentium Extreme with hyperthreading = 4 cores).
The only limit with Windows is they keep the low end XP home to 2 processors on the same die. There is probably an architectural limit on both OSX and XP and if it's not 8 it's 16. It's probably 8.
As for using a Dell, sure they could've used that. Would Windows use the extra 4 cores? Highly doubtful. Microsoft has sketchy 64 bit support let alone dual core support; I'm not saying "impossible" but I haven't read jack squat about any version of Windows working well with quad cores. You think those fools (the same idiots who came up with Genuine Advantage) actually optimized their OS to run in an 8 core setup? Please pass along what you're smoking. :rolleyes:
Sorry to burst your reality distortion field, but see my previous post. I ran a dual processor Pentium II NT setup ten years ago and Windows handled it just fine THEN -- back when Apple barely supported it with a hack to its cooperatively-multitasked OS and required specially written applications with special library support.
BTW my 2 year old Smithfield handles 4 processors fine (Dual Core Pentium Extreme with hyperthreading = 4 cores).
The only limit with Windows is they keep the low end XP home to 2 processors on the same die. There is probably an architectural limit on both OSX and XP and if it's not 8 it's 16. It's probably 8.
j_maddison
Aug 26, 06:58 PM
It's not really that.
It's just that the joke is soooo done. Played out.
It's time to turn the page.
I never found it funnny in the first place. But then again I never found it funny a few years back when everyone was going around going WAAAZZZ UPPP! :eek: Cause it was on the budweiser advert :)
It's just that the joke is soooo done. Played out.
It's time to turn the page.
I never found it funnny in the first place. But then again I never found it funny a few years back when everyone was going around going WAAAZZZ UPPP! :eek: Cause it was on the budweiser advert :)
Thomas Veil
Apr 28, 04:51 PM
Jesus wasn't born in America, yet you don't see Republicans trying to keep him out of government.Highly droll. I see we're channeling Mark Twain tonight. :D
Evangelion
Sep 14, 08:56 AM
On the server side.
Plenty of people ran NT on their desktops.
Nevertheless, ok. Windows did it first.
Admission of your mistakes is a good step in becoming a better person.
Plenty of people ran NT on their desktops.
Nevertheless, ok. Windows did it first.
Admission of your mistakes is a good step in becoming a better person.
simontarr
Sep 15, 07:46 AM
I think all this quad and oct core stuff is fantastic (it would be even more fantastic if I have the money to get such gear...)
But at the moment it's the HDD that slows everything down. Your RAM may be able to send 4GB/s of data to the processor to deal with, but the HD can't write the said executed data at even a 10th of the speed.
I remember reading a BBC news article the other month about mRAM (or magnetic RAM) which has the same write speeds as RAM, but without its volatility. It doesn't loose it's data when the power is off. Ideal for fast HDDs they say.
On an unrelated note, wouldnt it been cool to effectivly install a whole OS on RAM. That would be noticably quicker....
But at the moment it's the HDD that slows everything down. Your RAM may be able to send 4GB/s of data to the processor to deal with, but the HD can't write the said executed data at even a 10th of the speed.
I remember reading a BBC news article the other month about mRAM (or magnetic RAM) which has the same write speeds as RAM, but without its volatility. It doesn't loose it's data when the power is off. Ideal for fast HDDs they say.
On an unrelated note, wouldnt it been cool to effectivly install a whole OS on RAM. That would be noticably quicker....
krcbkidz
Mar 22, 04:07 PM
Samsung can say all they want about their products. There are the following glaring issues:
1. Has anyone realize how much less Samsung's profit margins will be on the Galaxy Tab versus the iPad2? (ie. Apple retains a high profitability based on inhouse product development rather than contracting to third parties like other hardware developers)
2. Given what I perceive to be an extremely small profit margin, I find it difficult from an investor standpoint to endorse Samsung's business model.
3. It is next to impossible from a longterm business perspective that Samsung can price match Apple in this respect. It's an unsustainable business practice.
1. Has anyone realize how much less Samsung's profit margins will be on the Galaxy Tab versus the iPad2? (ie. Apple retains a high profitability based on inhouse product development rather than contracting to third parties like other hardware developers)
2. Given what I perceive to be an extremely small profit margin, I find it difficult from an investor standpoint to endorse Samsung's business model.
3. It is next to impossible from a longterm business perspective that Samsung can price match Apple in this respect. It's an unsustainable business practice.
amin
Aug 18, 07:39 PM
... If apple releases a 2.66GHz Conroe iMac/Mac/whathaveyou it will be able to crunch through FCP/Photoshop/etc faster than a Mac Pro because it can use regular DDR2 and won't suffer from horrendous memory latency.
Where is your evidence to back up this statement? You have presented limited evidence about FCP, and none regarding "PS/etc." So far there is no "Mac/whathaveyou." Do you think a Conroe iMac will beat a Mac Pro due to lower memory latency alone? Do you have real experience or data regarding how horrendous a problem this is? Extra dual-core processor aside, the Mac Pro has a higher speed FSB, higher memory bus bandwidth, higher RAM capacity, and ability to set up internal RAID amongst other advantages over a Conroe iMac.
Where is your evidence to back up this statement? You have presented limited evidence about FCP, and none regarding "PS/etc." So far there is no "Mac/whathaveyou." Do you think a Conroe iMac will beat a Mac Pro due to lower memory latency alone? Do you have real experience or data regarding how horrendous a problem this is? Extra dual-core processor aside, the Mac Pro has a higher speed FSB, higher memory bus bandwidth, higher RAM capacity, and ability to set up internal RAID amongst other advantages over a Conroe iMac.
odedia
Aug 27, 03:19 AM
I dont see much change really, the 1.66GHz merom chip will find its way into the mini (they'll scrap the solo model).
The 1.83 & 2.00GHz for iMacs (if they use merom) and MacBooks and the 2.16 and 2.33 for the 15 & 17 MBPs respectively. Its that simple.
the iMac will get a conroe. Nothing can be as dumb as putting a laptop chip in the desktop iMac. If the iMac could hold a G5 in it, it sure can hold a Conroe chip.
The 1.83 & 2.00GHz for iMacs (if they use merom) and MacBooks and the 2.16 and 2.33 for the 15 & 17 MBPs respectively. Its that simple.
the iMac will get a conroe. Nothing can be as dumb as putting a laptop chip in the desktop iMac. If the iMac could hold a G5 in it, it sure can hold a Conroe chip.
Silentwave
Aug 20, 12:54 AM
That's okay. No worries. I just get a little defensive when I spend $5000 on a new system, and then see you posting about how it'll be better with Clovertown. But that's my problem I guess. :rolleyes:
Anyway, it's all cool.
but it might not! First the programs have to be made to use all 8 cores, then you have to combat the slower FSB and RAM (533 FBD instead of 667)
Tigerton is a totally different story of course ;) :D
Anyway, it's all cool.
but it might not! First the programs have to be made to use all 8 cores, then you have to combat the slower FSB and RAM (533 FBD instead of 667)
Tigerton is a totally different story of course ;) :D
Details Matter
Mar 31, 03:48 PM
Let the Apple fanboys begin patting each other on the back, and taking something and running wild with it.
By the end of this thread, it'll be impossible to decipher what the original story was about.
Ironic. You took the thread off-topic to complain about people taking the thread off-topic. Thanks for the giggle.
By the end of this thread, it'll be impossible to decipher what the original story was about.
Ironic. You took the thread off-topic to complain about people taking the thread off-topic. Thanks for the giggle.
danielespejo
Apr 5, 10:59 PM
sorry but that's not the case. While some contend it's jaw-dropping, that's only because they're stacking it up against what FCS is currently.
.....
While some may find the new FCS exciting, and it does have some bells and whistles, it's typical Apple doing an incremental bump to keep up with what others are doing. Sad really.
Which 'new FCS' are you speaking about? Are you referring to the version that will allegedly be released at NAB? If so, how did you see it? You must be important!
.....
While some may find the new FCS exciting, and it does have some bells and whistles, it's typical Apple doing an incremental bump to keep up with what others are doing. Sad really.
Which 'new FCS' are you speaking about? Are you referring to the version that will allegedly be released at NAB? If so, how did you see it? You must be important!
realitymonkey
Apr 6, 06:52 AM
Hmm we have a Blu Ray burner in our duplication bay in 3 years and approx 1500 hrs of Broadcast HD TV it has only been used so editors can take home personal projects to screen them.
Really do not see the need for Blu Ray at all there are so many other better suited formats.
Really do not see the need for Blu Ray at all there are so many other better suited formats.
ryanlaing
Apr 10, 01:41 AM
A bit of selective hearing on the part of MacRumors with the quotes they chose to use. At first the video sounds great, dude is hyping what he saw from Apple. But later he gets called out from another speculating Apple is making a very significant change and distancing Final Cut from the real 'pro' users, dumbing it down, etc, and the guy who has seen it gets real quiet.. He is asked if he will update his editing studio's workflow to the new Final Cut, and he basically danced around the question, pleaded the 5th, and made it pretty clear that he is holding back some reservations about how the industry will adapt to the changes.
Personally I'm very interested to see what they do, I'm sure it will have huge improvements on real time rendering and performance, sounds like the whole thing is being rewritten. But it does worry me that the program could become more for mass audience and no longer the pro application it has been for the past decade.
Personally I'm very interested to see what they do, I'm sure it will have huge improvements on real time rendering and performance, sounds like the whole thing is being rewritten. But it does worry me that the program could become more for mass audience and no longer the pro application it has been for the past decade.
maelstromr
Apr 19, 05:33 PM
Is that we here in ka world know our Apple products....
But out in the Minnesota farmlands.... They may not have seen the ads....
Met up with another farming buddy... A couple of beers.
Gone to a tech shop to buy a smartphone n thought through the beer bottle they bought themselves a samsung iPhone.
:rolleyes:
/sarcasm
So what's your point? The presence of competition does not harm a competitor? Seems contrary to that whole "competition" word.
And your next point is what? A successful company should allow a competitor to use it's technology/patents to compete with it? All at the same time as just taking it from all the competitors that sue Apple on the other companies' patents, right?
How many anti-Apple suing trolls here are also pro-other company suing Apple trolls in other threads?
So you don't like the way IP law works? Vote for someone who will change the legal structure. Until then, corporations are going to work in the environment your legislators and courts created. Hate the game, not the player.
But out in the Minnesota farmlands.... They may not have seen the ads....
Met up with another farming buddy... A couple of beers.
Gone to a tech shop to buy a smartphone n thought through the beer bottle they bought themselves a samsung iPhone.
:rolleyes:
/sarcasm
So what's your point? The presence of competition does not harm a competitor? Seems contrary to that whole "competition" word.
And your next point is what? A successful company should allow a competitor to use it's technology/patents to compete with it? All at the same time as just taking it from all the competitors that sue Apple on the other companies' patents, right?
How many anti-Apple suing trolls here are also pro-other company suing Apple trolls in other threads?
So you don't like the way IP law works? Vote for someone who will change the legal structure. Until then, corporations are going to work in the environment your legislators and courts created. Hate the game, not the player.
BaldiMac
Apr 19, 04:34 PM
I'm speaking about estimated Q1/11 to Q4/10 numbers (the est. Q1/11 numbers is what that news was about...). And what about reading the graphs I posted yourself? :rolleyes:
I like how you completely ignored the part of my post that proved your claim to be wrong. :rolleyes:
I like how you completely ignored the part of my post that proved your claim to be wrong. :rolleyes:
