JNZ Law Blogs

On the surface, Apple's position on this specific application seems ridiculous. Having said that, I don't know if the App store approval process changes much. If the iPhone was open to any application, then Apple could have taken legal action against Rogue Amoeba. I suppose it would be more difficult than just denying the app, but Apple would have a way to squash this app, if they wanted to.

This is the most credible of the iPhone rumors I've seen so far-- in no small part because it didn't have a picture attached... The feature set sounds right, the move away from doing everything from the ground up sounds right. There's a lot of companies that have put a lot of effort into building technologies for cell phones-- it would be foolhardy for Apple to think they could do everything better. Get into the market with something that innovates in one small area-- even if that's just in its support for iTunes. Once you understand the market a little better, improve on the pieces you think you can.

Wow, this is really, really bad. I've no idea how any company would think this was acceptable. There's no way this was simply an oversight.

Absolutely unacceptable.

This whole situation reminds me of this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_vs._MikeRoweSoft).

So I don't call this cloud thing a revolution, rather a gmmick at best, and ******** for my actual needs.
!

I'd love to save this quote and show it to you in a couple years... I bet you'll feel differently.

Have you ever actually watched Netflix or Hulu on a iPhone or iPad over 3G? It totally sucks - not even close to what it looks like when stored locally, especially on the iPad.

Tony

my point is that they stream from a location and aren't stored locally....
they stream fine for me.

I agree with you. if someone is drunk and is still able to operate the app they could be a hazard if they avoid these points.
That's GREAT. Call me crazy, but I actually want to know where these streets are that drunks are avoiding so that I can take them and not have to worry about getting t-boned by Drunky McDrunkerton.

It clearly states Dolby Surround and Dolby Pro Logic Systems. This is from the VHS days. DVDs support Dolby Digital 5.1 and DTS. This is plain nuts. Not only are you getting slightly inferior picture, the sound is ancient. Dolby Surround is nowhere as good as Dolby Digital. Here is a simple explanation.

Dolby Surround uses two tracks of audio to encode 4 tracks. The two additional tracks are for the center channel and a single rear channel. The single rear channel is not full spectrum (20Hz - 20kHz), but rather something very narrow.

For comparison, if you have a good surround sound system (I am not talking about the $200 Home Theatre in a box system, but a system that cost at least $1000), play a DVD that has both Dolby Surround and Dolby Digital. Play with the Dolby Surround track first and then play with the Dolby Digital track next. Huge difference. I am disappointed. Surely, there is a way they could embed discrete surround with AAC.

The specs for Dolby Digital is as follows: 5 tracks of discrete digital sound full spectrum 20Hz-20kHz. One channel for LFE (low frequency extension) - topping out at about 120Hz. That is why you have 5.1.

Dolby Digital is lossy compression though but still you have 5.1 channels. DTS is another lossy compression format but has a higher bit rate and sounds better than Dolby Digital. DTS typically have about 760kbps while Dolby Digital is about 448kbps.

HD-DVD and Bluray Disk support Dolby TrueHD that supports 8 channels of lossless sound upto 18Mbps. Cool. Well, we are way off from there.

I don't think Apple is aiming for the uber-geek with $25k worth of home entertainment equipment. IMHO, they will never be able to compete in that market.

I think they are reaching for the average joe blow that has a servicable $400 TV that he bought at Wal-mart, and maybe, just maybe, has a stereo hooked up to it. The average Joe doesn't care, and can't tell, that it's Dolby Surround and not Dolby Digital.

It doesn't need to be a virus. They're relatively rare issues these days even on Windows. Malware is about stealing identities (big money) not hackers playing games with machines
Identity theft is not malware and it's not targeted at just Mac or Windows. It can be done without using computers at all. There is no antivirus software that can protect a computer from the user's own stupidity or gullibility.

Would be nice if I could download movies and tv shows here in Canada!!!

Finally is this it?

Heck, every trade show I ever go to has girls with their tits half hanging out wondering the halls handing out leaflets nowhere near their particular stand.

What trade show are those? I wanna go!

The hardware giant has confirmed that Sandy Bridge was designed with an integrated content protection to prevent piracy of high-end digital quality.

Please explain.

Thats a bummer. Any info whether there will be a 7600 GT GPU in these babies? Coz the Alienware comes with them.

Whoa..

http://www.macminute.com/2006/08/23/apple-creative/

Guess they realized they couldn't win..

Do any of these suits ever actually get resolved?
yes they do. For good or ill, more conflicts are being mediated out of court. This saves taxpayer money:), but also prevents case law from being made, leaving judges without precedent to refer to in other cases:(

Close, Manic Mouse. I dont understand people's belief that every Intel chip made has to go into an Apple machine. I doubt the Conroe will be used in any Mac nor the Kentsfield. The range is covered, and I'm sick of these silly rumors of Mac mid towers.

There wont be a mid tower, not now, not "Next Tuesday".

The thing is that it is very easy to layout a reasoning as to why Apple should/will use a Conroe chip in its line up. It is very difficult with the current product lineup to show why they wont.

As noted in a previous post, there is a $1000US price gap in their lineup that has been left in the lineup. There is currently a chip that would fill in that gap. This machine would steal slightly from both the lower and higher priced machines, yet open another market segment.

Apple has seen massive growth in the laptop market with the iBook. The MacBook perfectly filled a need with a certain market segment. The desktop Macs cover all of the segments except 1. This big gaping hole in their lineup has the perfect processor to meet its needs. Apple has designed a new case style for the Mac Pro. A smaller version would be simple to build re-using many of the components allowing for some economies of scale. This makes both the Mac Pro and the smaller sibling more cost effective in terms of components and assembly line manufacture.

The argument against goes. Well apple hasn't had a mid range headless machine since the G3 era. Which is of course true. However there was no way to differentiate products because there wasn't enough variability to the chips.

We now have:

Duo<Duo 2 (Merom) <Duo 2 (Conroe) <Xeon (Woodcrest)
(Mini < iMac < Mac < Mac Pro)

So just because Apple has had a big hole in its product matrix for the last few years means that it will continue to have a big hole in its product matrix until the end of time? Apple left that hole because it wasn't possible to create enough distiction between the product lines if they closed it. Now with the processors available from Intel, it is possible.

Apple is out to make $$$. It is a big corporation, and one that we all (usually) like because of the innovative easy to use products it delivers. It is making a MASSIVE consumer push right now. If a midrange machine will make them the most dough that is what they will deliver.

SJ likes clean product lines and that is what is going on.

Shuffle < Nano < iPod (< vPod)
MacBook < MacBook Pro
Mini < iMac (<Mac) < Mac Pro
X-Serve

They are all very clean product lines. The reason they destroyed all the product lines was that they had:

PM 5XXX
PM 6XXX
PM 7XXX
PM 8XXX
PM 9XXX

And there were overlapping prices and specs and God knows what. Unless you were a regular koolaid drinker it was extremely tough to keep track of what did what in the product matrix.

This will be a very clean and easy to understand matrix.

Are they any good? I've never seen a phone with a good camera, 10MP phone sounds like 10MP of grainy nasty pictures to me.


By definition, 10MP phone cannot be as grainy as a 3MP phone. You do realize when someone says 10MegaPixel phone what they mean right?.
10 million pixels per square inch (before the tech police come out, this is a basic definition. I am aware an image does not have to be a square).

Either way, what are you going to do with a HD version of the movie on your computer?

HD is not going to happen, at least not next tuesday.

Worth revisiting.

The raw uncompressed bitrate for 720p = 1280*720*24bpp*30fps/(1024*1024) = 633 Mbps for 1080i it's ~711 Mbps 320x240 it's more like 53 Mbps.

720p compressed in H.264 with 5.1 sound seems to work out to about 1100 MB for your typical 45 minute drama show (i.e. compressed down to ~3 Mbps). This compares to 200 MB for the same show from iTMS in 320x240 H.264 (700 kbps). Not bad when you consider that 720p has 12X as many pixels (1280/320=4, 720/240=3)

Basically your typical movie would be about 2GB.

B

So what would be the size for a decent encoding of 480 (p or i)? Basically about DVD quality, but with a more efficient codec, which is the most likely format for release next week.

Not really. In both situations, the company that "lost" and paid out also received back some technology for their cash. In the current case there are other reasons why it's an ok deal for Apple beyond just the patent licence.

That's how these deals generally work. No company is going to settle a patent dispute for cash if they don't get a license for the technology in question in return. In this case, Apple absolutely could not afford to walk away without the patent license. Obviously. Getting one cost them $100 million. The rest is PR window-dressing.

Check it out.. 2x 30" Dell's connected to the 27 iMac

Image (http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/05/imac-2011-05-03-600-58.jpg)

http://www.engadget.com/2011/05/03/apple-imac-hands-on-with-dual-30-inch-displays-video/

Thanks alot:mad: I just slobbered all over my keyboard thanks to your reckless post!

;) Awesome Pic dude

The robbers got iShot.

still no blu-ray drive? iMacs should have blu-ray burners by now!
oh well, maybe with the next update...

No, this is the Target special edition nano that comes with a Target gift card.

I'm glad I'm not the only one that though along that line, lol.