If you're using a TIVO series 2 box, then this is what you want to try: TIVO Desktop. The Mac support has ended, but the software is supposed to work very well under the latest incarnation of Tiger.
Perhaps Dvorak should stick to writing about things he understands and knows something about, like Windows software. When it comes to writing about much of anything else he always falls far short and tends to make sweeping unjustified generalizations.
"...with Photoshop, most photographers only want to do perhaps a dozen or so functions." - Really? That's a rather impressive statement. John appears to have polled or knows personally and has asked MOST of them himself exactly how they use Photoshop. Wow. Color me impressed. I see all the documentation and supporting evidence right there in your article that backs up your broad statement... Oh, wait, no I don't. Sorry, this appears to be more typical Dvorak crap, all noise and hot air with nothing to support his position.
Hey John, how about reporting facts rather than huge supposition based upon nothing other than your own frustration for once. Keep up the good work and aim high. Your lack of standards certainly aren't suffering.
The tests done at ArsTechnica were pretty extreme and the scratching they caused wasn't nearly as bad as some people here are describing their own experiences to be. Sure, a 'soft cloth' damaged your Nano, I don't believe it, sorry.
There have been, as always on/., some extreme claims made by people here. Now the lawyers need to get in on it to make millions in a class action that will maybe get the consumers 1% of the cost of the Nanos back when Apple settles rather than waste more time and money in court? This is insane.
Is it just to garner some kind of perverted form of celebrity? An, "If they all hate me then they know who I am" sort of thing?
Obviously the publication he works for is somewhat biased, but most of that publication has been becoming more level about the whole Apple thing. What makes him such an "anti-Mac zealot"?
I have been unable to locate the "story" he recently wrote in which he claimed that he wasn't anti-Apple. I seem to recall one recently. I think it was a comparison of Vista and Tiger which was skewed in the regular Dvorak way...
I'd like to see some hard evidence that supports his claims. He says: "...today's newspaper and magazine tech writers know little about computers and are all Mac users. It's a fact."
But in typical Dvorak fashion, provides no evidence to support his positions. Where are the hard numbers that he based his conclusions on? There aren't any, because he pulls his supposed "facts" out his ass and presents them to the world. Typical Dvorak BS.
"...90 percent of the mainstream writers being Mac users..." --- Support your facts John. Where'd you get your numbers?
"I could list 50." -- So, then there's only 55 newspaper and magazine tech writers in the media? What a load of crap.
Quicktime Pro will allow you to change the format, you have to get the MPEG2 add-on though. Sure QTP is legal, whether or not the DTivo is or not is the real question...
I've found that moving from a DP 1 GHz G4 to a DP 2.7 GHz G5 has reduced my DVD encoding time from about 5 hours for 2 hours of video to about 1.5 hours of encoding time for 2 hours of video. This is using DVD Studio Pro 3 which doesn't offer the h.264 encoding yet. When I upgrade to DVD Studio Pro 4 I will be able to tackle the h.264 codecs.
This wasn't intended as a troll, it's a valid question. Why should they have to relinquish control to the EU or any members of the EU? What about Canada or countries in South America? Why isn't this a UN question seeing as how it seems to be a worldwide control issue?
>I have a DVR that has dual tuners so it powers 2 TV's in 2 seperate rooms. Dual tuner devices generally means that you have the ability to record multiple programs at one time while watching a recorded program. TIVO/DirecTV doesn't offer a multi-tuner device with outputs for each tuner. Seems a bit odd from my experience. With TIVO and DirecTV, you have a single box which contains 2 tuners (unlike what you seem to believe, makes me wonder how much comparison you made other than pricing and talking to a DISH salesman) and supplies one television. If you wanted to send the signal out to multiple televisions from one box you'd have to split the single output signal. I don't see the advantage to your set-up, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't work for you. If one device goes bad in your set-up, then you lose two televisions rather than one. In the DirecTV set-up, that won't happen.
I just looked into the DISH site a bit and you have a slight misconception about HD. If you want their HD-DVR, you need to buy it, at this point. Check out the DISH Player-DVR 942 which appears to be a purchase only device for $700. So, you don't just get to upgrade it without paying for it, just like everybody else.
>Dish network does it, does it matter? Certainly it does. If DISH didn't do the work, then you've gone to the trouble of altering a device that you don't own, which isn't what you've done. While I can pop open my devices and hack them to my hearts content, another major advantage to buying the device rather than renting it, in my experience. Whether I decide to hack them myself or not, I have the right to do it if I choose to.
Anybody has the freedom to switch at anytime. I found that the first company to market with the products that owns the satellites has been the better company all along. I also find that a great user interface makes a huge difference, I've experienced the DISH interface and it's clunky and not very user-friendly unlike the DirecTV interface. The TIVO user interface is also the most user-frinedly DVR interface that I have run across with the most useful options that everybody else have attempted to duplicate and failed doing so in their attempts. I never said that everyone values what I do. It sounds like your major concern is doing things on the cheap, while mine is all about the user experience. Nothing wrong with either. I'm not militant about DirecTV, I just wanted to point out how your rental agreement isn't such a savings as you seem to want others to believe it to be.
Most of those alternatives don't have the good features that TIVO gives you.
The real problem is that you subscribe to DISH rather than DirecTV. I paid $100 for my 80+ hour unit, $250 for a lifetime subscription and I have a better satellite service to begin with. All in all, I can't see how you save anything when you pay $10/month. In the three years that I have had my unit, it costs nothing while you are still paying for yours, I don't see that as being less expensive.
What good does a radio remote do if you can't see the TV? Or are you "illegally" using one box/DVR for multiple sets in the house? Sounds like you must be for that remote to be beneficial.
Does DISH do the upgrade to their DVR you are renting or did you send it to a third party to enhance it?
Yep. They should've pulled Systemworks on version 2.0, which was simply a repackaged version 1.0 with a couple of extra third party programs to "round it out". Version 1.0 and version 2.0 were identical except that they added Dantz Retrospect Express Backup and Aladdin Spring Cleaning and called it version 2.0. I've boycotted their products ever since.
They actually had a version 3 at one point, it's still on their site. And they even have the nerve to sell it with NUM, which they discontinued for the Mac, what, last year...
Symantec shouldn't just be pointing out how many exploits have come to their attention, they should be providing evidence to support their position. Things like, how many exploits became full blown threats to the security of OS X. None.
They should be providing details about how their NAV(Norton Anti-Virus) software has changed over the past several iterations to deal with this pervasive threat. It hasn't.
Currently Symantec is using the same software, without any significant changes, since the release of OS X, that's no significant changes or enhancements, zero, zilch, nada, for over three years, but they're still happy to sell you a new version for $70+ and come out and make wild claims about how you too are unsafe. When what the consumers are really unsafe from is bad business practices and corporations that are willing to try and scare you out of your hard earned cash.
Why is this happening? Money, greed, avarice and lying.
The tests done at ArsTechnica were pretty extreme and the scratching they caused wasn't nearly as bad as some people here are describing their own experiences to be.
There have been, as always on/., some extreme claims made by people here.
In Burnout 3, the F1 style racers were very difficult to drive. In Revenge, they're very easy to drive.
It seems that most of the difficulties have been removed from the game in order to reach a broader spectrum audience. Burnout 3 made people frustrated and many would just stop playing it at a certain point while with Revenge it just keeps going and going...
Don't get me wrong, I like the game, but it seems like a much easier game than the last one.
I have to disagree with Zonk about the gameplay being the same, as it's much easier than in the previous incarnation.
It's worse now, with the/. crowd hitting the page there are over 300 posts on their support page. Interesting how many sound like they've never touched a nano much less owned one...
The tests done at ArsTechnica were pretty extreme and the scratching they did wasn't nearly as bad as some people here are describing their own experiences to be.
Slashdot Mirror
If you're using a TIVO series 2 box, then this is what you want to try: TIVO Desktop. The Mac support has ended, but the software is supposed to work very well under the latest incarnation of Tiger.
Perhaps Dvorak should stick to writing about things he understands and knows something about, like Windows software. When it comes to writing about much of anything else he always falls far short and tends to make sweeping unjustified generalizations.
"...with Photoshop, most photographers only want to do perhaps a dozen or so functions." - Really? That's a rather impressive statement. John appears to have polled or knows personally and has asked MOST of them himself exactly how they use Photoshop. Wow. Color me impressed. I see all the documentation and supporting evidence right there in your article that backs up your broad statement... Oh, wait, no I don't. Sorry, this appears to be more typical Dvorak crap, all noise and hot air with nothing to support his position.
Hey John, how about reporting facts rather than huge supposition based upon nothing other than your own frustration for once. Keep up the good work and aim high. Your lack of standards certainly aren't suffering.
The tests done at ArsTechnica were pretty extreme and the scratching they caused wasn't nearly as bad as some people here are describing their own experiences to be. Sure, a 'soft cloth' damaged your Nano, I don't believe it, sorry.
/., some extreme claims made by people here. Now the lawyers need to get in on it to make millions in a class action that will maybe get the consumers 1% of the cost of the Nanos back when Apple settles rather than waste more time and money in court? This is insane.
There have been, as always on
Thanks... I think...
I never intended it to be interpreted like it was...
I appreciate the sentiment though.
They used PCs. I should have been clearer... :)
Funny thing, that's how you knew who the bad guys were in the first season of 24.
Obviously. But, why?
Is it just to garner some kind of perverted form of celebrity? An, "If they all hate me then they know who I am" sort of thing?
Obviously the publication he works for is somewhat biased, but most of that publication has been becoming more level about the whole Apple thing. What makes him such an "anti-Mac zealot"?
I have been unable to locate the "story" he recently wrote in which he claimed that he wasn't anti-Apple. I seem to recall one recently. I think it was a comparison of Vista and Tiger which was skewed in the regular Dvorak way...
What news? He's not reporting news, he's justifying his own bias by making up statistics that he provides zero support for.
I'd like to see some hard evidence that supports his claims. He says: "...today's newspaper and magazine tech writers know little about computers and are all Mac users. It's a fact."
But in typical Dvorak fashion, provides no evidence to support his positions. Where are the hard numbers that he based his conclusions on? There aren't any, because he pulls his supposed "facts" out his ass and presents them to the world. Typical Dvorak BS.
"...90 percent of the mainstream writers being Mac users..." --- Support your facts John. Where'd you get your numbers?
"I could list 50." -- So, then there's only 55 newspaper and magazine tech writers in the media? What a load of crap.
I don't have anything to really back it up, but I can guarantee that the new quad-core will require liquid cooling.
Quicktime Pro will allow you to change the format, you have to get the MPEG2 add-on though. Sure QTP is legal, whether or not the DTivo is or not is the real question...
I've found that moving from a DP 1 GHz G4 to a DP 2.7 GHz G5 has reduced my DVD encoding time from about 5 hours for 2 hours of video to about 1.5 hours of encoding time for 2 hours of video. This is using DVD Studio Pro 3 which doesn't offer the h.264 encoding yet. When I upgrade to DVD Studio Pro 4 I will be able to tackle the h.264 codecs.
So, MPEG-4 and H.264 aren't enough?
What do you get with all the other devices that you don't get from the Video iPod?
This wasn't intended as a troll, it's a valid question. Why should they have to relinquish control to the EU or any members of the EU? What about Canada or countries in South America?
Why isn't this a UN question seeing as how it seems to be a worldwide control issue?
So, why should they be willing to give up control over it?
Pornstar. It's the guys name in the chat window...
>I have a DVR that has dual tuners so it powers 2 TV's in 2 seperate rooms.
Dual tuner devices generally means that you have the ability to record multiple programs at one time while watching a recorded program. TIVO/DirecTV doesn't offer a multi-tuner device with outputs for each tuner. Seems a bit odd from my experience. With TIVO and DirecTV, you have a single box which contains 2 tuners (unlike what you seem to believe, makes me wonder how much comparison you made other than pricing and talking to a DISH salesman) and supplies one television. If you wanted to send the signal out to multiple televisions from one box you'd have to split the single output signal. I don't see the advantage to your set-up, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't work for you. If one device goes bad in your set-up, then you lose two televisions rather than one. In the DirecTV set-up, that won't happen.
I just looked into the DISH site a bit and you have a slight misconception about HD. If you want their HD-DVR, you need to buy it, at this point. Check out the DISH Player-DVR 942 which appears to be a purchase only device for $700. So, you don't just get to upgrade it without paying for it, just like everybody else.
>Dish network does it, does it matter?
Certainly it does. If DISH didn't do the work, then you've gone to the trouble of altering a device that you don't own, which isn't what you've done. While I can pop open my devices and hack them to my hearts content, another major advantage to buying the device rather than renting it, in my experience. Whether I decide to hack them myself or not, I have the right to do it if I choose to.
Anybody has the freedom to switch at anytime. I found that the first company to market with the products that owns the satellites has been the better company all along. I also find that a great user interface makes a huge difference, I've experienced the DISH interface and it's clunky and not very user-friendly unlike the DirecTV interface. The TIVO user interface is also the most user-frinedly DVR interface that I have run across with the most useful options that everybody else have attempted to duplicate and failed doing so in their attempts. I never said that everyone values what I do. It sounds like your major concern is doing things on the cheap, while mine is all about the user experience. Nothing wrong with either. I'm not militant about DirecTV, I just wanted to point out how your rental agreement isn't such a savings as you seem to want others to believe it to be.
Most of those alternatives don't have the good features that TIVO gives you.
The real problem is that you subscribe to DISH rather than DirecTV. I paid $100 for my 80+ hour unit, $250 for a lifetime subscription and I have a better satellite service to begin with. All in all, I can't see how you save anything when you pay $10/month. In the three years that I have had my unit, it costs nothing while you are still paying for yours, I don't see that as being less expensive.
What good does a radio remote do if you can't see the TV? Or are you "illegally" using one box/DVR for multiple sets in the house? Sounds like you must be for that remote to be beneficial.
Does DISH do the upgrade to their DVR you are renting or did you send it to a third party to enhance it?
Yep. They should've pulled Systemworks on version 2.0, which was simply a repackaged version 1.0 with a couple of extra third party programs to "round it out". Version 1.0 and version 2.0 were identical except that they added Dantz Retrospect Express Backup and Aladdin Spring Cleaning and called it version 2.0. I've boycotted their products ever since.
They actually had a version 3 at one point, it's still on their site. And they even have the nerve to sell it with NUM, which they discontinued for the Mac, what, last year...
To be used at the owner's expense...
No OS is immune from exploits.
Symantec shouldn't just be pointing out how many exploits have come to their attention, they should be providing evidence to support their position. Things like, how many exploits became full blown threats to the security of OS X. None.
They should be providing details about how their NAV(Norton Anti-Virus) software has changed over the past several iterations to deal with this pervasive threat. It hasn't.
Currently Symantec is using the same software, without any significant changes, since the release of OS X, that's no significant changes or enhancements, zero, zilch, nada, for over three years, but they're still happy to sell you a new version for $70+ and come out and make wild claims about how you too are unsafe. When what the consumers are really unsafe from is bad business practices and corporations that are willing to try and scare you out of your hard earned cash.
Why is this happening? Money, greed, avarice and lying.
The tests done at ArsTechnica were pretty extreme and the scratching they caused wasn't nearly as bad as some people here are describing their own experiences to be.
/., some extreme claims made by people here.
There have been, as always on
In Burnout 3, the F1 style racers were very difficult to drive. In Revenge, they're very easy to drive.
It seems that most of the difficulties have been removed from the game in order to reach a broader spectrum audience. Burnout 3 made people frustrated and many would just stop playing it at a certain point while with Revenge it just keeps going and going...
Don't get me wrong, I like the game, but it seems like a much easier game than the last one.
I have to disagree with Zonk about the gameplay being the same, as it's much easier than in the previous incarnation.
It's worse now, with the /. crowd hitting the page there are over 300 posts on their support page. Interesting how many sound like they've never touched a nano much less owned one...
The tests done at ArsTechnica were pretty extreme and the scratching they did wasn't nearly as bad as some people here are describing their own experiences to be.
How much do some people abuse their things?