There is not a "Windows-only" iPod. The iPod will work with both Mac and Windows. The reason they are labeled "Macintosh" and "Windows" at the Apple store is to distinguish which software is bundled with the iPod. However, all the software will be available for free download from the website, and the device will work with either platform.
The main thing, however, is the use of the email address.
Let me get this straight...you got a free email address, switched all your friends and family and mailing lists over to that address, and now you're upset that it's going away? Why did you switch them all over to that address in the first place? If you aren't willing to pay for and use an email account, then that's the risk you take. As Jobs said in the keynote, things are a lot different now than they were a year ago. The free email addresses now cost money, and no one can just afford to give them away. As I see it, you built your life on this house of cards, and now you're upset that you have to pay someone so it won't fall down. I'm sorry, but Apple can't be expected to just give things away indefinitely.
Then I started using it, and got fully hooked by the bundled apps. When I bought it, it was all "self-contained". I didn't need to go out and buy *anything*, which is the only reason I could justify spending CAN$2500 on the "budget" notebook.
Guess what? Your iBook is still self-contained! You don't need to buy anything to keep using it! The mac.com email address is something external to the iBook, not part of the iBook. And no one is forcing you to upgrade to 10.2 if you don't want to. But if you do, you will get a whole bunch of new features that will make your life easier. In fact, you know this already, because you talked about how great the features were when you bought your new iBook! So, in short, you're complaining because a company has proven to you that they are very good at making applications that you use and enjoy, and now they are making more applications that you will probably use and enjoy, and they would like to charge you a nominal fee for the work they put into those applications. Pardon me if I'm not welling up with tears of sympathy.
It is a great operating system, on very cool hardware, but to me it just isn't worth what they want me to pay for it. The reason I'm bitter is that they've made me discover that after I started paying for it.
When you bought the computer, you didn't realize that companies charge for substantial operating system updates? Maybe you should stick with simpler devices that don't force you into such dilemmas. For example, you could just buy a car...wait, just as a warning: You do realize that you will have to pay for gas and oil and service for the car, don't you? Don't want to you get caught unawares and get all upset.
Senior Jobs just got one of his engineers to make a BlueTooth cellphone that could talk with his address book thingy. I doubt Nokia is going to. Until Jobs, Gates, or Nealy can get on stage and say "This is the Nokia 3425, Ford Tunester, and Kenmore Neat-n-Shit and you can go to the store and buy them right now." These demo's are just Marketing/PR to make all the geeks love them.
You operate from a false assumption; Jobs did get on stage and demonstrate an actual Bluetooth product that you can go to the store and buy right now. It's the Sony Ericsson T68 phone. It's Bluetooth enabled. It syncs with computers. You can buy it today. And when iSync is available in September (note: actual release date, not a vaporware "technology demo"), then you will be able to do everything that Steve demoed.
In short: You don't know what you're talking about.
I don't believe that Dish Network EVER announced that a Moxi box would be available by summer. In fact, they never officially announced ANY Moxi box coming out, just that they were working with Moxi. Now that Digeo has purchased Moxi, I would imagine that they would now be focusing on cable boxes, not satellite. These business deals take time. Deal with it.
I'd say the odds against this device having a commercial skip button or even a fast-forward are pretty high.
What use would a PVR be without a fast-forward button? It will have one. And if you've seen any of the Moxi demonstrations, you would know that it also has a commercial-skip button. I highly doubt that this will be removed.
The words "Moxi-like" in the post should be changed to "Moxi." This new box is using Moxi technologies, since Moxi was acquired by Digeo (also owned by Paul Allen earlier this year.
Actually Aliens didn't have much "extra" footage. It was just footage that made the theatrical release but for whatever reason was not included in the video.
Wrong. There are many scenes that were cut for time, then released on earlier laserdisc special editions, then finally released on DVD. Those scenes (Ripley's daughter, extra stuff with Newt at the beginning, automatic mounted guns, etc.) were NOT in the theatrical version. However, some of them made it to TV versions at one time or another.
yeah, so i guess they did milk some with eps 4,5,6 already...atleast they were only VHS, and didn't cost as much as DVD...
Oh, does no one remember laserdisc? Let's see...there was the original letterboxed release of all three movies, $60 a piece. Then the remastered CAV boxed set, a steal at $250! If you want the Trilogy remastered in THX, you need to get this set! And then, of course, the inevitable CLV remastered releases of all three movies, at (I believe) somewhere around $50 apiece. So, far from being unmilked, those of us who wanted the best possible picture and sound would have to spend $580 for all the rereleases! And that doesn't even count the Special Edition boxed set, a steal at $125.
You DVD kids have it so easy these days! "Waaaah, I don't want to spend $50 for a six-disc special edition of Fellowship of the Ring!" Back in my day, we paid $60 for a two-disc set of Star Wars, with NO extras, NO anamorphic encoding, NO Dolby Digital soundtrack, and NO commentary! Hell, we felt lucky just to get a letterboxed copy! Oh, and we had to flip sides or switch discs every hour or so!
In short: Quit yer whining. If you want to buy both sets, buy them both. I want to have the version I saw in the theatres (on one disc, no less), and I want the extended version. I'll buy both, and I will smile while I'm doing it. And when I get home, I'll do a little dance.
Granted, it could be full-frame for scenes without special effects, but for scenes that do contain special effects, it will most likely be pan-and-scan. Why? When SFX are done, most studios just do the special effects for the part of the frame that will be seen in the theater, not the entire film frame. Since post-production time is usually so tight, they can't waste the time rendering effects that won't be seen in the theatrical release. And when it comes time to do the home-video version, they don't bother to do back and redo those scenes for the full-frame version.
The upshot is: For an effects-laden movie like Lord of the Rings, chances are that most of the movie will be pan-and-scan, not full-frame. If you don't believe me, do a side-by-side comparison of the widescreen and pan-and-scan versions of Jurassic Park, Titanic, and so on.
Slashdot Mirror
There is not a "Windows-only" iPod. The iPod will work with both Mac and Windows. The reason they are labeled "Macintosh" and "Windows" at the Apple store is to distinguish which software is bundled with the iPod. However, all the software will be available for free download from the website, and the device will work with either platform.
I'd be happy for Apple to keep their gee-whiz $100 itunes update to themselves and just release the bug fixes.
The iTunes update isn't $100. It's free. Also, iCal and iSync will be free. None of those are part of Jaguar.
The main thing, however, is the use of the email address.
Let me get this straight...you got a free email address, switched all your friends and family and mailing lists over to that address, and now you're upset that it's going away? Why did you switch them all over to that address in the first place? If you aren't willing to pay for and use an email account, then that's the risk you take. As Jobs said in the keynote, things are a lot different now than they were a year ago. The free email addresses now cost money, and no one can just afford to give them away. As I see it, you built your life on this house of cards, and now you're upset that you have to pay someone so it won't fall down. I'm sorry, but Apple can't be expected to just give things away indefinitely.
Then I started using it, and got fully hooked by the bundled apps. When I bought it, it was all "self-contained". I didn't need to go out and buy *anything*, which is the only reason I could justify spending CAN$2500 on the "budget" notebook.
Guess what? Your iBook is still self-contained! You don't need to buy anything to keep using it! The mac.com email address is something external to the iBook, not part of the iBook. And no one is forcing you to upgrade to 10.2 if you don't want to. But if you do, you will get a whole bunch of new features that will make your life easier. In fact, you know this already, because you talked about how great the features were when you bought your new iBook! So, in short, you're complaining because a company has proven to you that they are very good at making applications that you use and enjoy, and now they are making more applications that you will probably use and enjoy, and they would like to charge you a nominal fee for the work they put into those applications. Pardon me if I'm not welling up with tears of sympathy.
It is a great operating system, on very cool hardware, but to me it just isn't worth what they want me to pay for it. The reason I'm bitter is that they've made me discover that after I started paying for it.
When you bought the computer, you didn't realize that companies charge for substantial operating system updates? Maybe you should stick with simpler devices that don't force you into such dilemmas. For example, you could just buy a car...wait, just as a warning: You do realize that you will have to pay for gas and oil and service for the car, don't you? Don't want to you get caught unawares and get all upset.
Senior Jobs just got one of his engineers to make a BlueTooth cellphone that could talk with his address book thingy. I doubt Nokia is going to. Until Jobs, Gates, or Nealy can get on stage and say "This is the Nokia 3425, Ford Tunester, and Kenmore Neat-n-Shit and you can go to the store and buy them right now." These demo's are just Marketing/PR to make all the geeks love them.
You operate from a false assumption; Jobs did get on stage and demonstrate an actual Bluetooth product that you can go to the store and buy right now. It's the Sony Ericsson T68 phone. It's Bluetooth enabled. It syncs with computers. You can buy it today. And when iSync is available in September (note: actual release date, not a vaporware "technology demo"), then you will be able to do everything that Steve demoed.
In short: You don't know what you're talking about.
I don't believe that Dish Network EVER announced that a Moxi box would be available by summer. In fact, they never officially announced ANY Moxi box coming out, just that they were working with Moxi. Now that Digeo has purchased Moxi, I would imagine that they would now be focusing on cable boxes, not satellite. These business deals take time. Deal with it.
I'd say the odds against this device having a commercial skip button or even a fast-forward are pretty high.
What use would a PVR be without a fast-forward button? It will have one. And if you've seen any of the Moxi demonstrations, you would know that it also has a commercial-skip button. I highly doubt that this will be removed.
The words "Moxi-like" in the post should be changed to "Moxi." This new box is using Moxi technologies, since Moxi was acquired by Digeo (also owned by Paul Allen earlier this year.
Actually Aliens didn't have much "extra" footage. It was just footage that made the theatrical release but for whatever reason was not included in the video.
Wrong. There are many scenes that were cut for time, then released on earlier laserdisc special editions, then finally released on DVD. Those scenes (Ripley's daughter, extra stuff with Newt at the beginning, automatic mounted guns, etc.) were NOT in the theatrical version. However, some of them made it to TV versions at one time or another.
yeah, so i guess they did milk some with eps 4,5,6 already...atleast they were only VHS, and didn't cost as much as DVD...
Oh, does no one remember laserdisc? Let's see...there was the original letterboxed release of all three movies, $60 a piece. Then the remastered CAV boxed set, a steal at $250! If you want the Trilogy remastered in THX, you need to get this set! And then, of course, the inevitable CLV remastered releases of all three movies, at (I believe) somewhere around $50 apiece. So, far from being unmilked, those of us who wanted the best possible picture and sound would have to spend $580 for all the rereleases! And that doesn't even count the Special Edition boxed set, a steal at $125.
You DVD kids have it so easy these days! "Waaaah, I don't want to spend $50 for a six-disc special edition of Fellowship of the Ring!" Back in my day, we paid $60 for a two-disc set of Star Wars, with NO extras, NO anamorphic encoding, NO Dolby Digital soundtrack, and NO commentary! Hell, we felt lucky just to get a letterboxed copy! Oh, and we had to flip sides or switch discs every hour or so!
In short: Quit yer whining. If you want to buy both sets, buy them both. I want to have the version I saw in the theatres (on one disc, no less), and I want the extended version. I'll buy both, and I will smile while I'm doing it. And when I get home, I'll do a little dance.
Granted, it could be full-frame for scenes without special effects, but for scenes that do contain special effects, it will most likely be pan-and-scan. Why? When SFX are done, most studios just do the special effects for the part of the frame that will be seen in the theater, not the entire film frame. Since post-production time is usually so tight, they can't waste the time rendering effects that won't be seen in the theatrical release. And when it comes time to do the home-video version, they don't bother to do back and redo those scenes for the full-frame version.
The upshot is: For an effects-laden movie like Lord of the Rings, chances are that most of the movie will be pan-and-scan, not full-frame. If you don't believe me, do a side-by-side comparison of the widescreen and pan-and-scan versions of Jurassic Park, Titanic, and so on.