Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×

Special Apple Event Scheduled for September 12 113

Posted by Hemos from the here-comes-the-itunes-for-video dept.
davidmcg writes "Macworld are reporting that Apple is hosting a special media event on Tuesday, September 12th 2006 in San Francisco, CA at 10AM Pacific. The event will also be simulcast to a location in London where journalists have also been invited. The invitation to the media was entitled It's Showtime — suggesting Movie-related announcements. Rumors sites had originally expected iMac updates during the event, but Apple surprised everyone with iMac and Mac mini updates last week. This leaves iPods, a Movie Store and the possibility of a new streaming Media device for the Tuesday event."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Special Apple Event Scheduled for September 12 More

Special Apple Event Scheduled for September 12

Comments Filter:
  • ...give me the hardware. 16:9 touchscreen ipod would be mighty sweet...

    • Widescreen movies (Score:3, Insightful)

      by zoeblade ( 600058 )

      16:9 touchscreen ipod would be mighty sweet

      I love the way no one is even considering the possibility of 4:3 ratio film downloads, even though the 5G iPod's screen is small enough as it is without films taking up even less of the 320x240 resolution if they're going to remain backwards compatible with it. Sure, a widescreen iPod plus film downloads that you'll need to upgrade to the 6G in order to watch on the go seem likely, but it still amazes me how quickly people will refuse to put up with something l

      • Re:Widescreen movies (Score:5, Informative)

        by MichaelSmith ( 789609 ) on Monday September 11, 2006 @07:52AM (#16079971) Homepage Journal
        It's like there's an unwritten agreement that we'll never speak of VHS ever again, like it was an embarrassing mistake that it ever took off in the first place.

        It was the tubes, no, not the ones the internet uses, the ones which people used to watch pictures on. If you make it wider you have to make it deeper so you may as well make it higher and then you have a square screen again.

      • that just made me think of the wide-screen version of a video someone accidentally released. Instead of taking the original film, they pan-and-scanned the pan and scan, giving a doubly cropped wide screen!

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by TomHandy ( 578620 )
        Well, a lot of people "put up with" pan and scan for a variety of reasons; in some cases they didn't have much choice (only "full screen" versions of certain movies were easily available). In other cases, a lot of consumers were convinced that "pan and scan" was better because they didn't like those "black bars" at the bottom and top of their screen.

        I think the success of wide screen has at least something to do with consumers becoming a bit more savvy about buying movies....... I think that more consume

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Yvan256 ( 722131 )

        I love the way no one is even considering the possibility of 4:3 ratio film downloads [...] but it still amazes me how quickly people will refuse to put up with something like pan and scan, the format everyone watched films in at home until only a few years ago in most people's cases.

        Almost all movies are shot in widescreen. In order to display them in 4:3, you have to remove content. Look at the ending of The Fifth Element for a clear-cut indication that you really don't want to remove content. (Hint: you

        • For a lot of music produced in the '60's, the mono mix was the original, which had all of the effort put into it. Stereo mixes were afterthoughts, with gimmicks like putting the vocals on one side and most of the instruments on the other. A few CD re-reissues have included both mixes (often only a few bonus tracks, and not the entire album), but there's still a lot of lost content out there as most were made without thought from the stereo masters. Ironically, while there are some mono tracks available o

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by HTH NE1 ( 675604 )
          Studios that are trying to sell me a 4:3 version of their movies ("The Forbin Project" comes to mind) is the same as if a music studio would try to sell mono versions of their songs.

          And just because a DVD is widescreen doesn't mean it isn't also pan-and-scanned. For example, the movie Head Office was filmed at 2.35:1 [imdb.com], but the DVD release was 1.78:1.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Don853 ( 978535 )
          Whoa. Would have made that movie make marginally more sense. Thanks.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Golias ( 176380 )
          Almost all movies are shot in widescreen. In order to display them in 4:3, you have to remove content.

          It's not quite as simple as that.

          Actually, a great deal of movies are shot to fit both formats. Most, in fact.

          In a movie theater, the projectionist is expected to "mat" the top and bottom off to fit the image to whatever shape the screen is.

          On TV, an editor "crops" the sides off, but leaves in more of the top and bottom.

          Any good movie director knows that both things will be done to the movie before anybody

      • I love the way no one is even considering the possibility of 4:3 ratio film downloads, even though the 5G iPod's screen is small enough as it is without films taking up even less of the 320x240 resolution if they're going to remain backwards compatible with it.

        Its too bad that there is no 'software' way of dealing with pan and scan. One could see a method whereby the videos are encoded in anamorphic format, like widescreen DVDs. That way you could have true widescreen output when hooked to a TV, but 'pan

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by hixie ( 116369 )
        If you're watching a movie in 16:9, then you're still experiencing pan-and-scan. Movies are mostly shot in 2.39:1 or 1.85:1, which are both far wider than the so-called "widescreen" 16:9 ratio.
      • It's like there's an unwritten agreement that we'll never speak of VHS ever again, like it was an embarrassing mistake that it ever took off in the first place.

        That's about how I feel (not the never speaking about it part, though). Video has been an embarassment, VHS in particular. Film is much better. Before video came along, students and amateur film-makers would use 16mm film, which is a beautiful medium. High Definition video still can't beat 16mm film, after all these decades. But because of video, pe

  • Well duh. (Score:3, Funny)

    by popeyethesailor ( 325796 ) on Monday September 11, 2006 @07:37AM (#16079934)
    This leaves iPods, a Movie Store and the possibility of a new streaming Media device for the Tuesday event."
    Oh wow. I thought it was a new musical with Steve Jobs as the lead with a consort of white furry bunnies.
    • I was going for the "Apple unveils plans to dominate the universe in a giant Apple space station which suspiciously resembles a Death Star" theory.
      • But they said 'it's showtime'. That must mean that it's a musical song-and-dance affair where Apple Computer unveils plans to dominate the universe in a giant Apple space station which suspiciously resembles a Death Star.
    • Nope. It's going to be a new musical with Steve Jobs as the lead with a consort of OMG!!! Ponies!!!!
  • is this expected to be a "wireless monitor" or an airtunes-style limited app stream?

    if the latter then hopefully there'll be an Airfoil equivalent, but I hope it turns out to be wireless monitor and speakers. /dream
    • if the latter then hopefully there'll be an Airfoil equivalent, but I hope it turns out to be wireless monitor and speakers. /dream

      What is the value in a wireless monitor? Unless you're referencing a monitor that has touch screen and can be carried around the house. Because a monitor on a desk less than 3 feet from the workstation doesn't need to be wireless. That's just stupid. Same with speakers - absolutely no point in wireless speakers.

      • Re:streaming media device (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Yahweh Doesn't Exist ( 906833 ) on Monday September 11, 2006 @08:16AM (#16080065)
        the point is I only have 1 computer - a laptop I take with me to work and home every day.

        at home I have wireless:
        keyboard
        mouse
        internet
        speakers
        phone (sync + remote)

        why NOT have everything wireless if it can be?
        my laptop is only 3 feet from the monitor because it HAS to be to use the monitor.

        and if it makes my computer easier to use and I'm willing to pay for it who the fuck are you to stand in the way of progress?
        • my laptop is only 3 feet from the monitor because it HAS to be to use the monitor.
          My laptop is directly connected to the monitor and I can just close a lid and bring it along with me. What kind of shitty laptop did you buy that doesn't include a display?

        • and if it makes my computer easier to use and I'm willing to pay for it who the fuck are you to stand in the way of progress?

          I guess that depends if they happen to be an executive at a telco. I've noticed that far fewer Macintosh owners use bluetooth to sync their address book to their phone than one might think. The reason? For certain phone companies including at least Verizon and Quest, the vendors offer almost no bluetooth enabled phones to start with, special models of the same perfectly good pho

          • Only in the US. Here in the UK, everyone I know with both routinely syncs their Macs and 'phones. Most new 'phones support Bluetooth and SyncML; my last three 'phones have supported Bluetooth, and I don't upgrade very often.
        • I've never understood the wireless speakers thing. I mean - you still have to plug them in, right? How is having a big power cord sticking out the back (and possibly an AC Adapter brick) more agreeable than simply running some speaker cable? Also, ideal speaker placement may be compromised if you don't happen to have an outlet nearby.
          • the Apple airport express with airtunes is a wireless hub with a audio port. you plug speakers into it and they can then be accessed by anyone on the network (wireless or LAN, optional password). the speakers are normal speakers not wireless ones; wireless is handled by the airport.

            think of your speaker amplifier with all the inputs and outputs. instead of having an input from your laptop that you plug and unplug every time you move your laptop you just have the wire go the airport and your laptop automatic

        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by HTH NE1 ( 675604 )

          the point is I only have 1 computer - a laptop I take with me to work and home every day. at home I have wireless keyboard, mouse, internet, speakers, [and] phone (sync + remote). why NOT have everything wireless if it can be? my laptop is only 3 feet from the monitor because it HAS to be to use the monitor.

          So you just plonk it down on the desk and it knows to associate with the nearby peripherals? That reminds me of this bit from one of my favorite authors, Douglas Adams (RIP):

          "How... does it work?" he sa

        • the point is I only have 1 computer - a laptop I take with me to work and home every day.

          at home I have wireless:
          keyboard
          mouse
          internet
          speakers
          phone (sync + remote)

          why NOT have everything wireless if it can be?
          my laptop is only 3 feet from the monitor because it HAS to be to use the monitor.

          and if it makes my computer easier to use and I'm willing to pay for it who the fuck are you to stand in the way of progress?

          Wow, what's with the negative attituide? I just think it's stupid to want a wireless monitor and
          • Things that could honestly take advantage of being wireless are those that tend to move around and don't need to be plugged in for power or have their batteries recharged or replaced frequently.

            You are thinking the wrong way around. The monitor is not wireless, the computer is a wireless peripheral that connects to the monitor. Imagine a 5' screen on the wall which anyone who walks into the room can use (as long as it is not already in use). You could use it to display films, presentations, etc. from

            • Imagine a 5' screen on the wall which anyone who walks into the room can use (as long as it is not already in use). You could use it to display films, presentations, etc. from your laptop without having to connect up any wires.

              But after the initial connection the wire is not in the way - nothing is trying to move around. Also, a device like that would most likely have a stationary computer attached to it (or it attached to ...) that could be controled remotely. In our presentation center we have floor jacks
      • I don't have much use for a wireless monitor either, but they sure are popular. This site [pricegrabber.com] has dozens of them, all at different price points.
      • plus they still need power and that is way wireless keyboards and moues are mostly pointless as well.
  • Please give us a good media center application. I want to connect a mac to my tv and record tv shows, play my dvds and everything else from itunes.

    PLEASE, blow away windows media center and mythtv!
    • Please give us a good media center application. I want to connect a mac to my tv and record tv shows, play my dvds and everything else from itunes.

      PLEASE, blow away windows media center and mythtv!

      Beyond blowing away WinMCE and MythTV I'd like to see them blow away TiVo.

      (:

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by tacocat ( 527354 )

        If this is the direction they go into then they are probably risking over-diversification.

        Historically, Apple has made a mighty fine user-centric computer and have even set that standard of what a Graphical User Interface means. They have done well in terms of GUI design since the early Mac up to today with a consistent and well behaved interface.

        I personally do not believe there is any real merit in trying to consolidate everything into one box. When I say everything I mean: computer, game console, vis

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Gr8Apes ( 679165 )
          1 computer should be able to service radio, tv, and serve as a computer simultaneously these days. That's what multi-core/CPU is all about. So you're back down to 1 box.

          The only issue is the connectivity to the various locations you wish to have output to, and whatever input controls from those locations.

        • I personally do not believe there is any real merit in trying to consolidate everything into one box. When I say everything I mean: computer, game console, visual media center, audio media center, all things that are audo-visual in nature beyond a book. The problem that you will ultimately experience is that this one unit for all services becomes a choke point in your house, unless you only have one room. It is very common in my multi-user domestic facility to have a stereo on in one room, a television on i

        • Wouldn't it be nice to be able to do away with the cd player, dvd player, and vcr (used mostly as a poor man's TiVO) sitting in my entertainment center and just have one box that connects to my primary workstation?

          Throwing in a game console would probably be a stretch, but Apple doesn't seem to have any designs on entering into the game console market. Consolidation of everything A/V outside of that makes quite a bit sense provided that the hardware support is there. And in the past couple of years inexpe

          • >>Wouldn't it be nice to be able to do away with the cd player, dvd player, and vcr (used mostly as a poor man's TiVO) sitting in my entertainment center and just have one box that connects to my primary workstation?

            Yes, until the moment comes when 1) you want to surf the web/hack some code/write a paper and 2) your wife/kids/friends/etc. want to watch a movie or listen to music.
            (Here's a little tip from a married guy... #2 wins, every time).

            Besides, I'm not sure that a fragile laptop is appropriate f

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by tacocat ( 527354 )

              I think you understand the point I'm trying to make here. While there may be cases for someone to want a highly consolidated system (dorms, studios) these might be only cases where something like this can be effective. As a minor point, I can't imagine someone trying to use a laptop for their TV when they have guests over.

              But more significantly, if you look at a home (spouse & kids) you are presenting a picture where each person effectively has their own TV, TiVO, Game Console, Computer, Stereo. Tha

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by mhollis ( 727905 )

          tacocat (527354) wrote:

          I personally do not believe there is any real merit in trying to consolidate everything into one box. When I say everything I mean: computer, game console, visual media center, audio media center, all things that are audo-visual in nature beyond a book. The problem that you will ultimately experience is that this one unit for all services becomes a choke point in your house, unless you only have one room. It is very common in my multi-user domestic facility to have a stereo on in o

    • Why would you want to blow away MythTV?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by booch ( 4157 )
      Take a look at EyeTV [elgato.com]. It's a pretty decent PVR program. I've got their EyeTV 500 hardware to receive HDTV (ATSC), but I've got an EyeTV Hybrid [elgato.com] on order, which will do analog and digital. Add the EyeTV in full-screen mode to Front Row [apple.com], and you've got a pretty competitive media center. I got rid of my DVD player, stereo, and TV, and replaced them all with a Mac mini with the EyeTV and a RadioShark [griffintechnology.com].
    • Not going to happen. Apple's version of a media center is using frontrow to play movies and TV you buy off iTMS.
  • But it seems to me that I just don't feel the Apple hype. Most of the time, there is something equal or better out than the Apple product for a lower price. Still, I guess it's nice to see new [takes on old things] on the market, like we will see, but I just don't expect anything world shattering.
    • out of curiosity: what is better than the current 5G 60GB iPod for a cheaper price?

      n.b. must support mac.
      • Cowon IAudio X5 is comparable at 60GB. There are several advantages (open audio formats including flac, better screen quality, better audio output, simple hard drive interface with no special software needed, tougher build, USB host, battery life). And several disadvantages (can't look at photos while listening to music, except the background, the only video format is uses is hard to make except via their software, and it does not show off the better screen quality). All and all, most reviewers I've seen r

        • the only video format is uses is hard to make except via their software, and it does not show off the better screen quality

          I think the question was "What is better than the current 5G 60GB iPod for a cheaper price?" not "What product costs the same as a 5G 60GB iPod but sucks?"

          What is the point of the "better screen quality," looking at album art? If the video format is screwy and proprietary and doesn't look better on the screen than non-proprietary formats do on the iPod, what is the point of your

        • (I hate doing this, seriously)

          Why do I care if it supports FLAC? Apple provides a compressor and decompressor for ALAC, and you can freely convert between lossless formats without fear.

          Better audio output? Prove it.

          I don't need a simple hard drive interface, it'd be tougher for it to be simpler than iTunes, and I already like Apple's menu organizational structure (the one they paid Creative $100M for), so I don't feel the need to rearrange my menus by rearranging my files.

          What does the Cowon do with USB hos

          • Why do I care if it supports FLAC? Apple provides a compressor and decompressor for ALAC, and you can freely convert between lossless formats without fear.

            Yeah, true enough, but last I checked, due to DRM issues, it's hard to get from ALAC to other formats, Could be wrong.

            Better audio output? Prove it. You have to listen to the both to hear it. Several articles I googled (pretty sure it was on the CNET article as you linked) stated that the audio output quality was better.

            I don't need a simple hard d

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by Graff ( 532189 )

              Yeah, true enough, but last I checked, due to DRM issues, it's hard to get from ALAC to other formats, Could be wrong.

              What DRM issues? The only DRM on anything Apple does is on stuff sold from the iTunes Music Store. Stuff from the iTunes Music Store is not sold in ALAC format, it is sold in M4P format which is a DRM-protected AAC.

              You can choose to rip your CDs in ALAC format which losslessly compresses the sound. There is no DRM involved and you can convert it to another format at your own whim. So if

            • Why do I care if it supports FLAC? Apple provides a compressor and decompressor for ALAC, and you can freely convert between lossless formats without fear.

              Yeah, true enough, but last I checked, due to DRM issues, it's hard to get from ALAC to other formats, Could be wrong.

              I don't use DRMed content of any sort. There currently is no DRMed ALAC content at all, although I keep hearing rumors of it. Apple lets you burn DRMed content to CD, and then rerip it. If they let you do that with DRMed ALAC, you'd have a

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by bla ( 96124 )
          by "n.b. must support mac", I take it you mean that for that result, a notbook must support MacOS? Sorry, none do, but with FreeBSD, Linux, or IMO even Windows, I don't need MacOS.

          no, he probably means Nota Bene [m-w.com], which means he wants information about a digital music player that supports mac.

      • What is better than the current 5G 60GB iPod for a cheaper price?

        "Better" is a vague term. I hear that some products have more features, or support free (as in liberated) formats, but that they are harder to use and look less elegant. Either way, they're probably made by teenagers working 60 hour weeks plus overtime. So by "better," could you please clarify if you mean easier, better looking, more featureful, more liberated, or more ethical?

        • Re:guess I'm just a skeptic (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Yahweh Doesn't Exist ( 906833 ) on Monday September 11, 2006 @09:51AM (#16080513)
          for me better is all about the user experience. I don't believe there is anyone creating anything even remotely close to iPod + iTunes + iTMS, and some of the players put out there with better hardware specs than iPods treat their users horrifically (the one suggested by the other replier can't autosync and can't browse by artist, album, or genre!).

          every aspect of Apple product design is an order of magnitude greater than their nearest competitor. and every great new product Apple releases makes the integrated experience even stronger. so I don't expect to even consider moving away from iPod in the near future but am still curious what "the best of the rest" is.
    • Most of the time, there is something equal or better out than the Apple product for a lower price.

      Hardware-wise, pretty much all of the time.

      Software-wise? Apple's been the leader pretty much since Jaguar came out.

      Apple's a software company. Their hardware is an expensive "dongle" for their software.

  • iTunes 7 (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Jacob Moogberg ( 876462 ) on Monday September 11, 2006 @08:47AM (#16080197)
    I'd say that iTunes 7 is also a given:
    - last year, iTunes 5 then iTunes 6 (iTunes 5.1 in all but name) were released within a month, mostly to make iTunes release version coincide with the business year. iTunes 6 = 2005-06. iTunes 7 = 2006-2007
    - update of some core components to include the movie store
    - need to address the competition, particularly WMP, whose ergonomy is improving with v. 11, especially concerning visual interface and the use of artwork.

    iTunes is still well thought as a MP3 player but Apple needs to put some more buzz and hype into it as it hasn't much evolved for the last two or three years. It's the piece of Apple music strategy that has been the least covered by rumor sites for the last few months but it's determining none the less.
    • I think we'll see two changes with iTunes 7.0:

      1. It will be easier to configure and use.

      2. It will be designed to work with Apple's true video iPod player (aka vPod), as some have suggested for its name).

      • 2. It will be designed to work with Apple's true video iPod player (aka vPod), as some have suggested for its name).

        Now that's just stupid. If Apple was going to call it a vPod, then the original iPod would have been called an mPod or tPod. The i is from the branding they use for most all their consumer products - iTunes, iMovie, iDVD, iMac - and the Pod is a name that, as we are seeing, was intended to allow future expansion beyond music (remember everyone asking about the 1G why it was called iPod and not

        • Oh god please no. In the 80's everything had 2000 appended to make it sound futuristic. In the early 90's everything hip was X-this and X-That. Then came the e-craze. And then Apple started with iEverything. Please no v. When are we going to stop? When the alphabet is run through? And then? Cyrillic?? Arabic?? Kanji?
      • 1. It will be easier to configure and use.

        How could it get any easier?

        Nah, it'll have more integration with the iTunes Music Store.

        It'll integrate some kind of Dashboard-like visualizer based plugin mechanism for controls that'll work better on Mac OS than Windows.

        It'll have "video podcast" support and a way to let you drop your own files into the podcast tab to automatically share and stream them via .mac as podcasts posted to the iTMS.

        And a new DRM scheme to allow people to put restrictions on their Podca
        • Actually, one of the things iTunes 7.0 may allow is paid subscription-based podcast downloads. The Rush Limbaugh radio show web sites allows this, and an integrated version will allow podcast downloads from the likes of ESPN Insider podcast archive.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Seltsam ( 530662 )
      It'd be nice if they dumped QuickTime non-Pro and put all non-Pro QuickTime functions in iTunes.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by ben there... ( 946946 )
        It'd be nice if they dumped QuickTime non-Pro and put all non-Pro QuickTime functions in iTunes.

        No, that would really suck.

        I don't want to open up iTunes just to watch a movie I downloaded/purchased from the web.
  • I think I'm about ready to quit reading Slashdot. Most of the "articles" posted here over the past six months just seem to be warmed over press releases. An announcement about a future announcement is about as low as it gets; regular readers like me are looking for meat, not hype.
  • Well big deal. Letdown of the week last week was the absence of Conroe chips in the "new"" iMacs. Huge screens running on laptop chips is not what I call great technology.
    • Apple made the right decision updating the iMac to a 64-bit processor and using the low power version of the same 64-bit dual core chip family in the product. How many tons of coal will be saved over the lifetime of the first million of those iMacs sold, compared to the same system were it to use the desktop chip, whose primary technology advantage from the home user's perspective would have been that it runs hotter and slurps more electrons.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by laffer1 ( 701823 )
      In case you haven't noticed, iMacs are consumer systems. They also have a small form factor and have had heat issues in the past. A laptop chip is exactly what is needed. If you want power, buy a Mac Pro. Apple doesn't fill the in between market like dell tries to do. You either buy a workstation or a light, friendly desktop.

      I'm seriously considering a new iMac now that they are 64bit. That was my holdup to the mac intel switch. I need something I can test emt64 based stuff on. And no, i don't just

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by fo0bar ( 261207 )
        I'm seriously considering a new iMac now that they are 64bit.

        iMacs were available in G5 models. It was the minis that were G4-only.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by laffer1 ( 701823 )
          Yes, but I want a system I can test AMD64/EMT64 compatible software. A G5 doesn't cut it there. Besides, Apple never got around to using the G5 to its full potential. When Apple announced the Intel switch, my first thought was that they could go 64bit from the beginning and take advantage of the platform. Instead, they used the core chips and caused an additional transition to happen to customers.

      • Apple doesn't fill the in between market like dell tries to do. You either buy a workstation or a light, friendly desktop.

        Apple doesn't *sell* a regular desktop.

        What you're calling the "in between" market is most of the market. Look at what people are actually buying at any computer store: all-in-one PCs flunk in the market, every time, and the only reason Apple can sell them at all is because they make it the only option if you want a Mac... and they're losing sales from everyone who doesn't want a Mac qui

  • please be a phone, please be a phone (Score:4, Funny)

    by bunions ( 970377 ) on Monday September 11, 2006 @12:40PM (#16081875)
    Dear Steve Jobs,

    Just make a goddamn phone already, Jesus fucking Christ!!

    Sincerely,

    bunions

  • Powerbooks? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by david-bo ( 578532 ) on Monday September 11, 2006 @03:42PM (#16083629)
    What about updated Merom based Powerbooks? All major PC brands has announced Merom based laptops. Apple can't lag that much without losing brand value etc.

    Ooh, and I want to order a new Powerbook ASAP!
  • To complement the movie downloads from iTMS.
  • In offering the iMac in a 24" version it didn't just get a bigger screen. It got more pixels. It is 1920*1200, making it able to natively show 1920*1080 (1080i) HDTV at full detail, something most $4000 plasma televisions don't do. They're almost all only supporting 720p natively (720 pixels tall).

    Perhaps it is no coincidence that El Gato Systems [elgato.com] set the second week of September as the ship date for their Eye TV Hybrid [elgato.com] which allows recent Macs to watch, record and play NTSC (analog) and HDTV (off air ATSC
  • The Apple Store has been replaced with Apple's usual "We'll be right back" sticky note... that's usually a good sign that we'll be seeing some new products today...

Slashdot Top Deals

I've noticed several design suggestions in your code.

Close