[WinTard]

McDaveH said:

>>dinzdale wrote:
>>I love the apple/pc debate, because it highlights this strange identity religion of brand loyalty. In the end, it's just two tools, and you pick the one that does the job at the price point you want. (Incidentally I have both: built a PC for gaming and work, use an iMac for sound recording, have an iPhone, and use a non-apple mp3 player (iRiver clix)). But, imo apple's support for DRM-plagued files (iTunes store) makes them a huge loser - aggressively leveraging their market share to protect their stake in the hardware market at the expense of their loyal customers - i.e. not very hip at all (but who expects them to be?...) ok.
>Unfortunately iTunes dropped DRM on music a few months ago. Still, at least it was better than a right-click comment. Have fun with your PCs oh, & MP3 is 20 years old this year. Good to see you're on the cutting edge!
>
>McD

[quote name='McDaveH']
>

rgreen4 said:

> Actually MP3 is a good format and unlike many of the others not tied to one brand as are several of the others.
As is VHS, MP3 is MPEG1. This century we're at MPEG4 (AAC, contributed by Dolby) from the same standards group not tied in anywhere.

McD

Excerpt from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP3
MPEG-1 Audio Layer 3, more commonly referred to as MP3, is a digital audio encoding format using a form of lossy data compression. It is a common audio format for consumer audio storage, as well as a de facto standard of digital audio compression for the transfer and playback of music on digital audio players. MP3 is an audio-specific format that was designed by the Moving Picture Experts Group. The group was formed by several teams of engineers at Fraunhofer IIS in Erlangen, Germany, AT&T-Bell Labs in Murray Hill, NJ, USA, Thomson-Brandt, and CCETT as well as others. It was approved as an ISO/IEC standard in 1991.

Excerpt from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-4]
MPEG-4 is a collection of methods defining [compression of audio and visual (AV) digital data. It was introduced in late 1998 and designated a standard for a group of audio and video coding formats and related technology agreed upon by the ISO/IEC Moving Picture Experts Group (MPEG) under the formal standard ISO/IEC 14496. Uses of MPEG-4 include compression of AV data for web (streaming media) and CD distribution, voice (telephone, videophone) and broadcast television applications.

MPEG-4 absorbs many of the features of MPEG-1 and MPEG-2 and other related standards, adding new features such as (extended) VRML support for 3D rendering, object-oriented composite files (including audio, video and VRML objects), support for externally-specified Digital Rights Management and various types of interactivity. AAC (Advanced Audio Codec) was standardized as an adjunct to MPEG-2 (as Part 7) before MPEG-4 was issued.

MPEG-4 is still a developing standard and is divided into a number of parts. Companies promoting MPEG-4 compatibility do not always clearly state which "part" level compatibility they are referring to. The key parts to be aware of are MPEG-4 part 2 (including Advanced Simple Profile, used by codecs such as DivX, Xvid, Nero Digital and 3ivx and by Quicktime 6) and MPEG-4 part 10 (MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 or Advanced Video Coding, used by the x264 codec, by Nero Digital AVC, by Quicktime 7, and by next-gen DVD formats like HD DVD and Blu-ray Disc).

Most of the features included in MPEG-4 are left to individual developers to decide whether to implement them. This means that there are probably no complete implementations of the entire MPEG-4 set of standards. To deal with this, the standard includes the concept of "profiles" and "levels", allowing a specific set of capabilities to be defined in a manner appropriate for a subset of applications.

Initially, MPEG-4 was aimed primarily at low bit-rate video communications; however, its scope was later expanded to be much more of a multimedia coding standard. MPEG-4 is efficient across a variety of bit-rates ranging from a few kilobits per second to tens of megabits per second. MPEG-4 provides the following functionalities:

* Improved coding efficiency
* Ability to encode mixed media data (video, audio, speech)
* Error resilience to enable robust transmission
* Ability to interact with the audio-visual scene generated at the receiver

First, all PC users (Microsoft and Apple alike) enjoy the benefits of MPEG-4. All the codecs are there, for free! And excuse me, but in order to display the Dolby Digital logo, you must pay royalty to Dolby Laboratories. Dolby is old news... Dolby Labs was founded by Ray Dolby in Britain in 1965. Exactly 44 year old technologies...


Second, MP3 isn't obsolete technology at all. It just went beyond AAC. Please see:
Thomson Pumps up Volume With Tools for MP3HD Lossless Codec

Third, MPEG-4 isn't an Apple invention or exclusive domain, contrary to the BS some ignorant FUD suggests.

And finally, the most ubiquitous parts (algorithms now implemented in silicon ^1^ ) of MPEG-4 are MPEG-4 part 10 (MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 or Advanced Video Coding, used by the x264 codec, by Nero Digital AVC, a company that produced the Nero Burning software suite, first and foremost for the Microsoft Windows PC initially, then subsequently ported their apps to Linux. I am unsure of the Mac camp... But who cares? (Upon research on http://www.nero.com/enu/index.html, I can't find an Apple MacOS version or port).

Now who's behind the times?

MPEG-1 Audio Layer 3, is colloquically known as MP3. MPEG-1 is a subset of MPEG-2 which is a subset of MPEG-4. Technically, the benefits are higher lossy compression { for the layman, it means equal quality picture and sound in less bandwidth or absolute file size NOT higher quality yet more DRM } whereas the ultimate compression technology is zero loss. Also MPEG4 AAC (Advanced Audio Codec) was standardized as an adjunct to MPEG-2 (as Part 7) before MPEG-4 was issued. Effectively the audio portions of the AAC are MPEG-2, under MPEG-4.

MPEG-2 is the standard used to encode all DVD's picture and sound in the full multi-channel Dolby Digital methodology. Since day one the DVD standard has appeared.

-----
^1^ Examples of MPEG4 in silicon:

First MPEG4 decoder in silicon: (2002) For the PC of course!
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/SigmaAnnouncesFirstMPEG-4DecoderCardforPCUse%3BNewREALmagic...-a082539365
Sigma Designs (Nasdaq:SIGM), a leader in IP video streaming See streaming video and video stream. solutions, announced the first MPEG-4 client player add-in card for the PC. Marketed under the name REALmagic Xcard™, Sigma's newest MPEG-4 offering turns a PC into a home theatre solution, providing TV playback of top entertainment content from DivX Networks, DVDs and new Internet See Web 2.0 and Internet2. Streaming MediaSee streaming audio, streaming video and digital media hub.
..... Click the link for more information. Alliance (ISMAISMA

See: International Security Market Association
..... Click the link for more information.) compliant video streams. Sigma's REALmagic Xcard will retail for $99.95 and will be available initially from the company's REALmagic Online store at www.buyrealmagic.com starting March 2002.

http://www.cedmagazi...-4-silicon.aspx
Conexant bows MPEG-4 silicon
Jeff Baumgartner
CedMagazine.com - November 29, 2004
Conexant Systems has introduced a family of high-definition television decoding silicon based on the advanced MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 codec.
Use of the more efficient compression technology in Conexant's CX2418X family will enable digital video providers to improve bandwidth utilization over traditional MPEG-2-based systems, the company said.
Conexant said the new silicon is the first set of products to result from the company's acquisition of Amphion Semiconductor in June 2004.
Conexant expects to reach volume production in Q2 2004. The chips are priced at $20 per unit in quantities of 10,000.

Please google: Results 1 - 10 of about 545,000 for mpeg4 in silicon. (0.08 seconds) for more eye opening and mind expanding reading... (Which some of us tarded Windows PC users like to do) It's hard to stay at the leading-edge, with a single company it appears? Especially one who claims to invent everything, and is being copied by all others, when in fact the exact opposite happens, in REALITY.

~~~~~~~~~~
None of us is a smart as all of us.
{Japanese Proverb}

[dinzdale]

"iTunes offers customers a simple, one-click option to easily upgrade their entire library of previously purchased songs to the higher quality DRM-free iTunes Plus format for just 30 cents per song or 30 percent of the album price. "

So you have to repurchase the music you already "own" when you could have bought it at the original apple DRM iTunes price (99 cents) from Amazon with no DRM? Speaks for itself.

Cutting edge lol. No need to get poopy, McD. I'm not asking you to go scrape that little white apple off your Volvo station wagon.

[rgreen4]

Not to beat a dead horse, but you might be interested in this quote from Wikipedia:

>Overall, the AAC format allows developers more flexibility to design codecs than MP3 does, and corrects many of the >design choices made in the original MPEG-1 audio specification. This increased flexibility often leads to more concurrent >encoding strategies and, as a result, to more efficient compression. However, in terms of whether AAC is better than .MP3, the advantages of AAC are not entirely decisive, and the MP3 specification, although antiquated, has proven >surprisingly robust in spite of considerable flaws. AAC and HE-AAC are better than MP3 at low bit rates (typically less >than 128 kilobits per second)^[citation needed]^.
>This is especially true at very low bit rates where the superior stereo coding, pure MDCT, and more optimal transform >window sizes leave MP3 unable to compete. However, as bit rate increases, the efficiency of an audio format becomes >less important relative to the efficiency of the encoder's implementation, and the intrinsic advantage AAC holds over MP3 >no longer dominates audio quality.

In addition, while mp3 files can be read by almost every music playing device, AAC files are currently generally limited to Apple products. Once more tying you to their brand, the Apple tax anyone?

[lionroar]

you can get a dell or hp with linux on it which will be even lower than the one with windows.

[WinTard]

lionroar said:

you can get a dell or hp with linux on it which will be even lower than the one with windows.

Yeah, by about $50 as evidenced by the Dell Mini-9 Ubuntu $250, and Dell Mini-9 XP $300. And do it yourself Dell Mini-9 with OS X for $350.

Proof? http://www.engadget....ed-to-run-os-x/

~~~~~~~~~~
I like:
>Here's to the crazy ones, the misfits, the rebels, the troublemakers, the round pegs in the square holes... the ones who see things differently -- they're not fond of rules... You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them, but the only thing you can't do is ignore them because they change things... they push the human race forward, and while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius, because the ones who are crazy enough to think that they can change the world, are the ones who do.
>~ Steve Jobs

I don't:
>We don't know how to make a $500 computer that's not a piece of junk.
>~ Steven Jobs said last year in 2008 during a conference call with Wall Street analysts...

What he really meant, is the profit margin is too thin for Apple...

[warezeistheshizz]

microsoft is still good is just there doing stuff that there buyers don't like... they need to satisfy the buyers

[McDaveH]

rgreen4 said:

Not to beat a dead horse, but you might be interested in this quote from Wikipedia:

>Overall, the AAC format allows developers more flexibility to design codecs than MP3 does, and corrects many of the >design choices made in the original MPEG-1 audio specification. This increased flexibility often leads to more concurrent >encoding strategies and, as a result, to more efficient compression. However, in terms of whether AAC is better than .MP3, the advantages of AAC are not entirely decisive, and the MP3 specification, although antiquated, has proven >surprisingly robust in spite of considerable flaws. AAC and HE-AAC are better than MP3 at low bit rates (typically less >than 128 kilobits per second)^[citation needed]^.
>This is especially true at very low bit rates where the superior stereo coding, pure MDCT, and more optimal transform >window sizes leave MP3 unable to compete. However, as bit rate increases, the efficiency of an audio format becomes >less important relative to the efficiency of the encoder's implementation, and the intrinsic advantage AAC holds over MP3 >no longer dominates audio quality.

In addition, while mp3 files can be read by almost every music playing device, AAC files are currently generally limited to Apple products. Once more tying you to their brand, the Apple tax anyone?

That'll be the quote with the citation needed - time to read up! As mentioned above (if you can call a whole page by WinTard a mention) AAC is not Apple-only, nor is it restricted to Apple products, it's an example of an industry standard format they adopted ahead of the crowd. I did this exercise a while ago but just to make sure I checked the top 10 digital media players at amazon.com but they we mostly iPods, so I checked the top 20 - still iPods anyway the two players that make it into the top 25; Sansa Fuze & MS Zune also support it and have for a while as have players from Samsung, Sony and a whole load of others I'll never see.

Apple tax is MS propaganda - lap it up!

McD

[McDaveH]

Feisty if a little wordy (with only a few your own) I'll give you that WinTard. It's a shame most of what you reference has nothing to do with my post but let's see if we can paraphrase to keep it brief.

Quote

First, all PC users (Microsoft and Apple alike) enjoy the benefits of MPEG-4. All the codecs are there, for free! And excuse me, but in order to display the Dolby Digital logo, you must pay royalty to Dolby Laboratories. Dolby is old news... Dolby Labs was founded by Ray Dolby in Britain in 1965. Exactly 44 year old technologies...

I don't deny MPEG codecs are available as optional extras for other platforms, the reference to Dolby has nothing to do with their other standards, merely their Involvement with the development of AAC

Quote

Second, MP3 isn't obsolete technology at all. It just went beyond AAC. Please see:
Thomson Pumps up Volume With Tools for MP3HD Lossless Codec

>
AAC also has lossless, low-latency, high-efficiency & other forms all in the current MPEG set (MPEG-4) Thomson are clinging to MPEG-1 (although MP3HD actually has nothing to do with it - just playing on the 'brand') like Sony clung to MPEG-2. Let's face it, most legal digital music is in AAC, most music players support it - time to move on!

Quote

Third, MPEG-4 isn't an Apple invention or exclusive domain, contrary to the BS some ignorant FUD suggests.

Never said it was. Apple just adopted the AV codecs well in advance of most and at system-level which is why...

Quote

And finally, the most ubiquitous parts (algorithms now implemented in silicon ^1^ ) of MPEG-4 are MPEG-4 part 10 (MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 or Advanced Video Coding, used by the x264 codec, by Nero Digital AVC, a company that produced the Nero Burning software suite, first and foremost for the Microsoft Windows PC initially, then subsequently ported their apps to Linux. I am unsure of the Mac camp... But who cares? (Upon research on http://www.nero.com/enu/index.html, I can't find an Apple MacOS version or port).

Now who's behind the times?

>
(You're not going to like me for this one) The keyword you mention is Quicktime 6. In 2002, the same year as PC users were fiddling around installing third-party codecs and bizarre euro-UI software packages and having to play back through hardware cards, Apple release Quicktime 6 and in doing so instantly integrated MPEG-4 right into the media system that drives all OSX media software - all media systems that used QT (including iMovie, Safari could now play &/or encode MPEG-4 pt2. In 2005 the same thing happened with MPEG-4/AVC (H.264) but we didn't make a fuss - because it was just inherent in Quicktime.

Quote

MPEG-1 Audio Layer 3, is colloquically known as MP3. MPEG-1 is a subset of MPEG-2 which is a subset of MPEG-4. Technically, the benefits are higher lossy compression { for the layman, it means equal quality picture and sound in less bandwidth or absolute file size NOT higher quality yet more DRM } whereas the ultimate compression technology is zero loss. Also MPEG4 AAC (Advanced Audio Codec) was standardized as an adjunct to MPEG-2 (as Part 7) before MPEG-4 was issued. Effectively the audio portions of the AAC are MPEG-2, under MPEG-4.

>
Not according to MPEG (or at least one of their members)

MPEG-2 is the standard used to encode all DVD's picture and sound in the full multi-channel Dolby Digital methodology. Since day one the DVD standard has appeared.
Again you're confusing Dolby's involvement see above


^1^ Examples of MPEG4 in silicon:

First MPEG4 decoder in silicon: (2002) For the PC of course!
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/SigmaAnnouncesFirstMPEG-4DecoderCardforPCUse%3BNewREALmagic...-a082539365
Sigma Designs (Nasdaq:SIGM), a leader in IP video streaming See streaming video and video stream. solutions, announced the first MPEG-4 client player add-in card for the PC. Marketed under the name REALmagic Xcard(TM), Sigma's newest MPEG-4 offering turns a PC into a home theatre solution, providing TV playback of top entertainment content from DivX Networks, DVDs and new Internet See Web 2.0 and Internet2. Streaming MediaSee streaming audio, streaming video and digital media hub.
..... Click the link for more information. Alliance (ISMAISMA

See: International Security Market Association
..... Click the link for more information.) compliant video streams. Sigma's REALmagic Xcard will retail for $99.95 and will be available initially from the company's REALmagic Online store at www.buyrealmagic.com starting March 2002.

http://www.cedmagazi...-4-silicon.aspx
Conexant bows MPEG-4 silicon
Jeff Baumgartner
CedMagazine.com - November 29, 2004
Conexant Systems has introduced a family of high-definition television decoding silicon based on the advanced MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 codec.
Use of the more efficient compression technology in Conexant's CX2418X family will enable digital video providers to improve bandwidth utilization over traditional MPEG-2-based systems, the company said.
Conexant said the new silicon is the first set of products to result from the company's acquisition of Amphion Semiconductor in June 2004.
Conexant expects to reach volume production in Q2 2004. The chips are priced at $20 per unit in quantities of 10,000.

Please google: Results 1 - 10 of about 545,000 for mpeg4 in silicon. (0.08 seconds) for more eye opening and mind expanding reading... (Which some of us tarded Windows PC users like to do) It's hard to stay at the leading-edge, with a single company it appears? Especially one who claims to invent everything, and is being copied by all others, when in fact the exact opposite happens, in REALITY.
>
In 2000 our PowerPC G4 SIMD was 7 years ahead of Intel's and by 2002 allowed playback of MPEG-4/ASP (part2) in SOFTWARE, no cards required. Apple don't invent much they just get it right before most others who keep you strung along with token efforts though you think of it as innovation. How's that 'REALITY' looking now?

~~~~~~~~~~
None of us is a smart as all of us.
{Japanese Proverb}

Even if articulating the smartness of all is impossible & hence it's just a mechanism to silence the individual
(God help me - I'm even arguing with your pearls of wisdom now!)

McD

[aquavista0120]

To Papaspud, I bet your one of those ppl who are stuck in the past and think a Macintosh can't play games. Do u live in a rock or something? If you've noticed the Hardware Specs for the current line of Macs (desktops and notebooks alike) they are MORE than qualified to play games. It's the developers fault however if they weren't perfectly coded for Mac. That's why technology such as Apple's BootCamp and VMWareFusion, even Parallels is good. In fact, EVERY ONE, who actually uses a Mac on a daily basis say that a Mac is a better Windows PC than any other PC can. And since your a gamer, I'll give you this PERFECT gaming service. It's onlive.com , now as a BETA, it provides MILLION of titles of games for all OSes for FREE.

[VHMP01]

I would only say: “It is Not Cool to be Mac”, instead of: "I am not cool enough to be a Mac person"… PCs are far superior hardware for less $$$, much more applications, greater choices, etc. The phrase “Not enough” is for the Inferior with a superiority trauma. Thank you.

[drmac]

Not interested in specious claims of technical superiority either way, but some Apple fanatics make me laugh. If Steven Jobs announced the release of the iTurd, thousands of Apple fanboys would camp out waiting to be the first to buy, without even waiting for the price to be halved in three months. Oh wait. I understand you can already get the iFart App for your iPhone.

[WinTard]

Yes, but there is no war here. The only competition or perceived war between Apple vs Microsoft only comes from Apple fans it appears. When do you hear of a Micro$oftee PeeCee users comparing themselves to Apple Artsee-Fartsee fans? ;)

McDaveH said:

>{Snipped}

Quote

AAC also has lossless, low-latency, high-efficiency & other forms all in the current MPEG set (MPEG-4) Thomson are clinging to MPEG-1 (although MP3HD actually has nothing to do with it - just playing on the 'brand') like Sony clung to MPEG-2. Let's face it, most legal digital music is in AAC, most music players support it - time to move on!

You are wrong! MP3HD is a lossless compression algorithm, compatible with existing implementations (in software or silicon) of MPEG-1 Layer 3 decoding algorithms. Which means Thompson achieved compression, with zero loss (read HD, Hi-Fi) yet still fully backwards compatible with any MP3 player implementation. The players do not have to change at all, either software, or hardware. Which means MP3HD will play verbatim as-is in my car, my DVD player, my exiting MP3 players, etc... Just the encoding tool changes... Now no other product can state that. I am well aware of AAC lossless. But am using (like my re-direct states) open-source FLAC. I HATE AAC due to the DRM portions, and will avoid it like the plague. Not because I am a pirate, but because THEY the companies, including Apple are. They want to manage their rights on something I bought? Who would be stupid enough to sheepishly follow the wolves to the slaughterhouse? Anyways, it's a moot point, because today, most of my devices do not support AAC, yet MP3 is supported. Period. As well, it might very well be time for AAC to disappear, unless you are using Dolby Digital 5, 6, or 7+1 within your headphones earbuds with a vibrating subwoofer in your pants and a pull-cart for the attached battery behind you?

Quote

(You're not going to like me for this one) The keyword you mention is Quicktime 6. In 2002, the same year as PC users were fiddling around installing third-party codecs and bizarre euro-UI software packages and having to play back through hardware cards, Apple release Quicktime 6 and in doing so instantly integrated MPEG-4 right into the media system that drives all OSX media software - all media systems that used QT (including iMovie, Safari could now play &/or encode MPEG-4 pt2. In 2005 the same thing happened with MPEG-4/AVC (H.264) but we didn't make a fuss - because it was just inherent in Quicktime.

My point was that those algorithms you claim were present in Quicktime 6 were in fact invented by Nero Digital, a PC software ISV, for Window PCs. They didn't have to install any obscure or funky software, simply get the Nero Burning Rom software suite. Like Divx, the base codecs were free, and their products always have been on a free-trial basis. The codecs didn't stop however, if you didn't purchase the evaluation. The fact the Nero Digital codecs got implemented in silicon, was to show the advance, not retardness of the PC industry. Back in 2002, that was exclusively available for the PC architecture. Period. Yet anything and everything used under Apple Mac was also available to Windows PC, like Quicktime 6. Doh!...

Quote

> MPEG-1 Audio Layer 3, is colloquically known as MP3. MPEG-1 is a subset of MPEG-2 which is a subset of MPEG-4. Technically, the benefits are higher lossy compression { for the layman, it means equal quality picture and sound in less bandwidth or absolute file size NOT higher quality yet more DRM } whereas the ultimate compression technology is zero loss. Also MPEG4 AAC (Advanced Audio Codec) was standardized as an adjunct to MPEG-2 (as Part 7) before MPEG-4 was issued. Effectively the audio portions of the AAC are MPEG-2, under MPEG-4.
Not according to MPEG (or at least one of their members)

You read it wrong. Zero-loss always has been and will remain the ultimate compression technology. However, practicality dictates that whatever can't be perceived by a majority of people, isn't necessary, thus the rationale behind lossy compression algorithms. They statistically tune out what most regard as unimportant, or couldn't even discern is missing. Thus MPEG attempts to optimize not quality, but efficiency. In those terms, zero-loss is useless. Now try to tell that to a real music fan, audiophile like me, who has spent literally over $100K+ on their home theatre just in electronics over the past twenty years... Just because you don't care, doesn't mean others would agree. This argument about only people who can afford it buy apple Apple is hilarious! You should see how much some real passionate PC, car, technology, Video, and Audio enthusiasts spend on their hobbies.

Anyway, my regards, and let's focus on what's right, not wrong? I have no beef with Apple. Only with Apple cult followers stepping all over PC users, just for some unknown reason???

I say live and let live. Of course I'm not helping the situation, because when a retort on my part comes back, here we go again, ping, pong, ping, pong...

But I cannot (or should say will not) stay silent in face of fallacies, from either side. Thus I speak up.

Peace!
~~~~~~~~~~
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak. Courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.
~ Winston Churchill

[rasmasyean]

What's really sad is that this marketing ad to the general audience demonstrates the lack of understanding of computers by many Americans. The "price" isn't the only thing that should be considered. The real comparison is really simple. A computer by itself is useless. What you want are the "applications".
Windows runs practically every application out there that you will ever need at a much lower price.
Macs cannot run most applications out there and you pay a higher price for marketing costs and fashion premium.
Unfortunately, the above can potentially confuse many Americans who just don't know what a computer is capable of and how it can apply to their lives beyond email and a few internet sites perhaps. And don't even throw Linux into this picture.

[alexb]

i agree that nothing comes close to OS X. i am a newer mac owner coming from windows xp and i have another pc with vista and my mac virtualizes Win 7. OS X, in my opinion, does more out of the box. it handles windows (iso) and mac disk images out of the box very well. i actually make the windows iso disks on my mac for my other windows pcs. it can also understand all disk partition formats and can handle most archive formats (zip, ...) natively where as windows needs 3rd party apps. windows only can work with FAT and NTSF where as OSX can work with those plus its own. i've gone thru the utilities folder and have found more truly useful programs in there than i have in the windows counterpart of that folder. Dock is much more convenient, even tho it is simply a place holder for apps, than the start bar and the Spotlight utility is far better than the search wizard.... not to mention a million times faster. i remember when i had to search for files in XP how long it took for the wizard to come up with results. Spotlight is instantaneous. i just type in the first few letters and all relevant results appear live at the keystrokes. Spaces and Expose let me get more work done. tis is something microsoft finally sort of copied with the desktop button in the task bar that takes you either to the desktop or displays the open windows sort of like expose does but more like a cross between expose and alt-tab

i would like to agree also with another commenter. most people who hate macs have only used them for half hour. they complain that is more complicated to learn than windows. i felt somewhat lost coming from xp to mac. i had to spend some time learning how the OS worked like where it puts even simple things like downloaded files. i had to learn to appreciate the OS by living with it. the windows people who hate mac never go thru that learning phase. they expect it to work like windows and when they find they are a bit lost, they complain and convince themselves that OS X is an horrible without fully testing its capabilities.

[rgreen4]

You obviously have not used Vista very much as it will open a zip file without any third party apps. I do it all the time.

[rasmasyean]

Try comparing current generations with current generations alexb. XP came out in 2001. Should I go ahead and make a counterargument against yours by comparing Vista to OS 9?
Besides, it's great that you find the OSX features and navigating the computer more pleasent than what you are used to with Windows XP. To each their own. But here's a news flash. People don't buy computers to futz arround with the "native features" of the operating systems or whatever it is you find so exciting about file systems and docks. People buy computers for real-world applications of it. Whether that be software support or hardware support, Mac suck in both regards. Apple is closed to what they want you to use...and furthurmore, the technology is not built into OSX to easily support a large range of software and hardware even if the manufacturers want to make it for OSX. THAT is why Windows has such a large advantage over OSX...especially in business where cost efficiency AND effectiveness really do matter.
If you want to just play arround with OSX file managers and poke here and there for fun, by all means go crazy. But don't think that just because you understand what's going on in OSX, that makes it much more "advanced". In fact, it's probably that Windows is beyond your comprehention that you make these statements. Since you probably didn't know, there are multiple certifications and other qualifications that are acquired through expensive professional training (some of which are post-college) for VARIOUS parts of Windows and it's related systems. And this allows you to perform a certain job amoung many related to Windows. There isn't an equivalent for OSX. Oh, yeah...that's because OSX is soooo advanced.

[vijaesh]

when Apple switched over to Intel platform half their exclusiveness was over. When Pirated copies of OS X were floating over the net , i guess most PC users got a taste of a MAC without even spending a fortune !! Now agreed that OS X looks nice , does the job great ... but....I repeat again it cant match the unlimited softwares available(third party) for a Windows machine. Be it be any OS windows beats them all in this respect. Again about OSX , i seen MAC user go on and on praising their MACs . i ask with all respect to MAC users ..What a MAC can do which a XP /Vista machine cant ??? .... Dont tell it dosent hang ,gives a BLue screen ...this isnt a problem of a PC machine by itself ...it happens b/c of hardware and software issues...with so many third party software / hardware support u cant expect everything to work 100% perfect. so DONT go on blaming Microsoft for every problem in a PC .
Again I used a MAC with OSX .Agreed it functions nice...but i think the 'value for money' factor is decreasing in a MAC. b/c u can get excellent PC Laptops /desktops ....load with Linux /windows OS...and it works great with half the cost... and to end I WILL SAY when Windows 7 hits the market.... Apple guys will have to rethink b/c their "leapord ' may soon bacome a "cat" !!

[McDaveH]

WinTard said:

Yes, but there is no war here. The only competition or perceived war between Apple vs Microsoft only comes from Apple fans it appears. When do you hear of a Micro$oftee PeeCee users comparing themselves to Apple Artsee-Fartsee fans? ;)

>
Yet this whole blog stems from an Apple-bashing ad campaign which clearly wasn't started by Apple fans.

>

McDaveH said:

>{Snipped}
> AAC also has lossless, low-latency, high-efficiency & other forms all in the current MPEG set (MPEG-4) Thomson are clinging to MPEG-1 (although MP3HD actually has nothing to do with it - just playing on the 'brand') like Sony clung to MPEG-2. Let's face it, most legal digital music is in AAC, most music players support it - time to move on!

You are wrong! MP3HD is a lossless compression algorithm, compatible with existing implementations (in software or silicon) of MPEG-1 Layer 3 decoding algorithms. Which means Thompson achieved compression, with zero loss (read HD, Hi-Fi) yet still fully backwards compatible with any MP3 player implementation. The players do not have to change at all, either software, or hardware. Which means MP3HD will play verbatim as-is in my car, my DVD player, my exiting MP3 players, etc... Just the encoding tool changes... Now no other product can state that. I am well aware of AAC lossless. But am using (like my re-direct states) open-source FLAC. I HATE AAC due to the DRM portions, and will avoid it like the plague. Not because I am a pirate, but because THEY the companies, including Apple are. They want to manage their rights on something I bought? Who would be stupid enough to sheepishly follow the wolves to the slaughterhouse? Anyways, it's a moot point, because today, most of my devices do not support AAC, yet MP3 is supported. Period. As well, it might very well be time for AAC to disappear, unless you are using Dolby Digital 5, 6, or 7+1 within your headphones earbuds with a vibrating subwoofer in your pants and a pull-cart for the attached battery behind you?

>
Where did I say MP3HD wasn't lossless? I simply said it wasn't in the original MPEG-1 spec. which, incidentally, tops out at 384Kbps. Good luck getting those MP3 players to play 500-900Kbps profiles which MP3HD generates. I'm not sure I could HATE a codec especially when the DRM portions are no longer used anywhere and using technology to enforce useage rights - how dare they!

Quote

> (You're not going to like me for this one) The keyword you mention is Quicktime 6. In 2002, the same year as PC users were fiddling around installing third-party codecs and bizarre euro-UI software packages and having to play back through hardware cards, Apple release Quicktime 6 and in doing so instantly integrated MPEG-4 right into the media system that drives all OSX media software - all media systems that used QT (including iMovie, Safari could now play &/or encode MPEG-4 pt2. In 2005 the same thing happened with MPEG-4/AVC (H.264) but we didn't make a fuss - because it was just inherent in Quicktime.

My point was that those algorithms you claim were present in Quicktime 6 were in fact invented by Nero Digital, a PC software ISV, for Window PCs. They didn't have to install any obscure or funky software, simply get the Nero Burning Rom software suite. Like Divx, the base codecs were free, and their products always have been on a free-trial basis. The codecs didn't stop however, if you didn't purchase the evaluation. The fact the Nero Digital codecs got implemented in silicon, was to show the advance, not retardness of the PC industry. Back in 2002, that was exclusively available for the PC architecture. Period. Yet anything and everything used under Apple Mac was also available to Windows PC, like Quicktime 6. Doh!...

No, MPEG-4/ASP or AVC algorithms were not invented by Nero. Nero did an early implementation which was apparently adopted by some hardware vendors for the PC market, presumably because Intel processors were a bit behind. While QT was available for Windows very few applications were written for it whereas on the Mac it forms the primary media architecture instantly upgrading many apps. In fact Nero Digital v1 with MPEG-4/AVC wasn't released until 2006 the year after QT7 again plugged it in at system level for OSX, so not leading edge then.

Quote

> > MPEG-1 Audio Layer 3, is colloquically known as MP3. MPEG-1 is a subset of MPEG-2 which is a subset of MPEG-4. Technically, the benefits are higher lossy compression { for the layman, it means equal quality picture and sound in less bandwidth or absolute file size NOT higher quality yet more DRM } whereas the ultimate compression technology is zero loss. Also MPEG4 AAC (Advanced Audio Codec) was standardized as an adjunct to MPEG-2 (as Part 7) before MPEG-4 was issued. Effectively the audio portions of the AAC are MPEG-2, under MPEG-4.
> Not according to MPEG (or at least one of their members)

You read it wrong. Zero-loss always has been and will remain the ultimate compression technology. However, practicality dictates that whatever can't be perceived by a majority of people, isn't necessary, thus the rationale behind lossy compression algorithms. They statistically tune out what most regard as unimportant, or couldn't even discern is missing. Thus MPEG attempts to optimize not quality, but efficiency. In those terms, zero-loss is useless. Now try to tell that to a real music fan, audiophile like me, who has spent literally over $100K+ on their home theatre just in electronics over the past twenty years... Just because you don't care, doesn't mean others would agree. This argument about only people who can afford it buy apple Apple is hilarious! You should see how much some real passionate PC, car, technology, Video, and Audio enthusiasts spend on their hobbies.

The orginal comment was compressed MP3 vs compressed AAC (upon which an MPEG member comments in favour of the latter) - you hijacked it with your own audiophilic lossless vigour, ironically, the only loss was the point.

Quote

Anyway, my regards, and let's focus on what's right, not wrong? I have no beef with Apple. Only with Apple cult followers stepping all over PC users, just for some unknown reason???

You started it! (as usual)

I say live and let live. Of course I'm not helping the situation, because when a retort on my part comes back, here we go again, ping, pong, ping, pong...
Now where would we be without the ping-pong? & more of your own words this time!

But I cannot (or should say will not) stay silent in face of fallacies, from either side. Thus I speak up.

Peace!
~~~~~~~~~~
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak. Courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.
~ Winston Churchill
He was talking about his wife

I would say goodbye, but I think farewell is more likely

McD

[WinTard]

Hey McDaveH,

I'll let you have the last word. Have a nice life! I will. :)

~~~~~~~~~~
Nancy Astor: ?Sir, if you were my husband, I would give you poison.?
Churchill: ?If I were your husband I would take it.?
~ Winston Churchill

[WinTard]

Dear All,

I'd like to bring the point that all these various units are being manufactured under a single roof:

Excerpt from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foxconn
Foxconn (???) is the Trade name of the Taiwan based firm Hon Hai Precision Industry Co. (Ltd.) (London Stock Exchange:HHPD). Foxconn is the largest manufacturer of electronics and Computer components worldwide, and mainly manufactures on contract to other companies. Although sometimes referred to as an Original Equipment Manufacturer, Foxconn would be more accurately described as an Original Design Manufacturer.^+[/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed]^

Among other things, Foxconn produces the [Mac mini, the iPod and the iPhone for Apple; Intel-branded motherboards for Intel Corp.; various orders for American computer retailers Dell and Hewlett Packard; the PlayStation 2 and PlayStation 3 for Sony; the Wii for Nintendo; the Xbox 360 for Microsoft; cell phones for Motorola; and the Amazon Kindle.^[2]|#citenote-1]^ ^[[3]|#citenote-wsj-2]^ ^[[4]|#cite_note-3]^

The company was founded in 1974 as a manufacturer of plastic products (notably connectors) by [Terry Gou, who remains its CEO. It has been listed on the Taiwan Stock Exchange since 1991.

Foxconn mainly manufactures in China; in 2007 it employed 450,000 people there and was China's largest exporter.^+[/wiki/Wikipedia:Citationneeded]^ The company opened its first manufacturing plant in China in 1988, a factory in [Shenzhen that is now the company's largest, with more than 270,000 employees.^[3]|#citenote-wsj-2]^ Beginning in 1994, Foxconn purchased development centres in the [United States and Japan. The years 1998 and 1999 saw the establishment of additional manufacturing plants in the United Kingdom and the US. As of 2007, the company and its subsidiaries owned plants in the Czech Republic, Hungary, Mexico, Brazil, India and Vietnam.^[[3]|#citenote-wsj-2]^

So let's stop the feuding, and enjoy the best the world has to offer. We're all brothers and cousins!

~~~~~~~~~~
He who sacrifices his conscience to ambition burns a picture to obtain the ashes.
{Chinese Proverb}

I am fearful when I see people substituting fear for reason.
~ Klaatu

A life spent making mistakes is not only more honorable, but more useful than a life spent doing nothing.
~ George Bernard Shaw

I will either find a way, or make one.
{Latin Proverb}

The Stone Age did not end because humans ran out of stones. It ended because it was time for a re-think about how we live.
~ William McDonaugh

It is better to be prepared for an opportunity and not have one than to have an opportunity and not be prepared.
~ Whitney Young, Jr.

Beauty without virtue is as a flower without perfume.
{French Proverb}

Better a diamond with a flaw than a pebble without one.
{Chinese Proverb}