Magrathea
Apr 6, 11:23 PM
Close, but not quite right.
The Mercury Playback Engine is composed of 3 things:
1. 64 Bit Application
2. Multithreaded Application
3. Processing of some things using CUDA (an NVIDIA card)
If you don't have a CUDA based video card, you still have the Mercury Playback Engine (software) available. What you probably meant to say is that hardware acceleration for the Mercury Playback Engine is not available unless it's a CUDA card.
More info: http://blogs.adobe.com/premiereprotraining/2011/02/cuda-mercury-playback-engine-and-adobe-premiere-pro.html
Best,
Kevin
I can attest to mercury working on both my MBPs 2007 and mid 2008 (8gigs of ram) but add a fast color correction effect on AVCHD or 7D footage and you gotta render - machines grind to a halt, footage not playable at all. Transcode to Prores first and you're golden.
Of course most people will get newer quad core machines but laptop wise apple doesn't have a 1Gig CUDA card for any MBP right?
Also, I have seen tests for people with fancy Quattro 4300fx cards ($1500) NS 6 OR 8 core machines where they turn on and off the hardware acceleration and didn't see much of a difference not a 10x better / $1500 difference. Correct me if I'm wrong here.
The Mercury Playback Engine is composed of 3 things:
1. 64 Bit Application
2. Multithreaded Application
3. Processing of some things using CUDA (an NVIDIA card)
If you don't have a CUDA based video card, you still have the Mercury Playback Engine (software) available. What you probably meant to say is that hardware acceleration for the Mercury Playback Engine is not available unless it's a CUDA card.
More info: http://blogs.adobe.com/premiereprotraining/2011/02/cuda-mercury-playback-engine-and-adobe-premiere-pro.html
Best,
Kevin
I can attest to mercury working on both my MBPs 2007 and mid 2008 (8gigs of ram) but add a fast color correction effect on AVCHD or 7D footage and you gotta render - machines grind to a halt, footage not playable at all. Transcode to Prores first and you're golden.
Of course most people will get newer quad core machines but laptop wise apple doesn't have a 1Gig CUDA card for any MBP right?
Also, I have seen tests for people with fancy Quattro 4300fx cards ($1500) NS 6 OR 8 core machines where they turn on and off the hardware acceleration and didn't see much of a difference not a 10x better / $1500 difference. Correct me if I'm wrong here.
zero2dash
Sep 14, 08:33 AM
Yes. Windows NT was running on machines with eight processors several years before OS X was even released.
Windows supported 64 bit platforms and dual core CPUs long before OS X did.
On the server side.
Nevertheless, ok. Windows did it first.
That's probably because you're not interested in reading anything that might portray Microsoft in a non-negative light.
Couldn't be farther from the truth. I have no problem with Microsoft or Windows, evident by the fact that I've ran their operating systems for the last 10 years. I have a problem with all the crap they're putting in Vista, but otherwise - Win2k and XP Pro have left me primarily trouble-free.
Windows supported 64 bit platforms and dual core CPUs long before OS X did.
On the server side.
Nevertheless, ok. Windows did it first.
That's probably because you're not interested in reading anything that might portray Microsoft in a non-negative light.
Couldn't be farther from the truth. I have no problem with Microsoft or Windows, evident by the fact that I've ran their operating systems for the last 10 years. I have a problem with all the crap they're putting in Vista, but otherwise - Win2k and XP Pro have left me primarily trouble-free.
nevir
Sep 19, 12:15 PM
My demanding you to give me a reason has about the same weight as all the people in this thread (and many others) demanding Apple provide them with the machine they think they needed yesterday.
It's more along the lines of "We see all these other laptop manufacturers releasing new CPU's in their products. We see that Apple has already recieved these chips. We feel that it is extremely likely that Apple's laptop lines will be updated with these CPU's, and soon. Finally, We don't want to buy a product that will be outdated in just a month or two.
Of course, there's those who have been waiting for more than a couple months. For those, they are looking to 'future-proof' their machine, somewhat. If you notice, more or less every new CPU model that will be coming out is 64-bit, and there's no doubt that developers will write apps that take advantage of that architecture in the coming years. So why buy a computer that has a lower likliehood of supporting all the software you'd like to run over it's lifetime?
As for "needing it yesterday", that is a product of the hype; but I think, for the most part, we feel that the laptops could have been ready earlier - and certainly would have liked Apple to have come out and said "MBP updates soonish" (of course that makes no business sense for clearing inventory though).
It's more along the lines of "We see all these other laptop manufacturers releasing new CPU's in their products. We see that Apple has already recieved these chips. We feel that it is extremely likely that Apple's laptop lines will be updated with these CPU's, and soon. Finally, We don't want to buy a product that will be outdated in just a month or two.
Of course, there's those who have been waiting for more than a couple months. For those, they are looking to 'future-proof' their machine, somewhat. If you notice, more or less every new CPU model that will be coming out is 64-bit, and there's no doubt that developers will write apps that take advantage of that architecture in the coming years. So why buy a computer that has a lower likliehood of supporting all the software you'd like to run over it's lifetime?
As for "needing it yesterday", that is a product of the hype; but I think, for the most part, we feel that the laptops could have been ready earlier - and certainly would have liked Apple to have come out and said "MBP updates soonish" (of course that makes no business sense for clearing inventory though).
evilgEEk
Aug 11, 06:08 PM
You might want to read some reviews on the Chocolate before buying it. I've seen a handful of reviews that were less than favorable.
A good resource is Phonescoop.com. They usually have a decent amount of user reviews upon which you can base your purchasing decisions.
A good friend of mine just bought one and it definitely seems to be the best phone Verizon is currently offering. I also want a slider, I'm tired of flip phones, although if the iPhone was a flip I'm sure I could handle a flip phone for a few more years. ;)
Verizon's phone selection is just horrible, but that's not enough for me to change services. Especially since I've personally never had a single problem with Verizon coverage or customer service, they've always been great.
I think I'm going to hold off for a month or so, just because I don't have the cash to get a Chocolate and then an iPhone. And if an iPhone is released, I'll obviously have to get one. ;)
EDIT: Thanks for the link though, I'll definitely check it out. :)
A good resource is Phonescoop.com. They usually have a decent amount of user reviews upon which you can base your purchasing decisions.
A good friend of mine just bought one and it definitely seems to be the best phone Verizon is currently offering. I also want a slider, I'm tired of flip phones, although if the iPhone was a flip I'm sure I could handle a flip phone for a few more years. ;)
Verizon's phone selection is just horrible, but that's not enough for me to change services. Especially since I've personally never had a single problem with Verizon coverage or customer service, they've always been great.
I think I'm going to hold off for a month or so, just because I don't have the cash to get a Chocolate and then an iPhone. And if an iPhone is released, I'll obviously have to get one. ;)
EDIT: Thanks for the link though, I'll definitely check it out. :)
Thunderhawks
Mar 31, 03:55 PM
Good. I hope they take one of the last strengths of the iPad ecosystem away from it.
Hey, are you sure you want to state that Apple has anything that is good?
You are admitting they have "strengths" even if this is the last one.
And, let's even assume that happens and Apple goes under, all their products tank and and and.
What benefit would you have from that?
Any positive thoughts in your head? You know all the negative stress Apple seems to give you will eventually cause health issues.
Hey, are you sure you want to state that Apple has anything that is good?
You are admitting they have "strengths" even if this is the last one.
And, let's even assume that happens and Apple goes under, all their products tank and and and.
What benefit would you have from that?
Any positive thoughts in your head? You know all the negative stress Apple seems to give you will eventually cause health issues.
ChrisA
Aug 7, 06:13 PM
I wonder how "Time Machine" is implemented. I miss having a feature like this. I used VAX/VMS back in the early 1980's (before UNIX became popular) and of course VMS keept histories of files. So if I was editing a file and saved it I could always get any of the old versions back. It was great. The feature was built into the file system and of course all the applications used the file system. Finally now 20+ years later we get this feature. From experiance I can say the for certain, _everyone_ will like this and come to depend on it. The second part "come to depend on it" will be more true than many of you now think.
(1).jpg "This bluetooth keyboard case")
ChrisA
Aug 16, 10:53 PM
My main interest is in FCP the FCP results.
On a fixed budget, does anyone know the advantage/disadvantage of going for the 2.0Ghz with 1900XT over 2.6Ghz with the std video card?
I think movie editing depends a lot on the speed of the disk subsystem. After all Mini DV is 12GB per hour. That's a of data. When yo "scrub" a shot all that data has to move off the disk and onto the video card. Even with 16MB of RAM not much of the video data can be help in RAM. So the G5 and Intel machine have disks that are about the same speed. Speed of a disk is measured by how fast the bit fly under the read/write head not the interface speed. So I am not surprized the Intel Mac Pro is not hugly faster for video.
On a fixed budget, does anyone know the advantage/disadvantage of going for the 2.0Ghz with 1900XT over 2.6Ghz with the std video card?
I think movie editing depends a lot on the speed of the disk subsystem. After all Mini DV is 12GB per hour. That's a of data. When yo "scrub" a shot all that data has to move off the disk and onto the video card. Even with 16MB of RAM not much of the video data can be help in RAM. So the G5 and Intel machine have disks that are about the same speed. Speed of a disk is measured by how fast the bit fly under the read/write head not the interface speed. So I am not surprized the Intel Mac Pro is not hugly faster for video.
puuukeey
Sep 13, 12:32 PM
http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0007US79Y.01._AA240_SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg
MORE POWER!
MORE POWER!
epitaphic
Aug 18, 11:46 PM
So you think they put an extra processor in across the line just to be able to say they had a quad? Even the AnandTech article you used as a source showed here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=18) that PS took advantage of quad cores in Rosetta
Yes under some specific results the quad was a bit faster than the dual. Though with the combo of Rosetta+Photoshop its unclear what is causing the difference. However, if you compare the vast majority of the benchmarks, there's negligible difference.
Concerning Photoshop specifically, as can be experienced on a quad G5, the performance increase is 15-20%. A future jump to 8-core would theoretically be in the 8% increase mark. Photoshop (CS2) simply cannot scale adequately beyond 2 cores, maybe that'll change in Spring 2007. Fingers crossed it does.
Your points about latency and FSB are not separate negatives as you have made them. They are redundant theoretical concerns with implications of unclear practical significance.
I beg to differ. If an app or game is memory intensive, faster memory access does matter. Barefeats (http://barefeats.com/quad09.html) has some benchmarks on dual channel vs quad channel on the Mac Pro. I'd personally like to see that benchmark with an added Conroe system. If dual to quad channel gave 16-25% improvement, imagine what 75% increase in actual bandwidth will do. Besides, I was merely addressing your statements that Woodcrest is faster because of its higher speed FSB and higher memory bus bandwidth.
I am not worried. Everything anyone has come up with on this issue are taken from that same AnandTech article. Until I see more real-world testing, I will not be convinced. Also, I expect that more pro apps such as PS will be able to utilize quad cores in the near future, if they aren't already doing so. Finally, even if Conroe is faster, Woodcrest is fast enough for me ;).
Anandtech, at the moment, is the only place with a quad xeon vs dual xeon benchmark. And yes, dual Woodcrest is fast enough, but is it cost effective compared to a single Woodcrest/Conroe? It seems that for the most part, Mac Pro users are paying for an extra chip but only really utilizing it when running several CPU intensive apps at the same time.
I think you misread that. They were comparing Core 2 Extreme (not Woodcrest) and Conroe to see whether the increased FSB of the former would make much difference.
You're absolutely right about that, its only measuring the improvement over increased FSB. If you take into account FB-DIMM's appalling efficiency, there should be no increase at all (if not decrease) for memory intensive apps.
One question I'd like to put out there, if Apple has had a quad core mac shipping for the past 8 months, why would it wait til intel quads to optimize the code for FCP? Surely they must have known for some time before that that they would release a quad core G5 so either optimizing FCP for quads is a real bastard or they've been sitting on it for no reason.
Yes under some specific results the quad was a bit faster than the dual. Though with the combo of Rosetta+Photoshop its unclear what is causing the difference. However, if you compare the vast majority of the benchmarks, there's negligible difference.
Concerning Photoshop specifically, as can be experienced on a quad G5, the performance increase is 15-20%. A future jump to 8-core would theoretically be in the 8% increase mark. Photoshop (CS2) simply cannot scale adequately beyond 2 cores, maybe that'll change in Spring 2007. Fingers crossed it does.
Your points about latency and FSB are not separate negatives as you have made them. They are redundant theoretical concerns with implications of unclear practical significance.
I beg to differ. If an app or game is memory intensive, faster memory access does matter. Barefeats (http://barefeats.com/quad09.html) has some benchmarks on dual channel vs quad channel on the Mac Pro. I'd personally like to see that benchmark with an added Conroe system. If dual to quad channel gave 16-25% improvement, imagine what 75% increase in actual bandwidth will do. Besides, I was merely addressing your statements that Woodcrest is faster because of its higher speed FSB and higher memory bus bandwidth.
I am not worried. Everything anyone has come up with on this issue are taken from that same AnandTech article. Until I see more real-world testing, I will not be convinced. Also, I expect that more pro apps such as PS will be able to utilize quad cores in the near future, if they aren't already doing so. Finally, even if Conroe is faster, Woodcrest is fast enough for me ;).
Anandtech, at the moment, is the only place with a quad xeon vs dual xeon benchmark. And yes, dual Woodcrest is fast enough, but is it cost effective compared to a single Woodcrest/Conroe? It seems that for the most part, Mac Pro users are paying for an extra chip but only really utilizing it when running several CPU intensive apps at the same time.
I think you misread that. They were comparing Core 2 Extreme (not Woodcrest) and Conroe to see whether the increased FSB of the former would make much difference.
You're absolutely right about that, its only measuring the improvement over increased FSB. If you take into account FB-DIMM's appalling efficiency, there should be no increase at all (if not decrease) for memory intensive apps.
One question I'd like to put out there, if Apple has had a quad core mac shipping for the past 8 months, why would it wait til intel quads to optimize the code for FCP? Surely they must have known for some time before that that they would release a quad core G5 so either optimizing FCP for quads is a real bastard or they've been sitting on it for no reason.
Sydde
Mar 20, 06:56 PM
But they have worked so hard, all these decades, to diminish the "one man, one vote" to something much less than that.
Well, you see, it is not about the one-man-one-vote thing. That works just fine. You just have to make sure you keep the wrong men from voting.
Well, you see, it is not about the one-man-one-vote thing. That works just fine. You just have to make sure you keep the wrong men from voting.
samcraig
Apr 27, 08:39 AM
if any of you are concerned about being tracked - why on earth would you buy any product that has a GPS in it (all computers cash info) and why on earth would you buy a cell phone - the towers know almost exactly when (which apple doesn't know) and where you are? The reaction to this news is stupid.
Your type of apathy in the long term will do more harm than good.
There is a big difference between voluntarily and involuntarily giving out personal information and that's what was at stake here.
Apple admitted error - it's ok - you can admit it might not have been in the best interest of consumers too. Apple won't come and take your iPhone away.
Your type of apathy in the long term will do more harm than good.
There is a big difference between voluntarily and involuntarily giving out personal information and that's what was at stake here.
Apple admitted error - it's ok - you can admit it might not have been in the best interest of consumers too. Apple won't come and take your iPhone away.
amac4me
Jul 14, 07:26 PM
WWDC ... it's getting closer ... can't wait to see what's announced. Oh yeah ... we'll see the preview of Leopard too.
Bring it on Steve :D
Bring it on Steve :D
ChazUK
Apr 6, 02:39 PM
100,002
my cousin got his from Costco last night - he was waiting for the Wi-Fi only one
That's what I've gone for, Wifi only. With the wireless hotspot feature of the Nexus S, a 3G version seemed pointless for me.
my cousin got his from Costco last night - he was waiting for the Wi-Fi only one
That's what I've gone for, Wifi only. With the wireless hotspot feature of the Nexus S, a 3G version seemed pointless for me.
Bill McEnaney
Apr 27, 01:51 PM
It's neither moral nor virtuous to be against the rights of your fellow citizens. Just sayin'
What rights: civil ones, human ones, merely legal ones, or moral ones? As I've already said, moral liberty consists of the ability to adopt the means to do the good.[/quote]
One has to wonder why conservatives get so wrapped up in social issues when there are so many other things on the plate. Things like abortion and gays will never go away. It's just as stupid to obsess over them as it is to obsess over Obama's birth certificate. Let's fix the economy and put people back to work. Those are the real problems. Anything else is a distraction.
I'm not obsessing about anything. Maybe abortion and gay rights will never go away. But does that mean I should stop fighting, say, abortion? Think about it, liberals. Each time a doctor aborts a baby, the government forfeits the tax revenue it would have collected from the baby if he survived, grew up, and worked. The U.S. population is aging, and too few babies are being born to maintain the country's population. Whether liberals like it or not, the government me need to shrink when there are too few taxpayers to give it the revenue it demands.
Put nursing home patients on social programs when their families or their friends take care of them instead. As nursing home populations grow, so do tax rates. As tax rates go up, more people lose their low-paying jobs and discover that welfare gives them more money than they earned at their low-paying jobs. As more and more get welfare, taxes go up and up.
Sure, we need to repair the economy. That's partly why we need major tax-cuts and major spending-cuts. The $38 billion is insignificant, especially when government spending offsets it.
Tolerance isn't either approval or indifference. To tolerate something is to endure an evil to prevent a greater evil or to get a great good.
What rights: civil ones, human ones, merely legal ones, or moral ones? As I've already said, moral liberty consists of the ability to adopt the means to do the good.[/quote]
One has to wonder why conservatives get so wrapped up in social issues when there are so many other things on the plate. Things like abortion and gays will never go away. It's just as stupid to obsess over them as it is to obsess over Obama's birth certificate. Let's fix the economy and put people back to work. Those are the real problems. Anything else is a distraction.
I'm not obsessing about anything. Maybe abortion and gay rights will never go away. But does that mean I should stop fighting, say, abortion? Think about it, liberals. Each time a doctor aborts a baby, the government forfeits the tax revenue it would have collected from the baby if he survived, grew up, and worked. The U.S. population is aging, and too few babies are being born to maintain the country's population. Whether liberals like it or not, the government me need to shrink when there are too few taxpayers to give it the revenue it demands.
Put nursing home patients on social programs when their families or their friends take care of them instead. As nursing home populations grow, so do tax rates. As tax rates go up, more people lose their low-paying jobs and discover that welfare gives them more money than they earned at their low-paying jobs. As more and more get welfare, taxes go up and up.
Sure, we need to repair the economy. That's partly why we need major tax-cuts and major spending-cuts. The $38 billion is insignificant, especially when government spending offsets it.
Tolerance isn't either approval or indifference. To tolerate something is to endure an evil to prevent a greater evil or to get a great good.
easy4lif
Nov 28, 07:22 PM
steve jobs replied earlier this year to such nonsense
"the music companies are trying to be greedy"
I approve this messsage
"the music companies are trying to be greedy"
I approve this messsage
vand0576
Aug 11, 01:39 PM
am i the only one here that really thinks this is just a pathetic to even think apple is coming out with a phone? Personally, I can not see apple coming out with one. Honestly, I'm quite sick of hearing all of these posts about potential iPhone stuff. i just dont believe it would happen.
From what we're read so far, especially the quote that went something like: "it's not like we're sitting around not doing anything." or however it went, and everybody read this:
It's not a question of if, it's a question of WHEN
I just find it rather funny that so many people are already giving it the name iPhone. I think that is the worst name ever, and a little too predictable. Even the false "iChat Mobile" was a far superior name.
From what we're read so far, especially the quote that went something like: "it's not like we're sitting around not doing anything." or however it went, and everybody read this:
It's not a question of if, it's a question of WHEN
I just find it rather funny that so many people are already giving it the name iPhone. I think that is the worst name ever, and a little too predictable. Even the false "iChat Mobile" was a far superior name.
citizenzen
Mar 23, 12:15 PM
... the leftist side of the antiwar movement is all but gone, but not because the policies have changed, only because the man has changed.
If you listen to enough leftists you'll find plenty of people like me who question our involvement in Libya. However, to claim the policies are the same as Iraq ignores the very real fact that the United Nations Security Council approved this action.
While that lends credence to the notion that this isn't simply another example of American imperialism at work, it still isn't sufficient to convince me that it's the best solution to the problem.
If you listen to enough leftists you'll find plenty of people like me who question our involvement in Libya. However, to claim the policies are the same as Iraq ignores the very real fact that the United Nations Security Council approved this action.
While that lends credence to the notion that this isn't simply another example of American imperialism at work, it still isn't sufficient to convince me that it's the best solution to the problem.
Multimedia
Aug 18, 08:29 PM
I purchased Kingston PC2 5300 FB for my Mac Pro from New Egg. They seemed to have the best price and some Mac friendly reviews.
My Pro now starts 10.4.7 in less than 5 seconds!Great Caesar's Ghost! :eek: From OFF? :eek: With total 3GB RAM? You have a QT Movie you can post of that? :eek:
My Pro now starts 10.4.7 in less than 5 seconds!Great Caesar's Ghost! :eek: From OFF? :eek: With total 3GB RAM? You have a QT Movie you can post of that? :eek:
Biolizard
Apr 27, 08:37 AM
Its not about being a criminal or paranoid. This data is for the sole purpose of marketers to sell us crap.
Well, I'm tired of seeing ads everywhere I turn. You can't go to the bathroom now without seeing a ad shoved in your face and its becoming tiresome.
It reminds me of a line from Futurama:
Leela: Didn't you have ads in the 21st century?"
Fry: Well sure, but not in our dreams. Only on TV and radio, and in magazines, and movies, and at ball games... and on buses and milk cartons and t-shirts, and bananas and written on the sky. But not in dreams, no siree.
Well, Fry could have added our iPads and our phones too. Its disgusting already how much advertising has infiltrated our lives. You can't even read a news story on the internet without an ad being being intrusively shoved in your face.
Things don't just happen without money. People are increasingly adverse to paying for items like apps or news, or are only willing to pay so much (e.g. pay TV, sport etc.), such that marketing needs to subsidise the product.
That news story you read on the internet? It's because of that ad so intrusively shoved in your face that you didn't need to reach for your wallet to be able to read it.
There's no such thing as a free lunch.
Well, I'm tired of seeing ads everywhere I turn. You can't go to the bathroom now without seeing a ad shoved in your face and its becoming tiresome.
It reminds me of a line from Futurama:
Leela: Didn't you have ads in the 21st century?"
Fry: Well sure, but not in our dreams. Only on TV and radio, and in magazines, and movies, and at ball games... and on buses and milk cartons and t-shirts, and bananas and written on the sky. But not in dreams, no siree.
Well, Fry could have added our iPads and our phones too. Its disgusting already how much advertising has infiltrated our lives. You can't even read a news story on the internet without an ad being being intrusively shoved in your face.
Things don't just happen without money. People are increasingly adverse to paying for items like apps or news, or are only willing to pay so much (e.g. pay TV, sport etc.), such that marketing needs to subsidise the product.
That news story you read on the internet? It's because of that ad so intrusively shoved in your face that you didn't need to reach for your wallet to be able to read it.
There's no such thing as a free lunch.
yac_moda
Jul 20, 08:26 PM
I'm betting on Mac Pro OctaCore 2 :D
Should that "a" be an "o" ?
Its Mac raised to the power of INFINITY :eek:
The loga will just be a mobius loop !!!
Should that "a" be an "o" ?
Its Mac raised to the power of INFINITY :eek:
The loga will just be a mobius loop !!!
Billy Boo Bob
Nov 28, 11:02 PM
1 Random artist finds inspiration and writes a song
2 Artist decides his song is so good that he/she records it in a professional studio (which he can rent) so the sound quality is superb
3 Artists logs into the iTMS and publishes his song
4 Artists gets $ from every song sold and the iTMS charges the artist for the distribution
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
2 Artist decides his song is so good that he/she records it in a professional studio (which he can rent) so the sound quality is superb
3 Artists logs into the iTMS and publishes his song
4 Artists gets $ from every song sold and the iTMS charges the artist for the distribution
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
Mad Mac Maniac
Apr 7, 10:24 PM
Please tell him.
me too! I wanna learn!
How does withholding stock from the public aid a company? I can imagine holding them till everything is registered in their system and accounted for. But turning people away when they actually do have stock doesn't sound like a good business practice to me
me too! I wanna learn!
How does withholding stock from the public aid a company? I can imagine holding them till everything is registered in their system and accounted for. But turning people away when they actually do have stock doesn't sound like a good business practice to me
coolbreeze
Apr 7, 11:35 PM
You might want to look at Best Buy's pricing again.
All iPads, iPods and Macs are sold $.99 (at minimum) above Apple.
Time Capsule 1TB $334.99 at Best Buy, $299.00 at Apple
2TB $499.99, $499.00 at Apple
Airport Extreme - $189.99 at Best Buy $179.00 at Apple
Express, $109.99 at Best Buy, $99.00 at Apple
The small accessories are just as bad. And Apple isn't the only brand they mark over MSRP too. I wouldn't be surprised is Bose products were too.
This.
I went to buy a Time Capsule 1TB from these goons one day and noticed the pricing. I pulled up Apple.com's pricing of the TC and asked the "mac specialist" WHY they are charging a $34.99 premium over Apple themselves. He instantly said "no problem, we'll price match." I told him I'd buy it now for instant gratification, and then order from Amazon for $285 w/no tax and free Prime shipping.
Then I'd return the overpriced "pricematched" one back to best buy. He said I can't do that.
I did it 48 hrs later.
I hate that place. If they just had the MSRP Apple price on the shelf without me having to catch them trying to make an extra few bucks, I would have bought it and walked out happy.
That stunt pissed me off and I hope they had to resell it as an open box.
I hate Best Buy.
All iPads, iPods and Macs are sold $.99 (at minimum) above Apple.
Time Capsule 1TB $334.99 at Best Buy, $299.00 at Apple
2TB $499.99, $499.00 at Apple
Airport Extreme - $189.99 at Best Buy $179.00 at Apple
Express, $109.99 at Best Buy, $99.00 at Apple
The small accessories are just as bad. And Apple isn't the only brand they mark over MSRP too. I wouldn't be surprised is Bose products were too.
This.
I went to buy a Time Capsule 1TB from these goons one day and noticed the pricing. I pulled up Apple.com's pricing of the TC and asked the "mac specialist" WHY they are charging a $34.99 premium over Apple themselves. He instantly said "no problem, we'll price match." I told him I'd buy it now for instant gratification, and then order from Amazon for $285 w/no tax and free Prime shipping.
Then I'd return the overpriced "pricematched" one back to best buy. He said I can't do that.
I did it 48 hrs later.
I hate that place. If they just had the MSRP Apple price on the shelf without me having to catch them trying to make an extra few bucks, I would have bought it and walked out happy.
That stunt pissed me off and I hope they had to resell it as an open box.
I hate Best Buy.
bedifferent
Apr 10, 10:51 PM
Whether you think it's an issue or not is subjective. The guy I was replying to was implying that a different person worked on iMovie 08 and that same person was also behind the new Final Cut when in reality the lead architect has stayed the same throughout.
Oh I know, I was commenting on that, not you.
Oh I know, I was commenting on that, not you.