Cyberskip
Apr 6, 12:13 AM
I'm not trolling, this is an honest question. But isn't a Final Cut pretty much worthless for commercial use without a way to put the results on Blu-Ray?
Here are a few examples.
http://www.apple.com/finalcutstudio/in-action/
Skip
Here are a few examples.
http://www.apple.com/finalcutstudio/in-action/
Skip
cfedu
Apr 11, 06:59 PM
Maybe they need to wait in order to get 28/32nm A5 chips. No point in having an iPhone 5 with a 3 hour battery life
milo
Jul 27, 02:21 PM
Those aren't next generation version of the Core 2 just MCM (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-Chip_Module) of the existing Core 2.
Still, they are the successors to conroe and woodcrest. As long as they are socket compatible, they're the next generation for these machines, whether you consider them a new chip or not.
Am i the only one that seems to think that WWDC is getting clogged up with TOO many things? I mean sure the more Apple products released/updated the better, but this keynote seems to be taking a lot of emphasis off of Leopard previews (according to the rumors)
It's all just rumor at this point. More than 2 computer announcments would be very unlikely, and the idea that all macs would get updated at once is ridiculous.
Well it's back to the future for all of us. Remember when the Mac was going 64-bit with the introduction of the G5 PowerMac on June 23, 2003? :rolleyes: Only more thanthree years later and we're doing it all over again thanks to Yonah's 7 month retrograde.
The only mac that took a step back was the iMac, and it never took advantage of any of the 64 bit advantages in the first place.
I can't figure out why it wouldn't have a 2nd slot or FW800. They're both cheap enough to add. The only problem is the 2nd slot adds some height, but not that much. This unit would be less than 5" tall. And anyway, how do you backup your CD's?
A second slot is overkill for a midline model. And Apple has obviously made the decision that FW800 is a pro feature only, if it's not in the 15 inch MBP. Not to mention that it's not included in the standard intel chipsets, so adding it is extra work for Apple.
Remember that the G5 is 64 bit. While the consumer apps may not be too directly affected at first, (speed increases, but nothing else), as more memory is required, 32 bit will hit a brick wall at 4GiB, whereas 64 bit can go along happily to 2,305,843,009,200,000,000GiB.
And since the iMacs have never supported more than 2 gigs of ram, how is that a step back by switching them to Yonah?
Still, they are the successors to conroe and woodcrest. As long as they are socket compatible, they're the next generation for these machines, whether you consider them a new chip or not.
Am i the only one that seems to think that WWDC is getting clogged up with TOO many things? I mean sure the more Apple products released/updated the better, but this keynote seems to be taking a lot of emphasis off of Leopard previews (according to the rumors)
It's all just rumor at this point. More than 2 computer announcments would be very unlikely, and the idea that all macs would get updated at once is ridiculous.
Well it's back to the future for all of us. Remember when the Mac was going 64-bit with the introduction of the G5 PowerMac on June 23, 2003? :rolleyes: Only more thanthree years later and we're doing it all over again thanks to Yonah's 7 month retrograde.
The only mac that took a step back was the iMac, and it never took advantage of any of the 64 bit advantages in the first place.
I can't figure out why it wouldn't have a 2nd slot or FW800. They're both cheap enough to add. The only problem is the 2nd slot adds some height, but not that much. This unit would be less than 5" tall. And anyway, how do you backup your CD's?
A second slot is overkill for a midline model. And Apple has obviously made the decision that FW800 is a pro feature only, if it's not in the 15 inch MBP. Not to mention that it's not included in the standard intel chipsets, so adding it is extra work for Apple.
Remember that the G5 is 64 bit. While the consumer apps may not be too directly affected at first, (speed increases, but nothing else), as more memory is required, 32 bit will hit a brick wall at 4GiB, whereas 64 bit can go along happily to 2,305,843,009,200,000,000GiB.
And since the iMacs have never supported more than 2 gigs of ram, how is that a step back by switching them to Yonah?
Kranchammer
Apr 6, 04:43 PM
You both ignored HOT DOGS! Sheesh, hot dogs rule. The only problem is kids under 6 choking on them unless you cut them right. But that will be fixed in the v3.0 hot dog, they will come pre-sliced.
GTFO. :mad:
Or are you counting on the deal with that swedish sausage company to save hot dogs from doooom?
The race to the bottom continues...
GTFO. :mad:
Or are you counting on the deal with that swedish sausage company to save hot dogs from doooom?
The race to the bottom continues...
Macaroony
Mar 3, 04:08 AM
I'm sorry, Bill, but your logic has one big flaw.
If you decided to live celibately while other heterosexuals are open to have sex in a [monogamous] relationship, that's fine by me but what you're implying is that every homosexual should be celibate, so what's the point of being attracted to the same-sex at all in your logic?
I believe you have to label yourself asexual from now on, since not having or craving sex makes you neither a homosexual nor heterosexual.
If you decided to live celibately while other heterosexuals are open to have sex in a [monogamous] relationship, that's fine by me but what you're implying is that every homosexual should be celibate, so what's the point of being attracted to the same-sex at all in your logic?
I believe you have to label yourself asexual from now on, since not having or craving sex makes you neither a homosexual nor heterosexual.
gkarris
Nov 29, 10:39 AM
In the 70's:
Universal makes "Battlestar Galactica", and "Buck Rogers in the 25th Century", fun Sci-Fi shows.
In the 90's and early 00's:
USA Networks launches the Scifi Channel. They get great shows such as "Stargate SG-1" and "Farscape". USA Network has some great shows as well, "Monk", "The Dead Zone", "Peacemakers"
That was then....
This is now...
NBC has nothing but crap and gets jeleous of cable networks such as USA.
NBC/Universal buys USA Networks.
NBC/Universal cancels the last season of "Farscape", and the new western, "Peacemakers". They attempt to cancel "Monk" and "The Dead Zone", but to no avail. They also attempt to cancel "Stargate SG-1" and replace it with "Stargate Atlantis", this fails too.
NBC/Universal "retells" "Battlestar Galactica" - sorry, it's all about skin and a drunk Col. Tigh - junk.
NBC/Universal now is "cleaning up" the Scifi Channel by putting on on its own shows, "Eureka" (it is good though).
NBC/Universal is cancelling "Stargate SG-1", at a con, one of its actors did mention that "Universal did let it go on for another 5 seasons".
NBC/Universal's #1 show on the Sci-Fi channel is Wrestling....
Universal is good for what again???
(note: I might have my timing off, like the Farscape cancellation, but I think Scifi might have seen it coming with that series cancellation).
Universal makes "Battlestar Galactica", and "Buck Rogers in the 25th Century", fun Sci-Fi shows.
In the 90's and early 00's:
USA Networks launches the Scifi Channel. They get great shows such as "Stargate SG-1" and "Farscape". USA Network has some great shows as well, "Monk", "The Dead Zone", "Peacemakers"
That was then....
This is now...
NBC has nothing but crap and gets jeleous of cable networks such as USA.
NBC/Universal buys USA Networks.
NBC/Universal cancels the last season of "Farscape", and the new western, "Peacemakers". They attempt to cancel "Monk" and "The Dead Zone", but to no avail. They also attempt to cancel "Stargate SG-1" and replace it with "Stargate Atlantis", this fails too.
NBC/Universal "retells" "Battlestar Galactica" - sorry, it's all about skin and a drunk Col. Tigh - junk.
NBC/Universal now is "cleaning up" the Scifi Channel by putting on on its own shows, "Eureka" (it is good though).
NBC/Universal is cancelling "Stargate SG-1", at a con, one of its actors did mention that "Universal did let it go on for another 5 seasons".
NBC/Universal's #1 show on the Sci-Fi channel is Wrestling....
Universal is good for what again???
(note: I might have my timing off, like the Farscape cancellation, but I think Scifi might have seen it coming with that series cancellation).
jrhone
Aug 17, 01:20 AM
I AM SOOOO HAPPY I ORDERED THIS MACHINE!!! Ordered it yesterday, custom with 2gb RAM, got shipping confirmation today, I'll have it tomorrow!!! If its ALMOST as fast as a quad G5, it will be MUCH faster than my Rev A dual 2.0 G5....
Cameront9
Aug 7, 05:02 PM
Like the whole 3ghz thing?
Ahh, but that was a different situation. In that case, Steve said that, but was dependent on IBM to make it come true.
In this Case, steve is only dependent on his own company to make it come true.
And did anyone else laugh today when they showed the top of the line Mac Pro--at 3Ghz?
Ahh, but that was a different situation. In that case, Steve said that, but was dependent on IBM to make it come true.
In this Case, steve is only dependent on his own company to make it come true.
And did anyone else laugh today when they showed the top of the line Mac Pro--at 3Ghz?
chrmjenkins
Apr 6, 11:36 AM
That isn't what this story reads, and I don't think anyone but you and I have even read the actual facts supposed here.
I actually find this one of the least accurate stories ever posted on MacRumors.com for several reasons... the OP is assuming ULV in the 13" MBA. The OP is assuming that if SB IGP is good enough for MBP it's fine for MBA. There is no rumor or timeframe listing these chips especially not in the 13" MBA. It seems like it's a blatant attempt to stir up activity without any real facts, rumors, or even common knowledge about the chips used in the MBAs.
Certainly the people haven't read the story or they're somehow focusing on the 11" MBA. Sure, this would be fine for the 11" MBA in terms of CPU clock speed but even then it's a gigantic loss in Tue graphics capabilities. That leads to a problem with the author saying good enough for 13" MBP than good enough for MBA. However, the IGP clock speed used in this ULV chip will be nearly a 50% drop in graphics performance. That for me doesn't equate to if this then that...
I am disappointed with MR for even writing such a poor piece of garbage. Forget that I cannot stand the SB IGP... the assumptions made here are absurd! It definitely doesn't warrant this sort of reply from the fans of the MBA. You and I could assailed things all day, but that isn't the story written.
Given Apple's willingness to go with it on the 13", I'm inclined to go with the reasoning that they'll use it here. The argument that it will be a big step down from the 320M is kind of moot given that anyone will say you're crazy if you try to insist that a MBA should be used for anything like gaming or graphical work (read anyone as Apple). You also have to remember that the 320M is downclocked in the MBAs too compared to the 13", so the drop isn't as drastic as you state.
The combination of a lower or equal TDP, a GPU that doesn't need its own heatsink because its integrated into the CPU and the very likely prolonged battery life for the MBA, it's pretty much a done deal for the MBA.
So is that also true for the difference between SV and LV? If that is the case, the Core i7-2649M you cite above (2.3 LV chip) should be faster compared to the 2.3 i5 in the low end Pro 13?
Thanks!
He didn't quite tell the whole story. A LV and ULV chip likely went through different binning as their performance at the same settings varies because the process they are built on varies. The chips that work at the extremes (say Intel's extreme desktop processors or the lowest voltage CPUs they offer) are likely the top performers in their binning tests. Just because a chip can function as a LV doesn't mean it would meet the requirements for ULV, for example. However, if the ULV chip were to be scaled to the LV's parts speed and voltage, it would function just fine.
I actually find this one of the least accurate stories ever posted on MacRumors.com for several reasons... the OP is assuming ULV in the 13" MBA. The OP is assuming that if SB IGP is good enough for MBP it's fine for MBA. There is no rumor or timeframe listing these chips especially not in the 13" MBA. It seems like it's a blatant attempt to stir up activity without any real facts, rumors, or even common knowledge about the chips used in the MBAs.
Certainly the people haven't read the story or they're somehow focusing on the 11" MBA. Sure, this would be fine for the 11" MBA in terms of CPU clock speed but even then it's a gigantic loss in Tue graphics capabilities. That leads to a problem with the author saying good enough for 13" MBP than good enough for MBA. However, the IGP clock speed used in this ULV chip will be nearly a 50% drop in graphics performance. That for me doesn't equate to if this then that...
I am disappointed with MR for even writing such a poor piece of garbage. Forget that I cannot stand the SB IGP... the assumptions made here are absurd! It definitely doesn't warrant this sort of reply from the fans of the MBA. You and I could assailed things all day, but that isn't the story written.
Given Apple's willingness to go with it on the 13", I'm inclined to go with the reasoning that they'll use it here. The argument that it will be a big step down from the 320M is kind of moot given that anyone will say you're crazy if you try to insist that a MBA should be used for anything like gaming or graphical work (read anyone as Apple). You also have to remember that the 320M is downclocked in the MBAs too compared to the 13", so the drop isn't as drastic as you state.
The combination of a lower or equal TDP, a GPU that doesn't need its own heatsink because its integrated into the CPU and the very likely prolonged battery life for the MBA, it's pretty much a done deal for the MBA.
So is that also true for the difference between SV and LV? If that is the case, the Core i7-2649M you cite above (2.3 LV chip) should be faster compared to the 2.3 i5 in the low end Pro 13?
Thanks!
He didn't quite tell the whole story. A LV and ULV chip likely went through different binning as their performance at the same settings varies because the process they are built on varies. The chips that work at the extremes (say Intel's extreme desktop processors or the lowest voltage CPUs they offer) are likely the top performers in their binning tests. Just because a chip can function as a LV doesn't mean it would meet the requirements for ULV, for example. However, if the ULV chip were to be scaled to the LV's parts speed and voltage, it would function just fine.
Greeney
Aug 11, 10:24 PM
Personally I don't care, as long as its GSM...
ShiftyPig
Apr 6, 02:01 PM
Motorola not selling any units of a crappy product? Huh... who'd have thought.
borisadmin
Jul 28, 05:11 AM
Just to clarify a few things...
Merom uses the same amount of power essentially per MHz as Yonah. However, it is 20% more efficient than Yonah is. So while putting Merom into any of the current machines will NOT make them cooler or use less power than the Yonah versions, they will all:
1 - Be approximately 20% faster at the same MHz rating.
2 - Have 64-bit capability.
3 - Have enhanced SSE (closer to AltiVec than previous Intel chips.)
Some of the Merom chips also have twice the L2 cache (4 MB vs. 2 MB) which would also increase speeds, but the other items above are more important in the grand scheme of things.
Ensoniq, thanks so much for the useful corrections. How significant do you think that 64-bit capability will be in the future compared to not having it(say, 2-3 years time)?
Merom uses the same amount of power essentially per MHz as Yonah. However, it is 20% more efficient than Yonah is. So while putting Merom into any of the current machines will NOT make them cooler or use less power than the Yonah versions, they will all:
1 - Be approximately 20% faster at the same MHz rating.
2 - Have 64-bit capability.
3 - Have enhanced SSE (closer to AltiVec than previous Intel chips.)
Some of the Merom chips also have twice the L2 cache (4 MB vs. 2 MB) which would also increase speeds, but the other items above are more important in the grand scheme of things.
Ensoniq, thanks so much for the useful corrections. How significant do you think that 64-bit capability will be in the future compared to not having it(say, 2-3 years time)?
lazyrighteye
Aug 11, 10:50 AM
Using TimeMachine, Steve is going to release it two years ago.
That made my Friday... which may actually be a sad comment on things in my world. :D
That made my Friday... which may actually be a sad comment on things in my world. :D
xlii
Apr 8, 05:48 AM
Well fill me in. Our family used to run a small local (and successful) computer store in the 80's and if we had it, we sold it.
With cost of inventory being fairly high, why would you stop if you met a "quota"?
The only reason I can think of (and I know nothing down these lines) is to push more revenue into this quarter (the last quarter just ended March 31st). Perhaps BB made their number for the quarter from Jan 1 to Mar 31 and want to get a running start on this current one.
With cost of inventory being fairly high, why would you stop if you met a "quota"?
The only reason I can think of (and I know nothing down these lines) is to push more revenue into this quarter (the last quarter just ended March 31st). Perhaps BB made their number for the quarter from Jan 1 to Mar 31 and want to get a running start on this current one.
cult hero
Mar 25, 11:51 PM
It is a big update. Versions and Resume alone are huge, IMO. (Which you don't really appreciate until you start using them.)
The UI may not look radically different, but there's hardly a part of it that hasn't been retouched.
I still don't know what people want on these forums. I am SUBSTANTIALLY more excited about Lion than I was about Leopard or Snow Leopard. I don't care about more eye candy. Versions, autosave and resume are all great features and more importantly they're features non-techies will appreciate even more. For instance, my dad is definitely not the kind of person I would usually point to a preview of an OS, but I knew as soon as I read that, "Oh yeah, my dad's gonna love this." My mom too.
Merging server is damn cool, Mission Control and the improvements to Spaces both look very compelling and I like the interface changes. I'm all too happy to see scroll bars going bye-bye. And who knows what changes they'll be making to the main libraries. Full screen apps + the new Spaces = win for me when I'm using just my laptop screen and am not hooked up to an external monitor.
When that like 15 minute preview of 10.7 was posted on this site I got really excited. Everything looked really cool.
Since Launchpad is obviously considered by Apple to be the selling point of Lion, I think I'll wait until there's actually something to spend money on.
What? SRSLY? Have you even looked at what's being added?
The UI may not look radically different, but there's hardly a part of it that hasn't been retouched.
I still don't know what people want on these forums. I am SUBSTANTIALLY more excited about Lion than I was about Leopard or Snow Leopard. I don't care about more eye candy. Versions, autosave and resume are all great features and more importantly they're features non-techies will appreciate even more. For instance, my dad is definitely not the kind of person I would usually point to a preview of an OS, but I knew as soon as I read that, "Oh yeah, my dad's gonna love this." My mom too.
Merging server is damn cool, Mission Control and the improvements to Spaces both look very compelling and I like the interface changes. I'm all too happy to see scroll bars going bye-bye. And who knows what changes they'll be making to the main libraries. Full screen apps + the new Spaces = win for me when I'm using just my laptop screen and am not hooked up to an external monitor.
When that like 15 minute preview of 10.7 was posted on this site I got really excited. Everything looked really cool.
Since Launchpad is obviously considered by Apple to be the selling point of Lion, I think I'll wait until there's actually something to spend money on.
What? SRSLY? Have you even looked at what's being added?
noire anqa
Mar 26, 07:25 AM
Oracle's acquisition of Sun was just... bad. I have nothing good to say about that.
I loved ReiserFS (v3 anyway). I was using it in beta on Slackware about as early as I could.
And for my unnecessary griping about HFS+, I've never had a problem with it the whole time I've used Macs (so, about 6 years now). ZFS would be cool though.
I'm not sure about that .. my hfs+ partitions always seem to get corrupted more often than any linux box i've ever owned. I hate to say it, but probably even more than any windows box i've owned.
I loved ReiserFS (v3 anyway). I was using it in beta on Slackware about as early as I could.
And for my unnecessary griping about HFS+, I've never had a problem with it the whole time I've used Macs (so, about 6 years now). ZFS would be cool though.
I'm not sure about that .. my hfs+ partitions always seem to get corrupted more often than any linux box i've ever owned. I hate to say it, but probably even more than any windows box i've owned.
handsome pete
Apr 6, 08:57 AM
Yes, there are ways in FCP, but they are clunky! It was much easier for my project to do it in iMovie. Naturally, it is not true for every project.
For example, I can't do Multicam edits in iMovie. FCP has also its advantages, for sure! If FCP could marry with iMovie and make a child, the new FCP, that would be heaven.
If you can't do precision edits in FCP quickly and easily, then you just don't know the software that well.
Changing FCP to mimic iMovie would be the death of it as a "pro" application. It would turn away most of it's established user base. There aren't many complaints about the mechanics of the interface. After all, almost all pro NLEs are based in the same structure. What a new version of FCP needs instead are things like better media management, 64 bit support, better blu-ray authoring, etc.
For example, I can't do Multicam edits in iMovie. FCP has also its advantages, for sure! If FCP could marry with iMovie and make a child, the new FCP, that would be heaven.
If you can't do precision edits in FCP quickly and easily, then you just don't know the software that well.
Changing FCP to mimic iMovie would be the death of it as a "pro" application. It would turn away most of it's established user base. There aren't many complaints about the mechanics of the interface. After all, almost all pro NLEs are based in the same structure. What a new version of FCP needs instead are things like better media management, 64 bit support, better blu-ray authoring, etc.
Angelus520
Aug 11, 10:41 AM
Take a look at the Nokia E61. I just got one to replace my BlackBerry and love it. It's the European version and you have to buy it unlocked ($350 or so) but it works great. Cingular is coming out with a dumbed down version called the E62 but strips away some of the cool features like WiFi. Go figure - an American phone with less features than the one sold in the rest of the world.
With crappy phones and our pathetic broadband infrastructure, you'd think we were Third World rather than a "Superpower."
I don't care so much about the iPod capability, but I would like to see the result of a smartphone by Apple. I haven't jumped on the bandwagon of the Treos and Palms.
Call me a sucker, but I'd like somehting that could do all the mundane, make my life easier, organization crap, and have it look cool as well. Oh, and not run on a crap OS.
With crappy phones and our pathetic broadband infrastructure, you'd think we were Third World rather than a "Superpower."
I don't care so much about the iPod capability, but I would like to see the result of a smartphone by Apple. I haven't jumped on the bandwagon of the Treos and Palms.
Call me a sucker, but I'd like somehting that could do all the mundane, make my life easier, organization crap, and have it look cool as well. Oh, and not run on a crap OS.
Sydde
Mar 22, 08:47 PM
What I always wonder is what diplomatic efforts were used to pressure Qaddafi? There were no (as far as I know) threats of economic embargoes, freezing of assets, or other less violent methods to coerce Qaddafi.
As I recall, there was some freezing of the assets (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/27/gaddafi-family-assets-frozen-queen), though the figures they show make it look like little more than window dressing.
Really, the reason the west wants him outta there is because no one can agree on how to transliterate his name :confused:
As I recall, there was some freezing of the assets (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/27/gaddafi-family-assets-frozen-queen), though the figures they show make it look like little more than window dressing.
Really, the reason the west wants him outta there is because no one can agree on how to transliterate his name :confused:
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 01:54 PM
Doesn't Europe have many many carriers in each country? There's no carrier that spans the entire EU, is there?
We have many carriers in each country in europe, but we all of them have the same system which allows roaming between networks.
Who wants to pay 400$ for a phone that will look like an antique 12 months from now? That's a lot of money to pay for the status of having a brand new phone.
Why not?
People pay $399 for an iPod today that is antique within 12 months...
We have many carriers in each country in europe, but we all of them have the same system which allows roaming between networks.
Who wants to pay 400$ for a phone that will look like an antique 12 months from now? That's a lot of money to pay for the status of having a brand new phone.
Why not?
People pay $399 for an iPod today that is antique within 12 months...
boncellis
Jul 14, 11:32 PM
School House Rock - "Oh, I'm just a bill, a lonely old bill, sitting here on Capitol Hill" (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1569494088/002-8458341-9463244?redirect=true)
I prefer the Simpsons' parody of that cartoon:
"...and I'll make Ted Kennedy pay, if he fights back I'll say that he's gay."
But seriously, the $1799 price point is a step in the right direction. If we could get it down to $1599 or <gasp> $1499, then that would be the de facto mini tower so many have clamored for. I would like a redesigned case, but that'll come eventually.
Sometimes the right price can make a person forget about what might have been.
I prefer the Simpsons' parody of that cartoon:
"...and I'll make Ted Kennedy pay, if he fights back I'll say that he's gay."
But seriously, the $1799 price point is a step in the right direction. If we could get it down to $1599 or <gasp> $1499, then that would be the de facto mini tower so many have clamored for. I would like a redesigned case, but that'll come eventually.
Sometimes the right price can make a person forget about what might have been.
TheSideshow
Apr 25, 01:35 PM
They cant lose this surely?
Even Android stores your location in the exact same way iOS does.
Except secured
Even Android stores your location in the exact same way iOS does.
Except secured
PBF
Mar 25, 11:10 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8C148)
Yes, ipad3 will run os x lion! MBA will have a touch screen!!
As soon as MBA gets a multitouch display, I'm ditching my iPad. haha
Yes, ipad3 will run os x lion! MBA will have a touch screen!!
As soon as MBA gets a multitouch display, I'm ditching my iPad. haha
shawnce
Nov 28, 07:05 PM
I think it is crazy for everyone to think that the music industry is greedy when it getting squeezed out of all of their revenue streams. So, Apple makes hundreds of millions off of their back on the itunes site, and a billion off of iPod sales, and they cannot share in the wealth? Huh?
Apple pays the record labels for every song sold via iTMS, a vast majority of the "99 cents" for a song goes to the record labels (or direct to independent artist). iTMS is providing a new sales channel with effectively zero cost to the record labels (one that avoids manufacturing, shipping and stocking of physical units). This is a totally NEW revenue stream that arguable provides the record labels more bang for their buck then prior revenue streams and it is arguable more secure from copyright violations then prior revenue streams (FairPlay DRM). It also more directly connects customers with music (easy to do impulse purchases, etc.).
Now for the other half of your statement... just why should record companies get money for every iPod sold? This type of thinking is in some ways similar to demanding that paint manufactures should get a cut of the profits of every paint brush sold.
As a side note... I support the record companies/artist going after major copyright violators using legal proceedings.
Apple pays the record labels for every song sold via iTMS, a vast majority of the "99 cents" for a song goes to the record labels (or direct to independent artist). iTMS is providing a new sales channel with effectively zero cost to the record labels (one that avoids manufacturing, shipping and stocking of physical units). This is a totally NEW revenue stream that arguable provides the record labels more bang for their buck then prior revenue streams and it is arguable more secure from copyright violations then prior revenue streams (FairPlay DRM). It also more directly connects customers with music (easy to do impulse purchases, etc.).
Now for the other half of your statement... just why should record companies get money for every iPod sold? This type of thinking is in some ways similar to demanding that paint manufactures should get a cut of the profits of every paint brush sold.
As a side note... I support the record companies/artist going after major copyright violators using legal proceedings.